For a City of St. Louis condemnation question, start with the existing-structure inspection dataset; check the separate vacant-building demolition layer only when a demolition project is relevant. Keep the inspection finding and demolition status on separate timelines, then compare their identifiers and dates. Condemnation does not prove that demolition occurred. A planned project, an issued permit and a recorded completion also represent different evidence.
Follow the inspection record on its own terms
The City’s inspection dataset describes complaint-related inspections with outcomes ranging from violation letters to structural condemnations. Its field definitions include a project handle, parcel identifier, address, current result and violation-related information. Those fields help identify a record; the catalog does not define every result code or establish the condition of any particular building.
Keep two evidence rows and a separate connection check:
- Inspection row: Record the inspection or case reference, date, result wording and notice or letter actually shown. Identify the property and part of the building covered, then name any underlying notice or later disposition still needed.
- Demolition row: Keep the project handle or application reference, displayed status, and application, issue and completion dates when provided. Leave an empty date unresolved rather than supplying one from the inspection track.
- Connection check: Cite the cross-reference that links the two rows, if one exists. A shared address alone cannot establish the connection. Do not rename an unexplained inspection result code “condemned” or “resolved.”
An address can lead to several matters. A later entry may concern a different issue, portion of the building or inspection. Retain the original notice reference and any explicit cross-reference before describing the later entry as resolution of the earlier one. For general permit-file selection, use the St. Louis building and trade data guide; that separate guide does not turn a construction-permit entry into an enforcement finding.
Put demolition status beside the dates, not in place of them
The demolition layer definition lists SITEADDR, Handle and AppNumber, followed by distinct AppDate, IssueDate and CompleteDa fields. Its Status domain contains five values: 1 Under Review, 2 Planned, 3 Out to bid, 4 In progress and 5 Completed. These are the published schema’s labels, not observations of a project searched for this article.
Read the displayed status beside the dates that are actually populated. An application date cannot substitute for an issue date. A project marked planned does not establish completed demolition. If the completion field is populated, preserve its value as a dataset entry and seek the underlying completion record when that is the evidence you need. The final-inspection guide explains why a date in a project listing should not be renamed a passed final inspection.
Consider a fictional packet containing a condemnation notice dated February 8, a demolition application dated March 12, an issue date of May 4 and an empty completion field. All dates are invented. Even if the address matches, that packet does not establish that the project was undertaken because of that notice, or that demolition finished. Compare the inspection reference, project handle, application reference and property description; mark any missing connection explicitly. No guaranteed relationship between the two datasets was verified.
If a second hypothetical extract later contains a completion date, retain both extracts and their check dates. Determine which project the later date describes before amending your chronology. Neither a condemnation entry nor a demolition label establishes the property’s present physical condition.
Recover an older inspection or an absent completion record
The inspection catalog says its named 87/88 inspections API permits a 90-day search window and defaults to the past 90 days when no date is entered. That is a restriction on that distribution’s query window, not a 90-day retention rule. The catalog lists other inspection distributions separately; do not apply that limit to all of them.
For a missing or older record, save the source or distribution name, date range and identifiers used. A failed lookup does not prove that no complaint, condemnation or demolition record exists. Distinguish an access error from a completed search without a match, and distinguish both from a retrieved project that lacks a completion entry.
The Building Commissioner catalog gives the Building Division contact and lists inspection and demolition datasets separately. Ask for the specific inspection notice, condemnation disposition or demolition completion record using the City address, relevant period and known handle or application reference. Describe which document is missing rather than asking staff to confirm a whole property’s history from one status.
The City’s data-request guidance points to a Sunshine Request if portal data does not meet the need. That is a published fallback, not a tested form or a guarantee of a copy. Keep any custodian response with its stated search scope. This guide concerns the City of St. Louis; verify jurisdiction rather than relying on a St. Louis mailing address alone.
Official City inspection metadata, demolition schema and catalog/request links checked October 15, 2026 (UTC). The linked Sunshine instructions timed out. No address, parcel, inspection, condemnation, demolition project, API data query, account, form, request or agency contact was used. No common historical coverage start, complete dataset join or current-condition finding was established.