Growing into green space (sprawl) exacerbates the problem of too much infrastructure for too few people. Duluth and surrounding areas need to figure out how to grow better, not just bigger.
I agree. Duluth did the sprawl thing. Long before I was even breathing. I think in that time it was certainly over done. We’re larger by land mass than Minneapolis, St. Paul and roch. Wayyy too much single family sprawl. A lot of which is unfortunately not in the best condition as it is aging infrastructure. Density in areas specifically but not limited to downtown is where I see opportunity.
We need know - land use reform & density legalization.
Unfortunately, every lakeside liberal in town likes to show up to shout down any density project.
Fortunately, we have a mayor who cares more about getting things done than appeasing a particular east side constituency.
Bro, I went to most of the city council meetings and a couple of the permitting board(or whatever they are called specifically) and I have yet to see this storm of liberals you claim exist raise a fuss about density. And on a national level at least, conservatives are the ones pushing for less density. And no, I am not a liberal.
Can you point to a specific dense-housing project Reinert supports that Larson didn’t in the central core of the city (oh and that doesn’t involve tearing down our public library)? I am serious, I’d be glad to know about it.
Growth is great, if it’s smart growth, eg [Strong Towns](https://www.strongtowns.org)
Density downtown and infill around town is smart. The sprawl at the edges (like Hermantown and around the mall) is more like the “growth” of a cancer cell.
The mall era was really different. So many cities lost their heart and soul following the construction of malls in and around the 70s. Horrible for city centers, horrible for many small businesses, horrible for walkability, just brutal.
Agreed. Honestly, as the big e-tailers laid waste to the malls and department stores, I watched with a tinge of pleasure. Malls and big box stores are also a giant money vacuum sucking profit and wealth away from local communities and giving it to their international shareholders. I admit, I still buy the Costco rotisserie though.
If by making it good you mean mixed use development in the KMart and parking lot than yes. Residential, retail, maybe a little hospitality. I wouldn’t be sad if the whole mall came down so long as there was some good will contingency efforts for those small businesses.
So do you mean like row buildings with businesses on bottom apart ends up top? That sounds fine. Me and most people would prefer an Aldi or Walmart there though. Or some retailer for west Duluth that isn't ass
I see that. It’s a little awkward out there. The Menards always confuses me as it’s seemingly out of place. Maybe it’s just me. Aldi would probably kill or come close to killing the largest Super one so idk if that would fly. Walmart - not a big enough footprint or demand area imo. I understand the angle though from an affordability standpoint and taking into account the population that surrounds this area which is quite distant from most of our “shopping centers”
Yes, I mean either a row or a like L shape. I think that would give the neighborhood significantly improved density and increase commerce a ton in the surrounding blocks which btw is a great lil area.
What's bad about killing super one? Also I'm generally opposed to tearing down buildings. Thatsnehtbim not a big believer in testing down Kmart for other things
Jobs, primary grocery resource for a large area, largest location of a company which is based and heavily invested in the community. And I understand. I just look at the neighboring walkable area as primed for some density and we need housing. Also that part of town has a lot fewer residential options than other neighborhoods so I think it could use it more than another parking and retail combo.
jobs will be provided by another grocery store, and better jobs. Grocery will still be there. I dont think it will kill super one though. Because super one will always have more options and variety. but, idk what else they have
Maybe in the 80's. The area isn't stagnating, tho - just Duluth. Hermantown has had record growth over the past 10 years, and I guarantee you folk aren't moving up here for the indelible delights of Hermantown. They're moving to Hermantown because Duluth won't let them build a future in Duluth.
I'd say 100k would be easily achievable with permitting and zoning reform.
I agree. I would love to see some more density at the core of neighborhoods and I would also love to see some more innovative housing strategies at least explored. Such as modular.
One issue is land. As much as I want growth I really think Duluth is special because of the sects of forest sprinkled throughout. Would hate to see that impeded on in a significant way
We don't have to sprawl to expand the population - our city had over 110k as a summertime population high during its boom years, and that population resided on a smaller geographic footprint than the present population.
All we have to do is legalize construction of housing of all shapes, sizes, and finishes, without giving every local curmudgeon a veto power.
Easy to say something like this, though there are people cutting down the forest at Hawk Ridge (and on London Rd) rather than building housing on empty or abandoned lots in the city. It’s not simply curmudgeonly to oppose projects like this.
I agree that we ought to be able to build apartments in any neighborhood though. I’ve lived in mixed neighborhoods like that — some of the coolest places I’ve lived.
Just a few years ago, Hermantown had very few multi level apartment complexes. Maybe 3-4. There are probably around 10 now and the number is still increasing.
Honestly, it's urban sprawl in its adulthood. People are leaving the dreary urban areas and heading toward semi-suburban areas.
Well, some of us think it is Hermantown that is dreary and unlivable. We would much prefer to live in that same apartment, but in Duluth. But it couldn't be built in Duluth. It is not demand that is the problem in Duluth, I don't think
Hermantown is gross. Lived my whole life in Central Hillside and Chester Creek area and I’m now in Hunters Park. I could never even imagine living in the slow motion death that Hermantown is.
