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: Real Estate

  • Google opens first ever retail store in New York City

    Google just opened up its first ever retail store. It’s in Chelsea in New York City at the base of its offices in a building that the company owns. The space is about 5,000 square feet and it occupies a full city block.

    A collaboration with New York-architect, Suchi Reddy, the retail space is deliberately different from what you’ll find at an Apple store (though the broad intentions are arguably similar). Instead of sleek, metallic and futuristic, the focus here was on creating a warm and inviting space that feels more like a home. (Note the pale woods.)

    The approach is intended to make a statement about the role that technology, or at least Google’s technology, should play in our lives. It is about tech servicing humanity and not the other way around.

    FastCompany has a good article, here, that explains all of this.

    It is interesting to watch these spaces evolve into what we are now calling experiential retail or commerce. If you read the FastCompany article you’ll read about the work that Johns Hopkins University is doing on neuroaesthetics, which is the study of how spaces and aesthetics affect our bodies. That is how finely tuned these spaces have become.

    And it’s kind of what you need to do today. Consider the example of Microsoft’s retail stores, which launched in a clear attempt to mimic the successes that Apple has seen with its stores. They even looked somewhat similar. But then last year Microsoft announced that the company would be closing all of its stores.

    Why? Part of the problem is that they were too focused on just selling Microsoft products. And that, it would seem, can’t really be the main objective anymore. You also need to consider the experience. What story are we telling about our brand with our space, and is it compelling enough to standout?

    P.S. The first image at the top of this post is of their Google Translate booth. You walk in. Say something. And Google translates the hell out of it for you.

    Photos: Google

  • Floor plan comments, and thoughts on inset bedrooms

    I came across the above floor plan over the weekend. I reshared it on Twitter and there was then a pretty good discussion about what people like and don’t like. I mean, who doesn’t like looking at floor plans?

    The suite is 790 square feet with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. It rents, at least according to Bobby’s original tweet, at $2,600 per month. That’s $3.29 per square foot. I’m guessing that the apartment is in Philadelphia solely based on Bobby’s location.

    The divisive thing in this floor plan is the two inset bedrooms. Some people don’t like these. But designing a good floor plan is like working through a puzzle. You have all these constraints (some of which are just personal preference) and you have to find ways to work around them.

    When you’re working with a deep urban floor plate, you pretty much have no choice but to design floor plans with inset bedrooms. Otherwise, the suites get too big and they stop making economic sense. I have talked about this a few times before on the blog.

    So what you do is “bury” the bedroom(s) and keep the main living space as open as possible. In this case, the living/dining dimensions are about 17′ wide x 10′ deep. So a pretty good size, and certainly a very good width.

    An alternate solution might be to flip one of the bedrooms up towards the main glass (keeping the second one inset). But given that you only have 17 feet to work with here, something is going to have to give. So if you made the living room 9′ wide, you’d then only have somewhere around 8′ for your bedroom.

    Personally, I don’t mind inset bedrooms, especially if they allow for more generous living spaces. So I think that this is a fairly reasonable and functional suite layout. I would have absolutely lived in an apartment like this when I was going to school in Philadelphia. (Is this even the right location?)

    But if I were to make a few tweaks:

    I would compress the bedrooms slightly to enlarge the living space even more. (Though if the target market is student roommates, perhaps the idea is to allow for a desk in the bedroom.) I would then flip the closets to the partition wall between the two bedrooms to improve sound attenuation.

    I would also try and get the kitchen out of the hallway and into the main living/dining area. I don’t know where all the plumbing stacks sit (see, constraints), but perhaps it just slides up toward the glass. Another solution might be on the other side of the upper bedroom (where there is currently a closet).

    But what are your thoughts? Would you rent this apartment? Comments welcome below.

  • Economic update with Benjamin Tal — get ready for the second half of this year

    Benjamin Tal — CIBC’s Deputy Chief Economist — is seemingly everywhere. And earlier today, he was delivering an annual economic update at an online event hosted by Brattys LLP (our condo lawyers) in partnership with CIBC. Below are a handful of slides that I found interesting and that I tweeted out during the event.

