Future of Fredericton apartment building undecided after major fire
Engineer to examine structural integrity of 100 Clark St. this week
Owner Gabriel Elzayat said engineers will be on the site this week to examine the structural integrity of the building to determine "whether we need to tear the building down or we are able to clear and fix what's there."
To allow the engineer to see the "critical areas," Elzayat hired a crew to rip out water-damaged drywall and other building material in order to expose those areas.
He hopes to have an answer in the next two weeks about whether to tear it down or fix it up.
Elzayat said there are challenges to both approaches.
If the structure can be rebuilt, it will take about three months to gut it first. That also means extra costs.
Although it would be cheaper to demolish the building and start from scratch — to avoid the cost of the three-month cleanup — a rebuild couldn't begin until next year, he said, so it would be a lot longer before people are able to move in.
Either way, he said residents won't be living at 100 Clark St. for at least 16 to 18 months.
Last week, the Fredericton fire department said an investigation determined the Sept. 21 fire started on a balcony, although they don't yet know the cause.
Elzayat said they know the specific fourth-floor balcony where it started, but the occupants of that apartment were not home at the time of the fire. Nor, he said, did they have a barbecue, which would have been considered a potential source of ignition.
He said he's been told the fire couldn't have started in a worse place — the top floor.
And even worse than that, it started on a balcony and spread very quickly to the attic.
"Once the fire is in the attic, it's very, very hard to stop. The air flow that goes through the attic is significant, so then the fire just started circulating."
He said the fire spread from the attic to the corners of the building and continued downward. That's why the corners of the building are so badly damaged. The fire even reached the corner apartments on the first floor.
'It was heartbreaking'
Elzayat was at another work site on the other side of the river on Sept. 21 when his foreman called to say 100 Clark St. was on fire. It took him 17 minutes to arrive on site.
"It was heartbreaking. I actually stood there and I had a little emotional moment," he recalled.
When the apartment was completed three years ago, it was Bella Properties' largest project.
"This property has a lot of sentimental value for me because it was the first.… It was my biggest project at the time. We since have grown and built bigger apartments but this was one of our jewels."
The top floor of 100 Clark St. was almost entirely destroyed by fire. (Roger Cosman/CBC)
With 44 units and about 100 tenants, "this is really, really heartbreaking for me to see something this significant happened to that many tenants," said Elzayat earlier this week.
When he arrived around 3 p.m. on Sept. 21, with the fire raging through the building, Elzayat said it took about two hours to account for all of the tenants.
"We were missing one person and they couldn't find her. She didn't have her phone," he recalled.
Bella's initial response
Elzayat said the company struggled with how to handle such a devastating fire and figure out the process.
"This was the first incident that we've ever had with a fire — let alone a significant fire," he said.
"We can't make everybody happy, but we try to do whatever we can to make it easy."
Under New Brunswick laws, tenants are required to remove their possessions when they move out of an apartment or risk losing their security deposit.
Gabriel
Elzayat said what wasn't destroyed by fire was damaged by water. Water
was still dripping into this first-floor apartment on Monday after rain
on the weekend. (Roger Cosman/CBC)
Government officials said fire or floods "don't necessarily exempt" tenants from that rule, although the final decision is determined on a case-by-case basis by the Tenant and Landlord Relations Office.
Tenant Charlene Barron questioned Bella Properties about having to remove her worthless possessions and received this emailed response, "Unfortunately, in order to get your damage deposit back, the unit must be completely empty. Otherwise we as a company would have to pay somebody to remove it, which will come out of your damage deposit."
On Monday, Elzayat said, "So I want to make something very clear — we never once said that we're not going to refund anybody's damage deposit. There's rules in New Brunswick that we can't control, which is the rentalsman has the authority. We can't control that. The money is with the rentalsman."
Last week, Bella Properties contacted all tenants and told them the company would "release all security deposits."
Bella is also reimbursing all tenants for 10 days of rent.
The letter reminded tenants they are still "responsible for the items within your rented unit."
The company said insurance companies should contact Bella to "arrange for the removal of the remainder of your belongings, but we are still waiting to hear from most insurance companies." Elzayat said 90 per cent of tenants had insurance.
Tenants have until Oct. 29 to remove their things, and while he sympathizes with the displaced tenants, Elzayat said the slow response from some insurance companies has helped slow the overall recovery process.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Owner wants to put up new apartments on property in downtown Fredericton
CBC News · Posted: Jan 26, 2019 8:00 AM AST
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Fate of 1820s stone building in Fredericton causes worry
Owner wants to put up new apartments on property in downtown Fredericton
Concern is growing for an old stone building in downtown Fredericton, once the home of a thriving woodworking factory and now possibly headed for demolition.
The Risteen building at the corner of Queen and Smythe streets, the first cut stone building in New Brunswick, could be torn down to make way for a new development.
Gabriel Elzayat says he wants to put apartments on the property.
The prospect saddens Carl Risteen, great-grandson of Joseph Risteen, who took the building over in the 1870s.
"This building here is the cornerstone basically of Queen Street, so it's the first house in Queen Street," Risteen said.
He still lives in the house that his great-grandfather built adjacent to the building.
It was built in the 1820s by Anthony Lockwood, surveyor general of New Brunswick. When Joseph Ristine took it over, he created the Risteen Sash and Door factory.
"My great-grandfather bought the burned-out shell in about 1870 or thereabouts and fixed up the interior and built the big extension on the back — the big wooden part on the back — for his woodworking factory," Risteen said.
The products of that factory can still be found in the finishings and doorways of the New Brunswick Legislature, said Risteen.
He said he's not sure whether the building will be torn down or salvaged, but he's open to ideas about incorporating it into his new development.
The city said it hasn't received an application for development yet, but tenants are already on the move.
Ross Davidson, whose kitchen supply shop has been in the building for decades, has been told to vacate by the end of February.
"We got a notice from our landlord that the property was going to be redeveloped and that was it," Davidson said.
Heritage enthusiast Marcus Kingston wants to find a way to save it.
"It's been sitting on the spot for … nearly 200 years and it deserves to stay," he said.
Despite its history, there's no heritage designation to protect the Risteen building, which means developers are free to do whatever they want with it.
Commenting is now closed for this story.
Shawn McShane
Johnny Horton
He has a bad habit of letting leases expiring and then telling you to get out, a kids any calls or visits to his office she discuss your lease.
** avoids (not a kids)
Ken Stephens
Yep value. That’s all that matters. Gotta Aximize that tax base!
yep money, that’s all that matters. Gotta own every property!
Respectfully
MK
Mack Leigh
Gabriel is buying up and taking all the land in the area. Not much chance he’ll save it, or sell it t a preservation group.
Mack Leigh
There are ways to preserve our historical buildings and turn them into money makers.... Erasing our historical buildings is a sad statement as to what society has become and the direction it is headed..
Alex Butt
Methinks we got the governments we deserve because we overslept N'esy Pas?
Methinks the Irving Clan didn't cry N'esy Pas?
Now Go Figure Who is crazy and who is not
http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/lockwood_anthony_8E.html
However, the political crisis following Lieutenant Governor Smyth’s death on 27 March provided the occasion, if not the inducement, for Lockwood’s spectacular descent into madness.
An interim president of the Council being required, George Leonard*, the octogenarian senior member, was first offered the position, which he declined on the grounds of age. Despite a challenge by supporters of Christopher Billopp, Ward Chipman* assumed the post of administrator on 1 April. The challenges continued however. Lockwood attended the Council meetings on 30 April and on 1 May. Thereafter he absented himself and for the next few weeks his whereabouts are uncertain. By 24 May he had persuaded Leonard to assert his right to the presidency “in the hope that it would produce tranquillity in the province.” Ostensibly to assist in that purpose, Lockwood appointed himself as Leonard’s civil aide-de-camp and inspecting field officer, as well as acting secretary. On 25 May he attempted to disseminate Leonard’s proclamation in Saint John – while at the same time writing a letter to Chipman offering terms for his, Lockwood’s, support. From 25 to 30 May Lockwood behaved with erratic violence in Saint John: issuing threats, brawling, taking up residence in Government House, and gathering an appreciative mob. Dr Paddock attended him with scant success. By the time he returned to Fredericton on 30 May, Lockwood was approaching collapse; on the steamboat General Smyth he scribbled a desperate note to Chipman requesting release from his present public offices since his “ailment” was “subject to increase from confinement.”
David R. Amos
@Grant Buote continued
The Council considered Lockwood’s state of mind at their meeting on 31 May, hearing depositions from the doctors who had treated him and from the mayor of Saint John. The following day Lockwood set up a table in Fredericton square, at which he drank coffee, issued proclamations, and reacted pugnaciously to the crowd, before taking horse and riding about the streets firing pistols and declaring himself called to assume the government of the province. By nightfall Lockwood had been arrested and placed in the Fredericton jail. The Council received further evidence from the sheriff of York County on 2 June and were “fully satisfied” of Lockwood’s derangement. Chipman appointed a commission de lunatico inquirendo that day and by 5 June it had determined that Lockwood was legally mad, and had been since 19 May. On 7 June his wife and son petitioned for a committee of custody over his person and estate, which was immediately granted.
When George Shore, Lockwood’s replacement, examined the surveyor general’s office, he found confusion, mutilated documents, and disarray which would take “two extra employees five years to straighten out.” Furthermore, the discrepancy between Lockwood’s receipts as receiver general and the office’s bank deposit amounted to more than £2,000. Although he was moved from the jail to what was, in effect, house-arrest in September, Lockwood and his family had to suffer the public sale of his real and personal estate as the custodial committee sought to recover the missing public monies.
Methinks history can repeat itself The province has seized control of the Lockwood house before N'esy Pas?
http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/lockwood_anthony_8E.html
The following day Lockwood set up a table in Fredericton square, at which he drank coffee, issued proclamations, and reacted pugnaciously to the crowd, before taking horse and riding about the streets firing pistols and declaring himself called to assume the government of the province. By nightfall Lockwood had been arrested and placed in the Fredericton jail. The Council received further evidence from the sheriff of York County on 2 June and were “fully satisfied” of Lockwood’s derangement. Chipman appointed a commission de lunatico inquirendo that day and by 5 June it had determined that Lockwood was legally mad, and had been since 19 May. On 7 June his wife and son petitioned for a committee of custody over his person and estate, which was immediately granted.
When George Shore, Lockwood’s replacement, examined the surveyor general’s office, he found confusion, mutilated documents, and disarray which would take “two extra employees five years to straighten out.” Furthermore, the discrepancy between Lockwood’s receipts as receiver general and the office’s bank deposit amounted to more than £2,000. Although he was moved from the jail to what was, in effect, house-arrest in September, Lockwood and his family had to suffer the public sale of his real and personal estate as the custodial committee sought to recover the missing public monies.
Emilien Forest
Finally someone with my sense of humor...now watch we'll get bumped
Louie Youssef
Why should anyone have the right to dictate what all future generations do with private property? There are people around who just love to have a cause to champion, and that's fair. But when someone spends their time, money and energy taking a risk on something, it's not right to try and change the rules of the game, mid game. If tearing down old, inefficient, obsolete buildings was prevented, New York city would never have been built.
It's called progress. Getting rid of something to build something better, that will provide badly needed housing, shouldn't be discouraged.
Well said!
If city planners in Fredericton had had their way in the 1960's/70's then the entirety of Queen Street including City Hall would have been demolished. How would this have benefited Fredericton in the long run? Are you aware of how many tour busses stop outside of City Hall on any given day in the summer months?
Last summer we lost two 'beautiful' yellow homes on Regent Street, heritage homes that could have easily been saved, when there was an open lot just up the street on the corner of Charlotte and Regent. Tourists will be less and less inclined to visit Fredericton if we keep erasing it's past. I'm all for 'progress ' as you say, however progress isn't always 'moving forward'. I welcome new builds, many of us do, but why can they not be built on existing lots that are already vacant? Or put in places that do not already have historic structures.
Heritage should belong to us all, not simply those who can afford to own it.
If I had had $7,000,000 then I would have purchased all of these properties and saved them. However only a few people can afford to do such things. I'm sure no one jumped on these purchases because no one would have assumed that a buyer would demolish them. St. Dunstan's was turned into apartments as was York House, restoration is possible, you can mix old and new.
Respectfully,
MK
Now 16 families will be able to live where previously 3 could. You take a very simplistic view of development. It's not up to just one person to say "oh, there's some vacant property, I think I'll have it and build something". That's not how it works. Not everything can be saved, for both practical and financial reasons.
Cities are growing, and everyone has a right to live in them. Just because a few people think something is pretty, it doesn't mean that saving that house, and denying many others the right to live in a city is the best thing to do. It's not right to target a specific development that doesn't have any restrictions of demolition on it after the fact. That's a policy that needs to be in place before investment is made.
I'm against it, but I respect what the majority says. That's how a democratic society works.
Those memories are important to the people who made them. Beauty is subjective. Some people may like old architecture, some people may like contemporary. There is no right or wrong. To me, people should be able to do what they like with private property, while respecting the laws that are in place.
As far as pollution, wetlands, etc, I'm not sure why that's part of this commentary. But that's your right.
Dundonald Street area property owners say they have enough apartments on their street and they don't want another...Elzayat said he will make two-bedroom units to entice families. "A single family home or an apartment, they're family dwellings. Maybe you should change your thinking on that." - May 20th, 2010
@Louie Youssef wrote
The problem is that what we are building may be newer, but is not always better. Nor is it even significantly more efficient. Very few of the apartment buildings erected in the City in the past 25 years will see a 100th birthday let alone 200.
With respect to the Risteen Building (Significance of the original portion of the building being it was the first cut stone building in the City (perhaps province) and was the home of New Brunswick's first Surveyor General), I understand Gabriel's conundrum. I had looked at this building (and the surrounding properties) a year or two earlier with the intention of incorporating the Lockwood house into a Passivhaus mixed-use complex, but, in the end, could not reduce the risk sufficiently to move forward.
Colin Seeley
To the people who are calling this building a “heritage building” – if that is so, why does it not have a designation? Shouldn’t that be your avenue, trying to get a designation, rather than badmouthing law-abiding property owners?
To those who object to building higher density housing, shouldn’t your avenue be to change the zoning bylaws if you want to prevent more apartments in the city, not bashing property owners who are not breaking any rules?
And finally, what makes any of you authorities on what has value and what doesn’t? Your own opinion? Because it doesn’t seem like it is backed by any democratic process.
Jim Cyr
John Young
David R. Amos
In a nutshell Carl said that his home is considered a heritage home and he can't change the colour of even a shingle with Fat Fred City's permission and that the reports of people trying to buy it are pure BS. I told him that he should register with CBC and tell the folks himself Carl said he can't be bothered and was going for a walk and gave me his permission to state this.
Something smells
Ray Bungay
Bob Smith
Robert Gauvin as Minister of Tourism, Heritage and Culture should step up to the plate and classify it a "historic building" It is located in the Capital District N'esy Pas?
Some of us are doing just that.
Trevis L. Kingston
1492...was the starting date of 4 sided structures as we know them on this continent.
A 200 year old structure here is socially as valuable as a 2000 year old Italian Cathedral.
Canadians travel to the four corners of the world to see what?....old buildings !
But we will never have any for tourists to see if we tear them all down.
People pay good money to see Kings Landing and the Acadian Village. (1783 plus.)
Fredericton...the City of Stately...apartment buildings?
Methinks Mayor Mikey and his cohorts no doubt like the sound of that Perhaps they will change Fat Fred City's slogan N'esy Pas?
Shawn McShane
http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/lockwood_anthony_8E.html
Harold Benson
David R. Amos
Content disabled.
David R. Amos
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Gallant, Brian (LEG)"<Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 16:29:24 +0000
Subject: RE: YO Marcus Kingston I just called but you were too busy having coffee
to talk to me about your concerns about the Risteen building
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for writing to the Leader of the Official Opposition of New
Brunswick. Please be assured that your e-mail will be reviewed.
If this is a media request, please forward your e-mail to
ashley.beaudin@gnb.cam
>. Thank you!
---
Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le chef de l’opposition
officielle du Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que votre courriel
sera examiné.
Si ceci est une demande médiatique, prière de la transmettre à
ashley.beaudin@gnb.cam
---------- Original message ----------
From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 16:29:26 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Marcus Kingston I just called but you were too busy having coffee to talk to me about your concerns about the Risteen building
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical
support, please contact our Customer Service department at
1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.
If you are reporting a factual error please forward your email to
publiceditor@globeandmail.com<
Letters to the Editor can be sent to letters@globeandmail.com
This is the correct email address for requests for news coverage and
press releases.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 12:29:19 -0400
Subject: YO Marcus Kingston I just called but you were too busy having coffee
to talk to me about your concerns about the Risteen building
To: marcus.kingston@gnb.ca, mike.obrien@fredericton.ca,
blaine.higgs@gnb.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, andre@jafaust.com,
jbosnitch@gmail.com, David.Coon@gnb.ca, kris.austin@gnb.ca,
brian.gallant@gnb.ca, robert.gauvin@gnb.ca, premier@gnb.ca,
Matt.DeCourcey.c1@parl.gc.ca, bruce@downtownfredericton.ca,
dfi@downtownfredericton.ca, markandcaroline@gmail.com,
martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca,
Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
Stephen.Chase@fredericton.ca, info@bellaproperties.ca
Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca,
steve.murphy@ctv.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com
However I did tell what I was up to Correct?
Perhaps Chucky Lebalnc and his cohorts will take up your battles with
Fat Fred City with his buddy Premier Blaine Higgs and Hon. Robert
Gauvin in particular N'esy Pas?
https://www2.gnb.ca/content/
Heritage Designations in New Brunswick
Through the Heritage Conservation Act, the province is involved in a
number of procedures that can result in different types of heritage
designations. Depending on the level and nature of significance,
places in New Brunswick may be eligible for recognition under the
following types of designations:
•Provincial Heritage Place Designation
•Municipal Heritage Conservation Area
•Local Historic Place Designation
Provincial Heritage Places and Local Historic Places are listed on the
New Brunswick Register of Historic Places and on the Canadian Register
of Historic Places. Information on the Canadian Register of Historic
Places is available at www.HistoricPlaces.ca. For National Historic
Sites and related information, contact Parks Canada Agency web site,
click here.
Hon. Robert Gauvin
 Deputy
PremierMinister of Tourism, Heritage and Culture Minister responsible for La Francophonie |
https://oldmaison.wordpress.
North Start bar sold to Gabriel El-Zayat for $400,000. Plans more than 66 apartment units!!!!
thought on “North Start bar sold to Gabriel El-Zayat for $400,000. Plans more than 66 apartment units!!!!”
![]()
Triumph26said:Isn't it great that this Smart City we live in sold this club for $125,000 less than they paid to a known slum landlord. There were several other solutions to this issue.
Triumph26said:Fredericton tenants told to clear out ruined possessions or lose damage deposit
Law allows landlords to use damage deposit to pay to remove left-behind items
While rifling through her possessions, thieves broke her late husband's urn.
She was then told by her landlord that if she doesn't remove all of the water- and smoke-damaged contents of her apartment, she won't get her deposit back.
'This isn't a way to treat people who have lost everything they own," said Barron last week of her interactions with the building's owner.
Fire broke out in the four-storey building on Sept. 21, destroying nearly everything on the fourth floor and causing smoke and water damage to much of the rest of building.
The Fredericton fire department is investigating the blaze, but has not released any information.
Charlene
Barron was a tenant of 100 Clark St. when fire tore through her the
four-storey building. She was told that she would lose her damage
deposit if she didn't remove all her possessions — even if it was just
to take them to the dump. (Submitted by Charlene Barron)
Barron said she couldn't understand why the building owner wouldn't just take everything away at the same time.
"I replied to the email and said, 'Well, the building is just being torn down.'"
Barron said the landlord responded with, "Unfortunately, in order to get your damage deposit back, the unit must be completely empty. Otherwise we as a company would have to pay somebody to remove it, which will come out of your damage deposit."
Bella Properties owns the three-year-old building at 100 Clark St. on Fredericton's north side. The company's leasing manager, Rick Michaud, has repeatedly turned down interview requests, but said in an email that tenants' insurance companies "will remove the items for them in a safe and healthy manner. As part of their contract."
"If they do not have insurance which they agreed to have when they moved in, we will look at a case-by-case situation. The end result is it is up to the Rentalsman of New Brunswick who gets the damage deposit not the landlord," wrote Michaud.
In the end, Barron's insurance company paid a third party to go in and clear everything out.
That happened last Thursday, so Barron now fully expects to get her deposit back. She worries that others won't be so lucky — either because their insurance companies won't pay or they have no insurance.
What the law says
While the province and a legal expert say the law may allow the company to retain damage deposits when fire-affected apartments aren't cleaned out, one housing advocate doesn't believe they can.
Jael Duarte, a lawyer and a tenants' advocate with the New Brunswick Coalition for Tenants Rights, said the landlord would have to prove negligence on the part of a tenant in order to retain the deposit.
Essentially, a tenant would request their deposit back from the Tenant and Landlord Relations Office. A landlord can oppose the release of the funds and the office would have to decide on a case-by-case basis.
New
Brunswick Coalition for Tenants Rights lawyer Jael Duarte doesn't
believe tenants will lose their damage deposits if the landlord cannot
prove they were at fault for causing the fire that extensively damaged
their building. (N.B. Coalition for Tenants Rights)
Duarte said she does not believe a landlord would be successful with the argument that a tenant didn't clean up after a fire like the one that tore through 100 Clark St.
She said it's not the same as claiming a tenant "didn't do his or her diligence in taking care of an apartment, for example."
This was a fire, she said, it's not like someone trashed their apartment and then skipped out.
"No, I don't think they're gonna succeed, because … it has to be a particular tenant and even then, it has to be bad negligence of that tenant."
The province and a legal expert were more equivocal.
A Housing N.B. spokesperson said "in situations involving fire damage or flooding, the tenant is not necessarily exempt from their responsibility to remove personal items from their unit when they leave."
Fire
tore through the upper floors of 100 Clark St. on Sept. 21. Fire
officials say the investigation is still going on and have not released a
cause. (Submitted by Christina Beaulieu Lyons)
In an emailed response, Rebecca Howland said "a landlord can make a claim against a security deposit to recuperate costs the landlord would incur by a tenant not removing their items."
Claims have to be submitted within seven days of "when a tenancy ends and if the date the tenancy ended on is unclear, a residential tenancies officer may review and determine the most appropriate date," said Howland.
She said tenants are encouraged to contact the Tenant and Landlord Relations Office if they have any questions.
"Any tenants affected by the fire are also encouraged to apply promptly for the return of their security deposit as this ensures the T.L.R.O. has the most up-to-date contact information and forwarding address," wrote Howland.
Jeannette Savoie, a supervising lawyer with the University of New Brunswick's legal clinic, also said landlords can charge tenants for the cost of removing possessions against their damage deposit.
She said landlords "cannot just throw away the possessions of the tenants without the permission of the [Residential Tenancies Tribunal]."
The entire fourth floor is missing from this corner of 100 Clark St. (Pat Richard/CBC)
"If it's not an emergency, landlords have to wait 10 days to apply to the R.T.T. for a declaration that the property is abandoned," she explained.
She said the tribunal will then rule on how long to store the items and what to do next — either sell or throw them away.
In this case, selling them wouldn't be an issue, said Savoie.
She said any costs applied against the damage deposit can only apply to "the disposal of abandoned chattels … but only that."
She said "cleaning up the smoke-fire-water-damaged structure would be on the landlord's insurance."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Risteen building demolished after heritage designation denied
Pile of rubble remains from building constructed nearly two centuries ago
The historic Risteen building in Fredericton, N.B., has been demolished.
After Fredericton city council voted down a motion Sept. 9 to give the building heritage designation, the owner proceeded with plans to tear it down.
The city confirmed the building, located at the corner of Queen and Smythe streets, came down over two days. The wooden section came down on Thursday and the stone section on Friday.
All that remains at the fenced site is a large pile of rubble.
The Risteen building was torn down this week to make way for an apartment complex. (Mike Heenan/CBC)
The building was built in the 1820s and was the first cut-stone building in New Brunswick. In the 1870s, it became the Risteen Sash and Door Factory.
The building's fate has been in question for months.
Developer Gabriel El-Zayat owns the adjacent properties, which have already been demolished, and plans to build an apartment complex on the site.
He applied for a demolition permit for the Risteen building in April. That's when the city issued a stop-work order to consider whether it should come under heritage preservation rules.
The stop-work order on the demolition of the building was lifted after the motion was defeated in a 5-4 vote.
With files from Gary Moore and Lauren Bird