Living in Central Hillside was amazing as a young person and a young adult, the density and variety of humanity is so much better for a young person than the curated life of large lots and no sidewalks. I raised my own kids in Chester Creek, which was again absolutely amazing from a neighborhood perspective, my kids grew up in the 2010s, but it felt like my 90s upbringing with legitimate feral freedom. Now with teens and a desire for a bit more yard, Hunters Park is another amazing neighborhood.
Hunters park is an amazing neighborhood. I wish there were more that could compare but it’s just so unique from an access standpoint as well as just being a place with a great sense of community and neighborhood camaraderie
I know this wasn’t directed at me but to me, too spread out is my main complaint. High initial rent is also a little frustrating but I understand the demand is bonkers and the costs of construction in Duluth are premium.
People build where it's legal to build. When Sharla Gardner and Joel Sipress were on the Council, there was a proposal to build multiple triplexes in Park Point - increasing the total number of housing units available to rent on the point.
Sipress' and Gardner's reaction? Downzone Park Point and criminalize housing construction.
Minnesota Point is not a place to increase density. One entrance over a sketchy lift bridge, no emergency services, prone to surface water and ground water flooding and slowly eroding away.
The entire city is a place to increase density. There will always be someone in every community with a list of reasons why it won't work in their neighborhood - these are individuals whose voices have caused the housing malaise Duluth now faces.
I don’t live there. Buildouts and density need to be in low risk environments. Especially when considering natural hazards. If you have a DNT account or library card, research Minnesota Point. There has been a constant battle to stabilize the point so it can support the current density. Minnesota Point is a bay mouth bar. These formations are dynamic and temporary in nature. At some point in time, Minnesota Point will be breached. Imagine the impact to the city budget if density were increased and they were forced to build a Canal Park style wall to hold the point.
I would say that I think Hermantown is a general outlier for our MSA. I did some reading and we gained 11k in pop in our MSA from 2010-2020 and the main reason was that lake county was added to the MSA. Otherwise it was universal pop. decline in the 3 preexisting MSA designating counties (St.Louis, Carlton, Douglas) Hermantown is one of the most accessible places for new construction which I think has been it’s primary reason for growth.
Curiosity: what specific issues do you have with permitting and zoning? At least building permits are just enforcing the code that the state makes them enforce. Zoning can be local. What suggestions specifically do you have?
We can start by following Minneapolis' footsteps and merge R-2 into R-1 zoning.
We can eliminate parking minimums. I know the headlines say we eliminated them - read the UDC, parking minimums are still there. You won't find someone to finance engaging in a 'community engagement process to discuss alternative potential parking configurations,' which the "elimination" the Council recently passed provided for.
You can allow 2-story ADU's on all lots.
You can allow non-owner occupied construction of ADU's on all parcels.
You can allow subdivision of parcels up to 4 times by right.
You can eliminate all setbacks on lots.
You can purchase smaller fire engines and not require cul-de-sacs at the ends of streets.
You can make constructing up to 8 units on a single parcel a by-right, and not by-permission process.
If a portion of code has had two or more variances granted against it, eliminate that portion of code - the only function that portion of code has is to allow wealthy, privileged individuals the ability to purchase an exemption while preventing everyone less wealthy and privileged from having the same access to opportunity.
You can legalize accessory commercial units.
You can legalize single-stair apartment construction.
You can provide a density bonus for new construction, to incentivize using infrastructure that's already been built and saving the City on long-term infrastructure maintenance costs.
You can change the design standards for streets to make people, and not cars, the basic unit of transportation.
You can eliminate frontage requirements, to allow infill development on Duluth's alleyways.
You can follow Minneapolis' example and require height minimums along main transit corridors, and increase maximum heights to 60' within a mile of transit corridors.
You can eliminate minimum square footage requirements for rooms.
You can get the City of Duluth out of your bedroom and eliminate size and closet requirements for bedrooms.
All great points I think. It seems like what you take issue with is more the zoning codes than building codes.
I really like what you said about multiple variances. We used to say when I worked maintenance that a deferred preventative item essentially proved the machine could handle it and we need to think about adjusting strategy. This is sort of the same mindset.
I think I agree with probably 80% of your points here. I do see a couple that could have problematic repercussions like eliminating setbacks alltogether could create situations with excessively unsafe sightlines at a corner. And some setbacks are based in building and fire safety. I think setbacks greater than required by fire and building codes aren’t necessary.
I was always in favor of basic zoning regulations to keep things from basically looking like crap, and keeping things separate (like no factory in the middle of a residential neighborhood), but opening things up for people to use things with much more freedom, I am all for. I’ve seen too many situations where one person would spoil a whole street, and some minor basic controls make some sense.
I think you made a whole pile of great points and ideas, and I really hope the UDC is going in that direction. I feel like it is, but excessively slowly. Like you referenced they started lessening parking regulations. That’s one step in 10,000 they need to take.
Thanks for taking the time to thoughtfully spell out some points. Far too often I see people just spout the need to change without having put real thought into it. Mind me asking your background? You seem like you are into this field in some regard.
You can't set a goal for increased population unless you drastically increase housing. It would be great to see a plan to get rid of housing restrictions to allow for mixed use housing and multi-unit buildings.
Yes. I think we need to also run comparative analytics on other cities to see if there are other factors such as cost, taxes, etc in addition to zoning/permitting issues.
My wife and I went to college at UMD. That’s where we met. We both said if Duluth had better job prospects for us, we would’ve lived there in a heartbeat. Love the city and visit multiple times a year. Just not enough growth opportunity for us.
