Month: February 2016

• Lo Mein Loophole

  Maria Godoy of NPR recently published an interesting piece called Lo Mein Loophole: How U.S. Immigration Law Fueled A Chinese Restaurant Boom.

  The article starts by talking about how rising anti-Chinese sentiment in the late 19th and early 20th century eventually lead to the U.S. passing new immigration laws. These laws explicitly restricted Chinese laborers from moving to the U.S. and even made it difficult for legal residents to return after a visit home to China.

  However, embedded in these laws was a small loophole:

  But, as MIT legal historian Heather Lee tells it, there was an important exception to these laws: Some Chinese business owners in the U.S. could get special merchant visas that allowed them to travel to China, and bring back employees. Only a few types of businesses qualified for this status. In 1915, a federal court added restaurants to that list. Voila! A restaurant boom was born.

  “The number of Chinese restaurants in the U.S. doubles from 1910 to 1920, and doubles again from 1920 to 1930,” says Lee, referring to research done by economist Susan Carter. In New York City alone, Lee found that the number of Chinese eateries quadrupled between 1910 and 1920.

  This is fascinating on so many levels. 

  For one, it’s always interesting when small loopholes have unintended consequences. It is doubtful that anyone could have predicted a Chinese restaurant boom.

  Secondly, despite the U.S. being a nation of immigrants, you see here a long history of trying to keep immigrants out. In the early 20th century, the fear was Chinese laborers who worked for low wages. Today, it’s Mexican laborers who work for low wages.

  Finally, it’s amazing to look back at the foundation that these early Chinese entrepreneurs no doubt created. Today, Asian Americans are often considered a “model minority.” The Pew Research Center refers to them as “the highest-income, best-educated and fastest-growing racial group in the United States.” 

  When it comes to Ivy League admissions, they’ve even been called the “New Jews” – referring to the fact that many believe that top tier schools have systematically biased admissions against both Jews and Asians because of their tendency to overachieve relative to “white Americans.”

  And to think that this may have all started, at least partly, with a Chinese restaurant boom.

  2016.02.29

• NO TOWER on Commercial Drive

  For the past week or so I’ve been seeing the proposed Kettle Boffo Project in Vancouver make the rounds online. Here’s a rendering of the project, which is located at Commercial Drive and Venables Street:

  

  The reason it has been making the rounds is that a community group called NO TOWER (written in all caps) has come out in fierce opposition of the 5 to 12-storey building. They have over 3,500 signatures.

  As an outsider looking in, this is surprising. The scale of the project seems appropriate. The height roughly matches the existing building shown above to the right. It may even be lower. And the project will provide somewhere around 30 social housing units, as well as additional space for the Kettle Friendship Society non-profit, who are currently on the site. (Note: An application to the city hasn’t yet been made.)

  What this has me thinking about is the push and pull between bottom-up and top-down planning. 

  When architect Bjarke Ingels talks about his Dryline project in New York, he likes to refer to it as the love child of Robert Moses (top-down planning) and Jane Jacobs (bottom-up planning). In the case of this project, it’s because it’s a large infrastructure project that they are trying to root into the local neighborhoods. Makes sense.

  But this same thinking could also apply to overall city building. Local communities rightly have their own wants. But at the same time, cities need to be thinking about the overall. The challenge is finding that right balance.

  I would be curious to hear your thoughts on the Kettle Boffo Project in the comment section below – especially if you’re from Vancouver.

  2016.02.28

• What the UPX fare reduction means for the west side of Toronto

  

  Last week Metrolinx slashed fares on Toronto’s Union to Pearson Airport express train (UPX), by a lot. From $27.50 to $12 for people without a PRESTO card and from $19 to $9 for people with a PRESTO card. They listened to the pundits. And there were a lot of them regarding this topic.

  At these fares, the UPX is decidedly cheaper than a taxi or Uber, but more than regular transit, which I think makes sense given that it’s a better overall experience. I would take this train all day long.

  But the other thing that Metrolinx did was also reposition the train service as an inner city commuter service by matching fares with GO transit for non-airport trips within the city. As one example, this means that you can now go from Bloor & Dundas West in the west end to downtown Union Station for $5.30 in cash or $4.71 with a PRESTO card. This is in comparison to $3.25 in cash on the subway.

  But this is huge, because look at the options for this transit trip:

  • UPX Train: 8 minute trip; service every 15 minutes

  • GO Train: 12 minute trip (additional stop); service every 20-30 minutes during peak times and roughly every hour during off-peak times (so no drinks after work)

  • Subway: 26 minute trip; most frequent service

  This is a significant connectivity upgrade for the west side of the city. One that reinforces my belief that, next to Union Station, Bloor/Dundas West is the best connected mobility hub in the Toronto region. This now a perfect location for companies and people who need quick access to both the Financial District and the airport. Unfortunately though, I don’t think we’ve taken full advantage of this connectivity in terms of what we’ve allowed and disallowed to be built in the area to date.

