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

  • Reimagining Toronto’s University Avenue

    If I have learned anything from this pandemic it is that, when push comes to shove, Torontonians will eat pretty much anywhere. On sidewalks. On streets. In white tents that masquerade as outdoor dining. And in many other little urban crevices.

    I am only half-joking, because the reality is that this pandemic has pried us away from the status quo and forced us to reconsider how we allocate and how we occupy many of our public spaces. There will be some positive outcomes on the other side of this.

    To that end, a new city building effort has just been announced here in Toronto. (Alex Bozikovic of the Globe and Mail wrote about it here in “Rebirth of the Promenade”.) The vision is called “University Park” and the team behind it includes the landscape architecture firm PUBLIC WORK, the non-profit Evergreen, and the Michael Young Family Foundation.

    What they want to do is transform Toronto’s University Avenue into something akin to La Rambla in Barcelona — except better:

    Our vision brings together patches of public green space that are currently disconnected and inaccessible in order to create a signature destination in the centre of our province’s capital. By making minor adjustments to the existing roadway on University Avenue and converting only 9.5 acres of city-owned asphalt into native landscape, pedestrian walkways, bike paths, and cultural installations, we can create a 90-acre park that spans from Queen’s Park all the way to the waterfront.

    It’s about time. My only request is that they include small sidewalk crevice where I might be able to sit and enjoy a chicken burrito and a glass of wine. To learn more about University Park and to subscribe to their newsletter, click here.

    Image: PUBLIC WORK

  • The effects of low-income developments on house prices in Los Angeles

    Richard Voith and Jing Liu of Philadelphia-based Econsult, along with a bunch of other smart coauthors, have just published a working paper looking at the effects of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) on home prices. More specifically, they looked at the impact that LIHTC-financed properties have had in Los Angeles — both in low-income and high-income neighborhoods, as well as when it’s the first LIHTC development in the area or a subsequent one. Some of you might be assuming that low-income housing is likely to create downward pressure on home prices. But the authors found the opposite to be true. Below is the paper’s abstract. If you’d like to download a copy of the full working paper, you can do that over here.

    Abstract: While there is widespread agreement about the importance of the Low-Income Housing
    Tax Credit (LIHTC) in addressing the country’s affordable housing needs, there is less certainty about the effects of LIHTC-financed properties on their surrounding neighborhoods. A growing body of research has largely refuted the argument that affordable housing properties in and of themselves have negative effects on local property values and increase crime rates. Several key questions remain essentially unanswered, however. First, for how long do the observed spillover benefits of LIHTC construction last? Second, does the development of multiple LIHTC properties in a neighborhood have an additive, supplemental effect on surrounding conditions, or is there a threshold at which the concentration of such properties – and the predominantly low-income individuals they house – negatively affects the neighborhood?

    In this paper, we focus on Los Angeles County, a large, diverse urban area with significant affordability challenges. Drawing upon both public and proprietary property sales data, we conduct interrupted time series analyses to ascertain whether property value trends differed prior and subsequent to the introduction of a LIHTC-financed property in the community. We find that LIHTC properties positively impact surrounding housing values across the spectrum of Los Angeles’ neighborhoods. Further the concentration of multiple LIHTC properties in a neighborhood additively increases housing prices up to ½ mile away. Finally, these effects though of greater magnitude in lower-income neighborhoods, are fully present in high-income neighborhoods.

    Image: Econsult

  • Counties won by Biden generated 70% of America’s GDP in 2018

    Here is an interesting look at the economic geography of the recent US election. Similar to what they did for the last presidential election, Brookings has just analyzed each candidate’s aggregate share of US GDP broken down by the counties that they won. That’s what the above diagram represents. The blue and red tiles are showing the relative size of each county’s economy.

    In 2016, Clinton won 472 counties with nearly 66 million votes. These counties accounted for about 64% of US GDP at the time. Trump, on the other hand, won 2,584 counties with nearly 63 million votes. But these counties represented only about 36% of US GDP. (Note that Trump won the election with fewer total votes. This is the electoral college at work.)

    When Brookings published the above findings, votes were still outstanding for 11 counties. Most of them low-output. Still, Biden has won 477 counties with well over 75 million votes. These Democratic counties now account for about 70% of overall US GDP. Virtually every big economy county went to Biden in this last election. Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago, and so on.