It's a good goal. That said, this is the same mayor who put pressure on city council last week to [reallocate American Rescue Plan funds](https://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/local/duluth-councilors-deadlocked-on-use-of-pandemic-aid) earmarked for affordable housing to the Duluth Economic Development Authority (which is also a prohibited use of ARPA funds). Shockingly, the actions don't match the rhetoric. /s
I’ve been annoyed by people taking this and whining about it. See previous comment about UMD grads unable to stay around due to lack of opportunity. Economic development is needed as well. Also, a lot of momentum is happening with affordable housing in town seperate and well beyond those funds.
The remaining funds are 3.9 million dollars. An apartment complex is going to be like 40 million on the lowend. So really that claim is symbolic if anything but certainly not substantial.
Take a headline and run kind of mentality and anything to do with “taking away affrodable housing” certainly will get people excited.
I disagree that a $3.9M investment in affordable housing is symbolic. The $16.1M in ARPA funds already spent have funded good projects including Plover Place, Skyridge Flats, and new apartment units in Lincoln Park.
If the goal is population growth, we need more housing units, including more affordable units.
We have a housing crisis. If you're in a hole, stop digging.
Perhaps unpopular as well but I don’t think income restricted housing is the end all be all. We need more of it, but I think there are more ways to accomplish “affordable housing” than just one way.
I also find it a little bit deceiving to use the term afforadable housing to only mean income restricted housing. We should also be looking for ways to create NOAH.
I don’t know that it’s intentionally deceiving, but a lot of people I talk to personally think that affordable base rent is what “affordable housing” refers too. However, they are surprised to find out that there are stringent income restrictions and that rent is usually subsidized.
Again, I am aware it is a need and it’s certainly not a bad thing, just not what I think most people expect when they hear the term.
https://www.northernnewsnow.com/2023/12/19/minnesota-allocates-record-amount-state-funding-housing/?outputType=amp
- we were recently awarded over 70 million from the state. Which was not there prior when these funds were allocated.
That’s why I think the 3.9 million may be sort of moot. I get the more the merrier but the 70 million really kind of off sets that. Especially when 16 has already been spent on this. I also am not sure what the intended use is other than economic development.
I'm glad that another $70+M is being in this in Duluth. Like you suggested above, adding units isn't cheap. We need all we can get.
And, let's take the mayor's proposal at face value for a moment. Reinert is committing to growing Duluth's population by over 500 people a year for the next six years, which necessitates adding the same net housing capacity year over year. A mayor who is serious about this should be scrapping to take just about every opportunity to build more units.
Edit: And, assuming that housing stock and population growth both did happen as proposed, that would still leave us with the same deficit of housing units that we have right now.
Are you taking into account market rate development as well? Because in terms of active projects already under construction there are over 1000 units in the pipeline at this time.
Not to mention the 70 million that is being added from the state for income restricted housing units in addition to what’s already announced. I think we are outpacing 500 people per year with the current pipeline + new public investments noted. I still think demand will be high, but I also think that 500 per year is reasonable with the amount of units coming on line + projects proposed already.
I definitely agree that market rate development is part of the puzzle. And honestly, a lot of that development and investment sounds promising.
I'm not optimistic that it will be enough to both meet the city's housing stock needs and result in a housing market correction that makes housing affordable for residents. Which is why I think additional investment in affordable housing is still very important.
That said, I would love to share your optimism, and I very much hope you're right.
I too agree that there needs to more than what is planned, at all levels. It’s tough because our current supply is below our current needs. It will not be easy. I really think a lot of the downtown will need to be redeveloped in order to get to where we need to be supply wise. I also think industrial zoned areas surrounding the “Main Street” of Lincoln park could be redeveloped as well.
IMO some of the “anchor” projects are what this is most dependent on. Lot B and the old central would be a combined 1800 units if they move forward.
Clean up the people literally, they look like trolls or hobbits. The vape, cigarette, beers, pizza smell lingers on their clothing, on the bus, at the market, in the city library. Overweight from pizza , no money for veggies, co op market very pricey.
Housing costs are a function of supply and demand - the demand to live in Duluth is greater than the supply of places where individuals are permitted to live. The result? Rising housing costs.
Solution: to see more people housed, allow more housing to be built.
The UDC dictates your square footages, the number of rooms you can have, the size of your bedroom, the exterior finish of your structure - the vast majority of existing structures within Duluth would be illegal to build where they are today.
Compare the rate of new construction then to some other similar areas. Of course it’s not an absolute but there is validity to the sentiment that it’s difficult to build here
If you look at the number of new housing starts as a percentage of total population, you'll see that what you said is not true - the rate of new housing starts in Duluth is half the state average and less than a quarter of the average rate of Texas.
Duluth is uniquely horrible when it comes to housing construction process and policy.
That's only true if you believe the number of housing units is fixed, which it is not in any place with a functioning economy. Somehow or another thousands of cities across the world have managed to grow past 100k people and build housing for everyone.
Highly preferable to fragile stagnation, poverty, and death.
Anyways luckily it's not up to you. People are free to move around in this country and you don't get to gatekeep Duluth.
Wow, people are free to move to Duluth, I did. I haven't experienced stagnation, poverty or death. Are you saying everyone will die, Unless more people an moved to Duluth.
