Subscribe
The Urban Land Institute Toronto is hosting an event and panel discussion on April 8, 2021 about the future of high-rises in our cities. Here's the blurb:
Against the backdrop of the pandemic and its toll, what is the future of high-rises in our cities? What role do tall towers now play in shaping Toronto’s identity? While the pandemic has accelerated existing large trends, residential tall towers are proving the durability of a quality urban centre and hyper-urban lifestyles in Toronto and around the world.
An introduction will be provided by James Parakh (author, Fellow of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and Urban Design Manager for the Toronto & East York District) and then a discussion will be moderated by Robyn Player (Director, BTY).
The discussion will be focused on what ULI is calling three of Toronto's most exciting tower projects under development: Pinnacle One Yonge, One Delisle, and 11 Yorkville.
I will be on the panel (talking One Delisle) alongside Lee Koutsaris (VP, Sales and Marketing, Metropia) and Anson Kwok (VP, Sales and Marketing, Pinnacle International).
If you'd like to register, you can do that over here. It should be a great/timely conversation.
Building on yesterday's post about inclusionary zoning, below is a telling diagram from the Urban Land Institute showing which areas of Portland can support new development and which areas cannot. To create this map, ULI looked at achievable rents in each US census block to determine, quite simply, where rents will cover the cost of new development (all types of construction).
For those of you who aren’t going to be in Toronto next week, you can stop reading now and check back tomorrow. For the rest of you, next week is The Future Cities Canada Summit, which will be taking place from November 7 - 9. Full schedule, here.
Day 1 equals the Urban Land Institute Symposium 2018, which is all about Toronto urbanism. The tagline is: “Explore the urban frontiers of North America’s fastest growing, and the world’s most diverse city-region.”
A big part of day 1 will be bus tours around the city. And one of those tours is going to be focused on Toronto’s laneways. I am a speaker on that tour and the bus will be stopping at Junction House to talk about the laneway houses that we plan to release as part of the project.
But there’s much more to this summit than just laneway housing.
The Urban Land Institute Toronto is hosting an event and panel discussion on April 8, 2021 about the future of high-rises in our cities. Here's the blurb:
Against the backdrop of the pandemic and its toll, what is the future of high-rises in our cities? What role do tall towers now play in shaping Toronto’s identity? While the pandemic has accelerated existing large trends, residential tall towers are proving the durability of a quality urban centre and hyper-urban lifestyles in Toronto and around the world.
An introduction will be provided by James Parakh (author, Fellow of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and Urban Design Manager for the Toronto & East York District) and then a discussion will be moderated by Robyn Player (Director, BTY).
The discussion will be focused on what ULI is calling three of Toronto's most exciting tower projects under development: Pinnacle One Yonge, One Delisle, and 11 Yorkville.
I will be on the panel (talking One Delisle) alongside Lee Koutsaris (VP, Sales and Marketing, Metropia) and Anson Kwok (VP, Sales and Marketing, Pinnacle International).
If you'd like to register, you can do that over here. It should be a great/timely conversation.
Building on yesterday's post about inclusionary zoning, below is a telling diagram from the Urban Land Institute showing which areas of Portland can support new development and which areas cannot. To create this map, ULI looked at achievable rents in each US census block to determine, quite simply, where rents will cover the cost of new development (all types of construction).
For those of you who aren’t going to be in Toronto next week, you can stop reading now and check back tomorrow. For the rest of you, next week is The Future Cities Canada Summit, which will be taking place from November 7 - 9. Full schedule, here.
Day 1 equals the Urban Land Institute Symposium 2018, which is all about Toronto urbanism. The tagline is: “Explore the urban frontiers of North America’s fastest growing, and the world’s most diverse city-region.”
A big part of day 1 will be bus tours around the city. And one of those tours is going to be focused on Toronto’s laneways. I am a speaker on that tour and the bus will be stopping at Junction House to talk about the laneway houses that we plan to release as part of the project.
But there’s much more to this summit than just laneway housing.
However, in their models they are also assuming a land value of $0. And typically people want you to pay them money when you buy their land. So in all likelihood, this map is overstating the amount of blue -- that being land where new development is feasible.
But it does tell you something about developer margins. A lot of people seem to assume that the margins on new developments are so great that things like inclusionary zoning can simply be "absorbed" without impacting overall feasibility. The reality is that there are large swaths in most cities where development is never going to happen even if you were to start handing out free land.
This map is also helpful at illustrating some of the impacts of IZ. If you assume that rents are the highest in the center of the city and that they fall off as you move outward, then the outer edge of the above blue area is going to be where development is only marginally feasible. And so any new cost imposed on development would naturally start to uniformly eat away at the blue feasible area -- that is, until rents rise enough to offset it.
Of course, this is a simplified mapping. Land usually costs money. Land values might also be highest in the center and fall off as you move outward, or there could be pockets of high-cost land. There may be more price elasticity in certain sub-markets compared to others. So the impacts of a new development cost may not play out as neatly as I outlined above.
Regardless, there will be impacts, which is why I find this map telling even if it isn't fully accurate or up to date. Maybe some of you will as well.
However, in their models they are also assuming a land value of $0. And typically people want you to pay them money when you buy their land. So in all likelihood, this map is overstating the amount of blue -- that being land where new development is feasible.
But it does tell you something about developer margins. A lot of people seem to assume that the margins on new developments are so great that things like inclusionary zoning can simply be "absorbed" without impacting overall feasibility. The reality is that there are large swaths in most cities where development is never going to happen even if you were to start handing out free land.
This map is also helpful at illustrating some of the impacts of IZ. If you assume that rents are the highest in the center of the city and that they fall off as you move outward, then the outer edge of the above blue area is going to be where development is only marginally feasible. And so any new cost imposed on development would naturally start to uniformly eat away at the blue feasible area -- that is, until rents rise enough to offset it.
Of course, this is a simplified mapping. Land usually costs money. Land values might also be highest in the center and fall off as you move outward, or there could be pockets of high-cost land. There may be more price elasticity in certain sub-markets compared to others. So the impacts of a new development cost may not play out as neatly as I outlined above.
Regardless, there will be impacts, which is why I find this map telling even if it isn't fully accurate or up to date. Maybe some of you will as well.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog