It is disingenuous ("lacking in candor") of Ms Worthington, the City Planner, to claim ignorance of economics. Gosh, maybe, talk to the City's Economic Development Director?? Then explain to Minneapolis citizens the economic alternatives to home-ownership, and the negative consequences of this government-taking of asset protection (up-zoning with 4-plexes/hi-rises).
We must organize to ensure officials face their own consequences at the voting booth.
Instead of focusing on the physical "built form" aspects of the plan, there are other foundational tools the City should support to help balance equity in housing: education, occupation, and bank lending reform. If housing appreciation depends on location, the Park Board/Foundation is doing more for equity than any zoning plan, by developing parks in all underserved neighborhoods.
The comment period must be extended in order that officials educate themselves, and citizens, on the unintended consequences of this blunt instrument of a plan!
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Plan would not achieve desired results.
Start over.
J
John labree
8 years ago
This will cause one of the great migrations out of the city. Please rethink this idea.
S
SUZANNE HARDEN
8 years ago
Although I am not opposed to 4-plexes, I do not agree with the proposed larger multifamily buildings. I also do not think this plan adequately addresses affordability. Congestion is likewise not addressed. In our climate, off-street parking is essential.
K
Krista Medlin
8 years ago
Do better
S
Susan Rice
8 years ago
This plan is terrible for the darling, settled, quiet neighborhoods. Why change areas people love and enjoy? Leave it alone.
G
Greg Berkhof
8 years ago
I'm against the 2040 plan as it is currently structured.
B
Beth Russell
8 years ago
I think neighborhood input is vitally needed. I wholeheartedly support affordable housing options throughout the city, but this plan doesn’t work on so many levels.
D
daniel Messer
8 years ago
This plan has obviously been developed by people who have only studied theories about city planning without taking into consideration the specificity of Minneapolis as a center of the greater Twin Cities area. They also completely ignored the fragile balance between between city amenities, population density, and nature that Minneapolis has been able to achieve over its history and that is unique and greatly praised in North America.
Although the plan recognizes real issues that must be addressed to make Minneapolis an even greater place to live, ignoring and vilifying the middle class who lives in single-family homes will be completely counter-productive and create tension and division that will only exacerbate the current issues.
If the city has budget issues it believes can be solved by increasing the tax base through population density, the infrastructure is not in place to support the increase and must be addressed before increasing the number of large dwellings.
I could go on and on about what is wrong in this plan and I submitted my comments online.
Finally, a change of this scope should not be decided by the city council but by the citizen of Minneapolis through popular vote after an extensive information campaign
K
Kelly Quinn
8 years ago
As a resident of Armatage, I strongly oppose the 2040 plan. I do not support multi unit housing in my residential neighborhood.
M
Melissa Licht
8 years ago
I'm not opposed to well-designed density, but rezoning the entire city seems unlikely to foster good design and leaves neighborhoods out of the conversation. Let's make a plan that includes everyone and build in measures that will actually address affordable housing.
E
Elizabeth Howell
8 years ago
I am not supportive of the plan as it is currently drafted.
M
Maria Loomis
8 years ago
I strongly oppose the Minneapolis2040 Plan.
L
Lisa Russell
8 years ago
On top of the concerns that are mentioned in this petition, I have a lot of concerns about the amount of traffic this plan would bring to my neighborhood. I live near 50th and Chowen Ave and the increase in traffic and speeding cars have become very noticeable over the years. Chowen is the only "through" street in the area (it's one of the only streets to have a stoplight and goes from 50th directly to Southwest High School) which causes speeding down the street and makes the corner of 49th and Chowen (by Pershing Park) unsafe because people do not fully stop at the stop signs. On top of the high school and 50th and France traffic, many people park on Chowen to go to Red Cow, Lake Harriet United Methodist Church, or the Waters Senior Living building, and one side of Chowen is permit parking only after 4:00 PM. I think it would be best if another street could be made a “through” street, such as Zenith, Drew or Ewing. People barely use these other streets, and it would greatly alleviate some of the traffic on Chowen. If you build more housing on this street, there will be even more traffic and parking issues. Things have changed rapidly in the area over the years, yet there have been no changes to help traffic conditions. This plan has not taken into account these factors and has not properly researched this neighborhood.
