SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=223)
-   -   [Halifax] Flynn Flats (1363 Hollis) | 28 m | 7 fl | Completed (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=225283)

Jonovision Jun 12, 2019 10:37 PM

I love the detail between the windows. Looks like wood, but is more of the ceramic tile.

atbw Jun 13, 2019 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06 (Post 8600343)
Not a cheap or simple swap when you see the mobile crane setup.

They had two large mobile cranes on site Saturday, one in operation and another Irving machine that I guess went up Sunday. Definitely quite the operation.

Dmajackson Jun 28, 2019 8:47 PM

I was going to post photos but Tumblr won't let me today so I'll just report that the fencing has been removed on the front (Hollis) side and the building looks great. The recessed residential entry is unique. The building does a good job of blending while looking sharp.

someone123 Sep 29, 2019 11:11 PM

This angle will become unavailable if and when Governor's Plaza gets underway:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...48&oe=5E395323
Source

Keith P. Sep 29, 2019 11:39 PM

I notice the sign says it is fully leased.

IanWatson Sep 30, 2019 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8701975)
I notice the sign says it is fully leased.

Yeah it's been fully leased for quite some time. I'm not surprised. Prices are on par with other new DT construction (i.e. high!) but the quality and layouts appear to be top-notch. I haven't heard anything about the commercial space though; not sure if it's leased out yet.

someone123 Sep 30, 2019 3:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson (Post 8702216)
I haven't heard anything about the commercial space though; not sure if it's leased out yet.

It seems to me that commercial space downtown generally takes much longer to find tenants for, but that they come eventually.

I am most interested to see who's going to move in at the Roy and Green Lantern. I'd expect it to take another 2 years for the "dust to settle" along that stretch and for it to hit a new steady state of tenants and activity.

Likewise Bishop Street could turn into a real gem in a few years with a couple more changes.

IanWatson Oct 1, 2019 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 8702383)
It seems to me that commercial space downtown generally takes much longer to find tenants for, but that they come eventually.

Likewise Bishop Street could turn into a real gem in a few years with a couple more changes.

Yeah, my understanding is that commercial leases can be quite long, so landlords prefer to hold out for the perfect tenant rather than get "stuck" with a suboptimal tenant.

Bishop is going to be great someday. The Governor is supposed to start next year, and then I think there are plans to retrofit 1360 Lower Water with a few extra floors and an exterior that's more suited to downtown rather than Clayton Park. Lower Bishop has been a construction zone for 4+ years now, and looks like it'll continue to be for a number of years to come. But it'll be worth it in the end.

atbw Oct 2, 2019 1:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson (Post 8703400)
Yeah, my understanding is that commercial leases can be quite long, so landlords prefer to hold out for the perfect tenant rather than get "stuck" with a suboptimal tenant.

Bishop is going to be great someday. The Governor is supposed to start next year, and then I think there are plans to retrofit 1360 Lower Water with a few extra floors and an exterior that's more suited to downtown rather than Clayton Park. Lower Bishop has been a construction zone for 4+ years now, and looks like it'll continue to be for a number of years to come. But it'll be worth it in the end.

It'd be great to see 1360 Lower Water do something at ground level aside from being a wall of brick. It'll be a crazy turnaround for Bishop to have the Governor in though - 10 years ago most of this block was a gravel lot.

someone123 Oct 2, 2019 2:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atbw (Post 8704242)
It'd be great to see 1360 Lower Water do something at ground level aside from being a wall of brick. It'll be a crazy turnaround for Bishop to have the Governor in though - 10 years ago most of this block was a gravel lot.

I think the Cunard development will have an impact on the feel of this area too.

To me the biggest issue the neighbourhood faces is that there are a lot of historic buildings that aren't in great shape. The wooden building across from Flynn Flats is a good example of what I am talking about.

Keith P. Oct 2, 2019 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 8702383)
It seems to me that commercial space downtown generally takes much longer to find tenants for, but that they come eventually.

I am most interested to see who's going to move in at the Roy and Green Lantern. I'd expect it to take another 2 years for the "dust to settle" along that stretch and for it to hit a new steady state of tenants and activity.

Likewise Bishop Street could turn into a real gem in a few years with a couple more changes.

The fundamental problem with commercial space in this area is that HRM continues to do things that make DT more and more inaccessible and uninviting to those who do not live there. As they continue to choke off access from outside the DT core (an issue that will become acute once they begin demolition and reconstruction of Cogswell) most commercial space will have to rely upon only those who live DT as their customer base, with perhaps also some support from those who work there 9-5 (although as traffic worsens one suspects those people will want to get out of DT as quickly as they can). Few who live on outlying parts of the peninsula or in the suburbs will bother to try to get DT to patronize the latest trendy restaurant or boutique given the pain of trying to get there and park. Will that be enough to support all of the new space? Only time will tell, but I suspect not.

someone123 Oct 2, 2019 3:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8704493)
The fundamental problem with commercial space in this area is that HRM continues to do things that make DT more and more inaccessible and uninviting to those who do not live there. As they continue to choke off access from outside the DT core (an issue that will become acute once they begin demolition and reconstruction of Cogswell) most commercial space will have to rely upon only those who live DT as their customer base, with perhaps also some support from those who work there 9-5 (although as traffic worsens one suspects those people will want to get out of DT as quickly as they can). Few who live on outlying parts of the peninsula or in the suburbs will bother to try to get DT to patronize the latest trendy restaurant or boutique given the pain of trying to get there and park. Will that be enough to support all of the new space? Only time will tell, but I suspect not.

