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: Real Estate

  • Home is not a building type

    Home is not where you live, but where they understand you. — Christian Morgenstern

    One of the things that I like to be annoying about on this blog is the fact that “home” is not a building type. I say this because “home” is often shorthand for ground-oriented, single-family housing. For example, someone might say to me, “Do you think you’ll one day buy a home?” And I will be pedantic and say, “But I already own a home.”

    The words we choose, often because of cultural convention, show our biases. When people associate home with low-rise housing, I can only assume it’s because many cities have had a long history of thinking of apartments as disease-breeding tenements. So we oftentimes see low-rise housing as homes, and apartments as something more utilitarian, like a unit.

    But in the end, a home is not a building type; it is a psychological state of belonging. It is where comfort, safety, belonging, and identity hopefully all intersect.

    One of the interesting things that Bianca and I have both noticed since bringing home our daughter, Vivienne, is that our feeling of home has been heightened. There’s additional life within these four walls, and now it is also a place where she is kept safe and protected from the outside world.

    I’m not sure if any of you have experienced this, but we both felt it immediately, and it has us saying to each other on a regular basis, “I love our home.” And you know what? The view looks pretty great from up here.

  • Cité Radieuse, Duplex Type E

    Le Corbusier’s Cité Radieuse in Marseille is, as I have mentioned before, one of the most important and influential multi-family buildings of the 20th century. As an architecture student, this is one of those buildings that you get indoctrinated with, so I was excited to visit it for the first time with Neat B in 2022 on what was our second visit to Marseille. We’re big fans of the city. Here is the post I wrote following that visit.

    Today, let’s look at one of the actual suites, which is currently listed for sale through Architecture de Collection. But first, a reminder: The complex was originally constructed between 1948-1952 and was meant to serve as a new housing model for post-war France. In 2016, the building was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site and, today, you’ll sometimes find things like a Chanel fashion show taking place on its rooftop.

    The suite that is for sale is Type E, which is about 100 m2. It has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. A balcony. And a view of the Mediterranean. It is listed for 650 000 €, which works out 6,500 € per square meter. For Toronto readers, this is right now the equivalent of C$965,485 or about C$897 per square foot. The monthly copropriété charge is about 300 € and the annual property taxes are about 2000 €.

    Does this seem reasonable or expensive to you?

    For more info, click here.

    Photo by Louis Charron on Unsplash

  • Let’s get serious about building more homes in Canada

    I live in a condominium. I find it extremely desirable. I don’t yearn to live anywhere else. And I think of it as my home. But there is of course truth to this Globe and Mail article:

    Canadians, by and large, continue to think of condos and apartments as housing, not homes. That’s hardly surprising given the way Canada builds them: small units in tall towers clustered in downtown cores or near busy transit hubs. They’re the one- and two-bedrooms young people rent in their 20s (and, increasingly, their 30s). The starter homes. The initial landing spot for newcomers. But they are not desirable homes for two large swaths of the population. Young families need multiple bedrooms and proximity to parks and schools. Retirees looking to downsize often say they want to remain in the same neighbourhood. A dearth of higher-density homes for these two groups has dire consequences for cities.

    The problem is twofold.

    Our land use policies are too restrictive, though that is slowing starting to change for the better. And it is simply not economically feasible to build larger, family-sized apartments at any sort of meaningful scale. This is not a developer unwillingness problem, it is a math problem.

    Toronto, for instance, would be far better off if we had European-scaled apartment buildings all across the city and a lot more family-friendly housing. I believe this to be true at least. But in order to achieve this, we need to get serious. This is not serious.

    We need to dramatically reduce development charges and other government fees. We need to get rid of the site plan control process for smaller buildings. We need to remove required amenity areas (the city is the amenity for small-scale neighborhood apartments). And the list goes on.

    So if anyone in government is reading this and is truly serious about building more affordable housing in this country, please give me a call. I will gladly come into your office and run you through a development pro forma so that you can see what it’s going to take. We can fix housing.

