Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heritage panel approves storefront rehabilitation at 410 3rd Avenue North with staff conditions
Summary
The Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for rehabilitation of 410 3rd Avenue North in the Minneapolis Warehouse Historic District, imposing conditions on storefront designs, masonry cleaning methods and rooftop equipment visibility.
The Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission voted to approve a certificate of appropriateness for rehabilitation work at 410 3rd Avenue North in the Minneapolis Warehouse Historic District on Dec. 2, 2025.
Rob Skalecchi, senior city planner on the CPED historic preservation team, told commissioners the four-story brick-and-stone commercial building dates to 1884 and that the project is part of state and federal historic preservation tax-credit work. Staff described proposed work to remove non-historic infill, restore storefront bays, repair masonry and install rooftop mechanical equipment, and recommended conditions to align the project with design guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior’s standards.
Staff recommended— and the commission adopted— conditions that new front storefront systems include bulkheads compatible with historic precedents; that aggregate or media blasting not be used for masonry paint removal (gentle pressure washes or solvent approaches should be reviewed by staff); that masonry test panels and mortar/brick matches be submitted for staff review; and that rooftop equipment projecting above the roofline be set back from the primary elevation so it is not visible from the street.
Andrea Burke, supervisor of CPED’s historic preservation team, confirmed to the commission that the application did not include a historic variance despite an earlier agenda notation indicating one. The applicant’s representative, Alex Hecker of AWH Architects, attended to answer questions and described the proposal as a typical tax-credit rehabilitation project.
Commissioner Melblum moved to approve the certificate as conditioned; Commissioner Wallace seconded. The roll call recorded seven ayes and one abstention (Commissioner Alexander), and the motion passed.
The commission’s action allows the applicant to finalize design details with staff; applicants were told they may contact planning staff about next steps and permitting.
