Massive fire on Queen St.West!!!!

[Sarahbelle]

I was just downtown today.. and I walked past the fire spot...

It was pretty mind blowing.... it felt very wierd to see.. cause I had heard about it before I saw it... Surreal and pretty disturbing.. it made me feel kinda sad too.

There were all these creepy guys wearing suits with masks cleaning it all up. CRAAAAZY wierd....

[AD]

the owner of Suspect Video has purchased the stock from Giant Squid Independent Video in Stratford which recently went under. Suspect Video will be re-opening soon, not sure where yet.

[Jaimoe]

Isn't the other Suspect still in business near Honest Ed's?

[AD]

i have no idea. i was talking about the store that burned down

[AD]

brutal

City seeks $64,000 for fire cleanup

Queen St. W. business stunned at having to pay for demolition

Apr 25, 2008 04:30 AM

Emily Mathieu

Staff Reporter

After losing their bicycle business in the Queen St. W. fire, the Duke family thought they couldn't lose any more – until they got two letters from the city demanding more than $64,000 for the cleanup.

"I just find it ludicrous that we get this bill and even if it's legit, why don't they go after where the fire started?" said Gary Duke, owner and agent for Duke's Cycle, one of several businesses destroyed when a six-alarm fire ripped through a section of Queen St. W. in February.

By the time the smoke cleared, Duke's Cycle – which had operated out of the same building for more than 90 years – had been levelled.

The bill Duke is referring to, in the amount of $48,348.94, was sent to his family about three weeks ago and was to "cover costs incurred for heavy equipment, engineering and environmental services required for demolition during fire investigation," he said.

About a week later, another bill, in the amount of $16,123.20 for demolition, was sent to the Duke family.

"My theory was my building fell down, there wasn't much to demolish," he said.

Because Duke's parents, both in their mid-80s, are the landowners, the bills go to them. To send another bill to a family already devastated by the loss of a family business was the final straw, he said.

Four generations of Dukes have run the cycle and sporting shop on Queen St. W. near Bathurst St. Gary's father, Henry, was born in the apartment above the store.

"It's phenomenal how much money we give to the government and then to get this kind of bill, I think they just figure that insurance is covering it. I don't know," he said.

Duke said he wishes the city could have been more communicative before slapping his family with these bills. "I mean I'm not hard to find."

He has sent copies of the bills to his insurance broker who is equally shocked, he said.

Right now his biggest concern is for his parents who face a serious financial loss because insurance will not completely cover the $64,000, he said.

"I just hope I don't have to mortgage my house because of the debt load I have from the business and I have insurance but it's never enough," he added.

Duke and the rest of the family and crew have been working overtime to prepare for the grand opening of the new location on Richmond St. W.

Today he plans to phone fellow landowners to discuss the letters and what it could mean for his business if he doesn't pay.

"I want some answers at least, I don't know if I'll be satisfied. But I'll try to keep my humour but I think this is not right," he said.

[phishtaper]

classy

[Jaimoe]

I've been distracted with the proposed Leslieville "Smart Centre" development and haven't been following this story. Both issues make me sick.

[phishtaper]

i love smart centres. they are so convenient. everything i need is there. a big walmart. a big grocery store. loads of chain roadhouses. plenty of parking. and a big, dead downtown core of small shops right nearby. ugh.

[phishtaper]

another story about property rights and heritage building designation ... this one from Guelph ...

OUR HOUSE (see article for pics)

The former owners created a lot of history in 47 Alice Street. The new owner has plans to make his own history. City staff want it designated a heritage home, reporter Magda Konieczna writes.

May 24, 2008

Magda Konieczna

You'd probably walk by it without noticing. It blends into the Ward's streetscape, no different from any of the houses beside it. Many of those who know it best are wondering what all the fuss is about.

The home at 47 Alice St. is a tiny, red brick, "late Edwardian Ontario cottage with a hipped roof," says a report that's coming to council Monday.

Next door is a tinier, matching building, a shoe workshop used largely for storage since Vincenzo Valeriote closed up in the 1960s.

The modest buildings have unwittingly become the subject of a political imbroglio.

Blair Cleveland bought them in 2004. The listing said the workshop could be turned into a garage. That was his plan. There's no parking on the property.

The city rejected it. The workshop is too close to the road.

So he applied to demolish it and build a driveway.

It turned out the house is on a heritage inventory. Any application to change it automatically gets a second look.

The buildings aren't architecturally significant, Heritage Guelph said. But they represent the Italian community in St. Patrick's Ward in the early 20th century.

