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.

Category: Architecture

  • Introducing Crosby Studios’ virtual shoppable showroom

    One of my favorite interior design firms — Crosby Studios — has just launched a new home goods and accessories concept called Crosby Studios Home. The offerings are unmistakingly Harry Nuriev (the founder of Crosby Studios). It’s all about design, art, and fashion coming together. But what is also noteworthy is how the concept was launched using a virtual shoppable showroom. And the experience, which is pictured above, is shockingly good. You simply wander around this blue-floored apartment and click on whatever stuff you would like to add to your shopping cart. This isn’t the first virtual showroom experience, but as I was using it, I couldn’t help but think that we’ll be seeing a lot more of this in the future. This and things like shoppable augmented reality.

    Images: Crosby Studios Home

  • Design makes everything better — architecture as product

    https://dmeb.castos.com/episodes/interview-with-david-wex

    My friend David Wex of Urban Capital Property Group — who I featured in my “BARED” blog series back in 2016 — was recently interviewed by architect Vincent Van den Brink (of Breakhouse) for the firm’s podcast called, Design Makes Everything Better. It’s a great listen and I particularly like the bit around branded vs. opportunistic real estate development. In the case of Urban Capital, David would describe his firm as being a branded developer. They build a specific product and it doesn’t really change when they build across Toronto and in other markets. Expect exposed concrete ceilings and exposed ducts, among other things. If you can’t see the embedded podcast above, you can have a listen over here.

  • Carleton University’s Certificate of Real Estate Development

    Next Tuesday, January 19, I am helping to teach the introductory class of a Certificate of Real Estate Development program that is jointly offered by Carleton University’s Sprott School of Business and Azrieli School of Architecture & Urbanism. Here is a full list of the instructors and key note speakers that will be participating in the program. Obviously it is all being done online this time around.

    One of the great things about this program is that it’s a partnership between their school of architecture and their school of business. As you might expect given my background, I am biased in my view that this is a great way to teach real estate development. And it’s one of the reasons why I enjoyed my time so much at the University of Pennsylvania. I was free to take classes at whatever “school” I wanted to.

    When I later went on to study at the Rotman School, I actually tried to advocate for a better real estate development curriculum and for increased collaboration across the business and architecture schools (both alma maters). The response I got, at least back then, was that Rotman already had a real estate major and that it was fine just the way it was. Cool.

    For more information or to register for Carleton’s Certificate of Real Estate Development program, click here. I think there are only a few spots remaining.

  • Project Profile: Side Gallery Barcelona

    Side Gallery opened up a new 700 square meter exhibition space in Barcelona last month that is worth showcasing. It’s a beautiful space. Designed by Spanish architect Guillermo Santomà, the space sits within an old 19th century factory that used to house an Italian pasta company. It’s minimal and stark white, but the architecture of the former factory still comes through. There’s also a prominent greenhouse featuring flora that is local to South America. Fitting given that the gallery focuses on Latin American design. Have a look.

    I also love these images from the architect, which (I think) use light to completely transform the space.

    All photos via Side Gallery and Guillermo Santomà

  • A new Frame Home in Brooklyn

    Fred Wilson (venture capitalist) and Joanne Wilson (also an investor) have been working on a passive house apartment building in Brooklyn for the last five years. Their development company is called Frame Home. And this past week they received a pretty great Christmas gift in the form of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy from NYC Buildings.

    At 5 storeys and with only 10 two-bedroom units, you could classify this building as the kind “missing middle” housing that gets so much air time here in Toronto. And so not only have they managed to build relatively small, but they’ve done it using passive house design principles.

    Here are some of the apartment building’s features:

    • Cross-laminated timber (CLT) structure
    • Passive house design approach
    • Triple-pane windows
    • Interior polished and insulated concrete walls (presumably to act as a thermal mass to moderate heating/cooling throughout the year)
    • Solar panels installed on the upper facade and roof (passive house design should, in theory, allow these to supply a big chunk of the building’s energy needs)
    • No fossil fuels used throughout the building — everything is electrical
    • Fully sub-metered units
    • Outdoor circulation spaces/stairs, providing access to a shared rooftop courtyard (I’m assuming these also serve as required egress for the building)
    • Dedicated elevator entrance for every suite (i.e. no interior circulation/corridor spaces)
    • Composting facilities within the building
    • Bike room connected to the ground-floor lobby

    There’s also a co-working and community space planned for the ground floor called “Framework.” Interestingly enough, they have already responded to the current pandemic. Instead of open-air desks, you rent fully enclosed 8′ x 8′ pods that are sound-proofed and come with their own HVAC systems.

    Congratulations Fred and Joanne on such an exciting and pioneering project. (I would love to see the development pro forma!) If you’d like to learn more about Frame 283, here is their website and here is a profile that the New York Times did on the project back in January. Building with CLT is apparently prohibited in NYC. Frame 283 got an exemption.

  • The value of boredom

    I took a class during my undergraduate degree about the material culture of the Victorian era. I took it mostly for fun and because I found the lessons relevant to architecture. But it also allowed me to write papers about things like gin (though I remember not doing very well on that one).

    My big takeaway from that class, which continues to stick with me to this day, is about how difficult it was for the Victorians to process and ultimately accept new technologies and ideas. There seemed to be immense skepticism and concern for everything that was novel.

    Take, for example, the first ever escalator. An invention of the Victorian era, there were very serious concerns at the time about what such rapid changes in elevation would do to the human body. That’s why they initially gave people booze at the top of the ride. A little something to calm the nerves after such a traumatic experience.

    This, of course, seems silly today. But I always come back to it when I see us trying to process new technologies. Will posterity eventually think that we too were being silly for worrying? Will they think it’s cute that we thought social media was turning us all into narcissistic and envious creatures? Probably.

    Still, there’s no denying that material culture impacts us all. I was reminded of this while reading this WIRED article by Craig Mod called, “The Glorious, Almost-Disconnected Boredom of My Walk in Japan.” (Tim Ferriss shared it in his most recent newsletter.)

    Craig does ultra-marathon walks. And the article is about one that he did in Japan. While this may seem like a recipe for a whole lot of nothing, there are things to be learned here. In it, he talks about how he rationed his use of technology on these walks and how “boredom” became something of value.

    In the context of a walk like this, “boredom” is a goal, the antipode of mindless connectivity, constant stimulation, anger and dissatisfaction. I put “boredom” in quotes because the boredom I’m talking about fosters a heightened sense of presence. To be “bored” is to be free of distraction.

    Perhaps the biggest drawback of our phones is that they allow us to fill every second of boredom with stuff. Have 3 three seconds to spare? Pull out the phone. On the one hand it’s nice to never be bored. But on the other hand, it’s harder to be contemplative. It’s harder to go deep into things. And it’s harder to find that right kind of “bored.”

    Or maybe we’re just being fuddy-duddies who will one day be made fun of by future generations when somebody decides to teach a university course about early 21st century material culture.

  • Double height space at Mackay Laneway House

    The drywall started this week at Mackay Laneway House. This is a fun part of the construction process because it is that moment in time where, very quickly, the space transforms from a full on construction site to something that starts to resemble a livable space.

    What you are seeing above is a double height space (and 8 foot long skylight) that was incorporated into a sloping roof on the side of the house that faces the existing backyard. This is a design move that I felt pretty strongly about from the outset. Gabriel Fain, who is the project’s architect, likes to joke that it was really the only design directive.

    The move does a few things.

    1) It is a way to get light down and into the house without having a window facing the existing backyard. So it mitigates privacy concerns. 2) It frees up the north wall of the house, creating a place for a TV, art, photo backdrop, or whatever. You only have so many empty walls in a house of this size. And 3) it looks really cool and frames a large tree that overhangs the house.

    Stay tuned for more progress photos. The best way to do that is to follow @globizen.

