General Updates and News

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

That old house used to have a really good camera shop, Reid Sweet Ltd. Keith probably remembers it. Can we not hang on to a couple of old wooden buildings?

Indeed, I bought my last film camera there, a Pentax SLR. Now you can't even get the type of battery it used for the exposure metering and I don't know when was the last time I used it. That was a good store.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Indeed, I bought my last film camera there, a Pentax SLR. Now you can't even get the type of battery it used for the exposure metering and I don't know when was the last time I used it. That was a good store.

I bought a Canon rangefinder at Atlantic Photo around 1978, and bought most of my supplies at AP or Reid Sweet. I bought a second hand rangefinder at Reid Sweet around 1986. In those days, days of film, every shot counted.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JET

I bought a Canon rangefinder at Atlantic Photo around 1978, and bought most of my supplies at AP or Reid Sweet. I bought a second hand rangefinder at Reid Sweet around 1986. In those days, days of film, every shot counted.

Photography was an art form back then. Those days are long gone. Now about 95% of photography is done with cellphones. I'm as guilty as anyone else, but it's kind of sad really……..

BTW, I remember Reid Sweet too, but I also bought my first 35 mm SLR Minolta at Atlantic Photo. It was a really nice camera too!! I got some nice accessories from there as well, including a neat 80-200mm variable telephoto lens.

[pblaauw]

Originally Posted by JET

That old house used to have a really good camera shop, Reid Sweet Ltd. Keith probably remembers it. Can we not hang on to a couple of old wooden buildings?

I remember Reid Sweet. No need to go so far back in history.

[counterfactual]

I dunno. I'll give these guys the benefit of the doubt. I have no reason to doubt otherwise.

[Keith P.]

The Khyber issue is back at council today and I hope sense prevails and they vote to not pour $4 million (more likely $6-$8 million) into it so the KAS can have a renovated clubhouse. I still fail to see why the ratepayer is on the hook to support this organization to such an extent.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

This is getting into some sensitive and complex social/policy issues; that is, automobile licensing and seniors.

*snip*

I'm not interested in going too far down this route-- it's a bit of a rabbit hole of a debate-- but I cite these stories only to say that I'm deeply skeptical about relying on cars to deal with mobility issues for aging Boomers in the suburbs. That may, literally, turn out to be a policy prescription with a death wish.

I will decline further discussion on this so as not to clog the forum with too much car talk, but I will agree that bad drivers of all ages should not be on the road, and that there should be mandatory testing and education (both theoretical and "hands on") for all motor vehicle drivers and bicyclists on a regular basis.

As mentioned, a lot of this would be negated with an efficient and effective transit system, which would take more vehicles off the road and potentially have the side effect of making the roads safer by reducing traffic loads and difficult driving situations.

Suburbs are pretty hard to define precisely. It's almost like obscene material-- you can't define it, but you know it when you see it.

I definitely would not view Halifax or Dartmouth north end as "suburbs". A rough definition might be anything off the peninsula, except Downtown Dartmouth and some surrounding neighbourhoods around downtown Dartmouth (incl north end). Once you arrive at Penhorn mall, you're definitely in the 'burbs.

Pretty much agree with that, and will point out that many of these areas, such as downtown Dartmouth are lacking many necessary shopping amenities, like a grocery store withing reasonable walking distance.

I was engaged in a bit of lighthearted generational trolling there, to be sure; so in that spirit, I'll graciously dismiss your ad hominen attack on me as a bit of the same.

It wasn't readily apparent to me that it was lighthearted so I apologize for my comment. That said, it would be refreshing if all generations would stop blaming other generations for their problems and work together.

Truth is, however, there's a case to be made that Boomers are the "most selfish generation":

*snip*

Do these stories "say more" about the New York Times, Jeremy Paxon, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail, and the Philadelphia Magazine, than they do "about anything else" ? To borrow your device, please observe a *sarcasm alert* here.

