Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Category: Architecture

  • Building on top in London — how airspace developers are creating new housing supply in a tight market

    London has a breed of specialist developers that are known as rooftop or airspace developers. What these developers do is build on top of existing and occupied buildings — mostly residential. Firm examples include Upspace and Apex Airspace. According to this recent WSJ article, the city is also making moves to relax regulations so that more of these top-ups can be completed.

    Brokerage Knight Frank estimates that in central London alone there are probably 23,000 buildings that could support a few extra floors, resulting in upwards of 41,000 new homes. I have done early feasibility studies for similar projects here in Toronto and they’re not simple to execute. But building structures are typically constructed with a factor of safety and so, in some/most cases, you can build a little on top without doing any additional reinforcing. (Note: I am not a structural engineer.)

    In any case, the benefits of airspace projects are obvious. You’re creating additional supply in a tight housing market like London. Similar to Toronto’s laneway housing program, it’s not going to completely solve the larger problem of affordable housing. But every bit of new housing helps, regardless of where it lands on the spectrum of affordability.

    One of the drawbacks, which is the headline of the above WSJ article, is that penthouse residents are getting demoted in the process. They’re going from penthouse to sub, or sub-sub, or sub-sub-sub penthouse. They also need to endure a bit of construction right above them. Cry me a river?

    But what is also important to point out is that there are lots of buildings out there which are facing capital expenditure shortfalls. They have maintenance and repair demands that simply aren’t adequately funded. Adding additional floors can be a way for these buildings to generate that cash and, in some cases, residents are even partnering with airspace developers to share in some of the profit upside.

    Not surprisingly, these sorts of arrangements are seemingly being met with a fair bit of support. Because in these instances, your options are basically as follows: Either you cut a repairs and maintenance check right now or you support a bit of development and then hopefully you’ll be the one receiving a check in the future. I suspect we’ll be seeing a lot more of this, not just in London, but in cities all around the world.

    Photo by Sometimes I Snap on Unsplash

  • A circular spaceship in Winnipeg

    Winnipeg has a building along its waterfront that, I am told, is affectionately referred to as the “spaceship.” Designed by the award-winning architecture practice, 5468796, the spaceship is a 41-unit circular condominium building that is raised up on 35 foot stilts in order to fabricate views outward from the site. Sans stilts, the site wouldn’t have really had any.

    The raised up portion is made up of two circular floors, each with 20 identical units (so 40 in total). The 610 square foot units are all pie-shaped studios that splay outward to a 22 foot wide living room/bedroom. Supposedly, a circle creates 30% more perimeter glass than if the building were orthogonal. So good for views. I should know this.

    The building is organized around a central core and circulation system. The building’s common area corridors are also open and exposed to the elements. A fascinating design decision given the climate in Winnipeg, and most of Canada. But this would be good for build costs, good for the building’s overall efficiency/loss factor, and probably pretty good if you’re worried about things like airborne viruses.

    Completed in 2017, the hard cost budget for the project was supposedly $4.75 million. The developer in me is wondering how the hell they built 28,000 square feet for $170 per square foot. And the Torontonian in me is aghast at studios as large as 610 square feet. These would be generally sized 3 bedroom suites here in Toronto (I kid).

    On top of the building’s two floors is also a pretty unique penthouse suite that can be rented on Airbnb for what looks to be a reasonable price. The main living space is essentially a glass box with 360 degree views of the city. I am ashamed to say that I have never been to Winnipeg. But as soon travel resumes and these provincial boundary checkpoints dissolve, I think it might be time for a trip to the spaceship.

    All photography by James Brittain Photography

  • The new Miami

    The last year has been challenging for the hospitality industry. But at the same time, it was a good year to renovate. The W South Beach recently unveiled a $30 million renovation project that includes all 357 rooms. Designed by local studio Urban Robot Associates, the project directive was an interesting one. The team was asked to reimagine the hotel for the “new Miami.” A Miami that is more grown up and cultured, but that, of course, still has a bit of an edge. With all of the attention that Miami and Florida are getting right now, this project feels timely and indicative of something broader underway. Indeed, it’s hard not to acknowledge that Miami is having a moment right now. This also happens to be one of the last hotels that I stayed at prior to last March’s lockdown. So I have a clear “before” in my mind. It’s fun to see how much it has changed over the last year while I was mostly sitting at home. (Shameless plug: I also love the pale wood herringbone floors, which, coincidentally, will also be on offer at One Delisle.)

