Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission - 06/24/1974 - Special a MINUTES ' SPECIAL MEETING SMETANA LAKE SECTOR STUDY Eden Prairie Planning Commission Monday, June 24,1974 7:30 PM City Hall Members Present: Sorensen, Lynch, Fosnocht, Schee, Lane. Members Absent: Brown -out of town, Meyers-on vacation Staff Present: Dick Putnam, City Planner. Chairwoman Schee stated that the special meeting was a continuation of the public hearing and to begin the meeting the planner would present the staff report . The planner explained the 4 maps on the wall that illustrate the possible land uses; Maculan's plan , the Guide Plan, the Composite plan ( the staff's proposal) ', and Mr. Pearsons' proposal. Back-grounding the study the planner said that Mr. Ray Maculans was hired to complete the basic research and report , because during the study's origin the staff' was devoting the majority of its time to the MCA report. Besides Maculan's report there has also been numerous , data from agencies and landowners. After a recommendation is made by the Commisssion the Council will be reviewingall the information and will adopt a plan, or combination of plans, that will then be submittted to the necessary agencies for their reviewal. The planner foresees traffic problems at the various intersections because of the ` development in Lake Smetana and surrounding communities of Edina, Minnetonka, and Hopkins and that there should be a joint effort between the municipalities and highAray departments. 150,000-240,000 trips/ day are - foreseen for the total area which does not include the MCA. Mr..Sarensen added that those trips were generated trips wlich do not take into account what presently exists. The planner referred the Commission to the 8 listed general objectives on p. ]5b stating that more could have been added but these objectives were considered in the report. He then proceeded to summarize the 22 land use areas outlined in the staff report giving the proposed land use of each, their access points, and natural features. Excavation levels were recommended in some of the areas. The Composite plan has a total of 237 acres of open space some of which may be used as office or commercial credit. Whatever the use of the open space the intent is to retain the hill character. Mr. Sorensen asked what year the traffic data cited in the staff report was from. The planner said that they were '72 traffic figures. The planner believes that the peak hour volume is extremely critical because in industrial district about 40 % of the daily trips are during the peak hour period. In summarizing the traffic capacities of the 3 plans he stated that the Guide Plan is 5.4 times over capacity the Composite 3.2 times over the capacity, and Maculan's plan about 2.3 times over capacity so all of the proposals have traffic prcnlems. Special Meeting - Smetana Lake Sector Study June 24, 1974 page 2 He believed if the area develops as expected with such traffic problems that waits will even be experienced in parking-lots to reach secondary streets. He felt that modifications to normal business practices will be dictated to aIieviate some to the traffic problerrsas recommended in Maculan 's report. Mr. Fosnocht thought that there has been a less than favorable experience with mass transit due to people living in dispersed areas. It was Mr. Sor ensen's feeling from Uniflow representatives that a PRT system is extremely unlikely because presently the City does not have the necessary heavy traffic flow. The planner contended that if areas are built for autos that mass transit may never be achieved because it must be encouraged or forced. Because of the future traffic problems Mr. Fosnocht felt that the City should have a policy of controlling the problem or a reasonble solution. Being that heavy developnent is expected within 10-15 years Mr. Sorensen did not ;believe that the government could arrive at a transit solution within that time. The planner felt that the problem would be lessened . if.an area is provided where people Can both live and work. He stated that industries would not locate .where workers could not safely get to and from work therefore making the land unmarketable. To relieve some of . the congestion Fosnocht suggested that 2 or 3 partial on off ramps be investigated. Mr. Sorensen , suggested that projected traffic flows for 169,212 , 494, and 62 be provided to the Commission. Chairwoman Schee then asked for comments or suggestions from the audience. i Bill Pearson suggested a loop ramp off Washington Avenue onto 494 to dl.eviate some of the congestion and/or provide the extension of West 78th Street to Bush Lake Road on W. 7 8th Street. Mr. Frank Smetana asked if the grade levels were mandatory or suggested on the hills. The planner said that they were suggestions as to reasonable amounts to be cut. Mr. Bundlie, Mr. Pearson's attorney, questioned the reasoning for leaving the two knobs in the area above the creek. The planner responded that the purpose was for the scenic advantage and that it would enchance the value of the properties. Mrs.Balfanz asked how far into their property the N/S road would go. The planner said that the road's alignment could be along the property line or through it depsriding upon its future use and desires of the owners. Mr. Pearson briefly presented an illustrated model of a plan for a propcsed small shop/office complex on the open space area facing the creek. Mr. Smetana asked if the new Valley View wo uld border his property on :the north. The planner responded that it could. With no further comments or questions from the audience or Commission Schee entertained a motion. b � Special Meeting- Smetana Lake Sector Study June 24, 1974 ' page 3 Sorensen moved, Fosnocht seconded, to instruct the staff to do more staff research as to the questions of the Commission members and to continue the public: hearing to the July 2nd meeting. The motion was unanimously approved. Schee then, asked members of the audience to include any comments they may have to the Commission or to the staff prior to the July 2nd meeting if there was further input. She also encouraged some action on the ' Commission's part for the next meeting. Fosnocht moved, Lane seconded to adjourn at 10 : 15 PM. The motion carried unanimously.