Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning and Zoning Commission Packet 2026 06-10-26
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA Wednesday, June 10, 2026 7:00 PM Yorkville City Hall Council Chambers 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Meeting Called to Order: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Previous meeting minutes: February 11, 2026 (Court Reporter Transcript) April 8, 2026 Citizen’s Comments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Public Hearings 1. PZC 2026-01 Comprehensive Plan Update, United City of Yorkville, petitioner, is proposing to amend the Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, including a modified future land use map, pursuant to Section 11-12-7 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-12-7) and Section 9-1-1 of the Yorkville City Code. 2. PZC 2026-03 C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner, has submitted applications to the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois for special use authorization for a major amendment to an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) and preliminary PUD Plan approval for approximately 228 acres referred to as the Cyrus One CHI-11 data center campus. Unfinished Business New Business 1. PZC 2026-01 Comprehensive Plan Update, United City of Yorkville, petitioner, is proposing to amend the Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, including a modified future land use map, pursuant to Section 11-12-7 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-12-7) and Section 9-1-1 of the Yorkville City Code. Action Item Text Amendment 2. PZC 2026-02 Grande Reserve Units 10B & 11B, Tom Scofield on behalf of Ross Lane Development, LLC, petitioner, is seeking Final Plat approval for an approximately 22-acre site consisting of 158 new residential townhome lots located east of Kennedy Road and south of the BNSF railroad in Units 10 and 11 of Grande Reserve subdivision. Action Item Final Plat United City of Yorkville 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 www.yorkville.il.us 3. PZC 2026-03 C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner, has submitted applications to the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois for special use authorization for a major amendment to an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) and preliminary PUD Plan approval for approximately 228 acres referred to as the Cyrus One CHI-11 data center campus. Action Item PUD Amendment & Preliminary PUD Plan Additional Business 1. Appointment of Vice Chair 2. City Council Action Updates Adjournment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 1 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, Illinois Wednesday, February 11, 2026 7:00 p.m. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 2 PRESENT: Mr. Rich Vinyard, Chairman; Mr. Danny Williams, Commissioner; Mr. Ryan Forristall, Commissioner; Ms. Marge Linnane, Commissioner; Mr. Michael Crouch, Commissioner; Mr. Wally Werderich, Commissioner. ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director; Ms. Sara Mendez, Senior Planner; Mr. David Hansen, Senior Planner; Ms. Thiam Dim, Planner; Ms. Marlys Young, Minute Taker. - - - - - Reported by: Christine M. Vitosh Illinois CSR No. 084-002883 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 3 APPEARANCES: OTTOSEN, DiNOLFO, HASENBALG & CASTALDO, LTD. BY: MS. MEGAN LAMB 2241 Warrenville Road, Suite 310 Lisle, Illinois 60532 (630) 682-0085 appeared on behalf of the United City of Yorkville. - - - - - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 4 INDEX WITNESS: PAGE: VERA PLEVA 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 5 (WHEREUPON, the following proceedings were had in public hearing, commencing at 7:03 p.m. as follows:) CHAIRMAN VINYARD: There is one public hearing scheduled tonight for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The purpose of these hearings is to invite testimony from members of the public regarding the proposed requests that are being considered before this commission tonight. Public testimony from persons present who wish to speak may be for or against the request or just to ask questions of the petitioner regarding items being heard. Once all of the public hearings on tonight's agenda are closed, the commissioners will deliberate on their vote and vote on their recommendations to the City Council for each of the matters that are subject of tonight's hearing. Those persons wishing to testify are asked to speak clearly, one at a time, and state your name, who you represent. You are also asked 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 6 to sign in at the podium. If you plan to speak during tonight's public hearing as a petitioner or as a member of the public, please stand, raise your right hand, and repeat after me. Anybody? (Witness sworn.) CHAIRMAN VINYARD: So normally I would go into some rules to make sure everything is nice and orderly, but you look like a nice orderly lady, so do I have that correct? MS. PLEVA: Most days, yes. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: All right. Very good. Okay. So, listen, at any time during this the commissioners may ask you some questions. We will try to keep it as short and sweet. So the order of receiving testimony will be the petitioner's presentation followed by those who wish to speak in favor or opposition of the request. So may I have a motion to open the public hearing on Petition number PZC 2026-16? It's a variance request for the property located at 202 Wolf Street. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 7 COMMISSIONER WERDERICH: Second. MS. NOBLE: Vera, do you want to introduce your company or -- VERA PLEVA, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined upon oral interrogatories and testified as follows: MS. PLEVA: Oh. General Laboratory Products. MS. NOBLE: Can you go to the podium? MS. PLEVA: Sure. MS. NOBLE: And just give a brief couple of sentences of what it is you are requesting. MS. PLEVA: Okay. We are requesting a variance to put our refrigerator room in the front of the building. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Very good. All right. So we need to go back to the roll call. PZC 2025-16, variance request for the property located at 202 Wolf Street. Roll call vote on the motion. MS. YOUNG: Yes. Crouch. COMMISSIONER CROUCH: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Linnane. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 8 COMMISSIONER LINNANE: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Vinyard. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Forristall. COMMISSIONER FORRISTALL: Yes. MS. YOUNG: And Werderich. COMMISSIONER WERDERICH: Yes. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Okay. PZC 2025-16 Vera Pleva, petitioner, on behalf of GLP Real Estate, LLC, property owner, is requesting a variance to Section 10-3-9 of the United -- Unified Development Ordinance seeking to reduce the required minimum front yard setback within the M-1 Limited Manufacturing distance from 25 feet to five feet for a parcel located at 202 Wolf Street. Are you prepared to make a presentation or was that pretty much all you had to say? MS. PLEVA: Not much to say except Frank Willman is going to build a slab and the walls, insulation, and move the big refrigerator 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 9 room into it. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Very good. Thank you. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak in favor or against? (No response.) CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Seeing as there is none, all right. Anyone in Zoomland tonight? MS. MENDEZ: No. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Okay. All right. She's got responses? MS. NOBLE: Mm-hmm. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Would you like to have your responses to the standards entered into the public record? MS. PLEVA: Sure. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Very good. All right. We will conclude this and move on. MS. NOBLE: And close it. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: All right. Since all public testimony regarding this petition has been taken, may I have a motion to close the taking of testimony and this public hearing? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. COMMISSIONER WERDERICH: Second. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 10 CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Roll call vote, please. MS. YOUNG: Yes. Linnane. COMMISSIONER LINNANE: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Vinyard. CHAIRMAN VINYARD: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Williams. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Forristall. COMMISSIONER FORRISTALL: Yes. MS. YOUNG: Werderich. COMMISSIONER WERDERICH: Yes. MS. YOUNG: And Crouch. COMMISSIONER CROUCH: Yes. (Which were all the proceedings had in the public hearing, concluding at 7:05 p.m.) ---o0o--- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 11 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS: COUNTY OF LASALLE ) I, CHRISTINE M. VITOSH, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of Illinois, do hereby certify: That the foregoing public hearing transcript, Pages 1 through 12, was reported stenographically by me by means of machine shorthand, was simultaneously reduced to typewriting via computer-aided transcription under my personal direction, and constitutes a true record of the testimony given and the proceedings had; That the said public hearing was taken before me at the time and place specified; That I am not a relative or employee or attorney or counsel, nor a relative or employee of such attorney or counsel for any of the parties hereto, nor interested directly or indirectly in the outcome of this action. I further certify that my certificate attached hereto applies to the original transcript and copies thereof signed and certified under my hand only. I assume no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 12 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced copies not made under my control or direction. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I do hereunto set my hand at Leland, Illinois, this 16th day of February, 2026. /s / Christine M . Vitosh CHRISTINE M. VITOSH, Illinois C.S.R. Certificate No. 084-02883 / /s [1] - 12:8 0 084-002883 [1] - 2:24 084-02883 [1] - 12:10 1 1 [1] - 11:7 10 [1] - 4:3 10-3-9 [1] - 8:13 11 [1] - 1:21 12 [1] - 11:7 16th [1] - 12:4 2 202 [3] - 6:23, 7:20, 8:17 2025-16 [2] - 7:19, 8:10 2026 [2] - 1:21, 12:5 2026-16 [1] - 6:21 2241 [1] - 3:3 25 [1] - 8:17 3 310 [1] - 3:3 6 60532 [1] - 3:4 630 [1] - 3:4 651 [1] - 1:17 682-0085 [1] - 3:4 7 7:00 [1] - 1:22 7:03 [1] - 5:3 7:05 [1] - 10:17 A accuracy [1] - 12:1 action [1] - 11:20 agenda [1] - 5:17 aided [1] - 11:10 ALSO [1] - 2:9 AND [1] - 1:10 APPEARANCES [1] - 3:1 appeared [1] - 3:5 applies [1] - 11:22 assume [1] - 11:24 attached [1] - 11:22 attorney [2] - 11:17, 11:18 B Barksdale [1] - 2:10 Barksdale-Noble [1] - 2:10 behalf [2] - 3:5, 8:11 big [1] - 8:24 brief [1] - 7:12 build [1] - 8:23 building [1] - 7:16 BY [1] - 3:3 C C.S.R [1] - 12:9 CASTALDO [1] - 3:2 certificate [1] - 11:21 Certificate [1] - 12:9 Certified [1] - 11:3 certified [1] - 11:24 certify [2] - 11:5, 11:21 Chairman [1] - 2:2 CHAIRMAN [14] - 5:5, 6:7, 6:12, 7:17, 8:3, 8:10, 9:2, 9:6, 9:9, 9:12, 9:16, 9:19, 10:1, 10:6 CHRISTINE [2] - 11:3, 12:9 Christine [2] - 2:23, 12:8 City [2] - 3:5, 5:19 CITY [1] - 1:6 clearly [1] - 5:23 close [2] - 9:18, 9:21 closed [1] - 5:17 commencing [1] - 5:3 COMMISSION [1] - 1:10 Commission [1] - 5:7 commission [1] - 5:10 COMMISSIONER [14] - 6:24, 7:1, 7:23, 8:1, 8:5, 8:7, 8:9, 9:23, 9:24, 10:4, 10:8, 10:10, 10:12, 10:14 Commissioner [5] - 2:3, 2:4, 2:5, 2:6, 2:7 commissioners [2] - 5:17, 6:14 Community [1] - 2:10 company [1] - 7:3 computer [1] - 11:10 computer-aided [1] - 11:10 conclude [1] - 9:17 concluding [1] - 10:16 considered [1] - 5:10 constitutes [1] - 11:11 control [1] - 12:2 copies [2] - 11:23, 12:2 correct [1] - 6:10 Council [1] - 5:19 counsel [2] - 11:17, 11:18 COUNTY [1] - 11:2 couple [1] - 7:12 Crouch [3] - 2:6, 7:22, 10:13 CROUCH [2] - 7:23, 10:14 CSR [1] - 2:24 D Danny [1] - 2:3 David [1] - 2:13 days [1] - 6:11 deliberate [1] - 5:18 Development [2] - 2:11, 8:14 Dim [1] - 2:14 DiNOLFO [1] - 3:2 direction [2] - 11:11, 12:2 directly [1] - 11:19 Director [1] - 2:11 distance [1] - 8:16 Drive [1] - 1:17 duly [1] - 7:6 during [2] - 6:2, 6:13 E employee [2] - 11:16, 11:17 entered [1] - 9:13 Estate [1] - 8:12 examined [1] - 7:6 except [1] - 8:22 F favor [2] - 6:18, 9:4 February [2] - 1:21, 12:5 feet [2] - 8:17 first [1] - 7:5 five [1] - 8:17 followed [1] - 6:17 following [1] - 5:1 follows [2] - 5:4, 7:7 foregoing [1] - 11:6 FORRISTALL [2] - 8:7, 10:10 Forristall [3] - 2:4, 8:6, 10:9 Frank [1] - 8:23 front [2] - 7:16, 8:15 G general [1] - 7:8 given [1] - 11:12 GLP [1] - 8:11 H hand [3] - 6:5, 11:24, 12:4 Hansen [1] - 2:13 HASENBALG [1] - 3:2 heard [1] - 5:15 HEARING [1] - 1:11 hearing [9] - 5:3, 5:6, 5:21, 6:3, 6:21, 9:22, 10:16, 11:6, 11:14 hearings [2] - 5:8, 5:16 hereby [1] - 11:5 herein [1] - 7:5 hereto [2] - 11:19, 11:22 hereunto [1] - 12:3 hmm [1] - 9:11 I ILLINOIS [2] - 1:7, 11:1 Illinois [6] - 1:18, 2:24, 3:4, 11:4, 12:4, 12:9 IN [1] - 12:3 INDEX [1] - 4:1 indirectly [1] - 11:20 insulation [1] - 8:24 interested [1] - 11:19 interrogatories [1] - 7:7 introduce [1] - 7:3 invite [1] - 5:8 items [1] - 5:15 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 1 K keep [1] - 6:15 Krysti [1] - 2:10 L Laboratory [1] - 7:8 lady [1] - 6:10 LAMB [1] - 3:3 LASALLE [1] - 11:2 Leland [1] - 12:4 Limited [1] - 8:16 Linnane [3] - 2:5, 7:24, 10:3 LINNANE [2] - 8:1, 10:4 Lisle [1] - 3:4 listen [1] - 6:13 LLC [1] - 8:12 located [3] - 6:22, 7:20, 8:17 look [1] - 6:9 LTD [1] - 3:2 M M-1 [1] - 8:16 machine [1] - 11:8 Manufacturing [1] - 8:16 Marge [1] - 2:5 Marlys [1] - 2:15 matters [1] - 5:20 means [1] - 11:8 meeting [1] - 5:7 MEGAN [1] - 3:3 member [1] - 6:4 members [1] - 5:8 MENDEZ [1] - 9:8 Mendez [1] - 2:12 Michael [1] - 2:6 minimum [1] - 8:15 Minute [1] - 2:15 most [1] - 6:11 motion [3] - 6:20, 7:21, 9:21 move [2] - 8:24, 9:17 moved [2] - 6:24, 9:23 MS [25] - 3:3, 6:11, 7:2, 7:8, 7:10, 7:11, 7:12, 7:14, 7:22, 7:24, 8:2, 8:4, 8:6, 8:8, 8:22, 9:8, 9:11, 9:15, 9:18, 10:3, 10:5, 10:7, 10:9, 10:11, 10:13 N name [1] - 5:24 need [1] - 7:18 nice [2] - 6:9 NOBLE [5] - 7:2, 7:10, 7:12, 9:11, 9:18 Noble [1] - 2:10 none [1] - 9:7 normally [1] - 6:7 number [1] - 6:21 O OF [3] - 1:6, 11:1, 11:2 once [1] - 5:16 one [2] - 5:5, 5:23 open [1] - 6:20 opposition [1] - 6:18 oral [1] - 7:6 order [1] - 6:16 orderly [2] - 6:9, 6:10 Ordinance [1] - 8:14 original [1] - 11:22 OTTOSEN [1] - 3:2 outcome [1] - 11:20 owner [1] - 8:12 P p.m [3] - 1:22, 5:3, 10:17 PAGE [1] - 4:2 Pages [1] - 11:7 parcel [1] - 8:17 parties [1] - 11:19 personal [1] - 11:11 persons [2] - 5:12, 5:22 petition [1] - 9:20 Petition [1] - 6:21 petitioner [3] - 5:15, 6:3, 8:11 petitioner's [1] - 6:17 place [1] - 11:15 plan [1] - 6:2 Planner [3] - 2:12, 2:13, 2:14 Planning [1] - 5:6 PLANNING [1] - 1:10 Pleva [1] - 8:11 PLEVA [8] - 4:3, 6:11, 7:4, 7:8, 7:11, 7:14, 8:22, 9:15 podium [2] - 6:1, 7:10 Pointe [1] - 1:17 Prairie [1] - 1:17 prepared [1] - 8:19 PRESENT [2] - 2:1, 2:9 present [2] - 5:13, 9:3 presentation [2] - 6:17, 8:20 pretty [1] - 8:20 proceedings [3] - 5:2, 10:15, 11:13 Products [1] - 7:9 property [3] - 6:22, 7:19, 8:12 proposed [1] - 5:9 PUBLIC [1] - 1:11 public [14] - 5:2, 5:5, 5:9, 5:12, 5:16, 6:3, 6:4, 6:21, 9:14, 9:20, 9:22, 10:16, 11:6, 11:14 purpose [1] - 5:7 put [1] - 7:15 PZC [3] - 6:21, 7:19, 8:10 Q questions [2] - 5:14, 6:14 R raise [1] - 6:4 Real [1] - 8:11 receiving [1] - 6:16 recommendations [1] - 5:19 record [2] - 9:14, 11:12 reduce [1] - 8:14 reduced [1] - 11:9 refrigerator [2] - 7:15, 8:24 regarding [3] - 5:9, 5:15, 9:20 relative [2] - 11:16, 11:17 repeat [1] - 6:5 reported [2] - 2:23, 11:7 Reporter [1] - 11:4 represent [1] - 5:24 reproduced [1] - 12:1 request [4] - 5:14, 6:19, 6:22, 7:19 requesting [3] - 7:13, 7:14, 8:12 requests [1] - 5:9 required [1] - 8:15 response [1] - 9:5 responses [2] - 9:10, 9:13 responsibility [1] - 12:1 Rich [1] - 2:2 Road [1] - 3:3 roll [3] - 7:18, 7:21, 10:1 room [2] - 7:15, 9:1 rules [1] - 6:8 Ryan [1] - 2:4 S Sara [1] - 2:12 scheduled [1] - 5:6 Second [1] - 9:24 second [1] - 7:1 Section [1] - 8:13 seeing [1] - 9:6 seeking [1] - 8:14 Senior [2] - 2:12, 2:13 sentences [1] - 7:13 set [1] - 12:3 setback [1] - 8:15 short [1] - 6:15 Shorthand [1] - 11:4 shorthand [1] - 11:9 sign [1] - 6:1 signed [1] - 11:23 simultaneously [1] - 11:9 slab [1] - 8:23 specified [1] - 11:15 SS [1] - 11:1 stand [1] - 6:4 standards [1] - 9:13 state [1] - 5:23 STATE [1] - 11:1 State [1] - 11:4 stenographically [1] - 11:8 Street [3] - 6:23, 7:20, 8:18 subject [1] - 5:20 Suite [1] - 3:3 sweet [1] - 6:15 sworn [2] - 6:6, 7:6 T Taker [1] - 2:15 testified [1] - 7:7 testify [1] - 5:22 testimony [6] - 5:8, 5:12, 6:16, 9:20, 9:22, 11:12 thereof [1] - 11:23 Thiam [1] - 2:14 tonight [3] - 5:6, 5:11, 9:7 tonight's [3] - 5:17, 5:20, 6:3 transcript [2] - 11:7, 11:23 transcription [1] - 11:10 true [1] - 11:12 try [1] - 6:15 typewriting [1] - 11:10 U under [3] - 11:11, 11:24, 12:2 Unified [1] - 8:14 UNITED [1] - 1:6 United [2] - 3:5, 8:13 V variance [4] - 6:22, 7:15, 7:19, 8:13 Vera [2] - 7:2, 8:11 VERA [2] - 4:3, 7:4 via [1] - 11:10 Vinyard [3] - 2:2, 8:2, 10:5 VINYARD [14] - 5:5, 6:7, 6:12, 7:17, 8:3, 8:10, 9:2, 9:6, 9:9, 9:12, 9:16, 9:19, 10:1, 10:6 VITOSH [2] - 11:3, 12:9 Vitosh [2] - 2:23, 12:8 vote [4] - 5:18, 7:21, 10:1 W walls [1] - 8:24 Wally [1] - 2:7 Warrenville [1] - 3:3 Wednesday [1] - 1:21 werderich [1] - 10:11 WERDERICH [4] - 7:1, 8:9, 9:24, 10:12 Werderich [2] - 2:7, 8:8 WHEREOF [1] - 12:3 WHEREUPON [1] - 5:1 Williams [3] - 2:3, 8:4, 10:7 Vitosh Reporting Service 815.993.2832 cms.vitosh@gmail.com PZC - Public Hearing - February 11, 2026 2 WILLIAMS [4] - 6:24, 8:5, 9:23, 10:8 Willman [1] - 8:23 wish [2] - 5:13, 6:18 wishes [1] - 9:3 wishing [1] - 5:22 WITNESS [2] - 4:2, 12:3 witness [1] - 7:5 Witness [1] - 6:6 Wolf [3] - 6:23, 7:20, 8:18 Y yard [1] - 8:15 YORKVILLE [2] - 1:6, 1:7 Yorkville [2] - 1:18, 3:6 YOUNG [12] - 7:22, 7:24, 8:2, 8:4, 8:6, 8:8, 10:3, 10:5, 10:7, 10:9, 10:11, 10:13 Young [1] - 2:15 Z Zoning [1] - 5:7 ZONING [1] - 1:10 Zoomland [1] - 9:7 DRAFT Page 1 of 3 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION City Council Chambers 651 Prairie Pointe Drive, Yorkville, IL Wednesday, April 8, 2026 7:00pm Meeting Called to Order Commissioner Ryan Forristall called the meeting to order at 7:00pm, roll was called and a quorum was established. Roll Call Ryan Forristall-yes, Wally Werderich-yes, Chad Green-yes, Marge Linnane-yes Absent: Danny Williams, Michael Crouch, Richard Vinyard City Staff Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Megan Lamb, City Attorney David Hansen, Senior Planner Sara Mendez, Senior Planner Thian Dim, Planner 1 Other Guests Rich McDonald, Kylyn's Ridge Toni Wolgast, Kylyn's Ridge Mark Martin, White Oak Leesa Poss,White Oak Margaret E. Granger, White Oak Michael Granger, White Oak Joe Besco, Countryside Chuck Kasper/Zoom Chloe Russell/Zoom Angela Egner/Zoom (and others on Zoom) Previous Meeting Minutes February 11, 2026 Motion by Mr. Werderich and second by Mr. Green to approve the minutes as presented. Ms. Noble noted 3 corrections to the previous minutes. Roll call: Forristall-yes, Werderich-yes, Green-yes, Linnane-yes. Motion carried 4-0 to approve the minutes with the corrections noted by Ms. Noble. Additional Business (out of sequence) Announcement: Commissioner Forristall announced that some of the public might be attending the meeting regarding the City Council Action Updates. Since the first item under #1 of the updates is under consideration by the City Council, he said no action would be taken at this meeting. As a result, Mr. Forristall said he would like to move “Additional Business/City Council Action Updates”, to follow “Previous Meeting Minutes”. Commissioners Werderich and Linnane, respectively, moved and seconded to amend the agenda as requested. Roll call: Forristall-yes, Werderich-yes, Green-yes, Linnane-yes. Carried 4-0. 1. City Council Action Updates a. PZC 2025-13 Matt Gilbert (Meyer rezoning request) Ms. Noble said regarding PZC 2025-13--Meyer rezoning, at the February 11th meeting, the petitioner asked the rezoning be postponed before advancing to City Council. It was then heard on March 24th at City Council and was tabled. Staff will update the PZC when final action is taken. Page 2 of 3 b. PZC 2025-16 Vera Pleva/GLP Real Estate, LLC (Variance request) PZC 2025-16, 202 Wolf St. variance, was approved by City Council on March 24th. Citizen’s Comments Ms. Leesa Poss said the Annexation Agreement for Project Cardinal restricts generator testing to non-holiday weekends. She asked what city department or official is responsible for monitoring and enforcing this restriction and what penalty or remedy is in place for violations. Ms. Noble said the Annexation Agreement was not considered at the PZC , so it would be a City Council question. Ms. Poss also said Project Steel/Prologis is committed to a Tier 4 emission standard for generators. Is that memorialized in a legal or binding provision in the Annexation Agreement or PUD and if not, what mechanism is in place to ensure compliance? Mr. Mark Martin asked if the city had received an independent study of the water impact since Project Cardinal will use 350,000 gallons per day. This impact would be in addition to Project Steel usage, additional data centers and the impact on agricultural wells in the area. He said there is now talk of drilling wells. He also commented on the Meyer data center proposal and noted the Council initially rejected it on January 14th. The developer made changes to the proposal. Under what provision of the UDO or Illinois Municipal Code did the city determine that a substantially revised proposal did not require a new Public Hearing before going back to PZC for consideration or to City Council for a vote? He asked what finding of fact does the City Council require to override a unanimous Planning & Zoning denial recommendation? Will those findings be in writing and available before the meeting? Mr. Joe Besco, a 30-year Yorkville citizen, said he had also served on the Plan Commission and on City Council. He appreciates the time the Commissioners spend for the community and thanked them for their service. He expressed his displeasure with the way things were handled for the data centers--saying they are destructive, the citizen notification process was lacking, and the general approach and treatment he perceived from the leaders. Public Hearings None Unfinished Business None Presentation (out of sequence) a. Commissioner Training session with the Planning and Zoning Commission presented by City Attorney, Megan Lamb, Ottosen DiNolfo Hasenbalg & Castaldo, Ltd. Ms. Lamb refreshed the Commissioners on how the meeting agenda is handled, how the meeting is conducted and expectations from the Commission. She said all Commissioners received Open Meetings training. She reminded them if there are more than 3 Commissioners together or emailing or other communication regarding PZC business, it is considered a meeting and in violation of the Open Meetings Act. She summarized how the agenda is followed and requirements of the meeting. Requirements are: posting of agenda 48 hours in advance, call to order, roll call, minutes taken and approved, citizen comments, hearings if required with a court reporter present, testimony must be given under oath and action only on agenda items. An in-house quorum is required and a Zoom participant does not count as part of the quorum. For this commission, 4 members are required in person to constitute a quorum. For a special meeting, only items on the agenda can be discussed. Page 3 of 3 DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA ORDER, ETC: Citizen Comments Regarding public comment vs. Public Hearing, Ms. Lamb noted that public comment does not require an answer from the Commissioners. A question can be answered if the Commission desires, but she said it's a good practice to not answer questions during this time. Public Hearing The presenter can answer questions pertaining to the specific topic. Public comments can be limited if repetitive. Unfinished/Old Business This includes items with no resolution or tabled previously, but will require attention. New Business Any new items are brought forth under this heading. Land use decisions are located under New Business along with Variances, Special Use, Rezoning, PUD, but no Annexation Agreements. Most land use decisions must come through PZC. Annexation Agreements have Public Hearings at City Council. Ms. Lamb said the petitioner submits responses in their applications. Then Finding of Fact criteria need to be met and that determines whether or not to grant the land use as set forth in the statute or city UDO. The votes for the Finding of Fact must be based on the expert information and not on personal preferences. If there is not enough information, the matter can be tabled. There is also weight put on the “standards” when making the decision. If Commissioners have questions outside of the meeting setting, they should refer them to Ms. Noble or to the petitioner at the meeting. Commissioner Werderich asked about potential lawsuits over a PZC decision and what evidence the court would examine when looking at the PZC decision. Ms. Lamb stated that Findings of Fact would be very important in such a scenario. PZC is an advisory body. If PZC votes no for a Special Use or Variance, the City Council must have a 2/3 majority Aldermanic vote to override the PZC. With Rezoning, a simple majority is needed. If the PZC recommends in favor of a petition, only a simple majority is needed by the City Council to approve. FOIA City business in emails, texts or personal computer, spam and junk, are subject to a FOIA. Four or more members cannot discuss PZC business. Ms. Lamb said there are some exemptions that do exist, however, transparency always rules. When a FOIA request is received, city staff would ask the Commissioners for any documents pertaining to the request. Ms. Lamb suggested not deleting anything related to city business. Additional Business Contains informational items, updates on City Council actions and PZC updates. New Business None Additional Business (already discussed) Adjournment There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned at 7:58pm on a motion by Mr. Werderich and second by Ms. Linnane. Unanimous voice vote approval. Respectfully submitted by Marlys Young, Minute Taker 1 Monica Cisija From:Monica Cisija Sent:Thursday, April 9, 2026 10:28 AM Subject:Fw: Planning and Zoning Commission - April 8, 2026 - Kasper Comments From: chuckkasper1@att.net <chuckkasper1@att.net> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2026 12:27 PM To: Jori Contrino <jcontrino@yorkville.il.us> Subject: Planning and Zoning Commission - April 8, 2026 - Kasper Comments Planning and Zoning Commission — April 8, 2026 To: Yorkville Planning and Zoning Commission From: Chuck Kasper 17p Ashe Road Sugar Grove, Il 60554 Date: April 7, 2026 Dear Commissioners, I am an adjacent landowner in Sugar Grove and a member of Preserve Our Yorkville & Communities, LLC. I write to express my concerns about the cumulative impact of the five proposed data center projects in the Yorkville Eldamain Corridor on our community. In short, my property line literally is 112 feet from the property line of one of the data center sites. I request that the Commission ensure the following questions are addressed as the City continues to administer these approvals: 1. Has the City of Yorkville ever commissioned or received a cumulative environmental impact study addressing the combined effects of all five proposed data center projects in the Eldamain Corridor (Project Cardinal, Project Steel, CyrusOne, the Meyer parcel, and C1 Yorkville Phase 2) on noise, air quality, water supply, traffic, and groundwater in the surrounding area? 2. The five data center projects in this corridor total over 3,000 acres and up to 32 buildings. At what point does the City intend to evaluate the combined infrastructure burden (for example, roads, water, sewer, and electrical grid) of all five projects on Yorkville residents and taxpayers? Thank you for your service to the community. Respectfully, Chuck Kasper 17p Ashe Road Sugar Grove, Illinois 60554 1 SUMMARY: In 2025 and 2026, the City Council approved six (6) developments that required rezoning. Since these approvals are inconsistent with the future land use designations outlined in the adopted 2016 Comprehensive Plan (“Plan”), amendments to the Future Land Use Map and land use designations are required for each affected area. Staff is recommending updates to the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the recently approved land uses for these projects. These amendments ensure the Plan remains consistent with approved zoning and the existing built environment, while also preventing misinterpretation of land use expectations within the Plan’s planning horizon. A list of the affected developments is provided in the table below. Restore Church, approved in 2022, is also included, as staff noticed it was not part of any previous amendment lists from prior years. Project Current Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation Proposed Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation PZC 2022-19 Restore Church Estate/Conservation Residential Destination Commercial (DC) PZC 2025-01 DMYF Loftus – DMYF, LLLP Agricultural Zone Estate/Conservation Residential General Industrial (GI) PZC 2025-07 Project Steel - Prologis (Data Center Campus) Estate/Conservation Residential General Industrial (GI) PZC 2025-08 Project Cardinal - Pioneer (Data Center Campus) Estate/Conservation Residential Parks and Open Space General Industrial (GI) PZC 2025-09 1.5 Mile Review for USA Energy Independence (Solar Farm) Estate/Conservation Residential Agricultural Zone (AZ) PZC 2025-12 South Receiving Station Site Estate/Conservation Residential Institutional (I) PZC 2025-14 Yorkville School District Estate/Conservation Residential Institutional (I) Memorandum To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: David Hansen, Senior Planner CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Sara Mendez, Senior Planner Thian Dim, Planner I Date: June 10, 2026 Subject: PZC 2026-01: Comprehensive Plan Update – Future Land Use Amendments 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: The following provides a summary of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that staff is recommending for each development. Map images are also included to illustrate the proposed changes to the Future Land Use Map in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. PZC 2022-19: Restore Church Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: Destination Commercial (DC) Summary: An application was submitted requesting the rezoning of approximately 29 acres of commercially zoned land, generally located east of Wing Road and south of Illinois Route 71, to allow for continued use of the property for religious purposes as well as other potential non-religiously affiliated land uses. As part of the rezoning approval process, an annexation agreement amendment was approved via Ordinance 2022-41, which removed the three (3) parcels from the Windmill Farms PUD. Thus, the property was rezoned from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to B-3 General Business District. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Destination Commercial” is intended for a broad range of commercial activities ranging from large format retail and strip centers to hotels and recreational complexes. Changing this property’s designation to “Destination Commercial” is consistent with the site’s B-3 zoning and the church’s future plans, which may include additional non-religious affiliated land uses. 3 PZC 2025-01: DMYF Loftus – DMYF, LLLP Current Future Land Use: Agricultural Zone & Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: General Industrial (GI) Summary: An application was submitted requesting the rezoning of approximately 54 acres of vacant farmland generally located north of Faxon Road, adjacent to Beecher Road, and south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad for the purpose of constructing and operating a future industrial / data center land use. The property was rezoned A-1 Agricultural District to M-2 General Manufacturing District. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Agricultural Zone” and “Estate/Conservation Residential”. “Agricultural Zone” is meant for general farming uses. “Estate/Conservation Residential” is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M-2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. 4 PZC 2025-07: Project Steel – Prologis (Data Center Campus) Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: General Industrial (GI) Summary: An application was submitted requesting the annexation, rezoning, special use for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary PUD Plan for sixteen (16) parcels totaling approximately 540-acres of vacant farmland generally located southeast of Ashe and Galena Roads, east of Eldamain Road, north of Corneils Road, and west of East Beecher Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a master- planned, high-tech data center campus. The data center campus has a phased development plan for sixteen (16) two-story buildings totaling approximately 6.8 million square feet with four (4) electrical substations, associated stormwater detention basins, equipment yards, and vacation of the W. Beecher Road right-of- way. The property was rezoned R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residential District to M-2 General Manufacturing District. Amendment: Twelve (12) of the sixteen (16) parcels, approximately 300 acres, were originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M-2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. The remaining four (4) parcels that were approved in the application request, adjacent to Eldamain Rd, are currently designated as “General Industrial” and will remain unchanged. 5 PZC 2025-08: Project Cardinal – Pioneer (Data Center Campus) Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential & Parks and Open Space Proposed Future Land Use: General Industrial (GI) Summary: An application was submitted requesting the annexation, rezoning, special use for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary PUD Plan for twenty-one (21) parcels totaling approximately 1,037-acres of vacant farmland generally located northwest of Route 47 and Galena Road, south of Baseline Road, and east of Ashe Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a master-planned, high-tech data center campus. The data center campus has a phased development plan for fourteen (14) two-story data center buildings totaling over 17 million square feet, two (2) electrical substations, a utility switchyard, and associated stormwater detention basins. The property was rezoned R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residential District to M-2 General Manufacturing District for the annexation of seven (7) parcels totaling 305 acres. The remaining fourteen (14) parcels totaling approximately 730 acres were included in two (2) existing Annexation/Planned Unit Development Agreements. This includes the Bailey Meadows and Westhaven developments. The underlying zoning for both the Bailey Meadows and Westhaven developments includes R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District, R-3 Multi- Family Attached Residence District, and B-3 General Business District. All parcels included in these two developments were rezoned to M-2 General Manufacturing District. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential” and “Parks and Open Space”. Estate/Conservation Residential is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Parks and Open Space” designation is meant to preserve recreational areas and open space for either public or private use. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M- 2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. 6 PZC 2025-09: 1.5 Mile Review – USA Energy Independence (Solar Farm) Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: Agricultural Zone (AZ) Summary: An application was submitted requesting a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility and a variance to the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial solar energy facility on land within 1.5 miles of a municipality without an annexation agreement. The property is approximately 37 acres and is generally located immediately north of Corneils Road and approximately 0.5 miles east of Route 47 in unincorporated Kendall County. Since the property is located within the one and a half miles of the planning boundary for Yorkville, it allows the City the opportunity to review and provide comments to Kendall County. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Agricultural Zone” designation is meant for general farming uses. Changing this property’s designation to “Agricultural Zone” is consistent with the City’s zoning classification for a solar farm use. PZC 2025-12: South Receiving Station Site Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: Institutional (I) 7 Summary: An application was submitted requesting the rezoning of approximately 4 acres of vacant farmland generally located directly north of East Schoolhouse Road (Illinois Route 126), east of Wing Road, and south of Illinois Route 71 to accommodate the development of a south receiving station building, a standpipe (water tower), and a DuPage Water Commission (DWC) metering building as part of the City’s Lake Michigan water project. The property was rezoned B-3 General Business District to the PI Public Institutional District. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Institutional” designation is meant to accommodate public or quasi-public entities to plan accordingly for future location and expansion of such facilities. Changing this property’s designation to “Institutional” is consistent with PI Public Institutional District and aligns with other public, and institutional owned and zoned properties located within the City. PZC 2025-14: Yorkville School District Current Future Land Use: Estate/Conservation Residential Proposed Future Land Use: Institutional (I) Summary: An application was submitted requesting the annexation and rezoning of approximately 110-acres of vacant farmland generally located north of River Road, west of Game Farm Road, and east of Eldamain Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a future public school facility/campus. The property was rezoned R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District to PI Public Institutional District. Amendment: The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Institutional” designation is meant to accommodate public or quasi-public entities to plan accordingly for future location and expansion of such facilities. Changing this property’s designation to “Institutional” is consistent with PI Public Institutional District and aligns with other public, and institutional owned and zoned properties located within the City. 8 STAFF COMMENTS: The Comprehensive Plan land use map serves as a guide for future development and zoning decisions. However, it is also intended to be amended when conditions warrant a change in planning direction within a specific area of the City. In this case, the land use changes for these areas have already been approved by the City Council, and it is appropriate to update the corresponding future land use designations accordingly. PROPOSED MOTION: In consideration of testimony presented during a Public Hearing on June 10, 2026 and discussions conducted at that meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval to the City Council of a request to amend the Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, including a modified future land use map, pursuant to Section 11-12-7 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-12-7) and Section 9-1-1 of the Yorkville City Code. The proposed amendment adds sections the Future Land Use – Map Addendum to reclassify seven (7) identified developments. The changes are a result of a rezoning approvals made by the City Council in calendar years 2022, 2025, and 2026. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Appendix Amendment Pages 2. Public Hearing Notice Affidavit SECTION 9 - STEWARDSHIP AND IMPLEMENTATION 193THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE FUTURE LAND USE - MAP ADDENDUMS RESTORE CHURCH New Future Land Use Designation: Destination Commerical Summary: In 2022, an application was approved requesting the rezoning of approximately 29 acres of commercially zoned land, generally located east of Wing Road and south of Illinois Route 71, to allow for continued use of the property for religious purposes as well as other potential non-religiously affiliated land uses. As part of the rezoning approval process, an annexation agreement amendment was approved via Ordinance 2022-41, which removed the three (3) parcels from the Windmill Farms PUD. Thus, the property was rezoned from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to B-3 General Business District. The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Destination Commercial” is intended for a broad range of commercial activities ranging from large format retail and strip centers to hotels and recreational complexes. Changing this property’s designation to “Destination Commercial” is consistent with the site’s B-3 zoning and the church’s future plans, which may include additional non-religious affiliated land uses. DMYF LOFTUS (DMYF, LLLP) New Future Land Use Designation: General Industrial Summary: In 2025, an application was approved requesting the rezoning of approximately 54 acres of vacant farmland generally located north of Faxon Road, east of Beecher Road, and south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad for the purpose of constructing and operating a future industrial / data center land use. The property was rezoned A-1 Agricultural District to M-2 General Manufacturing District. The property was originally designated “Agricultural Zone” and “Estate/Conservation Residential”. “Agricultural Zone” is meant for general farming uses. “Estate/Conservation Residential” is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M-2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. PROJECT STEEL (PROLOGIS - DATA CENTER CAMPUS) New Future Land Use Designation: General Industrial Summary: In 2026, an application was approved requesting the annexation, rezoning, special use for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary PUD Plan for sixteen (16) parcels totaling approximately 540-acres of vacant farmland generally located southeast of Ashe and Galena Roads, east of Eldamain Road, north of Corneils Road, and west of East Beecher Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a master-planned, high-tech data center campus. The data center campus has a phased development plan for eighteen (18) two-story buildings totaling approximately 6.8 million square feet with three (3) electrical substations, associated stormwater detention basins, equipment yards, and vacation of the W. Beecher Road right-of-way. The property was rezoned R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residential District to M-2 General Manufacturing District. Twelve (12) of the sixteen (16) parcels, approximately 300 acres, were originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low- density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M-2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. The remaining four (4) parcels that were approved in the application request are currently designated as “General Industrial” and will remain unchanged. SECTION 9 - STEWARDSHIP AND IMPLEMENTATION 194 THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE FUTURE LAND USE - MAP ADDENDUMS PROJECT CARDINAL (PIONEER - DATA CENTER CAMPUS) New Future Land Use Designation: General Industrial Summary: In 2026, an application was approved requesting the annexation, rezoning, special use for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary PUD Plan for twenty-one (21) parcels totaling approximately 1,037-acres of vacant farmland generally located northwest of Route 47 and Galena Road, south of Baseline Road, and east of Ashe Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a master-planned, high-tech data center campus. The data center campus has a phased development plan for fourteen (14) two-story data center buildings totaling over 17 million square feet, two (2) electrical substations, a utility switchyard, and associated stormwater detention basins. The property was rezoned R-1 Single- Family Suburban Residential District to M-2 General Manufacturing District for the annexation of seven (7) parcels totaling 305 acres. The underlying zoning for both the Bailey Meadows and Westhaven developments includes R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District, R-3 Multi-Family Attached Residence District, and B-3 General Business District. All parcels included in these two developments were rezoned to M-2 General Manufacturing District. The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential” and “Parks and Open Space”. Estate/Conservation Residential is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Parks and Open Space” designation is meant to preserve recreational areas and open space for either public or private use. The “General Industrial” designation is meant to accommodate a broad range of warehousing, manufacturing, and energy/industrial land uses. Changing this property’s designation to “General Industrial” is consistent with the M-2 General Manufacturing zoning and future industrial / data center land uses. 1.5 MILE REVIEW (USA ENERGY INDEPENDENCE - SOLAR FARM) New Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural Zone Summary: In 2025, Kendall County approved a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility and a variance to the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial solar energy facility on land within 1.5 miles of a municipality without an annexation agreement. The property is approximately 37 acres and is generally located immediately north of Corneils Road and approximately 0.5 miles east of Route 47 in unincorporated Kendall County. Since the property is located within the one and a half miles of the planning boundary for Yorkville, it allows the City the opportunity to review and provide comments to Kendall County. The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Agricultural Zone” designation is meant for general farming uses. Changing this property’s designation to “Agricultural Zone” is consistent with the City’s zoning classification for a solar farm use. SOUTH RECEIVING STATION SITE New Future Land Use Designation: Institutional Summary: In 2025, an application was approved requesting the rezoning of approximately 4 acres of vacant farmland generally located directly north of East Schoolhouse Road (Illinois Route 126), east of Wing Road, and south of Illinois Route 71 to accommodate the development of a south receiving station building, a standpipe (water tower), and a DuPage Water Commission (DWC) metering building as part of the City’s Lake Michigan water project. The property was rezoned B-3 General Business District to the PI Public Institutional District. The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Institutional” designation is meant to accommodate public or quasi-public entities to plan accordingly for future location and expansion of such facilities. Changing this property’s designation to “Institutional” is consistent with PI Public Institutional District and aligns with other public, and institutional owned and zoned properties located within the City. SECTION 9 - STEWARDSHIP AND IMPLEMENTATION 195THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE FUTURE LAND USE - MAP ADDENDUMS YORKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT New Future Land Use Designation: Institutional Summary: In 2026, an application was approved requesting the annexation and rezoning of approximately 110-acres of vacant farmland generally located north of River Road, west of Game Farm Road, and east of Eldamain Road for the purpose of constructing and operating a future public school facility/campus. The property was rezoned R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District to PI Public Institutional District. The property was originally designated “Estate/Conservation Residential”, which is intended to allow flexibility in residential design, accommodating low-density detached single-family housing while preserving sensitive environmental and scenic features. The “Institutional” designation is meant to accommodate public or quasi-public entities to plan accordingly for future location and expansion of such facilities. Changing this property’s designation to “Institutional” is consistent with PI Public Institutional District and aligns with other public, and institutional owned and zoned properties located within the City. THE YORKVILLE PLAN CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Sold To: United City of Yorkville - 119899 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 Bill To: United City of Yorkville - 119899 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 Certificate of Publication: Order Number: 73032 Purchase Order: State of Illinois - Kendall Chicago Tribune Media Group does hereby certify that it is the publisher of the Aurora Beacon News Classified. The Aurora Beacon News Classified is a secular newspaper, has been continuously published Daily for more than fifty (50) weeks prior to the first publication of the attached notice, is published in the City of Aurora, Township of Aurora, State of Illinois, is of general circulation throughout that county and surrounding area, and is a newspaper as defined by 715 IL CS 5/5. This is to certify that a notice, a true copy of which is attached, was published 1 time(s) in the Aurora Beacon News Classified. The first publication of the notice was made in the newspaper, dated and published on 5/15/2026, and the last publication of the notice was made in the newspaper dated and published on 5/15/2026. This notice was also placed on a statewide public notice website as required by 715 ILCS 5/2. 1. PUBLICATION DATES: 15 May 2026. Aurora Beacon News Classified In witness, an authorized agent of The Chicago Tribune Media Group has signed this certificate executed in Chicago, Illinois on this 16 May 2026, by Chicago Tribune Company _________________________________________ Jeremy Gates Page 1 of 3 Page 2 of 3 Page 3 of 3 1 REQUEST SUMMARY: The petitioner, Tom Scofield, on behalf of Ross Lane Development, LLC., is seeking Final Plat approval for an approximately 20-acre site consisting of 154 new residential lots located east of Kennedy Road and south of the BNSF railroad in Yorkville. This submittal marks, Phase II, the final phase of development for Unit 10 (Neighborhood 7) and Unit 11 (Neighborhood 6) of the Grande Reserve subdivision (refer to map on the right). PROPERTY BACKGROUND: Under the original annexation agreement, approved via Ord. 2003-44, 298 townhome units were contemplated for Units 10 & 11. However, after more than two decades of inactivity, the developer restarted this portion of Grande Reserve and planned to develop the area in two phases. The first Phase, Unit 10A and 11A, was previously approved by the City in 2024 via Ord. 2024-35 and included a total of 158 units (78 units in Unit 10A and 80 units in Unit 11A). The proposed final phase for Units 10B & 11B will add 154 total townhome units, with 76 units in 10B and 78 units in 11B. At full build-out, the combined phases will result in 312 townhome units, which represents an increase of 14 units (~ 4.75%) than originally planned but was approved via Ord. 2021-13. DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND: As of March 2026, approximately 49% of Phase I has been built. Of the 78 dwelling units proposed for Unit 10A, 40 building permits have been issued. In Unit 11A, building permits for 38 out of the 80 proposed dwelling units have been issued. The photo on the following page, taken March 2026, shows a current snapshot of the development status of the Grande Reserve townhomes in Unit 11A (Phase I). Memorandum To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Thian Dim, Planner I CC: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Bart Olson, City Administrator Sara Mendez, Senior Planner David Hansen, Senior Planner Date: June 05, 2026 Subject: PZC 2026-02 Grande Reserve – Units 10B & 11B (Final Plat Approval) Proposed Approval of 154 lots in Units 10B & 11B of Grande Reserve 2 Following Phase I, Phase II will bring 76 units to Unit 10B in groupings of 4-5 townhomes fronting dedicated public roadways, Matlock Drive and Farren Street and 78 townhomes to Unit 11B in groupings of 4-6 units fronting dedicated public roadway, Richardson Circle (refer to map below). 3 ZONING AND LAND USE: Both units are zoned R-2 Single Family Traditional Residence District Planned Unit Development (PUD) The following are the current immediate surrounding zoning and land uses: Zoning Land Use North Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad R-2 Planned Unit Development (Grande Reserve) Transportation Residential South Grande Trail/Freedom Place R-2 Planned Unit Development (Grande Reserve) PI Public Institutional District (Grande Reserve Elementary) Transportation Residential School East R-2 Planned Unit Development (Grande Reserve) Residential West Kennedy Road A-1 SU Agriculture (Unincorporated Kendall County) Transportation Blackberry Oaks Golf Course PROPOSED FINAL PLAT OF RESUBDIVISION: Preliminary plans for both Units 10 and 11 were approved by the City Council in February 2005 but were never recorded and have since expired. However, in 2024, the City Council approved plans to develop the area in two phases. Phase I has been approved and is currently under construction. The proposed Final Plat of Subdivision for Phase II generally conforms to those originally approved plans. The area breakdown of the proposed final platted areas are as follows: 4 UNIT 10B - AREA SUMMARY Land Type Acres Square Feet Lots 2.483 108,160 Common Area/Outlot 6.128 266,961 Dedicated Right of Way (Public Streets) 1.448 63,080 TOTAL 10.059 Acres 438,201 SF UNIT 11B - AREA SUMMARY Land Type Acres Square Feet Lots 3.208 139,734 Common Area/Outlot 5.582 243,170 Dedicated Right of Way (Public Streets) 1.919 83,570 TOTAL 10.709 Acres 466,474 SF Building Setbacks: Proposed lot setbacks for front, side, and perimeter yards are consistent with the requirements established for parcels located in Neighborhoods 6 and 7, per “Exhibit E-1 Grande Reserve Variance Schedule for Neighborhoods 2-19” of the Annexation Agreement, as detailed below: 5 BUILDING SETBACK REQUIRED MINIMUM PROPOSED SETBACK Front 25’ 25’ Side (Corner) 20’ 20’ Perimeter 30’ 30’ PROPOSED PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT: As previously stated, the development for Grande Reserve Units 10 and 11 will occur in two phases. Illustrated below in the submitted phasing plan, all utilities required to operate Phase II will be installed with water mains looped and connected to exiting adjacent mains. Staff supports the phasing of the development, and all bonding or securities will be required by unit and not by phase, as required by the City’s Subdivision Control Ordinance. ANNEXATION AGREEMENT The original annexation agreement (Ord. 2003-44) and the subsequent economic incentive agreement (Ord. 2021-13) included provisions applying to specific units within Grande Reserve and conditions for final plat approval. Applicable provisions to Unit 10 (Neighborhood 7) and Unit 11 (Neighborhood 6) are briefly summarized below. Dwelling Unit Count The Annexation Agreement allows flexibility in the layout and design of Neighborhoods 4-8, with a total of 986 approved dwelling units through the Concept PUD plans. The exact location and mix of housing units will be decided during preliminary/final platting, and any development phase that stays within the approved limit for the neighborhoods is in substantial conformance with the Concept Plan. 6 However, in 2021, the Economic Incentive Agreement between the City and Grande Reserve (Chicago) ASLI VI, LLLP, approved a minor change to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Unit 9, replacing 224 duplexes to 111 single-family homes, which ultimately reduced the total for this section of Grande Reserve from 986 to 887 units. The updated total included the previous petitioner’s proposed addition of 14 units in Neighborhoods 6 (Unit 11) and 7 (Unit 10). This change remains well below the maximum number of units permitted under the original annexation agreement. Below is a comparison between the approved Concept Plan PUD dwelling unit count (Group Exhibit “C”) and the proposed final plat dwelling unit count for each neighborhood: NEIGHBORHOOD (UNIT) UNIT TYPE APPROVED DWELLING UNITS CONCEPT PUD PLAN PROPOSED/APPROVED DWELLING UNITS FINAL PLAT Neighborhood 4 (Unit 28)1 Apts. 300 300 Neighborhood 5 (Units 12, 15 and 22) TH 164 164 Neighborhood 6 (Unit 11) TH 156 158 Neighborhood 7 (Unit 10) TH 142 154 Neighborhood 8 (Unit 9) DU* 224 111 TOTAL 986 887 A breakdown of the dwelling unit count for each development phase of Neighborhood 6 (Unit 11) and Neighborhood 7 (Unit 10) is as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD (UNIT) PHASE PROPOSED/APPROVED DWELLING UNITS FINAL PLAT TOTAL Neighborhood 6 (Unit 11A) I 80 158 Neighborhood 6 (Unit 11B) II 78 Neighborhood 7 (Unit 10A) I 78 154 Neighborhood 7 (Unit 10B) II 76 Cul-de-Sacs Per the original annexation agreement, the homeowners’ association (HOA) for Units 10 and 11 are required to pay for and perform all snowplowing of cul-de-sacs, even though all roads within the units will be public roads. The HOA does not have the snowplowing obligation for other public roadways within the units. Phase II of Unit 11 has two (2) cul-de-sacs and therefore, will be obligated to pay for and perform all snowplowing. Declarations of CCR Per the original annexation agreement, the developer must submit a copy of the proposed Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions, and Easements to be reviewed by the City. A Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions, and Easements has been previously provided with the final plat request for Phase I: Units 10A & 11A and has been recorded with Kendall County on March 25, 2025 (202500003534). APPEARANCE STANDARDS In the original Annexation Agreement (Ord. 2003-44), Architectural Design Standards for townhome development were established, along with conceptual building elevations provided in Exhibit “D2”. 1 Grande Reserve Unit 28 is currently under construction. 7 Owners and developers must provide standards regulating façade materials, accessory structures, and other building restrictions for each neighborhood in Grande Reserve. The standards must meet or exceed the City’s current appearance standards, listed in Chapter 10-5-8 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), and cover aspects such as color schemes, deck and patio specifications, fence specifications, restrictions on accessory buildings, housing styles, minimum square footage, building materials, and roof specifications. Areas not yet platted must submit architectural standards at the time of final plat submission. Ross Lane Development, LLC has submitted plan elevations for two (2) townhome models in Units 10B and 11B that remain consistent with previously approved elevation plans submitted during Phase I of the development for Unit 10A and Unit 11A. These models, Seaboard and Portsmouth, feature architectural shingles, decorative dormers, board and batten siding, covered porches, window shutters, boxed out/projections, and transom windows on the front doors. Both models include masonry wainscoting on the front façade made of cultured stone veneer. Seaboard Townhome Series The Seaboard townhome units are rear-loaded, two-story buildings with four to six units per building, each with a minimum of 1,500 square feet per unit. They are proposed for construction in Neighborhood 6/Unit 10. Provided below is a data table comparing and calculating submitted elevation plans to ensure compliance with UDO appearance standards. Furthermore, below is a photo of a Seaboard townhome constructed during Phase I (Unit 10A) followed by the submitted elevation plan of a Seaboard townhome intended for Phase II (Unit 10B). These materials are provided to verify consistency with previously approved Seaboard elevation plan for Phase I, which complied with the Architectural Design Standards in the original annexation agreement and the UDO appearance standards. Seaboard Townhome Series (Unit 10B) Appearance Code Requirements Proposed Elevation Masonry product 75% of total buildings At least 57 of 76 buildings 75% of total buildings Premium Siding 50% on front façade – excluding openings 1,130.13 sq. ft. façade area (565 sq. ft. required) 241.75 sq. ft. premium siding (21.40%) Masonry Siding 25% of premium siding 141.25 sq. ft. of 565 sq. ft. required for masonry siding 241.75 sq. ft. masonry siding (~170%) Credit for major architectural feature 10% each 30% credit (dormers, covered porches, boxed-out projections) Meets premium siding requirement 8 Portsmouth Townhome Series The Portsmouth townhome units are front-loaded, two-story buildings with four to six units per building, each with a minimum of 1,600 square feet per unit. They are proposed for construction in Neighborhood 7/Unit 11. Provided below is a data table comparing and calculating submitted elevation plans to ensure compliance with UDO appearance standards. Also provided below is a photo of a Portsmouth townhome constructed during Phase I (Unit 11A) followed by the submitted elevation plan for a Portsmouth townhome intended for Phase II (Unit 11B) These materials are provided to verify consistency with previously approved Portsmouth elevation plan for Phase I, which complied with the Architectural Design Standards in the original annexation agreement and UDO appearance standards. Portsmouth Townhome Series (Unit 11B) Appearance Code Requirements Proposed Elevation Masonry product 75% of total buildings At least 59 of 78 buildings 75% of total buildings Premium Siding 50% on front façade – excluding openings 1,289.60 sq. ft. façade area (644.8 sq. ft. required) 305.74 sq. ft. premium siding (23.70%) Masonry Siding 25% of premium siding 161.2 sq. ft. of 644.8 sq. ft. required for masonry siding 305.74 sq. ft. masonry siding (~190%) Credit for major architectural feature 10% each 30% credit (dormers, covered porches, boxed-out projections) Meets premium siding requirement 9 Engineering Review: The revised Final Plat of Subdivision for Unit 10B & 11B has been reviewed and found acceptable by the City’s engineering consultant, Engineering Enterprises Inc., for compliance with the Subdivision Control Ordinance’s Standards for Specification. Comments dated April 02, 2026, May 11, 2026, and May 18, 2026 have been provided to the applicant (see attached). Staff Comments: Based upon the review of the proposed Final Plat of Subdivision of Grande Reserve Units 10B and 11B, staff believes the submitted plans are consistent with the approved development site plan and the current subdivision control regulations. 10 Proposed Motion: In consideration of the proposed Final Plat of Subdivision of Grande Reserve Units 10B and 11B, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the plats to the City Council as presented by the Petitioner in plans prepared by Manhard Consulting, Ltd., last revised May 14, 2026, and further subject to {insert any additional conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission}… Attachments: 1. Copy of Petitioner’s Application 2. Final Plat of Subdivision of Grande Reserve Units 10B and 11B prepared by Manhard Consulting Ltd., dated April 14, 2026 and May 14, 2026. 3. Proposed Infrastructure Phasing Plan prepared by Manhard Consulting Ltd., dated January 19, 2026. 4. Elevations prepared by Manhard Consulting, Ltd. 5. EEI Letter to the City dated April 02, 2026. 6. EEI Letter to the City dated May 11, 2026. 