I was disappointed to read about the St. Paul City Council's rejection of the hotly contested Alatus project along Lexington Parkway in the Union Park neighborhood near the Green Line ("St. Paul rejects building apartment complex on vacant lot," April 8). The primary reason: gentrification and the fears that it would put nearby rental prices out of reach for local residents. But gentrification is a much more nuanced concept than the debates would have one believe. According to the economist Joe Cortright, "the persistence and spread of concentrated poverty — not gentrification — is our biggest urban challenge." The urban planner Jeff Speck notes in his book "Walkable City Rules" that people often confuse gentrification with displacement, and he states that "more displacement actually takes place in our poorest neighborhoods than in neighborhoods that are gentrifying." He acknowledges that displacement is a "crisis deserving dedicated policy" and outlines a number of approaches for limiting it.
From where I sit, it appears that the Alatus team was working with the neighborhood to incorporate affordable units into the project. Team members were also committed to making an active and well-detailed public realm that would supplant a completely degraded pedestrian environment. A project like this should be not be evaluated based on a single issue. Like the neighborhood in which it would have been located, this project is multifaceted and can contribute to community health and character in many ways. Walk no further than to University Avenue from this site, and there are numerous examples of purely affordable multifamily housing that have been built along the Green Line, with more on the way.
A city is a collection of parts, all of them important, that together have the potential to make a community livable and inviting. The Alatus decision closes the door on a project that would have strengthened the neighborhood by adding diversity on an underutilized site without directly displacing anyone.
Bob Close, St. Paul
HENNEPIN AVENUE
It's a city; we use all of it — that is, if the city lets us
Regarding "Businesses fear losing parking on Hennepin" (April 4): I worked at Honeywell's corporate offices when they were just off Interstate 35W at 28th Street in Minneapolis. My colleagues and I would drive into Uptown for lunch and would patronize shops there as well on our way home. It was a great place to transact commerce. We'd even go there on the weekends. (Dudley Riggs, Uptown Bar, etc.)
But I no longer go Uptown, and the primary reason is the traffic and parking. It's worse than San Francisco, and that's nothing to be proud of.
In an age in which I can buy groceries from the Wedge Co-op via Instacart, or meals from any of Uptown's restaurants via GrubHub and the like, why on earth would I endure the hassle of going there in person? And to someone whose family has lived in the city since the 1930s, the sad thing is that the same thing is now happening in Northeast.
Mark Tarnowski, Minneapolis
ARTICLE ON TRIBES, UNIVERSITY
Was that a quote or 'air quotes'?
The article "Tribes seek answers" (April 4), pertaining to the University of Minnesota's history with Indigenous nations, included the following sentence: "Freeman said he was appalled to learn of the 'unethical' research."
Readers deserve an explanation of the punctuation. The sentence might be quoting William Freeman, a former Indian Health Service research director, or it might indicate that not everyone thinks the research done at Red Lake was unethical.