    This is a big deal because it shows the great economic divide that exists in the US, as well as in many (most?) other countries around the world. This is the urban vs. rural divide. Places with very different economic bases and, therefore, very different sets of priorities.

    Diagram: Brookings

  • The Ringelmann Effect and why Zoom meetings suck

    For a lot of us, this is now month eight of constant Zooming. The big question, of course, is whether this new habit is going to stick or if it will wane along with the virus. Because the degree in which it sticks will have an impact on cities, real estate, and how we move about these spaces. Anecdotally, it would seem that a lot of people seem to think that some element of working from home is destined to remain. People like the increased flexibility. And I don’t disagree that flexibility is an attractive feature.

    Personally, I am bullish on cities and on old-fashioned human interaction, because here’s how I am feeling about virtual meetings. One, we all have too many of them right now. The barriers to scheduling a virtual meeting are extremely low (one click in Outlook), and so it’s painfully easy to fill up a calendar with them. Two, it can be difficult to stay focused when jumping from back-to-back virtual meetings all day. And three, because we all have too many of these meetings, everyone is trying to multitask and respond to emails at the same time. This degrades the overall effectiveness of each meeting.

    Sarah Gershman published an article earlier this year in Harvard Business Review where she talked about some of the problems surrounding online meetings. One explanation for why many of us are losing focus is something known as the “Ringelmann Effect.” The theory here is that as group sizes increase, it can be easy for individuals to feel less responsibility for a meeting’s outcome. So they tune out. Max Ringelmann, who was a French engineer, demonstrated this effect by asking both individuals and groups to pull on a rope. What he found was that people generally tried less when they were part of a bigger group. There’s always somebody else who will pick up the slack, right?

    Sarah makes the argument that this phenomenon gets magnified in virtual meetings. We’re all just a little box, sometimes existing on another page, hidden mostly from view. Surely there’s another black box somewhere in this meeting who will pull the rope for me.

  • Norway’s new passport design enters circulation

    I don’t know about all of you, but I miss traveling. So let’s talk about Norway’s new passports, which just entered circulation. Designed by Neue, these new passports are the result of a design competition that was launched back in 2014. The goal of the competition was to come up with something that could very clearly express the Norwegian identity, as well as improve overall security (i.e. minimize forgery).

    The solution, and one clear idea, is this:

    Inside the passport and across each double page spread is a rendition of the Norwegian landscape. Mountains, lakes, streams, and probably a bunch of other beautiful things. But when you hold it under UV light, which is known to happen from time to time inside airports, each landscape image changes to a night view. It’s a simple and elegant solution that appears to solve two goals at once: identity and security.

    And that’s usually how good design works. It feels both simple and elegant.

    Images: Neue

  • Restaurants are a central pillar of superstar cities

    How important are urban restaurants? This recent article by Eduardo Porter makes the argument that they are a “central pillar of superstar cities.” They are the social spaces that draw young and smart people to cities (see above) and that fuel our creative economy.

    According to Eduardo, in the 1970s, urban consumers in US cities typically devoted about 28% of their overall food budget to dining out. As of 2019, restaurants, bars, food trucks, and other dining establishments consumed about 47% of this budget for people living in cities with a population greater than 2.5 million.

    By comparison, people who resided outside of an urban area in 2019, spent only about 38% of their food budget on eating out. Still, these are substantial numbers. A big part of the food and drink that we consume is, at least during normal times, happening outside of where we live.

    Right now is certainly not the finest hour for cities. Urban amenities (like restaurants) and social networks are part of what make living in a city so enjoyable. And these two things have been greatly (and rightly) reduced. But I don’t for a second doubt the overall resiliency of our cities.

    This isn’t their first crisis and, unfortunately, it won’t be their last.

    Image: New York Times

  • My Basic Income — 1,000 euros a month for a year

    Michael Bohmeyer is the founder of a Berlin-based startup called “Mein Grundeinkommen” or “My Basic Income.” In the six years since he first asked for donations, his company has given more than 650 people a no strings attached stipend of 1,000 euros a month for one year.

    The idea has been to test whether or not a basic income payment could, among other things, improve people’s happiness and improve the way that governments manage their social welfare systems. According to this recent NY Times article, Germany spends almost a third of their GDP on social welfare.