    All of our personal risk curves changed during this pandemic. When the first wave hit, we all had no idea how bad this was going to be and what to expect. And so we all stayed home and washed our hands and our groceries. That changed with each subsequent wave. And now we’re all ready and anxious to be done with this.

    Tal referred to this as one of the most unequal recessions we’ve ever seen. If you had a high paying job, you probably kept it. And after you stopped spending money on eating out, entertainment, travel, and watching the Leafs lose in person, you likely had a meaningfully higher savings rate. That has created some $100 billion of “excess cash” sitting on the sidelines.

    This cash wants to be spent and I think we’re going to see it flying out the door in the second half of this year. Much of it will also flow into services, which should help to prop up the hardest hit segments of the economy. So while there has been some real pain, many are expecting the economy to snap back pretty quickly. Get ready for some euphoria in the second half of this year.

    This last slide is particularly relevant to the kind of things we often talk about on this blog. It is essentially showing the increased demand for housing outside of the city during this pandemic (as of Q4 2020).

    A flatter line (Vancouver, Calgary) indicates that year-over-year price growth was less affected by “distance from the city center.” On the other hand, a steeper line (Toronto, Ottawa) indicates that price growth was stronger the more you moved outward from the core. In the case of Toronto, it was nearly 20% YoY when you got about 60-70 kilometers out of the city.

    But it’s important to keep in mind that the core of Toronto still grew at about 5% year-over-year. About the same as in Vancouver. And in the case of Ottawa, the number looks to be about 17.5% in the city center. These are meaningful numbers and not the kind of symptoms you would expect to see from downtowns in the middle of a death spiral.

    I would argue, as I have many times before, that this last chart is the result of short-term phenomena. I bet we’ll see a number of these pitches reverse by the time Q4 2021 arrives.

  • How meaningful is the exodus from Hong Kong?

    When I was in my early 20s, I spent a summer living and working in Taipei and Hong Kong. It was a wonderful experience. I’ll never forget my apartment in Hong Kong’s Causeway Bay. It was a small single room with a small bed and an even smaller bathroom. The bed didn’t fit me — at all — and my legs would hang over the bottom of it. I couldn’t stop hitting my shins on the bottom of the frame at night. The bathroom didn’t have a dedicated shower, just a hose coming out of the wall. So everything would get wet. It also took me 15 minutes the first morning I showered to figure out how to make the water hot. Eventually I got it.

    Despite all this, I remember being enchanted with Hong Kong. Here was this tiny little place with very little developable land that had managed to become, through trade, finance, real estate and other things, one of the wealthiest places in the world. Capitalism! I could also feel the connection to Toronto. Hong Kong has one of the largest Canadian expat communities in the world. In fact, I ran into one of my high school math teachers in a bar in LKF. That was wild. He had moved there with his wife to teach. I suppose because of all of this, I have tended to follow the region a bit more closely.

    Last July, the British government promised a path to citizenship for the 3 million or so Hong Kong residents who hold or are eligible for a British National Overseas passport. This passport, as I understand it, was given to citizens at the time of the 1997 handover. Though I don’t know how utility was actually derived from it over the years. Before last year’s announcement, this document didn’t include the right to stay in the UK. However, now it does. And the UK government expects that some 300,000 Hong Kong residents are going to take advantage of this in the first five years of the program. And indeed, according to the Financial Times, 2020 was the first year since SARS back in 2003 that the region lost people — it had a net outflow of about 39,800 people.

    What will this mean for Hong Kong? Well, Bank of America estimated earlier this year that capital outflows from Hong Kong could reach £25 billion in the first year of the program. But maybe this is being too conservative. Here in Canada, capital outflows from Hong Kong hit a record last year at C$43.6 billion. But this too could be an underestimation, as it doesn’t include transfers below C$10,000 and probably a bunch of other transfer methods. How much money is actually flowing outward?

    This weekend the Financial Times published the above survey results showing sentiment around leaving Hong Kong. Surveys are, of course, a funny thing. Saying you might probably potentially do something is a lot different than actually doing something. But for what it’s worth, about a quarter of pro-democracy supporters (which is maybe half of the population?) responded by saying that, yes, they would be prepared to leave. If you include those who responded no, but that they would reconsider and leave if things got worse, the number increases to about 70%.