7. EEI Letter to the City dated May 18, 2026. PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION1 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\01-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION2 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION3 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION4 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION5 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION6 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION7 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\02-07-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION8 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\08-09-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar“”“” “”“” “” “” ’ “”“”“”“” “” “” “” “”“”“”“”“”“” “”“”“” “” “ ” “ ” “ ” “” ’ “” PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10AYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION9 9 April 14, 2026 - 15:57 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 10B\08-09-DRHYVIL02-PS-10B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION1 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\01-DRHYVIL02-Unit-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION2 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\02-06-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION3 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\02-06-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION4 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\02-06-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION5 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\02-06-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 11BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION6 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:55 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\projects-lo\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\02-06-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10BYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION7 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:56 Dwg Name: P:\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\07-08-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar“”“” “”“” “” “” ’ “”“”“”“” “” “” “” “”“”“”“”“”“” “”“”“” “” “ ” “ ” “ ” “” ’ “” PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE - UNIT 10AYORKVILLE, ILLINOISFINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION8 8 April 14, 2026 - 15:56 Dwg Name: P:\Drhyvil02\dwg\Surv\Final Drawings\Plat of Subdivision\Final Plat\Unit 11B\07-08-DRHYVIL02-PS-11B.dwg Updated By: CSalazar N PROJ. MGR.: DRAWN BY: DATE: SCALE: OF SHEET PROJ. ASSOC.:DATEREVISIONSDRAWN BYTM333 East Butterfield Road, Suite 600, Lombard, IL 60148 ph:630.691.8500 fx:630.691.8585 manhard.comGRANDE RESERVE TOWNES - UNITS 10 & 11CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOISOVERALL UTILITY PLAN10 51 September 2, 2025 - 12:54 Dwg Name: \\mcl-lo-nas\Projects-LO\Drhyvil02\dwg\Eng\Final Drawings\Plan Set\OVERALL UTILITY PLAN .dwg Updated By: DRiendeau Premier Architecture, Inc. Premier Architecture, Inc. Premier Architecture, Inc. Premier Architecture, Inc. 1 REQUEST SUMMARY: The petitioner, C1 Yorkville, LLC (CyrusOne), is seeking approval of a Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan to amend Ordinance 2024-33, which approved the original special use PUD, and Ordinance 2026-09, which approved a Minor Amendment to the Planned Unit Development, for the approximately 228-acre CHI-11 data center campus. The initial application for amendment submitted in April 2026 proposed to revise the previously approved development from nine (9) two-story data center buildings totaling approximately 2,451,200 square feet with a maximum height of 70 feet, to eight (8) one-story standalone buildings totaling up to approximately 2,163,800 square feet with a maximum height of approximately 50 feet 10 inches, to be constructed in phases over an anticipated 10- to 20-year period. However, the petitioner recently updated their request to decrease the total building area of the campus from ~2,163,800 to ~1,854,805 square feet. The request also includes modifications to the overall campus layout, including reconfiguration and relocation of site access points and stormwater management basins, enhanced landscape treatments, and an increase in overall site coverage from approximately 28.7% to approximately 52.8%. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Faxon Road and Eldamain Road, as illustrated below. Memorandum To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Date: June 4, 2026 Subject: PZC 2026-03 C1 Yorkville – CHI 11 (Cyrus One) Data Center Proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment & Preliminary PUD Plan 2 PROPERTY BACKGROUND: Original PUD The originally approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement for the C1 Yorkville (CHI-11) CyrusOne data center campus (Ordinance 2024-33) consisted of nine (9) buildings totaling 2.45 million square feet pursuant to Ordinance 2024-33 adopted in July 2024. As depicted below, the approved Preliminary PUD Plan depicts the multi-building data center campus with an 800,000 square foot on-site electrical substation intended to serve the entire development. Further, the 2024 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement established the following: Approved certain deviations from the base M-2 General Manufacturing District standards for the subject property related to building setbacks for interior lots, parking requirements, vehicular cross access, pedestrian circulation, off-street loading, landscape requirements internal to the site, certain mechanical screening requirements (subject to sound study approval), street design for lots, and appearance standards. Identified modification standard #12 “Regional Utility Improvements” applies to the subject property, as the proposed development will extend public utilities (water and sanitary) to and through the property resulting in recapturable payments to the developer when future property owners in the area benefit from connecting to such utility that had not previously existed. Minor Amended PUD Subsequent to the original Planned Unit Development approval, the petitioner requested and received approval of a Minor Amendment to the Preliminary PUD Plan in February 2026 to slightly modify the campus configuration. The amendment reduced the size of the previously approved substation from approximately 800,000 square feet to approximately 400,000 square feet and relocated the substation slightly to the east, resulting in the elimination of a previously approved building. As part of the revised layout, Buildings #6, #8, and #9 were repositioned to the south and east of the reconfigured substation area. The removal of Building #7 reduced the total approved building area from approximately 2,451,200 square feet to approximately 2,163,800 square feet. The amendment also 3 included corresponding modifications to the internal roadway network and stormwater management facilities to accommodate the revised substation footprint and associated grading requirements. PROPOSED MAJOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT: The proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment primarily seeks to substantially revise the recently approved Minor Amended Preliminary PUD Plan by reconfiguring the campus from eight (8) two-story data center buildings totaling approximately 2.16 million square feet to eight (8) one-story data center buildings totaling approximately 1.85 million square feet. The amendment also proposes a reduction in the maximum building height from approximately 70 feet to 50 feet 10 inches, along with modifications to building footprints, mechanical yard locations, and the overall site layout to better accommodate evolving operational needs and construction efficiencies. The amended Preliminary PUD Plan further includes revised internal circulation patterns, relocated and modified access drives, updated parking and loading configurations, expanded landscaping and open space areas, and reconfigured stormwater management basins throughout the campus. The development will continue to include an approximately 400,000 square-foot electrical substation and associated utility infrastructure intended to support the phased construction of the campus over time. Primary full access to the site is proposed via a boulevard entrance from Eldamain Road through secured internal drive systems designed to accommodate employee, service, and visitor traffic. A secured secondary emergency access (right in/right out) is also proposed off of Eldamain Road, approximately 800 feet north of the primary access. Additionally, a gated full-access restricted for employees only is proposed off of Beecher Road. The petitioner has indicated that CyrusOne has secured full electrical capacity allocation of 480 megawatts (MW) for the project to date from the utility provider and is scheduled to receive the first electrical transformers for the campus later this fall. The petitioner anticipates energizing the site before the end of 2027, with occupancy of the first building anticipated by the end of the first quarter of 2028. Initial construction activities commenced earlier this spring and currently consist primarily of site grading operations associated with access improvements and development of the electrical substation area. Below are summaries of various aspects of the proposed major amendment to the Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for the data center campus: 4 Zoning & Land Uses of Surrounding Properties Since the approval of the original Planned Unit Development for this property in July 2025, there have been ownership changes and land use approvals affecting certain surrounding properties which are highlighted below in the following table: Zoning Land Use North A-1 (Kendall County) ComEd Substation/Transfer Station - Utility Use South A-1 (Kendall County) BNSF Railroad Agricultural, Residential and Business Uses (One of the two residential properties located on Faxon Road is currently under contract by the Petitioner) Transportation Land Use East A-1 SU (Kendall County) A-1 SU (Yorkville) Agriculture/Former Residence (Purchased by Petitioner) Solar Farm (Constructed in 2025) West Eldamain Road M-2 General Manufacturing (Plano) A-1 (Kendall County) Transportation Land Use Menards Distribution Center Residential/Farm Below is a summary site data table comparing the originally approved Preliminary PUD Plan, the recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan amendment, and the currently proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan amendment: Originally Approved Preliminary PUD Plan Recently Approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan % Change from Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Number of Buildings 9 8 8 N/A Size of Buildings 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 129,350 – 246,387 sq. ft. -14.9% -14.3% Total Building Area 2,451,200 sq. ft. 2,163,800 sq. ft. 1,854,805 sq. ft. -14.3% Number of Stories 2 2 1 -50% Height of Buildings 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 36’ (top of building) 50’-10” (top of equipment) -34.5% -27.4% Number of Parking Spaces 432 378 379 +0.26% Percent Building Coverage 12.3% 10.9% 17.3% +58.7% Percent Site Coverage 35.6% 28.7% 52.75% +83.8% Number of Site Access Drives 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Single Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Double Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 3 Eldamain Road (Primary/Double Drive) Eldamain Road (Emergency Access) Beecher Road +50% Number of Stormwater Basins 6 6 7 +16.7% Substation Area 800’ x 1,000’ (800,000 sq. ft) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) N/A Distance of Nearest Residential Structure Undetermined 485 ft. – 543 ft. 833 ft. – 732 ft. +71.8% - +34.8% 5 APPLICABILITY OF MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT: Per Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement established the criteria for major amendments which results in one or more specified changes to the approved Preliminary PUD Plan are proposed. The following two (2) deviations from the site data standards set forth on the Site Plan of the originally approved PUD Agreement apply: 1. The provided building coverage increased from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 17.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. 2. The provided site coverage increased from 28.7% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 52.75% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. Further, in addition to the criteria set forth above, Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development agreement also references major amendment criteria established in Section 10-8-8(G)(2) of the UDO as binding, of which the following applies: 1. Reduction in open space by more than five (5) percent. a. The building coverage increased 58.7% from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 17.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. 2. Alterations to alignment of roads, utilities, or drainage. a. Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates significant changes to the site access and road alignments off of Eldamain Road and Beecher Road, as well as reconfigurations to onsite stormwater management basins. ENERGY USE STANDARDS: The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement for the C1 Yorkville (CHI-11) CyrusOne data center campus (Ordinance 2024-33) was established prior to the City’s adoption of Energy Industrial Use standards for data centers via Ordinance 2025-53 in June 2025. Sections 2.1 and 4.3 of the previously approved PUD Agreement permit the waiver of subsequently adopted, more stringent Energy Industrial Use regulations, effectively vesting the development standards within the current agreement for a period of 20 years. However, the petitioner has agreed to comply with the provisions contained in the recently adopted Section 10-4-10 of the UDO as outlined below: 1. Landscape Buffer - Section 10-4-10(A)(1) of the UDO requires data center developments to maintain a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer when adjacent to non-manufacturing land uses, inclusive of an 8-foot tall berm when adjacent to residential and dedicated exclusively for dense landscaping including trees and shrubs but not utilized for stormwater detention, roadways, walking trails or surface parking. Additionally, a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer is required when a data center is adjacent to a public roadway and shall consist of a Transition Zone D landscape buffer. a. The proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates a 100’ wide landscape buffer along Eldamain Road and Beecher Road. Additionally, the plans illustrate a 50’ wide landscape buffer along a portion of the north property line adjacent to the Commonwealth Edison parcel and a varying depth landscape buffer of 50’-100’ wide along the southern property line. b. Due to the presence of the existing residential land uses to the south on Faxon Road, staff recommends a minimum 8-foot tall berm be installed along this portion of the campus. The petitioner has proposed an 8-foot tall berm but notes the berm cannot be continuous, as there are portions along the Faxon Road right-of-way which provides overland stormwater drainage. c. Additionally, staff recommends the petitioner install a shared use trail along Beecher Road within the City’s existing right-of-way and dedicate a 25’-30’ outlot along Eldamain Road for a future shared use path. The petitioner has indicated a 6 willingness to accommodate this request as there is sufficient right-of-way along Beecher Road and Eldamain Road, but requests the City own and maintain the trail. The petitioner will maintain the landscaping within this area. 2. Building Separation - Section 10-4-10(A)(3) of the UDO requires a minimum of a 500-foot building separation from the nearest data center building or structure (primary or accessory) to the nearest residential or commercial structure. a. As indicated above, the nearest data center building proposed on the major amendment to the Preliminary PUD Plan to a residential structure is ~833 feet along Faxon Road and ~732 feet along Eldamain Road, exceeding the City’s minimum distance requirement. 3. Operational Testing - Section 10-4-10(A)(6) of the UDO requires operational testing of emergency backup generators be limited to between the hours of 11am to 5pm on weekdays only, non-holidays. a. The petitioner has provided written confirmation of compliance with this standard and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. 4. Nuclear Energy - Section 10-4-10(A)(7) of the UDO strictly prohibits data centers from using, generating, storing, or deploying nuclear energy as a power source within the City. This includes, but is not limited to, nuclear reactors, small modular reactors (SMRs), or any other nuclear-based energy. a. The petitioner has provided written confirmation of compliance with this standard and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. 7 5. Phasing Plan - Section 10-4-10(A)(8) of the UDO requires the implementation of a phased construction plan that minimizes impacts on residential structures by prioritizing initial development at the farthest distance from existing residential structures. a. The previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan included a nine (9) phased development plan with each phase consisting of one (1) building and associated stormwater basin. The petitioner has provided an illustrated phasing plan for the C1- Yorkville CHI 11 Campus which indicates a three (3) phased development schedule. i. Phase 1, which includes the site grading and construction entrance to the substation, is currently under construction. ii. Phase 2, located in the central part of the site, includes the area covering six (6) buildings and four (4) stormwater basins. Building construction order and timing will be determined by tenant demand with each building taking approximately 18 months to construct. iii. Phase 3 will include two (2) buildings and three (3) stormwater basins at the northwest corner of the property. This phase’s building construction timing will also be based on tenant demand with each building taking approximately 18 months to construct. 8 6. Fencing - Section 10-4-10(A)(9) of the UDO requires fencing be constructed of security style aluminum, steel, wrought iron, or similar materials. Chain-link or barbed wire fencing is prohibited along public facing edges and properties adjacent to residential land uses. a. The petitioner proposes to install an eight foot (8’) tall steel security style fence around the perimeter of the data center campus buildings behind the landscape buffer area. 7. Lighting and Photometric Plan - Section 10-4-10(A)(10) of the UDO requires lighting and photometric plans must be submitted at the time of application and adhere to the City’s outside lighting standards. a. The photometric plan is to be provided with an application for final plat of subdivision or at such time the Developer submits for a building permit and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. 8. Traffic Management Plan - Section 10-4-10(A)(11) of the UDO requires a Traffic Management Plan be provided during construction, including a communication strategy and an on-site point of contact during construction. a. The petitioner will provide a Traffic Management Plan as part of the building permitting process and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. 9. Battery Storage - Section 10-4-10(A)(12) of the UDO requires battery storage systems shall be located a minimum of 50 feet away from any adjacent structure and must be readily accessible by Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) for firefighting efforts. a. The petitioner has provided written confirmation that no utility scale battery energy storage is proposed for the data center campus. 10. Emergency Operations Plan – Section 10-4-10(A)(13) of the UDO requires an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) be submitted and approved by the City and the Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) prior to issuance of a building permit and must include: (1) Procedures for fire suppression, hazardous material spills, evacuation, and communication in case of an incident; (2) The location of any battery storage systems; (3) Training sessions/drills and or walkthroughs with fire and police shall be required prior to occupancy permit; (4) Designated contacts for emergency services and a plan to broadcast information if an incident could affect the public; and (5) Must work with KenCom emergency managers to be part of text or siren alert systems. a. The petitioner has provided written confirmation of compliance with this standard and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. 11. Building Code Enhanced Standards - Section 10-4-10(A)(14) of the UDO requires installing advanced early fire detection in server rooms, using fire-resistive construction beyond code minimums on walls facing neighborhoods, or providing additional hazardous material safeguards. Compliance with National Fire Protection Association 855 is also required. a. The petitioner has provided written confirmation of compliance with this standard and will be a condition of the PUD amendment. Appearance Standards The proposed updated elevations continue to primarily feature light-colored precast concrete panels, complemented by medium and dark aluminum composite panel accents and a glass curtain wall system at the entrance. Additional design elements include prefinished metal coping and horizontal and vertical relief lines, which help break up the building mass and provide visual interest. While the buildings are now designed as single-story structures, the main entrance will feature a two-story element accommodating approximately 32,000 square feet of office space, with an overall height of 36 feet. The remainder of the data center building will have a height of 24 feet, excluding the rooftop equipment penthouse. 9 Mechanical Screening Per Section 10-5-4 Screening of the Unified Development Ordinance, ground/wall-mounted and roof mounted mechanical units that are visible from any public right-of-way or adjacent residential property shall be screened from public view. The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement allowed the petitioner to deviate from this requirement by screening only the ground-mounted mechanical equipment but was not required to provide screening for any rooftop mechanical units. The ground-mounted mechanical equipment in the Major PUD Preliminary Plan will no longer be screened as previously proposed with vinyl fencing equal to the height of the generator units (excluding any stacks protruding above the unit) but will now have a solid screen wall constructed of a light-colored concrete panel approximately 18’ – 24’ tall providing full-height coverage of the exterior equipment within this “mechanical yard”. 10 Comprehensive Plan The 2016 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as “General Industrial,” which is intended to accommodate a broad range of warehousing and manufacturing activities generally located adjacent to the Eldamain Corridor and the BNSF Railway line. Both the originally approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the currently proposed Major PUD Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan for the data center campus are consistent with the underlying M-2 General Manufacturing zoning designation. Supporting Reports/Studies As part of the application submittal, several supporting reports/studies prepared by outside consultants were provided by the petitioner to address specific concerns or comments related to the proposed data center campus development. Below is a summary of each of those reports and any City staff or City consultant review comments, where applicable: 1. Noise Study - The petitioner has provided a preliminary noise study for the subject property dated April 22, 2026, as prepared by Trinity Consultants. It is noted that the study utilizes sound measurements taken in three (3) locations in September 2024. a. The acoustical study submitted by the petitioner evaluated the anticipated operational noise impacts associated with the proposed data center campus, including rooftop mechanical equipment, cooling infrastructure, generators, and electrical equipment. The study concluded that the proposed development is expected to comply with the City’s applicable daytime and nighttime sound level standards at surrounding property lines through the incorporation of mitigation measures such as equipment screening, building orientation, acoustical barriers, and mechanical yard placement. The analysis further indicated that the revised one-story campus layout and reduced building heights help consolidate and better shield mechanical equipment areas, thereby reducing projected off- site noise impacts when compared to the previously approved configuration. b. The City’s acoustical consultant, Soundscape Engineering, reviewed the submitted noise study in a memo dated May 8, 2026. They concluded, while the listed mitigations are of the appropriate scale and type to allow the project to meet the noise ordinance, additional information is needed to sufficiently review the study findings. c. The petitioner has submitted a revised Noise Study dated May 21, 2026 and responses to the City’s acoustical consultant’s comments in a letter dated May 19, 2026. The study states at full build-out, the data center campus will have 56 air- cooled chillers, 7 RTUs, 57 back-up generators, and 56 UPS fans. The anticipated attenuation features proposed to mitigate sound for compliance with City ordinances include absorptive metal acoustic barriers, 8-foot discharge silencers, 2- foot wall acoustic louvers, CMU block walls and generator enclosures, as illustrated below. 11 2. Data Center Impact Analysis – The petitioner has provided an assessment of the potential electric system reliability and cost impacts of the proposed 960-megawatt (MW) data center development dated 2026, as prepared by The Power Bureau, LLC. a. The study evaluated the electrical infrastructure and regional power delivery requirements associated with the proposed data center campus, including utility demand, transmission coordination, substation capacity, and phased energization of the site. The study concluded that the project is not anticipated to negatively impact the reliability or stability of the broader regional electrical grid, as the required electrical capacity has been planned for and allocated through coordination with the utility provider and regional transmission infrastructure. The report further noted that power delivery to the campus will occur in phases tied to utility improvements, transformer installations, and transmission upgrades intended to maintain overall grid reliability while supporting the long-term operational needs of the development. b. The petitioner has provided an updated Data Center Impact Analysis study submitted June 3, 2026 which uses a proposed power load of 654 MW for the data center campus. c. The petitioner has also provided a letter dated June 1, 2026 which further details the anticipated electricity usage for the development broken down into three (3) categories as described below: i. Allocated Power – 480 MW of allocated power has been allotted for the data center campus to-date which has been memorialized in executed agreements and up-front payments between the petitioner and ComEd as well as physical improvements associated with beginning in 2026 and the planned energization of the campus beginning in 2028. ii. Requested Power – In addition to the already allocated 480 MW, the petitioner has requested an additional 174 MW supplemental power allocation in April 2026. A decision is forthcoming from ComEd on this request by early 2027 and should that request be approved, the petitioner will be responsible for any additional infrastructure costs. Delivery of this additional power is not expected until 2032 at the earliest. This supplemental allocation, if approved, would bring the campus’ overall power load to 654 MW, as referenced in the updated Data Center Impact Analysis. iii. Future Power – Based on the current configuration of the data center campus with eight (8) buildings, the data center campus could accommodate a total of 810 MW. The petitioner anticipates the additional 156 MW load capacity available will be requested from ComEd in the future when necessary and appropriate. 3. Fiscal Benefits Report – The petitioner has provided a fiscal benefits or tax revenue analysis of the proposed data center campus dated March 2026, as prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates. a. The Fiscal Benefits Report concluded that the proposed data center campus is anticipated to generate substantial long-term fiscal benefits for the City of Yorkville and other local taxing bodies through significant increases in property tax revenues, utility taxes, permit fees, and other development-related revenues. However, it is important to note that the property is wholly within the Plano School District #88. The analysis further indicated that the projected revenues generated by the development are expected to substantially exceed the anticipated demand for municipal services due to the relatively low employment density and limited public service impacts typically associated with data center operations. The report also estimates that the phased construction of the campus is expected to generate significant short-term economic activity and construction-related spending in addition to the long-term tax base benefits associated with the completed development. 12 b. The petitioner has stated that a revised Fiscal Benefits Report will be provided to address staff’s comments and an anticipated maximum power load of 654 MW. 4. Economic Impact Report – The petitioner has provided an economic impact report of the proposed data center campus development dated February 2026, as prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates. a. The Economic Impacts Report concluded that the proposed data center campus is expected to generate substantial direct and indirect economic benefits for Yorkville and Kendall County through construction activity, long-term operational investment, and increased local spending. The report identified significant short-term economic impacts associated with multi-year construction employment, contractor spending, and material procurement, as well as ongoing long-term benefits from permanent jobs, utility investment, and expanded commercial tax base activity. b. The petitioner has stated that a revised Economic Impact Report will be provided to reflect the updated reduced building square footage. 5. Traffic Impact Study – The petitioner has provided a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed data center campus development dated March 24, 2026, as prepared by Kenig, Lindgren, O’Hara, Aboona (KLOA), Inc. a. The Traffic Impact Study evaluated existing and projected traffic conditions associated with the proposed data center campus, including construction traffic, employee traffic, service vehicle circulation, and site access operations along Eldamain Road and surrounding roadway corridors. The study concluded that the data center campus is anticipated to generate relatively low daily traffic volumes compared to other industrial or commercial developments of similar size due to the limited number of on-site employees during normal operations. The analysis further determined that, with the proposed roadway access improvements and internal circulation design, the surrounding transportation network is expected to continue operating at acceptable levels of service during both construction and long-term operation of the facility. b. The City’s engineering consultant, EEI, Inc., reviewed the Traffic Impact Study in a memo dated May 4, 2026. As part of its review, EEI recommended that the study be updated to incorporate projected traffic impacts associated with the recently approved Project Steel and Project Cardinal data center developments located to the north. EEI further recommended evaluating potential mitigation measures for the existing signalized intersection at Eldamain and Galena Roads, as well as assessing cumulative impacts to adjacent roadway corridors, including Eldamain Road and Corneils Road. c. The petitioner has submitted a revised Traffic Impact Study prepared by KLOA dated May 29, 2026 which concludes that the existing roadway system off of Eldamain Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development without significant impact on traffic operations. Comments have been provided in a memorandum from the City’s engineering consultant, EEI, dated June 3, 2026 attached for review. i. The EEI comments on the updated Traffic Impact Study request that the petitioner incorporate projected traffic generated by both the approved Project Steel and Project Cardinal developments into the analysis. This includes evaluating cumulative impacts on the surrounding roadway network, including the proposed signal improvements at the intersection of Eldamain Road and Galena Road and the anticipated traffic effects at the Eldamain Road and Corneils Road intersection, which may require revising the findings of the updated study. 6. Natural Resources Information (NRI) Report - The petitioner has provided a Natural Resources Information report for site of the proposed data center campus dated June 2024, as prepared by Kendall County Soil & Water Conservation District. 13 a. The Natural Resources Information Report evaluated existing environmental features on the subject property, including wetlands, floodplain areas, drainage patterns, woodlands, topography, and other natural resource constraints that may be affected by the proposed data center campus development. The report concluded that the site can be developed in a manner that generally avoids or minimizes impacts to identified natural resources through the use of engineered stormwater management systems, grading controls, landscape buffering, and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local permitting requirements. The analysis further identified that portions of the site contain regulated environmental features requiring ongoing coordination with permitting agencies and implementation of mitigation measures as part of future engineering and construction activities. b. Updated Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) reports have been provided by the petitioner. 7. Property Value Impact Memo – The petitioner has provided a Property Value Impact Memo dated June 2, 2026, as prepared by CohnReznick Advisory LLC. The memo is intended to determine whether proximity to a data center use has an impact on adjacent property values. According to the findings and conclusions of the memo, after evaluating 39 property sales of residential parcels adjoining data centers (known as “Test Area Sales”) and 162 property sales in areas not adjoining the data center but within the general vicinity or sales market (known as “Control Area Sales”), there was no measurable and consistent difference between the sales groups attributed to the data center development as presented in the table below from the memo: STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE: The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend approval of a Special Use upon considering the following standards: 1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the Special Use will not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. 2. The Special Use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within or near the neighborhood in which it is to be located. 14 3. The establishment of the Special Use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or other necessary facilities have been or shall be provided. 5. Adequate measures shall be taken to provide ingress or egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. 6. The proposed Special Use is not contrary to the objectives of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. The petitioner has provided written responses to these standards which will be incorporated into the record during the public hearing. STANDARDS FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) upon considering the following standards (Section 10-8-8-E of the Unified Development Ordinance): 1. Plan and Policy Alignment. The Planned Unit Development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans and policy documents of the City. 2. Integrated Design with Identifiable Centers and Edges. The Planned Unit Development shall be laid out and developed as a unit in accordance with an integrated overall design, in which the various land uses function as a cohesive whole and support one another. The design shall provide identifiable centers, which form focus areas of activity in the development, and edges, which define the outer borders of the development, through the harmonious grouping of buildings, uses, facilities, public gathering spaces, and open space. 3. Public Welfare. The Planned Unit Development is designed, located, and proposed to be operated and maintained so that it will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property and will not substantially increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, and welfare. 4. Compatibility with Adjacent Land Uses. The Planned Unit Development includes uses which are generally compatible and consistent with the uses of adjacent parcels. If the uses are not generally compatible, all adverse impacts have been mitigated through screening, landscaping, public open space, and other buffering features that protect uses within the development and surrounding properties. 5. Impact on Public Facilities and Resources. The Planned Unit Development is designed so that adequate utilities, road access, stormwater management, and other necessary facilities will be provided to serve it. The Planned Unit Development shall include such impact fees as may be reasonably determined by the City Council. These required impact fees shall be calculated in reasonable proportion to the impact of the Planned Unit Development on public facilities and infrastructure. 6. Archaeological, Historical or Cultural Impact. The Planned Unit Development does not substantially adversely impact an archaeological, historical, or cultural resource, included on the local, state, or federal register, located on or off the parcel(s) proposed for development. The petitioner has provided written responses to these standards which will be incorporated into the record during the public hearing. STAFF COMMENTS: The proposed revised Preliminary PUD Plan for the C1 Yorkville – CHI-11 (CyrusOne) data center campus is generally consistent with the standards of the Unified Development Ordinance governing approval of a Major Amendment to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The petitioner has submitted 15 written responses addressing the applicable approval standards, which will be incorporated into the public hearing record. Additionally, while the proposal includes revisions to the campus layout, building footprints, and overall square footage, the modifications do not substantially alter the overall character, use, or intent of the previously approved Planned Unit Development. It is important to note that the previously approved PUD deviations, including allowances related to interior building setbacks, minimum parking requirements, vehicular cross-access, pedestrian circulation, off-street loading, parking lot and interior landscaping requirements, and lot frontage standards, remain in effect. These previously approved entitlements, along with the Preliminary Plan approved under the prior Minor PUD Amendment, would remain valid should the requested Major PUD Amendment not be approved. PROPOSED MOTIONS: 1. Major Amendment to Special Use for Planned Unit Development In consideration of testimony presented during a Public Hearing on June 10, 2026 and approval of the findings of fact, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval to the City Council of a request for a Major Amendment to the Special Use authorization of a Planned Unit Development for the C1 Yorkville – CHI-11 (CyrusOne) data center located at the northeast corner of Faxon Road and Eldamain Road and subject to staff comments enumerated in a memo dated June 4, 2026, EEI comments dated June 3, 2026, and Soundscape Engineering comments dated May 8, 2026, and further subject to {insert any additional conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission} … 2. Major Amendment to Preliminary PUD Plan The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval to the City Council of a Major Amendment to the Preliminary PUD Plan for the C1 Yorkville – CHI-11 (CyrusOne), as prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated May 21, 2024 and further subject to {insert any additional conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission} … Attachments: 1. Copy of Petitioner’s Original Application 2. Legal Description 3. Copy of Ordinance 2024-33 Approving a Planned Unit Development Agreement with C1 Yorkville, LLC. 4. Copy of Ordinance 2026-09 Approving a Minor Amendment to the Approved Planned Unit Development for C1 Yorkville, LLC. 5. Updated Cover Letter dated May 28, 2026 prepared and submitted by Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd., attorney, on behalf of C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner. 6. Updated Project Narrative (Petition for Development Approval) dated May 28, 2026 prepared and submitted by Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd., attorney, on behalf of C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner. 7. Major Change & Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 05/14/26 8. Landscape Design Color Exhibit, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 05/14/2026. 9. Preliminary Engineering Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 05/14/26. 10. Color Building Rendering and Exterior Elevations, prepared by Corgan and dated 05/14/26. 11. CHI-11 Infrastructure Phasing Exhibit, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 05/14/26. 12. Residential Setback Comparison Exhibit, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 05/14/26. 13. Petitioner’s Response to Staff’s Plan Council memorandum dated May 6, 2026. 14. EcoCAT Letters 15. SHPO Correspondences 16. Updated Noise Study, prepared by Trinity Consultants and dated May 21, 2026 and Responses to Sound Study Review Comments prepared by Trinity Consultants dated May 19, 2026. 17. Updated Data Center Impact Analysis – An Assessment of Potential Electric System Reliability and Cost Impacts of a Proposed Data Center in Yorkville, prepared by The Power Burau, LLC dated 2026. 18. Petitioner’s Letter re: Campus Power prepared by Rosanova & Whitaker dated June 1, 2026. 19. Property Value Impact Memo, prepared by CohnReznick Advisory LLC and dated June 2, 2026. 16 20. The Fiscal Benefits of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated March 2026. 21. The Economic Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated February 2026. 22. Updated Traffic Impact Study Proposed Data Center, prepared by KLOA and dated May 29, 2026. 23. EEI, Inc. memorandum dated June 3, 2026 24. Plan Council memorandum dated May 6, 2026 25. EEI, Inc. memorandum dated May 4, 2026 26. Soundscape Engineering memorandum dated May 8, 2026 27. Public Hearing Notice 28. Link to previous submittal documents: https://www.yorkville.il.us/940/C1-Yorkville-Cyrus-One-CHI-11- Data-Cente X500X500X25,000X5,000$31,000 PARCEL ONE: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 19, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1030.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 844.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, 231.91 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 852.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 73 DEGREES 28 MINUTES 36 SECONDS WEST, 514.80 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 24 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4 1816.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL TWO: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1917.41 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION, 3126.88 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 223.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, 886.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON SAID WEST LINE, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 886.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL THREE: THAT PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4, 1929.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 27 SECONDS EAST, 565.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59 DEGREES, 16 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST 913.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 191.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 23 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 57 SECONDS EAST, 820.55 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, SAID POINT BEING 1917.41 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AS MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, 1671.52 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION, 722.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, 702.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL FOUR: THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE, 3437.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 223.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION, 1102.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 1423.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT 231.91 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF SAID QUARTER LINE AS MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE, 1147.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH SAID QUARTER LINE, 1731.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. 02-18-100-006 COMMONWEALTH EDISON, % OSWEGOLAND PARK DISTRICT 3220 GROVE RD OSWEGO, IL, 60543 01-13-100-003 COMMONWEALTH EDISON, % OSWEGOLAND PARK DISTRICT 3220 GROVE RD OSWEGO, IL, 60543 01-13-400-005 MENARD INC 4777 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 02-18-300-002 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-18-300-001 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-18-300-003 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-18-300-004 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-19-100-004 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-19-100-005 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 02-18-400-004 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 01-13-400-009 MENARD INC 4777 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 01-13-400-014 MENARD INC ATTN: PROPERTIES DIVISION 5101 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 01-13-400-012 MENARD INC ATTN: PROPERTIES DIVISION 5101 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 01-13-400-011 MENARD INC ATTN: PROPERTIES DIVISION 5101 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 01-13-400-004 SANCHEZ, ERIK HECTOR PEREZ 12029 FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 01-13-400-013 MENARD INC ATTN: PROPERTIES DIVISION 5101 MENARD DR EAU CLAIRE, WI, 54703 01-24-200-011 BRUMMEL FAMILY TRUST 4 13349 C FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 01-24-200-001 TOCHIMANI, JOSE 220 ALEXIS ST PLANO, IL, 60545 01-24-200-020 BRUMMEL FAMILY TRUST 4 13349 C FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 01-24-200-021 TWK LLC 3029 ELDAMAIN RD PLANO, IL, 60545 01-24-200-018 FEECE OIL COMPANY 1700 HUBBARD ST BATAVIA, IL, 60510 01-24-200-018 CITY OF PLANO ATTN ZOILA GOMEZ 17 E MAIN ST PLANO IL 60545 02-19-100-001 BRUMMEL FAMILY TRUST 4 13349 C FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 02-19-100-002 SCHMIT, PETER & CHERYL 11800 FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 02-19-100-003 CAMACHO, MIGUEL & SANDRA E 11728 FAXON RD PLANO, IL, 60545 02-19-501-001 BN&SF RAILWAY CO PROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH, TX, 76161-0089 02-18-501-001 BN&SF RAILWAY CO PROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH, TX, 76161-0089 02-19-100-013 YORKVILLE NEXUS IV LLC % GREEN DOOR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS LLC 145 S WELLS ST STE 1800 CHICAGO, IL, 60606 02-19-100-013 YORKVILLE NEXUS IV LLC c/o SHANNON WESTBERG 30 CHESTNUT AVENUE CLARENDON HILLS IL 60514 02-19-100-012 YORKVILLE NEXUS IV LLC % GREEN DOOR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS LLC 145 S WELLS ST STE 1800 CHICAGO, IL, 60606 02-19-100-012 YORKVILLE NEXUS IV LLC c/o SHANNON WESTBERG 30 CHESTNUT AVENUE CLARENDON HILLS IL 60514 02-19-200-012 DANIELS MALINSKI YORKVILLE FAMILY LLLP 405 E SHERIDAN RD LAKE BLUFF IL 60044 02-18-400-008 DANIELS MALINSKI YORKVILLE FAMILY LLLP 405 E SHERIDAN RD LAKE BLUFF IL 60044 02-19-200-013 DANIELS MALINSKI YORKVILLE FAMILY LLLP 405 E SHERIDAN RD LAKE BLUFF IL 60044 02-18-400-009 DANIELS MALINSKI YORKVILLE FAMILY LLLP 405 E SHERIDAN RD LAKE BLUFF IL 60044 02-18-400-007 LOFTUS, ROBERT M & ILDEFONSA LIV TRUST 11159 FAXON RD YORKVILLE, IL, 60560 02-18-400-001 JYJ LLC 2622 BEECHER RD YORKVILLE, IL, 60560 02-18-400-001 C1 YORKVILLE LLC 2850 N HARWOOD ST STE 2200 DALLAS, TX, 75201 PRIMARY ENTRANCE BEECHER ROADELDAMAIN ROADRAILRO A D BUILDING 8 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 9 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 6 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.5 POND 6 BUILDING 3 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 2 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 4 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 1 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 5 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.0 POND 5POND 2 POND 1 POND 4 POND 3 SUBSTATION (436' X 920') FFE=±648.5 530.6'30.0'±233.6' 30.0' 75.0'275.4'925.0'436.0'30.0'221.3'M-2 ZONING 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 150' SETBACK EASEMENT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT A-1 ZONING 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT A-1 ZONING A-1 ZONING 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT EMERGENCY ENTRANCE 150' PROPOSED FUTURE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN C1 YORKVILLE PUD (CHI 11) - PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN6097.00-ILBDJ11/21/251"=200'1 1 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS C1 YORKVILLE PUD (CHI 11) WETLANDS PROPOSED BUILDING STORMWATER POND LEGEND PROJECT AREA EQUIPMENT YARD SECURITY FENCE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN DESIGN SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA ±9,956,767.47 SF (±228.57 AC) MAX BUILDING HEIGHT N/A SETBACKS FRONT (WEST) REQUIRED 25' FRONT (WEST) PROVIDED 150' REAR (EAST) REQUIRED 0' REAR (EAST) PROVIDED 60' SIDE (NORTH & SOUTH) REQUIRED 20' SIDE (NORTH & SOUTH) PROVIDED 50' TRANSITIONAL SIDE N/A *SETBACKS APPLY ONLY TO THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROPERTY IS RESUBDIVIDED. THERE SHALL BE NO SETBACKS APPLICABLE TO THE INTERNAL LOT LINES. PARKING DATA CENTER PARKING RATIO 0.2 SPACES PER 1,000 SF REQUIRED PARKING (# SPACES)433 PROVIDED PARKING (# SPACES)378 ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED (# SPACES)8 ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED (# SPACES)24 COVERAGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE N/A MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED BUILDING COVERAGE 10.9% MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED SITE COVERAGE 28.7% MAXIMUM FAR 85% PROVIDED FAR 21.7% BUILDING DATA BLDG #SIZE HEIGHT (TOP OF BLDG) HEIGHT (TOP OF EQPT.) BLDG 1 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 2 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 3 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 4 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 5 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 6 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 7 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 8 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 9 152,000 SF 55'-0"70'-0" TOTAL 2,163,800 SF N/A N/A X500X500X25,000X5,000$31,000 PARCEL ONE: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 19, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1030.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 844.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, 231.91 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 852.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 73 DEGREES 28 MINUTES 36 SECONDS WEST, 514.80 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 24 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4 1816.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL TWO: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1917.41 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION, 3126.88 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 223.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, 886.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON SAID WEST LINE, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 886.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL THREE: THAT PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4, 1929.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 27 SECONDS EAST, 565.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59 DEGREES, 16 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST 913.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 191.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 23 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 57 SECONDS EAST, 820.55 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, SAID POINT BEING 1917.41 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AS MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, 1671.52 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION, 722.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, 702.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL FOUR: THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE, 3437.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 223.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION, 1102.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 1423.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT 231.91 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF SAID QUARTER LINE AS MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE, 1147.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH SAID QUARTER LINE, 1731.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd. 445 Jackson Avenue, Suite 200 Naperville, Illinois 60540 Phone: 630-355-4600 Fax: 630-352-3610 www.rw-attorneys.com May 28, 2026 Krysti Barksdale-Noble Community Development Director United City of Yorkville 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 RE: SUBMITTAL – C1 Yorkville LLC – Approximately 230 acres north of Faxon Road on the east side of Eldamain Road – Major Amendment to Planned Unit Development Dear Ms. Barksdale-Noble, As you are aware, this firm represents C1 Yorkville LLC (“C1”) regarding the redevelopment of its approximately 230-acre property located north of Faxon Road on the east side of Eldamain Road (“Property”). We have reviewed the comments provided by the City in the memorandum dated May 6, 2026. Please accept the materials submitted herewith as part of our resubmittal package. We look forward to working with the United City of Yorkville. In support of our application, please find the following revised and/or supplemental documentation: 1. Comment Response Letter 2. Project Narrative (Petition for Development Approval) 3. Preliminary Planned Unit Development 4. Preliminary Engineering Plan (Previously titled: Concept PUD Plan) 5. Phasing Exhibit 6. Setback Exhibit 7. Landscape Plans 8. Building Elevations 9. EcoCAT letter 10. SHPO Correspondence Additional reports and studies will be forthcoming. We are finalizing revisions to reports and studies that were initially submitted for City review in April. We are also working on supplementary reports based on feedback from the Plan Council meeting. I expect additional information will be submitted next week. Sincerely, Russell G. Whitaker, III Russell G. Whitaker, III Attorney for C1 Yorkville, LLC russ@rw-attorneys.com 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) COUNTY OF KENDALL ) ) UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ) PETITION FOR MAJOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THE UNDERSIGNED Petitioner, C1 Yorkville LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter the “Petitioner”), respectfully petitions the United City of Yorkville (the “City”) for a major amendment to a special use for a planned unit development as detailed on the plans submitted herewith for the Property (as defined below). BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. The Petitioner, C1 Yorkville LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, having an office located at 2820 N. Harwood Street, Suite 2200, Dallas, TX 75201, is the owner of the Property comprising of +/- 228 acres located at the northeast corner of Eldamain Road and Faxon Road in the City of Yorkville, which property is legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof (the “Property”). 2. The Property was originally annexed to the City pursuant to Ordinance No. 2005- 48 on May 24, 2005; 3. The Property is zoned M-2 General Manufacturing District under the United City of Yorkville Unified Development Ordinance (the “Code”); 4. On July 9, 2024, the City approved a special use for a planned unit development and a Planned Unit Development Agreement (the “PUD Agreement”) for the Property; 5. Pursuant to the PUD Agreement, the City approved development of the Property as an Energy Industrial Use as generally depicted on the Preliminary PUD Plan (the “Preliminary PUD Plan”) attached hereto as Exhibit B. 2 6. The Preliminary PUD Plan specifically approved development of the Property with nine (9) two-story data center buildings comprising 2,451,200 square feet of total building area. 7. On February 10, 2026, the City approved a Minor Amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development and the amended PUD Plan (the “Amended PUD Plan”) a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 8. Shortly after the City’s approval of the Amended PUD Plan, Petitioner pulled necessary and appropriate site development permits and commenced construction pursuant to the Amended PUD Plan. 9. Petitioner now seeks a Major Change to the Amended PUD Plan as reflected on Exhibit D (the “CHI 11 PUD Plan”). 10. With the Major Change, Petitioner proposes to: i) replace the eight (8) two-story buildings approved pursuant to the Amended PUD Plan with eight (8) single-story buildings; and ii) reduce the total permitted square footage of buildings, all as reflected on the CHI 11 PUD Plan. 11. Petitioner has submitted the appropriate supporting details for approval of the Major Change to the Planned Unit Development as set forth herein. PROJECT SUMMARY Petitioner is a wholly owned subsidiary of CyrusOne. CyrusOne is a leading global data center developer and operator specializing in the delivery of state-of-the-art digital infrastructure solutions that serve some of the world’s foremost technology companies. CyrusOne owns and operates over 60 data centers across nine countries. In Illinois, CyrusOne owns and operates data center campuses in Aurora and Lombard. CyrusOne is also in the process of developing new Illinois campuses in Aurora, Wood Dale, Yorkville, and Sangamon County. 3 As reflected in the Jones Lange LaSalle (“JLL”) North America Data Center Report for year-end 2025, surging investment in the data center industry reflects strong institutional confidence in the sector’s outlook. JLL found vacancy rates at existing data centers are at a historic low of 1% for a second consecutive year, despite unprecedented levels of construction. Vacancy at historic lows reflects sustained structural demand rather than cyclical imbalance. JLL goes on to state that bubble concerns are difficult to reconcile with 99% sector occupancy, particularly given that the largest data center tenants rank among the most profitable and highest-rated companies globally. As it relates to new construction, JLL found that 92% of capacity is precommitted, either through binding lease agreements or owner-occupied development. Taken together, these dynamics point to vacancy remaining in the low single digits through 2030. In the Chicago market, JLL notes that there are no 10+ MW contiguous blocks available, which is driving tenants to commit to capacity 18-24 months in advance. With these fundamentals, Petitioner is well positioned to seize upon immediate demand with the expectation that the first building will be delivered to market in Q1 2028. Construction on the Property commenced earlier this spring with site grading associated with access to the Property and the electrical substation. CyrusOne has obtained allocation of electrical capacity necessary for the project, is scheduled to take delivery of the first electrical transformers for the Yorkville campus later this fall, and expects to have the site energized before the end of 2027. CyrusOne plans to commence building construction this fall with the goal of establishing occupancy for that first building by the end of the first quarter of 2028. CyrusOne is well positioned to seize upon market demand to facilitate build-out of the Property. The overall layout of the CHI 11 PUD Plan is generally consistent with the Amended PUD Plan. The CHI 11 PUD Plan either maintains or increases the setbacks that were established with 4 the Preliminary PUD Plan and affirmed with the Amended PUD Plan. Primary ingress/egress will occur via a boulevard style connection to Eldamain Road, consistent with the Amended PUD Plan. With the CHI 11 PUD Plan, the secondary means of ingress/egress to Faxon Road has been eliminated in favor of a larger consolidated stormwater basin along the south property line. This reconfigured stormwater basin will create a natural transition south to Faxon Road. A secondary roadway connection is now contemplated via Beecher Road to the east. This secondary roadway connection will be gated, no truck traffic will be permitted, and is intended exclusively for employee egress. Notably, Petitioner owns the adjacent property along Beecher Road which Petitioner acquired for purposes of facilitating utility improvements required for development of the Property. Finally, Petitioner is working with Kendall County Department of Transportation regarding a restricted emergency-only right-in-right-out movement in the northernmost section of the Property along Eldamain Road. Revised building elevations have been submitted along with the Major Change application. The revised elevations are generally consistent with the approved plans, maintaining similar architectural styling, building materials, and color palette. With the revised elevations, the main entrance or primary architectural component of the buildings is a two-story office component, comprising approximately 32,000 square feet, which is consistent with the original approvals for the project. This two-story feature, which is approximately 36’ in height, will help define the entrance to the buildings and create a clear focal point. The buildings are generally oriented such that the office component addresses the adjacent road frontage or entrance to the community. The primary mass of the building is the single-story box which measures approximately 24’ in height. This primary single-story component of the building also includes a mechanical penthouse. The mechanical penthouse incorporates an acoustic screen wall around all four sides of the mechanical 5 penthouse. This rooftop screening, which is recessed from the primary façade of the building, extends to approximately 51’ in height. The revised elevations reflect a significant reduction in the height approved with the PUD Agreement, which permits 55’ tall buildings with equipment screening to 70’. The side of each building also includes a mechanical yard, as depicted on the CHI 11 PUD Plan. The mechanical yard is designed as an integral component of each building. Full height screening is provided for each mechanical yard. STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE APPROVAL FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO UDO SECTION 10-8-5. D. 1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the Special Use will not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. The proposed development of the Property will promote the public health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the City. The Property was originally annexed and zoned in the City in 2005. Despite the underlying zoning, the Property set fallow, without productive use consistent with the underlying zoning district for nearly 20 years. The data center campus, which was preliminarily approved in 2024, is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the underlying M-2 General Manufacturing zoning for the Property. With the City’s 2024 approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan, the City determined that the Preliminary PUD Plan would not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. With the proposed major change, the CHI 11 PUD Plan depicts a total building area of 1,854,805 square feet, which is 308,995 square feet less than the Amended PUD Plan and 596,395 square feet less than the Preliminary PUD Plan. Changes to the layout of the buildings and the square footage of the buildings does not alter the character or intent of the approved planned unit development. Moreover, with the changes reflected on the CHI 11 PUD Plan, Petitioner seeks approval of single-story buildings in lieu of the two-story buildings approved with the Preliminary 6 PUD Plan. Because the proposed major change is consistent with the character and intent of the Preliminary PUD Plan, reduces the size of approved buildings, and increases the setback to existing residential uses, the major change will not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. The development of the Property will facilitate substantial investment in the City that will produce new construction jobs, long-term employment opportunities, and significant new tax revenue streams. In support of this premise, Petitioner hired Gruen Gruen + Associates to prepare reports evaluating both the economic (the “Economic Impact Report) and the fiscal (“the “Fiscal Impact Report”) impacts of the proposed development. The Fiscal Impact Report estimates that development of the Property will result in an average of 277 construction jobs annually for a period of ten years. In addition to the construction jobs, the development is estimated to support 1,881 permanent jobs in Kendall County, with annual labor income estimated at $187.4 million or approximately $99,700 per job. The operations of the campus are estimated to generate total annual economic output within Kendall County of approximately $1,053.2 billion dollars. The campus will also generate significant new tax streams, including projected annual tax revenue of $16,794,087 to the City at full buildout. Based on the construction schedule outlined above, Petitioner anticipates that the City would begin collecting significant new revenue in 2028. By 2029, tax receipts to the City will likely eclipse $2,000,000 and steadily grow for the next decade. The campus will establish the City as a regional leader in data center capacity, position the community as an employment base within a growing sector of the economy, and produce transformational new tax revenue streams. 2. The Special Use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within or near the neighborhood in which it is to be located. 7 With the approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan in 2024 the City found that the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within or near the neighborhood. With the proposed major change, which reduces the size and scale of the development occurring on the Property, the proposed major change will only mitigate any perceived concerns raised during the 2024 approval process. Immediately north of the Property is a very large, regional ComEd substation that is located in unincorporated Kendall County. This substation supplies power for the region and is a significant component of the utility infrastructure necessary to serve the data center campus. In fact, the data center campus is strategically and intentionally located immediately adjacent to the ComEd substation that will provide critical power supply to the data center campus. Eldamain Road defines the western boundary of the Property, with areas west of Eldamain Road being located in the Village of Plano and zoned M-2 General Manufacturing District. Uses within the adjacent Plano M-2 District include the Menards Distribution Center, Grundy Redi Mix, and a Groot transfer station. While there are some residential uses to the southwest, those homes are beyond applicable setback requirements under City of Yorkville zoning requirements. Faxon Road and the BNSF rail line collectively establish the southern boundary of the Property. Parcels south of Faxon Road are zoned A-1 in Kendall County. While there are two residential structures south of Faxon Road, those structures are beyond applicable setback requirements under the City of Yorkville zoning requirements. Beecher Road establishes the eastern boundary of the Property. East of Beecher Road is a new solar farm that was recently developed in the City of Yorkville. The area north of the solar farm is a separate parcel owned by Petitioner and which will immediately be utilized for purpose of extending electrical service to the Property. 8 3. The establishment of the Special Use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. With the approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan in 2024, The City found that the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. Here, Petitioner does not seek a new special use, but seeks a major change to the special use that was approved for the Property in 2024. With the proposed Major Change, Petitioner does not fundamentally alter the concept or the use approved by the City in 2024, but seeks to adjust the scale of the project, moving from taller two-story structures to single-story buildings that are more consistent with the scale of development in the region. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or other necessary facilities have been or shall be provided. The Property is generally well-positioned in terms of access and utilities. Since the City’s 2024 approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan, Petitioner has actively coordinated with the City to facilitate necessary and appropriate utility improvements that are proximate to the Property. Specifically, the Petitioner has funded the extension of municipal sanitary and water services that will serve not only the Property, but also future development in the area. With the extension of public utility services the property is adequately served by public utilities. Moreover, the extension of utilities that was facilitated by Petitioner, who bore significant up-front cost for said utility extensions, materially improves the City’s utility infrastructure and facilities additional development in the area around the Property. While the Petitioner has coordinated with the City on water and sanitary service, Petitioner has coordinated with ComEd regarding electrical service. Petitioner and ComEd have coordinated plans for the extension of electrical service from the adjacent ComEd substation to the Property. Additionally, Petitioner is undertaking construction of a new on-site electrical substation that will serve the Property. 9 Petitioner engaged the services of a professional traffic engineer to review ingress/egress conditions and the capacity of the surrounding roadway network to accommodate site generated traffic associated with the proposed data center development. The Traffic Impact Study prepared by KLOA, Inc., has been submitted with Petitioner’s application documents. The Traffic Impact Study shows that there is sufficient reserve capacity in the surrounding roadways to accommodate the proposed development. Petitioner also engaged the services of Pinnacle Engineering Group to provide civil engineering services associated with the proposed development of the Property. Pinnacle’s Preliminary Engineering Plans depict the anticipated improvements to the Property, including stormwater management facilities necessary to facilitate the development of the data center. 5. Adequate measures shall be taken to provide ingress or egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The primary means of ingress/egress to the Property is via Eldamain Road. At Eldamain Road, access will be restricted via a series of manned security gates. Ingress/egress is designed with a boulevard style section that will allow rejected vehicles to be directed back to Eldamain Road. Inside the gate, all drive aisles are privately owned and operated. Petitioner has relocated the secondary point of ingress/egress from Faxon Road to Beecher Road and added an emergency access point along Eldamain Road. With these changes, a larger contiguous stormwater facility is now located south of the data center buildings and will provide natural separation to the nearest residential dwellings. The Traffic Impact Study supports the proposed access points and confirms that the existing roads have sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate anticipated site traffic. 6. The proposed Special Use is not contrary to the objectives of the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. 10 The City adopted its most current Comprehensive Plan in 2016. According to the Comprehensive Plan, to accomplish the future development of the City’s industrial areas, the community planning objectives include: (i) removing barriers to industrial area investment and facilitating development through the use of incentives and regulatory relief; (ii) concentrating industrial attraction efforts in near-term industrial areas, such as the Yorkville Business Center and the Fox Industrial Park; (iii) facilitating redevelopment of industrial areas to accommodate industrial uses of different sizes and to achieve more modern office park settings; and (iv) encouraging best practices in industrial building/park design, stormwater management, landscape buffering and placemaking. The Comprehensive Plan identifies five (5) industrial areas with developable land, which include the Property. The proposed Major Change will advance the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in facilitating industrial development through regulatory relief. REVIEW STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO UDO SECTION 10-8-8. E. 1. Plan and Policy Alignment. The Planned Unit Development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans and policy documents of the City. The City approved the Preliminary PUD Plan in 2024, finding that it was consistent with the City’s plans and policies. The proposed major change is consistent with the intent and character of the Preliminary PUD Plan. The proposed major change, which reduces the size and scale of development on the Property, is likewise consistent with the City’s plans and policies. The Comprehensive Plan specifically references the development of the Lincoln Prairie Industrial Properties (which include the Property) in its vision strategy, stating that “..future Industrial development should occur as a planned industrial subdivision, similar to the Yorkville Business Center…”. By granting Petitioner’s request for a planned unit development in 2024, and 11 with approval of Petitioner’s proposed major change, the City will facilitate this goal in the near term, much in advance of the long-term strategy outlined in its Comprehensive Plan. By approving development of the Property as a planned unit development, the City ensured the coordinated and thoughtful planning of a large-scale industrial property and established a framework for the type of phased investment that is generally required for a development of this size and scale. The approval of the proposed major change is consistent with this regulatory framework and preserves the character and intent of the development originally approved in 2024. 2. Integrated Design with Identifiable Centers and Edges. The Planned Unit Development shall be laid out and developed as a unit in accordance with an integrated overall design, in which the various land uses function as a cohesive whole and support one another. The design shall provide identifiable centers, which form focus areas of activity in the development, and edges, which define the outer borders of the development, through the harmonious grouping of buildings, uses, facilities, public gathering spaces, and open space. In 2024 the City found that the Preliminary PUD Plan reflected unified development in accordance with an integrated overall design. The two (2) land uses function as a cohesive whole and support one another; one for the electric substation and the other for data center building uses. As reflected on the Amended PUD Plan, access improvements, certain phase 1 detention improvements, and the new electric substation are currently under development by Petitioner. With the proposed major change, Petitioner proposes to reconfigure the buildings and the stormwater detention around those improvements already under construction. With this reconfiguration, Petitioner substitutes predominantly single-story buildings for the previously approved two-story buildings. With this change from two-story to single-story buildings, Petitioner has expanded the area of the Property being developed, including that area originally designated for “future development” north of the main entrance on Eldamain Road. However, Petitioner has also reduced the total square footage of building area to be constructed on the Property. 12 Consistent with the approved Preliminary PUD Plan, the data center campus will be developed as a gated and secure facility whereby public access will be strictly limited. The CHI 11 PUD Plan maintains the emphasis on perimeter treatments, which is how most residents will interact with the data center campus. Petitioner has maintained perimeter setbacks that were established with the Preliminary PUD Plan and affirmed with the Amended PUD Plan. A black aluminum security fence, as specified on the landscape plan, will enclose the perimeter of the Property. The fence is strategically located inside of the northernmost and southernmost detention basins. The fence is also located inside of the scheduled landscape buffer that extends along public facing sides of the Property. With the substantial perimeter landscape buffer and the setbacks incorporated into the West Complex PUD Plan, the much shorter single-story data center buildings now proposed by Petitioner will not be a dominant feature of the broader landscape. 3. Public Welfare. The Planned Unit Development is designed, located, and proposed to be operated and maintained so that it will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property and will not substantially increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed CHI 11 PUD Plan will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property and will not substantially increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, and welfare. Petitioner strategically oriented data center improvements toward the core of the Property. Petitioner has emphasized open space around the perimeter of the Property, preserving setbacks approved with the Preliminary PUD Plan, and significantly expanding the size and scale of the southern detention basin located along Faxon Road. Planned perimeter setbacks are significantly greater than what is required under the zoning ordinance and upgraded perimeter landscape treatments will combine to create a substantial buffer to adjacent property. 13 4. Compatibility with Adjacent Land Uses. The Planned Unit Development includes uses which are generally compatible and consistent with the uses of adjacent parcels. If the uses are not generally compatible, all adverse impacts have been mitigated through screening, landscaping, public open space, and other buffering features that protect uses within the development and surrounding properties. With the approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan in 2024, the City confirmed Petitioner’s position that the plan for development of a data center campus is generally compatible with and consistent with the uses of adjacent parcels. With the major change, Petitioner is not changing the purpose or intent of the approved Preliminary PUD Plan. To the contrary, Petitioner is making changes which should benefit adjacent properties due to the reduction in size and scale of the development contemplated for the Property. Consistent with the approved Preliminary PUD Plan, the CHI 11 PUD Plan incorporates landscape buffers and building setbacks that exceed City Code requirements. 5. Impact on Public Facilities and Resources. The Planned Unit Development is designed so that adequate utilities, road access, stormwater management, and other necessary facilities will be provided to serve it. The Planned Unit Development shall include such impact fees as may be reasonably determined by the City Council. These required impact fees shall be calculated in reasonable proportion to the impact of the Planned Unit Development on public facilities and infrastructure. The City specifically considered impact on public facilities and resources with the 2024 approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan. At that time, Petitioner and the City entered into certain agreements to facilitate necessary and appropriate utility and roadway improvements to serve the planned unit development. With the proposed major change, there is no relevant change in impacts to public facilities or resources. Nevertheless, Petitioner has updated plans and studies, which have been submitted in support of the proposed Major Change, to reflect the impact of the planned unit development. As reflected in Petitioner’s plans and studies, the development reflected on the CHI 11 PUD Plan will not pose a significant burden on public facilities and infrastructure, but will 14 improve public facilities and infrastructure in a manner that will likely facilitate additional investment on nearby properties. Notably, with the proposed major change, Petitioner has submitted a study by The Power Bureau, LLC, which evaluates potential electric system reliability and cost impacts associated with the proposed development of the Property (the “Power Bureau Study”). As detailed in the Power Bureau Study, the development of the Property will not reduce the reliability of the regional grid or the local utility network. Additionally, the data center campus is unlikely to cause cost increases for ComEd’s current customers. 6. Archaeological, Historical or Cultural Impact. The Planned Unit Development does not substantially adversely impact an archaeological, historical, or cultural resource, included on the local, state, or federal register, located on or off the parcel(s) proposed for development. The proposed development of the Property does not substantially adversely impact an archaeological, historical, or cultural resource, included on the local, state, or federal register, located on or off the parcel(s) proposed for development. Petitioner has/will undertake necessary and appropriate studies to evaluate wetlands/waters, threatened/endangered species, and historical resources. Petitioner will coordinate necessary approvals with the City as a condition to the construction of improvements to the Property. REQUIRED DEVIATIONS FROM UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE With the approval of the Preliminary PUD Plan and the PUD Agreement in 2024, the City approved certain deviations from Code. With the proposed major change, Petitioner is not seeking additional deviations, but seeks to carry forward the deviations approved in 2024. WHEREFORE, by reason of the foregoing, the undersigned Petitioner requests the City’s Plan Council, Economic Development Committee, Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council take the necessary and appropriate action to grant a major amendment to a special use for 15 a planned unit development with development allowances as detailed on the plans submitted herewith for the Property and pursuant to the appropriate provisions of the City’s Code. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 28th day of May, 2026. PETITIONER: C1 YORKVILLE LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd. Attorney for the Petitioner 16 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property PARCEL ONE: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 19, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1030.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 844.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 18, 231.91 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 852.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 73 DEGREES 28 MINUTES 36 SECONDS WEST, 514.80 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 24 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4 1816.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL TWO: THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4, 1917.41 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST TO A POINT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION, 3126.88 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE, 223.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, 886.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON SAID WEST LINE, 3352.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 886.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL THREE: THAT PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS EAST ALONG 17 THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4, 1929.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 27 SECONDS EAST, 565.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59 DEGREES, 16 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST 913.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, 191.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 23 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 57 SECONDS EAST, 820.55 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS WEST, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, SAID POINT BEING 1917.41 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AS MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, 1671.52 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION, 722.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 54 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION, 702.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL FOUR: THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER LINE, 3437.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 33 SECONDS EAST, 223.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED COURSE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION, 1102.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD, 1423.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT 231.91 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF SAID QUARTER LINE AS MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OFWAY LINE, 1147.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 07 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH SAID QUARTER LINE, 1731.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. COMMONLY KNOWN AS approximately 228 acres of vacant land located at northeast corner of Eldamain Road and Faxon Road in Bristol Township, in unincorporated Kendall County PINs: 02-18-300-001; 02-18-300-002; 02-18-300-003; 02-18-300-004; 02-19-100-004; 02-19-100-005; and 02-18-400-004 18 EXHIBIT B Preliminary PUD Plan (Attached) BEECHER ROADELDAMAIN ROADFAXON ROAD RAILRO A D WETWET WETWETW E T W E T WETWET 30.00' TYP. 75.00' TYP. 75.00' 1000.00' 800.00' +/-233.60' 275.40' 221.27' 129.78' 121.26' 30.00' 530.60' 30.00' 36.00 TYP. BUILDING 1 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 2 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 4 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 5 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.0 BUILDING 8 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 SUBSTATION (800' x 1000') FFE=648.5 BUILDING 9 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 3 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 6 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.5 BUILDING 7 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 POND 1 POND 2 POND 3 POND 4 POND 5 POND 6oooo o o o o o o o o oooooooo o o o o o o o o o o oo o o oooooooooooooooooooooo o o oo o o o o o ooooooCYRUS ONE - YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS - PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN SCALE:1" = 200' AT FULL SIZE (24x36) DATE: May 21, 2024 Project Area Current Colo Build Equipment Yard Stormwater Pond Wetlands Security Fenceooooo 150' PROPOSED FUTURE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 150' SETBACK EASEMENT 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 60' SETBACK EASEMENT M-2 ZONING A-1 ZONING A-1 ZONING A-1 ZONING YORKVILLEPLANO UNINCORPORATED PROJECT SITE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA 9,956,767.47 SF (228.57 AC +/-) MAX BUILDING HEIGHT N/A SETBACKS* FRONT (WEST) REQUIRED 25'-0" FRONT (WEST) PROVIDED 150'-0" REAR (EAST) REQUIRED 0'-0" REAR (EAST) PROVIDED 60'-0" SIDE (N + S) REQUIRED 20'-0" SIDE (N + S) PROVIDED 50'-0" TRANSITIONAL SIDE N/A *SETBACKS APPLY ONLY TO THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROPERTY IS RESUBDIVIDED, THERE SHALL BE NO SETBACKS APPLICABLE TO INTERNAL LOT LINES. PARKING DATA CENTER PARKING RATIO 0.2 SPACES PER 1,000 SF REQUIRED PARKING (# SPACES)490 PROVIDED PARKING (# SPACES)432 ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED (# SPACES)9 ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED (# SPACES)27 COVERAGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE N/A MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE 85% PROVIDED BUILDING COVERAGE 12.3% MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE 85% PROVIDED SITE COVERAGE 35.6% MAXIMUM MAX FAR 85% PROVIDED SITE COVERAGE 24.6% FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BUILDING AREAS BUILDING #SIZE HEIGHT (TOP OF BUILDING) HEIGHT (TOP OF EQUIPMENT) BUILDING 1 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 2 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 3 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 4 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 5 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 6 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 7 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 8 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BUILDING 9 152,000 SF 55'-0"70'-0" TOTAL 2,451,200 SF N/A N/A EMERGENCY ENTRANCE PRIMARY ENTRANCE 19 EXHIBIT C Amended PUD Plan (Attached) PRIMARY ENTRANCE BEECHER ROADELDAMAIN ROADRAILRO A D BUILDING 8 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 9 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 6 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.5 POND 6 BUILDING 3 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 2 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 4 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 1 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 5 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.0 POND 5POND 2 POND 1 POND 4 POND 3 SUBSTATION (436' X 920') FFE=±648.5 530.6'30.0'±233.6' 30.0' 75.0'275.4'925.0'436.0'30.0'221.3'M-2 ZONING 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 150' SETBACK EASEMENT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT A-1 ZONING 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT A-1 ZONING A-1 ZONING 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT 30' WATER LINE EASEMENT EMERGENCY ENTRANCE 150' PROPOSED FUTURE EASEMENT 50' SETBACK EASEMENT © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN C1 YORKVILLE PUD (CHI 11) - PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN6097.00-ILBDJ11/21/251"=200'1 1 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS C1 YORKVILLE PUD (CHI 11) WETLANDS PROPOSED BUILDING STORMWATER POND LEGEND PROJECT AREA EQUIPMENT YARD SECURITY FENCE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN DESIGN SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA ±9,956,767.47 SF (±228.57 AC) MAX BUILDING HEIGHT N/A SETBACKS FRONT (WEST) REQUIRED 25' FRONT (WEST) PROVIDED 150' REAR (EAST) REQUIRED 0' REAR (EAST) PROVIDED 60' SIDE (NORTH & SOUTH) REQUIRED 20' SIDE (NORTH & SOUTH) PROVIDED 50' TRANSITIONAL SIDE N/A *SETBACKS APPLY ONLY TO THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROPERTY IS RESUBDIVIDED. THERE SHALL BE NO SETBACKS APPLICABLE TO THE INTERNAL LOT LINES. PARKING DATA CENTER PARKING RATIO 0.2 SPACES PER 1,000 SF REQUIRED PARKING (# SPACES)433 PROVIDED PARKING (# SPACES)378 ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED (# SPACES)8 ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED (# SPACES)24 COVERAGE MINIMUM LOT SIZE N/A MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED BUILDING COVERAGE 10.9% MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED SITE COVERAGE 28.7% MAXIMUM FAR 85% PROVIDED FAR 21.7% BUILDING DATA BLDG #SIZE HEIGHT (TOP OF BLDG) HEIGHT (TOP OF EQPT.) BLDG 1 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 2 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 3 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 4 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 5 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 6 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 7 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 8 287,400 SF 55'-0"70'-0" BLDG 9 152,000 SF 55'-0"70'-0" TOTAL 2,163,800 SF N/A N/A 20 EXHIBIT D CHI 11 PUD Plan (Attached) 12' 30' 30' 12' 12' 30' 12' 18'30'30' 12' 30'30' 18' 18' 30'30'12'ELDAMAIN ROADBNSF R A I L W A Y C O M P A N Y FAXON ROAD BEECHER ROADPROPOSED BLDG 11A FF = 659.20 PROPOSED BLDG 11B FF = 658.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11C FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11D FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11E FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11G FF = 651.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11H FF = 650.7030'12'30'12'30'12'12'30'12'30'12'30'12'30'30'30'12'30' 12' 30' 12' 30'30' 18' 18' 30' STORMWATER BASIN 1 STORMWATER BASIN 2 STORM WATER BASIN 3 STORMWATER BASIN 4 STORMWATER BASIN 7 STORMWATER BASIN 6 STORMWATER BASIN 550' BUILDING SETBACK 50' BUILDING SETBACK 50' BUILDING SETBACK SECURITY FENCE (TYP.) 20' UTILITY EASEMENT 60' BUILDING SETBACK 40' R.O.W. DEDICATION 20' UTILITY EASEMENT 150' BUILDING SETBACK 75' R.O.W. DEDICATION 25' UTILITY & PEDESTRIAN PATH EASEMENT 50' BUILDING SETBACK 150' UTILITY EASEMENT 60' R.O.W. DEDICATION PROPOSED GATED RIGHT-IN / RIGHT-OUT ONLY EMERGENCY ACCESS ELDAMAIN RD CENTERLINE 100' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 100' LANDSCAPE BUFFER OPEN SPACE / UTILITY EASEMENT BEECHER ROAD CENTERLINE 100' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SECURITY FENCE (TYP.) PROPOSED FULL ACCESS SECURITY FENCE GATED FULL ACCESS (NO TRUCK TRAFFIC & RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE EGRESS ONLY)© COPYRIGHT 2026SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 MAJOR CHANGE & PRELIMINARY PUD FOR C1 YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS1411.40-ILDAT05/14/261" = 200'1 1YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH CHI 11 COMPLEX SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA ±9,972,190.80 SF (±228.93 AC) BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT (WEST) REAR (EAST) SIDE (NORTH & SOUTH) TRANSITIONAL SIDE *SETBACKS APPLY ONLY TO THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROPERTY IS RESUBDIVIDED. THERE SHALL BE NO SETBACKS APPLICABLE TO THE INTERNAL LOT LINES. BUILDING DATA BLDG #SIZE*PARKING REQUIRED PARKING PROVIDED ** LOADING BERTH PROVIDED HEIGHT (TOP OF BLDG) HEIGHT (TOP OF EQPT. SCREENING WALL) BLDG A 246,387 SF 50 50 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG B 129,350 SF 26 50 2 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG C 246,387 SF 50 50 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG D 246,387 SF 50 38 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG E 246,387 SF 50 50 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG F 246,387 SF 50 38 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG G 246,387 SF 50 49 4 36'-0"50'-10" BLDG H 246,387 SF 50 54 4 36'-0"50'-10" TOTAL 1,854,805 SF 376 379 30 N/A N/A *INCLUDES 16,673 SF OF 2ND FLOOR OFFICE SPACE ** 1 ADA STALL PROVIDED PER BUILDING PARKING DATA DATA CENTER PARKING RATIO 0.2 SPACES PER 1,000 SF REQUIRED PARKING (# SPACES)376 PROVIDED PARKING (# SPACES)379 ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED (# SPACES)8 ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED (# SPACES)8 COVERAGE DATA MINIMUM LOT SIZE N/A MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED BUILDING COVERAGE 17.3% MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE 85.0% PROVIDED SITE COVERAGE 52.8% MAXIMUM FAR 85.0% PROVIDED FAR 18.6% C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS MAJOR CHANGE & PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR C1 YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS 25' 0' 20' N/A CODE 150' 60' 50' N/A PROVIDED RESIDENTIAL SETBACKS 500' (MINIMUM)VARIES (±600' - ±833') *INTERIOR SETBACKS (IN THE EVENT OF A SUBDIVISION)SAME AS ABOVE 0' © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 CHI 11 LANDSCAPE DESIGN COLOR EXHIBIT C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - CHI 11 LANDSCAPE DESIGN COLOR EXHIBIT6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261"=200'1 1YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH AMERISTAR IMPASSE II - SECURITY FENCE CANOPY TREE UNDERSTORY TREES EVERGREEN TREE C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS PROJECT LOCATION FAXON R O A D BNSF R A I L W A Y C O P M P A N YELDAMAIN RDELDAMAIN RDFAXON ROAD BNSF R A I L W A Y C O P M P A N Y BEECHER ROADBEECHER ROADWEST COMPLEX © COPYRIGHT 2023SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 COVER SHEET C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CAMPUS - COVER SHEET6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/26NONEC-1 C-3 ABBREVIATIONS C & G EP FG FF FL FP FW HWL ROW TB TF TP TS W CURB AND GUTTER EDGE OF PAVEMENT FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR FLOW LINE FLOODPLAIN FLOODWAY HIGH WATER LEVEL RIGHT-OF-WAY TOP OF BANK TOP OF FOUNDATION TOP OF PIPE TOP OF SIDEWALK TOP OF WALL ELEVATION BL CL FR INV PC PT PVI C D L R T ST MH CB WM SAN BASE LINE CENTERLINE FRAME INVERT POINT OF CURVATURE POINT OF TANGENCY POINT OF VERTICAL INTERSECTION LONG CHORD OF CURVE DEGREE OF CURVE LENGTH OF CURVE RADIUS TANGENCY OF CURVE EDGE OF CONCRETE STORM SEWER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN WATER MAIN SANITARY SEWER TDC TOP OF DEPRESSED CURB NWL NORMAL WATER LEVEL BW BOTTOM OF WALL BC BACK OF CURB EC INDEX OF SHEETS C-1 COVER SHEET C-2 CHI 11 CONCEPT GRADING PLAN C-3 CHI 11 CONCEPT UTILITY PLAN EXPIRATION DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 2026 CONTACTS GENERAL NOTES ELECTRIC COMED (800) 334-7661 NATURAL GAS NICOR (847) 642-6748 PHONE AT&T (800) 288-2020 CABLE/TELEVISION COMCAST (866) 594-1234 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PLAN FOR CONTACTS UTILITY CONTACTS ELECTRIC COMED (800) 334-7661 NATURAL GAS NICOR (847) 642-6748 PHONE AT&T (800) 288-2020 CABLE/TELEVISION COMCAST (866) 594-1234 (312) 466-4605 DALLAS, TEXAS 75201 2850 N. HARWOOD STREET PLANS PREPARED FOR LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1"=1,000' BENCHMARKS PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC ENGINEER'S LIMITATION PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC AND THEIR CONSULTANTS DO NOT WARRANT OR GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF THE DELIVERABLES HEREIN BEYOND A REASONABLE DILIGENCE. IF ANY MISTAKES, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCIES ARE FOUND TO EXIST WITHIN THE DELIVERABLES, THE ENGINEER SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED PRIOR TO BID SO THAT HE MAY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS NECESSARY TO RESOLVE THEM. FAILURE TO PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF SUCH CONDITIONS SHALL ABSOLVE THE ENGINEER FROM ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH FAILURE. ACTIONS TAKEN WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT TO THE ENGINEER, OR IN CONTRADICTION TO THE ENGINEER'S DELIVERABLES OR RECOMMENDATIONS, SHALL BECOME THE RESPONSIBILITY NOT OF THE ENGINEER BUT OF THE PARTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING SUCH ACTION. FURTHERMORE, PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION SAFETY OR THE MEANS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION. LEGEND EASEMENT LINE SOIL BORING TOPSOIL PROBE REVERSE PITCH CURB & GUTTER DEPRESSED CURB NORMAL WATER LEVEL (NWL) HIGH WATER LEVEL (HWL) CLEANOUT FLOODPLAIN FLOODWAY WETLANDS FIRE HYDRANT LIGHTING SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATER MAIN PRIVATE WATER WELL FORCE MAIN ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW OVERFLOW RELIEF ROUTING TREE WITH TRUNK SIZE POWER POLE STREET SIGN DITCH OR SWALE GAS MAIN TELEPHONE LINE FENCE LINE, WIRE CONCRETE SIDEWALK CURB AND GUTTER VALVE BOX ELECTRICAL CABLE OR PEDESTAL SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE CATCH BASIN INLET PRECAST FLARED END SECTION VALVE VAULT PRESSURE TAP EXISTING PROPOSED FENCE LINE, CHAIN LINK OR IRON FENCE LINE, WOOD OR PLASTIC POWER POLE WITH LIGHT GUY WIRE UTILITY CROSSING FENCE LINE, TEMPORARY SILT DIVERSION SWALE PROPERTY LINE REFERENCE BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT YY 49 (MF0524), DESCRIBED AS 4'1.4 MI E FROM PLANO. 1.4 MILES EAST ALONG THE CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD FROM THE STATION AT PLANO, KENDALL COUNTY, AT POLE 50/18, 9 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE SOUTH TRACK, AT A SIGNAL BRIDGE, IN THE TOP OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A 3- BY 8-FOOT CONCRETE BASE, AND LEVEL WITH THE TRACK. A STANDARD DISK, STAMPED YY 49 1934. DATUM: NAVD88 ELEVATION: 646.41 SITE BENCHMARK: IRON ROD IN PARKWAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF ELDAMAIN ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 200' NORTH OF THE ENTRANCE TO MENARDS DISTRIBUTION CENTER. EXISTING CONDITIONS: EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN REPRESENTS SITE CONDITIONS AS PREPARED BY PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, DATED JUNE 11, 2025. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD CHECK EXISTING HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SITE FEATURES AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION. YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1.THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SHALL BE NOTIFIED 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK AND 24 HOURS PRIOR TO EACH INSPECTION AT (630) 553-8573. 2.ALL UTILITY COMPANIES, INCLUDING THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, SHALL BE CONTACTED AND THEIR FACILITIES SHALL BE LOCATED PRIOR TO ANY WORK IN ANY EASEMENT, RIGHT-OF-WAY, OR SUSPECTED UTILITY LOCATION. REPAIR OF ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES SHALL BE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREIN ARE FOR GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATION ONLY AND ARE NOT TO BE RELIED UPON. 3.PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY OFFSITE CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION THAT ALL OFFSITE EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN SECURED, AND THAT PERMISSION HAS BEEN GRANTED TO ENTER ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY. 4.EXCEPT WHERE MODIFIED BY THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, ALL WORK PROPOSED HEREON SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS (LATEST EDITION): a.THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE. b.THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. c."STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION" BY ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. d."STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL ITEMS" BY ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. e."SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS AND RECURRING SPECIAL PROVISIONS" BY ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. f."STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER AND SEWER MAIN CONSTRUCTION IN ILLINOIS" BY ILLINOIS SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, ET AL. g.OTHER STANDARDS OR SPECIFICATIONS SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO IN AN INDIVIDUAL PROVISION OF THESE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. h."ILLINOIS URBAN MANUAL" AS PREPARED BY THE U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE & IL ASSOCIATION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS. i.THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, GENERAL CONDITIONS, SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS OF THE PROJECT AS PREPARED BY PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC. j.ALL DOCUMENTS CITED IN THE ABOVE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT UNDER CONSIDERATION. IF A CONFLICT ARISES BETWEEN ANY PROVISION(S) OF THE REFERENCE ITEMS ABOVE AND ANY PROVISION(S) OF THESE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THEN THE MORE RESTRICTIVE PROVISION(S) SHALL APPLY. l.UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE FINAL "RECORD DRAWINGS" (DIGITAL CAD AND PDF FILES, SIGNED AND SEALED BY THE ENGINEER) OF ALL INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR MUNICIPAL ACCEPTANCE. THIS MAY INCLUDE (BUT NOT LIMITED TO) UTILITIES WHICH INCLUDE THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF MAINS, SERVICE LINES, STRUCTURES, PAVED AREAS, SITE GRADING (INCLUDE ADA AREAS), STORMWATER FACILITIES, STREET LIGHTS, CURBS AND MONUMENTS. PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC BRIAN JOHNSON, P.E., CPESC 1051 EAST MAIN STREET | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, ILLINOIS 60118 (847) 551-5300 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE - PUBLIC WORKS ERIC DHUSE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 610 TOWER LANE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 60560 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KRYSTI BARKSALE-NOBLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 651 PRAIRIE POINTE DRIVE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 60560 (630) 553-8573 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE - BUILDING SAFETY & ZONING DEPARTMENT 651 PRAIRIE POINTE DRIVE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 60560 (630) 553-8545 652.13651.10 651.10 650.30 656.30FF652.30652.80652.80655.45652.00650.75652.75652.17651.00653.08650.75652.30652.00656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF656.30 FF 656.30 FF 656.30 FF 652.80656.30FF656.30FF656.30 FF 656.30 FF 656.30 FF 656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80656.20651.40651.95 651.40652.80652.80651.10 652.80652.80651.10 651.10 650.30 656.30FF652.30652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.00650.75650.75652.30652.00656.20656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF 656.30 FF 651.88656.30 FF656.30 FF 656.30 FF 656.30FF 656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80656.20651.40651.95652.80652.80651.40653.15652.80651.10 652.80652.80653.67653.67653.95655.30655.95655.30651.10 651.10 656.30FF652.30655.45655.45652.80655.45652.00652.60650.75651.10651.80652.17651.00651.58650.75652.30652.00656.20656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF 656.30 FF 656.30FF656.30 FF656.30 FF 656.30FF 656.30FF 656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80656.20651.40652.80651.40652.80652.80651.10 652.80650.91652.80651.10 651.10 656.30FF652.30652.80652.80652.80652.80652.00652.60650.75650.75652.30652.00656.20656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF656.30FF 656.30 FF 656.30FF656.30 FF656.30 FF 656.30FF656.30 FF 656.30FF656.30FF652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80652.80655.45652.80656.20651.40652.80651.40652.80653.75653.15654.20652.80651.10 652.80652.80653.45654.80654.80654.45644.40 643.90 R 644.25 643.90644.40643.90644.40643.90644.40644.40650.70 FF 649.70649.70647.90 649.40 649.40649.40 647.15 644.80644.80644.80644.80646.20646.40 645.25 644.35644.80648.50 R649.00 646.57 645.78 645.53 647.60 647.20 644.78646.70 646.70 645.80 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20649.20647.25647.50648.20 645.53646.96647.55651.00651.00650.50651.00651.47651.70651.40651.70650.80648.78643.90R644.40644.02R643.90644.40643.90644.80644.80644.80644.80644.20644.70 644.70652.70FF652.70FF652.70FF652.70 FF652.70FF652.70FF652.70FF652.70 FF 652.70 FF 652.70FF652.70 FF 652.70FF646.40 645.90 R 645.90 R 645.90 R 646.70 646.70 646.70 646.70 646.70 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20 647.20645.15 644.80645.30 650.70 FF 650.70FF 650.70 FF 650.70FF 650.70 FF 650.70 FF 650.70 FF 650.70 FF644.95644.47644.07644.40652.70FF652.70FF647.80648.40652.60648.70649.31 645.66 650.41646.82 646.70 646.35646.35646.35646.35646.35 646.70 647.15648.40647.15660.80648.70646.40 650.60645.15 645.80 645.30 644.98 644.63647.30645.95 644.58 649.04 R649.54649.04 R649.54649.54649.04 R649.54649.04 R649.54 649.94649.94649.94 649.94 649.94 649.94 649.94 649.84 649.94 649.94 649.94 649.94 649.94 649.94649.94649.94649.94649.94649.94 649.84 649.94 649.94 649.84 649.84 649.84654.10R654.10R654.10R653.60R653.60R653.60R653.60R649.94 649.84 649.94649.94649.94 649.94 649.85 649.78649.84 649.94649.94649.94649.94 649.54 649.54 649.04R 649.54 649.54 649.04 R 649.54 649.54 649.04R 649.54 649.04R 649.54 649.04 R 646.86 650.07 649.84 649.94 649.94 649.84 649.84 650.07 648.80 648.80 648.80 652.13652.55652.55649.95649.95647.96 650.17 647.67 650.07 649.84 648.80648.80 649.95649.95 652.91652.75655.00655.30655.00655.30655.00653.32653.02651.50651.84651.80 656.00655.30655.30655.00653.32653.02646.70644.70 645.00 645.45 645.95 645.45 645.45 645.45 645.45 645.45 646.35 646.35 646.35 646.35 646.35 646.35 646.25 647.25646.32645.45 R645.45 R645.95645.45 R645.95645.95645.45 650.70 FF650.60 646.30 645.00646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 644.65 R 644.65 R 644.65 R 644.65 R646.20 646.20646.50646.20 646.50646.50646.50646.50646.50646.50646.50646.50649.20649.20649.20647.00647.50647.42646.70647.90R648.40647.90R648.70648.70648.70644.65 R646.00647.00647.20648.00643.87644.75R644.75R644.75R644.75R645.13644.17 646.25645.05645.05645.05645.05645.55647.96 645.30 645.00 645.87 646.25 644.70644.70654.60654.10R654.60650.35 651.94650.15654.60654.60654.60649.73 648.80 648.80 648.80 648.80 648.80 648.40 647.90 648.40 647.90 648.40 647.90 653.95653.91653.36650.07 654.40 652.90 653.20 654.84 657.70 657.70 655.72 655.42 655.02 657.40 657.00 657.40 657.00 654.70 652.80653.70 654.40 653.50 652.70 652.00 R 654.66 652.70 652.00 R 652.70 652.40 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 655.20 658.70 FF 653.85653.50 658.70 FF 658.70 651.90R658.70FF 658.70 FF 651.90R651.90R652.40652.80653.50652.80655.20655.20 653.48653.20 656.60 652.88 651.80R 651.86 652.98 653.75 653.35 654.40 654.15 648.91648.09647.48645.90 R 654.00 654.00 653.12 659.20 FF 654.20 655.20 655.70 655.70 652.90652.40R652.90652.40R652.90652.90653.30653.30653.30653.20652.40 R 653.20 652.40 R 653.20 652.90 653.20 652.90 654.90 653.62 652.57652.57652.07R651.90R652.40651.90R652.80652.80652.80652.80654.00 655.69 653.90 654.48 657.90 658.20 656.22 655.52 657.90 658.20 657.50654.86 657.00R 653.48653.65 655.20 654.90 659.10659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 652.80652.80655.70 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 659.20 FF 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 655.70 648.40 648.70 647.90 R 648.40 647.90 R 648.40 647.90 R 648.60(657.46)(657.08)649.30 649.60 646.40646.40645.90 R646.40645.90 R645.90 R646.40 646.70646.70646.70646.70646.70 652.92 655.70 653.15 R 653.90 654.15 653.65 653.20 652.40 646.50646.20R659.10 654.30654.85655.70 653.50 654.30 655.70 652.40 R 653.97 651.40 R652.40R652.80645.20R 645.20R 645.20 R 646.50647.90 645.08 643.99 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 646.50 645.90 R645.90 R 646.50 644.90(652.36)(655.12)653.30653.20654.00 655.70 652.70 652.40 653.16 653.20653.81 655.42 654.30 654.75652.80652.50 646.70 646.83 TDC648.33 646.02 646.70 655.26 652.15 652.13 652.95 650.57 648.35 647.73 649.81 655.70 (653.89)648.70648.25654.00 654.00 654.00 ELDAMAIN ROADBNSF R A I L W A Y C O M P A N Y FAXON ROAD BEECHER ROADBEECHER ROADPROPOSED BLDG 11A FF = 659.20 PROPOSED BLDG 11B FF = 658.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11C FF = 656.30 PROPOSED BLDG 11D FF = 656.30 PROPOSED BLDG 11E FF = 656.30 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 656.30 PROPOSED BLDG 11G FF = 652.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 650.70 STORMWATER BASIN 1 HWL=650 / NWL=645 STORMWATER BASIN 2 HWL=650 NWL=645 STORM WATER BASIN 3 HWL=650 NWL=645 STORMWATER BASIN 4 HWL=647 NWL=642 STORMWATER BASIN 7 HWL=642 NWL=637 STORMWATER BASIN 6 HWL=642 / NWL=635 STORMWATER BASIN 5HWL=642 / NWL=635© COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 CHI 11 CONCEPT GRADING PLAN C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - CHI 11 CONCEPT GRADING PLAN6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261"=200'C-2 C-3YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURE PRECAST FLARED END SECTION CONTOUR SPOT ELEVATION DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW OVERFLOW RELIEF ROUTING C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWELDAMAIN ROADBNSF R A I L W A Y C O M P A N Y FAXON ROAD BEECHER ROADBEECHER ROADPROPOSED BLDG 11A FF = 659.20 PROPOSED BLDG 11B FF = 658.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11C FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11D FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11E FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11G FF = 651.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 650.70 STORMWATER BASIN 1 STORMWATER BASIN 2 STORM WATER BASIN 3 STORMWATER BASIN 4 STORMWATER BASIN 7 STORMWATER BASIN 6 STORMWATER BASIN 5W WWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W WWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W WWWWW W WWWWWWW WWWWWWW W W W WWWWW W W WWW LIFT STATION © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 CHI 11 CONCEPT UTILITY PLAN C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - CHI 11 CONCEPT UTILITY PLAN6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261"=200'C-3 C-3YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH LEGEND FIRE HYDRANT SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER WATERMAIN VALVE BOX SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE CATCH BASIN/RISER INLET PRECAST FLARED END SECTION VALVE VAULT EXISTING PROPOSED WW C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEwww.pinnacle-engr.comREVISIONS COLOR BUILDING RENDERING C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - COLOR BUILDING RENDERING6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/26NONE1 1 C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEwww.pinnacle-engr.comREVISIONS EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS A & B C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS A & B6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261/16" = 1'-0"1 3 0'4'8'16'2' YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEwww.pinnacle-engr.comREVISIONS EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATION C C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATION C6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261/16" = 1'-0"2 3 0'4'8'16'2' YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS © COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEwww.pinnacle-engr.comREVISIONS EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATION D C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATION D6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261/16" = 1'-0"3 3YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 0'4'8'16'2' C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS ELDAMAIN ROADBNSF R A I L W A Y C O M P A N Y FAXON ROAD BEECHER ROADSTORMWATER BASIN 1 STORMWATER BASIN 2 STORM WATER BASIN 3 STORMWATER BASIN 4 STORMWATER BASIN 7 STORMWATER BASIN 6 STORMWATER BASIN 5SUBSTATION © COPYRIGHT 2026SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 CHI 11 INFASTRUCTURE PHASING PLAN C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - CHI 11 INFASTRUCTURE PHASING PLAN6097.00-ILDAT05/14/261"=200' 1 1YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS PROPOSED PHASING SCHEDULE PHASE STORMWATER POND(S) SERVING PHASE ANCILLARY INFRASTRUCTURE *1 SUBSTATION BASIN 5 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TO & CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTATION 2 PHASING LIMITS ARE ESTIMATED AND MAY BE COMBINED AND / OR BUILDING PHASES MAY BE REVISED BASED UPON TENANT DEMAND. IN ALL CASES, ALL NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVICE A BUILDING, CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY CODE, WILL BE COMPLETED WITH THAT BUILDING OR PHASE 3 PHASING LIMITS ARE ESTIMATED AND MAY BE COMBINED AND / OR BUILDING PHASES MAY BE REVISED BASED UPON TENANT DEMAND. IN ALL CASES, ALL NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVICE A BUILDING, CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY CODE, WILL BE COMPLETED WITH THAT BUILDING OR PHASE *PHASE 1 COMMENCED, Q1 OF 2026 AND IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ELDAMAIN ROADBNSF R A I L W A Y C O M P A N Y FAXON ROAD BEECHER ROADPROPOSED BLDG 11A FF = 659.20 PROPOSED BLDG 11B FF = 658.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11C FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11D FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11E FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11F FF = 654.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11G FF = 651.70 PROPOSED BLDG 11H FF = 650.70 STORMWATER BASIN 1 STORMWATER BASIN 2 STORM WATER BASIN 3 STORMWATER BASIN 4 STORMWATER BASIN 7 STORMWATER BASIN 6 STORMWATER BASIN 5±543'±435'BUILDING 8 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 9 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.0 BUILDING 6 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=647.5 BUILDING 3 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 2 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 4 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.5 BUILDING 1 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=649.0 BUILDING 5 2 STORY DATA CENTER FFE=648.0 SUBSTATION (436' X 920') FFE=±648.5 ±732'±833'© COPYRIGHT 2025SHEET PEG JOB No.PEG PMSTART DATESCALEPINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP PINNACLE ENGINEERING GROUP www.pinnacle-engr.comCHICAGO OFFICE: 1051 E. MAIN ST. | SUITE 217 EAST DUNDEE, IL 60118 (847) 551-5300 ENGINEERING I NATURAL RESOURCES I SURVEYING PLAN I DESIGN I DELIVER CHICAGO I MILWAUKEE : NATIONWIDE w w w .p i n n a c l e -e n g r .c o m REVISIONS IL DESIGN FIRM 184.006289-0010 RESIDENTIAL SETBACK COMPARISON EXHIBIT C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS - RESIDENTIAL SETBACK COMPARISON EXHIBIT6097.00-ILBDJ05/14/261"=200'1 1YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS 1" = 200'0 400' GRAPHICAL SCALE (FEET) NORTH C1-YORKVILLE DATA CENTER CHI 11 CAMPUS 1 Memorandum To: Plan Council From: Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Date: May 6, 2026 Subject: PZC 2026-03 C1 Yorkville – CHI 11 (Cyrus One) Data Center NE Corner of Faxon Road & Eldamain Road Proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment & Preliminary PUD Plan I have reviewed the applications for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan received April 21, 2026 as submitted by C1 Yorkville, LLC, Petitioner, as well as the following supplemental documents/plans: 1.Project Narrative (Petition for Development Approval) prepared and submitted by Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd., attorney, on behalf of C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner. Revised and resubmitted. 2.Concept PUD Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 03/12/26. Revised and resubmitted. 3.Major Change & Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 03/12/26. Revised and resubmitted. 4.Final Plat of Subdivision, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 3/13/2026. Omitted. Petitioner has withdrawn request for the Final Plat of Subdivision. 5.Color Building Rendering and Exterior Elevations, prepared by Corgan and dated 03/12/26. Revised and resubmitted. 6.Noise Study, prepared by Trinity Consultants and dated April 22, 2026. Pending. 7.Data Center Impact Analysis – An Assessment of Potential Electric System Reliability and Cost Impacts of a Proposed Data Center in Yorkville, prepared by The Power Bureau, LLC dated 2026. Pending 8.The Fiscal Benefits of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated March 2026. Pending. 9.The Economic Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated February 2026. No changes necessary. 10.Traffic Impact Study Proposed Data Center, prepared by KLOA and dated March 24, 2026. Pending. The petitioner is seeking approval to amend existing ordinances (Ord. 2024-33 approving a special use Planned Unit Development and Ord. 2026-09 Minor Amendment to the Approved Planned Unit Development) for Major Planned Unit Development Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan to construct a secured data center campus and on-site substation on approximately 228- acres of land located at the northeast corner of Faxon Road and Eldamain Road, also known as CyrusOne’s CHI-11 campus. The site will consist of eight (8) one-story standalone buildings with a total building area of up to 2,163,800 square feet to be developed in phases over a 10-20 year period. Petitioner notes that the data center campus is already under construction, with Petitioner currently constructing the primary access to the facility PETITIONER RESPONSES TO STAFF COMMENTS ARE IN BOLD AND UNDERLINED (HIGHLIGHTED BY STAFF) 2 and the electrical substation that will support data center campus. Petitioner anticipates commencing construction of the first building of the campus before the end of the 4th quarter of 2026. With the revised plans submitted herewith, Petitioner has reduced the total square footage of the campus to 1,854,805 square feet. Based upon my review of the applications, supplemental documents, and concept PUD a preliminary PUD site plans, I have compiled the following comments: GENERAL PUD MAJOR AMENDMENT COMMENTS: The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement for the C1 Yorkville (CHI-11) CyrusOne data center campus (Ordinance 2024-33) was established prior to the City’s adoption of Energy Industrial Use standards for data centers via Ordinance 2025-53 in June 2025. Sections 2.1 and 4.3 of the previously approved PUD Agreement permit the waiver of subsequently adopted, more stringent Energy Industrial Use regulations, effectively vesting the development standards within the current agreement for a period of 20 years. The original PUD Agreement established the following: 1.CURRENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) – Section 10-8-8 of City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) establishes standards for Planned Unit Development (PUDs). PUDs are allowed to modify standards of the base district as long as the requested modifications are specifically identified and demonstrates how each allowance is compatible with surrounding development, is necessary for proper development of the site, and is aligned with at least one (1) modification standard found in Section 10-8-8D of the UDO. a.Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement (Ordinance 2024-33) approved certain deviations from the base M-2 General Manufacturing District standards for the subject property related to: building setbacks for interior lots, parking requirements, vehicular cross access, pedestrian circulation, off-street loading, landscape requirements internal to the site, certain mechanical screening requirements (subject to sound study approval), street design for lots, and appearance standards. b.Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement (Ordinance 2024-33) established modification standard #12 “Regional Utility Improvements” applies to the subject property, as the proposed development will extend public utilities (water and sanitary) to and through the property resulting in recapturable payments to the developer when future property owners in the area benefit from connecting to such utility that had not previously existed. 2.PROPOSED MAJOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT - Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement established the criteria for major amendments which results in one or more of the following changes to the approved Preliminary PUD Plan: a.More than 10% increase in square footage of the buildings. i.Proposed plan illustrates a decrease in the total building square footage of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan from 2,163,800 to 2,062,500 on the Major PUD Preliminary Plan but seeks an allowance to maintain the previously approved maximum building square footage. NOT APPLICABLE. As reflected in the revised plans submitted herewith, Petitioner has revised its request with respect to square footage for the campus. Petitioner is requesting approval of 1,854,805 square feet, which reflects a decrease in buildable area of approximately 310,000 square feet. b.Any structure greater than 100 feet in height. i.Proposed plan decreases the maximum height of the data center buildings on the Minor PUD Preliminary Plan from a maximum of 70’-0” to top of equipment to 50’-10” to top of equipment screening wall on the Major PUD Preliminary Plan. NOT APPLICABLE. 3 c.Except as other set forth above, any deviation from the site data standards set forth on the Site Plan. i.It is noted that the provided parking spaces increased from 378 stalls on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 437 stalls on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. With the aforementioned reduction in square footage the parking calculations have been updated. A total of 376 parking spaces are required pursuant to the approved planned unit development and Petitioner proposes to construct a total of 379 parking spaces. The proposed parking is consistent with the approved PUD Plan. ii.It is noted that the provided building coverage increased from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 18.6% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. Building Coverage has increased with the change from 2-story to 1-story buildings. The Building Coverage approved with the Original PUD in 2024 was 12.3%. With the 2026 Minor Change, an entire building was eliminated, which resulted in reduction of the Building Coverage to 10.9%. With the square footage reflected in the Major Change now proposed by Petitioner, Building Coverage will be increased to 17.3%. While Building Coverage is increased, we believe the sum of the changes associated with the increased Building Coverage (i.e. reduction in height and increased setbacks) will be a net positive to the surrounding community. iii.It is noted that the provided site coverage increased from 28.7% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 50.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. Like Building Coverage, Site Coverage has increased with the change from 2- story to 1-story buildings. The Site Coverage approved with the Original PUD in 2024 was 35.6%. With the 2026 Minor Change, Site Coverage was reduced to 28.7% as a result of a building being eliminated. With the single-story buildings proposed with the Major Change, Site Coverage has increased to 52.8%. While this is a significant increase in Site Coverage, the proposed Site Coverage remains well below the 85% Site Coverage permitted under the City’s Code. Moreover, Petitioner has largely maintained perimeter open space, which is how the community will perceive the data center campus. Given the gated nature of the campus, most residents will never perceive the increase to Site Coverage that is occurring within the fenced portion of the campus. d.Any deviation from applicable provisions of the UDO. i.In addition to the criteria set forth above, Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development agreement also references major amendment criteria established in Section 10-8-8(G)(2) of the UDO as binding, which is as follows: 1.Increase density. NOT APPLICABLE. 2.Increase the height of buildings. NOT APPLICABLE. 3.Reduce open space by more than five (5) percent. APPLICABLE. a.Building coverage increased 7.7% from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 18.6% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. As noted above, Petitioner proposes to increase Building Coverage to 17.3% with the change to single-story buildings. Petitioner believes that the benefits associated 4 with the reduced building height and the increase in setbacks to nearby residential properties outweigh any perceived impact associated with the increased Building Coverage. b. Site coverage increased 21.6% from 28.7% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 50.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. As noted above, Site Coverage has increased to 52.8% with the proposed Major Change. Given the nature of the data center campus and Petitioner’s effort to maximize perimeter open space, this change will be imperceptible to the general public who will perceive the campus while driving along Eldamain, Faxon or Beecher Road. 4. Modify the proportion of housing types. NOT APPLICABLE. 5. Change parking areas in a manner that is inconsistent with this UDO. NOT APPLICABLE. 6. Increase the approved gross floor area by more than five hundred (500) square feet. NOT APPLICABLE. 7. Alter alignment of roads, utilities, or drainage. APPLICABLE. a. Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates significant changes to the site access and road alignments off of Eldamain Road, a new access off of Beecher Road, and reconfigurations to onsite stormwater management basins. As discussed during Plan Council, Petitioner is working with Kendall County DOT regarding the restricted emergency access along Eldamain Road. Petitioner believes that the secondary access to Beecher Road will be beneficial to the overall function of the campus. 8. Result in any other change inconsistent with any standard or condition imposed by the City Council in approving the Planned Unit Development and/or the approved Site Plan, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. NOT APPLICABLE. 3. ZONING - The subject property consists of seven (7) parcels (#02-18-300-004, #02-19-100- 004, #02-19-100-005, #02-18-300-003, #02-18-300-001, #02-18-300-002, and #02-18-400- 004) and is zoned M-2 GENERAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT. The following are the most current immediate surrounding zoning and land uses based on recent development approvals: Zoning Land Use North A-1 (Kendall County) ComEd Substation/Transfer Station - Utility Use South A-1 (Kendall County) BNSF Railroad Agricultural, Residential and Business Uses Transportation Land Use East A-1 SU (Kendall County) A-1 SU (Yorkville) Agriculture/Former Residence (Owned by Petitioner) Solar Farm West Eldamain Road M-2 General Manufacturing (Plano) A-1 (Kendall County) Transportation Land Use Menards Distribution Center Residential/Farm 4. ENERGY INDUSTRIAL USE STANDARDS –Data centers are defined as Energy Industrial 5 Uses per Table 10-3-12(B) in the Unified Development Ordinance. While the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement provides for the waiver of subsequently adopted Energy Industrial Use standards from applying to the subject property, staff has identified and outlined the provisions contained in Section 10-4-10 of the UDO, as adopted in June 2025, and offers the following relevant comments: i. LANDSCAPE BUFFER - Section 10-4-10(A)(1) of the UDO requires data center developments to maintain a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer when adjacent to non-manufacturing land uses, inclusive of an 8-foot tall berm when adjacent to residential and dedicated exclusively for dense landscaping including trees and shrubs but not utilized for stormwater detention, roadways, walking trails or surface parking. Additionally, a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer is required when a data center is adjacent to a public roadway and shall consist of a Transition Zone D landscape buffer. 1. The proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates a 100’ wide landscape buffer along Eldamain Road and Beecher Road. It appears there is a 50’ wide landscape buffer along a portion of the north property line adjacent to the Commonwealth Edison parcel and a varying depth landscape buffer of 50’-100’ wide along the southern property line. a. Due to the presence of two (2) existing residential land uses to the south on Faxon Road, staff recommends a minimum 8- foot tall berm be installed along this portion of the campus. Please note that Petitioner is under contract to acquire one of the two residential properties located to the south along Faxon Road. The other “residential properties” does contain a single-family home, but there is also significant commercial activity associated with the operation of this property. While Petitioner can accommodate an 8’ berm to the south along Faxon Road, we question whether the berm is desirable given the substantial open space and landscape buffering that has been programmed along Faxon Road. Petitioner has specifically reached out to the adjacent property owner to discuss potential resolution of this issue. If a berm is ultimately preferred, Petitioner notes that the berm cannot be continuous as there is a portion of the Faxon Road ROW that drains overland to the north. Positive overland flow is required to prevent possible ponding water in the northern ROW of Faxon Road. b. The Landscape Plan indicates the security fencing will be located in front of the 100’ landscape buffer along the south property line adjacent to Faxon Road. However, the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan indicates the security fencing will be located behind Stormwater Basin #7. Please reconcile the plans accordingly. The landscape plan has been revised to reflect the location of the fence north of the stormwater detention basin and generally inside of the perimeter landscape buffers. The location of the fence is part of Petitioner’s efforts to maximize the impact of perimeter open spaces. c. The Parks & Recreation Department has inquired about the petitioner providing a trail easement along the Beecher Road and Eldamain Road frontages of the subject property. Based on follow-up discussion with the City Engineer, it is our 6 understanding that the Beecher Road right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate the desired trail section. Along Eldamain Road, Petitioner can accommodate a 30’ easement to the east and adjacent to the City’s 20’ utility easement. Provided that the City will own and maintain the trail, Petitioner has no objection to maintaining landscape within this area. d. Staff defers to the Landscape Reviewer for additional comments. 2. BUILDING SEPARATION – Section 10-4-10(A)(3) of the UDO requires a minimum of a 500-foot building separation from the nearest data center building or structure (primary or accessory) to the nearest residential or commercial structure. a. While the Site Data table on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan indicates “No Building within 500’ of existing residence”, staff recommends the plan be revised to provide dimensioned distances of the nearest data center building(s) to residential properties along Faxon Road and the two (2) unincorporated residential parcels along the west side of Eldamain Road (PINs #01-24-200- 001 and #01-13-400- 004). One of Petitioner’s goals with the Major change was to maximize setbacks to adjacent residential properties. To reflect the increase in setbacks, we have submitted a “Residential Comparison Setback Exhibit” which measures dimensions from existing residential structures to the nearest corner of Petitioner’s proposed data center building. With the Major Change, setbacks to residential structures have increased from 543’ to 732’ in one instance and from 485’ to 833’ in the other location. As noted above, Petitioner is the contract purchaser of the westernmost residential structure along Faxon Road, so we’ve omitted measurements to that structure. 3. OPERATIONAL TESTING – Section 10-4-10(A)(6) of the UDO requires operational testing of emergency backup generators be limited to between the hours of 11am to 5pm on weekdays only, non- holidays. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. Noted. 4. NUCLEAR ENERGY – Section 10-4-10(A)(7) of the UDO strictly prohibits data centers from using, generating, storing, or deploying nuclear energy as a power source within the City. This includes, but is not limited to, nuclear reactors, small modular reactors (SMRs), or any other nuclear-based energy. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. Noted. 5. PHASING PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(8) of the UDO requires the implementation of a phased construction plan that minimizes impacts on residential structures by prioritizing initial development at the farthest distance from existing residential structures. 7 a. The previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan included a nine (9) phased development plan with each phase consisting of one (1) building and associated stormwater basin. While there is no illustrated phasing plan on the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan, it is noted in the petition that construction is planned to begin with Building 11A (northwest quadrant) this fall with an anticipated tenant occupancy by the end of Q1 2028. i. Staff recommends a formal phasing exhibit be provided as an exhibit to the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan. A Phasing Plan has been submitted with the revised plans. As reflected in the Phasing Plan, Phase 1 construction commenced earlier this year with construction of site access from Eldamain Road and the on-site substation. Phases 2 and 3 will include the mass grading and stormwater management for all of the buildings within the respective phase. Individual buildings within a phase, which will take approximately 18 months to construct, will be staged one after another. Utilities and site access will be extended, as necessary, with each building constructed. Petitioner cannot presently commit to the order in which buildings within a phase will be constructed. 6. FENCING - Section 10-4-10(A)(9) of the UDO requires fencing be constructed of security style aluminum, steel, wrought iron, or similar materials. Chain-link or barbed wire fencing is prohibited along public facing edges and properties adjacent to residential land uses. a. Petitioner has provided an image of the proposed high security steel fencing on the Landscape Plan. Staff requests the petitioner verify the height of the proposed fencing. The proposed fence is 8’ tall, consistent with the Original PUD approved in 2024. 7. LIGHTING AND PHOTOMETRIC PLAN - Section 10-4- 10(A)(10) of the UDO requires lighting and photometric plans must be submitted at the time of application and adhere to the City’s outside lighting standards. a. Per the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the developer agrees to submit to the City for its approval a photometric plan with manufacturers cut sheets of the proposed lighting standards to be installed in the parking area of the subject property. The photometric plan is to be provided with an application for final plat of at such time the Developer submits for a building permit. i. Since the petitioner has provided in the packet materials a Final Plat of Subdivision (although no application was filed for approval) and the petitioner has indicated they intend to seek a building permit this fall, staff recommends the submittal of a photometric plan as part of this request for Major PUD Preliminary Plan Amendment. The 8 petitioner has elected to withdraw the Final Plat of Subdivision at this time and therefore the submittal of a photometric plan would not be required. These documents will be submitted, along with the required application, at a later date when the developer submits for a building permit. 8. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(11) of the UDO requires a Traffic Management Plan be provided during construction, including a communication strategy and an on-site point of contact during construction. a. Staff recommends the petitioner provide a Traffic Management Plan as part of the building permitting process. Noted. 9. BATTERY STORAGE – Section 10-4-10(A)(12) of the UDO requires battery storage systems shall be located a minimum of 50 feet away from any adjacent structure and must be readily accessible by Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) for firefighting efforts. a. Is the petitioner proposing any battery storage systems on site? If so, staff requests additional information on location and specifications. No utility scale battery energy storage is proposed. 10. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(13) of the UDO requires an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) be submitted and approved by the City and the Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) prior to issuance of a building permit and must include: a. Procedures for fire suppression, hazardous material spills, evacuation, and communication in case of an incident. b. The location of any battery storage systems. c. Training sessions/drills and or walkthroughs with fire and police shall be required prior to occupancy permit. d. Designated contacts for emergency services and a plan to broadcast information if an incident could affect the public. e. Must work with KenCom emergency managers to be part of text or siren alert systems. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. Noted. 11. BUILDING CODE ENHANCED STANDARDS - Section 10-4- 10(A)(14) of the UDO requires installing advanced early fire detection in server rooms, using fire-resistive construction beyond code minimums on walls facing neighborhoods, or providing additional hazardous material safeguards. Compliance with National Fire Protection Association 855 is also required. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. Noted. PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN COMMENTS: 5. MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN – Below is a summary site data table comparing the originally approved Preliminary PUD Plan, the recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan amendment, and the currently proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan amendment: Changes reflected in the revised plans for the Major Change are reflected in BOLD in the chart below. Originally Approved Preliminary PUD Plan Recently Approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan % Change from Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Number of Buildings 9 8 8 N/A Size of Buildings 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 129,350 – 246,387 sq. ft. -14.9% -14.3% Total Building Area 2,451,200 sq. ft. 2,163,800 sq. ft. 1,854,805 N/A Number of Stories 2 2 1 -50% Height of Buildings 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 36’ (top of building) 50’-10” (top of equipment) -34.5% -27.4% Number of Parking Spaces 432 378 379 .26% Percent Building Coverage 12.3% 10.9% 17.3% +58.7% Percent Site Coverage 35.6% 28.7% 52.75% +83.8% Number of Site Access Drives 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Single Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Double Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 3 Eldamain Road (Primary/Double Drive) Eldamain Road North ( Emergency Access) Beecher Road (Full Access) +50% Number of Stormwater Basins 6 6 7 +16.7% Substation Area 800’ x 1,000’ (800,000 sq. ft) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) N/A Distance of Nearest Residential Structure Undetermined 485/543 833/732 71.8% 34.8% a. As stated previously, the petitioner must provide Building Structure/Separation distances for the originally approved PUD Preliminary Plan, recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan, and proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan so that staff can compare previous distances to nearby residential to proposed new distances. These dimensions can be provided on the Site Plan or a separate plan exhibit. See enclosed Residential Setback Comparison Exhibit. b. Staff further recommends that the petitioner provide an additional Site Plan depicting the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan overlaid with the recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to serve as a visual comparison of the proposed changes and supplement the above table. See enclosed Residential Setback Comparison Exhibit. 6.PARKING - According to the previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan as part of the Minor PUD Amendment, there were 378 total parking spaces provided. Additionally, the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement stated in Section 2.4 that the parking ratio shall be 0.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area, but in case shall be less than 400 parking spaces, including ADA spaces. a.Per the Site Data table on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan, the total required parking for the subject property based on 2,062,500 square feet is 413 spaces, including 9 ADA accessible spaces. i.However, the petitioner is proposing to provide a total of 437 parking spaces, including 16 ADA accessible spaces, based on the potential of accommodating up to 2,163,800 square feet of building net floor area. Additionally, per Section 10-5-1K-1 of the Unified Development Ordinance, a minimum of 9 electric vehicle charging stations is required. With the revised plans, the total required parking under the PUD is 376 spaces. The New PUD site plan has been revised to provide a total of 379 spaces. In light of reductions to square footage, Petitioner does not believe that 400 parking spaces are necessary. However, if the City would like to see parking increased to 400 spaces, Petitioner can certainly accommodate that request. ADA and electrical vehicle charging spaces, as required, will be delineated with Final Engineering plans. 7.SITE ACCESS – The previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan as part of the Minor PUD Amendment had access to the site via two (2) points of access. One (1) primary entrance off of Eldamain Road and a secondary emergency access off of Faxon Road. These access points lead to internal private roadways which loop around the eight (8) data center buildings and connect to the central electric substation. i.According to the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan, it is noted there are still two (2) points of access. The primary access point, a double drive or “boulevard- style” looped connection, continues to be located off Eldamain Road, which is consistent with the prior approved plan. However, the secondary emergency access point is now located off of Beecher Road and eliminates the connection on Faxon Road which is directly across from existing residential lots and driveways. No changes are planned to the primary access drive via Eldamain Road. North of the primary access drive, Petitioner now plans an emergency right-in-right-out, which is being coordinated with Kendall County. In lieu of a secondary access to Faxon Road, which adjacent to existing residences, Petitioner has shifted the secondary access to Beecher Road. Petitioner proposes a full access on Beecher Road to facilitate employee ingress/egress. ii. The new proposed secondary emergency access off of Beecher Road could potentially align with a future access drive to the parcel to the east which is also currently owned by the petitioner. Petitioner believes that secondary access via Beecher Road is preferable to secondary access via Faxon Road. Access via Beecher Road minimizes conflict with adjacent residential uses and will facilitate direct access to the substation. With these changes, Petitioner proposes a full access on Beecher Road. iii. Staff defers to the City Engineer regarding site access. 8. MECHANICAL SCREENING – Per Section 10-5-4 Screening of the Unified Development Ordinance, ground/wall-mounted and roof mounted mechanical units that are visible from any public right-of-way or adjacent residential property shall be screened from public view. The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement allowed the petitioner to deviate from this requirement by screening only the ground-mounted mechanical equipment but was not required to provide screening for any rooftop mechanical units. a. Per the petitioner’s statement, the now single-story buildings will include a mechanical penthouse incorporating an acoustic screen wall on all four (4) sides. This rooftop screening would be recessed from the primary façade of the buildings and provides a maximum height of approximately 51 feet. b. It is also noted the ground-mounted mechanical equipment in the Major PUD Preliminary Plan will no longer be screened as previously proposed with vinyl fencing equal to the height of the generator units (excluding any stacks protruding above the unit). i. It appears the proposed new screening for the ground-mounted mechanical equipment will be a solid screen wall constructed of a light- colored concrete panel approximately 18’ – 24’ tall providing full-height coverage of the exterior equipment within this “mechanical yard”. Is this accurate? Yes. ii. The petitioner is also requesting flexibility to permit areas designated as “mechanical yards” to be converted to additional building floor area in the event that ground-mounted equipment is not required. This would allow the petitioner to achieve a maximum total building area of 2,163,800 square feet across the campus. This request has been withdrawn. Petitioner seeks approval of the 1,854,805 square feet reflected on the plans. 9. APPEARANCE STANDARDS – Per Section 10-5-8-C-4 Industrial Uses, masonry products or precast concrete shall be incorporated on at least fifty (50) percent of the total building, as broken down as follows: The "front facade" (defined as that facade that faces a street that includes a main entry to the building) shall itself incorporate masonry products or precast concrete on at least fifty (50) percent of the facade. Any other facade that abuts a street shall incorporate masonry products or precast concrete. The use of masonry products or precast concrete is encouraged on the remaining facades. Where precast concrete panels or split face block is utilized, the use of colors, patterns, or other architectural features within these panels/blocks is encouraged. a. Per Section 2.11 of the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the petitioner was permitted to deviate from certain aspects of the Appearance Standards and required to provide prototype building elevations representative of the architectural design and building materials to be utilized. The plans illustrated exterior building elevations with materials such as concert panels, metal panels, and acoustic barrier screen walls in hues of gray and pewter. Further, the petitioner was required to provide updated elevations with any application for final plat or at time of building permit application. b. The proposed updated elevations continue to primarily feature light-colored precast concrete panels, complemented by medium and dark aluminum composite panel accents and a glass curtain wall system at the entrance. Additional design elements include prefinished metal coping and horizontal and vertical relief lines, which help break up the building mass and provide visual interest. While the buildings are now designed as single-story structures, the main entrance will feature a two-story element accommodating approximately 32,000 square feet of office space, with an overall height of 36 feet. The remainder of the data center building will have a height of 24 feet, excluding the rooftop equipment penthouse. 10. FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION – The petitioner has submitted a Final Plat of Subdivision that consolidates the existing seven (7) parcels comprising the site into a single parcel. The plat also establishes stormwater management easements granting the City perpetual access to the seven (7) proposed basins. This access ensures the City can enter the property to maintain these stormwater facilities in the event the petitioner does not fulfill its long-term maintenance obligations. a. While the petitioner has submitted a Final Plat of Subdivision as part of their application materials, a separate application for Final Plat of Subdivision approval was not provided. It is staff’s understanding that the petitioner does not wish to move forward with Final Plat approval at this time but provided the plan as an informational item. Please confirm. Confirmed. 11. SIGNAGE – Per Section 2.12 of the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the petitioner was allowed to install a monument sign on Eldamain Road at the entrance of the project site in addition to a monument sign on Faxon Road. a. Per Section 10-6-6 of the Unified Development Ordinance, single tenant buildings shall be permitted a total of two (2) primary wall signs or one (1) primary wall sign per one hundred (100) linear feet of building frontage. One (1) additional wall sign shall be allowed per additional hundred (100) feet of building frontage. Only one (1) primary wall sign shall be displayed on any single building façade. b. Since the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan has eliminated the secondary entrance off of Faxon Road, is the petitioner still seeking to install a monument sign in this location? No. i. Is the petitioner seeking to install a secondary monument sign at the proposed new northern entrance off of Eldamain Road? No. ii. Is the petitioner seeking to install a monument sign at the proposed new entrance off of Beecher Road? Yes. 12. STUDIES a. Noise Study i. The petitioner has provided a preliminary noise study for the subject property dated April 22, 2026. It is noted that the study utilizes sound measurements taken in three (3) locations in September 2024. ii. It is noted that since that time, a 5MW solar farm was constructed on an approximately 26-acre site. This may or may not affect the baseline measurements taken in 2024. iii. It is also noted that the study references compliance with Yorkville’s Noise Ordinance as well as the Illinois Pollution Control Board noise requirements. iv. There have been previous comments related to “infra-sound” impacts, as well as vibration and sound impacts to domesticated and agricultural animals nearby. Can the petitioner’s expert provide commentary to these concerns? Yes, Petitioner will have an acoustical engineer at the public hearing. v. Staff defers to the City’s acoustical engineering consultant for comments on the findings of the study. Noted. b. Data Center Impact Analysis i. Staff notes the analysis references the project being a 960- megawatt data center. This is inconsistent with prior references to 540-megawatt center. The report has been revised. Petitioner anticipates maximum power load to be 654 MW. c. Fiscal Benefits Report i. Staff notes the report references the project being a 540- megawatt critical IT capacity data center. This is inconsistent with the reference in the Data Center Impact Analysis report. Please verify the energy capacity for the development and revise the report, if needed. The report has been updated to reflect the maximum power load anticipated by Petitioner. ii. Report references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet with seven (7) buildings having 246,387 square feet and one (1) building having 129,350 square feet. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and the individual building sizes being 275,000 square feet and 137,500 square feet, respectively. Please revise report and associated tables for estimated tax revenue per building to reflect the currently proposed building areas. The Report has been updated to reflect the correct square footages as outlined herein. iii. It is noted on Table 3 Estimated Annual Electric Tax Revenue at Build- Out for Yorkville on page 9 of the report, there is a reference to the City’s Electric Tax Rate of $0.0028 per kilowatt hour based on Section 3-2-4 Municipal Utility Tax of the Yorkville City Code. 1. Section 3-2-4 was recently amended in March 2026 via Ord. 2026-26 which revised the per kilowatt hour electric rate for users in excess of 20,000,000 kilowatt hours to $0.285. The Report has been updated accordingly. iv. It is noted that this parcel is wholly within Plano School District #88. d. Economic Impacts Report i. Report references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet with seven (7) buildings having 246,387 square feet and one (1) building having 129,350 square feet. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and the individual building sizes being 275,000 square feet and 137,500 square feet, respectively. Please revise report and associated tables for estimated tax revenue per building to reflect the currently proposed building areas. The PUD Plan has been revised to reflect the correct square footages as delineated herein. ii.Has the petitioner considered preparing a Real Estate Valuation Assessment evaluating the potential impact of the proposed data center campus on nearby property values, or alternatively, providing examples of property values before and after construction of comparable data center developments? Yes. Petitioner will be submitting a valuation report in support of the campus. e.Traffic Impact Study i.It is noted the study references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet and 466 parking spaces. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and 437 parking stalls. Please revise study to accurately reflect the currently proposed Preliminary PUD plan. The Traffic Impact Study is being revised consistent with the revisions to the Major Change. ii.Staff defers to the City Engineer for further review comments of the Traffic Impact Study. Noted. f.Natural Resources Information (NRI) Report i.The petitioner has provided a Natural Resources Information report dated June 2024 as prepared by the Kendall County Soil & Water Conservation District. The report provides commentary on the subject property related to current conditions of natural resources such as soil composition, drainage, runoff, and wetland/flood information. ii.Staff defers to the City Engineer regarding the findings of this report. Noted. 13.COMMUNITY MEETING - Per Section 10-8-8-F-1-a of the Unified Development Ordinance states a community meeting of area/neighborhood property owners, explaining the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment conducted by the petitioner at their own expense and at a location of their choosing may be required as a recommendation from the Plan Council prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing date. a.Due to the petitioner’s request to reorient and resize the proposed data center buildings on the campus and the proximity of those structures to the residential land uses to the south on Faxon Road and west on Eldamain Road north of the BNSF railroad, staff recommends the petitioner reach out to the homeowners regarding the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. Petitioner has endeavored to schedule meetings with each of the nearby residential property owners. 14.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES a.Has the petitioner completed, or does the petitioner intend to complete, additional environmental impact studies such as a Water Usage Study, Air Quality Study, EcoCAT Assessment, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment, Hazardous Materials/Chemical Handling Study, or Climate Resiliency and Heat Island Impact Analysis associated with the proposed data center campus development? If so, please provide copies of any completed studies and an anticipated timeline for any studies still in progress. Laura Cottrell is the Senior Director of Environmental Compliance at CyrusOne. Laura is working on documentation that is responsive to many of the issues identified above. We anticipate submittal additional documentation in advance of the public hearing. We also anticipate that Laura will participate in the public hearing process. With that being said, we believe that many of these considerations are beyond the scope of the proposed Major Change. b.Will the petitioner prepare a public-facing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document addressing environmental and operational topics associated with the proposed data center campus, including but not limited to the proposed air-cooled chillers, rooftop units (RTUs), tier classification and operation of backup generators, evaluation of cleaner alternatives to traditional diesel backup generators, operation of the proposed closed-loop cooling system, anticipated water consumption and recycling measures, and the types of chemicals or treatment agents proposed to be utilized within the cooling and mechanical systems? Petitioner is actively working on a publicly facing webpage that will address facts concerning the proposed development. We anticipate that the website will be active in advance of the public hearing. East Dundee, IL 60118 RE: Cyrus One - Yorkville Project Number(s): 2512170 [6097.00-IL] County: Kendall Dear Applicant: Adam Rawe Division of Ecosystems and Environment 217-785-5500 May 01, 2025 Scott Neville Pinnacle Engineering Group 1051 E. Main St, Suite 217 This letter is in reference to the project you recently submitted for consultation. The natural resource review provided by EcoCAT identified protected resources that may be in the vicinity of the proposed action. The Department has evaluated this information and concluded that adverse effects are unlikely. Therefore, consultation under 17 Ill. Adm. Code Part 1075 is terminated. This consultation is valid for two years unless new information becomes available that was not previously considered; the proposed action is modified; or additional species, essential habitat, or Natural Areas are identified in the vicinity. If the project has not been implemented within two years of the date of this letter, or any of the above listed conditions develop, a new consultation is necessary. The natural resource review reflects the information existing in the Illinois Natural Heritage Database at the time of the project submittal, and should not be regarded as a final statement on the site being considered, nor should it be a substitute for detailed site surveys or field surveys required for environmental assessments. If additional protected resources are encountered during the project¶s implementation, you must comply with the applicable statutes and regulations. Also, note that termination does not imply IDNR's authorization or endorsement of the proposed action. Please contact me if you have questions regarding this review. JB Pritzker, Governor Natalie Phelps Finnie, Director 02 September 2025 State Historic Preservation Office-IDNR Attn: Review & Compliance One Natural Resources Way Springfield, Illinois 62702 RE: SHPO No. 018050925 Dear State Preservation Staff: At the request of our client, Pinnacle Engineering Group, we have attached a pdf copy of our report of a 46.0-acre portion of the 229.0-acre parcel located at 2700 Eldamain Road near Yorkville in Kendall County, Illinois for review and comment. This project identified two archaeological sites within the project portion examined. We are recommending the sites be determined as Not Eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Based on this recommendation our findings are for a determination of No Historic Properties for this project and for cultural resource clearance. If you have any questions about the project, please contact me at (217) 333-1636 or (847) 287- 9045. Sincerely, Kevin McGowan a: Final Report electronically to SHPO.Review@Illinois.gov c: Ms. Leia J. Cooney, Pinnacle Engineering Group Kendall County PLEASE REFER TO: SHPO LOG #018050925 Yorkville NEC Eldamain Rd & Faxon Rd Sections:18,19-Township:37N-Range:7E Ineligible Sites: 11KE1460, 11KE1461 IEPA, Pinnacle-6097.00-IL, PSAAP-25-108 New Construction, Cyrus One- Yorkville September 24, 2025 Scott Neville Pinnacle Engineering Group 1051 E. Main St. Suite 217 East Dundee, IL 60118 The Illinois State Historic Preservation Office is required by the Illinois State Agency Historic Resources Preservation Act (20 ILCS 3420, as amended, 17 IAC 4180) (Act) to review all state undertakings for their effect on cultural resources. Pursuant to this requirement, we have received information regarding the above-referenced project for our comment. We have reviewed the reports of archaeological and architectural surveys and they appear adequate. No historic properties were identified within the area of potential visual effects, and two (2) archaeological sites were identified within the 46 acres of proposed project area that were surveyed. We concur that neither site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Our files do not identify any known historic properties within the remainder of the proposed project area, nor is it within the high probability area for archaeological resources as defined in the state Act. You have indicated there is no public funding, nor is the proposed project on public land. Accordingly, that portion of the proposed project area is EXEMPT from survey requests pursuant to Section 6 of the Act. An archaeological survey of the remaining 183 acres is not required under Illinois law. Since the area has never been surveyed for archaeological resources, however, it is possible that archaeological sites are present but remain unidentified. Please consider assisting the State of Illinois in its efforts to preserve and protect historic resources by sharing with us the results of any due diligence archaeological surveys. Early awareness of the presence of historic properties may help prevent unanticipated discoveries and potential construction delays The project, as proposed, is compliant with the Act. This letter remains in effect for two (2) years from the date of issuance. This approval does not pertain to any discovery during construction, nor is it a clearance for purposes of the Illinois Human Remains Protection Act (20 ILCS 3440). According to the information provided there is no federal involvement in your project. If your project will use any federal loans or grants, need any federal agency permits (including non-reporting), use any federal property, or involve any assistance from a federal agency, then your project must be reviewed under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. Please notify us immediately if this is the case. Additional survey coverage may be necessary. Please contact Jeff Kruchten, Principal Archaeologist, at 217/785-1279 or jeff.kruchten@illinois.gov if you need assistance. Sincerely, Carey L. Mayer, AIA Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Page 1 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden May 21, 2026 Ref: CyrusOne Yorkville AHJ Noise Study Trinity Project #25251401.0112 This memo documents compliance with the Yorkville Noise Code as required by the City of Yorkville, as well as the State-level noise requirements outlined in Title 35 of the Illinois Administrative Code. Our analysis considers projected sound levels from data center cooling equipment, back-up generators, transformers, and other auxiliary equipment. Additionally, measurement results from a 24-hour background noise survey are included for reference. 1.0 Noise Code The City of Yorkville, IL Noise Code is summarized below. Yorkville, Illinois Code of Ordinances Title 4, Chapter 4 – Noise Ordinance No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds the sound level limits in the table below. Table 1: Yorkville, IL Sound Level Limits Time of Day Receiving Property Land Use Residential Commercial Public Open Spaces Daytime (7am – 10pm) 60 dBA 67 dBA 67 dBA Nighttime (10pm – 7 am) 50 dBA 67 dBA 67 dBA A. Measurement may be made anywhere within the receiving property, but must be made at least three feet (3') from any building facade or other surface. The sound level meter shall be set to A-weighting with slow meter response, with a measured Lmax sound level. B. Measurement may be made at any height above grade, at or near locations that are regularly occupied by people. For example, a measurement may be made at a position three feet (3') to the exterior of a second-floor window since people can be expected to occupy the second-floor room. C. Measurement may be made inside a structure on the receiving property, in any space that is classified as inhabitable and constructed with necessary City construction permits. As outlined in Table 2 of Section 4-4-5, a 5 dB penalty applies to impulsive sound sources, and a 10 dB penalty applies to tonal sources. Operational noise of the data center equipment is anticipated to be continuous rather than impulsive, and not subject to the 5 dB penalty. Equipment attenuation will be coordinated such that pure tones are not generated, and therefore not subject to the 10 dB penalty. Page 2 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden Emergency operations are exempt under Section 4-4-6 of the Yorkville Noise Code. Accordingly, we understand that the use of back-up generators during a utility outage is exempt from the Noise Code. However, routine daytime generator testing must comply with applicable daytime noise limits. Illinois Pollution Control Board Within the Illinois Administrative Code, the Illinois Pollution Control Board specifies allowable noise levels based on the land use classifications of both the noise source and the receiving property. This state-wide Code, enforceable by law enforcement agencies, includes specific octave-band sound levels. Title 35: Environmental Protection – Subtitle H: Noise – Ch. 1: Pollution Control Board A person must not cause or allow the emission of sound from any property-line noise source located on any Class A, B, or C land to any receiving Class A land that exceeds any allowable octave band sound pressure level specified in the following table, when measured at any point within the receiving Class A land. Sound pressure levels must be measured at least 25 feet from the property-line noise source. Table 2: Maximum Sound Levels to Class A Land Frequency (Hz) Allowable Octave-Band Sound Pressure Level (dB) C to A B to A A to A Day Night Day Night Day Night 31.5 75 69 72 63 72 63 63 74 67 71 61 71 61 125 69 62 65 55 65 55 250 64 54 57 47 57 47 500 58 47 51 40 51 40 1000 52 41 45 35 45 35 2000 47 36 39 30 39 30 4000 43 32 34 25 34 25 8000 40 32 32 25 32 25 Overall dBA* 61 51 55 44 55 44 * Overall dBA levels are not stated in the IPCB code but have been included for reference “Daytime hours” means any continuous 16 hour period between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. local time. “Nighttime hours” means the 8 hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. that are not part of the 16 continuous daytime hours. We have received confirmation that the CyrusOne Yorkville Data Center campus will be classified as Class C land. We note that the allowable noise levels at residences (Class A) are 61 and 51 dBA (day/night), which is in-line with levels specified in the Yorkville Code. The project is also expected to comply with the stricter requirements as a Class B emitter. Page 3 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden The Illinois Administrative Code additionally prohibits the emission of any prominent discrete tone from any property-line noise source located on Class A, B, or C land to any receiving Class A, B, or C land, when measured at any point within the receiving land, at least 25 feet from the property-line noise source. Discrete tones are allowed if the source is at least 10dB quieter than the octave-band Code limit. Equipment attenuation will be studied with the manufacturer to ensure noise emissions are not tonal after attenuation is applied. 2.0 Site Survey The following section summarizes our procedure and findings from our site survey conducted from September 3 to September 4, 2024. 2.1 Measurement Locations We performed three 24-hour measurements in September 2024 at the locations shown in Figure 1, below. Figure 1: 24-Hour Measurement Locations Leq – Or the equivalent continuous sound level, represents the average sound level over a specified period of time. L90 - Or the 90th percentile noise levels, represents the noise level exceeded 90% of the time within each hour, effectively capturing the background noise during the quietest periods. This metric helps assess the ‘worst-case’ noise conditions, providing an understanding of the site’s baseline noise environment. Page 4 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden 2.2 Measurement Results Noise levels at Long-Term Meters A and C were largely controlled by intermittent traffic noise, and Long-Term B was controlled by train noise, which passed by throughout the day. Measured sound levels are presented in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2: 24-Hour Survey Results (September 3-4, 2024) Spikes in measured LAeq levels are primarily due to trains, traffic, or other loud, temporary events. The average recorded values are presented in Table 3, below. Table 3: Long Term Measurement Results (dBA re: 20 µPA) Position Time Average Sound Pressure Level (dBA) L90 Leq Long Term A 7am – 10pm 45 50 10pm – 7am 38 47 Long Term B 7am – 10pm 45 70 10pm – 7am 41 72 Long Term C 7am – 10pm 54 60 10pm – 7am 41 54 25 35 45 55 65 75 12:0013:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:000:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:0010:0011:0012:00Sound Pressure Level (dB re: 20µPa)Time Measurements 9/3/24 to 9/4/24 Long Term A LAeq Long Term B LAeq Long Term C LAeq Long Term A LAS90 Long Term B LAS90 Long Term C LAS90 Page 5 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden 3.0 Data Center Parameters At full build-out, the project site will consist of eight data center buildings. Each full-size building includes 56 air-cooled chillers, 7 RTUs, 57 back-up generators, and 56 UPS fans. The campus also contains a substation with 8 transformers. The following sound data has been provided by the manufacturer and included in our model. Transformer sound data is subject to change as equipment selections are finalized. Table 4: Equipment Sound Power Levels Equipment Type Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) dBA 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k Air-Cooled Chiller Discharge 98 111 108 105 101 97 91 85 107 Compressor 82 90 86 97 93 86 85 77 97 RTU Low-Sound Condenser Fans 78 83 81 80 78 75 71 65 83 UPS Fan 72 75 73 69 66 61 56 48 71 Transformer 88 103 90 87 85 79 74 68 91 The following attenuation features were input into our acoustic model. Rooftop Acoustic Barrier: Absorptive metal acoustic barrier Discharge Attenuator: 8-foot discharge silencer Inlet Attenuator: 2-foot acoustic louver Transformers: Attenuation to be coordinated with manufacturer Generator Yard Barrier: CMU block wall, dependent on location Generator Enclosure: Acoustically rated for 77-85dBA @ 23 feet, dependent on location Chiller attenuation is conceptually shown below: Figure 3: Chiller Enclosure Conceptual Diagram Page 6 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden 4.0 Results The figure and table below present projected operational noise levels at various receptor locations, with the City of Yorkville zoning map overlaid. Applicable code limits are included in the table and are based on the land use at each receptor, as well as whether the location falls within the City of Yorkville. Receivers R1, R5, R6, R7, R9, and R10 represent nearby residential zones or individual residences where the noise code is enforced. Receivers R2, R3, R4, and R8 are located either outside the City of Yorkville or on agriculturally zoned land without existing structures, and therefore are not subject to applicable noise code limits. Nighttime modeling assumes operation of the chillers, RTUs, UPS fans, and transformers, as generator testing is expected to occur only during daytime hours. Daytime noise levels reflect the same operating conditions, with the addition of two emergency generators per building to represent routine testing. Final noise levels may vary as coordination with equipment manufacturers continues; however, compliance with applicable Code limits will be maintained. Noise level receivers are modeled at 5 feet above the ground. Noise levels at existing nearby buildings with taller occupied floor elevations are expected to be similar. Figure 4: Site Layout and Receiver Locations Page 7 of 7 WorkingBuildings | Cerami | Longman Lindsey | Valcoustics | Jaffe Holden Table 5: Projected Data Center Noise Levels Time Period Data Center Noise Level at Receiver (dBA) R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 Daytime 54 55 69 53 45 41 45 53 51 54 Nighttime 41 42 45 45 35 30 33 42 38 43 Day / Night Code Limit* 60/ 50 - - - 60/ 50 60/ 50 60/ 50 - 60/ 50 60/ 50 * Octave band limits specified by the IPCB will be achieved at all locations indicated with a code requirement Based on our understanding of applicable Noise Codes, the project site is projected to be Code-compliant at all surrounding receivers. Residential Receiver Levels The City of Yorkville has requested that we provide projected noise levels at 26 surrounding residential locations, to evaluate the cumulative noise impact from 3 other planned data center developments in the area. Tabulated daytime and nighttime noise levels at these locations are included in Appendix A. This concludes our comments at this time. Should you have any questions, comments, or concerns please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you, Josh Cassarino Lucas Schwartz Associate Principal Associate CC: Henry Vandermillen | Trinity Appendix A – Sound Levels at Residential Receivers 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dBA 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dBA R1 43W904 Baseline Rd Sugar Grove 24.5 27.5 32.6 21.3 10.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.8 50.7 48.4 43.4 29.7 17.0 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.4 R2 297 Ashe Road Plano 25.8 28.8 34.0 23.1 12.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3 52.0 49.6 44.8 31.6 19.4 10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 30.9 R3 11843 Galena Road Plano 26.7 29.7 35.0 24.4 14.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 52.9 50.6 45.9 32.9 21.0 12.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 32.1 R4 4547 Garritano Street Yorkville 24.6 27.6 32.8 21.3 10.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.9 51.0 48.6 43.6 30.1 17.7 9.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 29.7 R5 11018 Galena Road Bristol 27.1 30.1 35.5 24.9 14.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.8 53.2 50.9 46.3 33.3 21.5 13.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 32.4 R6 10724 Galena Road Bristol 27.1 30.1 35.5 24.8 14.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.8 53.1 50.8 46.1 33.2 21.3 12.8 0.3 0.0 0.0 32.3 R7 10502 Galena Road Bristol 26.8 29.8 35.3 24.4 14.1 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.5 52.9 50.6 45.9 32.9 21.0 12.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 32.1 R8 790 Eldamain Road Plano 28.4 31.4 36.9 26.7 16.8 5.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 23.4 54.6 52.4 47.8 35.2 23.9 16.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 34.1 R9 10292 Galena Road Bristol 26.5 29.5 35.0 24.0 13.5 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.2 52.7 50.4 45.7 32.6 20.7 12.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 31.8 R10 980 Eldamain Road Plano 29.0 32.0 37.5 27.4 17.6 6.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 24.0 55.1 52.9 48.4 36.0 24.8 17.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 34.7 R11 1286 Eldamain Road Plano 31.8 34.8 40.6 31.0 21.7 10.9 2.2 0.0 0.0 27.4 58.0 55.9 51.6 39.7 29.1 23.1 8.6 0.0 0.0 38.1 R12 1410 Beecher Road East Bristol 30.3 33.3 39.1 29.0 19.5 8.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 25.7 56.1 53.9 49.6 37.3 26.3 19.5 3.4 0.0 0.0 35.9 R13 1855 Eldamain Road Plano 34.7 37.7 43.7 34.6 25.8 15.6 8.0 0.1 0.0 30.9 62.5 60.3 55.0 43.4 33.4 28.6 17.1 0.5 0.0 41.9 R14 10417 Corneils Road Plano 30.6 33.6 39.5 29.5 20.1 9.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 26.1 60.1 57.9 50.2 37.8 27.4 22.3 7.2 0.0 0.0 37.4 R15 10927 Corneils Road Plano 33.5 36.5 42.6 32.9 24.2 14.5 5.1 0.0 0.0 29.5 59.0 56.9 52.7 40.9 30.7 24.9 11.2 0.0 0.0 39.3 R16 2013 Beecher Road Plano 35.4 38.4 44.5 35.1 26.6 17.3 8.7 0.1 0.0 31.6 61.0 58.9 54.8 43.2 33.3 28.1 16.4 0.3 0.0 41.5 R17 3321 Lauren Drive Yorkville 32.0 35.0 41.1 31.4 22.3 12.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 27.9 61.8 59.7 51.8 39.6 29.5 25.0 10.8 0.0 0.0 39.1 R18 11014 Corneils Road Plano 35.7 38.7 44.9 35.2 27.0 19.9 10.5 0.2 0.0 32.0 66.1 63.9 55.1 43.1 33.8 30.4 18.6 0.5 0.0 42.9 R19 3171 Lauren Drive Yorkville 32.5 35.5 41.7 32.0 23.1 13.1 3.8 0.0 0.0 28.5 61.5 59.4 52.4 40.1 30.1 25.7 12.3 0.0 0.0 39.5 R20 2622 Beecher Road Yorkville 40.6 43.6 50.3 41.9 33.9 25.6 20.6 14.9 0.1 38.2 65.0 62.8 59.3 50.4 41.9 38.3 31.1 23.0 0.1 47.6 R21 2898 McMurtrie Court Yorkville 32.3 35.3 41.2 31.6 22.9 12.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 28.1 65.2 63.0 52.6 40.1 30.7 27.4 14.1 0.1 0.0 40.9 R22 12029 Faxon Road Plano 43.6 46.6 52.6 44.6 36.7 27.7 25.1 20.6 1.4 40.8 70.8 70.6 65.0 55.2 48.2 44.8 38.8 33.1 12.2 53.6 R23 11800 Faxon Road Plano 45.5 48.5 54.8 46.8 38.7 29.8 27.1 24.4 3.2 42.9 68.7 68.5 64.8 55.4 47.6 44.9 39.0 34.0 13.6 53.5 R24 11159 Faxon Road Yorkville 40.8 43.8 50.3 41.8 34.3 25.9 21.1 14.4 0.0 38.2 68.8 68.7 62.6 51.5 44.3 41.2 34.7 27.5 1.7 50.6 R25 808 Dillow Court Plano 39.4 42.4 48.5 40.1 32.3 22.8 17.5 6.6 0.0 36.3 65.1 62.9 58.8 48.6 41.0 37.8 29.6 16.4 0.0 46.7 R26 2381 Iroquois Lane Yorkville 35.6 38.6 44.9 35.8 27.8 18.6 11.3 0.7 0.0 32.3 62.8 60.7 55.0 44.2 35.2 31.2 21.7 6.0 0.0 42.4 Projected Daytime Sound Level (dB)Receiver ID House Number Street City Projected Nighttime Sound Level (dB) 5/21/2026CyrusOne Yorkville CHI11Projected Noise LevelsNighttime No generators testing All cooling equipment and transformers running Daytime (2) generators testing per building All cooling equipment and transformers running *Noise levels evaluated at 5' above ground dBA May 19, 2026 Russell Whitaker Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd. 445 Jackson Avenue, Suite 200 Naperville, Illinois 60540 Reference: CyrusOne Yorkville CHI 11 Proposed Data Center Campus Response to Sound Study Comments The following memo outlines responses to comments provided by the City of Yorvkille’s retained acoustic consultant, Soundscape, on the Sound Study submitted with the PUD application. 1. “There have been previous comments related to ‘infra-sound’ impacts, as well as vibration and sound impacts to domesticated and agricultural animals nearby. Can the petitioner’s expert provide commentary to these concerns?” Trinity response: We’ve designed the project to achieve the statewide IPCB noise code, which we understand was created to ensure community compatibility. We are not aware of any published criteria for infrasound or sounds affecting animals. 2. “The computer model included air-cooled chillers, RTUs, back-up generators, and UPS fans. However, it did not specify the number of chillers or fans planned per building. As such, there is insufficient detail for us to review the calculations. We ask that the Petitioner provide additional information on the quantities of equipment per building.” Trinity response: Equipment counts will be provided for reference in the updated acoustic report. 3. “The project is noted to include substation transformers, but their noise contribution does not appear to have been included in the model. We ask the Petitioner to provide the transformer sound levels and include them in the initial model.” Trinity response: Transformer noise contribution is included in the model, but the assumed sound data was not tabulated in the original report. Sound data input to the model will be included in the updated acoustic report. 4. “The Study assumes that it is possible to select chillers and mitigation such that the attenuated chillers have no prominent discrete tones. This has yet to be demonstrated. In the final noise study, the analysis is required to be conducted based upon actual measured sound levels for the selected chillers. It is likely that the manufacturer will need to conduct new sound level measurements prior to permitting in order to provide sound levels that are not empirically derived. Tonality should be assessed based on these measurements and at the planned operating speeds. If attenuators are expected to affect equipment tonality, we recommend that the testing be conducted with and without attenuators installed.” Trinity response: We concur. Mock-up testing of equipment prior to installation is expected to verify acoustic performance. 5. “While the report provided sound levels at discrete locations, it did not include a contour map of the noise transmissions into the surrounding neighborhood, which is standard practice for documenting SoundPLAN results and allows us to visually review source locations. We ask that the Petitioner provide a contour map of the predicted noise transmission to the neighborhood.” Trinity response: Contour map of operational noise levels will be provided in the updated report. 6. “The report noted that the IPCB limits from Class C to Class A land were applied. While enforcement of the IPCB ordinance is outside Yorkville’s jurisdiction, the project is well-advised to comply. We note that this property would be considered Class B land, in our interpretation of IPCB’s Title 35 documentation. (Part 901 lists Information services and data processing industries, Code 4240, as Class B.)” Trinity response: The project is expected to comply with IPCB Class B to Class A limits as at applicable surrounding properties. 7. “The City also requested that the Petitioner provide predicted sound levels at 26 residential locations for use in a cumulative noise study. The report notes that the sound levels at the Study receivers fall at least 4 dB below the Code requirements. Since three data center developments have approved PUDs, sound levels of this magnitude could still contribute to an overall exceedance. We ask that the Petitioner provide the predicted sound levels at each of the 26 residential locations requested.” Trinity response: We will provide predicted sound levels at the requested residential locations in the updated report. Data Center Impact Analysis 2026 AN ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ELECTRIC SYSTEM RELIABILITY AND COST IMPACTS OF A PROPOSED DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE THE POWER BUREAU, LLC Contents Executfve Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Approach ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Context ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Wholesale Power Markets. .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Retail Electricity Service. .................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Issues and Evaluatfon .............................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Questions Concerning Reliability. ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 ▪ Will the data center overload the ComEd network and cause blackouts? ..................................................................................... 8 ▪ Are there enough power plants to meet the Project and current ComEd loads? .......................................................................... 10 Questions Concerning Cost. ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 ▪ Who will pay the costs to connect the Project to the ComEd distribution network? ..................................................................... 11 ▪ Who will pay to deliver electricity to the Project? ...................................................................................................................... 11 ▪ Who will pay for the energy supply for the Project? ................................................................................................................... 12 ▪ Will increased demand for electricity from the Project increase wholesale electricity costs in Northern Illinois? .......................... 12 ▪ Will the Project increase power supply or offset demand in the northern Illinois market? ............................................................ 15 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Page | 1 Executfve Summary The development of large new energy users like the proposed 654-megawatt data center in the United City of Yorkville, Illinois (the “Yorkville Data Center”) has raised concerns about potentfal negatfve impacts on the reliability of local electric service and increases in overall energy costs for all consumers. CyrusOne (the developer of the Yorkville Data Center) retained The Power Bureau to evaluate whether and to what extent the proposed data center would negatfvely impact electric service reliability within the regional grid (managed by PJM Interconnectfon or “PJM”) and the local utflity network (operated by Commonwealth Edison or “ComEd”) and to comment on the potentfal cost impacts of the development. In its review, the Power Bureau considered the general scale and operatfon of the proposed data center and the conditfons within the current wholesale regional energy market. The Power Bureau arranged its analysis around key questfons that are intended to focus on key aspects of the broader reliability and cost issues. Based on its analysis, the Power Bureau concludes that the proposed data center will not reduce the reliability of the regional grid or the local utflity network. Two primary data points support these conclusions: ▪ Engineering analyses by both PJM and ComEd identffy that the Yorkville Data Park can connect to the regional grid without causing reliability issues after necessary upgrades have been completed; and, ▪ The design of the proposed interconnectfon that will provide the Yorkville Data Center with electric service provides a functfonal separatfon between the data center and existfng ComEd customers. In additfon, the Yorkville Data Center is unlikely to cause cost increases for ComEd’s current customers. Four primary data points support this conclusion: ▪ The data center developer is obligated to pay the full costs of establishing an interconnectfon to the regional grid through a Transmission Service Agreement (“TSA”) with ComEd. ▪ The data center developer will pay for ongoing electricity delivery service through rates that are: i) designed to charge consumers for the costs that they cause; and ii) approved by the Illinois Commerce Commission. ▪ The data center must secure its own electricity supply through either the ComEd Rate BESH - Basic Electric Service-Hourly, or through a bilateral agreement with a Retail Electricity Supplier. Neither of these optfons can cause existfng ComEd customers to subsidize the energy supply costs of the proposed data center; and, ▪ Price caps and the functfons of the wholesale capacity and energy markets will contfnue to insulate ComEd consumers from electricity price volatflity and increases as the Yorkville Data Cetner enters operatfon. Additfonally, we project that the Yorkville Data Center will contribute over $1.8 billion to funding Illinois’ clean energy transitfon to deploy new generatfon capacity, reduce energy consumptfon and peak demand, and workforce training with the following: ▪ Over 1,400 MW of new utflity-scale solar generatfon in Illinois. ▪ Over 400,000 residentfal heat pump incentfves for ComEd customers. ▪ Over 14,000 pre-apprentfceships for renewable energy industry workers. Based on these, the Power Bureau concludes that the Yorkville Data Center will not have negatfve impacts on network system reliability or energy costs. The Power Bureau appreciates the opportunity to partfcipate in this process and remains available to provide additfonal context and background on this analysis and conclusions. Page | 2 Approach This report evaluates the potentfal impacts on electric service reliability and costs related to the proposed development of a 654-megawatt (MW) data center in Yorkville, Illinois (the “Yorkville Data Center ” or “Project”). The Power Bureau was retained to evaluate the potentfal impact of the Project on electricity service reliability and costs. The Power Bureau is an energy planning and procurement consultfng firm with long-term experience in wholesale and retail energy issues in Illinois. The CV of the staff that performed this evaluatfon can be found in Attachment A. The Power Bureau’s actfvity followed the process outlined below: 1. Review baseline energy cost and reliability metrics for the ComEd Zone of PJM. 2. Identffy and evaluate the potentfal reliability and cost impacts that the Project may present within the ComEd Zone of PJM. 3. Issue this report and be available to respond to further questfons from the public and relevant public officials. For this engagement, the Power Bureau reviewed informatfon and documentatfon from the following partfes: 1. CyrusOne (data center developer) 2. Commonwealth Edison (local electric utflity) 3. PJM Interconnectfon (regional grid operator) 4. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (federal energy regulator) 5. Proprietary maps and software containing informatfon concerning transmission and generatfng assets operatfng in northern Illinois. Based on the above inputs, the Power Bureau identffied the following key questfons to serve as the structure for this project: 1. Service Reliability in the ComEd service territory: ▪ Will the Project overload the ComEd network and blackouts? ▪ Will the Project “take” electricity from current ComEd customers? ▪ Which power plants will provide the electricity for the Project? ▪ Are there enough power plants to meet Project in the near- and long-term? 2. Questfons Concerning Cost: ▪ Who will pay for the pay the capital cost of connectfng the Project to the ComEd distributfon network? ▪ Who will pay to deliver electricity to the Project? ▪ Who will pay for the energy supply for the Project? ▪ Will increased demand for electricity from the Project increase wholesale electricity costs in Northern Illinois? ▪ Will the Project increase power supply or offset demand in the northern Illinois market? Page | 3 Context The issues examined in this report relate to the structure and governance of wholesale power markets. This sectfon provides an overview of these structures to provide context for the later discussions concerning specific questfons raised about the potentfal impacts on service reliability and costs resultfng from the operatfon of the Yorkville Data Center. Wholesale Power Markets. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates the interstate transmission and sale of electricity under the authority granted by the Federal Power Act (FPA). The reliability of the bulk-power system is the highest priority under the FPA, and all rates and charges for wholesale power must be just reasonable and not unduly preferentfal or discriminatory. FERC approves reliability standards for the natfon’s interconnected regional transmission grids as developed and enforced by North American Electric Reliability Corporatfon (NERC). NERC ’s reliability standards must be met by industry partfcipants (i.e., local utflitfes) which operate within the six NERC regional organizatfons. The “Reliability First Corporatfon” is the NERC regional organizatfon that serves northern Illinois. Separately, FERC requires that wholesale power costs to be set through either cost-based or market-based methods. Market-based pricing is typically used by regions served by an Independent Market Operator (ISO) or a Regional Transmission Organizatfon (RTO). Northern Illinois is served by the RTO named PJM Interconnectfon (“PJM”). PJM uses auctfons to establish least-cost power supply. PJM processes also manage the interconnectfon of generators (e.g., power plants) and large energy users (e.g., data centers) to ensure that the reliability requirements set by NERC and Reliability First Corporatfon are maintained. The regions served by PJM are indicated in blue in Figure 1. ▪ Reliability. Power system frequency (measured in Hertz, “Hz”) reflects the instantaneous balance between power supply and demand on a regional grid. In the US, a frequency of 60 Hz must be maintained to prevent damage to primary grid components which could lead to blackouts. On an operatfonal level, reliability within northern Illinois is managed by PJM and ComEd. To meet grid reliability mandates, PJM performs a range of operatfonal functfons including: - Resource Planning. PJM issues two primary annual reports that frame expected resource changes and resultfng needs in the longer term. The first is the Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP) which identffied necessary grid improvements to ensure reliability up to 15 years into the future. Specifically, the RTEP tracks Baseline Projects (transmission upgrades required to meet natfonal and regional reliability standards), Generatfon Mix (analyses of the balance of dispatchable and variable generators on the gird today and proposed for the future), and the Interconnectfon Queue (the status of new generatfon projects seeking to connect to the grid). The PJM Load Forecast Report is issued annually and serves as the foundatfon for both transmission planning and capacity market auctfons within PJM over a 20-year planning horizon. The PJM Load Forecast Report contains Peak Demand Estfmates (specific summer can winter peak forecasts for each transmission zone) and Growth Drivers (detailed assessment of how data centers, electric vehicles, and building electrificatfon accelerate power demand) Figure 1: PJM Interconnectfon (PJM) Page | 4 - Interconnection Management. PJM must approve all proposed generatfon assets and large loads before they are allowed to connect to the regional grid to deliver or withdraw power. The interconnectfon approval process is designed to ensure that output from proposed generatfon resources (i.e., solar farms, battery storage, natural gas power plants) will not overwhelm transmission system components or fail to synchronize with consumer demand. The interconnectfon process also ensures that increased demand from proposed new consumers (i.e., factories, data centers, residentfal housing developments) will not exceed the maximum delivery capabilitfes of existfng generatfon and transmission systems in either the immediate or long term. - Reliability Pricing Model (RPM) Capacity Auctions. PJM manages annual capacity auctfons to secure commitments from power generators to provide generatfng capacity to meet peak electricity demand within PJM in the subsequent 1 to 3 years. All generatfng assets connected to the transmission network managed by PJM must partfcipate in the auctfon (link to the 2027/28 PJM Auctfon Results). The auctfon process concludes and a final clearing price is set when enough resources (generators, demand response, etc.) are secured to meet the region's forecasted peak demand, plus a reserve margin. - Supply Scheduling. PJM contfnuously matches supply with demand by controlling which generatfng resources deliver electricity to the regional transmission network. PJM utflizes auctfon processes to select which generatfng resources operate on a Day-Ahead and Real Time basis. - Ancillary Services. PJM Interconnectfon manages contfnuous grid reliability through market-based procurement of four primary ancillary services: Regulatfon (frequency regulatfon), Synchronized Reserve, Primary Reserve, and 30-minute Reserve. These services ensure real- tfme balance of supply and demand, with high partfcipatfon from batteries for frequency regulatfon. ▪ Cost. PJM utflizes market-based auctfons to set prices for electricity capacity, supply and ancillary services and cost-based tariffs to recover costs associated with interconnectfon to and use of transmission assets. ▪ Interconnection Costs (Transmission Access). New generatfon resources and large loads may connect to the transmission network managed by PJM only when: i) their additfon will not cause a loss of system reliability; and, ii) the owners of the proposed new generatfon resources or large loads pay for transmission system upgrades that would ensure the reliability of the grid after the connectfon of the new generatfon resources or large loads. These costs include, but are not limited to planning, engineering, procurement, and constructfon of transmission line extensions, reconductoring, substatfons, transformers, breakers, and all other elements required to ensure reliable operatfon of the transmission network after the introductfon of the new generatfon resource or large load. ▪ Annual Planning Resource Auctions (Capacity). PJM’s capacity auctfons yield prices for capacity that must be purchased by load serving entftfes (e.g., local utflitfes, retail electricity suppliers) that have not already secured capacity from another resource. ▪ Day-Ahead and Real Time Energy Auctions (Electricity Supply). PJM conductfons Day-Ahead and Rel Time auctfons to select which generators will operate each hour in the following day based on prices offered into the auctfon. ▪ Regulation Market (Ancillary Services). Ancillary services are secured through a mix of day-ahead and real-tfme auctfons as well as cost-based tariffs. ▪ Transmission Tariff. The cost of utflizing transmission assets in PJM are based on a formula that factors investment costs to build the assets, authorized rate of return (which is set by FERC), and asset utflizatfon. Retail Electricity Service. Power from the PJM regional grid is delivered to consumers in northern Illinois by ComEd’s local delivery network. The design standards and costs related to ComEd’s delivery functfons are regulated through a combinatfon of federal and state mandates. The reliability and safety of the local delivery networks is the highest priority for load serving entftfes like ComEd, and all rates and charges for retail service must be just, reasonable, Page | 5 non-discriminatory, with approval of the Illinois Commerce Commission (“ICC”) and filed with FERC. ▪ Reliability Functfons. The reliability of local service networks is driven by the ability to construct and maintain multfple (and ideally redundant) connectfons to the regional power grid, step-down voltages to suitable levels, and then provide a secure and contfnuous flow of electricity to customer meters. Each stage of this delivery chain requires capital investment as well as ongoing operatfng costs for planning, management, and operatfons. The reliability standards for retail electricity services are typically identffied in planning documents, filings with regulatory bodies (i.e., PJ M, utflity commissions) and the load-serving entfty’s tariff. - Resource Adequacy Planning. Generally, load-serving entftfes in Illinois have relied on resource planning provided by their respectfve RTO or ISO. However, new statute in Illinois now requires the Illinois Commerce Commission to undertake an Integrated Resource Plan (“IRP”) for the state. The IRP must identffy gaps between projected consumer demand and available generatfon resources in future periods, examine optfons for bridging any resource gaps, and lay out a plan of actfon for the organizatfon to secure additfonal capacity on a least-cost basis. - Interconnection Management. All proposed distributed generatfon assets (i.e., rooftop solar, on-site batteries, etc.) and large loads must receive permission from the local load-serving entfty to connect to the local service network. Interconnectfon approval processes are designed to ensure that distributed generatfon resources will not cause operatfonal complicatfons or safety issues. Additfonally, the interconnectfon process ensures that increased demand from proposed new loads can be accommodated by the existfng physical resources of the local electric network. Typically, the introductfon of large new loads will also cause local-serving entftfes to review their resource adequacy plans. ▪ Cost. The costs of retail electric service from the local utflity entfty may be market-based, cost-based, or a combinatfon of the two as determined by the load-serving entfty and state public utflity commission. ▪ Retail Supply. For investor-owned utflitfes in Illinois, consumers have the right to secure electricity supply under either default service or through a retail supply agreement with an Alternatfve Retail Electricity Supplier (“RES” or “ARES”) Both default and RES supply include the sum of wholesale capacity, energy, transmission, and ancillaries. Retail supply price for default service for the pool of ComEd’s residentfal and small commercial customers are fixed for monthly periods and based on i) energy secured through the Illinois Power Agency’s (“IPA”) competftfve procurement processes; ii) capacity prices resultfng from the PJM capacity auctfons; iii) transmission costs as approved by PJM and FERC; and iv) additfonal charges related to load balancing and services. Default service for large ComEd customers follows the same inclusions with the exceptfon that the energy supply price is set hourly and based on the PJM hourly wholesale price. Retail supply from a RES or ARES also provides pricing for energy supply, capacity, and transmission as well as service fees and a margin for the supplier. Retail supply from RES or ARES providers differs in that prices are established based on the use patterns of the individual consumer (instead of a pool of different consumers), and the consumer can structure the pricing in a range of optfons that mitfgate risk and provide greater pricing granularity. Typically, prices for retail supply for consumers served by investor-owned utflitfes in Illinois extend for periods as of between a few months and two to three years. ▪ Interconnection Costs. New large customer loads may connect to local service networks only after authorizatfon by the load-serving entfty. Typically, the load-serving entfty will require that the proposed distributed generatfon be configured in a manner to ensure the safety and reliability of the local service network. The costs of meetfng these configuratfon requirements are typically paid by the owner of the proposed distributed generatfon. Owners of new large loads in the ComEd service territory are required to enter a Transmission Service Agreement (“TSA”) that requires contractual commitments and postfng of credit to ensure that all interconnectfon costs will be paid by the large load – even if the load fails to meet its planned size. Page | 6 ▪ Delivery Charges. Customers pay for ongoing electricity delivery services through rates charged by the local load-serving entfty. Consistent with FERC mandates requiring non-discriminatory pricing, most load-serving entftfes undertake Cost-of-Service-Studies (COSS) to establish the cost to provide electric service to distfnct types of customers (i.e., residentfal, commercial, industrial), develop tariffs that apply those costs to the appropriate customers, and receive approval of those rates from the public utflity commission. In so doing, consumers are protected from subsidizing the delivery charges of other consumers. ▪ Ta xes and Fees. ComEd applies a series of state and local taxes as well as program fees to all customers. For ComEd, the program charges as generally presented as Riders which apply charges to customers to collect fees to support renewable energy development, utflity energy efficiency, job training, and other programs that are required by statute and approved by the ICC. Figure 2 below provides a reference for the reliability and cost-related functfons provided by the various partfes responsible for wholesale and retail power delivery in Illinois. Page | 7 Figure 2: Primary Partfes Responsible for Electricity Service in Central Illinois PARTY RELIABILITY ACTIONS COST ACTIONS Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ▪ Requires compliance with reliability standards (established and enforced by NERC under FERC authority) ▪ Requires that all generators and load-serving entftfes be allowed non-discriminatory access to transmission networks ▪ Allows costs to be market-based or cost-based ▪ Requires that all tariffs be non-discriminatory Regional Transmission Organizatfon ▪ Schedule Supply to match Demand (contfnuously) ▪ Evaluate and approve interconnectfon of Generatfon and Large Loads to the regional grid while maintaining reliability ▪ Plan and approve transmission system expansions ▪ Operate competftfve auctfons (Capacity, Day-Ahead and Real-Time) to select least-cost Supply to match Demand. ▪ Approve cost-effectfve transmission projects ▪ Establish cost-based tariffs for transmission Generators ▪ Own and reliably operate Generatfon ▪ Respond to PJM operatfonal requests/requirements ▪ Bid Generatfon outputs (Capacity, Electricity, Ancillary Services) into PJM-approved auctfons and processes Transmission ▪ Own and reliably operate high voltage Transmission ▪ Respond to PJM operatfonal requests/requirements ▪ Fund the operatfon and maintenance of transmission assets with approved funding and in accord with PJM requirements Retail Electricity Suppliers ▪ Secure Capacity from Generators for Load Serving Entftfes ▪ Schedule Energy deliveries from the regional grid ▪ Respond to PJM operatfonal requests/requirements ▪ Hedge against market volatflity (financial, physical) ▪ Secure least-cost Supply components (Capacity, Energy) Local Load- Serving Entfty ▪ Build and operate reliable local distributfon networks that connect the regional grid to individual consumers ▪ Make / Buy electricity Supply to meet consumer demand ▪ Respond to PJM operatfonal requests/requirements ▪ Obligatfon to allocate the costs of building and operatfng the local distributfon network to the cost causers via Cost- of-Service Studies (COSS) ▪ Secure stable / least-cost Capacity and Energy for consumers Page | 8 Issues and Evaluatfon The following series of questfons were selected to serve as a framework for the discussion concerning the potentfal impact of the Project on electrical service reliability and cost. Responses to the questfons are intended to provide higher- level informatfon on the specific topic. As such, certain graphics and other informatfon are provided for illustratfve purposes. Questfons Concerning Reliability. The following sectfon addresses whether and to what extent the Project may impact local and regional system reliability. ▪ Will the data center overload the ComEd network and cause blackouts? No. Electric service for the Project (see Figure 3) will be provided by a modificatfon of ComEd’s Plano substatfon that will accommodate the extension of two (2) 345 kV lines to the site (in yellow). A substatfon owned and paid for by the developer will deliver power to the data center campus. A separate substatfon that would be owned and paid for by the developer is contemplated on the eastern campus in the event it is needed in the future. As such, electric service to the Project will be delivered via dedicated infrastructure built and owned by the developer and served by dedicated transmission lines from ComEd that will be separate from their existfng local service network. This isolatfon from the broader ComEd network will prevent any complicatfons associated with supplying the Project from impactfng other customers. ▪ Will the Project “take” electricity from current ComEd customers? No. The transmission lines which will serve the Project are part of the regional transmission system that serves the power needs of the entfre ComEd region. As conveyed in Figure 4, multfple 345 kV transmission lines (in purple) and 138 kV transmission lines connect multfple substatfons to power generators (in teal) in the immediate areas and the remaining PJM footprint. As such, the Project cannot “take” or crowd out electricity from other consumers. Further, both PJM and ComEd have evaluated the impact of the Project on the ability of the regional transmission grid and local network to meet the Project’s electricity demand as well as all other existfng ComEd customers and have determined that extending service to the Project will not cause blackouts to ComEd customers after necessary system upgrades (paid for by the developer) are completed. Figure 3: Locatfon of Existfng Electric Transmission Infrastructure at the Yorkville Data Center Page | 9 ▪ Which power plants will provide the electricity for the Project? To be determined by PJM. As noted above, PJM selects which power plants operate each hour of each day based on the results of the PJM Day-Ahead and Real-Time auctfons. Figure 5 conveys the hourly mix of generatfon within PJM between 2/1/2026 and 2/22/2026. As noted, the generatfon during each hour can vary widely. Additfonally, PJM can import power from neighboring wholesale regions to meet its internal supply needs. Figure 5 tracks the electricity imports Figure 5: Sources of Energy Vary Hourly in PJM Figure 4: Significant power generatfon and high voltage transmission serving the greater Yorkville region Page | 10 (negatfve values) and exports (positfve values) between PJM and neighboring balancing authoritfes between 2/21/2026 and 2/21/2026. In short, the Yorkville Data Center will receive electricity generated by whichever power plants (or imports from neighboring regional grids) selected by PJM to ensure sufficient supply to reliability standards. ▪ Are there enough power plants to meet the Project and current ComEd loads? Yes. PJM updates load and generatfon requirements annually. As shown in Figure 6, PJM projects peak load increases through 2045. The Project is projected to begin operatfons in 2027 and then grow over tfme to a targeted 654 MW. As such, the additfonal load for the Project has already been included in PJM’s load forecast. Based on PJM’s evaluatfon, there is and will be sufficient generatfng capacity to meet the peak demand of all existfng ComEd customers as well as the new load presented by the Project. Moving forward, PJM will expand its generatfon portiolio and transmission network to allow more capacity to flow through the regional grid. Currently, there are 1,773 separate projects representfng over 342,000 MW of maximum facility output (“MFO”) with either actfve interconnectfon requests under consideratfon by PJM, are engaged in engineering and procurement, or are under constructfon (link to PJM Serial Service Request Status and Cycle Service Request Status queues). Additfonally local Figure 5: PJM Contfnuously Imports and Exports Electricity to Neighboring Regions Page | 11 generatfon may be accelerated by the ICC ’s new integrated resource plan process that is expected to be completed in 2027. Based on PJM’s evaluatfon of pending new generatfon project capacity, all existfng customer demand plus the 654 MW of new load associated with the Project can and will be met. Questfons Concerning Cost. The overall cost of electric service for existfng ComEd customers was also raised by partfes. The following questfons address aspects of electricity costs for consumers. ▪ Who will pay the costs to connect the Project to the ComEd distributfon network? The Project developer. Consistent with the ComEd tariff, the data center developer will be responsible for paying the full cost for connectfng the Project to the PJM regional grid. This arrangement is enforceable through a structured Transmission Security Agreement (“TSA”) between the data center developer and ComEd. The TSA is a FERC-jurisdictfonal contract that requires the Project developer to provide long-term financial commitments to cover the cost of all required grid upgrades and protects existfng customers from those costs. The TSA requires the Project developer to provide financial security for 10 years of transmission service revenues under a "take or pay” structure that will remain in force even if the data center development does not reach its maximum projected load ramp. If the Project fails to meet its projected load ramp, then the developer is obligated to cover all cost shortialls, which are then credited back to ComEd customers. The TSA sets clear protectfons against shifting costs from the data center developer to ComEd customers. ▪ Who will pay to deliver electricity to the Project? The Project developer. The Project will be placed into service as a ComEd retail customer under the appropriate approved Delivery Class based on metered peak electrical demand. Once the Project demand exceeds 10 MW it will be placed in the Extra-Large Load Delivery Class. Under the Public Utflity Act, utflity delivery rates must reflect cost causatfon. This means that the rates assessed for the Extra-Large Load Delivery Class must reflect the costs that those large customers represent to the ComEd delivery network. The ICC reviews and Figure 6: PJM Load Forecast for ComEd Service Region (2026) Page | 12 approves all proposed cost allocatfons and rates to prevent cross- subsidizatfon between customer classes. ▪ Who will pay for the energy supply for the Project? The Project developer. Utflity regulatfons require that the Project secure its own electricity supply though either the ComEd Rate BESH - Basic Electric Service-Hourly, or through a bilateral agreement with a Retail Electricity Supplier. Neither of these optfons have any connectfon to the energy supply rates charged to other ComEd customers that are served through ComEd’s default service or individual supply agreements with the more than 80 Alternatfve Retail Electricity Suppliers certffied to serve ComEd customers. ▪ Will increased demand for electricity from the Project increase wholesale electricity costs in Northern Illinois? Not likely. - Background. Electricity supply prices for ComEd customers have varied since the full implementatfon of the retail choice law in 2007. Figure 7 identffies the changes in the inflatfon-adjusted electricity supply prices for ComEd’s default rate customers (e.g., the “Price to Compare”) during the month of March in each of most recent fifteen (15) years (orange Figure 7: Inflatfon-Adjusted Price to Compare for ComEd Customers (2011-2026) $0.0000 $0.0200 $0.0400 $0.0600 $0.0800 $0.1000 $0.1200 $0.1400 ComEd price to Compare(Inflation Adjusted, $/kWh)Historical ComEd Price to Compare (Inflation Adjusted, Monthly Billing Periods) Monthly ComEd Price to Compare (Inflation Adjusted, $/kWh)Average ComEd Price to Compare (Inflation Adjusted, $/kWh) Page | 13 columns) as well as the average price for electricity supply for those months (horizontal blue line). [NOTE: we compare pricing for the month of March in each year to avoid seasonal pricing differences that might skew comparison results]. As observed, the ComEd Price to Compare for March 2026 is slightly above the average inflatfon-adjusted Price to Compare during the month of March in each of the past fifteen years, and 22% below the price reported for March 2012. Retail electricity supply prices for ComEd customers reflect the costs for three separate wholesale charges: electricity commodity, capacity, and transmission. Electricity commodity and capacity prices are set through PJM’s auctfon processes while transmission charges are set by PJM tariff. Clearing prices set by auctfons change over tfme based on the relatfve balance between supply and demand. Additfonally, clearing prices in the PJM auctfons can also be affected by the costs of fuels (e.g., uranium, coal, natural gas, fuel oil). The primary driver of recent increases in total retail electricity supply prices for ComEd customers has been capacity. Figure 8 shows the pricing history of capacity within the PJM wholesale market. Capacity pricing for ComEd customers tracks with RTO (magenta colored line). As noted, the increase in capacity prices for the June 2025 to May 2026 and the June Figure 8: Inflatfon-Adjusted Price to Compare for ComEd Customers (March, 2012-2026) Page | 14 2026 to 2027 periods correlates with the increase in overall electricity supply prices identffied in Figure 7 above. Capacity prices reflect the overall balance of generatfng capacity and electricity demand up to three (3) years into the future. Rising capacity prices indicate that demand has increased, or available capacity has decreased. Given that the interconnectfon approvals for the Project have already been approved for initfal power flows to begin during the 2026-2027 period, we project that the capacity requirements for the Yorkville Data Center have already been factored into the PJM capacity auctfon results. To a lesser extent, increases in wholesale electricity commodity prices have added to total electricity supply prices for ComEd customers. As shown in Figure 7 above, the inflatfon-adjusted pricing history of average annual wholesale electricity commodity within the PJM between 2011 and 2026. As noted, while wholesale electricity commodity prices did increase during 2025 and 2026, they remain near the fifteen (15) year average and are lower than inflatfon adjusted prices in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2020 and 2022 to 2023. Rising electricity commodity prices indicate a mix of drivers including increased demand, decreased generatfon supply, and rising fuel prices (e.g., natural gas, uranium, coal, fuel oil). - Market Responses. Growing demand for electricity is the primary driver for rising capacity and electricity commodity prices in PJM and northern Illinois. In market-based systems such as PJM, higher prices attract new resource development. The deployment of added resources will serve to suppress prices. We note several examples of new generatfng capacity moving towards deployment in PJM: ▪ Organic Capacity Development. 1,773 separate projects representfng over 342,000 MW of maximum facility output (“MFO”) are under review for interconnectfon, have moved to engineering and procurement, or are under constructfon in PJM (link to PJM Serial Service Request Status and Cycle Service Request Status queues). ▪ Accelerated Capacity Deployments. PJM’s has provided accelerated approval of 51 generatfon projects with 9,361 MW of capacity. 90% of the projects are expected to be online by 2030 and all are projected to be online by 2031. Additfonally, PJM has presented a plan to procure up to 15,000 MW of new capacity between September 2026 and March 2027. ▪ Retained and Repower Capacity. Approximately 9,600 MW of generatfng capacity connected to the PJM grid is being repowered (e.g., Crane Nuclear Power Statfon on Three-Mile Island, PA) or have delayed planned retfrement dates. ▪ Illinois Renewable Portiolio Standard. Illinois provides incentfves that currently support over 13,000 MW of capacity from renewable energy resources. By 2046, the state is projected to grow it renewable energy capacity to over 41,000 MW. - Regulatory Responses. Prompted by concerns about rising electricity prices and grid reliability state and federal policymakers and regulators have intervened with policies designed to constrain prices and deploy more generatfng capacity. We note several policy interventfons in PJM and Illinois: ▪ PJM Capacity Market Collar. PJM has implemented a capacity market price collar (e.g., setting a maximum price ceiling and minimum price floor) for its annual capacity auctfons. this mechanism limits capacity costs to slightly below the clearing price result for the 2026/27 period and is expected to control capacity costs while ensuring grid reliability. ▪ Illinois Battery Energy Storage Program. Under the recently passed Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act (CRGA), the state of Illinois is incentfvizing 3,000 MW of new battery storage capacity by 2030. ▪ Illinois Integrated Resource Plan. Also included in the CRGA is a new process that requires the ICC to assess the state’s capacity requirements and to order increased investment in capacity and efficiency programs (e.g., the Illinois Renewable Portiolio Standard, the Energy Efficiency Portiolio Standard, and the new Battery Energy Storage Program) Page | 15 ▪ Illinois Nuclear Power Fast-track. In February 2026, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker issued an executfve order acceleratfng the development of new nuclear power plants to add at least 2,000 GW of capacity. The initfatfve follows the early 2026 lifting of the state's moratorium on new large-scale nuclear constructfon and aims to bolster grid reliability and meet rising energy demands. - Conclusions. To be clear, increasing energy demand by data centers can increase the clearing prices in the PJM auctfons for capacity and electricity commodity, if there is not a corresponding increase in supply or a market intervention. As noted above, the PJM market and Illinois antfcipate increasing deployments of electricity generatfng capacity (which will counter the upward price pressure), and multfple market interventfons will also serve to suppress upward price pressure. In the immediate case, it is doubtiul that the deployment of the Project will have a discernable impact on capacity or electricity commodity prices for ComEd customers. ▪ Will the Project increase power supply or offset demand in the northern Illinois market? Yes. The Yorkville Data Center will provide funding for new generatfng capacity, energy efficiency programs, and job training for new entrants to the clean technology sector through its payments to ComEd for the following Riders: - Rider REA (Renewable Energy Adjustments). Over the first thirty (30) year operatfons and at the current rates applied under the Rider REA, the Yorkville Data Center is projected to pay over $652 million. These funds will be used to incentfvize the development of new renewable energy resources to serve ComEd customers. Based on the most recent Long Term Renewable Resource Procurement Plan published by the IPA, the level of funding provided by the Project would be sufficient to support over 1,000 MW of utflity-scale solar capacity. - Rider EEPP (Energy Efficiency Adjustments). Over the first thirty (30) year operatfons and at the current rates applied under the Rider EEPP, the Yorkville Data Center is projected to pay over $626 million. These funds will be used to incentfvize rebates for energy efficiency technologies for ComEd customers. Based on the current incentfves offered by ComEd, the level of funding provided by the Project would be sufficient to support rebates for over 313,000 residentfal heat pumps. - Rider ETAC (Energy Transitfon Assistance Charge). Over the first thirty (30) year operatfons and at the current rates applied under the Rider ETAC, the Yorkville Data Center is projected to pay over $109 million. These funds will be used to incentfvize clean energy deployments and job training in the ComEd service territory. Based on Climate Works estfmate of a $10,000 cost per partfcipant in the Pre-Apprentfceship programs supported by Rider ETAC funding, the level of funding provided by the Project would be sufficient to support over 10,900 Pre-Apprentfceship trainings. Based on the above, we conclude that the Yorkville Data Center will provide significant and sustained levels of funding to support new renewable energy generatfon and energy efficiency programs (which will serve to increase supply and decrease demand for electricity to offset upward price pressure), and support job training for new workers seeking careers in the clean energy sector. Page | 16 Conclusions Analysis indicates that deploying a 654 MW data center in the Yorkville Illinois area will not adversely impact the reliability of either the local service network (operated by ComEd) or the broader regional grid (operated by PJM). Evidence in support of these conclusions includes: ▪ The Project’s interconnectfon to the PJM grid is isolated from the remainder of the ComEd electric network; therefore, service challenges at the data center are less likely to cause interruptfons to other ComEd customers. ▪ Analysis by ComEd and PJM conclude that the available capacity of the high voltage transmission lines that will serve the Project as well as ComEd’s control of the interconnectfon engineering design and constructfon will ensure contfnuity and oversight will be maintained throughout the entfrety of the constructfon process. ▪ System impact analyses conducted by PJM under its FERC mandate to ensure the reliability of the regional grid further ensure that generatfng capacity within the region will be sufficient to meet the capacity requirements of all existfng ComEd customers as well as the added load for the Yorkville Data Center. Further, consumers are at no risk of subsidizing the Project electricity supply or delivery costs. Evidence in support of this conclusion includes: ▪ The TSA between the Project developer and ComEd to pay all costs incurred to establish a physical service connectfon to the PJM grid. ▪ The applicatfon of standard ComEd delivery rates to the Project for electricity over the life of the Project. ▪ The requirement for the Project to secure power and electric supply through its own contractfng decisions that are separate and apart from the supply arrangements for all other ComEd customers ; and, Lastly, increases in capacity and electricity commodity process are unlikely to increase materially because of the Project new load. Evidence supportfng this conclusion includes: ▪ Market rates for capacity and energy commoditfes today are near the long- term average of prices for the region. ▪ The load requirements for the Project have already been factored into the PJM forward capacity auctfons startfng for the delivery year 2026-27. ▪ Multfple market responses (e.g., organic development of capacity, incentfve for renewable energy resources in Illinois, etc.) and regulatory interventfons (e.g., cost caps for the PJM capacity auctfon through 2030, fast-tracking of new capacity, delayed or reversed retfrements of existfng capacity resources, etc.) are already underway to deliver more capacity to the PJM market and Illinois (which will suppress future price increases. In closing, The Power Bureau notes the following concerning the Project: ▪ If the Project is not built in Yorkville then it is almost certain that one or more data center projects of comparable size will seek to proceed with interconnectfon to the same transmissions lines. For Yorkville, the impact of this circumstance would be two-fold: - Development at any alternatfve locatfon in northern Illinois would carry similar reliability and cost impacts for residents; and, - The economic development and resources associated with the Project would be transferred to the new locatfon. In summary, the Power Bureau finds that the operatfon of the proposed Yorkville Data Center will have minimal – if any – impact on network system reliability or energy costs for the residents of Yorkville. Page | 1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Term Definitfon PJM PJM Interconnectfon is a regional transmission organizatfon (RTO) that coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia. ComEd Commonwealth Edison, commonly known as ComEd, is the largest electric utflity in Illinois, serving the Chicago and Northern Illinois area. FERC The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is the U.S. federal agency that regulates the transmission and wholesale sale of electricity and natural gas in interstate commerce. MW Megawatt. A unit of power equal to one million watts. It is commonly used to measure the output of power plants or the amount of electricity required by a large facility. kV Kilovolt. A unit of electrical potentfal equal to one thousand volts. It is often used to describe the voltage of high-voltage transmission lines. RTO Regional Transmission Organizatfon. An independent organizatfon that coordinates, controls, and monitors the operatfon of the electrical power system in a partfcular region. ATTACHMENT A: CV OF POWER BUREAU STAFF MARK PRUITT 291 Riverside Drive, Burns Harbor, Indiana 46304 • (219) 921-3828 • markjpruitt@thepowerbureau.com ENERGY ECONOMICS AND POLICY CONSULTANT 25+ year track-record in energy project development, commodity procurement, and utflity regulatfon. Strategic negotfator with ability to develop beneficial agreements between stakeholders with conflictfng and complex agendas. Well-developed management and communicatfon skills with a reputatfon for credibility and integrity. Core Knowledge and Skill Areas Wholesale & retail energy commodity transactfons Strategy development & implementatfon Generatfon & efficiency technologies Statfstfcal modeling & financial analysis Alternatfve project finance structures Negotfatfons & settlement fulfillment Procurement & sourcing processes Legislatfve and regulatory processes Renewable/Sustainable Portiolio Standards Program design and management PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE PRINCIPAL , THE POWER BUREAU/ICCAN, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 2011 TO PRESENT Consultant providing energy planning and procurement services to public and private organizations. Established specialty consultfng practfces focused on reducing energy costs and price risks for small and mid-sized consumers. Optfmizing existfng regulatfons and market structures to reduce costs and increase optfonality. Developing new opportunitfes by repositfoning energy commodity operatfons from a statfc cost-center to a risk-management tool that protects client interests. Advise energy generatfon developers entering new markets under new statutory designs. Advise energy project developers on site selectfon, wholesale market rate impacts, government and utflity policy, project finance, client acquisitfon, and incentfve development. Challenge Positioning developers and consumers to capture the benefits available in wholesale power markets. Planning ▪ Drafting and implementfng energy procurement and asset development plans to secure market value, investment returns, and organizatfonal goals. Strategic Sourcing ▪ Maximizing benefits of Municipal Aggregatfon for villages, towns, and countfes through procurement methods that reduce transactfon premiums ▪ Positfoning retail electric consumers as wholesale market partfcipants Asset Leveraging ▪ Internal process and governance evaluatfon ▪ Creatfng alliances among existfng market partfcipants to foster development of generatfon, efficiency and demand response products that deliver consumer value. Market Analysis & Monitoring ▪ Intervening in regulatory proceedings and drafting state legislatfon ▪ Modeling market price patterns to identffy purchasing and selling opportunitfes ▪ Developed Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Roadmap for Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Development. Project Development ▪ Advised multfple wind and solar project developments in Illinois under the Future Energy Jobs Act ▪ Developed specialized project finance structures to leverage the benefits of Qualified Opportunity Zones, Investment Tax Credits, and Qualifying Facilitfes compensatfon under PURPA ⧫⧫⧫⧫⧫ DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS POWER AGENCY, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 2008 TO 2011 State agency Director chartered to reduce and stabilize consumer electricity costs. Built a new state agency tasked with reversing substantfal consumer price increases resultfng from electric deregulatfon. Gained regulatory approval for statewide portiolio planning and hedging strategies valued at over $5.3 billion in annual ATTACHMENT A: CV OF POWER BUREAU STAFF expenditures. Maintained responsibility for planning and oversight of statewide carbon sequestratfon, renewable portiolio standard compliance, and synthetfc natural gas developments. Challenge Satisfy competing policy interests while reducing consumer costs. Fulfill aggressive and expanding mandates during a period of severe resource restrictions. Vision Planning ▪ Guided stakeholders in formulatfng new policies to repositfoned default supply electricity purchasing as an actfvely managed portiolio with cost containment, flexibility, and stability as primary values. Mission Fulfillment ▪ Delivered $1.6 billion in electricity cost reductfons to Illinois consumers. ▪ Introduced procurement planning techniques and adapted solutfons to specific market conditfons resultfng in a balanced portiolio to limited year-over-year price volatflity. Change Management ▪ Artfculated clear objectfves and plans to legislators, interest groups, and regulators in public hearings and private meetfngs to achieve policy consensus. ▪ Led consistent and fair negotfatfons that dramatfcally enhanced success in transactfon efforts. Market Positioning ▪ Re-established Illinois as a leading marketplace for electricity transactfons by generatfng solutfons to the consumer cost issue without undermining competftfve markets. ▪ Led regional developers and utflitfes to secure $2.6 billion in renewable energy funding with 20-year power purchase agreements at historically low market rates. ▪ Spearheaded initfatfves to support coal gasificatfon projects valued at $10 billion. ⧫⧫⧫⧫⧫ SENIOR PROGRAM MANAGER, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 2002 TO 2008 Manager for energy commodity procurement for state agencies and municipalities. Selected to restructure operatfonal functfons and reverse losses of small commodity procurement program; following successful achievement of immediate objectfves, was promoted in 2004 to assume full P&L responsibility for the unit, overseeing marketfng, development and roll-out of new services, and administratfve functfons. Challenge Improve program value for customers while reversing program losses. Bottom Line Improvements ▪ Ramped program from net loss to profitability, increased book of business from $2 to $65 million, tripled net program income, and limited administratfve costs to 20% total growth. ▪ Secured 25% cost savings for partfcipants while reducing price volatflity by 20%. Operations Improvement and Expansion ▪ Restructured procurement events around common credit terms, conditfons, and metrics. ▪ Expanded program from 4 to 39 state agencies and 12 municipalitfes. ▪ Captured new customer base by expanding into deregulated electricity markets. ▪ Led a comprehensive review of the University’s energy operatfons to evaluate competftfveness of campus power plants and utflity cost allocatfon methods. Team Development ▪ Toured customer facilitfes with management team to promote need for change, assure services value, and monitor key metrics. ⧫⧫⧫⧫⧫ PROJECT DEVELOPER, NICOR ENERGY SOLUTIONS. NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS 2000 TO 2002 Developer of energy generation and management solutions and services for regional clients. Contributed to team development of projects financed through alternatfve mechanisms including federal Super Energy Services Performance Contract, Utflity Energy Services, and Enhanced Use Leasing. Revenue Growth ▪ Standardized project evaluatfon and proposal formats to increase bid throughput by 15%. ▪ Coordinated the successful $14 million Phase 2 energy services contract proposal for the US Department of Energy Fermi Natfonal Laboratory. Process Design ▪ Led integratfon of third-party vendors into project development and cross-marketfng sales processes; methods developed were replicated for additfonal partnership initfatfves. Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd. 445 Jackson Avenue, Suite 200 Naperville, Illinois 60540 Phone: 630-355-4600 Fax: 630-352-3610 www.rw-attorneys.com June 1, 2026 Krysti Barksdale-Noble Community Development Director United City of Yorkville 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 RE: Campus Power C1 Yorkville LLC –Major Amendment to Planned Unit Development Dear Ms. Barksdale-Noble, In association with the above referenced Major Change for the C1 Yorkville Data Center Campus, we’ve submitted a number of different plans and studies in support of the application. You may notice that there are different references to electricity usage throughout the documentation. These differences are not errors. All of the numbers are correct, with each number reflecting a different component of analysis and build-out of the campus over time. Allocated Power. References to 480 MW reflect the power that has been allocated to-date for the C1 Yorkville data center. C1 has executed necessary documentation and paid deposits to ComEd in association with this power allocation. Physical improvements associated with this power allocation commenced in early 2026. Allocated Power will start to become available in tranches beginning in 2028. Requested Power. C1 Yorkville has requested a 174 MW supplemental power allocation for the C1 Yorkville data center. This supplemental power allocation was filed in April 2026 and a decision on the power allocation is not anticipated until late 2026 or early 2027. If ComEd allocates the additional power and C1 Yorkville signs necessary documentation to reserve said supplemental power, C1 Yorkville will be responsible for additional infrastructure costs associated with the delivery of the supplemental power to the C1 Yorkville Data Center Campus. C1 reasonably anticipates that the timeline for delivery of the supplemental power is 2032 or beyond. Please note that The Power Bureau, LLC, Data Center Impact Analysis was based on a 654 MW campus, which reflects the allocated power (480 MW) plus the supplemental power allocation (174 MW). Future Power. The plans for the C1 Yorkville Data Center Campus include eight separate buildings. Seven of the buildings are designed to accommodate 108 MW total power load. The eighth building is designed to accommodate 54 MW total power load. Based on the current configuration, the C1 Yorkville Data Center Campus could accommodate 810 MW. Additional load capacity will be requested from ComEd as necessary and appropriate. Sincerely, Russell G. Whitaker, III Russell G. Whitaker, III Attorney for C1 Yorkville, LLC russ@rw-attorneys.com THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE A Report to ROSANOVA AND WHITAKER, LTD. From GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES Urban Economists, Market Strategists & Land Use/Public Policy Analysts March 2026 C1713 THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE A Report to ROSANOVA AND WHITAKER, LTD. From GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES Urban Economists, Market Strategists & Land Use/Public Policy Analysts March 2026 C1713 APPLYING KNOWLEDGE CREATING RESULTS ADDING VALUE ©2026 Gruen Gruen + Associates. Do not reproduce without written permission from Gruen Gruen + Associates. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 GENERAL ECONOMIC AND FISCAL BENEFITS OF DATA CENTERS .................................. 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................... 3 Tax Revenue Estimates ................................................................................................................................. 3 FISCAL BENEFITS FOR YORKVILLE .................................................................................................... 6 Property Tax Revenue ................................................................................................................................... 6 Electric Utility Tax Revenue ......................................................................................................................... 8 APPENDIX A: PROPERTY TAXES BY DISTRICT ............................................................................ 11 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1: Estimated Annual Revenue Generated by the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center at Build-Out for Yorkville ................................................................................ 4 Table 2: Estimated Annual Property Tax Revenue at Build-out for Yorkville ......................................... 7 Table 3: Estimated Annual Electric Tax Revenue at Build-out for Yorkville .......................................... 9 Table A-1: Estimate of Annual Property Tax Revenue by District.......................................................... 11 THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION CyrusOne proposes to develop a eight-building data center campus totaling approximately 1,854,000 square feet of building space on nearly 229 acres at the northeast corner of Eldamain Road and Faxon Road in Yorkville. Buildings 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are planned to each contain 246,387 square feet of building space and support approximately 72 megawatts (“MW”) of critical IT load (108 MW utility load). Building 2 is planned to include 129,350 square feet of building space with 36 MW of critical IT load (54 MW utility load). Collectively, these eight buildings would support approximately 540 MW of critical IT capacity, assuming a power usage effectiveness (“PUE”)1 of 1.5 and an 80 percent utilization factor.2 Gruen Gruen + Associates (“GG+A”) was asked to estimate the fiscal benefits or tax revenues that the proposed data center campus will generate for the city of Yorkville. This report summarizes the tax revenue estimates. The figures presented in this report are expressed in current 2026 dollars. That is, the possible effects of inflation or deflation are not quantified. GENERAL ECONOMIC AND FISCAL BENEFITS OF DATA CENTERS Data centers enable the storage, processing, and transmission of digital data and information on which firms and organizations depend to operate. Data centers facilitate the scaling of businesses without the need for individual businesses to invest scarce capital in their own secure and reliable digital infrastructure. Jobs associated with the development of data centers include architects, engineers, construction trade workers, and support staff. The operations of data centers provide direct employment opportunities in security, maintenance, and operations support staff to keep the data centers functioning. Communities and regions that experience data center development benefit from improved internet connectivity and accessibility, and more stable, resilient power grids that often are associated with or required by data center developments. The enhancement of digital and utility infrastructure is a comparative advantage for supporting other economic sectors. When a data center opens, it can draw suppliers or vendors to the data center or additional businesses to the broader surrounding area. Other businesses may be attracted or expanded due in part to the availability of high-speed internet connectivity, and other infrastructure enhanced because of the presence of the data center. The development and operation of data centers stimulate demand for 1 PUE is an industry-standard metric used to measure energy efficiency in data center. The PUE indicates how much of the total power applies to computer equipment such as servers, storage, networking etc. as opposed to building infrastructure such as cooling, lighting, etc. Typical PUE values range from 1.1 to 2.0. A measure of 1.0 means that all of the power goes to IT equipment. 2 The utilization factor measures how much of the installed IT capacity (compute, storage, network) is actually being used. The utilization factor is the percentage of a data center’s installed (nameplate) capacity that is actually used at peak demand. The utilization factor equals the actual IT loan or usage divided by the installed or rated IT capacity. An 80 percent utilization factor is very efficient. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 2 infrastructure, technology goods and services, connectivity, and security that ripples through local and regional economies. In addition, as a relatively new land use, data centers provide for a diversification of property tax revenues. Compared to traditional office, industrial, and retail land uses, data centers, however, do not generate significant traffic or parking requirements. Compared to residential uses, data centers generate much less demand for public services. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Tax Revenue Estimates Table 1 summarizes the annual tax revenue the proposed CyrusOne C1 data center campus at build- out and operational is estimated to generate for the city of Yorkville. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 4 TABLE 1 Estimated Annual Revenue Generated by the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center at Build-Out for Yorkville Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Campus Buildings 1 $ 2 $ 3 $ 4 $ 5 $ 6 $ 7 $ 8 $ Total $ Electric Utility Tax Revenue 2,119,450 1,071,193 2,119,450 2,119,450 2,119,450 2,119,450 2,119,450 2,119,450 15,907,343 Property Tax Revenue 117,840 61,864 117,840 117,840 117,840 117,840 117,840 117,840 886,744 Total Annual Revenue 2,237,290 1,133,057 2,237,290 2,237,290 2,237,290 2,237,290 2,237,290 2,237,290 16,794,087 Sources: United City of Yorkville Code of Ordinances Chapter 2, Section 3-2-4 Municipal Utility Tax; CyrusOne; Gruen Gruen + Associates. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 5 The CyrusOne data center campus is forecast to generate approximately $16,794,100 of annual tax revenue for the city of Yorkville General Fund at build-out and full assessment. Electric utility tax revenue is estimated at approximately $15,907,300 and comprises about 95 percent of the direct fiscal benefit to Yorkville. Annual property taxes are forecast to generate an additional approximately $886,700 for Yorkville. Property taxes are forecast to comprise about five percent of the direct fiscal benefit to Yorkville. Buildings 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are each expected to generate $2,119,400 in annual electric utility tax revenue and $117,800 in annual property tax revenue. Building 2 is estimated to generate $1,071,200 in annual electric utility tax revenue and $61,900 in annual property tax revenue. As summarized in Appendix A, the proposed CyrusOne data center is forecast to generate approximately $15,744,000 in annual property tax revenues for all taxing districts, including Plano School District #88. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 6 FISCAL BENEFITS FOR YORKVILLE Property Tax Revenue Table 2 presents the annual property tax revenue at build-out the operation of the CyrusOne C1 data center campus is estimated to generate for Yorkville. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 7 TABLE 2 Estimated Annual Property Tax Revenue at Build-out for Yorkville Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Campus Buildings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total Building Space in Square Feet 246,387 129,350 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 1,854,059 Market Value Per Square Foot $325 $325 $325 $325 $325 $325 $325 $325 $325 Estimated Market Value $80,075,775 $42,038,750 $80,075,775 $80,075,775 $80,075,775 $80,075,775 $80,075,775 $80,075,775 $602,569,175 Equalized Assessed Value1 $26,691,925 $14,012,917 $26,691,925 $26,691,925 $26,691,925 $26,691,925 $26,691,925 $26,691,925 $200,856,392 2024 Yorkville Tax Rate 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% 0.44148% Annual Property Tax Revenue for Yorkville2 $117,840 $61,864 $117,840 $117,840 $117,840 $117,840 $117,840 $117,840 $886,741 1 Equalized assessed value is calculated at 33.33% of market value. Adjusted equalized assessed value factor of 1.0000. 2 Property taxes per $100 of equalized assessed value. Sources: CyrusOne; Kendall County Assessor; Gruen Gruen + Associates. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 8 The completed CyrusOne C1 data center campus is assumed to be valued at $325 per square foot of building space, resulting in an estimated total market value of approximately $602,569,175 upon a full assessment. This assumption is within the range of valuations applied to existing data centers in Elk Grove Village, Itasca, and DeKalb. The market value estimate draws on an identification of assessed values for comparable data center developments including the following: NTT Data, Inc. in Itasca, DuPage County (Parcel Identification Number 03-05-200-043) which consists of two data centers totaling 252,000 square feet built in 2021 and 2024. The market value for the 2024 tax year is reported at $61,974,300 or approximately $246 per square foot. The 2024 property taxes are about $1,496,200; CenterSquare (ORD2) in Elk Grove Village, DuPage County (Parcel Identification Number 03-02-106-001) consists of one 163,747-square-foot building built in 2014. The market value for the 2024 tax year is reported at $51,310,000 or approximately $313 per square foot. The 2024 property taxes are about $1,345,200; and Meta Data Center, in DeKalb, DeKalb County (Parcel Identification Number 11-01-100- 004) consisting of three buildings totaling 3,000,000 square feet built from 2020 to 2023. Based on current real estate tax of $31,458,804, the taxable equalized assessed value is approximately $394,479,700. This results in an estimated market value of $394 per square foot of building space. Note the real estate taxes are based on a 20-year Enterprise Zone tax abatement.3 The total Equalized Assessed Value upon build-out is estimated at approximately $200,856,400. Based on the current city of Yorkville property tax rate, annual property tax revenues at the full campus build-out and assessment are estimated at approximately $886,700. Buildings 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are estimated to each generate approximately $117,800 in annual property tax for Yorkville. Building 2 is expected to generate approximately $61,900 in annual property tax for Yorkville. Electric Utility Tax Revenue The city of Yorkville imposes an electric utility tax based on monthly consumption. Table 3 presents the annual electric utility tax revenue estimated to be generated by operation of the CyrusOne data center campus. A higher utilization factor means the data center is using its servers and other IT equipment more efficiently, because a greater portion of the installed capacity is actually being used rather than sitting idle. An 80 percent utilization factor is considered efficient. 3 DeKalb Park District missed out on thousands of tax dollars from Meta Data Center | Northern Public Radio: WNIJ and WNIU THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 9 TABLE 3 Estimated Annual Electric Tax Revenue at Build-out for Yorkville Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Campus Buildings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total Building Space in Square Feet 246,387 129,350 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 246,387 1,854,059 Average Monthly Electricity Usage, kWh Per Square Foot 256 244 256 256 256 256 256 256 254.5 Average Monthly Electricity (kWh) 63,072,000 31,536,000 63,072,000 63,072,000 63,072,000 63,072,000 63,072,000 63,072,000 473,040,000 City Electric Tax Rate, Per kWh1 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 $0.0028 Monthly Tax $176,621 $89,266 $176,621 $176,261 $176,621 $176,621 $176,621 $176,621 $1,325,613 Annual City Electric Tax Revenue $2,119,450 $1,071,193 $2,119,450 $2,119,450 $2,119,450 $2,119,450 $2,119,450 $2,119,450 $15,907,343 1 Effective rate based on sliding scale tax rate of monthly consumption. Sources: CyrusOne; United City of Yorkville, Code of Ordinances Chapter 2, Section 3-2-4 Municipal Utility Tax; Gruen Gruen + Associates. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 10 Information provided by CyrusOne indicates that the eight-building CyrusOne C1 data center campus at full build-out is expected to consume nearly 5.7 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity each year. This reflects an Annual “Power Usage Effectiveness” factor of 1.5 and a typical “utilization” factor of 80 percent. The resulting estimated average monthly electricity consumption totals 473,040,000 kilowatt- hours or about 255 kilowatt-hours per square foot of total building space. The city of Yorkville imposes an electric utility tax rate on a sliding scale based on the level of monthly consumption. The tiered rate ranges from 0.562 cents ($0.00562) per kilowatt-hour for the first 2,000 kilowatt hours consumed to 0.277 cents ($0.00277) per kilowatt-hour for any consumption exceeding 20,000,000 kilowatt-hours. The city’s effective electric tax rate per kilowatt-hour, based on the sliding scale of monthly consumption, is $0.0028 per kilowatt-hour. Buildings 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are estimated to each generate approximately $2,119,400 in annual electric tax for Yorkville. Building 2 is estimated to generate approximately $1,071,200 in annual electric utility tax revenue for Yorkville. Total monthly tax revenue is estimated to be nearly $1,325,600 for the CyrusOne C1 data campus at full build-out. Accordingly, the CyrusOne C1 data center campus at full build-out is forecast to generate about $15,907,300 in annual electric utility tax revenue for Yorkville. THE FISCAL BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 11 APPENDIX A: ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX BY DISTRICT Table A-1 summarizes the estimate of annual property tax by taxing entity at full build-out of buildings one through eight of the CyrusOne C1 data center campus. TABLE A-1 Estimate of Annual Property Tax Revenue by District Tax Rate1 Buildings 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (Each Building) Building 2 Total Annual Revenue from All 8 Buildings2 PLANO SCHOOL DISTRICT #88 $5.46402 $1,458,452 $765,669 $10,974,833 BRISTOL-KENDALL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT $0.62408 $166,579 $87,452 $1,253,505 KENDALL COUNTY $0.52808 $140,955 $73,999 $1,060,682 CITY OF YORKVILLE $0.44148 $117,840 $61,864 $886,741 JR COLLEGE #516 $0.41827 $111,644 $58,612 $840,122 FOREST PRESERVE $0.1304 $34,806 $18,273 $261,917 YORKVILLE LIBRARY $0.11642 $31,075 $16,314 $233,837 BRISTOL TOWNSHIP $0.06679 $17,828 $9,359 $134,152 BRISTOL TWP ROAD $0.0489 $13,052 $6,852 $98,219 TOTAL $7.83844 $2,092,231 $1,098,394 $15,744,008 1 Current property tax rates, per $100 of Equalized Assessed Value, for taxes payable 2025. 2 Based on projected Equalized Assessed Value of $200,856,392 for the completed data center campus. Sources: Kendall County Assessor; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Plano School District #88 is estimated to receive the largest share of annual property tax revenue at $10,974,800. Bristol-Kendall Fire Protection District is estimated to receive $1,253,500 in annual property tax revenue. Kendall County is estimated to receive $1,060,700 in annual property tax revenue. At full build-out, the CyrusOne data center campus is estimated to generate property tax revenue of approximately $15,744,000 per year for all the taxing entities listed in Table A-1. Gruen Gruen + Associates (GG+A) is a firm of economists, sociologists, statisticians and market, financial and fiscal analysts. Developers, public agencies, attorneys and others involved in real estate asset management utilize GG+A research and consulting to make and implement investment, marketing, product, pricing and legal support decisions. The firm's staff has extensive experience and special training in the use of demographic analysis, survey research, econometrics, psychometrics and financial analysis to describe and forecast markets for a wide variety of real estate projects and economic activities. Since its founding in 1970, GG+A has pioneered the integration of behavioral research and economic analysis to provide a sound foundation for successful land use policy and economic development actions. GG+A has also pioneered the use of economic, social and fiscal impact analysis. GG+A impact studies accurately and comprehensively portray the effects of public and private real estate developments, land use plans, regulations, annexations and assessments on the affected treasuries, taxpayers, consumers, other residents and property owners. San Francisco: Denver: Chicago: (415)433-7598 (720) 583-2056 (847) 317-0634 www.ggassoc.com APPLYING KNOWLEDGE, CREATING RESULTS, ADDING VALUE THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE A Report to ROSANOVA & WHITAKER, LTD. From GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES Urban Economists, Market Strategists & Land Use/Public Policy Analysts February 2026 C1713 THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE A Report to ROSANOVA & WHITAKER, LTD. From GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES Urban Economists, Market Strategists & Land Use/Public Policy Analysts February 2026 C1713 APPLYING KNOWLEDGE CREATING RESULTS ADDING VALUE ©2026 Gruen Gruen + Associates. Do not reproduce without written permission from Gruen Gruen + Associates. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – ECONOMIC IMPACT ESTIMATES ................................................. 1 Kendall County .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Construction Impacts Kendall County ........................................................................................................... 3 On-going Impacts Kendall County ................................................................................................................. 3 Yorkville .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Construction Impacts Yorkville ....................................................................................................................... 5 On-going Impacts Yorkville ............................................................................................................................. 5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON THE YORKVILLE AND KENDALL COUNTY ECONOMIES .. 6 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Sources ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Construction Impacts Kendall County ....................................................................................................... 7 Construction Impacts Yorkville ................................................................................................................... 8 On-going Impacts Kendall County ........................................................................................................... 10 On-going Impacts Yorkville ....................................................................................................................... 13 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Annual One-Time and On-going Economic Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Development on the Kendall County Economy ................................. 2 Table 2: Annual One-Time and On-going Economic Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Development on the Yorkville Economy ............................................. 4 Table 3: One-Time Economic Impacts of Construction on Kendall County Economy ....................... 7 Table 4: One-Time Economic Impacts of Construction on Yorkville Economy ................................... 9 Table 5: On-going Annual Economic Impacts of Operations on Kendall County Economy ............ 11 Table 6: On-going Annual Economic Impacts of Operations on Yorkville Economy ........................ 13 THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION CyrusOne proposes to develop an eight-building data center campus totaling approximately 1,854,059 square feet of building space on approximately 229 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Eldamain Road and Faxon Road in Yorkville. Buildings 1, and 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are planned to each contain 246,387 square feet of building space and support approximately 72 megawatts (“MW”) of critical IT load (108 MW utility load). Building 2 is planned to include 129,350 square feet of building space with 36 MW of critical IT load (54 MW utility load). Gruen Gruen + Associates (“GG+A”) was asked to evaluate and describe the economic impacts that the CyrusOne data center development is estimated to generate within the city of Yorkville and Kendall County. This report summarizes the economic impact estimates associated with the development and operation of the CyrusOne data center development by construction phase and upon full build-out. The figures presented in this report are expressed in constant 2026 dollars. That is, the possible effects of inflation or deflation on future economic activities are not quantified. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - ECONOMIC IMPACT ESTIMATES Kendall County Table 1 summarizes the estimated annual one-time construction and on-going economic impacts of the proposed CyrusOne data center development on the Kendall County economy. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 2 TABLE 1 Annual One-Time and On-going Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne Data Center on the Kendall County Economy (in $ Millions)1 Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Campus Buildings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total One-Time Impacts of Construction (Average Annual)2 Jobs3 289 193 289 289 289 289 289 289 277 Labor Income4 $19.6 $13.0 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $18.7 Output5 $111.2 $74.1 $111.2 $111.2 $111.2 $111.2 $111.2 $111.2 $106.6 On-Going Annual Impacts at Full- Buildout Jobs3 249 134 249 249 249 249 249 249 1,881 Labor Income4 $24.9 $13.4 $24.9 $24.9 $24.9 $24.9 $24.9 $24.9 $187.4 Output5 $139.7 $75.2 $139.7 $139.7 $139.7 $139.7 $139.7 $139.7 $1,053.2 1 Total gross impact include direct, indirect, and induced effects. Figures are rounded. 2 Total average annual construction impact is not cumulative or the sum of Buildings 1 through 8. Total for construction is the average annual over the 10-year construction process. Each building is estimated to be constructed in 15 months. 3 Full- and part-time employment (jobs). 4 Wages, salaries, benefits, and proprietor income. 5 Local value of goods and services produced or sold. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 3 Construction Impacts Kendall County The construction of the CyrusOne data center development is estimated to be associated with 277 construction-related jobs (average annual for a period of one year for all eight buildings) within the Kendall County economy. The total average annual labor income related to construction is estimated at approximately $18.7 million. The construction of the CyrusOne data center development is estimated to generate $106.6 million in average annual economic output (volume of economic activity) within Kendall County. For each building 1 and 3 through 8 construction economic impacts are estimated to include 289 annual jobs with an associated annual labor income of $19.6 million. The construction economic impacts of Building 2 are estimated to include 193 annual jobs with an associated annual labor income of $13.0 million. On-going Economic Impacts Kendall County On-going operations of the CyrusOne data center development at full build-out are estimated to support 1,881 permanent jobs within the Kendall County economy. The total annual labor income is estimated at $187.4 million or approximately $99,700 per job. CyrusOne data center operations are estimated to generate total annual output (or the volume of economic activity) within Kendall County of approximately $1,053.2 billion. The occupancy and operations of each building 1 and 3 through 8 is estimated to be associated with 249 annual jobs and annual labor income of $24.9 million. The occupancy and operations of Building 2 is estimated to be associated with 134 annual jobs and an annual labor income of $13.4 million. Yorkville Table 2 summarizes the estimated annual one-time construction and on-going economic impacts of the CyrusOne data center development on the Yorkville economy. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 4 TABLE 2 Annual One-Time and On-going Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne Data Center on Yorkville Economy (in $ Millions)1 Proposed CyrusOne Data Center Campus Buildings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total One-Time Impacts of Construction (Annual Average) 2 Jobs3 224 149 224 224 224 224 224 224 214 Labor Income4 $15.9 $10.6 $15.9 $15.9 $15.9 $15.9 $15.9 $15.9 $15.3 Output5 $88.6 $59.1 $88.6 $88.6 $88.6 $88.6 $88.6 $88.6 $84.9 On-Going Annual Impacts at Full Build-out Jobs3 150 81 150 150 150 150 150 150 1,133 Labor Income4 $19.6 $10.5 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $19.6 $147.5 Output5 $112.2 $60.4 $112.2 $112.2 $112.2 $112.2 $112.2 $112.2 $845.6 1 Total gross impact include direct, indirect, and induced effects. Figures are rounded. 2 Total average annual construction impact is not cumulative or the sum of Buildings 1 through 8. Total for construction is the average annual over the 10-year construction process. Each building is estimated to be constructed in 15 months. 3 Full- and part-time employment (jobs). 4 Wages, salaries, benefits, and proprietor income. 5 Local value of goods and services produced or sold. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 5 Construction Impacts Yorkville Nearly 80 percent of the construction-related economic impacts are estimated to occur within Yorkville. Construction impacts associated with the development of the CyrusOne CI data center are estimated to include 214 average annual jobs with associated average annual labor income of about $15.3 million. For each building 1 and 3 through 8 construction economic impacts within Yorkville are estimated to include 224 annual jobs and associated annual labor income of $15.9 million. The construction economic impacts of Building 2 within Yorkville are estimated to include 149 annual jobs and an associated annual labor income of $10.6 million. On-going Impacts Yorkville About 60 percent of the permanent jobs and 79 percent of the annual labor income are estimated to occur within Yorkville. On-going operations of the CyrusOne data center development at full build- out are estimated to support 1,133 permanent jobs within the Yorkville economy. The total annual labor income is estimated at $147.5 million or approximately $130,000 per job. CyrusOne data center operations are estimated to generate total annual economic output within the Yorkville economy of $845.6 million. The occupancy and operations of each building 1 and 3 through 8 is estimated to be associated with 150 annual jobs and an annual labor income of $19.6 million. The occupancy and operations of Building 2 is estimated to be associated with 81 annual jobs and an annual labor income of $10.5 million. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 6 ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON THE YORKVILLE AND KENDALL COUNTY ECONOMIES Introduction Three kinds of economic impacts will be associated with the proposed CyrusOne data center development and operations: (1) employment; (2) income (the sum of wages and salaries); and (3) output, or the volume of goods and services produced. These three types of economic impacts are defined and estimated in terms of: Direct Effects – The number of jobs, income, and economic output supported by the expenditures made on the initial development and by the operations of the CyrusOne data center; and Indirect and Induced Effects – The changes in the number of jobs, income, and output produced, based on interindustry transactions and interdependencies among industries. In addition to these indirect or spillover effects, indirect effects also include what are sometimes referred to as “induced effects” which occur as wages paid to employees get spent and recirculated within the local economy. The initial development and construction activity will generate temporary or “one-time” impacts within the local economy. Once completed and occupied, the operations of the CyrusOne data center development will generate “on-going” or recurring economic impacts on the local and regional economy as the data center produces sales, pays wages to employees, and purchases goods and services from other vendors or contractors in the local economy. Data Sources The economic impact analysis is based on anticipated characteristics of the proposed data center development, provided by representatives of CyrusOne, and RIMS II input-output multipliers obtained from the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, a provider of custom input-output data.1 1 A common method of estimating the economic impacts of real estate development is through the use of input- output models. Input output models are based on an extensive table or snapshot of the region’s market transactions between industry sectors, between industry and household sectors and between regional sectors and sectors outside the region. An initial demand stimulus, such as a real estate development, yields a set of multipliers from the transactions table based on distribution of the impacts of the development activity distributed by the affected industry and household sectors to produce final employment, income, and output impacts. Studies in the United States utilizing input-output models tend to employ one of two models. One type is the RIMS II input-output model produced by the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. This model has been “regionalized” for each of the states and for major metropolitan areas. Earnings by-industry and personal consumption expenditure data are used to include households as both suppliers of labor and purchasers of final goods and services. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 7 Construction of the CyrusOne data center development is expected to occur over a 10-year period. According to CyrusOne, the total construction hard (core and shell) costs and sitework costs to construct Buildings 1 through 8 totaling about 1,854,059 square feet of space is estimated at $434 per square foot or $805,000,000. This cost estimate excludes expenditure related to land acquisition, soft costs (e.g., architectural and engineering fees), and critical mechanical, engineering, and plumbing fixtures and equipment and IT equipment (which may be purchased from outside of Kendall County). Construction Impacts Kendall County Table 3 summarizes the estimated one-time construction (direct, indirect, and induced) economic impacts on the Kendall County economy. TABLE 3 One-Time Economic Impacts of Construction on Kendall County Economy Average Annual over Construction Period1 Employment1 # Jobs Annual Income2 $ Annual Output3 $ Per Building 1 and 3 – 8 Direct 209.9 15,180,252 84,000,000 Indirect & Induced 79.3 4,374,948 27,216,000 Total 289.2 19,555,200 111,216,000 Multiplier 1.37 1.28 1.32 Per Building 2 Direct 139.9 10,120,168 56,000,000 Indirect & Induced 52.8 2,916,632 18,144,000 Total 192.8 13,036,800 74,144,000 Multiplier 1.37 1.28 1.32 AVERAGE ANNUAL FOR ALL BUILDINGS 1 -8 277.2 18,740,000 106,582,000 Multiplier 1.37 1.28 1.32 1 Total full- and part-time jobs are created for a period of one year. 2 Total labor income associated with additional jobs. 3 Total volume of added economic activity. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Based upon Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) multipliers obtained from the Bureau of Economic Analysis for Kendall County, GG+A estimates that construction of the CyrusOne data center development will generate an annual employment impact within Kendall County totaling about 289 jobs per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual labor income associated with those jobs within Kendall County is estimated at approximately $19.5 million (or the equivalent of over $67,000 per job) for the construction of each building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8 during the construction period. Annual economic output in Kendall County from the construction activity is estimated at $111.2 million per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 8 The construction of Building 2 is estimated to generate an annual employment impact within Kendall County totaling about 193 jobs. The construction of Building 2 is estimated to generate an annual labor income associated with those jobs within Kendall County of about $13.0 million during the construction period. Annual economic output associated with the construction of Building 2 is estimated at $74.1 million. As indicated above in Table 3, multipliers associated with the construction activity are estimated to range from 1.28 to 1.37 in Kendall County. The employment multiplier of 1.37 indicates that for every 10 jobs created directly on-site, nearly four additional jobs will be indirectly supported elsewhere in Kendall County from construction activity. The income multiplier of 1.28 indicates for every dollar of income, an additional $0.28 will be indirectly created elsewhere in Kendall County. The output multiplier of $1.32 indicates for every dollar of output directly generated by the development an additional $0.32 will be indirectly generated throughout Kendall County. Construction Impacts Yorkville Table 4 summarizes the estimated one-time construction (direct, indirect, and induced) economic impacts on Yorkville economy. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 9 TABLE 4 One-Time Economic Impacts of Construction on Yorkville Economy1 Average Annual Over Construction Period1 Employment2 # Jobs Annual Income3 $ Annual Output4 $ Per Building 1 and 3 – 8 Direct 210.0 15,180,252 84,000,000 Indirect & Induced 13.5 743,741 4,626,720 Total 223.5 15,923,993 88,626,720 Multiplier 1.06 1.05 1.05 Per Building 2 Direct 140.0 10,120,168 56,000,000 Indirect & Induced 9.0 495,827 3,084,480 Total 149.0 10,615,995 59,084,480 Multiplier 1.06 1.05 1.05 AVERAGE ANNUAL FOR ALL BUILDINGS 1 – 8 214.2 15,260,493 84,933,940 Multiplier 1.106 1.05 1.05 1 Local estimates assume that seventeen percent (17%) of indirect and induced activity occurs within the city of Yorkville. City estimates are included within Kendall County (i.e., not additive). 2Total full- and part-time jobs are created for a period of one year. 3 Total labor income associated with additional jobs. 4 Total volume of added economic activity. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Nearly 80 percent of the estimated one-time construction impacts within Kendall County are estimated to occur within the city of Yorkville. This estimate reflects the assumption that approximately 17 percent of the indirect and induced jobs will be located in Yorkville (and 100 percent of direct jobs will be based in Yorkville).2 Construction of the CyrusOne data center development is estimated to generate an annual employment impact within Yorkville totaling about 223 jobs per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual labor income within Yorkville is estimated at approximately $15.9 million (or the equivalent of over $71,000 per job) per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual economic output in Yorkville associated with the construction activity is estimated at $88.6 million per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. Construction of Building 2 is estimated to generate an annual employment impact within Yorkville totaling about 149 jobs. Construction of Building 2 is estimated to generate an annual labor income associated with those jobs of $10.6 million during the construction process. The total annual economic 2 U.S. Census Bureau OntheMap indicates for 2023 that 17 percent of Yorkville’s jobs are filled by residents. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 10 output in Yorkville associated with the construction activity is estimated at $59.1 million for Building 2. The total average annual economic impacts of all eight buildings over the 10-year construction period are estimated at 214 jobs, $15.3 million in labor income, and $84.9 million in economic output. On-going Impacts Kendall County Table 5 summarizes the estimated annual economic impacts associated with the occupancy and operations of the proposed CyrusOne data center on the Kendall County economy. According to CyrusOne approximately 980 employees consisting of CyrusOne employees, tenant employees, maintenance contractors, and security personnel, are anticipated to be based on-site (direct employment) at the eight data center building campus in Yorkville. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 11 TABLE 5 On-going Annual Economic Impacts of Operations on Kendall County Economy Employment1 # Jobs Annual Income2 $ Annual Output3 $ Per Building 1 and 3 – 8 Direct 130.0 18,475,976 106,533,715 Indirect & Induced 119.5 6,388,993 33,174,599 Total 249.5 24,864,969 139,708,314 Multiplier 1.92 1.35 1.31 Per Building 2 39Direct 70.0 9,948,603 57,364,308 Indirect & Induced 64.3 3,440,227 17,863,246 Total 134.3 13,388,829 75,227,553 Multiplier 1.92 1.35 1.31 TOTAL FOR ALL BUILDINGS 1 – 8 1,880.6 187,443,613 1,053,185,749 Multiplier 1.92 1.35 1.31 1 Total full- and part-time jobs are created for a period of one year. 2 Total labor income associated with additional jobs. 3 Total volume of added economic activity. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Operations of the CyrusOne data center development are estimated to generate an annual employment impact within Kendall County totaling about 249 jobs per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual labor income within Kendall County is estimated at approximately $24.9 million (or the equivalent of about $99,700 per job) per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual economic output impact in Kendall County is estimated at $139.7 million per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The operations of Building 2 are estimated to generate 134 annual jobs and an associated annual labor income of about $13.4 million within Kendall County. The operations of Building 2 are estimated to generate annual economic output of about $75.3 million within Kendall County. The total annual economic impacts of the operation of all eight buildings upon full build-out is estimated at 1,881 jobs, $187.4 million in labor income, and $1,053.2 billion in economic output. As indicated above in Table 5, multipliers associated with the operations of the data center are estimated to range from 1.31 to 1.92 in Kendall County. The employment multiplier of 1.92 indicates that for every 10 jobs created directly on-site, an additional nine jobs will be supported indirectly in Kendall County from operations activity. The labor income multiplier of 1.35 indicates for every $1.00 directly generated, an additional $0.35 of income is generated elsewhere in Kendall County. The output multiplier of 1.31 indicates for every $1.00 of output directly generated that an additional $0.31 is estimated to be generated throughout Kendall County. THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 12 Ongoing Impacts Yorkville Table 6 summarizes the estimated annual economic impacts associated with the occupancy and operations of the proposed CyrusOne data center on the Yorkville economy. TABLE 6 On-going Annual Economic Impacts of Operations on Yorkville Economy1 Employment2 # Jobs Annual Income3 $ Annual Output4 $ Per Building 1 and 3 – 8 Direct 130.0 18,475,976 106,533,715 Indirect & Induced 20.3 1,086,129 5,639,682 Total 150.3 19,562,105 112,173,397 Multiplier 1.16 1.06 1.05 Per Building 2 Direct 70.0 9,948,603 57,364,308 Indirect & Induced 10.9 584,839 3,036,752 Total 80.9 10,533,441 60,401,060 Multiplier 1.16 1.06 1.05 TOTAL FOR ALL BUILDINGS 1 – 8 1,133.1 147,468,177 845,614,836 Multiplier 1.16 1.06 1.05 1Local estimates assume that seventeen percent (17%) of indirect and induced activity occurs within the city of Yorkville. City estimates are included within Kendall County (i.e., not additive). 2Total full- and part-time jobs are created for a period of one year. 3Total labor income associated with additional jobs. 4 Total volume of added economic activity. Sources: RIMS II, Regional Production Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis; Gruen Gruen + Associates. Approximately 60 percent of the permanent jobs and 79 percent of the annual labor income impacts within Kendall County are estimated to occur within the city of Yorkville.3 The operations of the CyrusOne data center development are estimated to generate annual employment impact within Yorkville totaling about 150 jobs per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total associated annual labor income within Yorkville is estimated at approximately $19.6 million (or the equivalent of about $130,000 per job) per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. The total annual economic output impact in Yorkville is estimated at $112.2 million per building for Buildings 1 and 3 through 8. 3 Similar to the estimates for one-time construction impacts, it is assumed that 17 percent of the indirect and induced jobs are filled by Yorkville residents (and 100 percent of the direct jobs are located in Yorkville.) THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CYRUSONE C1 DATA CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN YORKVILLE GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES PAGE 13 The operations of Building 2 are estimated to generate 81 annual jobs. The operations of Building 2 are estimated to generate annual labor income of about $10.5 million. The annual economic output associated with the operations of Building 2 is estimated at $60.4 million. The total annual economic impacts for Yorkville of all eight buildings upon full build-out are estimated at 1,133 jobs, $147.5 million in associated labor income, and $845.6 million in economic output. Gruen Gruen + Associates (GG+A) is a firm of economists, sociologists, statisticians and market, financial and fiscal analysts. Developers, public agencies, attorneys and others involved in real estate asset management utilize GG+A research and consulting to make and implement investment, marketing, product, pricing and legal support decisions. The firm's staff has extensive experience and special training in the use of demographic analysis, survey research, econometrics, psychometrics and financial analysis to describe and forecast markets for a wide variety of real estate projects and economic activities. Since its founding in 1970, GG+A has pioneered the integration of behavioral research and economic analysis to provide a sound foundation for successful land use policy and economic development actions. GG+A has also pioneered the use of economic, social and fiscal impact analysis. GG+A impact studies accurately and comprehensively portray the effects of public and private real estate developments, land use plans, regulations, annexations and assessments on the affected treasuries, taxpayers, consumers, other residents and property owners. San Francisco: Denver: Chicago: (415)433-7598 (720) 583-2056 (847) 317-0634 www.ggassoc.com APPLYING KNOWLEDGE, CREATING RESULTS, ADDING VALUE Traffic Impact Study Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois Prepared For: May 29, 2026 SITE Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 1 1. Introduction This report summarizes the methodologies, results, and findings of a traffic impact study conducted by Kenig, Lindgren, O’Hara, Aboona, Inc. (KLOA, Inc.) for a proposed Data Center to be located in Yorkville, Illinois. The site is located in the northeast quadrant of Eldamain Road with Faxon Road. The plans for the data center call for eight buildings totaling approximately 1,854,805 square feet, 466 parking spaces, and 16 accessible parking spaces. Access to the site will be provided via (1) a full-movement access drive off Eldamain Road and (2) an egress only access drive off Beecher Road. The purpose of this study was to examine background traffic conditions, assess the impact that the proposed development will have on traffic conditions in the area, and determine if any roadway or access improvements are necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development. Figure 1 shows the location of the site in relation to the area roadway system. Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the site. The sections of this report present the following: Test • Existing roadway conditions • A description of the proposed development • Directional distribution of the development traffic • Vehicle trip generation for the development • Future traffic conditions including access to the development • Traffic analyses for the weekday morning and evening peak hours • Recommendations with respect to adequacy of the site access and adjacent roadway system Traffic capacity analyses were conducted for the weekday morning and evening peak hours for the following conditions: 1. Existing Conditions – Analyzes the capacity of the existing roadway system using existing peak hour traffic volumes in the surrounding area. 2. Year 2031 No-Build Conditions – Analyzes the capacity of the existing roadway system using existing peak hour traffic volumes including ambient traffic growth. 3. Year 2031 Projected Conditions – Analyzes the capacity of the future roadway system using the projected traffic volumes that include the existing traffic volumes, ambient background traffic growth, and the traffic estimated to be generated by the full buildout of the development. Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 2 Site Location Figure 1 SITE Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 3 Aerial View of Site Figure 2 SITE Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 4 2. Existing Conditions Existing transportation conditions in the vicinity of the site were conducted by KLOA, Inc. in order to obtain a database for projecting future conditions. The following provides a description of the geographical location of the site, physical characteristics of the area roadway system including lane usage and traffic control devices, and existing peak hour traffic volumes. Site Location The site is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Eldamain Road with Faxon Road in Yorkville, Illinois. Currently, the development site is vacant. The surrounding land uses include residential, industrial, and commercial areas. Notable nearby establishments to the south include the Gas N Wash fuel center, Fox Valley Family YMCA, RKA Gun Gallery, and Plano Auto Repair. Additionally, to the west of the proposed development is a Menards Distribution Center. Existing Roadway System Characteristics The characteristics of the existing roadways near the development are described below and illustrated in Figure 3. Veterans Parkway (US Route 34) is an east-west, minor arterial roadway that in the vicinity of the site provides two travel lanes in each direction separated by a yellow solid line median of approximately 14 feet wide. At its signalized intersection with Eldamain Road, Veterans Parkway provides an exclusive left-turn lane, two through lanes, and an exclusive right-turn lane on both the eastbound and westbound approaches. A standard-style crosswalk is provided on both the east and west legs of the intersection. Veterans Parkway is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), carries an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume of 17,300 vehicles west of Eldamain Road (IDOT 2023) and 6,200 vehicles east of Eldamain Road (IDOT 2023), and has a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour. Eldamain Road is a north-south minor arterial roadway that provides one lane in each direction in the vicinity of the site with a center two-way left-turn lane south of Menards Distribution Center and a landscape median north of Menards Distribution Center. At its unsignalized intersection with Veterans Parkway, Eldamain Road provides an exclusive left-turn lane, a through lane, and an exclusive right-turn lane. Additionally, Eldamain Road provides a high visibility crosswalk on the southbound approach and a standard crosswalk on the northbound approach. At its unsignalized intersection with Faxon Road, Eldamain Road provides an exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane on both the northbound and southbound approaches. At its signalized intersection with Galena Road, Eldamain Road provides an exclusive left-turn lane, a through lane, and an exclusive right-turn lane on both the northbound and southbound approaches. Eldamain Road is under the jurisdiction of Kendall County, carries an AADT volume of 7,900 vehicles (IDOT 2023), and has a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour. SITE FAMILY YMCA FOX VALLEY CENTER DISTRIBUTION MENARDS GALLERY RKA GUN WASH GAS N 8 TONS OVER 34 Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 3Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS - TRAVEL LANE - TRAFFIC SIGNAL - STOP SIGN XX LEGEND - RAILROAD CROSSING - SPEED LIMIT SIGN EXISTING ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS 45 45 45 45 TONS 6 LIMIT WEIGHT 45 45 45 7 45 - HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - STANDARD CROSSWALK YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER 45 45 45 ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS PARKWAY VETERANS BNSF RAILWAY 5 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 6 Faxon Road is an east-west local road that provides one travel lane in each direction. East of Eldamain Road, Faxon Road is under posted dead-end signage. At its unsignalized intersection with Eldamain Road, Faxon Road is under stop sign control and provides an exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane on the eastbound approach and a shared left- turn/through/right-turn lane on the westbound approach. Faxon Road is under the jurisdiction of the Township of Yorkville and carries an AADT volume of 700 vehicles (IDOT 2023). Galena Road is an east-west minor arterial roadway that provides one travel lane in each direction. At its signalized intersection with Eldamain Road, Galena Road provides an exclusive left turn lane, one exclusive through lane and an exclusive right turn lane in both the westbound and eastbound approach. Galena Road is under the jurisdiction of the city of Yorkville and carries an AADT volume of 6,800 vehicles west of Eldamain Road (IDOT 2023) and 6,200 vehicles east of Eldamain Road (IDOT 2023). Existing Traffic Volumes In order to determine current traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site, KLOA, Inc. conducted peak period vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic counts using Miovision Video Scout Collection Units on Tuesday, March 3, 2026, during the weekday morning (6:00 to 9:00 A.M.) and weekday evening (3:00 to 6:00 P.M.) peak periods at the following intersections: 1. Veterans Parkway (US 34) with Eldamain Road 2. Eldamain Road with Faxon Road 3. Eldamain Road with Menards Distribution Center access drive 4. Eldamain Road with Galena Road From the turning movement count data, it was determined that the weekday morning peak hour generally occurs between 6:30 A.M. and 7:30 A.M. and the weekday evening peak hour generally occurs between 3:15 and 4:15 P.M. These two respective peak hours will be used for the traffic capacity analyses presented later in this report. Additionally, previous traffic counts conducted at the intersection of Eldamain Road with Corneils Road in October 2023 and at the intersection of Beecher Road with Corneils Road in August 2025 were utilized to reflect 2026 conditions. The existing peak hour vehicle traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4 and copies of the traffic count summary sheets are included in the Appendix. Crash Data Summary KLOA, Inc. obtained crash data0F 1 from IDOT for the most recent available five years (2018 to 2022) for the intersections of Eldamain Road with Corneils Road, Eldamain Road with Faxon Road, Eldamain Road with Galena Road, and Eldamain Road with Veterans Parkway. Summaries of the crash data are shown in Tables 1 through 4. 1 IDOT DISCLAIMER: The motor vehicle crash data referenced herein was provided by the Illinois Department of Transportation. Any conclusions drawn from analysis of the aforementioned data are the sole responsibility of the data recipient(s). SITE 34 405 (187)178 (632)157 (481)484 (193)223 (136)131 (124)219 (162) 433 (531) 222 (636) 143 (63 ) 152 (96 ) 44 (56 ) 12 (4) 69 (129) 54 (91)17 (43)57 (86)1 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1)0 (3)41 (31) 0 (0) 7 (3)4 (7)548 (339)77 (54) 69 (189)76 (131)93 (241)56 (47)32 (65)81 (91)8 (118) 31 (187)65 (157)3 (15)131 (423)459 (287)217 (532)20 (29) 21 (40)12 (38)33 (24)106 (178)10 (33)0 (4)70 (217)1 (18)0 (1)1 (4)0 (2)2 (2) 28 (43) 0 (7) 1 (1) 43 (33)13 (6)5 (1)5 (3)Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 4Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON LEGEND 00 (00) - AM PEAK HOUR (6:30-7:30 AM) - PM PEAK HOUR (3:15-4:15 PM) ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7 YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS PARKWAY VETERANS BNSF RAILWAY 7 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 8 Table 1 ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH VETERANS PARKWAY – CRASH SUMMARY Year Type of Crash Frequency Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total 2018 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2019 1 0 0 7 1 3 0 12 2020 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 5 2021 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 8 2022 0 0 0 3 1 8 2 14 Total 1 0 0 14 2 21 2 40 Average <1.0 <1.0 0 2.8 <1.0 4.2 <1.0 8 Table 2 ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH GALENA ROAD – CRASH SUMMARY Year Type of Crash Frequency Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total 2018 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 2019 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 2020 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 4 2021 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 2022 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total 2 0 0 4 2 5 0 13 Average <1.0 0 0 <1.0 <1.0 1 0 2.6 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 9 Table 3 ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH FAXON ROAD – CRASH SUMMARY Year Type of Crash Frequency Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total 2018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 4 ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH CORNEILS ROAD – CRASH SUMMARY Year Type of Crash Frequency Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total 2018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Average 0 0 0 0 0 <1.0 0 <1.0 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 10 3. Traffic Characteristics of the Proposed Development In order to properly evaluate future traffic conditions in the surrounding area, it was necessary to determine the traffic characteristics of the proposed development, including the directional distribution and volumes of traffic that it will generate. Proposed Site and Development Plan The proposed 228-acre site is proposed to contain eight two-story data center buildings totaling approximately 1,854,805 square feet with a total of 466 parking spaces, including 16 accessible parking spaces. Access to the proposed development will be provided via (1) a full movement access drive located approximately 2,040 feet north of Faxon Road, aligned opposite the existing Menards access drive on the east side of Eldamain Road, and (2) an egress only access drive located on the west side of Beecher Road along the east side of the site. The access drive on the east side of Eldamain Road will provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes striped as an exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. The access drive on the west side of Beecher Road will provide one outbound lane. Outbound movements at both access drives will operate under stop sign control. As discussed later in this report, a southbound left turn lane serving this access drive should be provided via restriping the existing median and a northbound right-turn lane will be warranted and should be provided on Eldamain Road serving this access drive. A proposed emergency exit will be provided via a right-in/right-out (RIRO) access drive located on the east side of Eldamain Road approximately 1,170 feet north of the main proposed access drive. A copy of the site plan is included in the Appendix. Directional Distribution The respective directional distributions of how development traffic will approach and depart the site were estimated based on a combination of existing travel patterns, the location of the site relative to area roadways, accessibility to interchanges, and the orientation and physical restrictions of the surrounding roadway system. The estimated directional distribution for the proposed development is illustrated in Figure 5. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes To determine the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hour vehicle trip generation for the proposed development, information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Trip Generation Manual, 12th Edition was utilized. ITE Land-Use Code 160 (Data Center) rates were used for the proposed data center. Copies of the ITE trip generation summary sheets are included in the Appendix. Table 5 summarizes the trips projected to be generated by the proposed data center. SITE 34 1 0 %10%5% 20%35%2100'1170'2040'15% 5%3600'LEGEND 00' 00%- PERCENT DISTRIBUTION - DISTANCE IN FEET Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 5Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION 7 YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS PARKWAY VETERANS BNSF RAILWAY 11 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 12 Table 5 PROJECTED SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ITE Land- Use Code Type/Size Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 160 Data Center (1,854,805 s.f.) 73 30 103 18 75 93 677 676 1353 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 13 4. Projected Traffic Conditions The total projected traffic volumes include the existing traffic volumes, increase in background traffic due to growth, and the traffic estimated to be generated by the proposed subject development. Development Traffic Assignment The peak hour traffic volumes projected to be generated by the proposed development were assigned to the area roadways based on the established directional distribution (Figure 5). Figure 6 shows the assignment of the development-generated traffic volumes. Background (No-Build) Traffic Conditions The existing traffic volumes (Figure 4) were increased by a regional growth factor to account for the increase in existing traffic related to regional growth in the area (i.e., not attributable to any particular planned development). Based on Average Daily Traffic (ADT) projections provided by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), the existing traffic volumes were increased by an annually compounded growth rate of 1.20 percent per year for six years (buildout year plus five years) for a total of approximately seven percent to project Year 2031 background (no-build) conditions, as illustrated in Figure 7. A copy of the CMAP letter is included in the Appendix. Total Projected Traffic Volumes The total projected traffic volumes include the Year 2031 no-build traffic volumes (Figure 7) and the traffic estimated to be generated by the proposed development (Figure 6). Figure 8 shows the Year 2031 total projected traffic volumes. SITE 34 7 (2)4 (1)7 (2)10 (25)4 (11)47 (11)19 (48)47 (11)19 (48)11 (3)2 (4)3 (8)22 (6)1 (2)8 (21)26 (7)6 (15)3 (8)25 (6) 15 (3) 4 (1)1 (2)1 (2)2 (4) 9 (23) 1 (2) 4 (1) Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 6Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON LEGEND 00 (00) - AM PEAK HOUR (6:30-7:30 AM) - PM PEAK HOUR (3:15-4:15 PM) ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7 YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS PARKWAY VETERANS BNSF RAILWAY 14 SITE 34 433 (200)190 (676)168 (515)518 (207)239 (146)140 (133)234 (173) 463 (568) 238 (681)70 (168)3 (16)153 (67 ) 47 (60) 74 (138) 13 (4)18 (46)61 (92)140 (453)9 (126) 33 (200)87 (97)44 (33) 0 (0) 0 (1) 0 (1) 1 (1)4 (7)0 (3)60 (50) 74 (202)34 (70)81 (140)82 (58)586 (363)58 (97)0 (4)491 (307)35 (26)232 (569)13 (41)21 (31) 22 (43) 163 (103 )113 (190)11 (35)7 (3)75 (232)100 (258)0 (1)1 (4)0 (2)2 (2) 30 (46) 0 (7)14 (6)5 (1)5 (3)1 (19) 1 (1) 46 (35) Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 7Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON LEGEND 00 (00) - AM PEAK HOUR (6:30-7:30 AM) - PM PEAK HOUR (3:15-4:15 PM) ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS YEAR 2031 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7 YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS PARKWAY VETERANS BNSF RAILWAY 15 SITE 34 436 (208)209 (724)168 (515)518 (207)246 (148)140 (133)249 (176) 463 (568) 238 (681)70 (168)3 (16)153 (67 ) 51 (61 ) 74 (138) 13 (4)20 (50)65 (103)147 (455)9 (126) 0 (0) 33 (200) 0 (0)87 (97)44 (33) 0 (0) 0 (1)4 (7)60 (50) 74 (202)34 (70)633 (374)19 (48)47 (11)499 (328)36 (28)254 (575)13 (41)22 (33) 26 (44) 69 (100) 163 (103 )26 (7)113 (190)11 (35)0 (3)1 (1) 0 (1) 7 (3)0 (4)81 (247)103 (266)91 (165)107 (64)0 (1)1 (4)0 (2)2 (2) 34 (47) 0 (7)15 (8)5 (1)6 (5)1 (19) 1 (1) 46 (35) 9 (23) 2 (4)2 (31)25 (11)Kenig,Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona,Inc. Figure: 8Job No: 24-050 N NOT TO SCALEDAO R E H S A ROAD GA LENA BNSF RAILWAY ROADELDAMAINROAD FAXON LEGEND 00 (00) - AM PEAK HOUR (6:30-7:30 AM) - PM PEAK HOUR (3:15-4:15 PM) PARKWAY VETERANS ACCESS DRIVE MENARDS YEAR 2031 TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES 7 YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS DATA CENTER ROADBEECHERROAD CORNEILS 16 Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 17 5. Traffic Analysis and Recommendations The following provides an evaluation conducted for the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours. The analysis includes conducting capacity analyses to determine how well the roadway system and access drives are projected to operate and whether any roadway improvements or modifications are required. Traffic Analyses Intersection analyses were performed for the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours for the existing, Year 2031 no-build, and Year 2031 total projected traffic conditions. The traffic analyses were performed using the methodologies outlined in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 7th Edition and analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic 12 software. The analyses for the traffic-signal controlled intersections were accomplished using existing cycle lengths, phasings, and offsets to determine the average overall vehicle delay and levels of service. The analyses for the unsignalized intersections determine the average control delay to vehicles at an intersection. Control delay is the elapsed time from a vehicle joining the queue at a stop sign (includes the time required to decelerate to a stop) until its departure from the stop sign and resumption of free flow speed. The methodology analyzes each intersection approach controlled by a stop sign and considers traffic volumes on all approaches and lane characteristics. The ability of an intersection to accommodate traffic flow is expressed in terms of level of service, which is assigned a letter from A to F based on the average control delay experienced by vehicles passing through the intersection. The Highway Capacity Manual definitions for levels of service and the corresponding control delay for signalized intersections and unsignalized intersections are included in the Appendix of this report. Summaries of the traffic analysis results showing the level of service and overall intersection delay (measured in seconds) for the existing, Year 2031 no-build, and Year 2031 total projected conditions are presented in Tables 6 through 10. A discussion of the intersections follows. Summary sheets for the capacity analyses are included in the Appendix. Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 18 Table 6 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS – ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH VETERANS PARKWAY – SIGNALIZED Peak Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall L T R L T R L T R L T R Existing Conditions Weekday Morning B 14.7 C 27.7 A 1.9 B 14.9 C 26.3 A 4..0 B 12.2 C 26.0 A 3.0 B 13.3 C 22.3 A 2.8 B 19.0 C – 21.7 B – 19.5 B – 17.0 B – 13.7 Weekday Evening C 29.8 D 42.5 A 6.0 C 28.9 D 45.7 A 6.0 B 15.5 C 26.5 A 2.8 B 15.9 C 25.2 A 2.3 C 30.1 D – 37.4 D – 39.6 B – 15.3 B – 14.7 No-Build Conditions Weekday Morning B 14.9 C 27.8 A 2.2 B 15.0 C 26.3 A 4.2 B 12.8 C 27.5 A 3.1 B 14.2 C 23.3 A 2.9 B 19.4 C – 21.8 B – 19.6 B – 18.0 B – 14.4 Weekday Evening C 31.6 D 42.5 A 6.3 C 30.3 D 46.3 A 5.8 B 16.8 C 28.4 A 3.0 B 17.3 C 27.2 A 3.2 C 30.9 D – 37.8 D – 40.4 B – 16.4 B – 16.2 Projected Conditions Weekday Morning B 16.0 C 28.7 A 2.2 B 15.3 C 27.2 A 4.1 B 12.8 C 28.6 A 3.1 B 14.5 C 23.0 A 2.8 B 19.7 C – 22.5 B – 19.2 B – 18.8 B – 14.2 Weekday Evening C 32.5 D 42.7 A 6.3 C 30.6 D 46.8 A 5.6 B 16.9 C 28.7 A 3.0 B 17.8 C 27.4 A 3.7 C 30.9 D – 38.1 D – 40.5 B – 16.6 B – 16.4 Letter denotes Level of Service Delay is measured in seconds. L – Left Turn T – Through R – Right Turn Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 19 Table 7 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS – ELDAMAIN ROAD WITH ASHE ROAD/GALENA ROAD – SIGNALIZED Peak Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall L T R L T R L T R L T R Existing Conditions Weekday Morning B 13.8 C 26.6 A 0.3 B 16.1 C 23.3 A 0.1 A 9.0 B 16.3 A 1.5 A 9.0 B 17.6 A 1.8 B 15.5 B – 17.8 B – 18.4 B – 14.3 B – 12.3 Weekday Evening B 16.3 C 28.3 A 3.1 B 17.8 C 30.7 -- A 8.4 B 13.8 A 2.3 A 7.8 C 20.8 A 2.0 B 16.2 B – 18.2 C – 25.0 A – 9.9 B – 15.5 No-Build Conditions Weekday Morning B 14.0 C 26.7 A 0.3 B 16.3 C 23.3 A 0.1 A 9.2 B 17.4 A 1.7 A 9.0 B 18.0 A 2.1 B 15.9 B – 17.9 B – 18.4 B – 15.2 B – 12.6 Weekday Evening B 16.4 C 28.2 A 3.5 B 18.0 C 30.8 -- A 8.7 B 14.1 A 2.3 A 8.0 C 22.4 A 2.0 B 16.8 B – 18.3 C – 25.1 B – 10.2 B – 16.6 Projected Conditions Weekday Morning B 14.0 C 26.7 A 0.6 B 17.1 C 23.3 A 0.1 A 9.3 B 17.5 A 1.9 A 9.0 B 18.0 A 2.1 B 15.9 B – 17.7 B – 18.7 B – 15.2 B – 12.9 Weekday Evening B 16.4 C 28.2 A 3.5 B 18.1 C 30.8 -- A 8.8 B 14.2 A 2.3 A 8.0 C 24.1 A 2.0 B 17.2 B – 18.2 C – 25.1 B – 10.1 B – 17.9 Letter denotes Level of Service Delay is measured in seconds. L – Left Turn T – Through R – Right Turn Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 20 Table 8 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS – EXISTING CONDITIONS – UNSIGNALIZED Intersection Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay Eldamain Road with Cornelis Road 1 • Westbound Approach B 13.3 C 15.9 • Southbound Left Turn A 8.5 A 8.0 Eldamain Road with Menards Access Drive 1 • Eastbound Approach B 11.8 C 23.4 • Northbound Left Turn A 8.2 B 10.4 Eldamain Road with Faxon Road2 • Eastbound Approach B 14.0 C 17.5 • Westbound Approach B 11.9 B 14.4 • Northbound Left Turn A 7.6 A 9.7 • Southbound Left Turn -- -- A 8.5 Beecher Road with Corneils Road2 • Northbound Approach A 9.2 A 9.1 • Southbound Approach A 9.6 A 9.4 • Eastbound Left Turn A 7.3 A 7.3 • Westbound Left Turn -- -- A 9.4 LOS = Level of Service Delay is measured in seconds. 1 – One-way stop control 2 – Two-way stop control Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 21 Table 9 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS – YEAR 2031 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS UNSIGNALIZED Intersection Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay Eldamain Road with Cornelis Road 1 • Westbound Approach B 14.9 C 20.0 • Southbound Left Turn A 8.6 A 8.1 Eldamain Road with Menards Access Drive 1 • Eastbound Approach B 13.1 E 36.9 • Northbound Left Turn A 8.3 B 10.9 Eldamain Road with Faxon Road2 • Eastbound Approach B 14.7 C 18.6 • Westbound Approach B 12.3 C 15.0 • Northbound Left Turn A 7.6 A 10.0 • Southbound Left Turn -- -- A 8.6 Beecher Road with Corneils Road2 • Northbound Approach A 9.3 A 9.1 • Southbound Approach A 9.6 A 9.4 • Eastbound Left Turn A 7.3 A 7.36 • Westbound Left Turn -- A 9.4 LOS = Level of Service Delay is measured in seconds. 1 – One-way stop control 2 – Two-way stop control Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 22 Table 10 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS – YEAR 2031 PROJECTED CONDITIONS UNSIGNALIZED Intersection Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour LOS Delay LOS Delay Eldamain Road with Cornelis Road 1 • Westbound Approach C 15.3 C 20.6 • Southbound Left Turn A 8.6 A 8.1 Eldamain Road with Menards Access Drive/Proposed Access Drive2 • Eastbound Approach B 13.3 E 35.9 • Westbound Left Turn C 19.7 F 99+ • Westbound Right Turn B 12.0 A 9.7 • Northbound Left Turn A 8.3 B 10.9 • Southbound Left Turn A 8.8 A 7.8 Eldamain Road with Faxon Road2 • Eastbound Approach C 15.5 C 19.6 • Westbound Approach B 12.8 C 15.6 • Northbound Left Turn A 7.7 B 10.2 • Southbound Left Turn -- -- A 8.6 Beecher Road with Corneils Road2 • Northbound Approach A 9.3 A 9.1 • Southbound Approach A 9.7 A 9.5 • Eastbound Left Turn A 7.3 A 7.3 • Westbound Left Turn -- -- A 7.5 Beecher Road with Proposed Access Drive1 • Eastbound Approach A 8.7 A 8.8 • Northbound Left Turn -- -- -- -- LOS = Level of Service Delay is measured in seconds. 1 – One-way stop control 2 – Two-way stop control Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 23 Discussion and Recommendations The following summarizes how the intersections are projected to operate and identifies any roadway and traffic control improvements necessary to accommodate the development-generated traffic. Eldamain Road with Veterans Parkway The results of the capacity analysis indicate that overall, this intersection currently operates at Level of Service (LOS) B during the weekday morning peak hour and LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour. The eastbound and westbound approaches operate at LOS D or better during the peak hours. The southbound and northbound approaches currently operate at LOS B during the peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build and total projected conditions, the intersection and all its approaches are projected to continue operating at the same existing levels of service during both peak hours. As such, the intersection has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, and no roadway improvements or traffic control adjustments will be required. Eldamain Road/Ashe Road with Galena Road The results of the capacity analysis indicate that overall, the intersection currently operates at LOS B during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours. The westbound approach currently operates at LOS C or better during both peak hours. The eastbound, northbound, and southbound approaches currently operate at LOS B or better during the peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build and total projected conditions, the intersection is projected to continue operating at the same LOS as existing conditions. As such, the intersection has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, and no roadway improvements or traffic control adjustments will be required. Eldamain Road with Faxon Road The results of the capacity analyses indicate that the eastbound and westbound approaches currently operate at LOS B or better during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hour. Furthermore, the northbound and southbound left turn movements currently operate at LOS A during both peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build conditions this intersection is projected to continue to operate at the same overall LOS as existing conditions. Under Year 2031 total projected conditions this intersection is projected to continue to operate at the same LOS as no-build conditions, except for the eastbound approach during the weekday morning peak hour and the northbound left turn movement during the weekday evening peak hour which is projected to operate at LOS C and LOS B, respectively. As such, the intersection has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, and no roadway improvements or traffic control adjustments will be required. Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 24 Eldamain Road with Cornelis Road The results of the capacity analyses indicate that the westbound approach and the southbound left turn movement currently operate at LOS C or better during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build and total projected conditions this intersection is projected to operate at LOS C or better during the peak hours. As such, the intersection has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, and no roadway improvements or traffic control adjustments will be required. Cornelis Road with Beecher Road The results of the capacity analyses indicate that all approaches and critical movements currently operate at LOS A during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build and total projected conditions this intersection is projected to continue to operate at LOS A during the peak hours. As such, the intersection has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, and no roadway improvements or traffic control adjustments will be required. Eldamain Road with Menards Access Drive/Proposed Access Drive The results of the capacity analyses indicate that the eastbound approach currently operates at LOS B during the weekday morning peak hour and LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour. Furthermore, the northbound left turn movement currently operates at LOS B or better during the peak hours. Under Year 2031 no-build conditions, the eastbound approach and the northbound left turn movement are projected to continue to operate at the same LOS as existing conditions, except for the eastbound approach during the weekday evening peak hour which is projected to operate at LOS E. As proposed, the site access drive will create the fourth (east) leg of this intersection and will be aligned opposite the Menards access drive. A southbound left turn lane serving the proposed access drive should be provided via restriping the existing median on Eldamain Road. A northbound right- turn lane serving the proposed access drive will be warranted based on Section 2 of the Kendall County Division of Transportation Permit Regulations and Access Control Regulation and should be provided. Both turn lanes should provide a minimum taper length of 180 feet and a minimum storage length of 150 feet. Under Year 2031 total projected conditions, assuming the proposed improvements, this intersection is projected to operate as follows: • The eastbound approach is projected to operate at LOS B during the weekday morning peak hour and LOS E during the weekday evening peak hour. • The northbound and southbound left turn movements are projected to operate at LOS B or better during the peak hours. • The westbound right turn movement is projected to operate at LOS B during the weekday morning peak hour and LOS A during the weekday evening peak hour. Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 25 • The westbound left turn movement is projected to operate at LOS C during the weekday morning peak hour and LOS F during the weekday evening peak hour. It is important to note that the projected 95th percentile queue length is less than six vehicles, indicating that queues are not expected to spill back or result in internal circulation conflicts within the site. As such, the proposed access drive will adequately accommodate site-generated traffic. Beecher Road with Proposed Access Drive As proposed and mentioned previously, this access drive will be located on the west side of Beecher Road and will provide one outbound lane with outbound movements under stop sign control. The results of the capacity analyses indicate that the outbound movement at this access drive will operate at LOS A during the weekday morning and weekday evening peak hours. It is important to note that the 95th percentile vehicles queue length is projected to be one to two vehicles with a v/c ratio of less than one indicating that these queues will not cause any internal circulation. As such, this access drive will have sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development. Proposed Data Center Yorkville, Illinois 26 6. Conclusion Based on the preceding analyses and recommendations, the following conclusions have been made: • The existing roadway system has sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic estimated to be generated by the proposed development. • The proposed development will not have a significant impact on traffic operations along Eldamain Road. • Access to the proposed development will be provided via (1) a full-movement access drive located approximately 2,040 feet north of Faxon Road, aligned opposite the existing Menards access drive on the east side of Eldamain Road, and (2) an egress only access drive located on the west side of Beecher Road along the east side of the site. o The access drive on the east side of Eldamain Road will provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes striped as an exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. o The access drive on the west side of Beecher Road will provide one outbound lane. o Outbound movements at both access drives will operate under stop sign control. o A southbound left turn lane serving this access drive should be provided via restriping the existing median. This turn lane should provide a minimum taper length of 180 feet and a minimum storage length of 150 feet. o A northbound right-turn lane will be warranted serving the proposed access drive and should be provided. This turn lane should provide a minimum taper length of 180 feet and a minimum storage length of 150 feet. • A proposed emergency exit will be provided via a right-in/right-out (RIRO) access drive located on the east side of Eldamain Road approximately 1,170 feet north of the main proposed access drive. Appendix Traffic Count Summary Sheets Site Plan CMAP 2050 Projections Letter Level of Service Criteria Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Traffic Count Summary Sheets Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name: Eldamain Road with Corneils RoadTMCSite Code:Start Date: 10/31/2023Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart TimeCorneils RoadEldamain RoadEldamain RoadWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnThruRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnLeftThruPedsApp. TotalInt. Total12:00 AM0000005207005051212:15 AM0000009009016071612:30 AM010010331034009094412:45 AM0000001630190040423Hourly Total0100106360690124025951:00 AM000000600600909151:15 AM000000500500707121:30 AM00000021030030361:45 AM0000002002006068Hourly Total0000001510160025025412:00 AM00000050050030382:15 AM000000600600707132:30 AM00000014001400505192:45 AM00000081090070716Hourly Total0000003310340022022563:00 AM010010800800505143:15 AM010010700700606143:30 AM00000020102100707283:45 AM0000001300130070720Hourly Total0200204810490025025764:00 AM01001020002000505264:15 AM00000028203000707374:30 AM0000003410350023023584:45 AM012030403043012202369Hourly Total0220401226012801570581905:00 AM0110203820400014014565:15 AM0100106050650015015815:30 AM0220405540590224026895:45 AM0300307370800130031114Hourly Total073010022618024403830863406:00 AM02103086409003270301236:15 AM03205091709802400421456:30 AM0700701076011301610621826:45 AM043070891301020353056165Hourly Total016602203733004030918101906157:00 AM044080125801330132033174 7:15 AM01901001113011404460501747:30 AM0540901083011103370401607:45 AM04206095501000336039145Hourly Total01419033043919045801115101626538:00 AM04105068907702440461288:15 AM02103084709101290301248:30 AM06309067407104510551358:45 AM0630905340570339042108Hourly Total0188026027224029601016301734959:00 AM06208071407500340341179:15 AM17109041804901480491079:30 AM0600604060460041041939:45 AM032050476053013803997Hourly Total1225028019924022302161016341410:00 AM04307043204502290318310:15 AM02103044204600310318010:30 AM04206048705500250258610:45 AM031040422044023103381Hourly Total0137020017713019004116012033011:00 AM08109037304000430439211:15 AM02103032003202360387311:30 AM0100010041604701360379411:45 AM0640100341035022903176Hourly Total0266032014410015405144014933512:00 PM041050507057014804911112:15 PM03306031403501430448512:30 PM042060534057014804911212:45 PM040040404044003803886Hourly Total015602101741901930317701803941:00 PM01304058206000400401041:15 PM0320504240460042042931:30 PM03306053405701410421051:45 PM011020532055004104198Hourly Total08901702061202180116401654002:00 PM05207040204201580591082:15 PM04105039704601610621132:30 PM064010048905705650701372:45 PM091010064206605970102178Hourly Total0248032019120021101228102935363:00 PM01203054706102860881523:15 PM000000910100013013233:30 PM0400407960850015101512403:45 PM0940130645069041470151233Hourly Total014602002061902250639704036484:00 PM06309048205001417501892484:15 PM09101004930520814301512134:30 PM03205050505501214101532134:45 PM0550100475052061410147209Hourly Total02311034019415020904060006408835:00 PM0420603350380412301271715:15 PM04004046204802950971495:30 PM0300302640300379082115 5:45 PM0210302830310267069103Hourly Total0133016013314014701136403755386:00 PM0310404220440049049976:15 PM0410503200320344047846:30 PM0520702810290033033696:45 PM011020311032003903973Hourly Total01350180133401370316501683237:00 PM0400402210230033033607:15 PM0310401710180023023457:30 PM0400402310240128029577:45 PM011020200020002402446Hourly Total012201408230850110801092088:00 PM0010102020220019019428:15 PM0000001800180130031498:30 PM0100101910200132033548:45 PM000000173020012502646Hourly Total0110207460800310601091919:00 PM0200202130240018018449:15 PM0100101600160022022399:30 PM0000001800180018018369:45 PM011020100010002002032Hourly Total041050653068007807815110:00 PM00000020102100150153610:15 PM000000900901110122110:30 PM000000100010008081810:45 PM0000001000100090919Hourly Total00000049105001430449411:00 PM0000005106009091511:15 PM000000500500120121711:30 PM000000400400170172111:45 PM0000001200120060618Hourly Total000000261027004404471Grand Total12481080357036442700391401273679038068077Approach %0.369.530.3--0.093.16.9--0.03.396.7---Total %0.03.11.3-4.40.045.13.3-48.50.01.645.5-47.1-Lights122199-32103284238-352201223286-34087251% Lights100.089.191.7-89.9-90.188.1-90.0-96.189.3-89.589.8Buses010-1090-90111-1222% Buses0.00.40.0-0.3-0.20.0-0.2-0.80.3-0.30.3Single-Unit Trucks0225-27010627-13301121-122282% Single-Unit Trucks0.08.94.6-7.6-2.910.0-3.4-0.83.3-3.23.5Articulated Trucks044-802455-25003261-264522% Articulated Trucks0.01.63.7-2.2-6.71.9-6.4-2.47.1-6.96.5Bicycles on Road000-0000-0000-00% Bicycles on Road0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians---0----0----0--% Pedestrians---------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name: Eldamain Road with Corneils RoadTMCSite Code:Start Date: 10/31/2023Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:30 PM)Start TimeCorneils RoadEldamain RoadEldamain RoadWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnThruRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnLeftThruPedsApp. TotalInt. Total3:30 PM0400407960850015101512403:45 PM09401306450690414701512334:00 PM06309048205001417501892484:15 PM0910100493052081430151213Total028803602401602560266160642934Approach %0.077.822.2--0.093.86.3--0.04.096.0---Total %0.03.00.9-3.90.025.71.7-27.40.02.866.0-68.7-PHF0.0000.7780.500-0.6920.0000.7590.667-0.7530.0000.4640.880-0.8490.942Lights0287-35023016-246026589-615896% Lights-100.087.5-97.2-95.8100.0-96.1-100.095.6-95.895.9Buses000-0030-3002-25% Buses-0.00.0-0.0-1.30.0-1.2-0.00.3-0.30.5Single-Unit Trucks001-1010-1007-79% Single-Unit Trucks-0.012.5-2.8-0.40.0-0.4-0.01.1-1.11.0Articulated Trucks000-0060-60018-1824% Articulated Trucks-0.00.0-0.0-2.50.0-2.3-0.02.9-2.82.6Bicycles on Road000-0000-0000-00% Bicycles on Road-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians---0----0----0--% Pedestrians---------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Faxon+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart TimeFaxon rdFaxon rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:00 AM0501060100010011710118001620181436:15 AM0700070001010013200132013400351756:30 AM012000120001010013200132005510562016:45 AM01400014000000001370013700304034185Hourly Total03801039010203005181051901135701437047:00 AM011030140000000213700139004520472007:15 AM0404080000000212900131003930421817:30 AM04010500000000990099005050551597:45 AM09010100100010089008900571058158Hourly Total028090370100010445400458001911102026988:00 AM03140800000000822084004430471398:15 AM05000500000001770078004920511348:30 AM02010300100100670067015110531248:45 AM0511070001010079007901641066153Hourly Total0152602300110201305203080220870217550*** BREAK ***-------------------------3:00 PM0600060100010054205600106501111743:15 PM08000800000003841088001791201912873:30 PM0130001301000103743080001771301902843:45 PM08000800100101112001130213330138260Hourly Total0350003502100307324603370259533063010054:00 PM0203050001010069006901141501472224:15 PM0511070100010255005700123701301954:30 PM0102030001010247004900127701341874:45 PM050106000101005400540014060146207Hourly Total013170210103040422500229015312505578115:00 PM0601070001010051005100130801381975:15 PM0103040000000160006100134501392045:30 PM0103040001010149005011125701341895:45 PM1100020000000244104701893093142Hourly Total1907017000202042041020912478230504732Grand Total11383300172052801502020301002060182138106022534500Approach %0.680.21.717.4--0.033.313.353.3--0.01.098.50.5--0.00.494.94.7---Total %0.03.10.10.7-3.80.00.10.00.2-0.30.00.445.10.2-45.80.00.247.52.4-50.1-Lights1135229-1670424-1001818508-1876141959103-20674120 % Lights100.097.866.796.7-97.1-80.0100.050.0-66.7-90.091.180.0-91.1100.050.091.697.2-91.791.6Buses0001-10000-00070-700100-1018% Buses0.00.00.03.3-0.6-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.30.0-0.30.00.00.50.0-0.40.4Single-Unit Trucks0210-30103-401510-5202592-63122% Single-UnitTrucks0.01.433.30.0-1.7-20.00.037.5-26.7-5.02.50.0-2.50.025.02.81.9-2.82.7Articulated Trucks0100-10001-1011222-125021101-113240% ArticulatedTrucks0.00.70.00.0-0.6-0.00.012.5-6.7-5.06.020.0-6.10.025.05.10.9-5.05.3Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad0.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Faxon+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 3Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM)Start TimeFaxon rdFaxon rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:30 AM012000120001010013200132005510562016:45 AM014000140000000013700137003040341857:00 AM011030140000000213700139004520472007:15 AM040408000000021290013100393042181Total04107048000101045350053900169100179767Approach %0.085.40.014.6--0.00.00.0100.0--0.00.799.30.0--0.00.094.45.6---Total %0.05.30.00.9-6.30.00.00.00.1-0.10.00.569.80.0-70.30.00.022.01.3-23.3-PHF0.0000.7320.0000.438-0.8570.0000.0000.0000.250-0.2500.0000.5000.9760.000-0.9690.0000.0000.7680.625-0.7990.954Lights04106-470000-0045030-507001369-145699% Lights-100.0-85.7-97.9---0.0-0.0-100.094.0--94.1--80.590.0-81.091.1Buses0001-10000-00010-10010-13% Buses-0.0-14.3-2.1---0.0-0.0-0.00.2--0.2--0.60.0-0.60.4Single-Unit Trucks0000-00001-100120-1200151-1629% Single-UnitTrucks-0.0-0.0-0.0---100.0-100.0-0.02.2--2.2--8.910.0-8.93.8Articulated Trucks0000-00000-000190-1900170-1736% ArticulatedTrucks-0.0-0.0-0.0---0.0-0.0-0.03.6--3.5--10.10.0-9.54.7Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.0-0.0-0.0---0.0-0.0-0.00.0--0.0--0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Faxon+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:15 PM)Start TimeFaxon rdFaxon rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total3:15 PM08000800000003841088001791201912873:30 PM0130001301000103743080001771301902843:45 PM080008001001011120011302133301382604:00 PM020305000101006900690114150147222Total031030340111030733940350036303306661053Approach %0.091.20.08.8--0.033.333.333.3--0.02.096.91.1--0.00.594.65.0---Total %0.02.90.00.3-3.20.00.10.10.1-0.30.00.732.20.4-33.20.00.359.83.1-63.2-PHF0.0000.5960.0000.250-0.6540.0000.2500.2500.250-0.7500.0000.5830.7570.333-0.7740.0000.3750.8800.635-0.8720.917Lights03103-340110-2052983-3060260032-634976% Lights-100.0-100.0-100.0-100.0100.00.0-66.7-71.487.975.0-87.4-66.795.297.0-95.292.7Buses0000-00000-00030-30020-25% Buses-0.0-0.