Worthless debate - taking everybody of a particular age group and making broad generalizations such as this is one of our society's traits that greatly disturbs me. If you really dig deeply you will find that the popular practice of dividing generations and giving each group a "brand" has it roots in marketing and it really has done a disservice to our society as a whole in creating a divide among generations rather than any sense of unity, IMHO. Again... straying too far off-topic, so that's as far as I wish to go

We live on the cusp of interesting times.

Indeed we do.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The Khyber issue is back at council today and I hope sense prevails and they vote to not pour $4 million (more likely $6-$8 million) into it so the KAS can have a renovated clubhouse. I still fail to see why the ratepayer is on the hook to support this organization to such an extent.

I expect that it is a lot less than $4 million; and I expect that they could find a lot of folks stepping forward to help renovate.:

"Claims that the necessary upgrades would cost the city $4 million are unsubstantiated and dramatically out of step with a 2010 assessment that put the maximum costs of repairs at $733,000. Since Halifax acquired the building for one dollar in 1988 to preserve it as a significant heritage landmark, investment is long overdue for a building that so enriches HRM."

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The Khyber issue is back at council today and I hope sense prevails and they vote to not pour $4 million (more likely $6-$8 million) into it so the KAS can have a renovated clubhouse. I still fail to see why the ratepayer is on the hook to support this organization to such an extent.

While I agree with your last sentence, I don't look at this as the city supporting a particular organization. Rather, it would be stepping up to fulfill a previous obligation to preserve this building as a key part of Barrington Street's designated heritage district.

To quote from the linked article:
http://thechronicleherald.ca/letters/123...ld-renovate-arts-centric-khyber-building

Since Halifax acquired the building for one dollar in 1988 to preserve it as a significant heritage landmark, investment is long overdue for a building that so enriches HRM.

If anything, it's a lesson that neglecting properties only looks good on the books for the short term, but will eventually lead to increased costs in the future due to the neglect.

The city must now show leadership and pay for that neglect to preserve the building and fulfill their responsibilities to the citizens who all would benefit from a nicely preserved heritage district.

In my view, the act of preserving the building is the crucial point here, and not who will occupy it.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

If anything, it's a lesson that neglecting properties only looks good on the books for the short term, but will eventually lead to increased costs in the future due to the neglect.

The city must now show leadership and pay for that neglect to preserve the building and fulfill their responsibilities to the citizens who all would benefit from a nicely preserved heritage district.

In my view, the act of preserving the building is the crucial point here, and not who will occupy it.

What it really teaches us is that some things are too expensive even if they are free. The building was a dump when they took it over and it remains so.

There was no need for the city to take over this building at the time except for lobbying from the KAS to protect their clubhouse. And if they do spend millions to renovate it, there is no way the KAS will ever be evicted. Although whether there would ever be any tenants for this place is an open question.

I do not want tax dollars spent to subsidize the KAS to this extent. They are not a broad-based organization and should not be a priority area for taxpayer funds.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

What it really teaches us is that some things are too expensive even if they are free. The building was a dump when they took it over and it remains so.

There was no need for the city to take over this building at the time except for lobbying from the KAS to protect their clubhouse. And if they do spend millions to renovate it, there is no way the KAS will ever be evicted. Although whether there would ever be any tenants for this place is an open question.

I do not want tax dollars spent to subsidize the KAS to this extent. They are not a broad-based organization and should not be a priority area for taxpayer funds.

The KAS have had a pretty far-reaching effect in terms of incubating artists who've had success around the country—it's been a very important part of putting Halifax on the national cultural map, and that in turn has created a difficult to quantify but certainly major re-investments into the city's culture and economy.

Plus, your characterization of it as a private clubhouse is really pretty off the mark. If you're in any way involved in making art in this city, the Khyber has room for you.

Places like the Khyber are one of the things successful cities spend bucks on. Dumping it on the market because it's costly to fix is a pretty small-town move.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

What it really teaches us is that some things are too expensive even if they are free. The building was a dump when they took it over and it remains so.

There was no need for the city to take over this building at the time except for lobbying from the KAS to protect their clubhouse. And if they do spend millions to renovate it, there is no way the KAS will ever be evicted. Although whether there would ever be any tenants for this place is an open question.