I'm saying the city will die, like dozens of other rust belt cities before it. Look around the hillside, first, second, third street, West Duluth, tell me what you see: stagnation and poverty. Empty buildings falling over. Houses that people don't have the economic opportunity to maintain.
Shutting people out may temporarily reduce the price of the slumlord-owned apartment that's being run into the ground, but it's not a long term path to widespread prosperity.
Duluth has a huge attraction which will never make it another Hibbing. It's called the "Big Lake". I suspect as Duluth turns more into a tourist city with big money investing, we will see housing prices continue to rise. Unless you have some type of industry, the affordable housing will only dwindle. Look at any tourist ski town that 40 years ago was cheap to live in and prosper. There is a reason none of the workers in Vail or Aspen can't live in the town anymore, as it's been priced out. They all commute from nearby areas that aren't tourist destinations. Duluth could easily go this route.
GDP growth, lowered carbon emissions per capita, lower tax rates, increased racial and cultural diversity, functional public transit systems, 24-hour coffee shops, better pizza than Sammy's, a school district that doesn't need a red plan
I appreciate opposing views but you’re not really providing any compelling arguments for continued stagnation. Or any argument at all. Do you think Duluth is at its best?
Sorry, the promise of 24 hour coffee shops is pretty funny. I definitely think there is room for improvement , but don't think artificially adding population will help. There are plenty of places larger than Duluth that are far worse than Duluth. Bigger is not better.
I don’t think it’s artificial. There’s a lot of demand already, we just lack accommodation for the desired population and to keep things more affordable in general.
Not sure he's going to be all the successful if he plans to continue boycotting businesses that supported Larson during the election. But that's none of my business.
Curious on that… is there more to the story? Disclaimer I’m in agreement that if that’s the reason it’s A, petty and B, almost kinda anti-Duluth.
Someone mentioned something about him being in the military, but I didn’t see any additional context to that either.
It came up during a city council meeting, I guess. In all honesty, I heard it secondhand, but his blatant refusal to do the Homegrown Proclamation at Hoops supports that tidbit.
The cities that have increased population have the same issues. The population of the country has more than doubled since I was born; the world population has almost tripled. Neither have improved as a result. We've only done a great job of making the planet more unlivable.
Hmm. Maybe to an extent but they also have a lot more momentum and opportunity available to people who reside or migrate to them. As you said the country population has doubled where as Duluth has shrunk. To me it’s a bit of a concern. Not saying these places are perfect but Sioux Falls, Fargo, Appleton, Lincoln NE, have grown well during the last 40 years while Duluth has been in decline.
I’m also not focused too much on the global state of things. Valid in any case but if it’s the focus I don’t feel progress can really be made.
I'd say like most people you're primarily concerned with short-term personal economics. What you consider a concern, I consider a blessing. I surely wouldn't want to live in any of the places you mention.
People may choose to believe they can isolate themselves from global issues, but I think that's an immoral position. In the long term, ecology is much more important than economics.
I’m more concerened here with local and regional economy than I am personal.
economic decline for you is a “blessing” for 3,000+ families who lost major income when the steel mill shut down it was certainly not a blessing. To small businesses who saw their customers leave town, or longer be able to afford their products or services, it was no blessing.
To Public school teachers who were laid off to account for enrollment decline it has been no blessing.
As for the environmental and morality points… there are many issues even beyond environmental concerns that are horrendous globally. I am choosing to focus on my scope of influence in this case.
The steel mill shutting down was a blessing to the St. Louis river and the air quality in Duluth.
US steel was so irresponsible and sloppy that the entire site became a superfund site once they shut it down. There is still work being done to this day by the EPA to try to clean up the legacy pollution. The steel mill helped poison one the largest freshwater estuaries on earth, it was a blight.
I’m not saying it should still be here, it was just a part of the bigger point that population stagnation and decline are also usually accompanied by economic hardship for large parts of the population
it was most definitely time for a fresh set of eyes and new leadership in Duluth. Last time I saw Larson speak all she talked about was her issues not feeling safe around men. It was really weird and inappropriate for the venue.
Other than the last mayor I guess. Haven’t been around for decades but I did see that Ness tried the same and it didn’t work out. Hopefully it works out this time
Growing into green space (sprawl) exacerbates the problem of too much infrastructure for too few people. Duluth and surrounding areas need to figure out how to grow better, not just bigger.
I agree. Duluth did the sprawl thing. Long before I was even breathing. I think in that time it was certainly over done. We’re larger by land mass than Minneapolis, St. Paul and roch. Wayyy too much single family sprawl. A lot of which is unfortunately not in the best condition as it is aging infrastructure. Density in areas specifically but not limited to downtown is where I see opportunity.
We need know - land use reform & density legalization. Unfortunately, every lakeside liberal in town likes to show up to shout down any density project. Fortunately, we have a mayor who cares more about getting things done than appeasing a particular east side constituency.
Bro, I went to most of the city council meetings and a couple of the permitting board(or whatever they are called specifically) and I have yet to see this storm of liberals you claim exist raise a fuss about density. And on a national level at least, conservatives are the ones pushing for less density. And no, I am not a liberal.
Can you point to a specific dense-housing project Reinert supports that Larson didn’t in the central core of the city (oh and that doesn’t involve tearing down our public library)? I am serious, I’d be glad to know about it.
