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.

  • How laneways are becoming Toronto’s most desirable address

    December 5, 2025 · View original


    Before laneway homes were permitted as-of-right in Toronto, many people couldn’t imagine them being a viable housing solution, let alone a desirable housing solution. I vividly remember some critics arguing that only people of questionable moral fiber would want to live in a laneway. Toronto’s laneways were only suitable for garages, cars, graffiti, and degenerates, apparently.

    If you’re a longtime reader of this blog you’ll know that I’ve always felt differently. In 2014, I wrote a post calling laneway homes the new loft. And in 2021, after Mackay Laneway House was finished, I wrote that “slowly but surely, we will start to think of our lanes not as back of house, but as front of house.” I went on to surmise that, one day, our laneways could even become the more desirable side of a property.

    I was reminded of this prognostication earlier this week when a friend of mine, who is very active in the multiplex space, was touring me through one of his construction sites. What struck me is that he said that on every single one of his projects, the highest-grossing suite is always the laneway or garden suite. It commands the highest rent and it’s what gets the most showings.

    This, of course, makes sense. It’s a standalone structure, whereas the other homes in a multiplex building are not. And if you have the site area to do two storeys, these suites can become relatively large — oftentimes between 1,200 and 1,400 sf. Laneways are also intimate and largely pedestrian-oriented streets, so a nice place to live.

    But there’s some hindsight bias in this obviousness. It wasn’t that long ago that most Torontonians couldn’t imagine a “house fitting behind a house.” It was an unthinkable solution that would ruin the character of our low-rise neighborhoods. Now we have planning policies that not only allow them, but that are, in a way, promoting an inversion in the way our low-rise neighborhoods function.

    Toronto’s policies allow up to six suites on the “front” of certain properties, plus a laneway or garden suite at the “back,” for a total of 7 suites. The effect is that an entirely new single-family house layer is today getting built on our laneways. An alternative way to think about this is that it’s like taking an existing single-family house, pushing it to the back, and then building a small “houseplex” in the front.

    Ironically, all of these policies were born out of a deep desire to not change the character of existing neighborhoods. It’s why no one would dare call these six-unit structures anything resembling an apartment. They are house-plexes, which are just like single-family houses, but with an added plex in the name. Nothing out of the ordinary to see here.

    But our neighborhoods are changing and they will continue to change. The market is already speaking in terms of which new homes it finds most desirable. And in the end, that’s a good thing. Change and evolution are features, not bugs, of cities. When Toronto stops growing and adapting, that’s when we need to start worrying.

    Back in 2014, I compared laneway housing to lofts because of the latter’s origin story. When manufacturing began to leave cities and warehouses started to get converted to apartments, they were viewed as dangerous, illegal misuses of commercial spaces. It was housing that no respectable middle-class person would want to live in.

    Then the opposite became true. Loft living became a symbol of urban cool, so much so that every new apartment somehow became a “loft.” I’m not suggesting that Toronto’s laneway suites are about to stage a global takeover in quite the same way, but some 11 years later, I do think it’s following the same arc of desirability. The things we desire aren’t as enshrined as they may seem.

    Cover photo by Nikhil Mitra on Unsplash

  • Developers, promoters, and sponsors. What’s in a name?

    December 4, 2025 · View original


    In this part of the world, the people who take on the risk of building and who orchestrate the creation of new buildings are typically called real estate developers. That’s what I call myself. But they can go by different names depending on where you are in the world and who you are asking.

    For example, when a developer is raising money for a project, another term you will often hear is “sponsor.” This emphasizes their role as the financial steward of the capital they are raising, as opposed to their operational expertise as a developer/builder. But in practice, they refer to the same thing. The audience has just changed.

    In French, real estate developers are typically called something else: promoteurs immobiliers. This literally translates into “real estate promoter,” and it speaks to one of the primary functions of developers, which is to initiate, sell, and generally push a project forward. So this is maybe a more accurate term.

