I think it would be great to read a full accounting of the Pevely issue. There are a lot of rumors out there that likely only an intrepid Post-Dispatch reporter could really get into. I've been told that SLU was shopping around for an architect to put together a rendering, any rendering of a medical facility, in the days leading up to the Preservation Board meeting. While Fr. Biondi stated that financing was in place and that ground breaking was a month away, this was clearly hyperbole at best. Now it's been 1.5 yrs? The decision to allow demo of the majority of the complex may prove fatal to the corner building as well. What prevents SLU from simply neglecting it until it's unstable and then getting an emergency demolition permit?
- 8,155
In this month of "I Have a Dream" reflection, is it possible that the new administration at SLU will go in a new direction and involve at least some transparency and public involvement in creating a solid Medical Campus vision that works for both the University and the surrounding neighborhood and urban form?
- 11K
I just wish that SLU would put together a public document like WU did in 2007.
- 3,762
Yes. This. Thank you. The whole process has been disgustingly underhanded and completely unacceptable, and now the corner building is in considerably worse shape than it was before. That SLU has not even covered the GAPING DEMOLITION-INDUCED HOLES in the building is, to be blunt, f*cking criminal.Alex Ihnen wrote:I think it would be great to read a full accounting of the Pevely issue. There are a lot of rumors out there that likely only an intrepid Post-Dispatch reporter could really get into. I've been told that SLU was shopping around for an architect to put together a rendering, any rendering of a medical facility, in the days leading up to the Preservation Board meeting. While Fr. Biondi stated that financing was in place and that ground breaking was a month away, this was clearly hyperbole at best. Now it's been 1.5 yrs? The decision to allow demo of the majority of the complex may prove fatal to the corner building as well. What prevents SLU from simply neglecting it until it's unstable and then getting an emergency demolition permit?
Not trying to be antagonistic, just curious. Alderman Roddy said that he was told work would begin by today to start cleaning up the mountains of rubble on this site. Did anybody notice work being done yet? I hope these mounds are cleared soon. These aren't the mounds we want the Mound City to be known by.
- 8,155
^ It really is unacceptable. What does that say to Joe Homeowner who gets cited for having grass a bit too high or whatever? It is a deterioration of the public trust.
- 3,235
Can we get SLU to secure the Pevely bldg or us it going to sit there and rot.
- 592
I don't think it's uncivil to question Roddy on the issue of the Pevely complex; from my perspective, to insinuate that he's machinating a scheme to keep a pile of rubble is odd. Perhaps we ought to look at the issue from a practical (political sciencey) perspective:
*SLU owns the property, but it costs very little for them aside from minor public relations to keep the site in its current state. It has little to gain by improving the site (cleaning the rubble) or by providing and acting upon appropriately urban site plans. SLU also has internal issues that preclude it from developing a significant vision for the future.
*The city (Roddy, Slay, bureaucracy, etc.) have the ability to exert pressure, but they have little to gain (aside from political points) by pushing SLU to improve the site and provide and act upon appropriately urban site plans. If they pressure SLU, they also could potentially alienate the SLU constituency (money, votes). Certain elements of the city (e.g. northside politicians) have more natural inclination to oppose SLU and exert pressure, but have less to gain by doing so.
*Urban preservationists (and others) have some ability to exert pressure on the city, less so on SLU, and even less so on its constituency. However, by pressuring the city too much, they alienate potential allies by ignoring the political realities.
Things could change going forward, but right now, the SLU money and votes outweigh the urbanist money and votes. Potential change might include an alliance between SLU and the urbanist movement, which would significantly alter the balance of power in the city. This would be unexpected on the part of the city, but not necessarily unwelcome (as they would no longer have to balance two competing constituencies).
*SLU owns the property, but it costs very little for them aside from minor public relations to keep the site in its current state. It has little to gain by improving the site (cleaning the rubble) or by providing and acting upon appropriately urban site plans. SLU also has internal issues that preclude it from developing a significant vision for the future.
*The city (Roddy, Slay, bureaucracy, etc.) have the ability to exert pressure, but they have little to gain (aside from political points) by pushing SLU to improve the site and provide and act upon appropriately urban site plans. If they pressure SLU, they also could potentially alienate the SLU constituency (money, votes). Certain elements of the city (e.g. northside politicians) have more natural inclination to oppose SLU and exert pressure, but have less to gain by doing so.
*Urban preservationists (and others) have some ability to exert pressure on the city, less so on SLU, and even less so on its constituency. However, by pressuring the city too much, they alienate potential allies by ignoring the political realities.
Things could change going forward, but right now, the SLU money and votes outweigh the urbanist money and votes. Potential change might include an alliance between SLU and the urbanist movement, which would significantly alter the balance of power in the city. This would be unexpected on the part of the city, but not necessarily unwelcome (as they would no longer have to balance two competing constituencies).
- 3,762
I don't think anybody insinuated that. Roddy is obviously placating Biondi/the SLU Board of Trustees. Problem is, because of their underhanded maneuvering throughout the whole debacle, he has put himself in the position of supporting liars and manipulators. And he seems to feel no need to address that. Even in the wake of this whole mess, I've heard nothing from him but support for SLU's "plan", which appears to be either lack of diligence combined with impulsive demolition, or land acquisition veiled in lies.stlhistory wrote:I don't think it's uncivil to question Roddy on the issue of the Pevely complex; from my perspective, to insinuate that he's machinating a scheme to keep a pile of rubble is odd.
