New York-based Extell Development is currently under construction on a Four Seasons Resort and Private Residences in the new Deer Valley East Village in Utah. When I was there in December, Bianca and I went by to check out the overall progress in the village, and the crew was in the midst of laying the decking for the ground floor. ODA designed the architecture, interiors, and landscaping.
The residential offering consists of Private Residences and Hotel Residences. The former are located in an owner-exclusive building and the latter are in the hotel building, where the units can be put into the Four Seasons Rental Program. I'm not sure if this is indicative of their overall inventory, but the remaining Hotel Residences are meaningfully larger than the Private Residences.
Based on current availability, the smallest remaining Private Residence (1,553 sf) is going for US$3,283 psf.
As a Park City booster, I think this additional village is exciting. There are now two large interconnected resorts and four distinct villages lining the Wasatch Back: Park City Mountain Resort, Park City Canyons Village, Deer Valley, and the Deer Valley East Village. Visit Utah would say that there's also a third resort in Woodward Park City (which happens to be adjacent to Parkview Mountain House).
But as a real estate developer and snowboarder, I do wonder about two things.
First, Deer Valley East Village is located in an area on the Wasatch Back that receives noticeably less snow compared to other areas because of its lower elevation and broad east exposure. If I refer back to Jim Steenburgh's book, Secrets of the Greatest Snow on Earth, the average annual snowfall at the base of the Jordanelle Gondola (located just north of the East Village) is probably less than 150 inches. This compares to 350+ inches at higher elevations in Park City and 500+ inches in the Cottonwood Canyons.
Because of this, the East Village has obviously invested heavily in snowmaking equipment. But artificial snow is not the same as natural snow. The higher elevations will be just fine, but the lower elevations will likely see marginal conditions. So why build a new village here? And was and is this a consideration for buyers at this new Four Seasons? Or are the luxury amenities and après events the real deciding factors? I'm not their target demographic, but from my perspective, this is reason enough not to buy here.
On the topic of the target buyer, my second question is about Deer Valley's "no snowboarding" rule (which is another reason why I'm not their target demographic). There are only 3 resorts in the United States that ban snowboarding. One of them is Deer Valley, and the other two are Alta (Utah) and Mad River Glen (Vermont). This seems to be a wildly popular rule among resort guests, and I support Deer Valley's decision to weed out "riff-raff" like me. Deer Valley is also known for capping daily lift tickets to keep the crowds down, so they don't seem to be hurting for patrons.
But according to recent data from Snowsports Industries America (SIA), the rough participation split in the US between skiers and snowboarders is somewhere around 60-70% and 30-40%, respectively. There are also many instances where families have a mix of skiers and snowboarders. If you're the Four Seasons at Deer Valley, this segment of the market is excluded. Oh well. The rich snowboarders have Park City, The Colony at Canyons Village, Powder Mountain, Aspen, and many other locations.
My assumption is that the ban on snowboarders is an unapologetic feature of Deer Valley and developments like the Four Seasons. It creates an air of exclusivity and differentiation. Some data also suggests that snowboarders tend to be a more ethnically diverse group compared to skiers (SIA reports show that among female snowboarders, 25% are Hispanic, and among males, 13% are Black — the highest diversity rates in winter sports), so one could argue that it's not just about the type of device used to get down the mountain. And, it seems to be working.
In July 2025, the Extell announced that they had closed a $600 million construction loan for the project from JVP Management and that 60% of the hotel residences were already sold. This is believed to be the largest construction loan on record for a hotel and residential condominium project in Utah.
At the same time, I'm also certain that the Four Seasons lost sales to certain buyers, perhaps a wealthy Boomer or Gen Xer with kids or grandkids who snowboard. Extrapolating this demographic trend, it is also believed that Millennials represent the first generation in the US with near-parity between skiers and snowboarders. So what will this mean for luxury real estate as these Millennials become the dominant buyer segment? My prediction is that the real estate market will respond.
Would you buy at the Deer Valley Four Seasons? Or have you already?
Cover photo: Deer Valley Four Seasons
Yesterday morning, we did a day trip to Monaco. The main thing I wanted to see was Le Renzo (which is a project I have written about before). Designed by Renzo Piano Building Workshop, it is among the most expensive residential buildings in the world. Condominiums have reportedly sold for as high as €120,000 per square meter (or about €11,148 per square foot).
Before the trip, I emailed the district's PR contact to see if we could get a tour inside. Unfortunately, it's August in Europe, and they told me that nobody from the development team would be around to take us through. So we ended up just walking the perimeter. Here is a photo of the project's north elevation, facing inland.
