[Halifax] LeMarchant Place | ? m | 7 fl | Completed

[beyeas]

I almost threw the paper out the window when I read this article.

Here is an example quote from someone as to their argument why the residence should not be built:

"Property developers from Toronto will buy up private houses in the neighbourhood and increase the ghetto," said Coburg Road resident Owen Carrigan, who stood up to speak at the meeting. "What we need is to be looking at is a different model of student accommodation. . . . Then we might stop the total destruction of the old south end."

Ahhhh yes... The old south end. How he yearns for the days when it was the exclusive home to the estates of old white guys.

To his credit (insert sarcastic glare here), he did at least offer an alternative plan...

... he would like to see gated student communities built.

If you can't get rid of them, at least lock them away eh?

I really am in awe of the sheer stupidity of people. Like I said above, the students aren't going to magically disappear if this doesn't get built. His argument is in fact 100% wrong, because the surest way to put more pressure on converting homes to student flats is to not provide residence alternatives. ARG!

Quoted from The Chronicle Herald
South-enders fear ramifications of change
By SELENA ROSS
Thu, Sep 8 - 5:51 PM

[planarchy]

Originally Posted by beyeas

I almost threw the paper out the window when I read this article.

Here is an example quote from someone as to their argument why the residence should not be built:



Ahhhh yes... The old south end. How he yearns for the days when it was the exclusive home to the estates of old white guys.

To his credit (insert sarcastic glare here), he did at least offer an alternative plan...



If you can't get rid of them, at least lock them away eh?

I really am in awe of the sheer stupidity of people. Like I said above, the students aren't going to magically disappear if this doesn't get built. His argument is in fact 100% wrong, because the surest way to put more pressure on converting homes to student flats is to not provide residence alternatives. ARG!

Quoted from The Chronicle Herald
South-enders fear ramifications of change
By SELENA ROSS
Thu, Sep 8 - 5:51 PM

I was equally as shocked reading Carrigan's quotes. But his preference for gates are less of a surprise seeing that he is the author of this gem:

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT IN CANADA: A HISTORY
by D. Owen Carrigan
ISBN 13: 9780771018923

Dr. Carrigan is a history Prof. at SMU.

[ScovaNotian]

I've been trying to figure out the reasoning behind the "property developers from Toronto" statement. Presumably, 300 new rez rooms will decrease demand for off-campus housing, not increase it. Is he worried that house prices will drop or is he simply incoherent?

[Jonovision]

I was more shocked and appalled at this fine comment.

"Break-ins, ramshackle buildings and a high incidence of rape are what happens when developers and criminals take advantage of students living in close quarters, Carrigan said after the meeting. "

I understand some people are passionate and possibly a bit crazy, but I expect a bit more from the Herald. Rape.....really?!

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by ScovaNotian

I've been trying to figure out the reasoning behind the "property developers from Toronto" statement. Presumably, 300 new rez rooms will decrease demand for off-campus housing, not increase it. Is he worried that house prices will drop or is he simply incoherent?

Exactly.

And the answer is probably both, but with an emphasis on the latter.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I was more shocked and appalled at this fine comment.

"Break-ins, ramshackle buildings and a high incidence of rape are what happens when developers and criminals take advantage of students living in close quarters, Carrigan said after the meeting. "

I understand some people are passionate and possibly a bit crazy, but I expect a bit more from the Herald. Rape.....really?!

I was surprised he even bothered to mildly discriminate between developers and criminals, since he clearly lumps them all together in one group.

And the thing that amused me most about the snotty comment about Torontonians coming in and buying up rentals is that it is probably more true that the most rental properties in the area are in fact investment properties owned by his fellow neighbours in "the old south end".

[someone123]

This is the funniest Herald article I've seen in quite some time. I'm pretty sure the writer was trying to make them look ridiculous.

I love the vague title and Sue Uteck's comment at the end.

[musicman]

I have come to the conclusion that people have to prove they are not idiots, and even then they are on probation.

[someone123]

There is a small rendering of the residence building on the Eastin Construction web page:



http://www.eastin.ca/education.html

[kph06]

Dal has a larger version of this rendering on their website now.

Source

[fenwick16]

It looks like an interesting addition to the Dalhousie Campus. I like the design.

[Keith P.]

Maybe Dal ought to fix their pension fund before building all these new structures.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Maybe Dal ought to fix their pension fund before building all these new structures.

They probably should just wait a couple of years on the pension plan. I don't think the stock markets can go down much more than they already have.

I think the building funds are coming from private contributions so I don't think that it can be diverted to their pension fund - I certainly hope not.

