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: Urbanism

  • A place for everything

    Housing is expensive in California:

    In 2021, San Jose had the least affordable housing among the 92 major US housing markets, with a median multiple of 12.6. San Francisco had a median multiple of 11.8, Los Angeles was at 10.7, followed by San Diego, at 10.1).7 Housing was severely unaffordable even in the interior markets, with Riverside-San Bernardino at 7.4 and Sacramento at 6.7.

    And there are some explanations for why that is the case:

    Dartmouth economist William Fischel published an early seminal review 9 of housing affordability in California (1970 to the 1990s). Fischel suggested that regulatory research should look for major changes that “are adopted in some places but not in others.”

    Fischel examined the higher house price increases that occurred in California compared to the rest of the nation between the late 1960s and late 1980s. Fischel cites various possible causal factors. He found that the higher prices could not be explained by higher construction cost increases, demand, higher personal income growth, the quality of life, amenities, Proposition 13, land supply or water issues.

    Instead Fischel cites stronger land use restrictions — There were two principal issues, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local growth management restrictions.10

    We have discussed this issue many times before on the blog, but Wendell Cox’s article is helpful in pointing out that zoning in and of itself wasn’t the problem. The problem arose, at least according to Fischel’s research, when these policies went from “ordinary zoning” to something that became a tool to restrict growth.

    The illustrate what “ordinary zoning” means, Cox uses the idiom, “a place for everything, but everything in its place.” And I think this is an interesting way of putting it. Part of the reason why we have zoning is that it is a way to organize uses. It is a way of saying that sex shops and cannabis shops can’t go here, but they can go over there.

    But the key part of this idiom is its first part: a place for everything. What this implies is that the answer should never just be, “no, sorry, you can’t build this.” At most, it should be, “no, sorry, you can’t build this here, but you can over there.” There is a place for everything.

    Of course, this is much harder to do when you flip from sprawl development to infill development. Because now there are fewer places “over there.” You really have to figure out “here.”

  • New York City proposes a bounty for reporting bike-lane blockers

    The general rule when it comes to bike lanes is that, if you build them without some sort of grade-separation, at some point a car is going to park in them. But here are two possible solutions to this problem. The first is that you could build some sort of grade-separation that can’t be driven over. And the second is as follows:

    Now a New York City Council member is pushing a bill that would give civilians the power to report bike lane scofflaws, as well as vehicles that block entrances or exits of school buildings, sidewalks and crosswalks. New Yorkers who submit evidence of a parking violation can earn 25% of a proposed $175 ticket. The Department of Transportation would review the evidence to determine whether an infraction has occurred, according to the bill’s text.

    What this essentially does is decentralize rule enforcement by paying people to be rats. Off hand, I can’t think of any other cities that have done something like this and so I don’t know how effective it might actually be. But being a rat sounds like it could be a good paying job.

    Let’s assume that somebody decided to treat this as their full-time job and work 8 hours a day, Monday to Friday. And then let’s assume that they were able to rat out one person per hour. Here’s how much money they could make in a year:

    • $175 x 25% = $43.75 per illegal incident
    • $43.75 x 8 incidents per day = $350 per day
    • $350 per day x 5 days a week = $1,750 per week
    • $1,750 per week x 52 weeks = $91,000 per year

    Now, if the goal of this rat-people-out program is to ultimately change behaviors, then it might make sense to assume that your revenues would decline over time as more people start following the rules. Either way, something tells me that more than a few people would be happy to take on this job.

  • It’s not too late for the Gardiner Expressway East

    Boy, time sure does melt away when you’re writing a daily blog and trying to build buildings. It’s hard to believe that it has already been 7-8 years since I was writing incessantly about the merits of Toronto removing the eastern portion of its elevated Gardiner Expressway.

    For those of you who may not be familiar, Toronto has an elevated highway that runs along the waterfront. It is old. Pieces sometimes fall off. Lots of water will drip on you. And so remediation works are underway. Several years ago, there was also a great debate that took place in the city about what should happen with its eastern leg. I even spoke at a Jane’s Walk where I was, for the most part, not very popular.