Here's the south side facing the sea:
And here's a photo of its western edge, including the building's outdoor pool amenity:
The -1 level is boat slips and retail, some of which are still in the process of opening. The fact that they placed the retail where they did stood out to me, because it feels akin to second-floor retail — meaning, it only works in certain places and under certain conditions. Maybe this is one of them.
The ground plane — or at least the level that connects inland — is visually open on all sides, except for the elevator cores and exit stairs coming down from the buildings. This gives you a clear view of the Mediterranean as you approach the district and makes the entire area feel publicly accessible. It's also meant to evoke the image of ships sitting in a dry dock.
We didn't stay in Monaco very long, but this project was the highlight for me. I would have really loved the opportunity to tour inside and get closer to its details.
Leaving Monaco requires some maneuvering if you didn't drive or take the train (which we didn't). Uber is banned within the principality. You can get dropped off in an Uber, but you can't request a car once you're there. This is what you'll see if you open up the app and try:
We were also told that they're very strict about this. If, for example, you get dropped off in an Uber and then try to go off-app for your return, the Uber driver runs the risk of a heavy fine and having their car confiscated for a week. So many drivers don't want to do this unless you're willing to compensate them for the risk.
What you instead need to do is walk to the Monaco-France border, which usually isn't far given the country has a total land area of around 2 square kilometers. As soon as the GPS on your phone signals that you're in France rather than Monaco, cars reappear in the app. And from my experience, the geofencing is accurate within a few meters. It was pretty neat.
In the future, I think a better option might be to road bike over. I saw a number of people doing that yesterday and, boy, it looked like fun.
New York-based Extell Development is currently under construction on a Four Seasons Resort and Private Residences in the new Deer Valley East Village in Utah. When I was there in December, Bianca and I went by to check out the overall progress in the village, and the crew was in the midst of laying the decking for the ground floor. ODA designed the architecture, interiors, and landscaping.
The residential offering consists of Private Residences and Hotel Residences. The former are located in an owner-exclusive building and the latter are in the hotel building, where the units can be put into the Four Seasons Rental Program. I'm not sure if this is indicative of their overall inventory, but the remaining Hotel Residences are meaningfully larger than the Private Residences.
Based on current availability, the smallest remaining Private Residence (1,553 sf) is going for US$3,283 psf.
As a Park City booster, I think this additional village is exciting. There are now two large interconnected resorts and four distinct villages lining the Wasatch Back: Park City Mountain Resort, Park City Canyons Village, Deer Valley, and the Deer Valley East Village. Visit Utah would say that there's also a third resort in Woodward Park City (which happens to be adjacent to Parkview Mountain House).
But as a real estate developer and snowboarder, I do wonder about two things.
First, Deer Valley East Village is located in an area on the Wasatch Back that receives noticeably less snow compared to other areas because of its lower elevation and broad east exposure. If I refer back to Jim Steenburgh's book, Secrets of the Greatest Snow on Earth, the average annual snowfall at the base of the Jordanelle Gondola (located just north of the East Village) is probably less than 150 inches. This compares to 350+ inches at higher elevations in Park City and 500+ inches in the Cottonwood Canyons.
Because of this, the East Village has obviously invested heavily in snowmaking equipment. But artificial snow is not the same as natural snow. The higher elevations will be just fine, but the lower elevations will likely see marginal conditions. So why build a new village here? And was and is this a consideration for buyers at this new Four Seasons? Or are the luxury amenities and après events the real deciding factors? I'm not their target demographic, but from my perspective, this is reason enough not to buy here.
On the topic of the target buyer, my second question is about Deer Valley's "no snowboarding" rule (which is another reason why I'm not their target demographic). There are only 3 resorts in the United States that ban snowboarding. One of them is Deer Valley, and the other two are Alta (Utah) and Mad River Glen (Vermont). This seems to be a wildly popular rule among resort guests, and I support Deer Valley's decision to weed out "riff-raff" like me. Deer Valley is also known for capping daily lift tickets to keep the crowds down, so they don't seem to be hurting for patrons.
But according to recent data from Snowsports Industries America (SIA), the rough participation split in the US between skiers and snowboarders is somewhere around 60-70% and 30-40%, respectively. There are also many instances where families have a mix of skiers and snowboarders. If you're the Four Seasons at Deer Valley, this segment of the market is excluded. Oh well. The rich snowboarders have Park City, The Colony at Canyons Village, Powder Mountain, Aspen, and many other locations.