    The things being developed and promoted can also take on different names. I use the word “project” to describe a new building. Seth Godin has written a lot about this term, and he differentiates it from tasks: “Important work is project work.” Meaning, it contributes to something bigger. So I like to use this term for almost everything I work on.

    But in British English, it is common for property developers to use something else: “scheme.” You’ll hear things like, “our scheme contains 250 apartment homes with retail at grade.” This word has always stood out to me as odd because I see it as having negative connotations. When someone is scheming, they’re up to no good. Or maybe it’s just because I’m not British.

    Whatever your view, if we combine the French and the British terminology, we arrive at someone who promotes schemes for a living. Hmm. I’ll likely stick to “developing projects,” but I think the semantics are interesting. Like it or not, it says something about how development functions as an industry, and the skills necessary to participate in it.

    Cover photo by aboodi vesakaran on Unsplash

  • It’s only getting harder to underwrite new rental housing

    December 3, 2025 · View original


    The vast majority of new purpose-built rental housing in Canada relies on CMHC-insured loans to make them financially feasible. In 2024, CMHC estimated that their construction financing programs backed an estimated 88% of new rental starts across the country.

    But anyone in the industry will tell you that the terms in which these loans are made available to developers are constantly changing. And I think it’s pretty clear that many of the changes being made are intended to push, maybe force, developers into building some percentage of affordable homes as part of their projects.

    At the political narrative level, this makes sense: Canada needs more affordable housing. But it’s important to remember that homes pegged to below-market rents are not financially feasible to build on their own. So, unless equivalent subsidies are being somehow provided, the remaining market-rate homes will be forced to shoulder the additional costs.

    We talk about this a lot on the blog (see inclusionary zoning posts), and I don’t see it as an equitable solution. But there’s also the problem of it further choking off new housing supply. And my sense is that that’s exactly what is happening. It’s only getting harder to underwrite new rental housing — certainly in cities like Toronto.

    This will have the opposite effect on overall affordability. It also increases the probability that my supply predictions will prove roughly correct. I can’t see a world where new rental supply is able to step up and fill the gap being left by new condominiums, a large portion of which was serving as new rental housing.

    Toronto is on a path toward a severe housing shortage, and it’s very hard for the private sector to do much about it in the current market environment. When that will change remains to be seen.

    Cover photo by Darren Richardson on Unsplash

  • The $1.3 billion secret: How Nobu turned restaurants into a real estate empire

    December 2, 2025 · View original


    The Financial Times published an article (paywall) over the weekend about the Nobu Hospitality Group.

    It stated that they have some 50 restaurants, 40 hotels, and 20 residential projects (i.e. branded residences) either open or in development around the world. One of the first of these branded residences was here in Toronto. And as of July 2024, which was a major liquidity event for the company, it was valued at US$1.3 billion.

    According to group CEO Trevor Horwell, their approach always starts with a restaurant: “It’s an upside-down business model where the restaurant is the social engine. If we believe a Nobu restaurant can become a genuine social hub for locals, then the hotel and residences can follow.”

    I like this business model because as we talked about a year ago on the blog, “everything is branded.” Knight Frank out of the UK estimates that the number of branded residences around the world is going to go from 611 this year to around 1,020 by 2030. So it seems destined to become a bigger part of our business.

    But the other reason I’m drawn to it is because it’s a good business to be in. If you own a brand that has value, you can do licensing deals all around the world — which is what Nobu is doing — and not take on the same equity risk that developers typically take on. It’s capital-light.

    However, the trade-off risk is that you’re dependent on the continued attractiveness of your brand. If Robert De Niro ceases to remain involved and/or Nobu just loses some of its cachet over time, then the business won’t do as well. But that’s true of any hospitality-type business, or any brand for that matter.

    Cover photo by Tamas Pap on Unsplash

  • Tehran’s water crisis: the cruel lesson for every megacity

    December 1, 2025 · View original


    Science:

    > Since at least 2008, scientists have warned that unchecked groundwater pumping for the city and for agriculture was rapidly draining [Iran’s] aquifers. The overuse did not just deplete underground reserves—it destroyed them, as the land compressed and sank irreversibly. One recent study found that Iran’s central plateau, where most of the country’s aquifers are located, is sinking by more than 35 centimeters each year. As a result, the aquifers lose about 1.7 billion cubic meters of water annually as the ground is permanently crushed, leaving no space for underground water storage to recover, says Darío Solano, a geoscientist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, who was not involved with the study.

