...is apparently up for appeal to the Planning Commission of a Preservation Board denial of a request to demolish.

Owned by the real estate arm of the St. Louis Arch Diocese. In the vicinity of St. Wenceslas and St. Francis DeSales. Highly visible building, left to rot by its current owner.

Now they want to tear it down for a parking lot.

^ Yikes. Would be a big loss.

It was originally a pharmacy. Looks like the pharmacist lived above it at the time of his death.

http://www.sos.mo.gov/images/archives/d ... 011772.PDF

It was originally a pharmacy. Looks like the pharmacist lived above it at the time of his death.

http://www.sos.mo.gov/images/archives/d ... 011772.PDF

That is fascinating. Thanks, erina. The internet can be a place of amazing surprises!

The handwriting of some of the people back then was so good and so neat!

I really love digging info on old buildings, long dead people etc. Especially mixed use commercial. Every once in a while I find a picture of what it was at the time. Sometimes I can track down death certificates of the original occupants.

The ads in the cleveland high school yearbook library are a goldmine for this btw. I may start another thread and periodically post my finds to it.

So today was the Planning Commission meeting on this demo.

Any word on the outcome?

Meanwhile, this "erina" person has me intrigued. Lots of info behind that pseudonym name....

I saw a post from Michael Powers on Facebook that the CRO has upheld the Preservation Board's denial of demolition!

I saw a post from Michael Powers on Facebook that the CRO has upheld the Preservation Board's denial of demolition!

Maybe now the city will enforce its building code and make them maintain the building? It looks awful and the owner can certainly afford the repairs.

^ i expect that they accepted the donation with the intention of eventually tearing it down. hopefully now they'll make an effort to find a new owner.

I visited that building today, and man, is it in bad shape. Pictures you see online do not do the decrepit condition of this building justice.

Windows in the building are missing and open to intrusion by weather and wildlife. That's never a good sign.

Water damage and bird droppings likely permeate the entire structure.

Gutters and roofing shingles are loose or missing.

It needs a huge amount of immediate attention. How are you supposed to sell a building like this?

What are the people who own buildings like this thinking???

And to think some in the city are cited for building code infractions as minor as flaking paint on a garage....

^ i guess we'd better hope that the city takes the archdiocese to task for the many code violations they've allowed to accumulate since they took ownership of the building in 2006.

that or the archdiocese could likewise donate the building, rather than sell it, to someone with the intent to rehab.

If we only had somebody(s) like the Gills to take on Gravois and MLK. The dream would then be complete.

^ i guess we'd better hope that the city takes the archdiocese to task for the many code violations they've allowed to accumulate since they took ownership of the building in 2006.

that or the archdiocese could likewise donate the building, rather than sell it, to someone with the intent to rehab.

I would like for some intrepid reporter to call on the St. Louis Arch Diocesan real estate corporation office and ask them this simple question:

Has the city of St.Louis EVER cited this building for violations of its building code, and if so, what was done in response to those code violation notices?

And then, I would like the results of that interview spread across Catholic communities in St. Louis.

So many Catholics see themselves as advancing a social justice ministry.

How do they reconcile their church doing these things to neighborhoods next to their historic church homes?

or i can just show you the way

http://dynamic.stlouis-mo.gov/citydata/ ... 2069020090



http://dynamic.stlouis-mo.gov/citydata/ ... =206902090

Well, I'm no lawyer or judge, but this looks like a problem to me.

The city condemns the building as being structurally unsound and maybe for demolition. Then it's tagged as "can't demolish".

The owner wants to demolish the structurally unsound building. Then is denied based on historic status.

Looks like a pretty screwed up situation. The city should have enforced its building code years ago, and obviously didn't.

http://dynamic.stlouis-mo.gov/citydata/ ... =206902090

The above link is interesting. It shows on the taxes info columns for demo charges and nuisance taxes. All are "zero" balances.

Why no taxes for being a nuisance property? Especially when it shows something like 150 CSB reports on the building?

It just appears this situation is a reflection of a wholesale lack of enforcement and follow up by city departments.

What's the point of citing code violations and neighbors making CSB reports if NOTHING HAPPENS???

The reason there are no taxes is probably because its owned by the Church. Which is a whole 'nother discussion....

The building is definitely not too far gone to be rehabbed, although it would probably take some incentives including HTC's and probably some block grant or other soft money CBG funds, etc (or maybe a donation of some sort from the Church...).

It could be a very important project for someone to undertake in and are of Fox Park/Benton Park West that seems to have some momentum these days....combined with the street improvements coming to Gravois, this could actually really be a cool deal!

Someone who knows how to leverage development incentives and city/church connections could position themselves to have a sweet little mixed use building in a spot that has good to great long term potential...

^ there are taxes...about $780 a year...he is talking about something else.