Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
3. PC M2021-028 Public Hearing for Consideration of Ordinance Rezoning 600 Greenvale Ave. (Parcel ID 2236150002) and Parcel ID 2236125002 from N1-B: Neighborhood General 1 to N2-B: Neighborhood General 2.
I strongly support the Kraewoods development. We need more housing, more equity, and more diversity in Northfield. This project helps fulfill our town’s carefully developed strategic plan by enhancing density near downtown.This property is also situated to help transcend the defacto segregation of Latinx Northfielders. This project creates a number of affordable apartments within walking distance of schools, churches and downtown. Rental housing is an essential piece of the market, especially for longterm residents without official documentation. The concerns raised are ones we can deal with, becasue we are a resource-rich, involved community with many residents eager to make a difference. The traffic issues are ones the City is prepared to deal with. Loss of some trees will be sad but many trees now can be nurtured by loving homeowners. Working together, we can create pollinator-friendly habitats in our own yards. Thank you serving and for doing this brave, difficult work.
Rezoning the land will allow a private company to do ecological damage to our community, for the purpose of building expensive housing.
Northfield can use affordable housing, but the affordable housing on offer as part of the Kraewood development is a fig leaf.
Moreover, the developer has applied for relief from property taxes for this development, meaning that Northfield will not even reap the tax revenue from the presence of this expensive housing.
There is another meeting, upstairs with Park & Recreation Advisory, regarding other approvals for this project. So even before this matter is decided here, the project is moving forward on other fronts. Schmidt homes is even advertising the Kraewood development on their website.
I urge you to oppose this motion. Preserve what forest we have. And if not, at least use it to the benefit of the people of Northfield instead of bending over backwards for a private company's benefit.
I oppose the rezoning of this property for the magnitude of the proposed development and high density apartment complex as well as the destruction of forest (think climate action) and an increase of impervious surfaces. TIF, requested for this development, was invented for the purpose of rehabbing blighted areas to improve land use. With TIF, there is front loading for the developer for infrastructure then continuing funding directly into the TIF district specifically disallowing latitude for other needs. TIF proceeds for 20 to 30 years. TIF was also developed to support low to moderate income housing. Based on SHED’s information, this development does not meet that criteria.
I strongly support the minor rezoning of two parcels along Lincoln Parkway/Greenvale Avenue. Making the zoning of the entire parcel consistent is a useful step, no matter what proves to be the eventual use of this land.
1) Is the development in character with the neighborhood?
2) Is the City responsible for helping a landowner sell their property?
3) Is the City obliged to help a developer recoup a speculative investment by approving rezoning & development that the neighbors & community are against?
4) If the Climate Action Plan is a priority, is the development of a large forested parcel the best use of this land? 65% of the stored carbon on-site will be removed & it will take at least 25 years for replacement trees to catch up; Do we have this kind of time?
5) Are the desires of the wealthy developers & tax revenues from this project more vital than the needs of the existing neighbors & contributions of the forest?
6) Can we wait to build similar housing capacity but without as much environmental destruction?
7) Should we focus on more community connection & collaboration through smaller, thoughtfully designed projects that directly work with the goals and feedback from the impacted communities?
I strongly support the Kraewoods development. We need more housing, more equity, and more diversity in Northfield. This project helps fulfill our town’s carefully developed strategic plan by enhancing density near downtown.This property is also situated to help transcend the defacto segregation of Latinx Northfielders. This project creates a number of affordable apartments within walking distance of schools, churches and downtown. Rental housing is an essential piece of the market, especially for longterm residents without official documentation. The concerns raised are ones we can deal with, becasue we are a resource-rich, involved community with many residents eager to make a difference. The traffic issues are ones the City is prepared to deal with. Loss of some trees will be sad but many trees now can be nurtured by loving homeowners. Working together, we can create pollinator-friendly habitats in our own yards. Thank you serving and for doing this brave, difficult work.
I oppose motion.
Rezoning the land will allow a private company to do ecological damage to our community, for the purpose of building expensive housing.
Northfield can use affordable housing, but the affordable housing on offer as part of the Kraewood development is a fig leaf.
Moreover, the developer has applied for relief from property taxes for this development, meaning that Northfield will not even reap the tax revenue from the presence of this expensive housing.
There is another meeting, upstairs with Park & Recreation Advisory, regarding other approvals for this project. So even before this matter is decided here, the project is moving forward on other fronts. Schmidt homes is even advertising the Kraewood development on their website.
I urge you to oppose this motion. Preserve what forest we have. And if not, at least use it to the benefit of the people of Northfield instead of bending over backwards for a private company's benefit.
I oppose the rezoning of this property for the magnitude of the proposed development and high density apartment complex as well as the destruction of forest (think climate action) and an increase of impervious surfaces. TIF, requested for this development, was invented for the purpose of rehabbing blighted areas to improve land use. With TIF, there is front loading for the developer for infrastructure then continuing funding directly into the TIF district specifically disallowing latitude for other needs. TIF proceeds for 20 to 30 years. TIF was also developed to support low to moderate income housing. Based on SHED’s information, this development does not meet that criteria.
I strongly support the minor rezoning of two parcels along Lincoln Parkway/Greenvale Avenue. Making the zoning of the entire parcel consistent is a useful step, no matter what proves to be the eventual use of this land.
1) Is the development in character with the neighborhood?
2) Is the City responsible for helping a landowner sell their property?
3) Is the City obliged to help a developer recoup a speculative investment by approving rezoning & development that the neighbors & community are against?
4) If the Climate Action Plan is a priority, is the development of a large forested parcel the best use of this land? 65% of the stored carbon on-site will be removed & it will take at least 25 years for replacement trees to catch up; Do we have this kind of time?
5) Are the desires of the wealthy developers & tax revenues from this project more vital than the needs of the existing neighbors & contributions of the forest?
6) Can we wait to build similar housing capacity but without as much environmental destruction?
7) Should we focus on more community connection & collaboration through smaller, thoughtfully designed projects that directly work with the goals and feedback from the impacted communities?