City staff want the home and workshop designated as heritage.

It's important to preserve buildings that "aren't mansions or grand institutions, but they're working class vernacular," city planner Joan Jylanne told councillors recently.

The debate represents a clash of philosophical questions of heritage with the narrative of a younger, simpler Guelph and questions of public sway over private property.

The Alice Street shoe workshop had the humblest of beginnings.

Vincenzo Valeriote was eight or nine when he learned the shoe trade in San Giorgio, in the Italian province of Calabria. He came to Guelph a few years later, following an older brother. He started a shoe shop on Old Quebec Street, say his sons, Joe and Tony. He went to San Giorgio in the early 1920s to marry Maria Annunziata Raco.

Much of San Giorgio was coming to Guelph at the time, including Maria's three brothers, Vincenzo's four and, eventually, his parents.

"The good life beckoned, and it was here," Joe said. "We didn't know we weren't in the upper echelon of society."

Vincenzo and his bride had a home built on Alice Street in 1924, next door to Vincenzo's brother. Up to 10 people -- all family -- lived at 47 Alice.

In 1926, Vincenzo bought 15 feet of street frontage next door to his home, built the shoe workshop, and closed the downtown store.

"He decided going to Quebec Street was not sensible," Joe said.

Their mother was always in the garden, growing fruits and vegetables for the family. She learned some English, but she always preferred Italian, Joe said.

The family bought grapes every year for wine, and 20 bushels of tomatoes at the market in the fall, cooking, crushing, blanching, pressing and canning them.

The Valeriote kids lived an easy life, especially in the summers.

"Aside from delivering shoes and doing the odd job, we were not worked very hard," Joe said. They never had far to go -- their father's business served customers within a mile and a half from home.

"There was nothing to do, and we did nothing," Tony said.

The Valeriote children went to school -- Sacred Heart, around the corner from their Alice Street home -- speaking little or no English, Tony said. Almost all of their neighbours were southern Italian -- northern Italians settled on Ferguson Street.

And there had been little need to leave the neighbourhood. Uncle Michael owned a grocery store on Alice. The ice truck came by daily and the milkman came twice a day.

Even leather and rubber wholesalers came to them, mostly from Toronto. Vincenzo would buy the whole side of a cow. You could still see the shape of the animal, Tony said.

"Every morning he would light the fire, and when it was warm enough, he'd start working," Joe said.

Skate sharpening was 25 cents a pair. Shoes went for about $2.

"If they were $5 they were terrific," Tony said. Someone once came in with a $10 pair. "Now, $10 for a pair of shoes -- this guy has more money than brains," Tony said.

Vincenzo sewed the shoes by hand, or sent his children to Mr. Campbell's shoe shop on Quebec Street. Campbell would sew on soles with his machine for 25 cents a pair.

In the late 1950s, Vincenzo finally got a stitching machine.

"It was going 80 miles an hour," Tony said. "He would be sweating buckets. I would be beside him helping him turn the corner so it wouldn't get away on him."

Before the war, shoes were piled three deep on the counter, waiting to be fixed. He'd do 30 pairs a day. After the war it was more like three or four.

"It came to the point where he would charge $5 to put a sole on and people could buy (new shoes) for $3.50, so why would they repair them?" Tony said.

There were no vacations. But Sundays meant a break from work. Occasionally there were family picnics. They would load up the baby carriage with food and drink -- salami, beer, wine -- and walk to the old reformatory property on Victoria.

"We all walked. The babies walked. There was no room in the buggy for the babies," Tony said.

Vincenzo died in 1971. His wife moved to a seniors home and his granddaughter bought the family home, eventually selling it to the current owner.

On the outside, the workshop looks exactly as it did when the kids were growing up. On the inside, it's mostly empty. There's a handful of tools, and a bicycle.

Tony and Joe say the shop has served its purpose.

"We're ambivalent about it," Joe said.

"I would say (Vincenzo) would say 'let it go,' " Tony added.

"What's the point of perpetuating what has limited purpose?" Joe said. "(Cleveland) owns the property. He can do what he likes."

Blair Cleveland unwittingly wandered into a debate about what is heritage, and what is the future of the ward. He's lived in Guelph about 20 years, but bought 47 Alice St. in 2004.

He had no idea it was on the heritage inventory. He didn't even know such a thing existed.

He applied to turn the workshop into a garage.

He was told it wasn't possible, because the workshop is too close to the road. He'd never seen a pedestrian on the sidewalk as he was pulling out.

