Rework the Minneapolis 2040 Plan

The 2040 plan as it reads seems designed to increase density in already too dense areas with little thought to the traffic and parking issues it is sure to create. A drive south from Lake street to 36th Street on Emerson Ave, for example , gives one an idea about the level of density we would be faced with . There has to be a better way to move forward without breaking up established neighborhoods, decreasing walkability( too crowded) , bringing side-street traffic almost to a stand-still in summer - and what about winter, adding a lane of plowed snow to already crowded streets ? This is a plan that needs more staff work and definitely more input from local citizens.

Our focus needs to be in the mid terms and this issue requires more thought and discussion. Please delay this action.

Opposed to 2040 plan

For years my wife and I searched for a house where we could raise our family and enjoy neighbors from all walks of life. Our block contains retirees, lawyers, non-profit employment consultants, writers and small business owners interested in making our block part of a community. The 2040 Plan erodes that sense of community. It is surprising in its breadth and threatens to transform our City of Lakes into a City of Congestion. Our streets, even main thoroughfares, are extremely finite for the increased number of vehicles this plan would flood the area with. This plan flies in the face of current planning and zoning laws. And tall structures bordering skinny streets would be a boon to only one group -- developers. Ask planning and development and executives if the current infrastructure could handle the demands on city electric and sewer systems. In short, the 2040 plan is a disaster that would further boost property taxes and litter a beautiful quadrant our city with mini-condo buildings.

Chose not to move back to Seattle because it is overdeveloped and yet unaffordable and congested. I don’t want to see Minneapolis trying to be another Seattle! Please show us a successful model, ideally with a climate that limits bike commuting for chunks of the year, so we know what we are aiming to realistically accomplish. Minneapolis is a thoughtful, measured city and we should plan 2040 that way too.

I've been composing my own email opposing this plan but you've expressed it so, so well. I'll still send in my own, too, and hope that we can all make a difference. Thank you!!!

I agree wholeheartedly

Please don’t ruin the character of our neighborhood for an untested plan. I moved into LH for the non crowded small village feel. Uptown is not what we want in here. I had mixed emotions until I talked to friends that are real estate agents and developers. They are salavating at the thought of this happening. They also informed me that If we are planning on moving do it sooner than later.

The 2040 Plan needs to be revised to address the many concerns expressed by residents of Minneapolis - both home owners and renters. Besides planning for to accommodate additional residents, owners and renters of various economic levels the infrastructure needs of the city must be improved and expanded for the additional population that is anticipated. The scale of residential units, particularly the height of buildings, must be considered when being developed adjacent and/or in proximity to existing neighborhood and communities. Six and ten story building in areas with two and three story residential structures is not an acceptable solution.

I have two primary concerns. Building more multi-family housing does not make them affordable for the "wrongs" the plan intends to make "right" Educated people that are able to get good paying jobs can live where they want. I think education and jobs would go a long way for affordable housing. My second huge concern is the pretense that the plan wants a green tree canopy. Drive south of 50th on Xerxes and count the trees in the single family homes' yards. Do you really think apartment buildings will have green space or setback of 30 feet? A prime example of an opportunity in Mpls to make a stellar statement about green space was the re-work of the Nicollet Mall. That is a complete disaster. We didn't take vehicles off of the mall, we didn't add green space or places to sit. And are the trees alive now - or will they ever be? What was the city thinking? We NEED green space. There are studies that cite tree lined streets have less crime. I mean tall trees that provide shade and calming; not 8 foot tall trees that are treated like garden plants and are cut down to start over every 6 years. I have visited huge cities where it is wall to wall 30 story concrete apartment buildings. I am always happy to get home to the short buildings of Minneapolis .

