Carol Becker's editorial counterpoint "So, let's talk about what 'density' really is" (Opinion Exchange, Sept. 17) is right that cities should strategically encourage density to support transit and walkable neighborhoods, but I had trouble finding a single fact in her piece (really).
Let's review some examples: Becker states that the Minneapolis 2040 Plan lets developers "put 10-story buildings all over the city." She cities Lyndale Avenue to support this claim. But rather than allowing 10-story buildings, Lyndale Avenue North is designated a four-story corridor and Lyndale Ave South allows a maximum of six stories (from Franklin Avenue to 31st Street), four stories (31st Street to 38th Street) and 2.5 stories (south of 38th).
Similar low- to mid-rise guidance exists for all of Becker's other examples.
Becker further claims light-rail transit does not spur development, perplexingly citing the 38th Street station area, recently approved for a multiphase urban development with residential, retail, and office space (phase 1 is complete).
Last, Becker declares that allowing triplexes does not create functional density. Really? Greater per-acre density in low-rise neighborhoods supports transit in Boston, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.
I'll end my corrections there to stay within Star Tribune letter-to-the-editor word limits.
The 2040 Plan is comprehensive. It likely didn't get everything right. But we need an honest discussion about the merits of the plan if we want to be able to address places where it may have missed the mark. Opinion pieces designed to be taken literally but not seriously, or seriously but not literally, are not helpful.
Sam Rockwell, Minneapolis
The writer is president of the Minneapolis Planning Commission.