He could turn it into a studio, or a rental apartment.

But the building isn't insulated. There's no heat, no hydro, no frame -- just a double-brick wall. It would cost $25,000 to make it livable, he was told.

Besides, he needed a place to park. So he applied to demolish it to make room for a driveway.

That triggered the heritage process. Cleveland's been to committees. He's written letters. He's listened to people discuss him and his situation. He's not angry or frustrated. He understands everyone's point of view. But he believes his plan makes sense.

"I'm an individual who's come into the area and willing to upgrade and invest," he said. "Each idea I've presented to the city has been turned down.

"I wanted to make it into a garage and really I didn't feel it was unreasonable. I hadn't purchased it with the intent of an alternate use."

For now, he parks around the corner on Duke Street. Because he has no parking on his property, he's automatically eligible for a city-issue, on-street parking permit.

But he says that won't work. Alice is the narrowest of streets. In the winter, it gets down to one lane. The sidewalks run directly along the road. There's no grass in between.

"I don't feel comfortable (parking on Alice). People go down here at a fairly good clip," Cleveland said.

If the discussion at a recent council committee is any indication, the decision on 47 Alice St. will be far from easy.

The vote to designate the property failed on a tie. Council will decide Monday how to proceed.

The Alice Street properties "have a historical connection with the city's early growth -- an important period of Guelph's Italian immigration," Jylanne said. "It contributes to the understanding of St. Patrick's Ward as a working-class neighbourhood with mixed uses."

That's the argument for saving the workshop.

But some disagree.

"This is one little niche of downtown that is developable, if carefully done," real estate agent Murray Taylor told committee. "It's the wrong time and place to put a tiny roadblock in the way of redevelopment."

But representatives of Heritage Guelph say they've gone a long way toward making sure the property remains livable.

"The committee was very careful to not preclude additions, extensions or preclude merging the building. The committee did not want to freeze that property in time," said Paul Ross, president of the group.

Cleveland had no way of knowing, and no reason to imagine, the home he was buying would be on a heritage registry.

"People find out they're on the inventory through a development inquiry or because they're curious," Jylanne told committee. "It does catch some people by surprise."

"I can totally understand why this happened, because I wouldn't think (the home) could be on a list," Councillor Christine Billings said.

The city's looking into how to ensure better communication between homeowners, sellers and agents, Jylanne said.

When the interests of the city and the interests of a private homeowner collide, the city should consider stepping up to help the homeowner, said Gil Stelter, a local historian and heritage expert.

"In some cases, the community, if it wishes to keep something that's going to penalize the owner, should ante up," he said. The city could offer tax relief or a grant to help fix up a property, similar to what was done for the Gummer building after it burned down.

"As the Ward changes and gets upgraded and gentrified, it's good to keep a reminder of what we were," Stelter said. "But you have to find a use for (the building). . . . Guelph's not ready to have a little working-class museum of shoemakers."

[phishtaper]

oops. double posted

Edited May 26, 2008 by Guest

[Jaimoe]

I love how the article gets a point of view from a developer and shockingly, he sees nothing wrong with re-development.

[phishtaper]

would you classify this particular project as "redevelopment", jaimoe? i would not.

i would classify it as a homeowner removing an unusable building on his property.

[AD]

i don't see how the real estate agent's comment is unreasonable. is he a 'developer'?

[Jaimoe]

It's not that. It's more of the philosophy of a developer that I'm getting at. There's too many quick bulldozing and wrecking-balls going on in this country.

[phishtaper]

It's not that. It's more of the philosophy of a developer that I'm getting at. There's too many quick bulldozing and wrecking-balls going on in this country.

you keep saying that, Jaimoe. We understand your point. But, you dont seem to understand the very real financial and logistical limitations inherent in so many of these sorts of cases.

are YOU willing to put YOUR money where your mouth is and cough up the extra few millions of dollars necessary to rebuild historically each and every time?

of course I'd like to save old buildings whenever feasible, but personally, I can think of a few hundred other things I'd rather spend tax money on.

[Jaimoe]

Rebuilding history is impossible. Maintaining the little we have left isn't. Tearing down a house for a parking spot is perverse, really.

[phishtaper]

you conveniently ignored my questions, jaimoe.

