We talk a lot about the greenbelt here in Toronto. Some argue that it’s squeezing the housing market and driving up prices.
But what about the yellowbelt? (Credit to Gil Meslin for the term.)
Here is a land use map of Toronto:
The yellow areas are “neighborhoods.” They, along with parks, ravines, watercourses, and valleys, make up ¾ of the city’s land area. The Official Plan describes these areas as being “stable” – meaning they will see little physical change. Supply cannot adjust to demand.
I get why this is the way it is and I understand how difficult it would be change something like this. But let’s not ignore the impact that this land use constraint has and will continue to have on the housing market.
It’s the yellowbelt. Thank you Gil for letting me to steal the name.
I came across this discussion on Twitter yesterday about how so many of the spaces we love in cities would not conform to today’s modern city planning practices:
@jonahletovsky we could go all weekend tweeting pics of places that would contravene modern formulaic codes, and yet are amazing envts.
— Gil Meslin (@g_meslin) October 29, 2016
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
This is a topic I’ve been thinking about lately and so it’s a timely discussion. In fact, I’ll often come across spaces in Toronto where I’ll think to myself: This is a really great space. But it’s highly unlikely that it could be built this way today. Naturally the question then becomes: What does this say about modern city planning?
City planning is obviously important. But at the same time, we are almost certainly making mistakes and doing things that we will later regret. I say this not because I’m particularly critical of planning today, but because cities are enormously complex entities and it’s difficult to believe that we’ve figured everything out at this point.
One thing I wonder about is if we aren’t over-planning and being too prescriptive about our cities. Some of you will probably argue the exact opposite. But hear me out.
Vancouver is a city that has long been considered to be the gold standard in modern city planning. We talk about its podium + tower building typology. We talk about its “gentle density.” And we talk about its great public and recreational spaces, among many other things.
But when I was there last month having dinner with a friend of mine, she said something to me that stood out. She said: “Brandon, Vancouver is a boring city. If it weren’t for my family being here, I would happily move to Toronto, New York, or somewhere else.”
Cities are amazing places because they unleash human ingenuity. They allow new and unforeseen things to emerge. The challenge, I think, is to not sterilize that away when we plan and build. And all of us involved in the building of cities are probably guilty of doing that to an extent.
Hotels play such an interesting role within cities. They are public-facing in a way that many other uses are not and they invite a mixing of different people – everyone from transients to locals. It is therefore no surprise that they can serve a variety of different roles. They can be cultural hubs. But they can also be places in which to misbehave.
When the Drake Hotel opened up on the west side of downtown Toronto in 2004, I remember it feeling far out. It was on the edge of that which was interesting at the time. But it quickly anchored West Queen West with its cultural and nightlife offerings. And today, we could be about to see the exact same story repeat itself in the east end with
We talk a lot about the greenbelt here in Toronto. Some argue that it’s squeezing the housing market and driving up prices.
But what about the yellowbelt? (Credit to Gil Meslin for the term.)
Here is a land use map of Toronto:
The yellow areas are “neighborhoods.” They, along with parks, ravines, watercourses, and valleys, make up ¾ of the city’s land area. The Official Plan describes these areas as being “stable” – meaning they will see little physical change. Supply cannot adjust to demand.
I get why this is the way it is and I understand how difficult it would be change something like this. But let’s not ignore the impact that this land use constraint has and will continue to have on the housing market.
It’s the yellowbelt. Thank you Gil for letting me to steal the name.
I came across this discussion on Twitter yesterday about how so many of the spaces we love in cities would not conform to today’s modern city planning practices:
@jonahletovsky we could go all weekend tweeting pics of places that would contravene modern formulaic codes, and yet are amazing envts.
— Gil Meslin (@g_meslin) October 29, 2016
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
This is a topic I’ve been thinking about lately and so it’s a timely discussion. In fact, I’ll often come across spaces in Toronto where I’ll think to myself: This is a really great space. But it’s highly unlikely that it could be built this way today. Naturally the question then becomes: What does this say about modern city planning?
City planning is obviously important. But at the same time, we are almost certainly making mistakes and doing things that we will later regret. I say this not because I’m particularly critical of planning today, but because cities are enormously complex entities and it’s difficult to believe that we’ve figured everything out at this point.
One thing I wonder about is if we aren’t over-planning and being too prescriptive about our cities. Some of you will probably argue the exact opposite. But hear me out.
Vancouver is a city that has long been considered to be the gold standard in modern city planning. We talk about its podium + tower building typology. We talk about its “gentle density.” And we talk about its great public and recreational spaces, among many other things.
But when I was there last month having dinner with a friend of mine, she said something to me that stood out. She said: “Brandon, Vancouver is a boring city. If it weren’t for my family being here, I would happily move to Toronto, New York, or somewhere else.”
Cities are amazing places because they unleash human ingenuity. They allow new and unforeseen things to emerge. The challenge, I think, is to not sterilize that away when we plan and build. And all of us involved in the building of cities are probably guilty of doing that to an extent.
Hotels play such an interesting role within cities. They are public-facing in a way that many other uses are not and they invite a mixing of different people – everyone from transients to locals. It is therefore no surprise that they can serve a variety of different roles. They can be cultural hubs. But they can also be places in which to misbehave.
When the Drake Hotel opened up on the west side of downtown Toronto in 2004, I remember it feeling far out. It was on the edge of that which was interesting at the time. But it quickly anchored West Queen West with its cultural and nightlife offerings. And today, we could be about to see the exact same story repeat itself in the east end with
It’s for these reasons that I was both excited and curious to learn that Bedrock (real estate company) and Shinola are in the midst of launching a new boutique hotel concept in Detroit. It is called The Shinola Hotel. It will be located at 1400 Woodward Avenue. And it will be all about the city of Detroit. They expect it to open sometime in the fall of 2018.
What I am about to say may be an availability bias talking, but there seems to be a push by many companies into the hotel space. In 2015, Equinox Fitness announced that it would be opening its first hotel in 2018 at Hudson Yards in New York. And just last month furniture retailer West Elm announced that it would be opening a first set of hotels in both Savannah and Detroit. (Go Detroit!)
West Elm sells furniture. Equinox operates gyms. And Shinola makes and sells watches, bikes, and leather goods. But all of them are now in the hotel space. What other new hotel brands have I missed?
Image: Shinola
It’s for these reasons that I was both excited and curious to learn that Bedrock (real estate company) and Shinola are in the midst of launching a new boutique hotel concept in Detroit. It is called The Shinola Hotel. It will be located at 1400 Woodward Avenue. And it will be all about the city of Detroit. They expect it to open sometime in the fall of 2018.
What I am about to say may be an availability bias talking, but there seems to be a push by many companies into the hotel space. In 2015, Equinox Fitness announced that it would be opening its first hotel in 2018 at Hudson Yards in New York. And just last month furniture retailer West Elm announced that it would be opening a first set of hotels in both Savannah and Detroit. (Go Detroit!)
West Elm sells furniture. Equinox operates gyms. And Shinola makes and sells watches, bikes, and leather goods. But all of them are now in the hotel space. What other new hotel brands have I missed?
Image: Shinola
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