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.90.0-0.9-0.00.30.0-0.30.5Single-Unit Trucks0000-00001-10180-900120-1222% Single-UnitTrucks-0.0-0.0-0.0-0.00.0100.0-33.3-14.32.40.0-2.6-0.01.90.0-1.82.1Articulated Trucks0000-00000-001301-3201161-1850% ArticulatedTrucks-0.0-0.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-14.38.825.0-9.1-33.32.53.0-2.74.7Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.0-0.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Mendards+Access+DriveTMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart TimeAccess Dreldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnLeftThruPedsApp. TotalU-TurnThruRightPedsApp. TotalInt. Total6:00 AM02406022101012308200281576:15 AM0610016035970132026280542026:30 AM00120120441010145038330712286:45 AM01304044108015202736063219Hourly Total09290380145407055209911702168067:00 AM04307012135014704190502047:15 AM03801105127013203830411847:30 AM044080496010005050551637:45 AM024060119501060531054166Hourly Total01319032032453048501821802007178:00 AM022040107708704670531448:15 AM048012067508104200421358:30 AM056011066407004580531348:45 AM039012011760870573060159Hourly Total0142503903329203250190180208572*** BREAK ***----------------3:00 PM0102503502435059087120991933:15 PM0437001130503308301222101433393:30 PM0557001250483908701163101473593:45 PM010230330586101190113320145297Hourly Total0118188030601801680348043896053411884:00 PM01017027018560740128701352364:15 PM07401107590660132101332104:30 PM06901502460480119501241874:45 PM0490130652058013440138209Hourly Total02739066033213024605131705308425:00 PM0141402806540600120401242125:15 PM0360906540600130101312005:30 PM0340704490530132301351955:45 PM06501107370440873090145Hourly Total0262905502319402170469110480752Grand Total02073290536044617270217301891277021684877Approach %0.038.661.4--0.020.579.5--0.087.212.8---Total %0.04.26.7-11.00.09.135.4-44.60.038.85.7-44.5-Lights0157233-39003401651-199101811221-20324413% Lights-75.870.8-72.8-76.295.6-91.6-95.879.8-93.790.5 Buses000-0007-7090-916% Buses-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.4-0.3-0.50.0-0.40.3Single-Unit Trucks01221-3302328-510359-44128% Single-Unit Trucks-5.86.4-6.2-5.21.6-2.3-1.93.2-2.02.6Articulated Trucks03875-11308341-12403647-83320% Articulated Trucks-18.422.8-21.1-18.62.4-5.7-1.917.0-3.86.6Bicycles on Road000-0000-0000-00% Bicycles on Road-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians---0----0----0--% Pedestrians---------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Mendards+Access+DriveTMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 3Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM)Start TimeAccess Dreldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnLeftThruPedsApp. TotalU-TurnThruRightPedsApp. TotalInt. Total6:30 AM00120120441010145038330712286:45 AM013040441080152027360632197:00 AM04307012135014704190502047:15 AM0380110512701320383041184Total0826034010547105760144810225835Approach %0.023.576.5--0.018.281.8--0.064.036.0---Total %0.01.03.1-4.10.012.656.4-69.00.017.29.7-26.9-PHF0.0000.5000.542-0.7080.0000.5970.872-0.9470.0000.8780.563-0.7920.916Lights0410-14090455-545013168-199758% Lights-50.038.5-41.2-85.796.6-94.6-91.084.0-88.490.8Buses000-0001-1010-12% Buses-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.2-0.2-0.70.0-0.40.2Single-Unit Trucks015-6048-12072-927% Single-Unit Trucks-12.519.2-17.6-3.81.7-2.1-4.92.5-4.03.2Articulated Trucks0311-140117-180511-1648% Articulated Trucks-37.542.3-41.2-10.51.5-3.1-3.513.6-7.15.7Bicycles on Road000-0000-0000-00% Bicycles on Road-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians---0----0----0--% Pedestrians---------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+Mendards+Access+DriveTMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:15 PM)Start TimeAccess Dreldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftRightPedsApp. TotalU-TurnLeftThruPedsApp. TotalU-TurnThruRightPedsApp. TotalInt. Total3:15 PM0437001130503308301222101433393:30 PM0557001250483908701163101473593:45 PM0102303305861011901133201452974:00 PM0101702701856074012870135236Total011818002980174189036304799105701231Approach %0.039.660.4--0.047.952.1--0.084.016.0---Total %0.09.614.6-24.20.014.115.4-29.50.038.97.4-46.3-PHF0.0000.5360.643-0.5960.0000.7500.775-0.7630.0000.9360.711-0.9690.857Lights0111163-2740149173-322046283-5451141% Lights-94.190.6-91.9-85.691.5-88.7-96.591.2-95.692.7Buses000-0003-3010-14% Buses-0.00.0-0.0-0.01.6-0.8-0.20.0-0.20.3Single-Unit Trucks054-9053-8091-1027% Single-Unit Trucks-4.22.2-3.0-2.91.6-2.2-1.91.1-1.82.2Articulated Trucks0213-1502010-30077-1459% Articulated Trucks-1.77.2-5.0-11.55.3-8.3-1.57.7-2.54.8Bicycles on Road000-0000-0000-00% Bicycles on Road-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.0-0.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians---0----0----0--% Pedestrians---------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+US+Route+34 TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart Timeus 34us 34eldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:00 AM0418830132011221004304571507601019130422936:15 AM0528419015505251204207592809401626150573486:30 AM058126120196012431507008532308401924150584086:45 AM051941701620166222010006673101040162212050416Hourly Total02023925106450441525902550252369703580619155020714657:00 AM05393801540183921078066045011101527180604037:15 AM15712019019702378190120012433208702620250714757:30 AM0261401201780281001401420204961013002028170655157:45 AM03412616017602471120107018445511170233815076476Hourly Total1170479550705093288660447056196193144508411375027218698:00 AM02414511118002356120910184465012701819120494478:15 AM02510512014202061100910183554010701921100503908:30 AM0241189015102777130117015334809601516140454098:45 AM035110701520367923013801729380840143618068442Hourly Total010847839162501062735804370681412050414066925402121688*** BREAK ***-------------------------3:00 PM0291041301460301731302160172416057024514011155343:15 PM0341341601840431401101940193829086027577301576213:30 PM0391271101770381711702260183630084135747201826693:45 PM050124110185050158120220011413308503857470142632Hourly Total0152489510692016164253085606513910803121124239232159624564:00 PM139146901950581671402390172132070031532501096134:15 PM0211241611610661696024102834400102029683901366404:30 PM021821601190621691502460192847094039473701235824:45 PM03415482196063162210246016294208703168460145674Hourly Total1115506493671024966756097208011216103530130236147051325095:00 PM0371251301750612022702900182326067033684101426745:15 PM037123201621521412602200183233083043654101496145:30 PM0301271501720512082902880223339194027595101376915:45 PM023106130142037131280196015252416403763360136538Hourly Total0127481430651120168211009940731131222308014025516905642517Grand Total28742825288439891854270440203961036793788632190160510267321236412504Approach %0.121.970.87.2--0.021.668.310.1--0.016.842.840.5--0.025.643.431.0---Total %0.07.022.62.3-31.90.06.821.63.2-31.70.02.97.57.1-17.50.04.88.25.9-18.9-Lights28522764267-388517972656348-38020360843835-20381552940699-219211917 % Lights100.097.597.892.7-97.4100.093.398.286.6-96.0-98.190.094.2-93.1100.091.291.695.5-92.795.3Buses0394-1601740-2100512-170293-1468% Buses0.00.30.31.4-0.40.02.00.10.0-0.5-0.00.51.4-0.80.00.30.90.4-0.60.5Single-Unit Trucks011279-47062313-42051711-330102215-47169% Single-UnitTrucks0.01.31.03.1-1.20.00.70.93.2-1.1-1.41.81.2-1.50.01.72.12.0-2.01.4Articulated Trucks08258-410342141-96027228-1020415515-111350% ArticulatedTrucks0.00.90.92.8-1.00.04.00.810.2-2.4-0.57.73.2-4.70.06.85.42.0-4.72.8Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad0.00.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----4-----0-----3-----1--% Pedestrians----100.0-----------100.0-----100.0-- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+US+Route+34 TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 3Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM)Start Timeus 34us 34eldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:30 AM058126120196012431507008532308401924150584086:45 AM0519417016201662220100066731010401622120504167:00 AM05393801540183921078066045011101527180604037:15 AM1571201901970237819012001243320870262025071475Total12194335607090692227703680322231310386076937002391702Approach %0.130.961.17.9--0.018.860.320.9--0.08.357.833.9--0.031.838.929.3---Total %0.112.925.43.3-41.70.04.113.04.5-21.60.01.913.17.7-22.70.04.55.54.1-14.0-PHF0.2500.9440.8590.737-0.9000.0000.7500.7120.875-0.7670.0000.6670.8320.728-0.8690.0000.7310.8610.700-0.8420.896Lights121442247-68405420867-329031208125-3640637564-2021579% Lights100.097.797.583.9-96.5-78.393.787.0-89.4-96.993.395.4-94.3-82.980.691.4-84.592.8Buses0111-30620-80021-30040-418% Buses0.00.50.21.8-0.4-8.70.90.0-2.2-0.00.90.8-0.8-0.04.30.0-1.71.1Single-Unit Trucks0255-120164-110134-80484-1647% Single-UnitTrucks0.00.91.28.9-1.7-1.42.75.2-3.0-3.11.33.1-2.1-5.38.65.7-6.72.8Articulated Trucks0253-100866-2000101-110962-1758% ArticulatedTrucks0.00.91.25.4-1.4-11.62.77.8-5.4-0.04.50.8-2.8-11.86.52.9-7.13.4Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad0.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Eldamain+Road+with+US+Route+34 TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:15 PM)Start Timeus 34us 34eldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total3:15 PM0341341601840431401101940193829086027577301576213:30 PM0391271101770381711702260183630084135747201826693:45 PM0501241101850501581202200114133085038574701426324:00 PM13914690195058167140239017213207003153250109613Total116253147074101896365408790651361240325113124121705902535Approach %0.121.971.76.3--0.021.572.46.1--0.020.041.838.2--0.222.240.836.8---Total %0.06.420.91.9-29.20.07.525.12.1-34.70.02.65.44.9-12.80.05.29.58.6-23.3-PHF0.2500.8100.9090.734-0.9500.0000.8150.9300.794-0.9190.0000.8550.8290.939-0.9450.2500.8620.8140.743-0.8100.947Lights115952244-726018562947-861064112120-2961121236208-5662449% Lights100.098.198.393.6-98.0-97.998.987.0-98.0-98.582.496.8-91.1100.092.497.995.9-95.996.6Buses0033-60310-40023-50110-217% Buses0.00.00.66.4-0.8-1.60.20.0-0.5-0.01.52.4-1.50.00.80.40.0-0.30.7Single-Unit Trucks0230-50142-70111-30114-621% Single-UnitTrucks0.01.20.60.0-0.7-0.50.63.7-0.8-1.50.70.8-0.90.00.80.41.8-1.00.8Articulated Trucks0130-40025-700210-210835-1648% ArticulatedTrucks0.00.60.60.0-0.5-0.00.39.3-0.8-0.015.40.0-6.50.06.11.22.3-2.71.9Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad0.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Galena+Road+with+Eldamain+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart TimeGalena rdGalena rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:00 AM02334506207920180576200101011670242056:15 AM0402612078017710250690180114012770352526:30 AM028521409401619303801921401070147100582976:45 AM03934140870111630300295130110012920050277Hourly Total013014645032105151901110143536504320411944016710317:00 AM0412840730191840410111011501270121150372787:15 AM035381208508162026031131501310034200542967:30 AM036331108001117102907901501120130230542757:45 AM032401809006291036087615099012914044269Hourly Total014413945032804480801320293806004690311472018911188:00 AM02132110640121860360359140760328100412178:15 AM0252790610121500270105710077002880362018:30 AM022225049013151029075618081003080381978:45 AM02723130630913002204491206500309039189Hourly Total095104380237046617011402422154029903116350154804*** BREAK ***-------------------------3:00 PM018231505601727104506291505002752601032543:15 PM02029130620243300570114318072071073101453363:30 PM01628120560202510460124827087011022301263153:45 PM0142418056027382067015342006903102680173365Hourly Total06810458023008812340215044154800278013386148054712704:00 PM0131511039018331052034316062041013501402934:15 PM0181914051013345052016381206607994101473164:30 PM01515120420223620600530904402923301272734:45 PM01417904001934205509261705203117480168315Hourly Total06066460172072137100219033137540224016409157058211975:00 PM01697032014324050012371506404933101282745:15 PM023327062016404060073718062031133601523365:30 PM01723904901522103806291104602993901402735:45 PM012168036014263043042813045046726097221Hourly Total0688031017905912012019102913157021701337213205171104Grand Total056563926301467036057250098201731376370019190521516588021566524Approach %0.038.543.617.9--0.036.758.25.1--0.09.071.719.3--0.02.470.327.3---Total %0.08.79.84.0-22.50.05.58.80.8-15.10.02.721.15.7-29.40.00.823.29.0-33.0-Lights0558624225-1407026454950-86301511360268-17790511497585-21336182 % Lights-98.897.785.6-95.9-73.396.0100.0-87.9-87.398.872.4-92.7-98.198.799.5-98.994.8Buses0036-90430-70118-100020-228% Buses-0.00.52.3-0.6-1.10.50.0-0.7-0.60.12.2-0.5-0.00.10.0-0.10.4Single-Unit Trucks06103-19028140-4205833-4601133-17124% Single-UnitTrucks-1.11.61.1-1.3-7.82.40.0-4.3-2.90.68.9-2.4-1.90.90.5-0.81.9Articulated Trucks01229-3206460-70016761-840040-4190% ArticulatedTrucks-0.20.311.0-2.2-17.81.00.0-7.1-9.20.516.5-4.4-0.00.30.0-0.22.9Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Galena+Road+with+Eldamain+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 3Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM)Start TimeGalena rdGalena rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:30 AM028521409401619303801921401070147100582976:45 AM039341408701116303002951301100129200502777:00 AM0412840730191840410111011501270121150372787:15 AM03538120850816202603113150131003420054296Total014315244033905469120135017401570475031316501991148Approach %0.042.244.813.0--0.040.051.18.9--0.03.684.412.0--0.01.565.832.7---Total %0.012.513.23.8-29.50.04.76.01.0-11.80.01.534.95.0-41.40.00.311.45.7-17.3-PHF0.0000.8720.7310.786-0.9020.0000.7110.9080.750-0.8230.0000.3860.8870.950-0.9060.0000.7500.6970.813-0.8580.966Lights014214837-3270356412-11101439943-4560312765-1951089% Lights-99.397.484.1-96.5-64.892.8100.0-82.2-82.499.575.4-96.0-100.096.9100.0-98.094.9Buses0002-20000-00002-20000-04% Buses-0.00.04.5-0.6-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.03.5-0.4-0.00.00.0-0.00.3Single-Unit Trucks0140-50640-100104-50020-222% Single-UnitTrucks-0.72.60.0-1.5-11.15.80.0-7.4-5.90.07.0-1.1-0.01.50.0-1.01.9Articulated Trucks0005-501310-140228-120020-233% ArticulatedTrucks-0.00.011.4-1.5-24.11.40.0-10.4-11.80.514.0-2.5-0.01.50.0-1.02.9Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name:Galena+Road+with+Eldamain+Road TMCSite Code:Start Date: 03/03/2026Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:15 PM)Start TimeGalena rdGalena rdeldamain rdeldamain rdEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total3:15 PM02029130620243300570114318072071073101453363:30 PM01628120560202510460124827087011022301263153:45 PM01424180560273820670153420069031026801733654:00 PM013151103901833105203431606204101350140293Total063965402130891294022204116881029001541215705841309Approach %0.029.645.125.4--0.040.158.11.8--0.014.157.927.9--0.02.670.526.9---Total %0.04.87.34.1-16.30.06.89.90.3-17.00.03.112.86.2-22.20.01.131.512.0-44.6-PHF0.0000.7880.8280.750-0.8590.0000.8240.8490.500-0.8280.0000.6830.8750.750-0.8330.0000.5360.9630.577-0.8440.897Lights0629549-2060761254-20503516567-267014407157-5781256% Lights-98.499.090.7-96.7-85.496.9100.0-92.3-85.498.282.7-92.1-93.398.8100.0-99.096.0Buses0002-20100-10102-30010-17% Buses-0.00.03.7-0.9-1.10.00.0-0.5-2.40.02.5-1.0-0.00.20.0-0.20.5Single-Unit Trucks0110-20230-50127-100140-522% Single-UnitTrucks-1.61.00.0-0.9-2.22.30.0-2.3-2.41.28.6-3.4-6.71.00.0-0.91.7Articulated Trucks0003-301010-110415-100000-024% ArticulatedTrucks-0.00.05.6-1.4-11.20.80.0-5.0-9.80.66.2-3.4-0.00.00.0-0.01.8Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name: Corneils Road with Beecher RoadTMCSite Code:Start Date: 08/19/2025Page No: 1Turning Movement DataStart TimeCorneils RoadCorneils RoadBeecher RoadBeecher RoadEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:00 AM00200200200200010100100166:15 AM00140014003104010001000000196:30 AM00200200500500100100100196:45 AM01710900901904030700000025Hourly Total01251027001911200514010002002597:00 AM003003005106062109000000187:15 AM007007005106032106000000197:30 AM0032050271010020002000000177:45 AM005106023005061301000000021Hourly Total001830210420302701755027000000758:00 AM00200200100010031004000000168:15 AM001304006006010203011002158:30 AM004206017008120104000000188:45 AM01510700200202010302000214Hourly Total0112601901250026181401403100463*** BREAK ***-------------------------3:00 PM003003002103021003012104133:15 PM005409001001020204022004183:30 PM00114015027009010001003003283:45 PM00210301700800110200100114Hourly Total002190300317102105230100381012734:00 PM00115016013004012104003003274:15 PM0073010023005000000010001164:30 PM005207107109011103012003224:45 PM002801011600802010300200223Hourly Total002518043241910260433010027009885:00 PM012508026109030104000101225:15 PM005409007007020103010001205:30 PM0061070091010010001022004225:45 PM00610700500502210500200219Hourly Total01191103102272031082301303410883Grand Total03120480171214127811511471422084011222035441Approach %0.01.870.228.1--1.39.384.15.3--1.256.016.726.2--0.031.462.95.7---Total %0.00.727.210.9-38.80.53.228.81.8-34.20.210.73.25.0-19.00.02.55.00.5-7.9-Lights0211447-163291196-1361451420-80011221-34413 % Lights-66.795.097.9-95.3100.064.393.775.0-90.1100.095.7100.090.9-95.2-100.0100.050.0-97.193.7Buses0030-30241-70000-00000-010% Buses-0.02.50.0-1.80.014.33.112.5-4.60.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.02.3Single-Unit Trucks0120-30231-60201-30000-012% Single-UnitTrucks-33.31.70.0-1.80.014.32.412.5-4.00.04.30.04.5-3.6-0.00.00.0-0.02.7Articulated Trucks0000-00110-20000-00000-02% ArticulatedTrucks-0.00.00.0-0.00.07.10.80.0-1.30.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.5Bicycles on Road0011-20000-00001-10001-14% Bicycles onRoad-0.00.82.1-1.20.00.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.04.5-1.2-0.00.050.0-2.90.9Pedestrians----0-----1-----0-----0--% Pedestrians----------100.0-------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name: Corneils Road with Beecher RoadTMCSite Code:Start Date: 08/19/2025Page No: 3Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM)Start TimeCorneils RoadCorneils RoadBeecher RoadBeecher RoadEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total6:30 AM00200200500500100100100196:45 AM017109009019040307000000257:00 AM003003005106062109000000187:15 AM00700700510603210600000019Total01191021002421260135502300100171Approach %0.04.890.54.8--0.00.092.37.7--0.056.521.721.7--0.00.0100.00.0---Total %0.01.426.81.4-29.60.00.033.82.8-36.60.018.37.07.0-32.40.00.01.40.0-1.4-PHF0.0000.2500.6790.250-0.5830.0000.0000.6670.500-0.7220.0000.5420.6250.417-0.6390.0000.0000.2500.000-0.2500.710Lights01171-1900221-2301355-230010-166% Lights-100.089.5100.0-90.5--91.750.0-88.5-100.0100.0100.0-100.0--100.0--100.093.0Buses0000-00010-10000-00000-01% Buses-0.00.00.0-0.0--4.20.0-3.8-0.00.00.0-0.0--0.0--0.01.4Single-Unit Trucks0010-10011-20000-00000-03% Single-UnitTrucks-0.05.30.0-4.8--4.250.0-7.7-0.00.00.0-0.0--0.0--0.04.2Articulated Trucks0000-00000-00000-00000-00% ArticulatedTrucks-0.00.00.0-0.0--0.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0--0.0--0.00.0Bicycles on Road0010-10000-00000-00000-01% Bicycles onRoad-0.05.30.0-4.8--0.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0--0.0--0.01.4Pedestrians----0-----1-----0-----0--% Pedestrians----------100.0-------------- Kenig Lindgren O'Hara Aboona, Inc.9575 W. Higgins Rd., Suite 400Rosemont, Illinois, United States 60018(847)518-9990 mmendoza@kloainc.comCount Name: Corneils Road with Beecher RoadTMCSite Code:Start Date: 08/19/2025Page No: 4Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:15 PM)Start TimeCorneils RoadCorneils RoadBeecher RoadBeecher RoadEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalU-TurnLeftThruRightPedsApp.TotalInt. Total4:15 PM0073010023005000000010001164:30 PM005207107109011103012003224:45 PM0028010116008020103002002235:00 PM01250802610903010400010122Total01161803525222031061301002410783Approach %0.02.945.751.4--6.516.171.06.5--0.060.010.030.0--0.028.657.114.3---Total %0.01.219.321.7-42.22.46.026.52.4-37.30.07.21.23.6-12.00.02.44.81.2-8.4-PHF0.0000.2500.5710.563-0.8750.5000.6250.7860.500-0.8610.0000.5000.2500.750-0.6250.0000.5000.5000.250-0.5830.902Lights011618-3524212-290613-100241-781% Lights-100.0100.0100.0-100.0100.080.095.5100.0-93.5-100.0100.0100.0-100.0-100.0100.0100.0-100.097.6Buses0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Buses-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Single-Unit Trucks0000-00010-10000-00000-01% Single-UnitTrucks-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.04.50.0-3.2-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.01.2Articulated Trucks0000-00100-10000-00000-01% ArticulatedTrucks-0.00.00.0-0.00.020.00.00.0-3.2-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.01.2Bicycles on Road0000-00000-00000-00000-00% Bicycles onRoad-0.00.00.0-0.00.00.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.0-0.00.00.0-0.00.0Pedestrians----0-----0-----0-----0--% Pedestrians------------------------- Site Plan CMAP 2050 Projections Letter February 16, 2024 Ryan May Project Coordinator Kenig, Lindgren, O’Hara and Aboona, Inc. 9575 West Higgins Road Suite 400 Rosemont, IL 60018 Subject: Eldamain Road from Galena Road to US 34 IDOT Dear Ms. May: In response to a request made on your behalf and dated February 15, 2024, we have developed year 2050 average daily traffic (ADT) projections for the subject location. ROAD SEGMENT Current ADT Year 2050 ADT Eldamain Rd north of Galena Rd 6,300 8,000 Eldamain Rd south of Galena Rd 7,300 9,300 Galena Rd east of Eldamain Rd 6,200 8,600 Galena Rd west of Eldamain Rd 6,800 9,400 Corneils Rd at Eldamain Rd 1,300 2,200 Eldamain Rd at Faxon Rd 7,900 10,500 Faxon Rd at Eldamain Rd 700 1,200 IL 34 east of Eldamain Rd 17,900 26,300 IL 34 west of Eldamain Rd 15,000 22,100 Traffic projections are developed using existing ADT data provided in the request letter and the results from the December 2023 CMAP Travel Demand Analysis. The regional travel model uses CMAP 2050 socioeconomic projections and assumes the implementation of the ON TO 2050 Comprehensive Regional Plan for the Northeastern Illinois area. The provision of this data in support of your request does not constitute a CMAP endorsement of the proposed development or any subsequent developments. If you have any questions, please call me at (312) 386-8806 or email me at jrodriguez@cmap.illinois.gov Jose Rodriguez, PTP, AICP Senior Planner, Research & Analysis Cc: Rios (IDOT) \2024_TrafficForecasts\Yorkville\ke-02-24\ke-02-24.docx Level of Service Criteria LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA Signalized Intersections Level of Service Interpretation Average Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) A Favorable progression. Most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping. 10 B Good progression, with more vehicles stopping than for Level of Service A. >10 - 20 C Individual cycle failures (i.e., one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle) may begin to appear. Number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping. >20 - 35 D The volume-to-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is too long. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. >35 - 55 E Progression is unfavorable. The volume-to-capacity ratio is high and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent. >55 - 80 F The volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor, and the cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue. >80.0 Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Total Delay (SEC/VEH) A 0 - 10 B > 10 - 15 C > 15 - 25 D > 25 - 35 E > 35 - 50 F > 50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 03/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 143 152 44 54 69 12 17 405 57 3 131 65 Future Volume (vph) 143 152 44 54 69 12 17 405 57 3 131 65 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 190 180 170 200 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1942 1392 1337 1869 1615 1530 1980 1292 1805 1845 1615 Flt Permitted 0.498 0.657 0.610 0.470 Satd. Flow (perm) 937 1942 1392 925 1869 1615 982 1980 1292 893 1845 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 116 116 89 89 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft) 4330 3472 4586 3161 Travel Time (s) 98.4 78.9 69.5 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 3% 16% 35% 7% 0% 18% 1% 25% 0% 3% 0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 147 157 45 56 71 12 18 418 59 3 135 67 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 745381523167 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 745381523167 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (%) 13.8% 42.5% 13.8% 13.8% 42.5% 13.8% 13.8% 30.0% 13.8% 13.8% 30.0% 13.8% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s) 18.3 10.0 18.8 12.2 9.3 15.2 30.3 28.3 37.0 28.5 24.6 38.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.18 0.34 0.22 0.17 0.27 0.55 0.51 0.67 0.52 0.44 0.70 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.45 0.08 0.23 0.23 0.02 0.03 0.41 0.07 0.01 0.16 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.8 26.6 0.3 16.1 23.3 0.1 9.0 16.3 1.5 9.0 17.6 1.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 13.8 26.6 0.3 16.1 23.3 0.1 9.0 16.3 1.5 9.0 17.6 1.8 LOS BCABCAABAABA Approach Delay (s/veh) 17.8 18.4 14.3 12.3 Approach LOS BBBB Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 53 0 13 23 0 3 100 0 1 37 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 103 0 34 54 0 13 #267 10 4 83 12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 03/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft) 4250 3392 4506 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft) 290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph) 482 1020 586 247 982 582 617 1012 892 604 822 1159 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.15 0.08 0.23 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.41 0.07 0.00 0.16 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 55.3 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 15.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3403/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 219 433 56 69 222 77 32 223 131 76 93 70 Future Volume (vph) 219 433 56 69 222 77 32 223 131 76 93 70 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft) 300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 220 170 205 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3689 1392 1480 3585 1429 1752 1869 1538 1543 1681 1482 Flt Permitted 0.523 0.446 0.690 0.534 Satd. Flow (perm) 974 3689 1392 695 3585 1429 1273 1869 1538 867 1681 1482 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 93 93 146 78 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft) 6798 4542 2076 4964 Travel Time (s) 103.0 68.8 31.5 75.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 3% 16% 22% 6% 13% 3% 7% 5% 17% 19% 9% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 243 481 62 77 247 86 36 248 146 84 103 78 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 745381523167 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 745381523167 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 24.0 9.5 11.0 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 11.0 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s) 18.0 47.0 11.0 18.0 47.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 Total Split (%) 18.0% 47.0% 11.0% 18.0% 47.0% 11.0% 11.0% 24.0% 18.0% 11.0% 24.0% 18.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s) 28.2 14.2 26.6 20.5 12.3 25.4 25.8 18.3 32.0 27.0 18.9 36.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.21 0.40 0.31 0.19 0.38 0.39 0.28 0.48 0.41 0.29 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.61 0.10 0.25 0.37 0.14 0.07 0.48 0.18 0.20 0.21 0.09 Control Delay (s/veh) 14.7 27.7 1.9 14.9 26.3 4.0 12.2 26.0 3.0 13.3 22.3 2.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 14.7 27.7 1.9 14.9 26.3 4.0 12.2 26.0 3.0 13.3 22.3 2.8 LOS BCABCABCABCA Approach Delay (s/veh) 21.7 19.5 17.0 13.7 Approach LOS C B B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 64 97 0 19 48 0 8 88 0 19 33 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 109 146 12 43 83 23 26 172 29 50 79 19 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3403/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft) 6718 4462 1996 4884 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph) 616 2325 640 417 2260 619 566 517 927 433 480 921 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.21 0.10 0.18 0.11 0.14 0.06 0.48 0.16 0.19 0.21 0.08 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 66.1 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 19.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 03/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 21 0 20 0 459 33 12 217 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 21 0 20 0 459 33 12 217 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr000000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 245 - - 205 - 215 200 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 000000020020 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 22 0 21 0 488 35 13 231 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 745 745 488 231 0 0 523 0 0 Stage 1 488 488 ------- Stage 2 256 256 ------- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.45.5------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.45.5------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 385 345 584 1349 - - 1053 - - Stage 1 621 553 ------- Stage 2 791 699 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 380 0 584 1349 - - 1053 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 380 0 ------- Stage 1 621 0 ------- Stage 2 781 0 ------- Approach WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 13.28 0 0.44 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1349 - - 380 584 1053 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.059 0.036 0.012 - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 0 - - 15.1 11.4 8.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 0.1 0 - - HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive 03/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 8 31 106 484 157 81 Future Vol, veh/h 8 31 106 484 157 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 0 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 50 62 14 3 9 16 Mvmt Flow 9 34 115 526 171 88 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 971 215 259 0 - 0 Stage 1 215 ----- Stage 2 757 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.9 6.82 4.24 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 15.9----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.9----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.95 3.858 2.326 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 230 696 1239 - - - Stage 1 720 ----- Stage 2 388 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 209 696 1239 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 307 ----- Stage 1 653 ----- Stage 2 388 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 11.8 1.47 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1239 - 307 696 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.093 - 0.028 0.048 - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 8.2 - 17.1 10.4 - - HCM Lane LOS A - C B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - 0.1 0.2 - - HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 03/19/2026 EX AM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 41 0 7 0 0 1 4 548 0 0 178 10 Future Vol, veh/h 41 0 7 0 0 1 4 548 0 0 178 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr000000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 50 -----170--40-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 001400006002010 Mvmt Flow 43 0 7 0 0 1 4 577 0 0 187 11 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 778 778 193 773 783 577 198 0 0 577 0 0 Stage 1 193 193 - 585 585 ------- Stage 2 585 585 - 187 198 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.34 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 16.15.5-6.15.5------- Critical Hdwy Stg 26.15.5-6.15.5------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.426 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 316 330 819 319 328 520 1387 - - 1007 - - Stage 1 814 745 - 500 501 ------- Stage 2 500 501 - 819 741 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 315 329 819 315 327 520 1387 - - 1007 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 409 410 - 410 409 ------- Stage 1 814 745 - 499 499 ------- Stage 2 498 499 - 812 741 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 14.04 11.94 0.06 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1387 - - 409 819 520 1007 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - 0.105 0.009 0.002 - - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 7.6 - - 14.8 9.4 11.9 0 - - HCM Lane LOS A - -BABA - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0--0.4000-- HCM 7th TWSC 18: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 EX AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 4:16 pm 06/19/2024 Existing Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 43 1 0 28 2 13 5 5 0 1 0 Future Vol, veh/h 1 43 1 0 28 2 13 5 5 0 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 Heavy Vehicles, %0 10 0 0 8 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 61 1 0 39 3 18 7 7 0 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 42 0 0 62 0 0 104 106 61 108 106 41 Stage 1 ------64 64 -41 41 - Stage 2 ------40 42 -67 65 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1580 --1554 --881 788 1009 876 788 1036 Stage 1 ------952 845 -979 865 - Stage 2 ------980 864 -949 845 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1580 --1554 --878 787 1009 861 787 1036 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------878 787 -861 787 - Stage 1 ------951 845 -979 865 - Stage 2 ------978 864 -933 844 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.16 0 9.24 9.58 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)881 40 --1554 --787 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.037 0.001 -----0.002 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.2 7.3 0 -0 --9.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A --A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 0 --0 --0 Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 03/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 63 96 56 91 129 4 43 187 86 15 423 157 Future Volume (vph) 63 96 56 91 129 4 43 187 86 15 423 157 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft) 290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 190 180 170 200 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1980 1482 1570 1942 1615 1570 1961 1380 1687 1980 1615 Flt Permitted 0.520 0.688 0.320 0.628 Satd. Flow (perm) 969 1980 1482 1137 1942 1615 529 1961 1380 1115 1980 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 83 83 96 174 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft) 4330 3472 4491 3161 Travel Time (s) 98.4 78.9 68.0 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 1% 9% 15% 3% 0% 15% 2% 17% 7% 1% 0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 107 62 101 143 4 48 208 96 17 470 174 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 745381523167 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 745381523167 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s) 10.0 34.5 10.0 10.0 34.5 9.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 9.5 30.5 10.0 Total Split (%) 11.8% 40.6% 11.8% 11.8% 40.6% 11.2% 11.8% 36.5% 11.8% 11.2% 35.9% 11.8% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s) 17.3 9.9 22.4 16.6 10.1 18.6 34.8 29.8 42.5 32.8 25.9 40.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.16 0.36 0.26 0.16 0.30 0.55 0.47 0.67 0.52 0.41 0.64 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.35 0.11 0.29 0.46 0.01 0.12 0.22 0.10 0.03 0.58 0.16 Control Delay (s/veh) 16.3 28.3 3.1 17.8 30.7 0.0 8.4 13.8 2.3 7.8 20.8 2.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 16.3 28.3 3.1 17.8 30.7 0.0 8.4 13.8 2.3 7.8 20.8 2.0 LOS BCABCAABAACA Approach Delay (s/veh) 18.2 25.0 9.9 15.5 Approach LOS B C A B Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 40 0 29 54 0 8 42 0 3 155 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 44 81 16 60 103 0 24 113 19 12 270 25 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 03/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft) 4250 3392 4411 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft) 290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph) 358 920 588 348 903 542 402 928 965 639 814 1095 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.12 0.11 0.29 0.16 0.01 0.12 0.22 0.10 0.03 0.58 0.16 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 63 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.58 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 16.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3403/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 162 531 47 189 636 54 65 136 124 131 241 217 Future Volume (vph) 162 531 47 189 636 54 65 136 124 131 241 217 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft) 300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 220 170 205 120 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3725 1524 1770 3762 1429 1770 1695 1568 1671 1961 1553 Flt Permitted 0.173 0.249 0.590 0.615 Satd. Flow (perm) 322 3725 1524 464 3762 1429 1099 1695 1568 1082 1961 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 53 57 131 228 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft) 6798 4542 2076 4992 Travel Time (s) 103.0 68.8 31.5 75.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 2% 1% 13% 2% 18% 3% 8% 2% 4% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 171 559 49 199 669 57 68 143 131 138 254 228 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 745381523167 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 745381523167 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s) 23.0 49.0 16.0 21.0 47.0 16.0 16.0 47.0 21.0 16.0 47.0 23.0 Total Split (%) 17.3% 36.8% 12.0% 15.8% 35.3% 12.0% 12.0% 35.3% 15.8% 12.0% 35.3% 17.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s) 40.0 24.6 38.4 41.1 25.2 41.2 51.7 41.4 60.9 56.7 45.8 64.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.23 0.35 0.38 0.23 0.38 0.48 0.38 0.56 0.52 0.42 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.66 0.09 0.59 0.77 0.10 0.12 0.22 0.14 0.22 0.31 0.22 Control Delay (s/veh) 29.8 42.5 6.0 28.9 45.7 6.0 15.5 26.5 2.8 15.9 25.2 2.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh) 29.8 42.5 6.0 28.9 45.7 6.0 15.5 26.5 2.8 15.9 25.2 2.3 LOS CDACDABCABCA Approach Delay (s/veh) 37.4 39.6 15.3 14.7 Approach LOS D D B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 77 186 0 91 229 0 22 67 0 47 119 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 127 260 23 147 316 26 56 138 31 102 226 37 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3403/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft) 6718 4462 1996 4912 Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph) 392 1489 639 397 1434 610 645 646 992 638 827 1101 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000 Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000 Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.38 0.08 0.50 0.47 0.09 0.11 0.22 0.13 0.22 0.31 0.21 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 133 Actuated Cycle Length: 108.6 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 30.1 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 03/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 40 0 29 0 287 24 38 532 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 40 0 29 0 287 24 38 532 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr000000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - 245 - - 205 - 215 200 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0000012040040 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 43 0 31 0 305 26 40 566 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 952 952 305 566 0 0 331 0 0 Stage 1 305 305 ------- Stage 2 647 647 ------- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.5 6.32 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.45.5------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.45.5------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.408 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 290 261 712 1016 - - 1240 - - Stage 1 752 666 ------- Stage 2 525 470 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 281 0 712 1016 - - 1240 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 281 0 ------- Stage 1 752 0 ------- Stage 2 508 0 ------- Approach WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 15.98 0 0.53 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1016 - - 281 712 1240 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.152 0.043 0.033 - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 0 - - 20.1 10.3 8 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.5 0.1 0.1 - - HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive 03/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 118 187 178 193 481 91 Future Vol, veh/h 118 187 178 193 481 91 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 0 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 9 14 9 4 9 Mvmt Flow 137 217 207 224 559 106 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1251 612 665 0 - 0 Stage 1 612 ----- Stage 2 638 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.46 6.29 4.24 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 15.46----- Critical Hdwy Stg 25.46----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.554 3.381 2.326 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 187 480 870 - - - Stage 1 533 ----- Stage 2 519 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 143 480 870 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 272 ----- Stage 1 406 ----- Stage 2 519 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 23.38 5 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 870 - 272 480 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.238 - 0.505 0.453 - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.4 - 31 18.5 - - HCM Lane LOS B - D C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - 2.6 2.3 - - HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 03/19/2026 EX PM 24-050 - Data Center - Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 31 0 3 1 1 1 7 339 4 3 632 33 Future Vol, veh/h 31 0 3 1 1 1 7 339 4 3 632 33 Conflicting Peds, #/hr000000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 50 -----170--40-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 1 - - 1 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 12 25 33 5 3 Mvmt Flow 34 0 3 1 1 1 8 368 4 3 687 36 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1096 1099 705 1079 1115 371 723 0 0 373 0 0 Stage 1 711 711 - 386 386 ------- Stage 2 384 388 - 693 729 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.39 - - 4.43 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 16.15.5-6.15.5------- Critical Hdwy Stg 26.15.5-6.15.5------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.461 - - 2.497 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 193 214 440 198 210 680 768 - - 1034 - - Stage 1 427 439 - 642 614 ------- Stage 2 643 612 - 437 431 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 189 211 440 194 207 680 768 - - 1034 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 313 324 - 315 317 ------- Stage 1 426 438 - 635 608 ------- Stage 2 634 606 - 432 430 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 17.47 14.44 0.19 0.04 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 768 - - 313 440 384 1034 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 - - 0.108 0.007 0.008 0.003 - - HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 9.7 - - 17.9 13.2 14.4 8.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C B B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0--0.4000-- HCM 7th TWSC 8: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 EX PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 1:17 pm 06/26/2024 Existing Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 33 18 7 43 2 6 1 3 2 4 1 Future Vol, veh/h 1 33 18 7 43 2 6 1 3 2 4 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 37 20 8 48 2 7 1 3 2 4 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 50 0 0 57 0 0 114 114 47 104 123 49 Stage 1 ------49 49 -64 64 - Stage 2 ------66 66 -39 59 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.3 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.38 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1570 --1440 --867 780 1028 881 771 1025 Stage 1 ------969 858 -951 845 - Stage 2 ------950 844 -981 850 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1570 --1440 --856 775 1028 871 766 1025 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------856 775 -871 766 - Stage 1 ------969 857 -946 840 - Stage 2 ------939 840 -975 849 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.14 1.01 9.09 9.41 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)891 32 --240 --824 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 0.001 --0.005 --0.009 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.1 7.3 0 -7.5 0 -9.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A A -A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 0 --0 --0 Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Year 2031 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)153 163 47 58 74 13 18 433 61 3 140 70 Future Volume (vph)153 163 47 58 74 13 18 433 61 3 140 70 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)190 220 180 180 170 180 200 220 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1787 1942 1392 1337 1869 1615 1530 1980 1292 1805 1845 1615 Flt Permitted 0.495 0.651 0.605 0.437 Satd. Flow (perm)931 1942 1392 916 1869 1615 974 1980 1292 830 1845 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)116 116 89 89 Link Speed (mph)30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft)4330 3472 4586 3161 Travel Time (s)98.4 78.9 69.5 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%3%16%35%7%0%18%1%25%0%3%0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)158 168 48 60 76 13 19 446 63 3 144 72 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (s)11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (%)13.8%42.5%13.8%13.8%42.5%13.8%13.8%30.0%13.8%13.8%30.0%13.8% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)18.6 10.3 19.1 12.5 9.6 15.5 30.3 28.3 37.0 28.5 24.7 38.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.19 0.34 0.22 0.17 0.28 0.54 0.51 0.67 0.51 0.44 0.70 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.47 0.09 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.07 0.01 0.18 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh)14.0 26.7 0.3 16.3 23.3 0.1 9.2 17.4 1.7 9.0 18.0 2.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)14.0 26.7 0.3 16.3 23.3 0.1 9.2 17.4 1.7 9.0 18.0 2.1 LOS B C A B C A A B A A B A Approach Delay (s/veh)17.9 18.4 15.2 12.6 Approach LOS B B B B Queue Length 50th (ft)38 58 0 18 26 0 4 111 0 1 41 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)74 111 1 47 60 0 16 #301 14 5 90 14 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)4250 3392 4506 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph)486 1018 591 249 980 587 611 1008 889 577 818 1155 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.33 0.17 0.08 0.24 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.07 0.01 0.18 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 55.6 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 15.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.6%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road #1 Ø1 11 s #1 Ø2 24 s #1 Ø3 11 s #1 Ø4 34 s #1 Ø5 11 s #1 Ø6 24 s #1 Ø7 11 s #1 Ø8 34 s Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)234 463 60 74 238 82 34 239 140 81 100 75 Future Volume (vph)234 463 60 74 238 82 34 239 140 81 100 75 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)220 215 170 200 205 205 120 213 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 3689 1392 1480 3585 1429 1752 1869 1538 1543 1681 1482 Flt Permitted 0.507 0.419 0.685 0.495 Satd. Flow (perm)944 3689 1392 653 3585 1429 1264 1869 1538 804 1681 1482 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)93 93 156 83 Link Speed (mph)45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft)6798 4542 2076 4964 Travel Time (s)103.0 68.8 31.5 75.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%3%16%22%6%13%3%7%5%17%19%9% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)260 514 67 82 264 91 38 266 156 90 111 83 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 11.0 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 11.0 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)18.0 47.0 11.0 18.0 47.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 Total Split (%)18.0%47.0%11.0%18.0%47.0%11.0%11.0%24.0%18.0%11.0%24.0%18.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)29.5 15.0 27.6 21.3 13.0 26.2 25.9 18.3 32.2 27.0 18.9 36.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.22 0.41 0.32 0.19 0.39 0.39 0.27 0.48 0.40 0.28 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.62 0.11 0.27 0.38 0.15 0.07 0.52 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.10 Control Delay (s/veh)14.9 27.8 2.2 15.0 26.3 4.2 12.8 27.5 3.1 14.1 23.3 2.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)14.9 27.8 2.2 15.0 26.3 4.2 12.8 27.5 3.1 14.1 23.3 2.9 LOS B C A B C A B C A B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)21.8 19.6 18.0 14.4 Approach LOS C B B B Queue Length 50th (ft)70 107 0 24 55 0 9 102 0 24 42 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)118 161 15 53 92 28 29 200 32 62 99 21 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)6718 4462 1996 4884 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph)613 2291 649 410 2226 624 554 509 920 408 472 910 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.22 0.10 0.20 0.12 0.15 0.07 0.52 0.17 0.22 0.24 0.09 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 67.2 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 19.4 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.3%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 #5 Ø1 11 s #5 Ø2 24 s #5 Ø3 18 s #5 Ø4 47 s #5 Ø5 11 s #5 Ø6 24 s #5 Ø7 18 s #5 Ø8 47 s HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 22 0 21 0 491 35 13 232 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 22 0 21 0 491 35 13 232 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ---245 --205 -215 200 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 23 0 22 0 522 37 14 247 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All ---797 797 522 247 0 0 560 0 0 Stage 1 ---522 522 ------- Stage 2 ---274 274 ------- Critical Hdwy ---7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy ---3.5 4 3.3 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 307 322 558 1331 --1022 -- Stage 1 0 0 0 541 534 ------- Stage 2 0 0 0 736 687 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ---303 317 558 1331 --1022 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ---303 317 ------- Stage 1 ---541 534 ------- Stage 2 ---726 677 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 14.87 0 0.45 HCM LOS -B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1331 --303 558 1022 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio ---0.077 0.04 0.014 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 --17.9 11.7 8.6 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.2 0.1 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 33 113 518 168 87 Future Vol, veh/h 9 33 113 518 168 87 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 0 300 --- Veh in Median Storage, #1 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %50 62 14 3 9 16 Mvmt Flow 10 36 123 563 183 95 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1039 230 277 0 -0 Stage 1 230 ----- Stage 2 809 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.9 6.82 4.24 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.9 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.9 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.95 3.858 2.326 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 209 681 1220 --- Stage 1 707 ----- Stage 2 365 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 188 681 1220 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 216 ----- Stage 1 636 ----- Stage 2 365 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 13.13 1.48 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1220 -216 681 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.101 -0.045 0.053 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)8.3 -22.5 10.6 -- HCM Lane LOS A -C B -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.3 -0.1 0.2 -- HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 44 0 7 0 0 1 4 586 0 0 190 11 Future Vol, veh/h 44 0 7 0 0 1 4 586 0 0 190 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 50 -----170 --40 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --1 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 14 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 20 10 Mvmt Flow 46 0 7 0 0 1 4 617 0 0 200 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 831 831 206 825 837 617 212 0 0 617 0 0 Stage 1 206 206 -625 625 ------- Stage 2 625 625 -200 212 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.34 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.426 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 291 307 805 294 305 494 1371 --973 -- Stage 1 801 735 -476 480 ------- Stage 2 476 480 -806 731 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 290 307 805 290 304 494 1371 --973 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 388 392 -388 390 ------- Stage 1 801 735 -474 479 ------- Stage 2 473 479 -799 731 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 14.71 12.31 0.05 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1371 --388 805 494 973 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 --0.119 0.009 0.002 --- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)7.6 --15.5 9.5 12.3 0 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C A B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.4 0 0 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 18: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 NB AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 46 1 0 30 2 14 5 5 0 1 0 Future Vol, veh/h 1 46 1 0 30 2 14 5 5 0 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 Heavy Vehicles, %0 10 0 0 8 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 65 1 0 42 3 20 7 7 0 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 45 0 0 66 0 0 111 113 65 115 113 44 Stage 1 ------68 68 -44 44 - Stage 2 ------43 45 -71 69 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1576 --1548 --871 781 1004 867 781 1032 Stage 1 ------947 842 -976 863 - Stage 2 ------976 861 -944 841 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1576 --1548 --869 780 1004 852 781 1032 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------869 780 -852 781 - Stage 1 ------946 841 -976 863 - Stage 2 ------975 861 -928 841 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.15 0 9.29 9.62 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)873 37 --1548 --781 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.039 0.001 -----0.002 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.3 7.3 0 -0 --9.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A --A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 0 --0 --0 Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Year 2031 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)67 103 60 97 138 4 46 200 92 16 453 168 Future Volume (vph)67 103 60 97 138 4 46 200 92 16 453 168 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)190 220 180 180 170 180 200 220 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1980 1482 1570 1942 1615 1570 1961 1380 1687 1980 1615 Flt Permitted 0.510 0.684 0.286 0.620 Satd. Flow (perm)950 1980 1482 1130 1942 1615 473 1961 1380 1101 1980 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)83 83 102 187 Link Speed (mph)30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft)4330 3472 4491 3161 Travel Time (s)98.4 78.9 68.0 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%1%9%15%3%0%15%2%17%7%1%0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)74 114 67 108 153 4 51 222 102 18 503 187 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)10.0 34.5 10.0 10.0 34.5 9.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 9.5 30.5 10.0 Total Split (%)11.8%40.6%11.8%11.8%40.6%11.2%11.8%36.5%11.8%11.2%35.9%11.8% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)17.7 10.2 22.8 16.9 10.4 18.8 34.3 29.4 42.1 32.4 25.5 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.16 0.36 0.27 0.17 0.30 0.55 0.47 0.67 0.52 0.41 0.64 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.35 0.11 0.31 0.48 0.01 0.14 0.24 0.11 0.03 0.63 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)16.4 28.2 3.5 18.0 30.8 0.0 8.7 14.1 2.3 8.0 22.4 2.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)16.4 28.2 3.5 18.0 30.8 0.0 8.7 14.1 2.3 8.0 22.4 2.0 LOS B C A B C A A B A A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)18.3 25.1 10.2 16.6 Approach LOS B C B B Queue Length 50th (ft)21 43 0 34 60 0 10 47 0 3 172 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)47 85 19 71 112 0 29 123 22 13 #302 26 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)4250 3392 4411 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph)362 927 598 353 909 548 375 916 961 627 802 1096 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.12 0.11 0.31 0.17 0.01 0.14 0.24 0.11 0.03 0.63 0.17 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 62.9 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 16.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.6%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road #1 Ø1 9.5 s #1 Ø2 31 s #1 Ø3 10 s #1 Ø4 34.5 s #1 Ø5 10 s #1 Ø6 30.5 s #1 Ø7 10 s #1 Ø8 34.5 s Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)173 568 50 202 681 58 70 146 133 140 258 232 Future Volume (vph)173 568 50 202 681 58 70 146 133 140 258 232 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)220 215 170 200 205 205 120 213 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 3725 1524 1770 3762 1429 1770 1695 1568 1671 1961 1553 Flt Permitted 0.151 0.230 0.563 0.601 Satd. Flow (perm)281 3725 1524 428 3762 1429 1049 1695 1568 1057 1961 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)53 61 140 221 Link Speed (mph)45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft)6798 4542 2076 4992 Travel Time (s)103.0 68.8 31.5 75.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%2%6%2%1%13%2%18%3%8%2%4% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)182 598 53 213 717 61 74 154 140 147 272 244 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)23.0 49.0 16.0 21.0 47.0 16.0 16.0 47.0 21.0 16.0 47.0 23.0 Total Split (%)17.3%36.8%12.0%15.8%35.3%12.0%12.0%35.3%15.8%12.0%35.3%17.3% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)42.8 26.8 40.9 43.6 27.2 43.5 52.0 41.4 61.4 57.0 45.9 65.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.24 0.37 0.39 0.24 0.39 0.47 0.37 0.55 0.51 0.41 0.59 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.67 0.09 0.64 0.78 0.10 0.14 0.24 0.15 0.25 0.34 0.24 Control Delay (s/veh)31.6 42.5 6.3 30.3 46.3 5.8 16.8 28.4 3.0 17.3 27.2 3.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)31.6 42.5 6.3 30.3 46.3 5.8 16.8 28.4 3.0 17.3 27.2 3.2 LOS C D A C D A B C A B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)37.8 40.4 16.4 16.2 Approach LOS D D B B Queue Length 50th (ft)84 208 0 100 255 0 26 87 0 57 137 7 Queue Length 95th (ft)138 283 26 159 347 29 63 175 34 121 257 51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 8:54 am 03/19/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)6718 4462 1996 4912 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph)379 1450 652 387 1396 623 609 629 973 613 806 1076 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.41 0.08 0.55 0.51 0.10 0.12 0.24 0.14 0.24 0.34 0.23 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 133 Actuated Cycle Length: 111.6 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.78 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 30.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 #5 Ø1 16 s #5 Ø2 47 s #5 Ø3 21 s #5 Ø4 49 s #5 Ø5 16 s #5 Ø6 47 s #5 Ø7 23 s #5 Ø8 47 s HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 1:40 pm 05/28/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 43 0 31 0 307 26 41 569 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 43 0 31 0 307 26 41 569 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ---245 --205 -215 200 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 12 0 4 0 0 4 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 46 0 33 0 327 28 44 605 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All ---1019 1019 327 605 0 0 354 0 0 Stage 1 ---327 327 ------- Stage 2 ---693 693 ------- Critical Hdwy ---7.1 6.5 6.32 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy ---3.5 4 3.408 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 217 239 692 983 --1216 -- Stage 1 0 0 0 690 652 ------- Stage 2 0 0 0 437 448 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ---209 230 692 983 --1216 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ---209 230 ------- Stage 1 ---690 652 ------- Stage 2 ---421 432 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 20.03 0 0.54 HCM LOS -C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)983 --209 692 1216 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio ---0.218 0.048 0.036 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 --26.9 10.5 8.1 -- HCM Lane LOS A --D B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.8 0.1 0.1 -- HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 1:40 pm 05/28/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 10.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 126 200 190 207 515 97 Future Vol, veh/h 126 200 190 207 515 97 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 0 300 --- Veh in Median Storage, #1 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %6 9 14 9 4 9 Mvmt Flow 147 233 221 241 599 113 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1338 655 712 0 -0 Stage 1 655 ----- Stage 2 683 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.46 6.29 4.24 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.46 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.46 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.554 3.381 2.326 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 165 454 835 --- Stage 1 509 ----- Stage 2 494 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 122 454 835 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 198 ----- Stage 1 375 ----- Stage 2 494 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 36.94 5.19 0 HCM LOS E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)835 -198 454 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.265 -0.741 0.512 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)10.9 -62.3 21 -- HCM Lane LOS B -F C -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)1.1 -4.9 2.9 -- Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 1:40 pm 05/28/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 0 3 1 1 1 7 363 4 3 676 35 Future Vol, veh/h 33 0 3 1 1 1 7 363 4 3 676 35 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 50 -----170 --40 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --1 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0 29 12 25 33 5 3 Mvmt Flow 36 0 3 1 1 1 8 395 4 3 735 38 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1171 1174 754 1153 1191 397 773 0 0 399 0 0 Stage 1 760 760 -412 412 ------- Stage 2 410 414 -741 779 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.39 --4.43 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.461 --2.497 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 171 193 412 176 189 657 734 --1010 -- Stage 1 401 417 -621 598 ------- Stage 2 622 596 -411 409 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 168 191 412 172 186 657 734 --1010 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 292 305 -294 298 ------- Stage 1 400 416 -615 592 ------- Stage 2 614 590 -406 408 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 18.6 15.03 0.19 0.04 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)734 --292 412 362 1010 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 --0.123 0.008 0.009 0.003 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)10 --19 13.8 15 8.6 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C B C A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.4 0 0 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 8: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 NB PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 1:40 pm 05/28/2026 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 35 19 7 46 2 6 1 3 2 4 1 Future Vol, veh/h 1 35 19 7 46 2 6 1 3 2 4 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 39 21 8 51 2 7 1 3 2 4 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 53 0 0 60 0 0 121 121 49 109 130 52 Stage 1 ------52 52 -68 68 - Stage 2 ------69 69 -42 62 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.3 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.38 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1565 --1436 --859 774 1025 874 764 1021 Stage 1 ------966 856 -948 842 - Stage 2 ------946 841 -978 847 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1565 --1436 --848 769 1025 864 760 1021 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------848 769 -864 760 - Stage 1 ------966 855 -942 838 - Stage 2 ------935 837 -973 846 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.13 0.96 9.12 9.44 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)885 31 --227 --818 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 0.001 --0.005 --0.01 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.1 7.3 0 -7.5 0 -9.4 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A A -A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 0 --0 --0 Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Year 2031 Total Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)153 163 51 69 74 13 20 436 65 3 147 70 Future Volume (vph)153 163 51 69 74 13 20 436 65 3 147 70 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)190 220 180 180 170 180 200 220 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1787 1942 1392 1337 1869 1615 1530 1980 1292 1805 1845 1615 Flt Permitted 0.495 0.651 0.601 0.433 Satd. Flow (perm)931 1942 1392 916 1869 1615 968 1980 1292 823 1845 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)116 116 89 89 Link Speed (mph)30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft)4330 3472 4586 3161 Travel Time (s)98.4 78.9 69.5 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%3%16%35%7%0%18%1%25%0%3%0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)158 168 53 71 76 13 21 449 67 3 152 72 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (s)11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 34.