    I don’t know how meaningful all of this becomes for Hong Kong. Time will tell. But it has me thinking about my tiny bed and tiny shower in Causeway Bay.

    Image: Financial Times

  • Rich people and single-family zoning

    This is a chart from Abundant Housing LA (a YIMBY group), via City Observatory, showing the relationship between median household income and single-family zoning across the 88 cities that make up L.A. County. On average, about 80% of the land in the County is zoned for single-family housing. This is also true for Los Angeles, which is not surprisingly its biggest city. What is pretty clear from this chart is that the richest areas tend to have a higher percentage of single-family homes. If you read Anthony Dedousis’ post, you’ll also see that the housing tends to be more expensive (makes sense) and that the homeownership rates are higher in these single-family areas. One obvious takeaway is that it shows you how clearly we are dividing our cities. Zoning is regulation. And here we are seeing some of the socioeconomic implications. But I’m curious if this relationship would be as strong in other cities around the world and at different scales (i.e. neighborhood levels). When it’s made available (not all cities have this much space), how universal is this pull toward single-family housing?

  • Experiential art center opens in Miami’s Allapattah neighborhood

    A new 50,000 square foot experiential art center (EAC to those in the know), called Superblue, has just opened up in Miami’s Allapattah neighborhood. It includes installations by Tokyo-based teamLab, Amsterdam’s DRIFT, James Turrell (amazing), as well as many others.

    This is noteworthy because experiential art is both fun (and Instagrammable) and because it is another example of the continuing rise of Allapattah. Art, design, and culture are usually pretty good for city building.

    At the same time, the New York Times raises an interesting question: “Is this a forward step in the march of modernism or a debasement of art into theme-park entertainment?” Arthur Lubow goes on to say:

    The popularity of this genre is driven by contradictory desires, as demonstrated memorably by the line of visitors in 2019 who waited up to six hours for a one-minute stay amid the twinkling lights in Yayoi Kusama’s infinity mirror room at the David Zwirner gallery in Chelsea. Malnourished by their phones and computer screens, people yearn for real-life visceral experiences. And yet they remain stuck in the gravitational pull of virtual reality: The experiences they seek are ones they can record on their phone cameras and post on social media.

    I get this logic.

    But my own view is that just because something has commercial appeal, it shouldn’t mean that the art is any less serious. And just because people want to photograph and share it, doesn’t necessarily mean that they aren’t appreciating it in the same way as someone just standing around and pondering it.

    Perhaps this is a good time to mention that Snap has also just announced the next version of its Spectacles. These ones come with the promise of augmented reality. What is real anymore?

  • From office to residential in London

    It was recently announced that the City of London — the historic town center and primary CBD of the region — is aiming to create at least 1,500 new residential units in the Square Mile by 2030. Part of its strategy is to convert disused office buildings into residential. Currently, the City has about 7,850 residences, which is a drop in the bucket and whole lot smaller than its 19th century population of 125,000.

    Tony Travers, director of LSE London, is quoted in FT saying that the City is really facing “twin challenges.” You’ve got Brexit, which caused prime office cap rate rates to stagnate in the UK, and you’ve now got the whole work from home thing. Nobody really knows how this latter piece will fully shake out when it’s all said and done, but we shouldn’t forget the power of agglomeration economies. It’s what powers cities.

    Calgary is another example of a city that is looking to encourage change. Last month a $1-billion plan was approved to help convert office buildings into housing. (Shout out to Steven Paynter of Gensler who is quoted in the article talking about what makes for a suitable office conversion project.)

    What’s interesting about these announcements is that oftentimes cities cling to their non-residential spaces out of fear that once that supply gets converted it will never come back. That is certainly the case here in Toronto with its office replacement policies, although many years ago when downtown living wasn’t nearly as cool, there was a similar push to encourage more residential development in the core. Looks like that idea worked.

    We know that office space isn’t going away. Zoom is an awful substitute for in-person interactions. People need to congregate (and tend to like doing it). Urban agglomeration economies drive innovation. Bigger cities with higher population densities tend to create more wealth for their inhabitants. So perhaps the takeaway from these announcements should be that, yeah, office space is vital, but it’s okay to do a little rebalancing once in a while.