  I’ll end by saying that I think the pundits have been overly critical of the UPX train. Everyone loves to talk about it as a failure. But look, every organization and person makes mistakes. If you’re not making mistakes, then you’re not pushing yourself hard enough. The key is to iterate and refine as you charge along. So go make some mistakes today 🙂

  Image: UP Express

  2016.02.27

• #BuildHereNow — Crowdsourced city building

  

  This week Strong Towns has been running a great social media campaign called #BuildHereNow. 

  The way it works is very simple. They asked people to get outside and take photos of vacant and/or underutilized properties in their town or city and post them to Twitter or Instagram using the hashtag #BuildHereNow. The goal was to start to identify properties that could “use a little love" and to encourage city builders who might need a little push to develop a particular property.

  I’m a big fan of crowdsourcing information and I love the idea of digitally annotating buildings and spaces. In this case, it’s about pulling together the desires of the community,

  Hashtags are a great way to quickly make something like this happen, but I would love to see a purpose-built tech platform do this in a more permanent way. Of course, it doesn’t just have to be about developing. Buildings are rich in information; hopefully so rich that a platform like this could survive.

  If you think about it, property titles are already a form of annotating real property. So this isn’t really a new idea. 

  But now technology allows us to harvest all kinds of other information – such as what people would like to see built. Imagine the possibilities if we became more effective at collecting, organizing, and leveraging this data at scale.

  2016.02.26

• How things could be

  I have about 15 minutes before I need to head out for dinner, so I’m afraid that there won’t be much of an ATC post today. It has been a busy week.

  But given that this week was Bjarke Ingels’ talk in Toronto and many of us are pretty excited about his King West project, I thought I would share a video where he sketches and talks about architecture. Click here if you can’t see it below.

  [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIsIKv1lFZw?rel=0&w=560&h=315]

  I love the idea that architecture is about imagining how things could be. That’s how I feel about both architecture and real estate development.

  2016.02.25

• The local vs. global city

  Blogger and Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Aaron M. Renn, recently published an interesting long-form article called, Rethinking America’s Cities’ Success Strategy.

  One of the central themes is the idea that globalization has caused a kind of bifurcation in cities – a disconnect between the local and the global. In an effort to compete with other global cities around the world, we have begun to turn our back on local concerns. At the same time, not every city has the market power of, say, New York or London.

  So what does this mean for cities? Here’s a quote from the article that I think does a good job explaining the mental model:

  

  At the end of the article, Aaron makes a number of recommendations for how to better think about local entrepreneurship and economic growth. The first one is as follows:

  “Local civic priorities should favor building a successful and inclusive local economy, including entrepreneurship, over global concerns and real estate development.”

  Despite this being seemingly contradictory to do what I do for a living, I think it’s important to note that on a fundamental level, architects and developers simply create space. 

  It might be a beautiful space. A space that improves well-being, creates value, and enables certain activities. But at the end of the day, there needs to be demand for that space. And a robust local economy is paramount to that equation. So I agree that we shouldn’t forget about local and expect that “if we build it, they will come.”

  If you have the time, the full article is worth a read. It’s also part of a broader series on entrepreneurship and cities, so there are a bunch of other related articles on the same page.

  2016.02.25

• The advantages of disadvantages in business and entrepreneurship

  This morning I stumbled upon an interesting book by Claudia Kalb called Andy Warhol Was a Hoarder: Inside the Minds of History’s Great Personalities. 

  I obviously haven’t read it yet, but I like the premise. The book examines 12 famous figures and makes the argument that each of them had some sort of mental health condition that aided them in their success. 

  Here is an excerpt from a recent Harvard Business Review interview with the author:

  “The most common one may be narcissism. Frank Lloyd Wright is a good example. He had classic narcissistic qualities — a sense of grandiosity, superiority, a huge and complete belief in his aesthetic sensibility, and disregard for architecture that did not live up to his standard. Narcissists also have an ability to be charming, and to lure people into their orbit. That’s obviously useful for an entrepreneur. The issue is that while these qualities may make you a good leader, they may not make you a winning boss. Employees often feel that narcissistic bosses are ruthless or lacking in empathy. Also, unlike people with depression or anxiety disorders, narcissists don’t suffer as much personally from their condition — but the way they behave can be much harder on the people around them.”

  Related to this topic is an emergent body of research that, more specifically, looks at the relationship between mental illness and entrepreneurship. And according to work done by professor Michael A. Freeman of UC-San Francisco and professor Sheri Johnson of Berkeley, there’s a significant relationship. 

  Below are two excerpts from a Washington Post article published last year.

  “Forty-nine percent of entrepreneurs surveyed reported at least one mental health condition. Nearly a third reported having two or more mental health issues, such as ADHD, bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety or substance use conditions. And half of the entrepreneurs who reported no mental-health conditions identified themselves as coming from families with a history of mental illness.”

  Why would these conditions be of any benefit to entrepreneurs?

  “For all of its ills, depression also brings empathy and creativity. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi attempted suicide as teenagers. Uncommon levels of empathy can allow a businessman to better understand a customer’s need. And a creative mind won’t be satisfied on the corporate ladder, but instead in a fast-moving start-up where he or she can unfurl ideas and dreams.
  