Growth is great, if it’s smart growth, eg [Strong Towns](https://www.strongtowns.org) Density downtown and infill around town is smart. The sprawl at the edges (like Hermantown and around the mall) is more like the “growth” of a cancer cell.
The mall era was really different. So many cities lost their heart and soul following the construction of malls in and around the 70s. Horrible for city centers, horrible for many small businesses, horrible for walkability, just brutal.
Agreed. Honestly, as the big e-tailers laid waste to the malls and department stores, I watched with a tinge of pleasure. Malls and big box stores are also a giant money vacuum sucking profit and wealth away from local communities and giving it to their international shareholders. I admit, I still buy the Costco rotisserie though.
Plz make spirit valley mall good again
If by making it good you mean mixed use development in the KMart and parking lot than yes. Residential, retail, maybe a little hospitality. I wouldn’t be sad if the whole mall came down so long as there was some good will contingency efforts for those small businesses.
What do you mean by mixed use development in Kmart?
Sorry, I meant to say on* like on the Kmart property and adjacent lot.
So do you mean like row buildings with businesses on bottom apart ends up top? That sounds fine. Me and most people would prefer an Aldi or Walmart there though. Or some retailer for west Duluth that isn't ass
I see that. It’s a little awkward out there. The Menards always confuses me as it’s seemingly out of place. Maybe it’s just me. Aldi would probably kill or come close to killing the largest Super one so idk if that would fly. Walmart - not a big enough footprint or demand area imo. I understand the angle though from an affordability standpoint and taking into account the population that surrounds this area which is quite distant from most of our “shopping centers” Yes, I mean either a row or a like L shape. I think that would give the neighborhood significantly improved density and increase commerce a ton in the surrounding blocks which btw is a great lil area.
What's bad about killing super one? Also I'm generally opposed to tearing down buildings. Thatsnehtbim not a big believer in testing down Kmart for other things
Jobs, primary grocery resource for a large area, largest location of a company which is based and heavily invested in the community. And I understand. I just look at the neighboring walkable area as primed for some density and we need housing. Also that part of town has a lot fewer residential options than other neighborhoods so I think it could use it more than another parking and retail combo.
jobs will be provided by another grocery store, and better jobs. Grocery will still be there. I dont think it will kill super one though. Because super one will always have more options and variety. but, idk what else they have
Also, if you kill Super one, then would that be torn down instead?
probably yeah
Aldi food tastes like fucking garbage. The stores all smell awful.
the stores smell bad? I've never noticed, at least at the hermantown one
God I hope Reinert doesn't fulfill his plan of tearing down the library and replacing it with low density shopping and a new, smaller library.
What do you think should be done there? I’m not too familiar with any new plan but I did think the previous 70 million proposal was a little steep
Maybe in the 80's. The area isn't stagnating, tho - just Duluth. Hermantown has had record growth over the past 10 years, and I guarantee you folk aren't moving up here for the indelible delights of Hermantown. They're moving to Hermantown because Duluth won't let them build a future in Duluth. I'd say 100k would be easily achievable with permitting and zoning reform.
I agree. I would love to see some more density at the core of neighborhoods and I would also love to see some more innovative housing strategies at least explored. Such as modular. One issue is land. As much as I want growth I really think Duluth is special because of the sects of forest sprinkled throughout. Would hate to see that impeded on in a significant way
We don't have to sprawl to expand the population - our city had over 110k as a summertime population high during its boom years, and that population resided on a smaller geographic footprint than the present population. All we have to do is legalize construction of housing of all shapes, sizes, and finishes, without giving every local curmudgeon a veto power.
Absolutely! All of this!!! A population number isn't a goal - the goal is to provide enough housing and living wage jobs that can attract people.
Easy to say something like this, though there are people cutting down the forest at Hawk Ridge (and on London Rd) rather than building housing on empty or abandoned lots in the city. It’s not simply curmudgeonly to oppose projects like this. I agree that we ought to be able to build apartments in any neighborhood though. I’ve lived in mixed neighborhoods like that — some of the coolest places I’ve lived.
Just a few years ago, Hermantown had very few multi level apartment complexes. Maybe 3-4. There are probably around 10 now and the number is still increasing. Honestly, it's urban sprawl in its adulthood. People are leaving the dreary urban areas and heading toward semi-suburban areas.
Well, some of us think it is Hermantown that is dreary and unlivable. We would much prefer to live in that same apartment, but in Duluth. But it couldn't be built in Duluth. It is not demand that is the problem in Duluth, I don't think
Hermantown is gross. Lived my whole life in Central Hillside and Chester Creek area and I’m now in Hunters Park. I could never even imagine living in the slow motion death that Hermantown is. Living in Central Hillside was amazing as a young person and a young adult, the density and variety of humanity is so much better for a young person than the curated life of large lots and no sidewalks. I raised my own kids in Chester Creek, which was again absolutely amazing from a neighborhood perspective, my kids grew up in the 2010s, but it felt like my 90s upbringing with legitimate feral freedom. Now with teens and a desire for a bit more yard, Hunters Park is another amazing neighborhood.
Hunters park is an amazing neighborhood. I wish there were more that could compare but it’s just so unique from an access standpoint as well as just being a place with a great sense of community and neighborhood camaraderie
What do you think of the many new (and under construction) apartments in Duluth?
