Click on image to enlarge.
My letter to the editor
was published in the
Windsor Star April 26, 2007.
Monday, April 28, 2008
My letter to editor - Unfair Advantage
Click on image to enlarge.
My letter to the editor
was published in the
Windsor Star April 26, 2007.
Expropriation vs Demolition
If the city approved a demolition
permit for 2929 Riverside Drive
East, EWCC/EWCP's semi-detached,
then not only would the corporation
make out like a bandit because it
only had to pay for half the
building to get a demolition permit
for the demolition of the whole
building, but the city wouldn't have
to worry about any future cost of expropriating
my semi-detached property, 2925 Riverside
Drive East. I think I know how
that would work, 2925 "NO SUCH
ADDRESS IN CIS"
And to think a year ago I thought
expropriation was the worse
case senario.
permit for 2929 Riverside Drive
East, EWCC/EWCP's semi-detached,
then not only would the corporation
make out like a bandit because it
only had to pay for half the
building to get a demolition permit
for the demolition of the whole
building, but the city wouldn't have
to worry about any future cost of expropriating
my semi-detached property, 2925 Riverside
Drive East. I think I know how
that would work, 2925 "NO SUCH
ADDRESS IN CIS"
And to think a year ago I thought
expropriation was the worse
case senario.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Microsoft Virtual Earth - The Seagrave Building
Want to see the Seagrave
building before it's
demise? Go to Microsoft
Virtual Earth and type in
the search box, 961
Walker Road Windsor
Ontario Canada. You'll
see a satellite image of
the Seagrave building.
Although the satellite
image is old, it's still
pretty cool to see.
Try 963 Walker too. And
take look see at 2929 & 2925
Riverside Drive East.
If you want to know about the document
I've posted, see my earlier post below.
Click on image to enlarge
Microsoft Virtual Earth address
http://maps.live.com/
Friday, April 18, 2008
On February 5, 2008, I faxed a letter
of the same date to the city's Building
department manager, Mr. Bill Jean. Shortly
after I sent the fax, I received by fax
from the city's building department a
"REQUEST FOR INFORMATION" attachment,
from a city employee, that was not Mr. Jean.
The request had nothing to do with my
letter. About a minute or so later, I
received another "REQUEST FOR INFORMATION"
that was in regards to my letter.
A cover letter indicated that the wrong
attachment had been sent the first time.
After reading the contents, I decided
to keep the document rather than throw
it away. At the time, it seemed similar
to me
Until the Seagrave story, I had forgotten
all about the document. It was the address
of 933 Walker road indicated in the
earlier story about the Seagrave demolition,
that made me think of the document. When
I checked the address numbers indicated in
the document. Neither address numbers were
933. So I was really surprised today to turn
to the letters to the editor section
of the Windsor Star to see a picture of the
demolished Seagrave building,with the few bricks
still standing, with white painted on
address number of 961. Now that address
number was in the document. Click on
document to enlarge. See letter below.
City heritage at risk at
Lettert
Published: Friday, April 18, 2008
The historic Seagrave Building is lost ... perhaps it's time to save the Windsor Heritage Committee itself from "demolition."
I have served on the Windsor Heritage Committee for 10 years, most of those in the capacity of chair. I'm proud to be associated with the achievements the WHC has made toward protecting our city's heritage. This has included the recent preservation of the Holy Rosary Convent and John Campbell school buildings and multiple other property designations under the Ontario Heritage Act. We have been grateful for the strong heritage awareness and support exhibited by the current city council for these initiatives. As well, the committee has carried on a long tradition of annual local heritage celebration through community recognition awards, Heritage Highlights video clips, heritage property funding, youth colouring contests and many other projects. Indeed, the vibrancy of Windsor's heritage advocacy was recognized in 2005 as a provincial standout by the Ontario Heritage Trust.
Beyond the significant efforts by a group of volunteer members, the lifeblood of the WHC has traditionally been the dedicated and professional service of the heritage planner, a full- time city staff member who would conduct our research, guide the structure of our motions, police other city departments with respect to heritage priorities and otherwise co-ordinate all aspects of WHC activities. It is a vital and indispensable role in the heritage life of our city. Windsorites owe a debt of gratitude to Nancy Morand who served with distinction in this capacity for many years until her retirement mid last year.
