Minneapolis Planning Commission denies Park Board plan for Hiawatha service center parking and office

The Minneapolis Planning Commission voted 5–3 on Jan. 5 to deny land‑use applications from the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) for a one‑story, roughly 1,500‑square‑foot maintenance office and a 48‑space surface parking lot at the Hiawatha Service Center near Lake Hiawatha and Minnehaha Parkway.

Chair Chris Meyer opened the meeting and the commission heard a detailed staff presentation from Alex Cohas of the city’s Community Planning and Economic Development (CPED) department outlining the application’s requests: three variances (exceed a 100‑space zoning‑lot maximum for surface parking; reduce the required 8‑foot corner side yard; and allow parking between a principal building and the front or corner side lot line), site plan review for a new non‑residential building, and several requests for alternative compliance with landscaping, window, and ground‑floor‑activation standards. Staff recommended approval with conditions.

In a roughly three‑hour public session, Park Board project manager Tyler said the service center is an aging maintenance facility used by multiple park divisions and that the phased project would replace substandard buildings and provide secure parking and fleet storage. Tyler said the proposed layout retains several valued trees — including a heritage oak and a stand of spruce — and that tight project budgets constrained the Park Board’s options. “We’re trying to avoid those spruce trees altogether,” he said, and described the proposal as a safety and operational necessity for staff who currently park on Longfellow Avenue.

Commissioners pressed the applicant on alternatives, asking why the building could not be sited closer to the sidewalk with parking behind it, whether some employee parking could be designated at the nearby clubhouse lot, how many employees use the site, and what measures would limit stormwater or pollution reaching Lake Hiawatha. Staff and the applicant said the site lies outside the regulatory floodplain and that stormwater controls would be addressed in the city’s separate engineering review; they also said a recent tree inventory informed siting to protect certain large trees.

Several commissioners expressed concern that approving the requested variances for the entire zoning lot — which already contains about 123 existing surface stalls at the clubhouse — would permit the Park Board to maintain or expand parking across the combined zoning lot up to the 171 spaces proposed. Commissioner Baxley urged attention to impervious surface and shoreline impacts, saying the added parking “shifts the character of this area away from park adjacent setting toward an auto‑oriented service use.” Commissioner Jones and others pressed for more bicycle parking and for clearer strategies to reduce employee driving.

The commission considered a motion that would have (a) adopted staff findings for two of the variances, (b) denied the corner‑side setback variance, and (c) approved the site plan with conditions including a requirement for bicycle parking and a prohibition on parking between the building and the corner‑side lot line. That motion failed on a 3–5 roll call.

After additional discussion about potential redesigns or a continuance to allow the Park Board to return with revised documents, Chair Meyer moved to deny the entire application, saying commissioners were not persuaded that applicants had demonstrated the statutory practical difficulties required to grant the variances and citing harms to walkability, aesthetics and water quality in the Hiawatha shoreline area. The motion carried 5–3; the clerk recorded the final roll call as Aye: Commissioner Chaudhry, Gordon, Shepherd, Vice President Baxley and President Meyer; Nay: Commissioners Garcia, Jones and Wagner.

The denial leaves the Park Board able to redesign the proposal and return for future review; staff said a continuance or denial would both require the applicant to rework site plans and possibly re‑notice public hearings if new land‑use applications are required. CPED staff also noted that the applicant will still need to satisfy separate Public Works engineering and stormwater reviews if a revised proposal moves forward.

The commission adjourned after concluding the item and noted upcoming meetings: the next full Planning Commission on Jan. 20 and the next committee of the whole on Jan. 22.