  • Call with a Paris developer

    I had a call with a developer in Paris earlier this week and it was interesting to hear him talk about the new home market over there. It sounded a lot like Toronto. Higher interest rates cooled demand. Individual investors largely disappeared. And now developers are having to rethink their strategies and floor plans (including suite sizes).

    But in his view, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It now means that you actually have to be a reasonably good developer in order to have a chance at succeeding. You have to design thoughtful floor plans and build great housing. It’s a return to fundamentals, and I would argue that the same thing is happening here in Toronto.

    My other noteworthy takeaway was around social housing. All new developments in the Île-de-France region are subject to inclusionary zoning. I believe the requirement is 30% of the suites. These suites are then purchased by social housing operators, and it is one of the ways that new supply is created in the market.

    We talk a lot about IZ on this blog, but what’s interesting about this approach is that it becomes a forward sale for the developer. Meaning, it helps to de-risk projects. Before doing anything, you know you’ve sold 30% of your inventory, and somehow the numbers all work. European social housing math is baffling to me.

    I am now wondering if this creates some kind of incentive to keep development costs in check. Because if social housing operators are expected to buy 30% of all new homes, then they too are going to want them to be as cost effective as possible. I’m speculating though; I don’t know that this is the case.

    If you’re a developer or real estate person in Paris, please get in touch. I’d love to learn more about your market and trade notes.

  • Burnaby backtracks on inclusionary zoning

    The City of Burnaby recently passed an amendment to its inclusionary rental requirements. It has now been removed from the southeast portion of the city, which, according to Burnaby Now, has one of the lowest median incomes in the city.

    Here’s an excerpt from the staff recommendation report that was approved in early October:

    The analysis explored the impacts of increasing the density of developments in the Edmonds Town Centre area to try and improve revenues. However, the results showed that at current values, additional density is not able to offset the costs of providing the non-market housing, and that the equity needed to pursue large developments became prohibitive. As such, it is recommended that inclusionary rental requirements apply city-wide, with a delayed effective date for the Southeast Burnaby CMHC rental zone (the “SE Burnaby CMHC Zone”), until such time that inclusionary rental requirements become financially viable.

    What’s noteworthy about this amendment is that it acknowledges the real costs associated with non-market housing and shows how important high market rents are to subsidizing them. There’s no such thing as no-cost affordable housing. In the end, somebody always has to pay.

  • Two different multifamily markets

    I had lunch today with a friend (from school) who runs a multifamily development company in South Florida. His business is very similar to the apartment strategy that we are now working on in Toronto, in that he builds a repeatable apartment product (garden style apartments). In fact, he was telling me that he now has a dedicated design & QA/QC team within the company. Their job is to focus on continuous optimization and on reducing construction inefficiencies.

    This is the way!

    But each market is obviously unique. His rents are in the US$3 – 3.25 psf range (call it ~C$4.15 – 4.50 psf), whereas in Toronto you need something closer to C$5 psf to have a feasible project. Our yields are also lower on average. It’s hard work to get to an untrended yield-to-cost of 5% here. But for him, he can’t raise capital with anything less than 6.5%, which represents a development spread of at least 150 bps over where multifamily cap rates are today in his market (~5%).

    Juicy by comparison.

  • Map of every development project in Paris

    It is surprisingly difficult to find good real estate and development information about a market that you’re not familiar with. So I was pretty excited when I came across this map of every development project in Grand Paris (Greater Paris) created by Arthur Weidmann.

    It’s in Google My Maps and what he has done is pin every project according to status: under construction, under renovation, approved, proposed, and recently delivered. For each pin, you’ll also find information like the expected completion date, the use(s), the area, the architect(s), and photos. It is unbelievably detailed and, according to Google, it was last updated 8 hours ago.

    Here’s the full map with all statuses shown:

    And here’s what it looks like if you filter by only projects under construction:

    It’s interesting, but not surprising, to note that the majority of construction projects seem to be taking place outside the boundaries of Paris proper. However, if you alternate to projects under renovation, it more or less flips, with most of the projects being within Paris:

    This tells you something about the city.

    Sometimes when I’m looking at or for information like this, I think to myself that I must be in the minority of people who are interested in tracking development projects with this level of detail. So I find it interesting that this map has been viewed nearly 300,000 times. Clearly, I’m not actually alone.

  • Western resort real estate is in very high demand

    People like ski and snowboard towns. Here’s an excerpt from a recent WSJ article talking about Park City:

    Prices continued to rise in most luxury ski towns this past year, but none grew as much as Park City, a former silver mining town 32 miles east of Salt Lake City. The average home sale price there grew 35% in 2023 from 2022, compared with a 9.4% increase at Vail and Beaver Creek and 3.2% at Aspen, according to the resort report by Summit Sotheby’s International Realty. 

    The main point of the article is this: Park City has gotten really expensive, and so people are now looking and buying homes further out in places like Heber City, Midway, and Kamas. Here’s how expensive expensive is:

    Over the last four years, Covid has stoked demand for western resort real estate. In Park City, single-family homes have sold for a median price of $4 million year-to-date, up from $1.996 million in 2019, according to Redfin, which averaged the monthly median sales prices weighted for the number of homes sold. One home was listed in September for $65 million, which could set a record for the state. It’s now under contract, according to listing agent Paul Benson of Engel & Völkers, who declined to disclose the sale price.

    This, of course, isn’t a novel phenomenon. It’s the whole “drive until you qualify” thing. But what’s interesting about this particular mountain example is that it’s not centered around access to a CBD or downtown; it’s centered around “how fast can I get to a ski and snowboard resort?”

    For example, Deer Valley has a new East Village that is expected to open up in 2025. This brings the cities mentioned above closer in. And buyers seem to be doing that math: “It’s a 25-minute drive today, but next year I’ll be able to get on a lift in 15 minutes. Score.”

    Given that Deer Valley also doesn’t allow snowboarders, it’s interesting to think about how these trends could be bifurcating the region between skiers and snowboarders. I don’t have any data on this, but I bet if you mapped it out, there would be some sort of clustering happen.

    The article also goes on to talk about transportation. Because you can’t talk about new development and real estate without talking about traffic. But I think Bill Ciraco (Park City Council) gets it exactly right in the article: This is a car problem, and less of a people problem.

    In my mind, the Wasatch Range is destined for something like this ONE Wasatch concept, which is/was a proposal to link seven resorts through a handful of new skiable connections. This is similar to what you’ll find in Europe, and it means less driving and more time on the mountain.

    That’s what everyone wants to be doing anyway.

    Photo by Lauren Pandolfi on Unsplash

  • Checking in on office utilization in Toronto

    Let’s check in on office utilization (in Toronto). The last time we talked about this was in April. At that time, the average weekly utilization figure was 63%. The peak day — Wednesday — was 73%. And the low day — Friday — was 40%. Today, well as of September 15, these numbers are now 69%, 79%, and 39%, respectively (see above chart). So we continue to climb. The only slight downward trend is Fridays. People don’t like coming into the office on Fridays. Still, the average is up 6% over the span of about 6 months. This makes you continue to wonder: When does this level off? I also don’t know what this index looked like before 2020. Are we back, or not yet?

  • Canada’s proptech landscape

    The morning I attended the release of Venturon’s 2024 Sustainable Proptech Report. What’s great is that it includes a list of all the (known) companies that are active in this space in Canada. It also summarizes venture funding by region. Interesting to see Alberta punching above its weight and coming in second behind Ontario. It has roughly half the population of Quebec.

    As part of the event, the following companies also gave short presentations:

    • Panergy — they make a prefabricated insulated wall system
    • Darabase — they are creating an advertising ecosystem around augmented reality; one that will allow building owners to monetize in a new digital world
    • Axe Buildings — they make simple, prefabricated homes; they are optimizing for speed and price, not quality
    • QEA Tech — they use drones with thermal cameras to tell you where your building envelope is leaking and wasting energy

    I don’t know anything about these companies other than what I heard this morning, but all are working on important problems. Darabase is perhaps the most future oriented in that it appears to rely on AR / spatial computing becoming a thing. I believe this will happen, and so I found it particularly interesting.

    The 2024 report is available online, here.