REDUCED TO RUBBLE: Demolition crews dismantle an old brick building in the 900 block of Walker Road last Thursday. The building reportedly housed Seagraves Fire Engine manufacturing plant.View Larger Image View Larger Image
REDUCED TO RUBBLE: Demolition crews dismantle an old brick building in the 900 block of Walker Road last Thursday. The building reportedly housed Seagraves Fire Engine manufacturing plant.
It's with Nancy's departure that our serious problems began. We expected that her qualified replacement would be hired in advance for training and a seamless transition prior to her leaving.
Instead, without consultation with us, an arbitrary decision was made by senior administration not to replace the position, ostensibly, for reasons of cost efficiency. In the void left behind, we now have heritage chaos. Murky interdepartmental and personal agendas prevail and we've seen a silly tug-of-war over the heritage mandate between planning and cultural affairs departments.
As a result, we fail to receive adequate support from either. The careful protocols put in place by Nancy to flag heritage interests among building and planning departments applications has broken down and big things are falling through the cracks. Our modest operating budget has been cut to one-third its traditional level. Heritage Week in Windsor was effectively cancelled this year because no one could get authorization to reproduce a few hundred copies of the colouring contest form to distribute to the schools and the community heritage recognition awards were hijacked by others. Despite this, we try to carry on. I laud the efforts of our Doors Open subcommittee dedicated to bringing back this popular program notwithstanding lacklustre financial and material support from the city. But even our recent initiatives toward saving the prominent Low-Martin House have been stymied by needless procedural wrangling evident of a city administration without an appropriate structure for heritage administration.
attention of the CAO and other senior administration staff without the courtesy of a reply. We have also appealed to our councillors without effect.
It's time for council and the mayor to review this matter "in the full light of day." Without it, it's only a matter of time before another Seagrave building falls to a bulldozer and the Windsor Heritage Committee is damaged beyond repair.
GREGORY HEIL
Chair, Windsor Heritage Committee
To see picture
http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/letters/story.html?id=f247f53d-9060-456a-a41a-03361fce0439&k=84698
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Historical Building Demolished
This demolition just goes to show
that my concern that I could arrive
home one day to find my house demolished,
(as well as dead pets), isn't far fetched.
Fortunately the building demolished wasn't
someone's home and the building was vacant.
Read the article below.
History erased, city hall blamed
Doug Williamson, Windsor Star
Published: Friday, April 11, 2008
The chairman of Windsor's heritage committee says the city's building department "dropped the ball" when it approved the demolition this week of a former fire engine factory on Walker Road.
The Seagrave Building was on a heritage inventory list that was supposed to give it a 60-day grace period before a permit is issued, so the building could be evaluated for its historical significance and possibly protected.
The demolition permit application for the brick structure at 933 Walker Rd. should have been forwarded to the heritage committee before being approved, said Greg Heil.
"It was a very significant industrial building that we had hoped to designate (give it official historical designation) someday," Heil said Thursday. Such designation would hav
"The building department dropped the ball," Heil said of the approval to demolish the structure.
"The building has gone through multiple uses since, but it was a fine example of brick architecture," Heil said. "It could have had a very nice adaptive reuse and restoration had the right opportunity presented itself. In recent years it has been quite dilapidated."
Recently the building housed a carpentry business and auto body shop, but was empty at the time of demolition. In the last year there was a fire on the second floor, Weeks said.
Heil said buildings on the heritage inventory list are routinely referred to the heritage committee when demolition permits are applied for. "There was no referral to the heritage committee ... so we know that the process broke down somewhere along the way."
Bill Jean, manager of permits for the city, was not available for comment Thursday. But Ashok Sood, the building's owner, said he was unaware that it was on the heritage inventory list.
He said the building had been vacant for more than year, and was for sale or rent with no takers.
"I wish I knew, because we would have pursued it that way. I would have worked with people," Sood said. "It was too costly to renovate and I couldn't find anybody to go in." He owned the building for three years and plans to leave the property vacant for the time being.
He said he decided to tear it down because of vandalism and other problems. "I bought the building because I loved it, but I couldn't find anybody to do anything; there was no grants available, there was nothing."
Sood said he was told a few months ago by someone that the building had historical significance and gave the person his business card, but he was never contacted again.
"It was an eyesore, there was a lot of vandalism and it was looking pretty ugly."