    Images: Urban Robot Associates

  • The Koblick House by Richard Neutra

    I came across the above photo this morning. If you can’t see it, click here. It’s a photo of the Koblick House in Los Angeles designed by Richard Neutra and Gregory Ain for art professor Harry Koblick. Built into the hills of Silver Lake in 1937, the house is a three-storey duplex with about 1,620 square feet according to some sources. (I couldn’t find any plans or drawings, but I’d really like to see the section.) The upper unit has 2 bedrooms and 1 bath. And the lower unit has 1 bedroom and 1 bath.

    Richard Neutra was a prolific modernist and designed numerous “international style” buildings, like the Koblick House. His work was included in the seminal 1932 MoMA (New York) exhibition on modern architecture, which was an important moment for modernism in the United States. It helped to import the international style from Europe at a time when exhibitions did things like that. It is perhaps easy to forget that ideas didn’t spread as quickly around the world back then.

    I love the simplicity of this house. The double car garage that services the two units. The side stair that leads to the front door. And the two large terraces that probably look out over some kind of landscape. Over 80 years later and it still feels contemporary. Perhaps some of you will be equally inspired by this archive photo.

  • A modernist utopia at Summit Powder Mountain

    About 60 miles north of Salt Lake City is the largest ski resort in America, called Summit Powder Mountain. It’s some 10,000 acres. But beyond just being big, there is also a fascinating story and philosophy behind the mountain.

    It was started by four partners — Elliott Bisnow (of Bisnow events), Brett Leve, Jeff Rosenthal and Jeremy Schwartz — who partnered up with Learn Capital in 2013 to buy the mountain from a distressed seller for $40 million.

    The four guys were already running a successful invitation-only event series for entrepreneurs and creative types called the Summit Series, and big part of their vision for the mountain was to recreate this same ethos.

    The idea was to create a community focused on relationship-building, entrepreneurship, innovation, environmental sustainability, and good design. Put differently: a kind of utopia for rich people.

    So far, about 80% of the home buyers at Summit Powder Mountain are members of the Summit Series.

    All of this has translated into some pretty cool mountain architecture (see above). In fact, people who buy vacant lots within the community are effectively banned from building the kind of faux chalet stuff that permeates a lot of (or most?) mountain towns.

    Here is a taste of some of the homes that have already been built.

    Image: Paul Bundy for the Wall Street Journal

  • The resilient story of Toronto’s tall towers

    The Urban Land Institute Toronto is hosting an event and panel discussion on April 8, 2021 about the future of high-rises in our cities. Here’s the blurb:

    Against the backdrop of the pandemic and its toll, what is the future of high-rises in our cities? What role do tall towers now play in shaping Toronto’s identity? While the pandemic has accelerated existing large trends, residential tall towers are proving the durability of a quality urban centre and hyper-urban lifestyles in Toronto and around the world.

    An introduction will be provided by James Parakh (author, Fellow of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and Urban Design Manager for the Toronto & East York District) and then a discussion will be moderated by Robyn Player (Director, BTY).

    The discussion will be focused on what ULI is calling three of Toronto’s most exciting tower projects under development: Pinnacle One Yonge, One Delisle, and 11 Yorkville.

    I will be on the panel (talking One Delisle) alongside Lee Koutsaris (VP, Sales and Marketing, Metropia) and Anson Kwok (VP, Sales and Marketing, Pinnacle International).

    If you’d like to register, you can do that over here. It should be a great/timely conversation.

  • How balconies and winter gardens were added to the Grand Parc Bordeaux apartment blocks

    The 2021 Pritzker Prize was just awarded to French architects Anne Lacaton and Jean-Philippe Vassal. One of the most notable aspects of their work is their appreciation for and reuse of existing structures, which, as many of you will know, is far more sustainable than building new. A good example of this approach is their Grand Parc project in Bordeaux, where they transformed three existing tower blocks and 530 dwellings.

    What’s fascinating about this project is how they added balconies and winter gardens to structures that previously didn’t have any. I also like how there are two layers of outdoors spaces. There’s the more enclosed winter garden portion and then there’s an open air balcony-type component, which also happens to be a more public-facing space where you might actually run into some of your neighbors.