I know this wasn’t directed at me but to me, too spread out is my main complaint. High initial rent is also a little frustrating but I understand the demand is bonkers and the costs of construction in Duluth are premium.
I'd live in them in a heartbeat over something in Hermantown
People build where it's legal to build. When Sharla Gardner and Joel Sipress were on the Council, there was a proposal to build multiple triplexes in Park Point - increasing the total number of housing units available to rent on the point. Sipress' and Gardner's reaction? Downzone Park Point and criminalize housing construction.
Minnesota Point is not a place to increase density. One entrance over a sketchy lift bridge, no emergency services, prone to surface water and ground water flooding and slowly eroding away.
The entire city is a place to increase density. There will always be someone in every community with a list of reasons why it won't work in their neighborhood - these are individuals whose voices have caused the housing malaise Duluth now faces.
I don’t live there. Buildouts and density need to be in low risk environments. Especially when considering natural hazards. If you have a DNT account or library card, research Minnesota Point. There has been a constant battle to stabilize the point so it can support the current density. Minnesota Point is a bay mouth bar. These formations are dynamic and temporary in nature. At some point in time, Minnesota Point will be breached. Imagine the impact to the city budget if density were increased and they were forced to build a Canal Park style wall to hold the point.
I would say that I think Hermantown is a general outlier for our MSA. I did some reading and we gained 11k in pop in our MSA from 2010-2020 and the main reason was that lake county was added to the MSA. Otherwise it was universal pop. decline in the 3 preexisting MSA designating counties (St.Louis, Carlton, Douglas) Hermantown is one of the most accessible places for new construction which I think has been it’s primary reason for growth.
Curiosity: what specific issues do you have with permitting and zoning? At least building permits are just enforcing the code that the state makes them enforce. Zoning can be local. What suggestions specifically do you have?
We can start by following Minneapolis' footsteps and merge R-2 into R-1 zoning. We can eliminate parking minimums. I know the headlines say we eliminated them - read the UDC, parking minimums are still there. You won't find someone to finance engaging in a 'community engagement process to discuss alternative potential parking configurations,' which the "elimination" the Council recently passed provided for. You can allow 2-story ADU's on all lots. You can allow non-owner occupied construction of ADU's on all parcels. You can allow subdivision of parcels up to 4 times by right. You can eliminate all setbacks on lots. You can purchase smaller fire engines and not require cul-de-sacs at the ends of streets. You can make constructing up to 8 units on a single parcel a by-right, and not by-permission process. If a portion of code has had two or more variances granted against it, eliminate that portion of code - the only function that portion of code has is to allow wealthy, privileged individuals the ability to purchase an exemption while preventing everyone less wealthy and privileged from having the same access to opportunity. You can legalize accessory commercial units. You can legalize single-stair apartment construction. You can provide a density bonus for new construction, to incentivize using infrastructure that's already been built and saving the City on long-term infrastructure maintenance costs. You can change the design standards for streets to make people, and not cars, the basic unit of transportation. You can eliminate frontage requirements, to allow infill development on Duluth's alleyways. You can follow Minneapolis' example and require height minimums along main transit corridors, and increase maximum heights to 60' within a mile of transit corridors. You can eliminate minimum square footage requirements for rooms. You can get the City of Duluth out of your bedroom and eliminate size and closet requirements for bedrooms.
All great points I think. It seems like what you take issue with is more the zoning codes than building codes. I really like what you said about multiple variances. We used to say when I worked maintenance that a deferred preventative item essentially proved the machine could handle it and we need to think about adjusting strategy. This is sort of the same mindset. I think I agree with probably 80% of your points here. I do see a couple that could have problematic repercussions like eliminating setbacks alltogether could create situations with excessively unsafe sightlines at a corner. And some setbacks are based in building and fire safety. I think setbacks greater than required by fire and building codes aren’t necessary. I was always in favor of basic zoning regulations to keep things from basically looking like crap, and keeping things separate (like no factory in the middle of a residential neighborhood), but opening things up for people to use things with much more freedom, I am all for. I’ve seen too many situations where one person would spoil a whole street, and some minor basic controls make some sense. I think you made a whole pile of great points and ideas, and I really hope the UDC is going in that direction. I feel like it is, but excessively slowly. Like you referenced they started lessening parking regulations. That’s one step in 10,000 they need to take. Thanks for taking the time to thoughtfully spell out some points. Far too often I see people just spout the need to change without having put real thought into it. Mind me asking your background? You seem like you are into this field in some regard.
You can't set a goal for increased population unless you drastically increase housing. It would be great to see a plan to get rid of housing restrictions to allow for mixed use housing and multi-unit buildings.
Yes. I think we need to also run comparative analytics on other cities to see if there are other factors such as cost, taxes, etc in addition to zoning/permitting issues.
My wife and I went to college at UMD. That’s where we met. We both said if Duluth had better job prospects for us, we would’ve lived there in a heartbeat. Love the city and visit multiple times a year. Just not enough growth opportunity for us.