I do not want tax dollars spent to subsidize the KAS to this extent. They are not a broad-based organization and should not be a priority area for taxpayer funds.

You make good points and I will admit that I am not all that well-versed on the KAS and thus not qualified to comment on their status as tenants of the Khyber.

I will still stick to my assertion that the city should still preserve this building. Yes, it could be expensive (although it appears that whether it will cost "millions" is still up for debate), but how do you determine the historical value of preserving this building - I believe that is hard to define in dollars and cents.

If the building is brought down now, it is gone forever. If it is preserved, it has the potential to exist long after the KAS has dissolved or moved on.

The time is now for the city to show that it is serious about preserving this section of Barrington as a heritage district. Enough wishy-washyness let's show some balls and make the first step towards doing this right.

[Drybrain]

It's probably important for the sake of this discussion that today's vote is not about whether to demolish the building or not. It's about whether to fix it or sell it.

If they vote to sell it, it'll go to the private property market. HOWEVER, given the fact that it's a fairly small heritage property in need of pricy renovations, the return on investment would seem to be fairly small for a purchaser. It's entirely likely that no one would even bother, leaving it to sit vacant for a long time, even as the costs to rehab it mount, and eventually it gets condemned. If council votes to sell it, they aren't demolishing it today—but it may end up A: An empty, deteriorating building on Barrington (yes, another one) and B: coming down in a few years anyway.

The first outcome would suck, the second would just be ridiculous. Cities spend this kind of cash to fix historical buildings all the time. I have no idea why Halifax can't just say: "This is our building, it's important historically, culturally, and architecturally, and we've really let it go. Time to fix it."

Honestly, MOST cities in this country would.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

It's probably important for the sake of this discussion that today's vote is not about whether to demolish the building or not. It's about whether to fix it or sell it.

If they vote to sell it, it'll go to the private property market. HOWEVER, given the fact that it's a fairly small heritage property in need of pricy renovations, the return on investment would seem to be fairly small for a purchaser. It's entirely likely that no one would even bother, leaving it to sit vacant for a long time, even as the costs to rehab it mount, and eventually it gets condemned. If council votes to sell it, they aren't demolishing it today—but it may end up A: An empty, deteriorating building on Barrington (yes, another one) and B: coming down in a few years anyway.

The first outcome would suck, the second would just be ridiculous. Cities spend this kind of cash to fix historical buildings all the time. I have no idea why Halifax can't just say: "This is our building, it's important historically, culturally, and architecturally, and we've really let it go. Time to fix it."

Honestly, MOST cities in this country would.

Thank you for the clarification.

This is precisely the implication (that I skipped over in jumping right to the end point result) of the city basically doing nothing.

I think it is extremely likely that if they do not take direct action to preserve the building now that its fate within 10 years will be demolition.

[JET]

http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2014/09/09/q-essay-khyber-halifax/

[JET]

"Coun McCluskey says she's going to support Mason's motion cuz the "great Joel Plaskett" cried on her shoulder" "Mason's motion has passed.. There will be another report on future of the Khyber. Mayor Savage says ppl can put their shirts back on"
"Councillor Mason has moved to take Khyber off the disposal list and asks for a report on turning it into an arts and cultural ctr."

there's a reason that I love this town

[Drybrain]

Sorry Keith.

[Keith P.]

I have no problem with the city GIVING it to the KAS as long as there isn't an annual million-dollar commitment to give them funds to restore it. We need to get this albatross off the city's back.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Great news!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I
The first outcome would suck, the second would just be ridiculous. Cities spend this kind of cash to fix historical buildings all the time. I have no idea why Halifax can't just say: "This is our building, it's important historically, culturally, and architecturally, and we've really let it go. Time to fix it."

That is a deceptive statement. To say that the city "let it go" presumes it was in wonderful shape when they got it. It was a bigger dump then than it is now. There is little that is important about the building and IMO it is one of the ugliest structures in town. An appointment with a bulldozer is long overdue.

But giveit away. Just do something that gets us off the multimillion dollar hook Mason wants to hang us on. For once, just once in this city, think about the hapless taxpayer.