My assumption is that the ban on snowboarders is an unapologetic feature of Deer Valley and developments like the Four Seasons. It creates an air of exclusivity and differentiation. Some data also suggests that snowboarders tend to be a more ethnically diverse group compared to skiers (SIA reports show that among female snowboarders, 25% are Hispanic, and among males, 13% are Black — the highest diversity rates in winter sports), so one could argue that it's not just about the type of device used to get down the mountain. And, it seems to be working.
In July 2025, the Extell announced that they had closed a $600 million construction loan for the project from JVP Management and that 60% of the hotel residences were already sold. This is believed to be the largest construction loan on record for a hotel and residential condominium project in Utah.
At the same time, I'm also certain that the Four Seasons lost sales to certain buyers, perhaps a wealthy Boomer or Gen Xer with kids or grandkids who snowboard. Extrapolating this demographic trend, it is also believed that Millennials represent the first generation in the US with near-parity between skiers and snowboarders. So what will this mean for luxury real estate as these Millennials become the dominant buyer segment? My prediction is that the real estate market will respond.
Would you buy at the Deer Valley Four Seasons? Or have you already?
Cover photo: Deer Valley Four Seasons
Yesterday morning, we did a day trip to Monaco. The main thing I wanted to see was Le Renzo (which is a project I have written about before). Designed by Renzo Piano Building Workshop, it is among the most expensive residential buildings in the world. Condominiums have reportedly sold for as high as €120,000 per square meter (or about €11,148 per square foot).
Before the trip, I emailed the district's PR contact to see if we could get a tour inside. Unfortunately, it's August in Europe, and they told me that nobody from the development team would be around to take us through. So we ended up just walking the perimeter. Here is a photo of the project's north elevation, facing inland.
Here's the south side facing the sea:
And here's a photo of its western edge, including the building's outdoor pool amenity:
The -1 level is boat slips and retail, some of which are still in the process of opening. The fact that they placed the retail where they did stood out to me, because it feels akin to second-floor retail — meaning, it only works in certain places and under certain conditions. Maybe this is one of them.
The ground plane — or at least the level that connects inland — is visually open on all sides, except for the elevator cores and exit stairs coming down from the buildings. This gives you a clear view of the Mediterranean as you approach the district and makes the entire area feel publicly accessible. It's also meant to evoke the image of ships sitting in a dry dock.
We didn't stay in Monaco very long, but this project was the highlight for me. I would have really loved the opportunity to tour inside and get closer to its details.
Leaving Monaco requires some maneuvering if you didn't drive or take the train (which we didn't). Uber is banned within the principality. You can get dropped off in an Uber, but you can't request a car once you're there. This is what you'll see if you open up the app and try:
We were also told that they're very strict about this. If, for example, you get dropped off in an Uber and then try to go off-app for your return, the Uber driver runs the risk of a heavy fine and having their car confiscated for a week. So many drivers don't want to do this unless you're willing to compensate them for the risk.
What you instead need to do is walk to the Monaco-France border, which usually isn't far given the country has a total land area of around 2 square kilometers. As soon as the GPS on your phone signals that you're in France rather than Monaco, cars reappear in the app. And from my experience, the geofencing is accurate within a few meters. It was pretty neat.
In the future, I think a better option might be to road bike over. I saw a number of people doing that yesterday and, boy, it looked like fun.
Last year, the GTHA recorded 29,671 new condo completions. This was some sort of a record. This year, condo completions are projected to total around 31,396 homes. Even higher. But then completions start to fall off, with 17,487 homes scheduled for completion in 2026. By 2029, this number is expected to be close to 1,000. So let's call it zero for argument's sake.
If we are to crudely assume that 50% of these new condominiums ultimately make it to the secondary condo rental market, then we are expecting nearly 16,000 condo rentals this year, just under 9,000 condo rentals in 2026, and ultimately no new condo rentals by around 2029 (or some number close to it).
Now let's consider the purpose-built rental side of the equation.
The 10-year average for purpose-built rental apartment starts in the GTHA is only 2,819 homes. This is a far cry from the volume of rental housing that we delivered in the 60s and 70s. Of course, with the new condominium market largely shut off, there's renewed interest in building purpose-built rentals.
In 2024, purpose-built rental apartment completions totalled 5,537 homes. And in the first half of this year, 3,156 homes reached the occupancy stage. Extrapolating out, I'm guessing that puts us somewhere around 6,000 new purpose-built rental apartment homes by the end of 2025.