[Ol'Hickster]

As a Heritage stone mason myself, it kills me to see historical buildigns and masonry being teared down and dystroyed but I also know What it costs do restore aswell so as much as it sad'ns me to see things gone I can understand why it happens it does cost million and millions of dollars to do heritage restoration,

[Jaimoe]

It's not that. It's more of the philosophy of a developer that I'm getting at. There's too many quick bulldozing and wrecking-balls going on in this country.

you keep saying that' date=' Jaimoe. We understand your point. But, you dont seem to understand the very real financial and logistical limitations inherent in so many of these sorts of cases.

are YOU willing to put YOUR money where your mouth is and cough up the extra few millions of dollars necessary to rebuild historically each and every time?

of course I'd like to save old buildings whenever feasible, but personally, I can think of a few hundred other things I'd rather spend tax money on. [/quote']

#1 - I don't always think there's logistic problems since I don't trust the motives of most developers. Also, it's often cheaper to tear a building down than renovate it. However, a lot of developers, especially the ones in Toronto, almost always (and generalization is appropriate and accurate) will, given the chance, go for the cheap, and they ain't poor. It's all about profit.

#2 - Yes, I have millions. Actually, I see nothing wrong with tax money being used for preserving heritage along with the arts, parks and recreation etc... Quality of life has many slices. And as I said, builders CAN afford to renovate and rebuild. Thank God for the new heritage law.

I'm glad Guelph has people concerned about their history. Parks, buildings and neighbourhoods help give citizens their identity and which inevitably instills pride. So sue me if I'm a romantic.

[Ol'Hickster]

The company I work for have been doing a couple job out in Guelph

[Tungsten Gruvsten]

you guys would have to see this building to believe it - it is friggin tiny, right on the edge of the sidewalk...no sign remains of the shoe-shop that was once there...I say tear it down, and i'm all for saving -real- heritage sites...There's lots of other neat stuff in the ward - old corner grocers, butcher shops, even horse stables from mid 1800's (most of the houses are 1800's to early 1900's, not much building here since 1940) and this guy wants to take out one unremarkable, unusable structure. It's a block away from me - I walk past it twice a day, I used to wonder why it existed...no real legacy there...

[phishtaper]

i may be wrong, but i think city council just voted to designate this house as a heritage property along with another property whose only historical relevance involves a building that hasnt actually existed for years.

i'll read up on it tomorrow.

[Jaimoe]

Maybe the town wants to preserve the entire block. Makes sense - you start tearing down pieces of the pie and it diminishes the significance of the whole, plus keeping the small house keeps things in context. I still find all this talk and the heritage fighting interesting and important even though I've been to Guelph only a few times.

[phishtaper]

yep, guelph city council did vote last night to designate these two properties. one is the little shop/garage on Alice Street. unless the owner appeals within 30 days he will forever be prevented from tearing it down. he has already indicated he will appeal and plans to tear it down to allow for parking. currently, the tiny structure is unusable, as it was when he purchased the modest property a few years ago.

the other property is a very odd situation and one that may very well end up setting legal precedence regarding property rights and heritage designation. between 1883 and 1892 it is thought that a "cottage knitting industry" was run out of an outbuilding behind a house on manitoba street in guelph by a man named samuel carter who later became mayor. i say 'thought' because it is not known for certain if the actual knitting facility was located there or if it was simply listed as being there because this was the owner's home address (a very common way of doing things then). regardless, a full scale knitting factory was built in 1892 nearby (now ironically, abandoned and in complete disrepair across from the new guelph youth music hall) and the outbuilding on manitoba street was later torn down. it no longer exists and hasn't for decades.

guelph city council voted last night to designate the manitoba street property as "culturally historic" because common perception is that there used to be a cottage industry knitting factory there. designation is based on this property being an example of the cultural evolution of the city where industry and residential areas were one and the same during the late 1800s.

what seems so odd is that 1) the building in question hasn't actually existed for decades, and 2) it is not even certain that the building was actually used for the purposes for which heritage designation was sought.

jaimoe, when you say perhaps the city is looking to preserve the whole block, this may very well be the case. it seems that the heritage board is seeking to reverse the current trend of gentrification and turn this older, modest working-class neighbourhood into some sort of static, living museum and city council is going along with it. the problem, especially with the manitoba street property, is that the physical structure upon which heritage status was based no longer exists. (and the alice street property is in such disrepair it is essentially unusable). so, why restrict the current owners use of their properties? wouldn't plaques suffice?

a number of people in guelph woke up this morning scratching their heads. this is an odd one, for sure.

[Ol'Hickster]

Whats the name of the company doing the work phishtaper? are there colors Green? and maybe called Clifford Restoration?