I thought it was arson as soon as I heard about the fire in the corporate media. The excessive heat of the fire suggests they used unnatural combustables to start the fire. A natural cause fire probably wouldn't have melted nearby signs and other objects the way this fire did.

I'm more likely to believe the arson was by the developers themselves than by an anti-gentrification() activist. The drawings of the proposed condos suggest there isn't enough demand for the owner to sell a high percentage of the units at the high prices. The easiest way for a developer to make a profit as this housing bubble bursts is to destroy her own building and pocket a fat insurance check.

For example, a woman from Ladue owned absentee an old building in U City, couldn't make a profit rehabbing, so she had someone set the building on fire, then pretended to be surprised when she was told the building was on fire. Unfortunately the idiot insurance company won't deny the claim.

Another example of arson by the owner: Lauren Grossman burned down his Subway store in the Loop in 1995. He was about to open a deli in Wash U. Again, he probably wasn't formally charged with arson and the idiot insurance company probably paid him a fat check (raising rates on honest people to make up for the payouts to arsonists).

As the actual values of housing in STL continue to plumment with the housing bubble burst the vast majority of the lofts, new housing gotten from kickback deals with Slay() and his cronies, rehabs, etc, are NOT affordable), owners will continue to destroy their investments for insurance money.

Sorry to take joy away from anyone who cheered the fire hoping it was started by real residents to take back the community.

When I lived near South Grand in the 1990s, I enjoyed the area. It was like the Loop was before the Loop was destroyed by gentrification. Ideally South Grand won't become another Loop, forcing out the Vietnamese and other mom & pop stores in favor of Starbucks and fondue bistros.