    Since founding “My Basic Income,” Michael has gone on to publish a book and also partner with the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin. And so far, his findings seem fairly positive. Instead of valuing the money itself, people seem to really value the sense of security that it brings.

    Few people quit working, because a basic income is exactly that — basic. Instead, people seem to be using it to do things like quit that job they hate in order to find a better one. The payment provides some downside protection and that can be empowering.

    This is obviously not a new concept. It’s been tested and even implemented in many places around the world, and it has become increasingly popular as an idea in recent years. So here are some additional data points. If you’re interested in this topic, you may want to check out what Michael has been up to since 2014.

  • Register your interest for One Delisle

    Toronto will soon be home to One Delisle — the first residential building in Canada designed by visionary architect, Jeanne Gang of Studio Gang.

    Jeanne Gang is known for challenging the stylistic and technical parameters of architecture. Named one of the most influential people in the world by TIME 100 in 2019, Gang is a MacArthur Fellow and a leading advocate for gender equality in the field of architecture and design.

    Gang and her eponymous studio are responsible for some of the world’s most diverse and compelling buildings and spaces. One Delisle, as seen in the rendering above, will break from convention and refresh Toronto’s skyline. The rhythmic exterior maximizes natural light, views, and outdoor living for residents.

    One Delisle was revealed this evening for the first time to a select group of Toronto’s top real estate brokers. Follow #onedelisle on IG for some of the reactions. It was done online via a livestream, which was exceptional for what it was, but is obviously not as great as being in one room together. That time will return.

    At this point, we are thrilled to announce that we are opening up “limited registration” for the project. If you’d like to register your interest, you can do that now at onedelisle.com. However, to register at this phase of the project, you’ll need to pay a one-time fee of C$150.

    Why are we doing that?

    We’re doing it to ensure that those who are genuinely interested in a One Delisle residence get first access to the project when it launches next year. Anyone who registers during this “limited registration” phase will be guaranteed a private appointment at our sales gallery before the general public.

    So what else do you get?

    In addition to first access — including first access to the project’s terrace suites — limited registrants will receive a copy of Studio Gang: Architecture (retail price, US$100), an invitation to our One Delisle Film Series, an invitation to our launch event (including a talk with Jeanne Gang), as well as other exclusive news and updates.

    The other thing I’d like to point out about the project’s website is that the animation you see on the homepage (pictured above) will, in fact, change depending on the time of day wherever you are and when you visit the website.

    This allows you to get a feel for how the architecture might respond to light and shadow throughout the day and how it might be illuminated at night. What you’re seeing above is an artist’s impression of that night view.

    For more information and to register your interest, visit onedelisle.com.

  • Moving from the city to the suburbs and back

    This is an interesting story about a Toronto couple who got married about 20 years ago, initially lived in a small downtown condo, and then decided it was “time to adult” and move to the suburbs. They bought a 3,200 square foot home in Markham and lived there for a number of years. It had a lawn, a garage, and all sorts of other suburban comforts. But eventually they realized that they had made a mistake. They preferred the conveniences of city living over the amenities of the suburbs. Living in the city was simply better suited to their lifestyles. And so they sold their house, bought an epic 2,100 square foot penthouse in the Shangri-La Residences — which just so happens to be one of my favorite buildings in the city — and hired the design firm NIVEK REMAS to completely redo it. I think their new home turned out great and maybe you do too.

  • Learning from the Spanish Flu

    “We learn from history that we do not learn from history.” -Georg Hegel

    Back in March, I was reading everything I could find about COVID-19 and about pandemics. Eventually that tapered off. But this week I decided that it was time to go back and learn a lot more about the 1918 Spanish Flu.

    I’ve just ordered John M. Barry’s 2004 book called The Great Influenza. Bill Gates wrote about it over the summer — after he reread it — and said that it will teach you almost everything you need to know about the influenza. He also said that it’s never been more relevant.

    Despite happening over 100 years ago, there are no doubt lessons that we can learn from this great influenza. The most important being that leadership and honesty, of course, matter a great deal during a time of crisis.

    Barry also argues that the 1918 influenza was responsible for altering the flow of history. He makes the claim (convincingly according to Bill) that it was a contributing factor in the rise of Hitler and the start of World War II.

    So I’m looking forward to receiving my copy later this week. If you’d like to purchase your own, you can do that over here. And if you’ve already read it, please let me know what you thought in the comment section below.