I disagree a bit. Maybe I don't have the numbers to back it up, but I believe SLU is doing itself a disservice financially by letting this site rot, surrounded by mountains of rubble. The site looks terrible. It really does. If I were a prospective med student, medical professional, or donor, and SLU drove me past the Pevely site, my gut reaction would be decreased confidence in the resources and management of the institution owning the property. I think they could be losing potential revenue daily by not clearing those mountains of rubble surrounding the Missouri Belting building.stlhistory wrote: *SLU owns the property, but it costs very little for them aside from minor public relations to keep the site in its current state. It has little to gain by improving the site (cleaning the rubble) or by providing and acting upon appropriately urban site plans. SLU also has internal issues that preclude it from developing a significant vision for the future.
The wacko conspiracy theorist in me tells me the only reason they placed and have kept those mountains of rubble around the Missouri Belting building (which they still do not yet own) is to drive down the property value of that building so they can purchase it cheaper down the road.
I hope I'm wrong and work has begun to clear the site. I didn't get the chance to drive by there today to check.
- 5,433
This.Alex Ihnen wrote:I think it would be great to read a full accounting of the Pevely issue. There are a lot of rumors out there that likely only an intrepid Post-Dispatch reporter could really get into. I've been told that SLU was shopping around for an architect to put together a rendering, any rendering of a medical facility, in the days leading up to the Preservation Board meeting. While Fr. Biondi stated that financing was in place and that ground breaking was a month away, this was clearly hyperbole at best. Now it's been 1.5 yrs? The decision to allow demo of the majority of the complex may prove fatal to the corner building as well. What prevents SLU from simply neglecting it until it's unstable and then getting an emergency demolition permit?
I have a hard time believing that Fr. Biondi was ever serious about constructing a new medical building at the southwest corner of Grand Boulevard and Chouteau Avenue. I think it was just one more blighted property that he wanted to get rid of.
- 8,155
Its past 2 weeks now and I don't see any visible removal. There needs to be some kind of public shaming if this doesn't start by Labor Day.ward17 wrote:Dmmonty
You asked on another thread when the clean up would start--the answer is any day but thought I would also provide you with this additional background in response to some misinformation or lack of information Alex provided you....
The Building Division and the Mayor’s office has been involved for months in trying to resolve this. dmmonty1—the Mayor met with Father Biondi on Friday 8/9. I was out of town but was advised the removal would begin within two weeks of that meeting.
Perhaps the date September 1 has become more germane to the timeline.
- 2,929
^^Note how the Alderman's the source of the "It's getting cleaned up in 2 weeks, calm down!" claim, yet he then positions the Mayor's office and Fr. Biondi & SLU as the sources so he can readily allocate blame should nothing take place within the timeline that he provided here. "I was out of town, not my fault! Blame Alex! Still any day!"
And this is why things fail.
And this is why things fail.
The Peveley site must have been ignored win they ranked SLU as the No. 9 most beautiful medical campus
http://www.bestmedicaldegrees.com/beaut ... l-schools/
http://www.bestmedicaldegrees.com/beaut ... l-schools/
Hey gang,
I am making a something fun to publicly shame the SLU Mound. Can someone give me a good picture to use for my project? I would need rights to post it and alter it for my site.
Thanks!
I am making a something fun to publicly shame the SLU Mound. Can someone give me a good picture to use for my project? I would need rights to post it and alter it for my site.
Thanks!
Don't be too hasty in shaming the wonderful institution of SLU. Perhaps they are simply trying to make the area reminiscent of Sarajevo in the early 90's to make our Bosnian citizens feel more at home 
SLU is really starting to annoy me 
SLU is really starting to annoy me - 11K
^ you can use anything on nextSTL - the website, Flickr, whatever
- 131
Feel free to use any of my photos @ flickr.com/photos/pasa
Some Pevely related shots here: http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=53301297@N00&q=pevely
Some Pevely related shots here: http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=53301297@N00&q=pevely
While many may disagree with some of the decisions regarding the Pevely site, I don't think there is any disagreement that it needs to be cleaned up. In response to some of the comments here I asked Frank Oswald the city's buiding commissioner to provide an update that i could post here on where things are now.
This was his response: "Alderman, As you are aware I requested and had a meeting with S.L.U. re the problematic conditions of the Pevely dairy site. The meeting was productive and concluded with the following agreements.
1. S.L. U. will hire a contractor to remove all of the debris mounds, grade the area with topsoil and plant grass.
2. S.L.U. will secure the remaining building such that entry can not be made. They also will be meeting my staff at the site to determine what can be done to maintain minimum code conditions until a final decision re this building has been made.
As you have requested I will press to get this done as soon as possible and will keep you informed on the progress!"
This was his response: "Alderman, As you are aware I requested and had a meeting with S.L.U. re the problematic conditions of the Pevely dairy site. The meeting was productive and concluded with the following agreements.
1. S.L. U. will hire a contractor to remove all of the debris mounds, grade the area with topsoil and plant grass.
2. S.L.U. will secure the remaining building such that entry can not be made. They also will be meeting my staff at the site to determine what can be done to maintain minimum code conditions until a final decision re this building has been made.
As you have requested I will press to get this done as soon as possible and will keep you informed on the progress!"
- 3,235
Please secure the Pevely building and push for redevelopment. It's important to try and preserve a sense of place in this area, or at least what's left.
Thank you Ward17. It seems like SLU has really dropped the ball on this project in embarrassingly bad fashion. I think we are all very interested in not only seeing their mess cleaned up, the building stabilized, but also an updated timeline for revitalizing this area the they have totally screwed up. This is a black mark on the school and really hurts their standing in the community, especially after they did such a great job on the new SLU Law School. Keep up the pressure on a timeline for REAL improvement to the area.
- 11K
Any chance SLU will be fined for the conditions that have existing on this site for more than a year. They decried the horrible eyesore of the vacant buildings, calling them ugly and detriment to their campus and their mission of caring for the sick. However, they have been all too happy to leave the site as-is. While we all assume the site will eventually be cleaned up, without some kind of punitive measures there's really zero impact on SLU.