    The two options under consideration ended up being: 1) remove it and replace it with a grand surface boulevard or 2) remove it and rebuild it with a slightly different alignment. This second option was dubbed the “hybrid” option, but that was mostly political speak so that it sounded like some sort of generous compromise. You can think of it as the more expensive rebuild option.

    City Council voted on these two options as one would expect. Councillors in the core of the city did not want an elevated highway running through their neighorhoods, and the Councillors and people in the inner suburbs — who might use it for commuting — were by and large more accommodating. Apparently there are somewhere around 15,000 commuters who use it each rush hour.

    But here’s the thing.

    This vote took place in June 2015 and the thing still hasn’t yet been rebuilt. So maybe it’s not too late! Maybe there’s an opportunity to save a few hundred million dollars between us friends. Also, if anyone is interested, I’m still available for controversial Jane’s Walk presentations. One new idea I have is an elevated highway that runs through the inner suburbs and connects the best weekend brunch spots.

  • Community living rooms in New York City

    This is a great collection of third places or “community living rooms” in New York City. Simply speaking, a third place is any space where people hang out that isn’t their home and isn’t their place of work. Hence the third moniker. The most typical example is arguably the humble coffee shop. But what is clear from this thread list, is that a third place can take on many different permutations — everything from a bathhouse to an art library with the world’s largest collection of artist’s sketchbooks. What is also clear is that these are the kinds of spaces that really define a city. They create a sense of place, they give us community, and they help us with our sense of self — because they allow us to think things like, “I am the kind of person who hangs out and enjoys independent bookstores in the East Village.”

  • AusterityTO

    I don’t know who is behind the guerrilla art project AusterityTO, but it is exceedingly clever. Whoever it is, they are going around Toronto and tagging various objects and moments with museum labels — all of which cite mayor John Tory as the artist. Here is one called “Urinal.”

    And here is the installation description from the website:

    A clever subversion of the seminal work “Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp. Water does not flow from this fountain due to neglected maintenance and lack of attention. It is a sculpture which asks the viewer to imagine what it could be, and to ponder why it isn’t. However, the artist’s title also challenges the viewer, much as Toronto challenges the citizen to find ways to make the most out of what we have: the washrooms are frequently locked, and perhaps this fountain can be repurposed for something else.

    There is growing frustration in Toronto around the quality of our public services and spaces. I can’t open Twitter these days without coming across at least one photo of a busted and/or overflowing garbage bin. And now these sorts of posts are all being tagged with #AusterityTO.

    Images: AusterityTO

  • Some Sicilian inspiration for #KioskTO

    I have written before about how Lisbon’s kiosks both anchor and beautify the city’s public spaces. I have also written about how Toronto should have something similar — #KioskTO anyone?

    Some of you might remember an expanded street food program that the city piloted many years ago. It was a complete and utter failure. In my opinion (and from what I can remember), it was too heavily regulated. The food ended up being far too expensive and, frankly, none of it was very good.

    That’s not how this should work. The entire point of things like food trucks and street kiosks is that they are cheaper alternatives to a conventional physical location. You can also more easily place them in locations where demand is being underserved.

    The one pictured here is in Catania, Sicily. I carried my beer over from a panini shop down the street and then we ordered three espressos for a total of 2€. I tried to sit on a crate they had lying on the ground but I ended up breaking it. Sorry, guys. So we stood instead. It was all rather civilized.

    Let entrepreneurs figure out what to sell and where. It will be a boon for both small business and for our public spaces.

    P.S. I tweeted this photo out earlier today and it elicited a good discussion on Twitter. Toronto wants this.

  • The greatest photo of Venice I have ever seen

    This afternoon we went to the Mucem (Museum of Civilizations of Europe and the Mediterranean) here in Marseille. By far, my favorite exhibition was one that dealt with the urbanization of five cities surrounding the Mediterranean — namely Marseille, Venice, Istanbul, Cairo, and Alger. At one point, this was the center of the commercial world. Great empires were forged and great fortunes were made here. But things have changed a little since then. And in some cases, what we are now left with are scenes like the one you see above (photograph by Martin Parr). This is easily the greatest photo of Venice I have ever seen. Venice is a tiny city, but it receives tens of millions of tourists each year. This photo does an extraordinary job of capturing what that might feel like.

