I'm good friends with Gabriel Fain (of Gabriel Fain Architects) and Francesco Valente-Gorjup and Aleris Rodgers (of Studio VAARO). Gabriel, Francesco, and I all went to architecture school together (undergrad). Gabriel is the architect behind Mackay Laneway House. And the three of us are really good about staying in touch, and taking group photos so we can document our aging.

Here's us circa 2013:

And here's us 10 years later at my 40th birthday:

Earlier this year, we were all hanging out when they told me that they were working on a research project with the Neptis Foundation called Impossible Toronto. They were authoring the project's inaugural publication and the goal was to explore a housing typology that could be suitable for the city — perhaps even highly desirable — but that is currently impossible to build.

As they were telling me about the project, they casually added, "Oh, and we volunteered you to help the team with development feasibility and financial modeling. We need you do a pro forma for the housing type we're proposing." If that's not true friendship, I don't know what is.

Well, that publication has landed from the printers. It's called Impossible Toronto: On the Courtyard — Learning from European Blocks. And it's beautiful (graphic design by Blok Design):

The full launch is set for October 3rd, 2025 here in Toronto (mark your calendars). At that point, hard copies will be available for sale and soft copies will be available as a free download. But even before then, I want to congratulate the team and everyone involved — there's a long list. This is important work for our great city.

I also very much enjoy the premise of the book and the series as a whole. Most bold ideas start out as impossible, until all of a sudden they're not. The best ideas, it has been said, are just on the right side of impossible.

This is the battle that is now playing out across Toronto — and many other cities — as we look to intensify our existing communities; even in the ones sitting on higher-order transit. Cities rightly want to see it happen. But local ratepayers do not.

From the Globe and Mail:

“This project is in no way gentle intensification,” said the architect Terry Montgomery, representing the powerful local group the Annex Residents Association. “It will set a dangerous precedent for all areas in the city which currently [are zoned for] low-scale residential-buildings.”

It’s not clear whether that legal argument is true. At the meeting, City of Toronto planning manager David Driedger and director Oren Tamir – who, to their great credit, were supporting the development – said it would not set a precedent.

But if it did, why would that be “dangerous”? It is commonsensical. The Lowther site has two subway stations within an eight-minute walk. Toronto’s Line 1 and Line 2 intersect right here. This is one of the best-located, best-connected places in all of Canada.

Alex Bozikovic is, of course, right. This is commonsensical. 

If our goals are to create more homes, improve housing affordability, reduce traffic congestion, and make us overall a more sustainable city, then there’s no better place to build than on top of transit within our already built-up areas.

Brigitte Shim (of Shim-Sutcliffe Architects) invited Gabriel Fain and I to the Daniels Faculty this morning (at the University of Toronto) to talk about Mackay Laneway House.

It was for a class on laneway housing and, as it turns out, some of the students had been using MLH as a case study. That's pretty cool, although the primary lesson is probably "don't build next to large trees."

Following the presentation, we had a good discussion about laneways, and it reminded me of some of the things that I believe to be true. More specifically, it reminded me of what I think will happen in the future:

• Bona Fide Streets: Laneways will become bona fide streets. Meaning, they'll get real names (most don't have one today) and they'll get serviced. Today, laneway suites are typically serviced via the main/existing house.

• Severable Lots: Laneway lots will become severable. Right now this is strongly discouraged, because the intent is to create new rental housing and not new for-sale housing.

• Market Inversion: Once these lots become severable, the market will then be able to decide which frontage is most valuable -- the current street side or the laneway side. Maybe some get split right down the middle (50/50) or maybe some get biased toward one frontage. Either way, I think it will become common for the laneway frontage to be more desirable given its intimate scale and pedestrian orientation.

• Mixed-Use: Non-residential uses will become allowed.

I have no idea when all of this might happen, but I believe it will happen. So I wanted to write it down publicly.

I'm good friends with Gabriel Fain (of Gabriel Fain Architects) and Francesco Valente-Gorjup and Aleris Rodgers (of Studio VAARO). Gabriel, Francesco, and I all went to architecture school together (undergrad). Gabriel is the architect behind Mackay Laneway House. And the three of us are really good about staying in touch, and taking group photos so we can document our aging.

Here's us circa 2013:

And here's us 10 years later at my 40th birthday:

Earlier this year, we were all hanging out when they told me that they were working on a research project with the Neptis Foundation called Impossible Toronto. They were authoring the project's inaugural publication and the goal was to explore a housing typology that could be suitable for the city — perhaps even highly desirable — but that is currently impossible to build.

As they were telling me about the project, they casually added, "Oh, and we volunteered you to help the team with development feasibility and financial modeling. We need you do a pro forma for the housing type we're proposing." If that's not true friendship, I don't know what is.

Well, that publication has landed from the printers. It's called Impossible Toronto: On the Courtyard — Learning from European Blocks. And it's beautiful (graphic design by Blok Design):

The full launch is set for October 3rd, 2025 here in Toronto (mark your calendars). At that point, hard copies will be available for sale and soft copies will be available as a free download. But even before then, I want to congratulate the team and everyone involved — there's a long list. This is important work for our great city.

I also very much enjoy the premise of the book and the series as a whole. Most bold ideas start out as impossible, until all of a sudden they're not. The best ideas, it has been said, are just on the right side of impossible.

This is the battle that is now playing out across Toronto — and many other cities — as we look to intensify our existing communities; even in the ones sitting on higher-order transit. Cities rightly want to see it happen. But local ratepayers do not.

From the Globe and Mail:

“This project is in no way gentle intensification,” said the architect Terry Montgomery, representing the powerful local group the Annex Residents Association. “It will set a dangerous precedent for all areas in the city which currently [are zoned for] low-scale residential-buildings.”

It’s not clear whether that legal argument is true. At the meeting, City of Toronto planning manager David Driedger and director Oren Tamir – who, to their great credit, were supporting the development – said it would not set a precedent.

But if it did, why would that be “dangerous”? It is commonsensical. The Lowther site has two subway stations within an eight-minute walk. Toronto’s Line 1 and Line 2 intersect right here. This is one of the best-located, best-connected places in all of Canada.

Alex Bozikovic is, of course, right. This is commonsensical. 

If our goals are to create more homes, improve housing affordability, reduce traffic congestion, and make us overall a more sustainable city, then there’s no better place to build than on top of transit within our already built-up areas.

Brigitte Shim (of Shim-Sutcliffe Architects) invited Gabriel Fain and I to the Daniels Faculty this morning (at the University of Toronto) to talk about Mackay Laneway House.

It was for a class on laneway housing and, as it turns out, some of the students had been using MLH as a case study. That's pretty cool, although the primary lesson is probably "don't build next to large trees."

Following the presentation, we had a good discussion about laneways, and it reminded me of some of the things that I believe to be true. More specifically, it reminded me of what I think will happen in the future:

• Bona Fide Streets: Laneways will become bona fide streets. Meaning, they'll get real names (most don't have one today) and they'll get serviced. Today, laneway suites are typically serviced via the main/existing house.

• Severable Lots: Laneway lots will become severable. Right now this is strongly discouraged, because the intent is to create new rental housing and not new for-sale housing.

• Market Inversion: Once these lots become severable, the market will then be able to decide which frontage is most valuable -- the current street side or the laneway side. Maybe some get split right down the middle (50/50) or maybe some get biased toward one frontage. Either way, I think it will become common for the laneway frontage to be more desirable given its intimate scale and pedestrian orientation.

• Mixed-Use: Non-residential uses will become allowed.

I have no idea when all of this might happen, but I believe it will happen. So I wanted to write it down publicly.