    If you can’t see the video above, click here. Once you’ve had a chance to watch the video, I would be curious to know: Are these spaces that you would like to live in?

  • The crane is now up at Junction House!

    Today was an important milestone for Junction House: The construction crane was erected! The crew started early in the morning and we ended up having a perfect bluebird day (I don’t know where this expression comes from but it’s used all the time by skiers and snowboarders).

    It’s been a tough winter for most of us. And so in my view, it is particularly important to celebrate these kinds of milestones and achievements. Thankfully, there seems to be a general optimism in the air these days. I think it’s going to be a great summer.

    Now that the crane has been installed, it’s time to start building up.

  • Los Angeles adopts “standard plan program” to encourage ADU construction

    The city of Los Angeles has taken an interesting approach to accessory dwelling units (what we generally call laneway or garden suites here in Toronto). In an effort to streamline the approvals process and bolster the supply of housing in the city, they’ve gone out and pre-approved a series of “standard plans” that you can quickly implement on your property. The idea here is that all of their approved plans have already been checked for compliance with the various building codes. So those reviews don’t need to happen before a permit can be issued (though the building department would still need to review any site-specific conditions).

    What that means is that if you’re in the market for, say, a one-storey, one-bedroom ADU at around 450 sf, you can simply scroll through their list and find the one you like the most. Here is one that fits this criteria by Design, Bitches (I just wanted to mention this firm name). The potential downside of this approach is that it could encourage less architectural experimentation. On the flipside, many of their approved designs are really nice and so maybe it’s a boon for those who are lacking in good taste. Either way, if you want to encourage more of something, the way to do that is to reduce friction.

    To start to give you a sense of how meaningful this could become, the city of Los Angeles received 1,980 applications for ADU construction back in 2017. This is the year in which the state changed its regulations so that ADUs were no longer prohibited in some municipalities (I don’t know all of the specifics truthfully). Last year, LA saw 5,374 applications and I suspect the number will be even higher this year. Should other cities look at pre-approving certain designs? And could this be an approach used for even larger building typologies? Speed is good.

  • 225 Brunswick Ave is yet another example of why the missing middle is so damn hard to deliver

    Building buildings is really hard.

    It’s hard for countless reasons, but one reason in particular is that it can be difficult to please everyone. Take parking, for example. This is often a primary concern when you’re trying to develop something new. Too little parking and people might be concerned that cars will start flooding the surrounding streets in search of a spot. Too much parking and people might be concerned about traffic congestion. So it can often feel like you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t.

    I thought of this as I was reading through Alex Bozikovic’s recent opinion piece in the Globe and Mail called, “Yes, in my backyard: How urban planning must shift to meet our postpandemic challenges.” In it, he mentions a small missing middle-type infill project at 225 Brunswick Avenue here in Toronto. A century-old office building located in a residential neighborhood, a small developer has been working (with Suulin Architects) since 2018 to convert it into seven apartments.

    Here are a few photos:

    This is the kind of infill housing that planning staff and many councillors are trying to encourage across the city. And yet, the year is 2021. This developer is on year three in a process that will, maybe, deliver a total of seven new rental homes. There are also many other examples that we can point to in the city that have faced similar challenges, like this one here on Gerrard Street East. While not nearly as interesting architecturally speaking, it would have delivered 10 new homes proximate to transit. Maybe that will still happen. I can’t say for sure.

    I’m not going to get into the specifics of any one proposal, but two things are clear to me: (1) Our city, and many other cities around the world, have a need for more missing middle-type infill housing and (2) our system is greatly flawed if it takes years and years to ultimately green light the delivery of only a half dozen or so new homes.

    Time equals money. And when we make the process this difficult it means that many developers aren’t going to bother (because the math probably doesn’t work) and that the ones who are successful will need to absorb a bunch of unnecessary costs in the end pricing/rents of their homes (i.e. make the homes more expensive than they need to be).

    225 Brunswick is exactly the kind of project that I would love to work on: a small-scale adaptive reuse project where design is clearly a priority. But with a 3-4 year entitlement timeline (perhaps longer?), it’s simply not worth it (though I do commend the efforts of the project team). I’m sure many others feel the same way that I do and that’s unfortunate when you’re trying to build a more vibrant, inclusive, and competitive global city.