If we pause and think about only 2025, we're on track to deliver roughly 37,000 new condo/rental apartments and ~22,000 new rental homes (again assuming 50% of the new condominiums become secondary rentals). I view this as our peak supply year for this cycle.
There's a lot of talk about a "record" number of purpose-built rental apartments now under construction, and while it is true that the numbers are elevated compared to the latest 10-year average, it is not a long-term record compared to the 60s and 70s and, more importantly, it is not enough to offset our dwindling new condominium supply.
Even if purpose-built rental completions spiked to 8,000 or even 10,000 new homes next year, we are still going to see a drop in new rentals and new housing overall in the GTHA. 2026 is the turning point year where new supply turns south. And it's going to keep going south until probably 2029, which is when I believe we will see supply bottom out.
Nothing in this post should be construed as investment or development advice, but here's the way I'm thinking about it:
2025: ~37,000 new condominium/apartment homes (peak supply year resulting from the pandemic boom)
2026: ~25,000 new homes (supply begins its decline)
2027: ~18,000 new homes
2028: ~10,000 to 13,000 new homes
2029: ~8,000 to 10,000 new homes (supply bottom)
I have no idea what will happen with interest rates, immigration, investor sentiment, and the countless other factors that impact a housing market, but even if things started to turn around next year, it would be mostly impossible to avoid the housing supply bottom that I believe we have coming in 2029. Buildings take a long time to build.
Conclusion: I think that 2026 will prove to be an excellent year to buy assets (land, unsold inventory, IPP, and so on), and that 2028 onward will be an excellent time to be delivering new homes. By then, we should be dramatically undersupplying the market. It doesn't feel that way today, but eventually the bill from our frozen development market will come due.
Cover photo by Adam Vradenburg on Unsplash
Last year, the GTHA recorded 29,671 new condo completions. This was some sort of a record. This year, condo completions are projected to total around 31,396 homes. Even higher. But then completions start to fall off, with 17,487 homes scheduled for completion in 2026. By 2029, this number is expected to be close to 1,000. So let's call it zero for argument's sake.
If we are to crudely assume that 50% of these new condominiums ultimately make it to the secondary condo rental market, then we are expecting nearly 16,000 condo rentals this year, just under 9,000 condo rentals in 2026, and ultimately no new condo rentals by around 2029 (or some number close to it).
Now let's consider the purpose-built rental side of the equation.
The 10-year average for purpose-built rental apartment starts in the GTHA is only 2,819 homes. This is a far cry from the volume of rental housing that we delivered in the 60s and 70s. Of course, with the new condominium market largely shut off, there's renewed interest in building purpose-built rentals.
In 2024, purpose-built rental apartment completions totalled 5,537 homes. And in the first half of this year, 3,156 homes reached the occupancy stage. Extrapolating out, I'm guessing that puts us somewhere around 6,000 new purpose-built rental apartment homes by the end of 2025.
If we pause and think about only 2025, we're on track to deliver roughly 37,000 new condo/rental apartments and ~22,000 new rental homes (again assuming 50% of the new condominiums become secondary rentals). I view this as our peak supply year for this cycle.
There's a lot of talk about a "record" number of purpose-built rental apartments now under construction, and while it is true that the numbers are elevated compared to the latest 10-year average, it is not a long-term record compared to the 60s and 70s and, more importantly, it is not enough to offset our dwindling new condominium supply.
Even if purpose-built rental completions spiked to 8,000 or even 10,000 new homes next year, we are still going to see a drop in new rentals and new housing overall in the GTHA. 2026 is the turning point year where new supply turns south. And it's going to keep going south until probably 2029, which is when I believe we will see supply bottom out.
Nothing in this post should be construed as investment or development advice, but here's the way I'm thinking about it:
2025: ~37,000 new condominium/apartment homes (peak supply year resulting from the pandemic boom)
2026: ~25,000 new homes (supply begins its decline)
2027: ~18,000 new homes
2028: ~10,000 to 13,000 new homes
2029: ~8,000 to 10,000 new homes (supply bottom)
I have no idea what will happen with interest rates, immigration, investor sentiment, and the countless other factors that impact a housing market, but even if things started to turn around next year, it would be mostly impossible to avoid the housing supply bottom that I believe we have coming in 2029. Buildings take a long time to build.
Conclusion: I think that 2026 will prove to be an excellent year to buy assets (land, unsold inventory, IPP, and so on), and that 2028 onward will be an excellent time to be delivering new homes. By then, we should be dramatically undersupplying the market. It doesn't feel that way today, but eventually the bill from our frozen development market will come due.
Cover photo by Adam Vradenburg on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
