World

Firemen take Hour to get to Fire a Block Away from Fire Station

by jr | January 29, 2009 at 12:48 pm

184 views | 0 Recommendations | 6 comments

A former tenant in the rooming house at 90 Alexander St. above the Incendio restaurant, has questions about the fire at 5 a.m. on Jan. 6 that left all tenants evicted. It took the fire department “about an hour to arrive” – even though there is a fire station just a block away at Main & Powell.

Several tenants would like to move back into the rooming house. They've been told that it will be six months before renovations are finished, but they doubt they will ever be allowed to move back in. The fire was allowed to burn long enough that the offshore landlord may be in a position to circumvent laws that curb the practice of evicting lower income tenants, doing renovations -- workmen were there yesterday doing renovations -- and then jacking up the rents. “If there is structural damage and the floors are burned,” says the former tenant, “they can say, “It’s not safe, you have to move out.” Indeed, all tenants were told to move, even though only the suites immediately above the restaurant stove, where the fire is believed to have started, were damaged.

There are questions not only about whether the offshore landlord had something to gain from this fire, but whether the operators of Incendio would have had something to gain. "That business wasn't doing very well," a tenant alleges, pointing out that they will now get fire insurance. And there are questions about whether the fire department was called right away.

At this point, there is no evidence of wrongdoing against anybody. It's just that evicted tenants can start thinking along the same lines as fire insurance investigators: “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”

Full story at Downtown Eastside Enquirer

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

eastvanray

at 13:30 on January 29th, 2009

Could it be that the fire deptment had been dispatched to another incident when the alarm came in?

Tina Kells

at 13:35 on January 29th, 2009

That could be as well since #1 at Main and Powell is one of the city's busiest fire halls.

Tina Kells

at 13:32 on January 29th, 2009

I think with a fire of this magnitude, a fire that required the services of trucks from three fire halls, it is unfair to even suggest that the men and women of the VFD did anything but their jobs in this case.

Perhaps, being an older building that may have had asbestos throughout, this fire required the VFD to call in one of the 2 HAZMAT trucks they have. These trucks are located at #17 Hall (57th and Knight Street) and #10 Hall (UBC) and were not "just a block away."

I think the headline here is a little misleading and suggests some sort of misconduct that is not supported by the facts and is actually not the main focus of the rest of this article.

The three-alarm blaze began around 5 a.m. at the four-storey building on Alexander Street at Columbia, which houses a restaurant at street level and apartments on the upper floors...

Kelly Mullin, battalion chief of the Vancouver Fire Department, said the materials in the century-old building were highly flammable, with the fire spreading from floor to floor via the walls and plaster.

at 15:09 on January 30th, 2009

Tina,

You are speculating about asbestos and a Hazmat Unit. I prefer to rely on actual witness testimony.

Witnesses made no mention of a Hazmat truck. Even the fire dept. pr hack in the msm article to which you link does not mention a Hazmat truck or asbestos.

But you're on a speculative roll. You continue: "These [Hazmat] trucks are located at #17 Hall (57th and Knight Street) and #10 Hall (UBC) and were not 'just a block away.' "
This is irrelevant. Even if a Hazmat truck -- that would a Hazmat truck that
appears to have surfaced nowhere but your imagination -- had come from 57th St. or UBC, that doesn't preclude one of the two fire trucks at the fire station a block away from arriving sooner. That is, if they received a call.

Although the fire department spokesperson in the article to which you link makes no mention of Hazmat unit, or asbestos, he does say that the materials in the old building were "highly flammable". The materials couldn't have been all that flammable if, after burning unchecked for an extended period, the fire damaged only the suites directly above the stove. The majority of tenants had no damage to their suites or belongings.

You claim that my title about the Fire Dept. taking too long to arrive is misleading. You ignore the fact that it is supported by witness testimony.

eastvanray

at 15:23 on January 30th, 2009

Something is not right when a "highly flammable" building burns for an hour and is not comepltely gutted by the fire. Either the building was not "highly flammable" or the fire department did not take an hour to beging fighting the fire. These two facts cannot co-exist truthfully. We need more witness info.

at 12:24 on January 31st, 2009

eastvanry,

I mentioned in the longer article on the Downtown Eastside Enquirer blog that it has been pointed out to me that when people are in an emergency situation, they have a different sense of time. It can feel as though it is taking longer for emergency personnel to arrive than is actually the case.

My main witness, though, is a solid person. I've known this person for years. Even if we factor in that this person may have overestimated the time -- they were still stressed when we talked a few days after the fire -- I believe them when they say that it took an inordinately long time for the fire trucks from the station a block away to arrive.

You're right, "We need more witness info." I just wanted to raise the questions that were being asked by tenants. The fire investigators can take it further if they wish. But I'm sure they have already looked at motives.

As I pointed out in on the blog, this is apparently not the first time the Incendio stove caught fire.