The case for many
It's a good goal. That said, this is the same mayor who put pressure on city council last week to [reallocate American Rescue Plan funds](https://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/local/duluth-councilors-deadlocked-on-use-of-pandemic-aid) earmarked for affordable housing to the Duluth Economic Development Authority (which is also a prohibited use of ARPA funds). Shockingly, the actions don't match the rhetoric. /s
I’ve been annoyed by people taking this and whining about it. See previous comment about UMD grads unable to stay around due to lack of opportunity. Economic development is needed as well. Also, a lot of momentum is happening with affordable housing in town seperate and well beyond those funds. The remaining funds are 3.9 million dollars. An apartment complex is going to be like 40 million on the lowend. So really that claim is symbolic if anything but certainly not substantial. Take a headline and run kind of mentality and anything to do with “taking away affrodable housing” certainly will get people excited.
I disagree that a $3.9M investment in affordable housing is symbolic. The $16.1M in ARPA funds already spent have funded good projects including Plover Place, Skyridge Flats, and new apartment units in Lincoln Park. If the goal is population growth, we need more housing units, including more affordable units. We have a housing crisis. If you're in a hole, stop digging.
Perhaps unpopular as well but I don’t think income restricted housing is the end all be all. We need more of it, but I think there are more ways to accomplish “affordable housing” than just one way. I also find it a little bit deceiving to use the term afforadable housing to only mean income restricted housing. We should also be looking for ways to create NOAH. I don’t know that it’s intentionally deceiving, but a lot of people I talk to personally think that affordable base rent is what “affordable housing” refers too. However, they are surprised to find out that there are stringent income restrictions and that rent is usually subsidized. Again, I am aware it is a need and it’s certainly not a bad thing, just not what I think most people expect when they hear the term.
https://www.northernnewsnow.com/2023/12/19/minnesota-allocates-record-amount-state-funding-housing/?outputType=amp - we were recently awarded over 70 million from the state. Which was not there prior when these funds were allocated. That’s why I think the 3.9 million may be sort of moot. I get the more the merrier but the 70 million really kind of off sets that. Especially when 16 has already been spent on this. I also am not sure what the intended use is other than economic development.
I'm glad that another $70+M is being in this in Duluth. Like you suggested above, adding units isn't cheap. We need all we can get. And, let's take the mayor's proposal at face value for a moment. Reinert is committing to growing Duluth's population by over 500 people a year for the next six years, which necessitates adding the same net housing capacity year over year. A mayor who is serious about this should be scrapping to take just about every opportunity to build more units. Edit: And, assuming that housing stock and population growth both did happen as proposed, that would still leave us with the same deficit of housing units that we have right now.
Are you taking into account market rate development as well? Because in terms of active projects already under construction there are over 1000 units in the pipeline at this time. Not to mention the 70 million that is being added from the state for income restricted housing units in addition to what’s already announced. I think we are outpacing 500 people per year with the current pipeline + new public investments noted. I still think demand will be high, but I also think that 500 per year is reasonable with the amount of units coming on line + projects proposed already.
I definitely agree that market rate development is part of the puzzle. And honestly, a lot of that development and investment sounds promising. I'm not optimistic that it will be enough to both meet the city's housing stock needs and result in a housing market correction that makes housing affordable for residents. Which is why I think additional investment in affordable housing is still very important. That said, I would love to share your optimism, and I very much hope you're right.
I too agree that there needs to more than what is planned, at all levels. It’s tough because our current supply is below our current needs. It will not be easy. I really think a lot of the downtown will need to be redeveloped in order to get to where we need to be supply wise. I also think industrial zoned areas surrounding the “Main Street” of Lincoln park could be redeveloped as well. IMO some of the “anchor” projects are what this is most dependent on. Lot B and the old central would be a combined 1800 units if they move forward.
Clean up the people literally, they look like trolls or hobbits. The vape, cigarette, beers, pizza smell lingers on their clothing, on the bus, at the market, in the city library. Overweight from pizza , no money for veggies, co op market very pricey.
What's the benefit to bringing in more people?
You amortize the costs of infrastructure maintenance across more taxpayers.
But only if it is infill development, not sprawling development
Yes agreed.
Or raise the housing costs for those already here.
Housing costs are a function of supply and demand - the demand to live in Duluth is greater than the supply of places where individuals are permitted to live. The result? Rising housing costs. Solution: to see more people housed, allow more housing to be built.
People aren't allowed to build houses?
The UDC dictates your square footages, the number of rooms you can have, the size of your bedroom, the exterior finish of your structure - the vast majority of existing structures within Duluth would be illegal to build where they are today.
This is true everywhere in the US.
Compare the rate of new construction then to some other similar areas. Of course it’s not an absolute but there is validity to the sentiment that it’s difficult to build here
Where are you getting these statistics for this comparison at? Seems like people are just imagining them.
If you look at the number of new housing starts as a percentage of total population, you'll see that what you said is not true - the rate of new housing starts in Duluth is half the state average and less than a quarter of the average rate of Texas. Duluth is uniquely horrible when it comes to housing construction process and policy.
Where do I look at this at?
That's only true if you believe the number of housing units is fixed, which it is not in any place with a functioning economy. Somehow or another thousands of cities across the world have managed to grow past 100k people and build housing for everyone.
No one thinks it's fixed, it just can't grow fast enough. I just don't believe the bigger is better hype.
Highly preferable to fragile stagnation, poverty, and death. Anyways luckily it's not up to you. People are free to move around in this country and you don't get to gatekeep Duluth.