Tony Gallippi, who owns a restaurant next door, said the demolition process slowed Walker Road traffic Wednesday and disrupted his normal luncheon business because vehicles blocked his parking lot.
"In this city we're too quick to tear things down," Gallippi said Thursday.
Heil said there are about 700 buildings on the city's heritage inventory, plus about 100 buildings that are historically designated. He said about two years ago a similar situation occurred and assurances were given by the city that it wouldn't happen again.
"We're not in the business of trying to designate every single building on the inventory. I would classify this one though as one of the more prominent and important buildings on the inventory, and we very, very much regret seeing it lost," Heil said.
The heritage committee, which met Wednesday evening and discussed the demolition, will ask the city's planning department to review the matter with the building department "and report back to us in terms of how this mistake was made and give us some assurance that it won't happen again."
Coun. Ron Jones, who along with Coun. Dave Brister sits on the heritage committee, said he was very disturbed that the demolition was allowed to proceed.
"I'm certainly appalled at the fact that somehow, some way, this fell through the cracks," said Jones, a retired firefighter. "This was on the list to be designated. The history of that building was so rich."
He said the city should step up efforts to protect historically significant buildings. "We have a list of buildings that we hope to designate, and we're just going to have to fast track some of these things. It doesn't bring this building back, but we certainly have to be conscientious as to handing out permits."
Weeks bemoaned the building's loss.
"It adds to the long list of buildings torn down in this city," she said. "I think it really is part and parcel of the concern of how the city thinks of itself."
A group calling itself scaledown.ca was angered by the demolition. It held a candlelight vigil, attended by about a dozen people, to mourn the loss of the building on Thursday night.
"It's incomprehensible, in this day and age, that something like this could be allowed to happed," said James Coulter in a news release. "Protecting the history and heritage of our city is critical to its identity -- past, present and future."
BUILT FIRST FIRE TRUCK
According to history buff Elaine Weeks, the factory was built in the early 1900s and housed the Canadian subsidiary of the Seagrave Fire Apparatus Company of Ohio. It was the first company to produce a motorized fire engine in Canada, according to Weeks' publication, The Walkerville Times. It operated from 1907 to 1923.
© The Windsor Star 2008
that my concern that I could arrive
home one day to find my house demolished,
(as well as dead pets), isn't far fetched.
Fortunately the building demolished wasn't
someone's home and the building was vacant.
Read the article below.
History erased, city hall blamed
Doug Williamson, Windsor Star
Published: Friday, April 11, 2008
The chairman of Windsor's heritage committee says the city's building department "dropped the ball" when it approved the demolition this week of a former fire engine factory on Walker Road.
The Seagrave Building was on a heritage inventory list that was supposed to give it a 60-day grace period before a permit is issued, so the building could be evaluated for its historical significance and possibly protected.
The demolition permit application for the brick structure at 933 Walker Rd. should have been forwarded to the heritage committee before being approved, said Greg Heil.
"It was a very significant industrial building that we had hoped to designate (give it official historical designation) someday," Heil said Thursday. Such designation would hav
"The building department dropped the ball," Heil said of the approval to demolish the structure.
"The building has gone through multiple uses since, but it was a fine example of brick architecture," Heil said. "It could have had a very nice adaptive reuse and restoration had the right opportunity presented itself. In recent years it has been quite dilapidated."
Recently the building housed a carpentry business and auto body shop, but was empty at the time of demolition. In the last year there was a fire on the second floor, Weeks said.
Heil said buildings on the heritage inventory list are routinely referred to the heritage committee when demolition permits are applied for. "There was no referral to the heritage committee ... so we know that the process broke down somewhere along the way."
Bill Jean, manager of permits for the city, was not available for comment Thursday. But Ashok Sood, the building's owner, said he was unaware that it was on the heritage inventory list.
He said the building had been vacant for more than year, and was for sale or rent with no takers.
"I wish I knew, because we would have pursued it that way. I would have worked with people," Sood said. "It was too costly to renovate and I couldn't find anybody to go in." He owned the building for three years and plans to leave the property vacant for the time being.
He said he decided to tear it down because of vandalism and other problems. "I bought the building because I loved it, but I couldn't find anybody to do anything; there was no grants available, there was nothing."
Sood said he was told a few months ago by someone that the building had historical significance and gave the person his business card, but he was never contacted again.