[Jstaleness]

I like how open it will be in the entrance area's. Looks well lit and safe. Good addition.

[someone123]

I seem to recall that Risley Hall was funded through a combination of donations and financing to be covered with residence fees. In other words, it didn't really cost Dalhousie anything. Not sure how this building will work since it is not all residences.

I work in the private sector so I don't have a ton of sympathy for the pension issue, aside from the fact that the pension was promised in the first place. It seems crazy that the university is in practice 100% on the hook for risks to the fund. The lucky older employees get great, unsustainable pensions. Meanwhile, younger people have to pay high tuition and then by the time they get out into the workforce they'll have to fend for themselves. It doesn't seem like a very fair situation.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

I work in the private sector so I don't have a ton of sympathy for the pension issue, aside from the fact that the pension was promised in the first place. It seems crazy that the university is in practice 100% on the hook for risks to the fund. The lucky older employees get great, unsustainable pensions. Meanwhile, younger people have to pay high tuition and then by the time they get out into the workforce they'll have to fend for themselves. It doesn't seem like a very fair situation.

This is a common point of view but it is one I do not share.

The "unsustainable" comment is where we disagree These types of funds are hardly new. They have been around for generations. Someone contributes for 30+ years, the employer matches their contribution, and for all those years the fund trustees invest the contributions and earn a return. It is no different in that respect from a defined-contribution plan.

When the person retires there is an understanding that the nest egg will be sufficient to find the expected lifespan of the pension payout. That is based on actuarial studies and expected rates of return that in tandem determined contribution rates over the years. It was never a problem until the last few years. In fact, 10 or so years ago the plans were in such a surplus position that many had to refund contributions to members.

Now the markets have tanked and suddenly everyone who has no such plan is complaining that they are unsustainable. Not so. If and when the markets recover suddenly there will be no deficit in the plan. I take issue with the pension rules that say every plan must be 100% funded. In the case of private companies like NewPage we can see why those rules might be necessary. But does anyone expect Dal to go out of business? I think not. What needs to be changed are the rules, not necessarily the plans.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

What needs to be changed are the rules, not necessarily the plans.

Sure, but I consider the rules part of the plans. It seems pretty clear that the rules are messed up when surpluses get paid back out to members but risk is assumed by the institution itself.

My sense of the whole issue of public employee unions is that they tend to get unfair deals because they have a disproportionate amount of power over politicians. It's far easier to cave into demands and leave a mess for the future than it is to drive a hard bargain and risk political fallout. Note that many public institutions also have a lot of older employees and pretty restricted hiring practices (including hiring freezes related to tight budgets related to employee compensation), so not everybody can share in these sweetheart deals even if they are qualified. Actually what I expect is that many of the great benefits will simply not be extended to new hires and will die out with the old employees.

What's the average age of a prof at Dal? 55-60? What was the average age of profs at Dal in 1980?

There's a much more general issue at play here, which is that changing technology and globalization are destroying many of the entitlements and advantages of past generations.

There are still people in the grocery store by my house making $25 or so an hour because of old collective agreements more or less inherited from the 70s. What do the new employees make? Minimum wage, which has effectively been falling in BC for years (good luck buying any property whatsoever here on that wage!). The union at one point agreed to a different pay schedule for new hires.

[kph06]

I spoke to the people from Dal at VivaCity last night and got a few more details on this.

-Aecon will be the general contractor, the Mona Campbell building was the last Dal building they did.
-A fence will be going up soon around the four buildings that will be demolished, Aecon is chomping at the bit to get the go-ahead to hire a demolision company.
-Dal is still working out the kinks on how this new building will connect to the rink, as the two buildings will be very close together.
-Eliza Ritchie Hall will be closed when this opens which will make way for the Dalplex expansion.

[mcmcclassic]

Originally Posted by kph06

Eliza Ritchie Hall will be closed when this opens which will make way for the Dalplex expansion.

I doubt I will still be at Dal when the Dalplex is expanded, but this is an incredibly necessary project for the university. The Dalplex is too small and out of date in its current state and will be leagues better with the additional wing added.

One good thing for me is that I won't have to pay into the fees pool they will be creating to pay for the new Dalplex - somewhere around $125-$150 per student per year.

[JET]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I doubt I will still be at Dal when the Dalplex is expanded, but this is an incredibly necessary project for the university. The Dalplex is too small and out of date in its current state and will be leagues better with the additional wing added.

One good thing for me is that I won't have to pay into the fees pool they will be creating to pay for the new Dalplex - somewhere around $125-$150 per student per year.

Amazing, my full-time tuition at Dal in 1976 was $780. No wonder tuition is so high, all those nice new buildings.