Hi Linea I received your letter regarding Minneapolis 2040. I am re-sending a letter I sent over a month ago, both to you and the council members. I am adding a few other points that I have come up with. I am very disheartened as I don’t believe this is a well thought through plan. A few of the council members responded and told me to submit on the Minneapolis 2040 website which I had already done I feel no one is listening and I am mostly concerned that the infrastructure will not support such density. As an example, our street W 32nd Street, is rarely plowed and becomes a “less than one lane street” during the winter, and would NEVER ALLOW ACCESS to an emergency vehicle. Is this what we are supposed to live with? Anyway, in case you missed it, here is my original letter: Dear Council Members Reich, Gordan, Fletcher, Cunningham, Ellison, Warsame, Goodman, Jenkins, Cano, Bender, Schroeder, Johnson and Palmisano, My husband and I moved here almost three years ago, from the south, and were ecstatic to find that such a beautiful place exists. I cannot imagine what it will be like once the planned building takes place. I only heard about this plan a few weeks ago, so not sure how 'advertised' it has been. I am also not sure that the planners have taken everything into account: the amount of congestion, especially on a weekend is huge. There have been numerous accidents over the past few years, involving cars, cyclists and pedestrians. These have occurred everywhere, but especially at the Dean Parkway/Lake Street intersection. Not to mention, a friend's child was hit while riding his bike last week, and thankfully survived even though he cracked the car's windshield If we leave our house on 32nd street at 5:30 pm, to pick up children from the Kenwood School, it takes anywhere from an hour to an hour and a half round trip. It is awful. We make a left onto Excelsior and have to sit through five or six green lights before even moving. We are

My family strongly opposes the plan and wish it to be reworked taking into account community involvement. To think that our 1900 home that we’ve put significant time and resources to restore to its original beauty could be zoned to become a new construction 4 plex or larger is upsetting and sad. The very character of of neighborhood will be ripped away in the name of developers profits. I’m certain that an “affordable” housing option would be never be errected in its place. This is all aside from the fact that this is an investment which would vastly decrease in value should apartments become abundant. We are not opposed to affordable housing but we cannot pretend that the plan makes any promise that any new development will be “affordable”. Our request is to rework the rezoning part of the plan.

Who are these people? Does anyone developing these plans actually live in this area? How did it get this far in the first place?

This is a rushed and ineffective plan that has encouraged divisive and unproductive mischaracterizations of Southwest Minneapolis residents as white, wealthy and out of touch, High density does not mean affordable housing, especially when developers and landlords stand to gain so much at the expense of so many longtime citizens. Why does the plan, unlike affordable housing plans in a number of other major U.S. cities, not focus more on ways to help low income families afford single family home ownership, instead of rental living in apartments and high rises. , My neighbors are diverse, politically active, informed, socially aware and not rich. We saved and worked hard to afford to buy our homes, we spend our hard earned money to pay taxes, support our schools, maintain and improve our homes and properties, and we raise families and sometimes multi generations in our single family homes. Our neighborhoods are special because they are communities where we gather for block parities and national night out, where we know one another's names, welcome new neighbors, and keep an eye out for one another. The proposed plan would not only decimate neighborhoods by tearing apart the physical appearance of the neighborhood with its 100 year old plus homes, it would tear apart the fabric of the community. Instead of stability,, there will be renter turnover and absent landlords, instead of homes and properties that are maintained and respect the architecture and history of the neighborhoods, there will be new, oversize structures that make developers and landlords richer, and with no incentives to keep up the rental properties. There will be congested streets, more strain on our infrastructure and city services, and increase stress on the environment and the Chain of Lakes,. Every block in this plan faces an uncertain future without any written assurances for residents. There is no upside for residents under a plan that is so broad that every block is designated for higher

Return the City Council to 2-year terms with public campaign financing!!

We strongly oppose the current proposal and do not feel it is best for Minneapolis

Who is coming up with these ideas? Are these planners from Minneapolis? Do they have any idea of beauty? Why are we even thinking of this project?

I am absolutely opposed to the 2040 plan as it now stands. We need far more neighborhood and citizen input, and a vote should be put to Minneapolitans, if not in 2018, then in 2020. No more trying to ramrod this through.

Because the City did a great job with the K-Mart area.

My family of four oppose the 2040 plan!