"It was an eyesore, there was a lot of vandalism and it was looking pretty ugly."
Tony Gallippi, who owns a restaurant next door, said the demolition process slowed Walker Road traffic Wednesday and disrupted his normal luncheon business because vehicles blocked his parking lot.
"In this city we're too quick to tear things down," Gallippi said Thursday.
Heil said there are about 700 buildings on the city's heritage inventory, plus about 100 buildings that are historically designated. He said about two years ago a similar situation occurred and assurances were given by the city that it wouldn't happen again.
"We're not in the business of trying to designate every single building on the inventory. I would classify this one though as one of the more prominent and important buildings on the inventory, and we very, very much regret seeing it lost," Heil said.
The heritage committee, which met Wednesday evening and discussed the demolition, will ask the city's planning department to review the matter with the building department "and report back to us in terms of how this mistake was made and give us some assurance that it won't happen again."
Coun. Ron Jones, who along with Coun. Dave Brister sits on the heritage committee, said he was very disturbed that the demolition was allowed to proceed.
"I'm certainly appalled at the fact that somehow, some way, this fell through the cracks," said Jones, a retired firefighter. "This was on the list to be designated. The history of that building was so rich."
He said the city should step up efforts to protect historically significant buildings. "We have a list of buildings that we hope to designate, and we're just going to have to fast track some of these things. It doesn't bring this building back, but we certainly have to be conscientious as to handing out permits."
Weeks bemoaned the building's loss.
"It adds to the long list of buildings torn down in this city," she said. "I think it really is part and parcel of the concern of how the city thinks of itself."
A group calling itself scaledown.ca was angered by the demolition. It held a candlelight vigil, attended by about a dozen people, to mourn the loss of the building on Thursday night.
"It's incomprehensible, in this day and age, that something like this could be allowed to happed," said James Coulter in a news release. "Protecting the history and heritage of our city is critical to its identity -- past, present and future."
BUILT FIRST FIRE TRUCK
According to history buff Elaine Weeks, the factory was built in the early 1900s and housed the Canadian subsidiary of the Seagrave Fire Apparatus Company of Ohio. It was the first company to produce a motorized fire engine in Canada, according to Weeks' publication, The Walkerville Times. It operated from 1907 to 1923.
© The Windsor Star 2008
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Getting Drunk Not Good For the Common Good
So here we go again. There's the
car parked in my driveway again.
By the way I don't drive. So
there shouldn't be any vehicles
parked on my property unless they
are my guests. This vehicle is
from the kid living in the house
behind me. He and his friends use
to park in front of the house the
kid lives in and along the street.
But AECON employees have hogged
up every parking spot on the street
including in front where the kid
lives. I can see that the street
is empty of vehicles and Our
Lady of the Rosary Church (AECON)
parking lot is empty too.
There's parking in front of the house.
I'm annoyed because I spoke to
him about this before, only about
week and half ago. And here was his
car again, parked in my driveway,
when there is parking in front
of his house and the entire street.
I speak to the kid again. He says,
he's sorry, again. My response was,
"No you're not." He admits that he
is trespassing, but then goes on to
say that he was told he could park
on the property. I asked him who told
him that. He says, "The construction guys."
Translation - AECON guys.
The kid knows he's trespassing, but
parks his vehicle on my property
anyway. Neither the kid or
his friends would have parked on
my property before the big corporations
moved in. And would have asked
before parking on my property.
When I think of this kid and some of my
other neighbours (and a particular
Habitat for Humanity employee)
a saying comes to mind, " A drunken man's
words is a sober man's thoughts."
The kid knowingly trespassing on my property
is his 'drunken man's words' his lack
of respect is his 'sober man's thoughts"
The 'sober man's thoughts" were there
before the corporation, but since the
corporations have moved in, some people
feel secure in drinking until they're
drunk.
car parked in my driveway again.
By the way I don't drive. So
there shouldn't be any vehicles
parked on my property unless they
are my guests. This vehicle is
from the kid living in the house
behind me. He and his friends use
to park in front of the house the
kid lives in and along the street.
But AECON employees have hogged
up every parking spot on the street
including in front where the kid
lives. I can see that the street
is empty of vehicles and Our
Lady of the Rosary Church (AECON)
parking lot is empty too.
There's parking in front of the house.
