Heritage commission continues hearing on Glendale Townhouses designation after hours of testimony

The Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission on April 8 continued the public hearing on a proposal to designate the Glendale Townhouses as a local historic district and scheduled further consideration for the commission's April 22 meeting.

City planning staff recommended denial of local designation, saying Glendale lacks sufficient historic integrity to meet local- designation criteria. "These later alterations from the 1970s and 1980s have diminished the historic integrity of the complex and its ability to convey its feeling and association as a post–World War II public housing complex," said Rob Skolecki, senior city planner in the historic preservation section of the planning division, during the staff presentation.

The designation question drew large public turnout and prolonged testimony from residents, neighborhood advocates and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority (MPHA). MPHA Chief Executive Officer Abdi Warsami said the agency opposes local historic designation because, he said, it would constrain investments residents want and would not protect them from displacement. "Historic designation stops Glendale residents from getting generational investment that they need," Warsami told commissioners, adding that the agency estimates about $22,000,000 in deferred capital needs at Glendale.

Why it matters: Glendale, a multi‑family development of 28 buildings on about 13 acres in the Prospect Park neighborhood completed in 1952, was developed as the city's first public housing project and is home to several hundred low‑income residents. The commission must weigh the site's historical significance against staff findings that roofline changes, siding replacements and other alterations limit the property's ability to convey its original 1950s appearance under the local ordinance.

Key facts and positions - Staff presentation: Skolecki summarized a designation study and earlier National Register review by the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Staff told the commission the 2019 study and SHPO review recognize Glendale's historical significance under criterion related to social history and community planning, but both concluded the complex lacks the integrity required for local designation. - MPHA position: Abdi Warsami, CEO and executive director of the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, framed the question around resident needs and capital funding. Warsami said Glendale houses roughly 600 residents, that MPHA estimates a $22 million capital backlog at the site and that Glendale comprises a small share of MPHA's portfolio but a disproportionate share of its backlog. He described recent resident engagement around four hypothetical renovation or redevelopment approaches and said MPHA intends to preserve public ownership while pursuing funding that often flows through conversion programs such as RAD/Section 8. - Resident testimony: Dozens of residents and community members testified on both sides. Multiple residents said Glendale provides safety, community networks and access to transit and services; several specifically urged preserving residents' right to shape redevelopment and protecting them from displacement. Others, including neighborhood preservation advocates and members of the Prospect Park Association, urged designation to preserve Glendale's cultural and physical history. - Legal/administrative context: Staff noted the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances (Chapter 599, preservation chapter) requires that local designation be submitted to the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office for review; staff also referenced the federal Section 106 review process that prompted the earlier SHPO evaluation.

Commission action and next steps The commission did not vote on designation at the April 8 meeting. After hearing testimony and taking procedural business earlier in the meeting, the commission voted to continue the Glendale Townhouses historic-district item to the April 22, 2025 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting.

Votes at a glance (procedural votes recorded during the meeting) - Approval of the meeting agenda: motion moved by Commissioner Masten, seconded by Commissioner Alexander; outcome: approved by voice vote. - Approval of minutes from the March 18, 2025 meeting: motion moved by Commissioner Melvin, seconded by Commissioner Booty; outcome: approved (recorded abstentions: Commissioner Corrado and Commissioner Rodriguez). - Motion to continue the Glendale Townhouses hearing to April 22, 2025: motion moved by Commissioner Malblum, seconded by Commissioner Thomas; outcome: continued to the April 22, 2025 meeting by voice vote.

What commissioners pressed on Commissioners asked staff to clarify why the period of significance focused on 1952 and whether later changes (1970s–1980s) could be included; staff replied the nomination frames significance around post‑World War II public housing and that later alterations were evaluated as changes that reduce integrity relative to that era. Commissioners also asked MPHA about the timeline and consequences of conversion to different federal subsidy platforms; MPHA staff said conversion to a Section 8/RAD funding platform is technically possible even with exterior designation but argued that designation would make meaningful redesign or enlargement of units more difficult.

Community context and clarifications - Architecture and alterations: Staff described original exterior features (brick veneer on first floor, cement‑asbestos siding on upper stories originally) and said later roof form changes and siding replacement occurred in 1972 and 1989 and that windows have been replaced, leaving historic openings but altered materials and profiles. These physical changes are central to staff's integrity determination. - Demographics and needs cited by MPHA: MPHA told the commission Glendale houses roughly 600 residents; MPHA said 89% of residents are Black or African American, that nearly half are children and that many households are large; MPHA stated the site receives a small share of MPHA holdings but a larger share of the agency's capital backlog. MPHA described resident concerns about accessibility, indoor air quality and the need for larger family units. - Procedural notes: Staff said it had received about 85 written comments on the nomination, roughly 50 of which were submitted before the staff report was published and included in the packet; the remainder were submitted later and entered into the record.

Where this goes next The commission will resume the Glendale Townhouses designation hearing at its next regular meeting on April 22, 2025, when commissioners will continue to hear testimony, ask additional questions and may vote on whether to forward a recommendation to the City Council. Any local designation decision would be subject to review processes described in the Minneapolis preservation ordinance and SHPO comment requirements.

Ending note: Commissioners thanked residents and other commenters for attending and for the written record submitted in advance of the hearing.