For planning purposes only, the preferred future land use on Block 10 is a full-block City park.
Until such time as the City is able to take the necessary actions to assemble land and build a park, parcels on the block may be used for any legal use permitted under their current zoning classification, provided that the proposed use meets all applicable conditions and/or standards. Any future use may not be denied exclusively on the basis that the vision for the block is of a public park.
At the CIB (Capital Improvement Budget) Task Force meeting last night, some District 17 folks were there requesting one million dollars to aid in the construction of the park on block 10. They believe that the development of the park in the immediate future is critical to the development of the entire area, especially in attracting outside investment. Both the Penfield and Lund's have expressed interest in developing in the Fitzgerald Park area, but according to the folks last night, that development hinges on the construction of the park land, which in turn hinges on removing the existing buildings from block 10. One building is the Pedro Luggage building, currently unoccupied and up for sale. Two others are occupied: one by Union Gospel Mission and the other--the Public Safety Annex--by the St. Paul Police. The presenters expressly said that only the Union Gospel Mission had any plans to remain on the site for the next 10 years, but even they were planning to find a new location after 10 years.
Rewind 40 minutes in the meeting. A representative from the St. Paul Police was presenting on the 6 CIB projects that the police had submitted. The first three were requesting 3.1 million dollars for repairs to the Public Safety Annex, money to replace the roofs and HVAC system, install a new elevator and create a new ADA compliant entrance to the building. The repairs to the roof are urgent; the fourth floor is unusable due to severe leaks, and I imagine the present or soon-to-be growth of mold. The building currently houses about 60 staff members, a radio repair shop for the department and (most critically) the only indoor firing range operated by the St. Paul Police. Replacing the firing range by building a new facility or retrofitting an existing building would cost far more than repairing the annex. The officer did not sound like the police were planning on vacating the building, although several of the task force members suggested that it would be wiser to build new.
How did these two organizations both working for the betterment of the city come to this point--wires crossed, fighting for the same piece of land?