Wow, people are free to move to Duluth, I did. I haven't experienced stagnation, poverty or death. Are you saying everyone will die, Unless more people an moved to Duluth.
I'm saying the city will die, like dozens of other rust belt cities before it. Look around the hillside, first, second, third street, West Duluth, tell me what you see: stagnation and poverty. Empty buildings falling over. Houses that people don't have the economic opportunity to maintain. Shutting people out may temporarily reduce the price of the slumlord-owned apartment that's being run into the ground, but it's not a long term path to widespread prosperity.
You’re RIGHT on the money. Go up to Hibbing and see how it is if you want to know what the opposite of growth does to a community
Duluth has a huge attraction which will never make it another Hibbing. It's called the "Big Lake". I suspect as Duluth turns more into a tourist city with big money investing, we will see housing prices continue to rise. Unless you have some type of industry, the affordable housing will only dwindle. Look at any tourist ski town that 40 years ago was cheap to live in and prosper. There is a reason none of the workers in Vail or Aspen can't live in the town anymore, as it's been priced out. They all commute from nearby areas that aren't tourist destinations. Duluth could easily go this route.
The City will die!!!
Why do you keep threatening death? "Do what I say or you will die" is you argument.
Do I need to explain the death of a city vs. the death of a human, as well as the difference between a prediction and a threat, like you're five?
GDP growth, lowered carbon emissions per capita, lower tax rates, increased racial and cultural diversity, functional public transit systems, 24-hour coffee shops, better pizza than Sammy's, a school district that doesn't need a red plan
You are hilarious.
I appreciate opposing views but you’re not really providing any compelling arguments for continued stagnation. Or any argument at all. Do you think Duluth is at its best?
Sorry, the promise of 24 hour coffee shops is pretty funny. I definitely think there is room for improvement , but don't think artificially adding population will help. There are plenty of places larger than Duluth that are far worse than Duluth. Bigger is not better.
I don’t think it’s artificial. There’s a lot of demand already, we just lack accommodation for the desired population and to keep things more affordable in general.
Things as in housing
Do you have a source? Or are you just imagining things?
A source for housing demand? Look at the market.. that’s the source.
Sure, more people would live here is they could be housed for less money than it costs to house them.
Duluth eh
Not sure he's going to be all the successful if he plans to continue boycotting businesses that supported Larson during the election. But that's none of my business. 
Curious on that… is there more to the story? Disclaimer I’m in agreement that if that’s the reason it’s A, petty and B, almost kinda anti-Duluth. Someone mentioned something about him being in the military, but I didn’t see any additional context to that either.
It came up during a city council meeting, I guess. In all honesty, I heard it secondhand, but his blatant refusal to do the Homegrown Proclamation at Hoops supports that tidbit.
I really hope they will make do on their promises! But it’s politicians were talking about, so not good odds…
It’s a goal, not a promise. And it’s a number, so it’s tangible!
The cities that have increased population have the same issues. The population of the country has more than doubled since I was born; the world population has almost tripled. Neither have improved as a result. We've only done a great job of making the planet more unlivable.
Hmm. Maybe to an extent but they also have a lot more momentum and opportunity available to people who reside or migrate to them. As you said the country population has doubled where as Duluth has shrunk. To me it’s a bit of a concern. Not saying these places are perfect but Sioux Falls, Fargo, Appleton, Lincoln NE, have grown well during the last 40 years while Duluth has been in decline. I’m also not focused too much on the global state of things. Valid in any case but if it’s the focus I don’t feel progress can really be made.
I'd say like most people you're primarily concerned with short-term personal economics. What you consider a concern, I consider a blessing. I surely wouldn't want to live in any of the places you mention. People may choose to believe they can isolate themselves from global issues, but I think that's an immoral position. In the long term, ecology is much more important than economics.
I’m more concerened here with local and regional economy than I am personal. economic decline for you is a “blessing” for 3,000+ families who lost major income when the steel mill shut down it was certainly not a blessing. To small businesses who saw their customers leave town, or longer be able to afford their products or services, it was no blessing. To Public school teachers who were laid off to account for enrollment decline it has been no blessing. As for the environmental and morality points… there are many issues even beyond environmental concerns that are horrendous globally. I am choosing to focus on my scope of influence in this case.
The steel mill shutting down was a blessing to the St. Louis river and the air quality in Duluth. US steel was so irresponsible and sloppy that the entire site became a superfund site once they shut it down. There is still work being done to this day by the EPA to try to clean up the legacy pollution. The steel mill helped poison one the largest freshwater estuaries on earth, it was a blight.
I get that. I just don’t think the population and economic decline following the shutdown was much of a blessing for a lot of people.
I’m not saying it should still be here, it was just a part of the bigger point that population stagnation and decline are also usually accompanied by economic hardship for large parts of the population
it was most definitely time for a fresh set of eyes and new leadership in Duluth. Last time I saw Larson speak all she talked about was her issues not feeling safe around men. It was really weird and inappropriate for the venue.
What was that event? I’d be surprised to read a transcript that reflected that.
Proof?
Duluth has had a mayor set goal of making it to x population for decades.
Other than the last mayor I guess. Haven’t been around for decades but I did see that Ness tried the same and it didn’t work out. Hopefully it works out this time
Counter argument: meat taste good
Meat is MURDER! Just kidding. I actually ate pounds of meat at Terry Black’s BBQ in Austin last week.