another casulty of SLU and their misguided visions







http://vanishingstl.blogspot.com/



http://ecoabsence.blogspot.com/2008/12/ ... ngton.html



this property is the last on the block and was in the process of being rehabbed







from a blogposter

Size (6,000 square feet), location, historic appeal (circa 1891), and its not too close to other homes



It still needs a lot of work but the biggies seem like they are already done; new electric, new plumbing, new roof, new windows, new duct work, it had 3 furnaces and 2 water heaters but 2 furnaces and 1 heater have been stolen.

this is such a bad deal from SLU, how do they feel they can destroy perfectly good historic houses?



this is from the city assessors site



Assessed land: $8,550.00

Assessed improvements: $77,540.00

Assessed total: $86,090.00

Appraised total: $453,100.00





it seems to have been owned by a prominent gynecologist Dr Frank Glasgow around 1904



http://www.mohistory.org/genealogy/address/1713?a=1



so the alderman Terry Kennedy, the mayor and preservation dept all let this one slip by?



A almost 1/2 million dollor house as it was appraised they tore down??



why?, just doesnt seem right to me, something very wrong here

bikin'_man wrote:what seems odd to me is that it's so far away from campus. i have a hard time understanding what slu wants to do with this property. is there a satellite building there?

They do have a retreat center on that block, a bit to the east of this building. They also own most of the (empty) lots around it. Just a couple they don't have yet. Maybe they're planning something bigger?

Hey slu urban planning students... Do your profs ever speak out against this needless demo by biondi?

The urban planning department at SLU is pretty much ignored by the University, at least in my experiences. I see lot's of natural studio and other working relationships between the department and university, but none of that type of stuff happens.

You can look at it from a purely cold hearted business prospect and you make some sense out of the madness and then compare to Wash U. First, Midtown doesn't have nearly the market for prospecctive buyers or renters as Wash U benefits from having Clayton, University City and even Forest Park/Barnes Jewish on or near its borders. Second, it is cheaper to own and maintain empty lots if you think the market won't be their until 10, 15 or even twenty years down the road. In that sense, SLU is realistic in thought that their isn't huge influx of people moving back into the city as well as maintaining a sense of fiscal judgement. Finally SLU is essentially the only buyers in the neighborhood to speak. Otherwise, the city would own even more properties with even less prospect.

Good point, the question, if you could have kept the property, is what to put next to it. It looks like empty lots on each side.



I think the biggest problem with SLU is they really don't share any info on their holdings or seem to run it as a seperate businees entitiy. I don't think Wash U shares anymore then SLU but gives me the impression that their property holdings are completely seperate and thus more engaged with surrounding community. Would that be a fair point? The other thing that seems to hurt mid-town is Grand Center seems to be in lock step with SLU instead of questioning nor is their a strong neighborhood organization. Wash U has to be deal with strong city govs as well as strong neighborhoods. City, in my opinion, is just avoiding being a landholder at any cost (demolition as in this property)

I drove by this morning, and the demolition crew doesn't have a lot more work left to do. I saw several pallets of bricks ready to be loaded onto a truck, probably headed for some soulless lifestyle center in Wentzville or maybe to the suburbs of Phoenix.



As outraged as I am by this senseless demolition of yet another Midtown architectural gem, I think I'm going to have to adopt the attitude of warwickland since I'm probably going to be in St. Louis for the rest of my life anyway. Our so-called leaders blithely approve of the destruction of St. Louis' primary competitive advantage over other cities- its unique and beautiful built environment. Thankfully much of the city, especially South St. Louis, is intact, but unfortunately the same cannot be said for much of Midtown. And I don't foresee any type of boom that would radically transform that area anytime soon. With vacant blocks like this one, suburban-style houses on surrounding blocks, and the half-baked Gaslight Square recreation, this area ranks among St. Louis' worst blunders and missed opportunities.

SLU's administration drives me insane.

In that sense, SLU is realistic in thought that their isn't huge influx of people moving back into the city as well as maintaining a sense of fiscal judgement. Finally SLU is essentially the only buyers in the neighborhood to speak. Otherwise, the city would own even more properties with even less prospect.

one of the DUMBEST things i've ever read on this site. how sad that they leveled entire blocks of 3 story mansions/row houses around their campus. what is so incredible is that they ALL could have been rehabbed and could have had something far more attractive than Wash U has, but no, they are full of dumb ass hoosiers like Biondi, who obviously doesn't understand the merits of preservation and how to capitalize on it. SLU might as well be Maryville Unviersity, outside of a few historic structures they somehow saved. looking at historic photos of this area is truly depressing. just look at the hoosier/chintzy "art" that Biondi thinks is so impressive around the campus. swimming dolphins in fountains?! it's almost a joke. take a look to the better school down the street for some guidance.. the destruction of such a building is beyond ridiculous. what's going in the spot? a surface lot? Biondi has to be STL's most powerful hoosier. total idiot.

Except the fact that SLU stayed in the city and now has a student population exceeding 12,000 inside the city and probably employs a few thousand people on top of that. Jcity, I'm curious, what have you done for the city that is comparable to having that many students coming into the city with a payroll of that size? You have already used dumb and idiot in your last post. So you might get creative in your name calling on the next post.

Dredger wrote:Except the fact that SLU stayed in the city and now has a student population exceeding 12,000 inside the city and probably employs a few thousand people on top of that. Jcity, I'm curious, what have you done for the city that is comparable to having that many students coming into the city with a payroll of that size? You have already used dumb and idiot in your last post. So you might get creative in your name calling on the next post.

So let me get this straight... if JCITY hasn't done something comparable then he has no reason to complain about the senseless demo done by SLU over the last few decades? HMMM... just throw logic out the window eh?

The fact remains, while the current SLU is much better than no SLU, they have created a suburban campus in the middle of our city.

Considering that it is St. Louis University and not St. Charles University, I'm not so sure they had too much motivation to leave the city...I'm not sure how much the fact that they "stayed in the city" really has to do with anything at all.

Moorlander, Fair enough. The point is I don't need to call people idiots nor do I need to state that people have dumb comments. I don't do it in my professional career nor do I do it on this blog. So far that civility has served me well even when I might make dumb comments in the minds of others.

^ and I respect you for that.

newstl2020 wrote:Considering that it is St. Louis University and not St. Charles University, I'm not so sure they had too much motivation to leave the city...I'm not sure how much the fact that they "stayed in the city" really has to do with anything at all.

When I was in school, I remember hearing that the university was offered land in West County when Fr. Reinert was president, but made the commitment to stay in Midtown.

Edit: Not the point of the thread, sorry.

When I was in school, I remember hearing that the university was offered land in West County when Fr. Reinert was president, but made the commitment to stay in Midtown.

in west county they would have room to expand.

that isnt the case in midtown,



how much endowment monies have they used to buy up buildings and tear them down??



In this case it was $150,000, and whatever Bellon (sp) charged them to demolish this 6000 sq ft house



in west county they would have more money to build more buildings and Biondi would have had more money for art (sic)



such joy that the decision was made to stay in midtown, such joy



how does Biondi see art in his bizarre figurines and fountains?



the true ART of the area was right outside his window in the form of historic housing,



untill he destroyed it



what a boring and mentally deficient line of thinking,

anyone that supports it should have their head examined