A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Heritage panel approves demolition of Cheatham Avenue silos, requires head house be retained

May 13, 2026 | Minneapolis City, Hennepin County, Minnesota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Heritage panel approves demolition of Cheatham Avenue silos, requires head house be retained
The Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission voted 6-1 on May 12 to approve a demolition-of-potential-historic-resource application for the former grain elevator at 3716 Cheatham Avenue, requiring that the property’s central head house be retained.

Chair Marie Bjornberg opened the public hearing and heard a staff report from Erin Kaye, a senior city planner in the Department of Community Planning and Economic Development, who said staff found the property eligible as a contributing resource to the Hiawatha Corridor Grain Industry Historic District and determined two of the three demolition findings were not met but that Finding 3 — that rehabilitation is not economically viable — was supported by the materials submitted with the application. Kaye told the commission that the Section 106 environmental review was opened on March 20, 2026 and that SHPO "concurred that the undertaking will have an adverse effect on the NRHP eligible historic district," and asked for additional information before mitigation is agreed.

The applicant’s project team reiterated the difficulty of adapting terminal grain elevators. Rachel Peterson of Hess Royce & Company said the building type is "exceptionally difficult to adaptively reuse" and cited the applicant’s rehabilitation estimate as driving roughly "over $1,000,000 per unit," a figure the project team said justified demolition under the economic infeasibility finding. Dan Walsh of Trellis, the nonprofit that plans to develop the north half as affordable housing, said Trellis studied reuse options but found them impractical; he said the north parcel will be developed as a 98-unit affordable project and that the expected new-construction cost was about $270,000 per unit.

Neighborhood speakers urged the commission to weigh preservation and raised safety and health concerns about the demolition process. "I want to have a reassurance... that every due care and caution, meaning tenting, of our structures will be done so that we don't have the kind of damage that that wave of concussion could cause," said resident Betty Westman. Neighbor Alex Pears called the silos "the Roman ruins of the Howe neighborhood" and expressed worry about dust, asbestos and lead release; Brian Meadows described repeated trespass and safety incidents around the site and urged immediate action to address the nuisance.

Commissioners’ remarks reflected the tension between historic preservation goals and the presented economic analysis. Commissioner Malblum, who moved the recommendation, said the commission is bound to interpret the regulations and that, "being an architect," she found these structures hard to make work economically. Commissioner Corrado cast the lone no vote, warning that repeated demolitions could erode the prospect of a cohesive milling historic district.

The motion approved by the commission reads: approval of the demolition-of-potential-historic-resource application for 3716 Cheatham Avenue "subject to the following condition, that the head house shall be retained." The roll call vote was: Corrado — nay; Malblum — yes; Rodriguez — yes; Smith — yes; Thomas — yes; Vice Chair Masten — yes; Chair Bjornberg — yes.

CPED historic preservation supervisor Andrea Burke advised the public that the commission’s decision may be appealed within 10 calendar days; an appeal would bring the matter to a city council committee for final action. The Section 106 federal review and SHPO consultation will continue and may shape mitigation requirements before final demolition and permitting.

Next steps: applicants may proceed with entitlement processes for new construction, subject to site-plan review and any applicable mitigation agreed through the Section 106 process; the commission’s record will be open to appeal for 10 calendar days.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee