Toledo building fire: Firefighters let it burn, or did they?

I am trying to figure out what really happened during a fire in an abandoned building at 1852 Dorr Street in Toledo, Ohio yesterday. The Toledo Blade's website had the headline yesterday (see below) "Abandoned building on Dorr left to burn", but have a picture of a firefighter with a hose line operating through a window.

The "let it burn theme" was in a number of the stories. NorthwestOhio.com wrote, "Firefighters have closed Dorr Street at Upton while they let a vacant structure fire burn out on its own."

The FoxToledoNews.com called it a "massive fire" (not) and reported. "When crews arrived they determined the structure was not safe to enter and decided to just let the fire burn as the roof collapsed."

I have no idea what really happened but the Blade today has a slightly different version of events. The lead to the article says firefighters spent hours containing the fire and it added these details:

Firefighters watched the building, which was built in 1949, burn. Part of the roof at the back of the structure had collapsed years ago, and fire caused the rest to collapse.

The partial collapse made the building unsafe for crews to enter, Chief Krause said.

Firefighters had to let the roof collapse first because "the roof will shed water," Chief Krause said.

Could it be the firefighters just let the roof burn off so they could get to the fire and didn't watch it burn to the ground? I have no clue and am greatly ill informed from reading the news out of Toledo.