A few days I retweeted the above home from Dwell Magazine. Then yesterday I was driving through midtown Toronto and I stumbled upon it. And that got me thinking more about this kind of project.
The house is a triplex with, presumably, one unit in the basement, one unit on the main floor, and one unit across the 2nd and 3rd floor. The existing detached house was only 2 storeys and so a third floor was added to create what is likely the “owner’s suite.”
It’s not uncommon for many of the houses in central areas of Toronto to be converted into duplexes and triplexes or to flip back into single family homes after being subdivided for rentals. It goes to show how adaptable the single family house can be.
But it’s not everyday that you see such a high end triplex being built as, what seems to be, a permanent residence and kind of dream home for the owners. Historically, when people built their dream home it has meant a single family home.
This might not seem like an important distinction, but I think it demonstrates a growing acceptance of intensification within low-rise single family neighborhoods.
Part of this I’m sure has to do with rising housing costs. But I think it also has to do with valuing location over raw space and with an acceptance of urban density.
I don’t know about you, but I would have no concerns with permanently laying down roots in a house like this. It’s beautiful.
Image: Dwell
Earlier this week, 5 design proposals were unveiled for Jack Layton Ferry Terminal & Harbour Square Park along Toronto’s waterfront. They are part of an international design competition being organized by Waterfront Toronto – the arm’s length agency in charge of revitalizing this city’s waterfront.
The first proposal – called Cloud Park – was submitted by Stoss Landscape Urbanism, nARCHITECTS, and ZAS Architects.
I really like how they integrated water features, pools, and hot tubs into the park and lake. Their proposal made me realize how great it would be to have these functions along the water. It has been done in many other cities around the world. And I think a hot tub could be a big draw during the winter.
The second proposal was submitted by Clement Blanchet Architecture, RVTR and Batlle i Roig.
The big ideas here are a grand staircase (”social carpet”) that runs in line with Bay Street and an elevated east-west platform that runs from York Street in the west all the way across the Yonge Street slip in the east.
When I first saw this proposal I thought it was by Rem Koolhaas (OMA) and I doubt I’m the only one with that feeling. That’s not a criticism though. I like the work of OMA. But I think that many Torontonians have an intrinsic aversion to things that are elevated near our waterfront. (We’re currently pontificating about whether we should tear down a portion of our elevated urban highway.)
That said, I think the connection over the Yonge Street slip is an important one. The larger opportunity with this project is to use it as a mechanism to better stitch together our waterfront. I hope we take advantage of that.
The third proposal – called Civic Canopy – is by Diller Scofidio+Renfro, architectsAlliance, and Hood Design.
This proposal immediately caught my eye. It’s one of the more sculptural designs and it reminds me of something you might find in Barcelona or Madrid. It also includes a beach (#10 on the site plan shown below).
The fourth proposal – called Harbour Landing – was submitted by KPMB Architects, West 8, and Greenberg Consultants.
It consists of an undulating green roof terminal building and a more natural surrounding at the foot of Bay Street.
Finally, the fifth proposal was submitted by Quadrangle Architects, aLL Design (Will Alsop), and Janet Rosenberg & Studio.
This proposal consists of a hot pink terminal building running east-west along the water (shown above) and many other features that will strike you as being quintessentially Will Alsop.
My favorite part of this proposal though is the patterning of the surrounding urban park and the pool located towards the bottom left of the site plan shown below. Can you tell that I would really like to see usable water features along the lake?
When I first set out to write this post I was determined to pick one design to recommend. And if I were asked to do that I would pick Civic Canopy by Diller Scofidio+Renfro, architectsAlliance, and Hood Design.
However, as I was going through the designs, I instead found myself taking from all of the proposals and mentally accumulating a list of things that I would love to see happen on this site.
Connections to the surrounding area (such as across the Yonge Street slip)
Usable water features along and in the lake (pools, hot tubs, fountains, and so on)
An iconic terminal building that you can see when you’re out in the lake and on the Toronto Islands
Urban spaces that could be truly used and programmed in all seasons
Do you have a favorite proposal? What are the most important design elements in your opinion?
Images via Waterfront Toronto
‘Jailhouse Rock’ by Michael Hill on 500px
Real estate development is a risky game. So much so that some people in the business like to say that their primary function is to mitigate risk.
Today I’m going to focus on 3 risks that developers face. There are, of course, others risks, but these are some of the biggest. Some people might also categorize them differently, but this is my simplified way of thinking about it.
The first risk is approvals. Oftentimes in development you need some sort of special permissions to build what you hope to build. These permissions come in many different forms, but whatever the case may be, there is risk associated with this part of the process.
What happens if you’re not able to build what you were hoping to build? Is the project still feasible? Do you have a viable plan B? Did you budget for a redesign? Have you now overpaid for the land? There’s a lot of uncertainty in this phase and uncertainty generally means risk.
Assuming you’re able to obtain your entitlements (this is more of an American term), the next big risk factor is the market. Can you sell or lease out the space that you’re about to build and can you do it at the rates you were assuming when you acquired the site?
In a bull market this isn’t usually a problem. In fact, prices and rents may actually exceed your early assumptions. But what if you bought the site in 2006 and now it’s 2008 and you’re hoping to go to market. Now you might be in trouble. In business school I learned to do sensitivity analyses and stress tests. How far does the market need to drop before I lose my shirt? Those are good exercises to do in development.
Assuming though that the market holds up and you’re able to pre-sell and/or pre-lease your new project and obtain financing, you would then be ready for construction – another big risk. This is why many developers bring construction in-house. It’s them trying to exercise more control over the process and mitigate risk.
Construction is messy both literally and figuratively. There’s a lot to consider.
Are the drawings that you’re using to buy construction properly coordinated? Because if they’re not, you’re going to pay for it later. Is that Chinese curtain wall a great bargain or are you going to end up on a flight to China when it never shows up on your construction site? Are the trades hungry for work or are they busy? If it’s the latter, you’re going to get higher prices. And oftentimes there’s nothing you can do about it. You’re just buying construction at the wrong time.
But we all know that with risk there’s reward. So if weren’t for all these risks, real estate development just wouldn’t be the same.
If you’re in the business, what keeps you up at night? Did I miss something? Let us all know in the comment section below.