Rework the Minneapolis 2040 Plan

You have not done a good job of informing mpls residents of this plan and how it will affect them. Most people I have talked to know nothing about it. Additionally, our council member, Jeremy Schroeder, holds community meetings on this plan during the day when many, many people can't attend: people who work, mothers with children at home (especially when school isn't in session), etc. etc. I have found this plan very difficult to follow. What are the specific details that affect my neighborhood? What is the timeline? Are you listening to your constituents or just ramming this through? Who does this benefit: developers or neighborhoods? For us, this is not a racial, gender, age, economic issue. It's about saving our beautiful neighborhood, schools, businesses, etc. Don't turn it into a racial thing!! We have many young families moving into our neighborhood that have invested heavily in improving their homes and properties as well as people that have lived here a long time and worked hard to own their homes and make improvements. Are you going to just ignore this and take all of this away? Where's the incentive for people to continue to make this the wonderful neighborhood it is? Where are the demographic facts of our specific area?

Why ruin a beautiful, charming, stable, functioning, low crime neighborhood with apartments. I bet there are other neighborhoods that would love 2040 more than the Fulton neighborhood. I have lived in my house in the Fulton neighbor for 50 years and when it comes time for us to sell our house, I would like to sell my house at a decent value without a 6 story apartment in the backyard.

I live in a historical neighborhood, full of vintage bungalows. I moved to my neighborhood specifically because of this. It is the character of this neighborhood.I have put down roots, worked on my house & yards, and created community with my neighbors. We are already being hit my devleopers tearing down smaller houses and replacing them with McMansions. If this poorly thought out plan passes, I will immediately plan to move.

Minneapolis is a beautiful city with great potential for thoughtful growth. Look at the most beautiful cities in the world. They are the ones who did not destroyed their charm or history as they grew, but the ones that preserved their uniqueness as they thoughtfully planned their growth. This plan in no way achieves this. It is a bad plan.

I am strongly opposed to Minneapolis 2040 Plan as currently drafted. I am opposed to centralized zoning by the Minneapolis city council. Zoning, as in the past, should be governed at the neighborhood level. I am opposed to universal Fourplexes zoning: The plan should not adopt universal fourplex zoning. The plan should honor current residential zoning. The plan should not set precedence for increased density in neighborhoods that are currently zoned single family or duplex. I am opposed to increased density everywhere. Linden Hills is a prime example where increased density will be detrimental to quality of life. As drafted, the plan will reduce green-space. It will increase vehicle traffic on now quiet residential streets and will negatively impact the family friendly nature of this community. It will make Linden Hills a dangerous place for children to play without adult supervision. Zoning should be evaluated street by street with the goal to maintain current character and livability. I am opposed to loss of green space. I am opposed to six story multiplex building on conduit streets that currently are lined by single family or duplex homes. I am opposed to increased poisonous diesel bus traffic in my neighborhood. I am opposed to increased vehicle traffic on residential streets. I support 20 MPH speed limit for residential neighborhoods, as recently adopted by Portland, Oregon. I encourage city council to petition for change in state law that would make this possible. I don’t believe the Chain of Lakes parks can accommodate increased traffic. Currently there is little, if any, enforcement of pedestrian/bike only paths, one way traffic on bike paths, and 10 MPH speed limit on bike paths. It’s important to recall that bike and walking paths were segregated by the Park Board in the 1970s after a biker fatally struck a pedestrian on a combined path at Lake Harriet in 1972. There is no appreciable enforcement of traffic or pedestrian laws at the bu

"Transit corridors" will soon be obsolete with ride-sharing and self-driving vehicles before 2040. I suspect this is about driving up the city's tax base to pay for pension obligations.

Concerned about the 2040 Plan. I do not believe it will create 'affordable' housing in some of the rezoned areas so in practice will not be a good plan.

thisplan is short sighted and politically generated for developer profiteering.

This is just way too much zoning change for one lifetime.

Without strong rent control laws in Minneapolis more development, apartments and condos will only lead to further gentrification and redistribution if wealth to the 0.1%

Ruining my neighborhood, and 'personal wealth' that is tied to my home when apartments are built across the street... as Heather Worthington said, "owning your residence is an outdated..way.. to build wealth". Thanks Heather, myopic, very

No to the 2040 plan. I am for keeping Minneapolis great!

Please rework this plan.

This plan is deeply flawed. Let’s open up the discussion.

how about rent control to make housing affordable to low income folks

Horrible plan!

Neighborhoods before developers!!!!!

this is NOT a good plan.

I am very opposed to the 2040 plan. Increased density does not lead to more affordable housing - it leads to gauging by developers and toxic environments with fewer wild spaces and lawns, fewer trees and more concrete, more rules and less freedom of movement.

Density is not the goal for a livable city, only destroys small town values and vibes and brings big city problems, pollution, traffic, higher costs of living Ive witnessed it,