D
DAVID D SADLER
8 years ago
Let's keep Minneapolis with its quality of life forever.
P
Patricia Helin
8 years ago
Listen to your community and VOTE NO!
S
stan finkelstein
8 years ago
good intentions gone wrong by our elected officials who do not want (or appreciate) input from their constituents
It is disingenuous ("lacking in candor") of Ms Worthington, the City Planner, to claim ignorance of economics. Gosh, maybe, talk to the City's Economic Development Director?? Then explain to Minneapolis citizens the economic alternatives to home-ownership, and the negative consequences of this government-taking of asset protection (up-zoning with 4-plexes/hi-rises). We must organize to ensure officials face their own consequences at the voting booth. Instead of focusing on the physical "built form" aspects of the plan, there are other foundational tools the City should support to help balance equity in housing: education, occupation, and bank lending reform. If housing appreciation depends on location, the Park Board/Foundation is doing more for equity than any zoning plan, by developing parks in all underserved neighborhoods. The comment period must be extended in order that officials educate themselves, and citizens, on the unintended consequences of this blunt instrument of a plan!
Plan would not achieve desired results. Start over.
This will cause one of the great migrations out of the city. Please rethink this idea.
Although I am not opposed to 4-plexes, I do not agree with the proposed larger multifamily buildings. I also do not think this plan adequately addresses affordability. Congestion is likewise not addressed. In our climate, off-street parking is essential.
Do better
This plan is terrible for the darling, settled, quiet neighborhoods. Why change areas people love and enjoy? Leave it alone.
I'm against the 2040 plan as it is currently structured.
I think neighborhood input is vitally needed. I wholeheartedly support affordable housing options throughout the city, but this plan doesn’t work on so many levels.
This plan has obviously been developed by people who have only studied theories about city planning without taking into consideration the specificity of Minneapolis as a center of the greater Twin Cities area. They also completely ignored the fragile balance between between city amenities, population density, and nature that Minneapolis has been able to achieve over its history and that is unique and greatly praised in North America. Although the plan recognizes real issues that must be addressed to make Minneapolis an even greater place to live, ignoring and vilifying the middle class who lives in single-family homes will be completely counter-productive and create tension and division that will only exacerbate the current issues. If the city has budget issues it believes can be solved by increasing the tax base through population density, the infrastructure is not in place to support the increase and must be addressed before increasing the number of large dwellings. I could go on and on about what is wrong in this plan and I submitted my comments online. Finally, a change of this scope should not be decided by the city council but by the citizen of Minneapolis through popular vote after an extensive information campaign
As a resident of Armatage, I strongly oppose the 2040 plan. I do not support multi unit housing in my residential neighborhood.
I'm not opposed to well-designed density, but rezoning the entire city seems unlikely to foster good design and leaves neighborhoods out of the conversation. Let's make a plan that includes everyone and build in measures that will actually address affordable housing.
I am not supportive of the plan as it is currently drafted.
I strongly oppose the Minneapolis2040 Plan.
On top of the concerns that are mentioned in this petition, I have a lot of concerns about the amount of traffic this plan would bring to my neighborhood. I live near 50th and Chowen Ave and the increase in traffic and speeding cars have become very noticeable over the years. Chowen is the only "through" street in the area (it's one of the only streets to have a stoplight and goes from 50th directly to Southwest High School) which causes speeding down the street and makes the corner of 49th and Chowen (by Pershing Park) unsafe because people do not fully stop at the stop signs. On top of the high school and 50th and France traffic, many people park on Chowen to go to Red Cow, Lake Harriet United Methodist Church, or the Waters Senior Living building, and one side of Chowen is permit parking only after 4:00 PM. I think it would be best if another street could be made a “through” street, such as Zenith, Drew or Ewing. People barely use these other streets, and it would greatly alleviate some of the traffic on Chowen. If you build more housing on this street, there will be even more traffic and parking issues. Things have changed rapidly in the area over the years, yet there have been no changes to help traffic conditions. This plan has not taken into account these factors and has not properly researched this neighborhood.
Let's keep Minneapolis with its quality of life forever.
Listen to your community and VOTE NO!
good intentions gone wrong by our elected officials who do not want (or appreciate) input from their constituents
Listen to your community and VOTE NO!
Listen to your community and VOTE NO!
You will lose my vote