  • Houses with large yards and where you have to drive to places

    The National Association of Realtors in the US has a “Community and Transportation Preference Survey” that it conducts usually every two years. Last year (2020), wasn’t supposed to be a survey year, but given the pandemic, they decided to run it in June and see if people’s preferences had changed at all during that time.

    Last June feels like eons ago to me and I bet that if you asked people how they were feeling today it may be slightly different. Nonetheless, the survey asked 2,000 adults from the fifty-largest metro areas a bunch of questions about where and how they live and where and how they might want to live in the future.

    The topline results can be found over here. But for a bit of context, 58% of respondents were people who lived in a single-family detached house; 26% of respondents were people who lived in a building with two or more apartments and condos; and the rest of the respondents were split across townhouses, rowhouses, mobile homes, trailers, and other. (I’m kind of curious about the 2% who answered with other.)

    One of the questions that I thought might be interesting to this audience is this one here about housing preferences going forward:

    The question asks the respondents to imagine that they are moving into another home. It then asks about priorities and, more specifically, about their preferred trade-off between amenities and walkability versus a large detached house with a big yard.

    Overall the split in preferences has remained close to 50/50 over the last three surveys. But there appears to be a small uptick toward large homes and less amenities. I wouldn’t be surprised if the pandemic contributed to this thinking last summer. But who knows if this will persist. At the same time, actions speak louder than words.

    My response to the above question would be less space, greater walkability, and more amenities. I have no desire to live in a low-rise grade-related house, especially one that is disconnected from the city. I like urbanity. What about you?

  • There is no such thing as a free lunch

    Inclusionary zoning has been on my mind this week and so I thought I would revisit some of my old posts on the topic. I wrote about it here, here, here, here, here, and probably in a bunch of other places that I am forgetting right now. A number of these posts go as far back as 2015-2016.

    As well-intended as inclusionary zoning may be, I have never been able to get my head around it. There are lots of cities with inclusionary zoning polices in place and what history generally tells us is that it tends to reduce overall housing supply and increase market rents/prices.

    This makes intuitive sense when you consider that inclusionary zoning is in effect a tax on new development. And one of the only things I remember from my economics classes is that it’s generally good practice to tax the things we want less of. You know, things like cigarettes and carbon.

    This is why I have also been a strong supporter of road pricing over the years on this blog. Traffic congestion is bad (demand also happens to be relatively inelastic). So tax it and redirect the funds toward transit.

    Housing supply, on the other hand, isn’t bad. It’s pretty good and fairly useful. So in my simple mind, I don’t know why we would want to apply a tax to it instead of figuring out way to simultaneously encourage and incent the supply of new affordable housing. Here’s one idea.

  • New condo sales totaled 5,385 units last quarter

    Urbanation released its Q1-2021 quarterly condo market update for the Greater Toronto Area at the end of last month. And there’s some good stuff in it. New condo sales totaled 5,385 units in the first quarter of this year, which is higher than the 10-year average of 4,924 units and only slightly below sales from a year ago (Q1-2020). By and large, the numbers are starting to feel a bit pre-pandemic-like.

    If you remember what happened back in the second quarter of last year, there was a quick shift in demand toward the suburbs and outskirts of Toronto. Part of this was driven by affordability. But I guess part of this was also driven by the fact that some people seemed to think that our cities had never before experienced a health crisis and were going to somehow die. Or perhaps it was because Zoom is so much fun (and not at all exhausting) and that this time was destined to be different. Either way, I never understood this.

    Fast forward a year and the core is not surprisingly coming back. The oldest part of the city (former City of Toronto) saw 2,886 new condo sales in the first quarter of this year. This is actually higher than sales in Q1-2020. New condo openings in downtown Toronto sold for an average price of $1,419 per square foot. And overall absorption was about 76% in the quarter, which is the highest it has been since 2017.

    Some of you may be looking at these numbers and thinking WTF. But when developers look at the costs in their pro forma, as well as what’s on the horizon — ahem, inclusionary zoning — it’s usually that same feeling. So it’s hard to imagine average prices and rents going anywhere but up.