  Individuals with ADHD naturally make decisions faster, are comfortable working independently and are more creative, necessary skills at a start-up. They’re likely to be bored working for someone else.”

  From a city building standpoint, all of this is quite relevant. Because for all of the focus on promoting innovation and entrepreneurship, we don’t seem to be talking about healthcare and mental health systems. And there’s clearly an argument to be made that the two are connected.

  2016.02.23

• What’s next for Walmart?

  Today I was surprised to learn from Charlie Gardner’s blog that groceries now represent 56% of Walmart’s sales. This is a huge number that I frankly wouldn’t have expected. 

  Groceries have relatively low online penetration, which makes them great for brick-and-mortar retailers. I’ve written about this topic before in the context of big box stores and online shopping. But I clearly didn’t realize that it had become such a big segment for Walmart. 

  What’s also noteworthy about grocery shopping though, is that customers appear to be less likely to travel far distances for it, even for lower prices. This means that the radial impact of Walmart the supermarket is less significant and far tighter (~2 miles) than Walmart the discount store. Click here for that study.

  This is important because a big catchment area has been central to the Walmart model. They consume cheap land on the outskirts of cities and then offload the transportation costs (indirect costs) to consumers in exchange for everyday low prices (direct costs). Studies show that we, consumers, typically undervalue indirect costs.

  Charlie argues in his post that this does not mean that we should write off big box retailing. And I would agree. The Walmart Express concept may have failed, but they are clearly looking for ways to rethink their model. Urban stores will need to form part of that.

  2016.02.23

• Towards a cashless society

  I increasingly never carry cash on me. I just never think to take out money and, when I do, I hate paying for things and getting change back. That change just ends up in a “change jar” in my apartment and then never comes out ever again. I keep telling myself that I need to buy coin rolls but that never seems to happen.

  Lucky for me, it’s pretty clear that many cities and countries are quickly headed towards a cashless society. It’s pretty easy to get by in most cities today without cash. Here in Toronto, I use Uber and my PRESTO card to get around. I can use my phone for many purchases like coffee. And I can use my credit/debit cards for everything else. I never really thought about it until recently, but I have unintentionally gone almost completely cashless.

  But of course it’s not just cash that is going to disappear; it’s also our physical wallets. Just this week Fred Wilson wrote a post on his blog about how he forgot his wallet at home and how Apple Pay came to the rescue at Whole Foods. I can’t wait until more banks roll this out in Canada. It’s also encouraging to see that under “coming soon” on the Apple Pay website, the Toronto Transit Commission is listed. I guess that means it will be integrated with PRESTO.

  However, this transition is not happening in the same way everywhere. There are many countries that still prefer cash. According to CNN (November 2015), only about 10% of people in Indonesia and the Philippines would prefer to pay with a credit card. And it’s for this reason that Uber now accepts cash in a number of countries. It’s what those customers wanted. I find this interesting though, because not having to carry cash is one of the main reasons I use Uber.

  Of course, there’s also the question of what happens to people who are currently not connected in anyway to electronic forms of money. I get asked by people on the street for change at least every day when I walk around Toronto. But there is actually no way for me to transmit the money I have to them. I don’t carry cash and I certainly don’t carry change.

  I would be curious how many of you have gone or are close to going cashless. And if you are operating cashless, did you even notice the transition happening?

  2016.02.22

• Ziggurats and gondolas

  Yesterday was an exciting day for Toronto city building announcements. 

  Firstly, Alex Bozikovic of the Globe and Mail published an exclusive preview of architect Bjarke Ingel’s plan for King Street West. Here’s a photo of the architectural model (it’s by Landon Speers):

  

  My favorite quote from the article is this one from Bjarke:

  “It would be sad if the most diverse city in the world had the most homogenous real estate.”

  It’s true.

  For those of you who emailed me about the details of his talk next week (there were a lot of you!), I believe I emailed you all back. But in case I missed some of you, you can click here for the event details. I should have included it in my original post about BIG, but I thought the event was already oversubscribed.

  

  Secondly, a private company called Bullwheel International Cable Car Corp. has just proposed to build a $20 to $25 million gondola running from Danforth Avenue (near Broadview subway station) to the Evergreen Brickworks. The total length would be almost 1 km and it, allegedly, wouldn’t require any public money. Here is their website.

  The timing of this proposal feels a bit serendipitous to me. When I was in Park City, Utah a few weeks ago, snowboarding right into the town and then taking their “town lifts” back up to traverse the mountain, I remember thinking to myself: what a wonderful form of transportation this is.

  Of course, Park City has giant mountains and Toronto, unfortunately, does not. But we do have spectacular ravines and a spectacular institution known as the Evergreen Brickworks.

  But one of the challenges with our ravines is that they can be a bit hidden – particularly for visitors to the city. Part of this is because we are trying to figure out the right balance between natural preservation and active use. But that’s one of the things that makes this proposal so intriguing. It’s a way to celebrate our ravines and natural landscape, without physically encroaching it.

  Here’s a map of the proposed gondola path:

  

  What do you think about these announcements?

  2016.02.20