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 11.0 Total Split (%)13.8%42.5%13.8%13.8%42.5%13.8%13.8%30.0%13.8%13.8%30.0%13.8% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)18.6 10.3 19.1 12.5 9.6 15.5 30.4 28.3 37.0 28.5 24.7 38.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.19 0.34 0.22 0.17 0.28 0.55 0.51 0.67 0.51 0.44 0.70 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.47 0.10 0.29 0.24 0.02 0.04 0.44 0.08 0.01 0.19 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh)14.0 26.7 0.6 17.1 23.3 0.1 9.3 17.4 1.9 9.0 18.0 2.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)14.0 26.7 0.6 17.1 23.3 0.1 9.3 17.4 1.9 9.0 18.0 2.1 LOS B C A B C A A B A A B A Approach Delay (s/veh)17.7 18.7 15.2 12.9 Approach LOS B B B B Queue Length 50th (ft)38 58 0 22 26 0 4 112 0 1 44 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)74 111 3 53 60 0 17 #303 15 5 95 14 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)4250 3392 4506 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph)486 1017 591 249 979 587 609 1009 889 574 818 1155 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.33 0.17 0.09 0.29 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.44 0.08 0.01 0.19 0.06 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 55.6 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 15.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.7%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road #1 Ø1 11 s #1 Ø2 24 s #1 Ø3 11 s #1 Ø4 34 s #1 Ø5 11 s #1 Ø6 24 s #1 Ø7 11 s #1 Ø8 34 s Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)249 463 60 74 238 107 34 246 140 91 103 81 Future Volume (vph)249 463 60 74 238 107 34 246 140 91 103 81 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)220 215 170 200 205 205 120 213 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 3689 1392 1480 3585 1429 1752 1869 1538 1543 1681 1482 Flt Permitted 0.491 0.419 0.684 0.447 Satd. Flow (perm)915 3689 1392 653 3585 1429 1262 1869 1538 726 1681 1482 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)93 119 156 90 Link Speed (mph)45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft)6798 4542 2076 4964 Travel Time (s)103.0 68.8 31.5 75.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%3%16%22%6%13%3%7%5%17%19%9% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)277 514 67 82 264 119 38 273 156 101 114 90 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 11.0 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 11.0 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)18.0 47.0 11.0 18.0 47.0 11.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 11.0 24.0 18.0 Total Split (%)18.0%47.0%11.0%18.0%47.0%11.0%11.0%24.0%18.0%11.0%24.0%18.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 5.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)29.8 15.0 27.5 20.9 12.6 25.7 27.0 18.1 31.9 29.2 20.9 39.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.22 0.40 0.30 0.18 0.37 0.39 0.26 0.46 0.42 0.30 0.57 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.64 0.11 0.28 0.41 0.20 0.07 0.56 0.20 0.26 0.22 0.10 Control Delay (s/veh)16.0 28.7 2.2 15.3 27.2 4.1 12.8 28.6 3.1 14.5 23.0 2.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)16.0 28.7 2.2 15.3 27.2 4.1 12.8 28.6 3.1 14.5 23.0 2.8 LOS B C A B C A B C A B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)22.5 19.2 18.8 14.2 Approach LOS C B B B Queue Length 50th (ft)75 107 0 24 55 0 9 105 0 27 43 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)126 161 15 53 92 32 29 205 32 68 102 22 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)6718 4462 1996 4884 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph)586 2199 630 392 2137 613 567 489 889 395 507 924 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.23 0.11 0.21 0.12 0.19 0.07 0.56 0.18 0.26 0.22 0.10 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 69.2 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 19.7 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.1%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 #6 Ø1 11 s #6 Ø2 24 s #6 Ø3 18 s #6 Ø4 47 s #6 Ø5 11 s #6 Ø6 24 s #6 Ø7 18 s #6 Ø8 47 s HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 26 0 22 0 499 36 13 254 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 26 0 22 0 499 36 13 254 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ---245 --205 -215 200 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 28 0 23 0 531 38 14 270 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All ---829 829 531 270 0 0 569 0 0 Stage 1 ---531 531 ------- Stage 2 ---298 298 ------- Critical Hdwy ---7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy ---3.5 4 3.3 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 292 308 552 1305 --1013 -- Stage 1 0 0 0 536 529 ------- Stage 2 0 0 0 715 671 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ---288 304 552 1305 --1013 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ---288 304 ------- Stage 1 ---536 529 ------- Stage 2 ---705 661 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 15.6 0 0.42 HCM LOS -C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1305 --288 552 1013 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio ---0.096 0.042 0.014 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 --18.8 11.8 8.6 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.3 0.1 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive/Proposed Access Drive 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0 33 19 0 9 113 518 47 26 168 87 Future Vol, veh/h 9 0 33 19 0 9 113 518 47 26 168 87 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 0 --0 --300 -150 215 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --1 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %50 0 62 2 0 2 14 3 2 2 9 16 Mvmt Flow 10 0 36 21 0 10 123 563 51 28 183 95 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1095 1146 230 1048 1142 563 277 0 0 614 0 0 Stage 1 286 286 -809 809 ------- Stage 2 809 860 -239 334 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.6 6.5 6.82 7.12 6.5 6.22 4.24 --4.12 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 5.5 -6.12 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.6 5.5 -6.12 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.95 4 3.858 3.518 4 3.318 2.326 --2.218 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 155 201 681 206 202 526 1220 --965 -- Stage 1 628 678 -374 397 ------- Stage 2 312 376 -764 647 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 133 175 681 170 176 526 1220 --965 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 205 256 -263 267 ------- Stage 1 610 659 -337 357 ------- Stage 2 275 338 -703 628 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 13.33 17.3 1.38 0.82 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1220 --205 681 263 526 965 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.101 --0.048 0.053 0.078 0.019 0.029 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)8.3 --23.4 10.6 19.8 12 8.8 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C B C B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.3 --0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 -- HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 44 0 7 0 0 1 4 633 0 0 209 11 Future Vol, veh/h 44 0 7 0 0 1 4 633 0 0 209 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 50 -----170 --40 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --1 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 14 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 20 10 Mvmt Flow 46 0 7 0 0 1 4 666 0 0 220 12 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 901 901 226 895 906 666 232 0 0 666 0 0 Stage 1 226 226 -675 675 ------- Stage 2 675 675 -220 232 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.34 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.426 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 261 280 785 264 278 463 1348 --933 -- Stage 1 781 721 -447 456 ------- Stage 2 447 456 -787 717 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 260 279 785 260 277 463 1348 --933 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 362 370 -362 368 ------- Stage 1 781 721 -446 455 ------- Stage 2 445 455 -780 717 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 15.48 12.8 0.05 0 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1348 --362 785 463 933 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 --0.128 0.009 0.002 --- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)7.7 --16.4 9.6 12.8 0 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C A B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.4 0 0 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 21: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 46 1 0 34 2 15 5 6 0 1 0 Future Vol, veh/h 1 46 1 0 34 2 15 5 6 0 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 Heavy Vehicles, %0 10 0 0 8 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 65 1 0 48 3 21 7 8 0 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 51 0 0 66 0 0 117 119 65 120 118 49 Stage 1 ------68 68 -49 49 - Stage 2 ------49 51 -71 69 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1569 --1548 --864 775 1004 860 776 1025 Stage 1 ------947 842 -969 858 - Stage 2 ------970 857 -944 841 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1569 --1548 --862 774 1004 844 775 1025 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------862 774 -844 775 - Stage 1 ------946 841 -969 858 - Stage 2 ------968 857 -927 841 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.15 0 9.31 9.65 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)871 37 --1548 --775 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 0.001 -----0.002 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.3 7.3 0 -0 --9.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A --A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 0 --0 --0 HCM 7th TWSC 24: Beecher Road & Proposed Access Drive 05/28/2026 PR AM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:40 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Morning Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 0 25 2 0 Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 0 25 2 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 0 0 27 2 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 29 2 2 0 -0 Stage 1 2 ----- Stage 2 27 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 985 1082 1620 --- Stage 1 1021 ----- Stage 2 995 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 985 1082 1620 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 985 ----- Stage 1 1021 ----- Stage 2 995 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 8.66 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1620 -985 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.002 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 -8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A -A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets Year 2031 Total Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)67 103 61 100 138 4 50 208 103 16 455 168 Future Volume (vph)67 103 61 100 138 4 50 208 103 16 455 168 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)190 220 180 180 170 180 200 220 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1980 1482 1570 1942 1615 1570 1961 1380 1687 1881 1615 Flt Permitted 0.510 0.684 0.281 0.615 Satd. Flow (perm)950 1980 1482 1130 1942 1615 464 1961 1380 1092 1881 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)83 83 114 187 Link Speed (mph)30 30 45 45 Link Distance (ft)4330 3472 4491 3161 Travel Time (s)98.4 78.9 68.0 47.9 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%1%9%15%3%0%15%2%17%7%1%0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)74 114 68 111 153 4 56 231 114 18 506 187 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)10.0 34.5 10.0 10.0 34.5 9.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 9.5 30.5 10.0 Total Split (%)11.8%40.6%11.8%11.8%40.6%11.2%11.8%36.5%11.8%11.2%35.9%11.8% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)17.7 10.2 22.8 16.9 10.4 18.8 34.3 29.4 42.2 32.4 25.5 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.16 0.36 0.27 0.17 0.30 0.55 0.47 0.67 0.52 0.41 0.64 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.35 0.12 0.32 0.48 0.01 0.15 0.25 0.12 0.03 0.66 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)16.4 28.2 3.5 18.1 30.8 0.0 8.8 14.2 2.3 8.0 24.1 2.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)16.4 28.2 3.5 18.1 30.8 0.0 8.8 14.2 2.3 8.0 24.1 2.0 LOS B C A B C A A B A A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)18.2 25.1 10.1 17.9 Approach LOS B C B B Queue Length 50th (ft)21 43 0 35 60 0 11 49 0 3 177 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)47 85 20 72 112 0 31 128 24 13 #345 26 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)4250 3392 4411 3081 Turn Bay Length (ft)290 260 150 155 140 150 230 230 Base Capacity (vph)362 927 598 353 909 548 371 916 965 623 761 1095 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.12 0.11 0.31 0.17 0.01 0.15 0.25 0.12 0.03 0.66 0.17 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 62.9 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.66 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 17.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.8%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1: Eldamain Road/Ashe Road & Galena Road #1 Ø1 9.5 s #1 Ø2 31 s #1 Ø3 10 s #1 Ø4 34.5 s #1 Ø5 10 s #1 Ø6 30.5 s #1 Ø7 10 s #1 Ø8 34.5 s Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)176 568 50 202 681 64 70 148 133 165 266 247 Future Volume (vph)176 568 50 202 681 64 70 148 133 165 266 247 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 1900 2000 1900 Storage Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft)220 215 170 200 205 205 120 213 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 3725 1524 1770 3762 1429 1770 1695 1568 1671 1961 1553 Flt Permitted 0.148 0.230 0.559 0.597 Satd. Flow (perm)276 3725 1524 428 3762 1429 1041 1695 1568 1050 1961 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)53 67 140 220 Link Speed (mph)45 45 45 45 Link Distance (ft)6798 4542 2076 4992 Travel Time (s)103.0 68.8 31.5 75.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%)2%2%6%2%1%13%2%18%3%8%2%4% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph)185 598 53 213 717 67 74 156 140 174 280 260 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detector Phase 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 9.5 24.0 9.5 Total Split (s)23.0 49.0 16.0 21.0 47.0 16.0 16.0 47.0 21.0 16.0 47.0 23.0 Total Split (%)17.3%36.8%12.0%15.8%35.3%12.0%12.0%35.3%15.8%12.0%35.3%17.3% Yellow Time (s)3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 All-Red Time (s)0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 3.5 6.0 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None Max None None Max None Act Effct Green (s)43.2 27.0 41.1 43.8 27.3 44.2 52.0 41.4 61.4 57.8 46.4 66.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.24 0.37 0.39 0.24 0.39 0.46 0.37 0.55 0.51 0.41 0.59 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.67 0.09 0.64 0.79 0.11 0.14 0.25 0.15 0.29 0.35 0.26 Control Delay (s/veh)32.5 42.7 6.3 30.6 46.8 5.6 16.9 28.7 3.0 17.8 27.4 3.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)32.5 42.7 6.3 30.6 46.8 5.6 16.9 28.7 3.0 17.8 27.4 3.7 LOS C D A C D A B C A B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)38.1 40.5 16.6 16.4 Approach LOS D D B B Queue Length 50th (ft)87 212 0 102 259 0 26 90 0 69 142 12 Queue Length 95th (ft)143 283 26 158 348 30 64 178 34 142 266 60 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 3405/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Internal Link Dist (ft)6718 4462 1996 4912 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 215 200 300 215 215 330 250 Base Capacity (vph)376 1438 650 385 1384 624 602 624 967 611 809 1075 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.42 0.08 0.55 0.52 0.11 0.12 0.25 0.14 0.28 0.35 0.24 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 133 Actuated Cycle Length: 112.4 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 30.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: Eldamain Road & Veterans Parkway (US Route 34)/Veterans Parkway (US Route 34 #6 Ø1 16 s #6 Ø2 47 s #6 Ø3 21 s #6 Ø4 49 s #6 Ø5 16 s #6 Ø6 47 s #6 Ø7 23 s #6 Ø8 47 s HCM 7th TWSC 2: Eldamain Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 44 0 33 0 328 28 41 575 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 44 0 33 0 328 28 41 575 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ---245 --205 -215 200 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 12 0 4 0 0 4 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 47 0 35 0 349 30 44 612 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All ---1048 1048 349 612 0 0 379 0 0 Stage 1 ---349 349 ------- Stage 2 ---699 699 ------- Critical Hdwy ---7.1 6.5 6.32 4.1 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ---6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy ---3.5 4 3.408 2.2 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 208 230 672 977 --1191 -- Stage 1 0 0 0 671 637 ------- Stage 2 0 0 0 434 445 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ---200 221 672 977 --1191 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ---200 221 ------- Stage 1 ---671 637 ------- Stage 2 ---418 429 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 20.8 0 0.54 HCM LOS -C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)977 --200 672 1191 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio ---0.234 0.052 0.037 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 --28.4 10.7 8.1 -- HCM Lane LOS A --D B A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.9 0.2 0.1 -- HCM 7th TWSC 3: Eldamain Road /Eldamain Road & Menards Access Drive/Proposed Access Drive 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 20.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 126 0 200 48 0 23 190 207 11 7 515 97 Future Vol, veh/h 126 0 200 48 0 23 190 207 11 7 515 97 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 0 --0 --300 -150 215 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %6 0 9 2 0 2 14 9 2 2 4 9 Mvmt Flow 147 0 233 56 0 27 221 241 13 8 599 113 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1354 1367 655 1298 1410 241 712 0 0 253 0 0 Stage 1 672 672 -683 683 ------- Stage 2 683 695 -615 728 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.16 6.5 6.29 7.12 6.5 6.22 4.24 --4.12 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.16 5.5 -6.12 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.16 5.5 -6.12 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.554 4 3.381 3.518 4 3.318 2.326 --2.218 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 124 148 454 139 140 798 835 --1312 -- Stage 1 439 458 -439 453 ------- Stage 2 433 447 -478 432 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 88 108 454 ~ 49 102 798 835 --1312 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 200 219 -~ 49 102 ------- Stage 1 436 455 -323 333 ------- Stage 2 308 328 -232 429 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 36.17 207.03 5.05 0.09 HCM LOS E F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)835 --200 454 49 798 1312 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.265 --0.731 0.512 1.129 0.034 0.006 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)10.9 --60.3 21$ 301.6 9.7 7.8 -- HCM Lane LOS B --F C F A A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)1.1 --4.8 2.9 5 0.1 0 -- Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 7th TWSC 4: Eldamain Road & Faxon Road 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 0 3 1 1 1 7 374 4 3 724 35 Future Vol, veh/h 33 0 3 1 1 1 7 374 4 3 724 35 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 50 -----170 --40 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-1 --1 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0 29 12 25 33 5 3 Mvmt Flow 36 0 3 1 1 1 8 407 4 3 787 38 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1235 1239 806 1217 1255 409 825 0 0 411 0 0 Stage 1 812 812 -424 424 ------- Stage 2 422 426 -793 832 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.39 --4.43 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.461 --2.497 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 155 177 385 159 173 647 700 --999 -- Stage 1 376 395 -612 591 ------- Stage 2 613 589 -385 387 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 152 175 385 155 171 647 700 --999 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 274 289 -276 282 ------- Stage 1 374 394 -605 584 ------- Stage 2 604 583 -380 386 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 19.61 15.57 0.19 0.03 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)700 --274 385 344 999 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 --0.131 0.008 0.009 0.003 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)10.2 --20.1 14.4 15.6 8.6 -- HCM Lane LOS B --C B C A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 --0.4 0 0 0 -- HCM 7th TWSC 8: Beecher Road & Corneils Road 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 35 19 7 47 2 8 1 5 2 4 1 Future Vol, veh/h 1 35 19 7 47 2 8 1 5 2 4 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------------ Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 39 21 8 52 2 9 1 6 2 4 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 54 0 0 60 0 0 122 122 49 111 131 53 Stage 1 ------52 52 -69 69 - Stage 2 ------70 70 -42 62 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.3 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.38 --3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1564 --1436 --858 772 1025 872 763 1020 Stage 1 ------966 856 -946 841 - Stage 2 ------945 841 -978 847 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1564 --1436 --847 768 1025 861 758 1020 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------847 768 -861 758 - Stage 1 ------966 855 -941 837 - Stage 2 ------934 836 -971 846 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0.13 0.94 9.09 9.45 HCM LOS A A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)896 31 --223 --816 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.017 0.001 --0.005 --0.01 HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)9.1 7.3 0 -7.5 0 -9.5 HCM Lane LOS A A A -A A -A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 0 --0 --0 HCM 7th TWSC 21: Beecher Road & Proposed Access Drive 05/28/2026 PR PM 24-050 -Data Center -Yorkville 2:41 pm 03/18/2026 Projected Weekday Evening Peak Hour Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 0 0 11 31 0 Future Vol, veh/h 4 0 0 11 31 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 4 0 0 12 34 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 46 34 34 0 -0 Stage 1 34 ----- Stage 2 12 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 964 1040 1578 --- Stage 1 989 ----- Stage 2 1011 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 964 1040 1578 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 964 ----- Stage 1 989 ----- Stage 2 1011 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 8.75 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1578 -964 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.005 -- HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v)0 -8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A -A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- 1 I have reviewed the applications for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan received April 21, 2026 as submitted by C1 Yorkville, LLC, Petitioner, as well as the following supplemental documents/plans: 1. Project Narrative (Petition for Development Approval) prepared and submitted by Rosanova & Whitaker, Ltd., attorney, on behalf of C1 Yorkville, LLC, petitioner. 2. Concept PUD Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 03/12/26. 3. Major Change & Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plan, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 03/12/26. 4. Final Plat of Subdivision, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering Group and dated 3/13/2026. 5. Color Building Rendering and Exterior Elevations, prepared by Corgan and dated 03/12/26. 6. Noise Study, prepared by Trinity Consultants and dated April 22, 2026. 7. Data Center Impact Analysis – An Assessment of Potential Electric System Reliability and Cost Impacts of a Proposed Data Center in Yorkville, prepared by The Power Burau, LLC dated 2026. 8. The Fiscal Benefits of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated March 2026. 9. The Economic Impacts of the Proposed CyrusOne C1 Data Center Development in Yorkville, prepared by Gruen Gruen + Associates and dated February 2026. 10. Traffic Impact Study Proposed Data Center, prepared by KLOA and dated March 24, 2026. The petitioner is seeking approval to amend existing ordinances (Ord. 2024-33 approving a special use Planned Unit Development and Ord. 2026-09 Minor Amendment to the Approved Planned Unit Development) for Major Planned Unit Development Amendment and Preliminary PUD Plan to construct a secured data center campus and on-site substation on approximately 228- acres of land located at the northeast corner of Faxon Road and Eldamain Road, also known as CyrusOne’s CHI-11 campus. The site will consist of eight (8) one-story standalone buildings with a total building area of up to 2,163,800 square feet to be developed in phases over a 10-20 year period. Based upon my review of the applications, supplemental documents, and concept PUD a preliminary PUD site plans, I have compiled the following comments: GENERAL PUD MAJOR AMENDMENT COMMENTS: The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement for the C1 Yorkville (CHI-11) CyrusOne data center campus (Ordinance 2024-33) was established prior to the City’s adoption of Energy Industrial Use standards for data centers via Ordinance 2025-53 in June 2025. Sections 2.1 and 4.3 of the previously approved PUD Agreement permit the waiver of subsequently adopted, more stringent Energy Memorandum To: Plan Council From: Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Date: May 6, 2026 Subject: PZC 2026-03 C1 Yorkville – CHI 11 (Cyrus One) Data Center NE Corner of Faxon Road & Eldamain Road Proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment & Preliminary PUD Plan 2 Industrial Use regulations, effectively vesting the development standards within the current agreement for a period of 20 years. The original PUD Agreement established the following: 1. CURRENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) – Section 10-8-8 of City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) establishes standards for Planned Unit Development (PUDs). PUDs are allowed to modify standards of the base district as long as the requested modifications are specifically identified and demonstrates how each allowance is compatible with surrounding development, is necessary for proper development of the site, and is aligned with at least one (1) modification standard found in Section 10-8-8D of the UDO. a. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement (Ordinance 2024-33) approved certain deviations from the base M-2 General Manufacturing District standards for the subject property related to: building setbacks for interior lots, parking requirements, vehicular cross access, pedestrian circulation, off-street loading, landscape requirements internal to the site, certain mechanical screening requirements (subject to sound study approval), street design for lots, and appearance standards. b. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement (Ordinance 2024-33) established modification standard #12 “Regional Utility Improvements” applies to the subject property, as the proposed development will extend public utilities (water and sanitary) to and through the property resulting in recapturable payments to the developer when future property owners in the area benefit from connecting to such utility that had not previously existed. 2. PROPOSED MAJOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT - Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement established the criteria for major amendments which results in one or more of the following changes to the approved Preliminary PUD Plan: a. More than 10% increase in square footage of the buildings. i. Proposed plan illustrates a decrease in the total building square footage of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan from 2,163,800 to 2,062,500 on the Major PUD Preliminary Plan but seeks an allowance to maintain the previously approved maximum building square footage. NOT APPLICABLE. b. Any structure greater than 100 feet in height. i. Proposed plan decreases the maximum height of the data center buildings on the Minor PUD Preliminary Plan from a maximum of 70’-0” to top of equipment to 50’-10” to top of equipment screening wall on the Major PUD Preliminary Plan. NOT APPLICABLE. c. Except as other set forth above, any deviation from the site data standards set forth on the Site Plan. i. It is noted that the provided parking spaces increased from 378 stalls on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 437 stalls on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. ii. It is noted that the provided building coverage increased from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 18.6% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. iii. It is noted that the provided site coverage increased from 28.7% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 50.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE. d. Any deviation from applicable provisions of the UDO. 3 i. In addition to the criteria set forth above, Section 7.1 of the approved Planned Unit Development agreement also references major amendment criteria established in Section 10-8-8(G)(2) of the UDO as binding, which is as follows: 1. Increase density. NOT APPLICABLE. 2. Increase the height of buildings. NOT APPLICABLE. 3. Reduce open space by more than five (5) percent. APPLICABLE. a. Building coverage increased 7.7% from 10.9% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 18.6% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. b. Site coverage increased 21.6% from 28.7% on the Site Data Standards of the approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to 50.3% on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan. APPLICABLE 4. Modify the proportion of housing types. NOT APPLICABLE. 5. Change parking areas in a manner that is inconsistent with this UDO. NOT APPLICABLE. 6. Increase the approved gross floor area by more than five hundred (500) square feet. NOT APPLICABLE. 7. Alter alignment of roads, utilities, or drainage. APPLICABLE. a. Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates significant changes to the site access and road alignments off of Eldamain Road, a new access off of Beecher Road, and reconfigurations to onsite stormwater management basins. 8. Result in any other change inconsistent with any standard or condition imposed by the City Council in approving the Planned Unit Development and/or the approved Site Plan, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. NOT APPLICABLE. 3. ZONING - The subject property consists of seven (7) parcels (#02-18-300-004, #02-19-100- 004, #02-19-100-005, #02-18-300-003, #02-18-300-001, #02-18-300-002, and #02-18-400- 004) and is zoned M-2 GENERAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT. The following are the most current immediate surrounding zoning and land uses based on recent development approvals: Zoning Land Use North A-1 (Kendall County) ComEd Substation/Transfer Station - Utility Use South A-1 (Kendall County) BNSF Railroad Agricultural, Residential and Business Uses Transportation Land Use East A-1 SU (Kendall County) A-1 SU (Yorkville) Agriculture/Former Residence (Owned by Petitioner) Solar Farm West Eldamain Road M-2 General Manufacturing (Plano) A-1 (Kendall County) Transportation Land Use Menards Distribution Center Residential/Farm 4. ENERGY INDUSTRIAL USE STANDARDS –Data centers are defined as Energy Industrial Uses per Table 10-3-12(B) in the Unified Development Ordinance. While the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement provides for the waiver of subsequently adopted Energy Industrial Use standards from applying to the subject property, 4 staff has identified and outlined the provisions contained in Section 10-4-10 of the UDO, as adopted in June 2025, and offers the following relevant comments: i. LANDSCAPE BUFFER - Section 10-4-10(A)(1) of the UDO requires data center developments to maintain a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer when adjacent to non-manufacturing land uses, inclusive of an 8-foot tall berm when adjacent to residential and dedicated exclusively for dense landscaping including trees and shrubs but not utilized for stormwater detention, roadways, walking trails or surface parking. Additionally, a minimum 100-foot landscape buffer is required when a data center is adjacent to a public roadway and shall consist of a Transition Zone D landscape buffer. 1. The proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan illustrates a 100’ wide landscape buffer along Eldamain Road and Beecher Road. It appears there is a 50’ wide landscape buffer along a portion of the north property line adjacent to the Commonwealth Edison parcel and a varying depth landscape buffer of 50’-100’ wide along the southern property line. a. Due to the presence of two (2) existing residential land uses to the south on Faxon Road, staff recommends a minimum 8-foot tall berm be installed along this portion of the campus. b. The Landscape Plan indicates the security fencing will be located in front of the 100’ landscape buffer along the south property line adjacent to Faxon Road. However, the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan indicates the security fencing will be located behind Stormwater Basin #7. Please reconcile the plans accordingly. c. The Parks & Recreation Department has inquired about the petitioner providing a trail easement along the Beecher Road and Eldamain Road frontages of the subject property. d. Staff defers to the Landscape Reviewer for additional comments. 2. BUILDING SEPARATION – Section 10-4-10(A)(3) of the UDO requires a minimum of a 500-foot building separation from the nearest data center building or structure (primary or accessory) to the nearest residential or commercial structure. a. While the Site Data table on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan indicates “No Building within 500’ of existing residence”, staff recommends the plan be revised to provide dimensioned distances of the nearest data center building(s) to residential properties along Faxon Road and the two (2) unincorporated residential parcels along the west side of Eldamain Road (PINs #01-24-200- 001 and #01-13-400-004). 3. OPERATIONAL TESTING – Section 10-4-10(A)(6) of the UDO requires operational testing of emergency backup generators be limited to between the hours of 11am to 5pm on weekdays only, non- holidays. 5 a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. 4. NUCLEAR ENERGY – Section 10-4-10(A)(7) of the UDO strictly prohibits data centers from using, generating, storing, or deploying nuclear energy as a power source within the City. This includes, but is not limited to, nuclear reactors, small modular reactors (SMRs), or any other nuclear-based energy. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. 5. PHASING PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(8) of the UDO requires the implementation of a phased construction plan that minimizes impacts on residential structures by prioritizing initial development at the farthest distance from existing residential structures. a. The previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan included a nine (9) phased development plan with each phase consisting of one (1) building and associated stormwater basin. While there is no illustrated phasing plan on the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan, it is noted in the petition that construction is planned to begin with Building 11A (northwest quadrant) this fall with an anticipated tenant occupancy by the end of Q1 2028. i. Staff recommends a formal phasing exhibit be provided as an exhibit to the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan. 6. FENCING - Section 10-4-10(A)(9) of the UDO requires fencing be constructed of security style aluminum, steel, wrought iron, or similar materials. Chain-link or barbed wire fencing is prohibited along public facing edges and properties adjacent to residential land uses. a. Petitioner has provided an image of the proposed high security steel fencing on the Landscape Plan. Staff requests the petitioner verify the height of the proposed fencing. 7. LIGHTING AND PHOTOMETRIC PLAN - Section 10-4- 10(A)(10) of the UDO requires lighting and photometric plans must be submitted at the time of application and adhere to the City’s outside lighting standards. a. Per the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the developer agrees to submit to the City for its approval a photometric plan with manufacturers cut sheets of the proposed lighting standards to be installed in the parking area of the subject property. The photometric plan is to be provided with an application for final plat of at such time the Developer submits for a building permit. i. Since the petitioner has provided in the packet materials a Final Plat of Subdivision (although no application was filed for approval) and the petitioner has indicated they intend to seek a 6 building permit this fall, staff recommends the submittal of a photometric plan as part of this request for Major PUD Preliminary Plan Amendment. 8. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(11) of the UDO requires a Traffic Management Plan be provided during construction, including a communication strategy and an on-site point of contact during construction. a. Staff recommends the petitioner provide a Traffic Management Plan as part of the building permitting process. 9. BATTERY STORAGE – Section 10-4-10(A)(12) of the UDO requires battery storage systems shall be located a minimum of 50 feet away from any adjacent structure and must be readily accessible by Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) for firefighting efforts. a. Is the petitioner proposing any battery storage systems on site? If so, staff requests additional information on location and specifications. 10. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN - Section 10-4-10(A)(13) of the UDO requires an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) be submitted and approved by the City and the Bristol Kendal Fire Protection District (BKFD) prior to issuance of a building permit and must include: a. Procedures for fire suppression, hazardous material spills, evacuation, and communication in case of an incident. b. The location of any battery storage systems. c. Training sessions/drills and or walkthroughs with fire and police shall be required prior to occupancy permit. d. Designated contacts for emergency services and a plan to broadcast information if an incident could affect the public. e. Must work with KenCom emergency managers to be part of text or siren alert systems. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. 11. BUILDING CODE ENHANCED STANDARDS - Section 10-4- 10(A)(14) of the UDO requires installing advanced early fire detection in server rooms, using fire-resistive construction beyond code minimums on walls facing neighborhoods, or providing additional hazardous material safeguards. Compliance with National Fire Protection Association 855 is also required. a. Staff will require written confirmation from the petitioner acknowledging this standard as part of the amended Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement. 7 PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN COMMENTS: 5. MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN – Below is a summary site data table comparing the originally approved Preliminary PUD Plan, the recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan amendment, and the currently proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan amendment: Originally Approved Preliminary PUD Plan Recently Approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan % Change from Minor PUD Preliminary Plan Number of Buildings 9 8 8 N/A Size of Buildings 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 152,000 – 287,400 sq. ft. 137,500 – 275,000 sq. ft. -9.5% -4.3% Total Building Area 2,451,200 sq. ft. 2,163,800 sq. ft. 2,062,500 sq. ft. Up to 2,163,800 sq. ft. N/A Number of Stories 2 2 1 -50% Height of Buildings 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 55’ (top of building) 70’ (top of equipment) 36’ (top of building) 50’-10” (top of equipment) -34.5% -27.4% Number of Parking Spaces 432 378 437 +15.6% Percent Building Coverage 12.3% 10.9% 18.6% +70.6% Percent Site Coverage 35.6% 28.7% 50.3% +75.3% Number of Site Access Drives 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Single Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 2 Eldamain Rd (Primary/Double Drive) Faxon Rd (Emergency Access) 3 Eldamain Road (Primary/Double Drive) Eldamain Road (Emergency Access) Beecher Road (Emergency Access) +50% Number of Stormwater Basins 6 6 7 +16.7% Substation Area 800’ x 1,000’ (800,000 sq. ft) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) 436’ x 920’ (401,120 sq. ft.) N/A Distance of Nearest Residential Structure Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined TBD a. As stated previously, the petitioner must provide Building Structure/Separation distances for the originally approved PUD Preliminary Plan, recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan, and proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan so that staff can compare previous distances to nearby residential to proposed new distances. These dimensions can be provided on the Site Plan or a separate plan exhibit. b. Staff further recommends that the petitioner provide an additional Site Plan depicting the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan overlaid with the recently approved Minor PUD Preliminary Plan to serve as a visual comparison of the proposed changes and supplement the above table. 8 6. PARKING - According to the previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan as part of the Minor PUD Amendment, there were 378 total parking spaces provided. Additionally, the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement stated in Section 2.4 that the parking ratio shall be 0.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area, but in case shall be less than 400 parking spaces, including ADA spaces. a. Per the Site Data table on the proposed Major PUD Preliminary Plan, the total required parking for the subject property based on 2,062,500 square feet is 413 spaces, including 9 ADA accessible spaces. i. However, the petitioner is proposing to provide a total of 437 parking spaces, including 16 ADA accessible spaces, based on the potential of accommodating up to 2,163,800 square feet of building net floor area. Additionally, per Section 10-5-1K-1 of the Unified Development Ordinance, a minimum of 9 electric vehicle charging stations is required. 7. SITE ACCESS – The previously approved Preliminary PUD Plan as part of the Minor PUD Amendment had access to the site via two (2) points of access. One (1) primary entrance off of Eldamain Road and a secondary emergency access off of Faxon Road. These access points lead to internal private roadways which loop around the eight (8) data center buildings and connect to the central electric substation. i. According to the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan, it is noted there are still two (2) points of access. The primary access point, a double drive or “boulevard-style” looped connection, continues to be located off Eldamain Road, which is consistent with the prior approved plan. However, the secondary emergency access point is now located off of Beecher Road and eliminates the connection on Faxon Road which is directly across from existing residential lots and driveways. ii. The new proposed secondary emergency access off of Beecher Road could potentially align with a future access drive to the parcel to the east which is also currently owned by the petitioner. iii. Staff defers to the City Engineer regarding site access. 8. MECHANICAL SCREENING – Per Section 10-5-4 Screening of the Unified Development Ordinance, ground/wall-mounted and roof mounted mechanical units that are visible from any public right-of-way or adjacent residential property shall be screened from public view. The previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement allowed the petitioner to deviate from this requirement by screening only the ground-mounted mechanical equipment but was not required to provide screening for any rooftop mechanical units. a. Per the petitioner’s statement, the now single-story buildings will include a mechanical penthouse incorporating an acoustic screen wall on all four (4) sides. This rooftop screening would be recessed from the primary façade of the buildings and provides a maximum height of approximately 51 feet. b. It is also noted the ground-mounted mechanical equipment in the Major PUD Preliminary Plan will no longer be screened as previously proposed with vinyl fencing equal to the height of the generator units (excluding any stacks protruding above the unit). i. It appears the proposed new screening for the ground-mounted mechanical equipment will be a solid screen wall constructed of a light- colored concrete panel approximately 18’ – 24’ tall providing full-height 9 coverage of the exterior equipment within this “mechanical yard”. Is this accurate? ii. The petitioner is also requesting flexibility to permit areas designated as “mechanical yards” to be converted to additional building floor area in the event that ground-mounted equipment is not required. This would allow the petitioner to achieve a maximum total building area of 2,163,800 square feet across the campus. 9. APPEARANCE STANDARDS – Per Section 10-5-8-C-4 Industrial Uses, masonry products or precast concrete shall be incorporated on at least fifty (50) percent of the total building, as broken down as follows: The "front facade" (defined as that facade that faces a street that includes a main entry to the building) shall itself incorporate masonry products or precast concrete on at least fifty (50) percent of the facade. Any other facade that abuts a street shall incorporate masonry products or precast concrete. The use of masonry products or precast concrete is encouraged on the remaining facades. Where precast concrete panels or split face block is utilized, the use of colors, patterns, or other architectural features within these panels/blocks is encouraged. a. Per Section 2.11 of the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the petitioner was permitted to deviate from certain aspects of the Appearance Standards and required to provide prototype building elevations representative of the architectural design and building materials to be utilized. The plans illustrated exterior building elevations with materials such as concert panels, metal panels, and acoustic barrier screen walls in hues of gray and pewter. Further, the petitioner was required to provide updated elevations with any application for final plat or at time of building permit application. b. The proposed updated elevations continue to primarily feature light-colored precast concrete panels, complemented by medium and dark aluminum composite panel accents and a glass curtain wall system at the entrance. Additional design elements include prefinished metal coping and horizontal and vertical relief lines, which help break up the building mass and provide visual interest. While the buildings are now designed as single-story structures, the main entrance will feature a two-story element accommodating approximately 32,000 square feet of office space, with an overall height of 36 feet. The remainder of the data center building will have a height of 24 feet, excluding the rooftop equipment penthouse. 10. FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION – The petitioner has submitted a Final Plat of Subdivision that consolidates the existing seven (7) parcels comprising the site into a single parcel. The plat also establishes stormwater management easements granting the City perpetual access to the seven (7) proposed basins. This access ensures the City can enter the property to maintain these stormwater facilities in the event the petitioner does not fulfill its long-term maintenance obligations. a. While the petitioner has submitted a Final Plat of Subdivision as part of their application materials, a separate application for Final Plat of Subdivision approval was not provided. It is staff’s understanding that the petitioner does not wish to move forward with Final Plat approval at this time but provided the plan as an informational item. Please confirm. 11. SIGNAGE – Per Section 2.12 of the previously approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement, the petitioner was allowed to install a monument sign on Eldamain Road at the entrance of the project site in addition to a monument sign on Faxon Road. 10 a. Per Section 10-6-6 of the Unified Development Ordinance, single tenant buildings shall be permitted a total of two (2) primary wall signs or one (1) primary wall sign per one hundred (100) linear feet of building frontage. One (1) additional wall sign shall be allowed per additional hundred (100) feet of building frontage. Only one (1) primary wall sign shall be displayed on any single building façade. b. Since the proposed Major Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan has eliminated the secondary entrance off of Faxon Road, is the petitioner still seeking to install a monument sign in this location? i. Is the petitioner seeking to install a secondary monument sign at the proposed new northern entrance off of Eldamain Road? ii. Is the petitioner seeking to install a monument sign at the proposed new entrance off of Beecher Road? 12. STUDIES a. Noise Study i. The petitioner has provided a preliminary noise study for the subject property dated April 22, 2026. It is noted that the study utilizes sound measurements taken in three (3) locations in September 2024. ii. It is noted that since that time, a 5MW solar farm was constructed on an approximately 26-acre site. This may or may not affect the baseline measurements taken in 2024. iii. It is also noted that the study references compliance with Yorkville’s Noise Ordinance as well as the Illinois Pollution Control Board noise requirements. iv. There have been previous comments related to “infra-sound” impacts, as well as vibration and sound impacts to domesticated and agricultural animals nearby. Can the petitioner’s expert provide commentary to these concerns? v. Staff defers to the City’s acoustical engineering consultant for comments on the findings of the study. b. Data Center Impact Analysis i. Staff notes the analysis references the project being a 960-megawatt data center. This is inconsistent with prior references to 540-megawatt center. Please verify the energy capacity for the development and revise report, if needed. c. Fiscal Benefits Report i. Staff notes the report references the project being a 540-megawatt critical IT capacity data center. This is inconsistent with the reference in the Data Center Impact Analysis report. Please verify the energy capacity for the development and revise the report, if needed. ii. Report references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet with seven (7) buildings having 246,387 square feet and one (1) building having 129,350 square feet. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and the individual building sizes being 275,000 square feet and 137,500 square feet, respectively. Please revise report and associated tables for estimated tax revenue per building to reflect the currently proposed building areas. 11 iii. It is noted on Table 3 Estimated Annual Electric Tax Revenue at Build- Out for Yorkville on page 9 of the report, there is a reference to the City’s Electric Tax Rate of $0.0028 per kilowatt hour based on Section 3-2-4 Municipal Utility Tax of the Yorkville City Code. 1. Section 3-2-4 was recently amended in March 2026 via Ord. 2026-26 which revised the per kilowatt hour electric rate for users in excess of 20,000,000 kilowatt hours to $0.285. iv. It is noted that this parcel is wholly within Plano School District #88. d. Economic Impacts Report i. Report references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet with seven (7) buildings having 246,387 square feet and one (1) building having 129,350 square feet. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and the individual building sizes being 275,000 square feet and 137,500 square feet, respectively. Please revise report and associated tables for estimated tax revenue per building to reflect the currently proposed building areas. ii. Has the petitioner considered preparing a Real Estate Valuation Assessment evaluating the potential impact of the proposed data center campus on nearby property values, or alternatively, providing examples of property values before and after construction of comparable data center developments? e. Traffic Impact Study i. It is noted the study references the data center campus as having 1,854,000 square feet and 466 parking spaces. The proposed preliminary PUD Plan has the total allowable building area as 2,163,800 square feet and 437 parking stalls. Please revise study to accurately reflect the currently proposed Preliminary PUD plan. ii. Staff defers to the City Engineer for further review comments of the Traffic Impact Study. f. Natural Resources Information (NRI) Report i. The petitioner has provided a Natural Resources Information report dated June 2024 as prepared by the Kendall County Soil & Water Conservation District. The report provides commentary on the subject property related to current conditions of natural resources such as soil composition, drainage, runoff, and wetland/flood information. ii. Staff defers to the City Engineer regarding the findings of this report. 13. COMMUNITY MEETING - Per Section 10-8-8-F-1-a of the Unified Development Ordinance states a community meeting of area/neighborhood property owners, explaining the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Amendment conducted by the petitioner at their own expense and at a location of their choosing may be required as a recommendation from the Plan Council prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing date. a. Due to the petitioner’s request to reorient and resize the proposed data center buildings on the campus and the proximity of those structures to the residential land uses to the south on Faxon Road and west on Eldamain Road north of the BNSF railroad, staff recommends the petitioner reach out to the homeowners regarding the proposed Planned Unit Development 12 (PUD) Major Amendment prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. 14. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES a. Has the petitioner completed, or does the petitioner intend to complete, additional environmental impact studies such as a Water Usage Study, Air Quality Study, EcoCAT Assessment, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment, Hazardous Materials/Chemical Handling Study, or Climate Resiliency and Heat Island Impact Analysis associated with the proposed data center campus development? If so, please provide copies of any completed studies and an anticipated timeline for any studies still in progress. b. Will the petitioner prepare a public-facing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document addressing environmental and operational topics associated with the proposed data center campus, including but not limited to the proposed air-cooled chillers, rooftop units (RTUs), tier classification and operation of backup generators, evaluation of cleaner alternatives to traditional diesel backup generators, operation of the proposed closed-loop cooling system, anticipated water consumption and recycling measures, and the types of chemicals or treatment agents proposed to be utilized within the cooling and mechanical systems? Soundscape Engineering 3711 N. Ravenswood Ave., Ste. 104 • Chicago, IL 60613 • (312) 436-0032 729 W. Ann Arbor Trl., Ste. 150 • Plymouth, MI 48170 • (734) 418-8663 www.SoundscapeEngineering.com MEMORANDUM May 8, 2026 To: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director, United City of Yorkville, knoble@yorkville.il.us From: Aimee Lalime, INCE Bd. Cert. Re: C1 Yorkville CHI 11 Proposed Data Center Campus and On-site Substations Development Review of Initial Sound Study Dated April 22, 2026 C1 Yorkville LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of CyrusOne, is seeking approval from the United City of Yorkville for development of CHI 11, a 228-acre data center campus and on-site substation development. The original PUD was approved on July 9, 2024, and C1 Yorkville has submitted a major change to the PUD, including an updated initial sound study dated April 22, 2026. The City requested this initial sound study to have the elements described below; our comments regarding each of these elements are shown in blue. 1. Conduct a site noise survey to establish the existing ambient noise environment in the vicinity of the development including the following: a. Measure at locations representative of closest residences to the project at one or more locations in each of the 4 compass directions b. At least one of the measurements in each compass direction shall be at least 24 hours in duration to capture the daytime and nighttime levels c. Additional measurements could be short-duration (15-30 minutes) at the discretion of the project's acoustic consultant. d. Conduct 24-hour measurements at the closest residential subdivision The site noise survey measured sound levels near the roadways bordering the proposed site in 3 of the 4 compass directions at locations A, B, and C. Sound levels were not measured in the north cardinal direction, likely because the closest residence to the north is approximately 2500 feet away. The sound levels were measured for the appropriate durations. While the distances between the measurement locations and the closest roadway or railway were not stated in the report, these measurements appear to be too close to the roadway for the measured Leq (equivalent sound pressure) levels to be representative of the sound levels at the nearest residences (Figure 1 in the Study). However, the study also provided L90 levels, which is the sound level exceeded 90% of the time. In this case, traffic and other transient noise sources are effectively ignored in the L90, making it a more applicable metric to describe the background noise level at the nearest residences. CyrusOne Data Center – Initial Sound Study Review May 8, 2026 SE No. 2234 Page 2 of 3 Soundscape Engineering 3711 N. Ravenswood Ave., Ste. 104 • Chicago, IL 60613 • (312) 436-0032 729 W. Ann Arbor Trl., Ste. 150 • Plymouth, MI 48170 • (734) 418-8663 www.SoundscapeEngineering.com 2. Generate an initial 3D computer model (SoundPLAN, CadnaA, or similar) of the project using the tentative site plan as follows: a. Use representative sound power levels for the mechanical equipment in the planned cooling scheme (generators during routine testing, chillers, RTUs, AHUs, fans, cooling towers, etc.) b. Model peak operation during nighttime hours (and daytime if equipment is planned to operate in a quieter mode during nighttime hours). c. Consider tonality of noise sources and apply the 10-dB penalty to those types of noise sources. d. Describe mitigation methods that may be needed to comply with the City noise ordinance. 1) The computer model included air-cooled chillers, RTUs, back-up generators, and UPS fans. However, it did not specify the number of chillers or fans planned per building. As such, there is insufficient detail for us to review the calculations. We ask that the Petitioner provide additional information on the quantities of equipment per building. 2) The project is noted to include substation transformers, but their noise contribution does not appear to have been included in the model. We ask the Petitioner to provide the transformer sound levels and include them in the initial model. 3) The Study assumes that it is possible to select chillers and mitigation such that the attenutated chillers have no prominent discrete tones. This has yet to be demonstrated. In the final noise study, the analysis is required to be conducted based upon actual measured sound levels for the selected chillers. It is likely that the manufacturer will need to conduct new sound level measurements prior to permitting in order to provide sound levels that are not empirically derived. Tonality should be assessed based on these measurements and at the planned operating speeds. If attenuators are expected to affect equipment tonality, we recommend that the testing be conducted with and without attenuators installed. 4) The acoustic model includes several different noise mitigation measures, including approximately 15-foot-tall rooftop barriers, chiller inlet and discharge attenuators, generator enclosures, and a generator yard barrier. Generator mufflers will be required, and compressor wraps may also be needed, to meet the noise ordinance thresholds. 3. Issue report(s) to document the ambient measurements and initial modeling results. While the report provided sound levels at discrete locations, it did not include a contour map of the noise transmissions into the surrounding neighborhood, which is standard practice for documenting SoundPLAN results and allows us to visually review source locations. We ask that the Petitioner provide a contour map of the predicted noise transmission to the neighborhood. The report noted that the IPCB limits from Class C to Class A land were applied. While enforcement of the IPCB ordinance is outside Yorkville’s jurisdiction, the project is well-advised to comply. We note that this property would be considered Class B land, in our interpretation of IPCB’s Title 35 documentation. (Part 901 lists Information services and data processing industries, Code 4240, as Class B.) CyrusOne Data Center – Initial Sound Study Review May 8, 2026 SE No. 2234 Page 3 of 3 Soundscape Engineering 3711 N. Ravenswood Ave., Ste. 104 • Chicago, IL 60613 • (312) 436-0032 729 W. Ann Arbor Trl., Ste. 150 • Plymouth, MI 48170 • (734) 418-8663 www.SoundscapeEngineering.com The purpose of this initial study was to give the project an opportunity to define noise mitigation challenges early on and change the site layout if needed to facilitate noise mitigation. In general, the listed mitigations are of the appropriate scale and type to allow the project to meet the noise ordinance. However, additional information is needed for us to review the Study findings, as noted above. The City also requested that the Petitioner provide predicted sound levels at 26 residential locations for use in a cumulative noise study. The report notes that the sound levels at the Study receivers fall at least 4 dB below the Code requirements. Since three data center developments have approved PUDs, sound levels of this magnitude could still contribute to an overall exceedance. We ask that the Petitioner provide the predicted sound levels at each of the 26 residential locations requested. **END OF MEMORANDUM** Sold To: United City of Yorkville - 119899 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 Bill To: United City of Yorkville - 119899 651 Prairie Pointe Drive Yorkville, IL 60560 Certificate of Publication: Order Number: 75377 Purchase Order: PUBLIC HEARING PZC 2026-03 State of Illinois - Kendall Chicago Tribune Media Group does hereby certify that it is the publisher of the Aurora Beacon News Classified. The Aurora Beacon News Classified is a secular newspaper, has been continuously published Daily for more than fifty (50) weeks prior to the first publication of the attached notice, is published in the City of Aurora, Township of Aurora, State of Illinois, is of general circulation throughout that county and surrounding area, and is a newspaper as defined by 715 IL CS 5/5. This is to certify that a notice, a true copy of which is attached, was published 1 time(s) in the Aurora Beacon News Classified. The first publication of the notice was made in the newspaper, dated and published on 5/22/2026, and the last publication of the notice was made in the newspaper dated and published on 5/22/2026. This notice was also placed on a statewide public notice website as required by 715 ILCS 5/2. 1. PUBLICATION DATES: 22 May 2026. Aurora Beacon News Classified In witness, an authorized agent of The Chicago Tribune Media Group has signed this certificate executed in Chicago, Illinois on this 23 May 2026, by Chicago Tribune Company _________________________________________ Jeremy Gates Page 1 of 5 Page 2 of 5 Page 3 of 5 Page 4 of 5 Page 5 of 5