Opponents of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board’s proposed redesign of The Mall park, in the East Isles neighborhood, suffered a setback on March 5, when the Park Board voted down a staff-drafted resolution that would have required the Metropolitan Council to restore two blocks of westbound parkway to its current condition after major sewer work is completed this summer.
The root of the controversy, covered in de tail in last month’s issue of the Hill & Lake Press, dates back to the Park Board's 2020 Southwest Service Area Master Plan, which recommended abandoning sections of both east- and westbound parkway and parking at The Mall and converting that area to green space. Many local residents oppose the proposed change, including renters in the apartments that line the southern boundary of the park.
Because of the park’s relatively low Park Board priority ranking, the master plan proposal likely would have remained dormant for some time, but for the fact that the Metropolitan Council will be performing major subsurface sewer work in the park this summer.
That sewer work will require removal of large portions of The Mall’s westbound park way. That, in turn, opened the question of whether, once the work is finished, that portion of parkway should be returned to its existing condition, or sodded over with grass, as envisioned by the plan.
By a 5-4 vote, Park Board commissioners voted for the latter option, not to require the Met Council to restore the existing westbound roadway. Prior to voting down the resolution, introduced by District 4 Commissioner Elizabeth Shaffer, several commissioners spoke out against it.
At Large Commissioner Tom Olsen spoke first, describing the resolution to restore the parkway as “a betrayal of our shared values as a Park Board,” and characterizing opponents of the redesign as “a well-connected minority” who sought to undercut “over two years of planning at the eleventh hour.” Olsen said that passing the resolution would send the message, “You have to be the right person, in the right room, with the right board allies, at the right time, if you want your voice to be reflected in our parks.”
In a similar vein, District 3 Commissioner Becky Alper described opponents as “a small minority,” and asserted, “You can’t have a park if you have parking.” Alper went on to state, “We have a great plan here, we have a plan that had an incredible community input that went into that development, that the board of commissioners approved… and to vote ‘yes’ to this resolution today is really just to throw all of those procedures and planning processes right into the garbage.”
Alper’s characterization of community in put conflicts with the recollection of Craig Wilson, a member of the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) for the Southwest Service Area Master Plan, who said the CAC was charged with making recommendations for no fewer than 42 neighborhood parks, six potential parks, and three park search areas in southwest Minneapolis. Wilson said that the CAC discussions for The Mall, specifically, took less than 30 minutes, and had relatively limited community input due in part to the very large number of parks under consideration at that time. The Park Board vote to approve the project occurred in November 2020, during the height of the pandemic.
Speaking in favor of the resolution, Board President Cathy Abene began by noting that “for certain members of our community, cars and parking are political now… it’s a political movement.” Noting her background as a civil engineer, Abene observed that the master plan is a “concept plan” only, and that there was no feasibility study associated with it. She said that portions of the plan related to road closures had already been deemed infeasible by the fire marshal, and that it made sense to hit “pause” on the plan to determine overall feasibility before taking steps to implement it.
Commissioner Shaffer noted similar concerns when reached for comment on this article. Said Shaffer: “Advancing a small portion of The Mall master plan now without under standing the design elements that may need to be amended is bad process, especially when fire access issues have been identified in the plan’s eastbound closures. We don’t need any more expensive infrastructure projects to correct. It would be more constructive for park and city staff to understand potential design limitations prior to community engagement.”
Such arguments from Shaffer, Abene and others were unavailing; commissioners voted down the resolution 5-4. Voting no: Becky Alper, Meg Forney, Billy Menz, Steffanie Musich and Tom Olsen. Voting yes: Cathy Abene, Charles Rucker, Elizabeth Shaffer and Becka Thompson. This may not be the final chapter, however. Word is that unaddressed legal issues may force the issue to be reexamined. Stay tuned.