  • 3 things about Le Corbusier’s Cité Radieuse

    I have written about Le Corbusier’s Cité Radieuse in Marseille many times before on the blog. It is one of the most influential multi-unit buildings of the 20th century. For better and for worse, it inspired a generation of architects. But up until this afternoon, I had yet to actually see it in person. Now that I have, here are 3 takeaways.

    The corridors throughout the building were thought of as “streets” in a vertical village. Because of this, each street had a mailbox and each front door came equipped with an elaborate delivery system. The large curvy thing pictured above was for general deliveries (mostly food I’m guessing). And the smaller door below was for ice block deliveries (i.e. refrigeration). In both cases, these doors could be accessed from inside the kitchen.

    The two “streets” in the middle of the building were dedicated to commercial uses. And by being in the middle of the building, they were equidistant from residents living either above or below. I was told that when the building first opened in the 1950s, these streets were actually quite successful — filled with everything from bakeries to grocery stores. So you can imagine people running deliveries up and down to the other streets. But that quickly fell off as the retailing landscape developed in Marseille and in France. Today, this portion of the building houses mostly offices, art galleries, and specialty boutiques. Though there remains a widely-used 21-room hotel (pictured above).

    To fully appreciate what the Cité Radieuse meant for housing in France, you kind of have to imagine what the rest of its stock was like at that time. The introduction of duplex and dual aspect units with modern kitchens and bathrooms and with views of the sea, represented meaningful progress at the time. But it is interesting to see how much ceiling heights have changed over the years. They’re really low here — well under 8 feet. And that is probably its greatest Achilles’ heel today.

    If ever you happen to find yourself in Marseille, I would encourage a visit to the Cité Radieuse. Many of the things we do today started in this building. And there are some other ideas here that might also be worth bringing back.

  • Laser distance metering Le Panier in Marseille

    I usually always have a laser distance meter in my bag. I use it when I’m on construction sites and I need to confirm important dimensions. But they can also be useful when you’re traveling and you want to appear as nerdy as humanly possible to the locals.

    This is a typical older street in Le Panier area of Marseille, which is the oldest part of the city in probably the oldest city in France. Greek settlers colonized this area around 600, and at that time it was called Massalia.

    There is one major street in Le Panier — la rue de la République — which will make you feel like you’re in Paris. It was pierced through in the late 19th century, around the same time that Paris was doing its large-scale urban renewal things.

    But there remains lots of examples of what you see here: streets that are 12 to 13 feet wide from building face to building face. This is wider than your typical Toronto condo living room, but not by much.

    There are, I guess, sidewalks on these streets. But most of them tend to be taken over by potted plants and other urban accessories. Everyone who uses these streets really just has to figure out how to share them.

    It would be illegal to build this close and compact in most modern cities. Part of this is, of course, because modernity used to view this kind of urban form as being unhealthy and generally undesirable. Humans needed light, air, and space.

    This is true. But we also like intimate urban spaces that put people first.

  • We’re running out of land — or are we?

    The headline, here, is that “the US is running short of land for housing.” But if you read the article, you’ll see that the headline should probably read, “the US has land-use restrictions in place that make it unnecessarily difficult to build enough new housing.” Here’s an excerpt:

    Asking prices for homes in these new communities [the exurbs of Tampa] go as high as $900,000, in part because the land underneath is so valuable. That has a lot to do with land-use regulations.

    Tampa’s zoning rules prevent developers from building anything larger than a single-family home in much of the city. When officials for Hillsborough County, which includes Tampa, adopted zoning regulations in 1950, they said the measures were necessary to prevent overcrowding and traffic jams and would preserve the neighborhood character, all “with a view to conserving the value of buildings,” according to the regulations.

    If all you can build are single-family homes, then you’re going to need a lot more land compared to if you were allowed to build a bit higher and/or a bit denser. But it is a good way to ensure that supply remains somewhat scarce and that one is faithfully “conserving the value of buildings.”

    It is, however, worth mentioning that we have invented ways to use land more efficiently. The population density of Hillsborough County is somewhere around 1,200 people per square mile. The population density of Paris, on the other hand, is over 50,000 people per square mile.

    Somehow people still enjoy Paris.