  • Reimagining Toronto’s University Avenue

    If I have learned anything from this pandemic it is that, when push comes to shove, Torontonians will eat pretty much anywhere. On sidewalks. On streets. In white tents that masquerade as outdoor dining. And in many other little urban crevices.

    I am only half-joking, because the reality is that this pandemic has pried us away from the status quo and forced us to reconsider how we allocate and how we occupy many of our public spaces. There will be some positive outcomes on the other side of this.

    To that end, a new city building effort has just been announced here in Toronto. (Alex Bozikovic of the Globe and Mail wrote about it here in “Rebirth of the Promenade”.) The vision is called “University Park” and the team behind it includes the landscape architecture firm PUBLIC WORK, the non-profit Evergreen, and the Michael Young Family Foundation.

    What they want to do is transform Toronto’s University Avenue into something akin to La Rambla in Barcelona — except better:

    Our vision brings together patches of public green space that are currently disconnected and inaccessible in order to create a signature destination in the centre of our province’s capital. By making minor adjustments to the existing roadway on University Avenue and converting only 9.5 acres of city-owned asphalt into native landscape, pedestrian walkways, bike paths, and cultural installations, we can create a 90-acre park that spans from Queen’s Park all the way to the waterfront.

    It’s about time. My only request is that they include small sidewalk crevice where I might be able to sit and enjoy a chicken burrito and a glass of wine. To learn more about University Park and to subscribe to their newsletter, click here.

    Image: PUBLIC WORK

  • Moving from the city to the suburbs and back

    This is an interesting story about a Toronto couple who got married about 20 years ago, initially lived in a small downtown condo, and then decided it was “time to adult” and move to the suburbs. They bought a 3,200 square foot home in Markham and lived there for a number of years. It had a lawn, a garage, and all sorts of other suburban comforts. But eventually they realized that they had made a mistake. They preferred the conveniences of city living over the amenities of the suburbs. Living in the city was simply better suited to their lifestyles. And so they sold their house, bought an epic 2,100 square foot penthouse in the Shangri-La Residences — which just so happens to be one of my favorite buildings in the city — and hired the design firm NIVEK REMAS to completely redo it. I think their new home turned out great and maybe you do too.

  • Why do haunted houses look the way that they do?

    This short 5-minute video by Vox is a perfect example of how, just like with fashion, architecture and design tastes are always changing. The things we like at one point in time may not be what we like in the future. And it can go from extreme desire to extreme disgust. In this video, Vox makes the argument that the mansions of America’s Gilded Age are the reason why all haunted houses seem to look the same in popular culture and in our imaginations.

    Once the extreme desire of America’s nouveau riche (who were clearly trying to emulate rich Europeans), they fell out of favor with the arrival of modernism and a new cultural ethos. All of a sudden it wasn’t fashionable to have copious amounts of ornament and labyrinthian-like floor plans filled with a bunch of gaudy stuff. So the rich moved on and many of these homes fell into disrepair, setting the stage for spooky thoughts.

    What’s interesting about this phenomenon is that it can make it difficult to discern what has design and cultural value and what doesn’t. Because something that has value today, may not have perceived value tomorrow (and it may also become the backdrop for future horror movies). Of course, the opposite is also true. We could hate something today, but eventually learn to love it.

    Brutalism is perhaps a good example. Though there seems to be a groundswell of people interested in preserving this style of architecture, I continue to think that it remains a generally unloved kind of built form when it comes to the general public. So does that mean it has little present and/or future value? That’s not a straightforward question.

    The other thing I find fascinating about this haunted house phenomenon is that it shows how one thing can lead to another. If the typology of haunted houses is a result of the Gilded Age mansion, then it’s also important to consider that the Gilded Age mansion is arguably a result of the new wealth that was being amassed by some Americans at the end of the 19th century.

    The Gilded Age was a period economic expansion for the United States. New fortunes were being made via rail, steel, tobacco, and other industries. (Inequality was a concern.) And this new wealth was naturally looking for a way to show off (as it usually does). That happened to manifest itself in ornate European-like mansions. But had that not happened, would haunted houses look the way that they do today?

    Happy Halloween.