I am not sure this theory matches the reality of what's been happening downtown over the past 20 years though. I don't think it had more successful shops and restaurants in the past than it has today. In recent years we've seen major retailers like Urban Outfitters and Lululemon move in. There was nothing like that downtown in 2000.

The circa 2000 strategy of building facilities like the MetroPark to encourage people to drive downtown and shop didn't work at all. Maybe free parking and wide open streets would, but I don't see how that could be viable downtown or what the point of that would be, particularly in this era of declining bricks and mortar retail. The area has a 1700's street grid and lots of historic buildings. It doesn't make sense to try to reconfigure it to work like Bayers Lake. It's designed for pedestrians.

It also makes sense to have some parts of the city that are designed for pedestrians and transit and some for cars. Not everybody can or wants to drive everywhere and some people like to drive and don't care about boutique stores or historic buildings. If you hate busy areas you can move to Tantallon or something, get a suburban job, and never set foot downtown.

Keith P. Oct 2, 2019 4:46 PM

I don't disagree with your take. What you describe is essentially what I am saying. The issue is that HRM seems to demand commercial ground-level space in every new development to satisfy current-day planning theory. The only customers for those spaces will be those who live DT. At some point there will be an excess of such space, if there isn't already, given how long it has taken for many of those spaces to be occupied.

someone123 Oct 2, 2019 4:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8704842)
I don't disagree with your take. What you describe is essentially what I am saying. The issue is that HRM seems to demand commercial ground-level space in every new development to satisfy current-day planning theory. The only customers for those spaces will be those who live DT. At some point there will be an excess of such space, if there isn't already, given how long it has taken for many of those spaces to be occupied.

I tend to agree that there isn't demand for every building to have a row of shops at street level in front. You don't see this even in Manhattan on streets with rows of highrises.

But the main streets like Barrington, Spring Garden Road, or Gottingen should have storefronts, and I think those will eventually fill up. Flynn Flats is in a weird hybrid area that isn't a major commercial hub but is busier than a normal residential area. I would expect it to have some buildings with 1-2 shops in them and some with nothing, exactly what we see. There's nothing wrong with buildings like the Waterford which have no shops.

I'd say it should just be left to the market to decide but bad street level designs can have big negative externalities, hurting a whole block. I think sometimes the city does need to push for commercial spaces to help the long-term health of the city. I also think a bit of an oversupply of commercial space (office and storefront) is really good for a city's economy. A healthy city is one with 10% vacancy, where new businesses have good options to choose from, not one where every little space is filled and many existing or potential businesses are out of luck. Of course, the space doesn't all have to be in one small area. Spring Garden Road can be packed and competitive rent-wise while Gottingen and Agricola can offer affordable space for small businesses.

It's also worth pointing out that ground-level space in busy areas is not very desirable for condos and apartments. I live in a quiet area and even in my building the ground floor units are much cheaper (and get ~95% of the break-ins, although I do know somebody who had a thief climb up onto his second-floor balcony).

IanWatson Oct 7, 2019 12:10 PM

I generally don't think planning rules should require ground floor commercial, except on the busiest streets (and in those cases the market usually provides it anyways), but I do like the Downtown Halifax Plan rules that require ground level floor-to-floor heights to be 4.5 metres. It does add a little up-front cost to the building, but floor-to-floor height is pretty much the only thing you can't change about a building later in its life. If the market isn't there for commercial now, they can be nice residential units with high ceilings, and then get converted someday in the future.

someone123 Nov 10, 2019 12:29 AM

https://scontent.fyvr4-1.fna.fbcdn.n...2a&oe=5E50AFE0
Source

Jonovision Nov 18, 2019 11:10 PM

This one looks nice from afar but when you get up close it looks poorly finished. I hope there will be some repair work done to the ground level tiles as a number of them are broken and a lot of them do not line up cleanly on the corners which makes it look quite shotty.

IanWatson Nov 19, 2019 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision (Post 8752139)
This one looks nice from afar but when you get up close it looks poorly finished. I hope there will be some repair work done to the ground level tiles as a number of them are broken and a lot of them do not line up cleanly on the corners which makes it look quite shotty.

Funny, I was noticing the same thing this morning. I like this tile system a lot, but it doesn't lend itself well to material transitions. All along the sidewalk is quite jagged, and pieces are already broken. I think if I were to use this system on a building, I'd want a "skirt" of more traditional material, like brick or stone, to handle the ground-level issues.

Overall though this is a great building.

Jonovision Nov 19, 2019 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson (Post 8752519)
Funny, I was noticing the same thing this morning. I like this tile system a lot, but it doesn't lend itself well to material transitions. All along the sidewalk is quite jagged, and pieces are already broken. I think if I were to use this system on a building, I'd want a "skirt" of more traditional material, like brick or stone, to handle the ground-level issues.

Overall though this is a great building.

I agree. Something maybe a bit more solid for the ground level would have worked better. For me its the corners that don't line up that really bother me. Some have nice smooth 45 degree edges so the two tiles meet and create a nice corner, while others don't have the cut so you see right into the ceramic tile. If I was the developer I would order the contractors to fix that. It just looks shotty and rushed.

OldDartmouthMark Nov 19, 2019 10:36 PM

Got any pics? Probably won't be walking in that area for awhile.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.