I'm annoyed because I spoke to
him about this before, only about
week and half ago. And here was his
car again, parked in my driveway,
when there is parking in front
of his house and the entire street.
I speak to the kid again. He says,
he's sorry, again. My response was,
"No you're not." He admits that he
is trespassing, but then goes on to
say that he was told he could park
on the property. I asked him who told
him that. He says, "The construction guys."
Translation - AECON guys.
The kid knows he's trespassing, but
parks his vehicle on my property
anyway. Neither the kid or
his friends would have parked on
my property before the big corporations
moved in. And would have asked
before parking on my property.
When I think of this kid and some of my
other neighbours (and a particular
Habitat for Humanity employee)
a saying comes to mind, " A drunken man's
words is a sober man's thoughts."
The kid knowingly trespassing on my property
is his 'drunken man's words' his lack
of respect is his 'sober man's thoughts"
The 'sober man's thoughts" were there
before the corporation, but since the
corporations have moved in, some people
feel secure in drinking until they're
drunk.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Last Homeowner
Well it looks like I am the only
homeowner whose property EWCP
has not bought. I hope
EWCP is not of the mind
that when it bought the semi-
next door, 2929 Riverside Drive
East, that it was a 2 for 1 sale.
You know, buy 1 get the other one
free or rather buy half a building
and get the other half free.
EWCC/EWCP knew the building had
two owners and should have
negotiated the sale of the building
with both owners together, myself
and Debbie Revels who were at the
time joint owners of the building
(I'm sure you can see the obvious
problems with the confidentiality
clause). Particularly since EWCC/
EWCP wants to demolish the building.
Since I'm still here, the Revels
should still be next door.
Instead a deal was made with
only one of the building owners, Debbie
Revels. Her husband was not named on
the title. She owned the house before
she met him. Though,you wouldn't
know it if you spoke to him. The
key here is how EWCC/EWCP
interprets the deal.
I was thinking, I have two house cats.
One is almost nine years old, the
other will be eighteen years old
this year. They wouldn't dare hurt
my pets would they?
Cameras or no cameras, I am afraid,
literally,that one day I am going
to come home to find my house demolished
and my pets dead. You can best believe
that if that were to happen to me
that it will happen to others who
a corporation has an irrational
prejudice against. It's just a
matter of means, and opportunity.
One More Thing. Two weeks ago, I
spoke to the owner who owned the
house behind me. It's rental property.
At that time, he told me that he had
not heard from EWCP, although his nephew
had told me just the week prior they were
talking. Today, the nephew told me that
his uncle sold the house. He said that he
thinks that his uncle got $200.000. It's
possible. I know when I spoke to
him a couple weeks ago he said he
made an offer of $230.000.
homeowner whose property EWCP
has not bought. I hope
EWCP is not of the mind
that when it bought the semi-
next door, 2929 Riverside Drive
East, that it was a 2 for 1 sale.
You know, buy 1 get the other one
free or rather buy half a building
and get the other half free.
EWCC/EWCP knew the building had
two owners and should have
negotiated the sale of the building
with both owners together, myself
and Debbie Revels who were at the
time joint owners of the building
(I'm sure you can see the obvious
problems with the confidentiality
clause). Particularly since EWCC/
EWCP wants to demolish the building.
Since I'm still here, the Revels
should still be next door.
Instead a deal was made with
only one of the building owners, Debbie
Revels. Her husband was not named on
the title. She owned the house before
she met him. Though,you wouldn't
know it if you spoke to him. The
key here is how EWCC/EWCP
interprets the deal.
I was thinking, I have two house cats.
One is almost nine years old, the
other will be eighteen years old
this year. They wouldn't dare hurt
my pets would they?
Cameras or no cameras, I am afraid,
literally,that one day I am going
to come home to find my house demolished
and my pets dead. You can best believe
that if that were to happen to me
that it will happen to others who
a corporation has an irrational
prejudice against. It's just a
matter of means, and opportunity.
One More Thing. Two weeks ago, I
spoke to the owner who owned the
house behind me. It's rental property.
At that time, he told me that he had
not heard from EWCP, although his nephew
had told me just the week prior they were
talking. Today, the nephew told me that
his uncle sold the house. He said that he
thinks that his uncle got $200.000. It's
possible. I know when I spoke to
him a couple weeks ago he said he
made an offer of $230.000.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)