    Some of the largest cities in the world, including São Paulo, Mexico City, Cape Town, Bangalore, and Tehran, are today facing critical water shortages. In the case of Tehran, the situation is so dire that Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian has publicly said that the country now has no choice but to move its capital from Tehran to the southern part of the country:

    > Amid a deepening ecological crisis and acute water shortage, Tehran can no longer remain the capital of Iran, the country’s president has said.

    > The situation in Tehran is the result of “a perfect storm of climate change and corruption,” says Michael Rubin, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.

    > “We no longer have a choice,” said Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian during a speech on Thursday.

    This will be expensive, and it won’t solve all of the country’s problems, but forcing a bunch of people out of the city will help to relieve some of the localized pressures. Tehran has a population of nearly 10 million, and the metro region is estimated at over 14 million, making it the second largest city in the Middle East.

    Of course, there’s a city-building lesson in all of this: If you’re at this stage of capitulation, it means you’re too late. Water scarcity is about physical scarcity, but it’s generally also a failure of governance, infrastructure, and demand management. Proactive adaptation is always cheaper, easier, and safer than waiting until the last minute to adopt desperate measures.

    Cover photo by Behnam Norouzi on Unsplash

  • Harnessing the missing middle moment

    November 30, 2025 · View original


    On Friday, Craig Race Architecture hosted its annual holiday dinner at Barberian’s Steak House. It was a great evening and I really appreciate the invite, especially considering that we’re not yet clients. Thank you, Craig. I’m also not sure I had ever been to Barberian’s before. That probably makes me a bad Torontonian.

    Because of their work and because of the current market, the dinner has also become a kind of gathering for missing middle developers. I felt like the odd one out not having a sixplex + laneway suite built or under construction.

    What’s interesting about the current environment is that it’s pushing developers — both big and small — towards missing middle housing. Smaller developers are doing it because the barriers to entry are lower, and meaningful progress has been made on improving the development economics (the no HST and development charges are crucial). And bigger developers are doing it because larger projects simply don’t work right now, or the absorption risk is perceived as too great.

    But here’s the thing: as soon as the market turns, there’s once again going to be a natural inclination to scale up. On Friday, I heard many developers say, “I’m dealing with the same amount of bullshit that I used to deal with on my larger projects.”

    For example, I was told of an instance where a client wanted to keep the facade of their house and build a sixplex behind it. The facade had heritage and sentimental value. But because the removal of HST on rental housing only applies to new construction, keeping the facade would have made it a renovation. And so they had no choice but to demolish everything. (Of course, developers will also play the opposite game and keep one wall so as to not be deemed new construction in other instances.)

    What all of this stuff means is that as soon as the conditions allow for it, developers are going to want to increase their return on bullshit. In the meantime, though, this city has an industry chomping at the bit to build more missing middle housing. We should do everything we can to harness that.

  • The two ways to buy land: Then vs. now

    November 29, 2025 · View original


    Way back when everyone wanted to buy development land, my friend Jeremiah Shamess of Colliers used to always tell me that the only way to do this was to either (1) pay the most or (2) believe in something that others don’t. This — making non-consensus bets — is something I like to talk about a lot on this blog, but what did that mean back then?

    Well, when sites were seeing dozens of offers and the market was hyper-competitive, you really had to work to find any sort of overlooked value. Maybe it was an assembly. Maybe it was a density opportunity that others were missing. Or maybe it was a rail setback that the market felt would neuter the site, but that you had a solution for. Whatever the case, believing in something different was hard work.

    Today, things are a lot different. The consensus bet would be to not buy development land in the first place, and the non-consensus bet would be to buy. But instead of having to believe in unique unlocks for a site, it’s obvious that the greater obstacle is believing that the market will be there to absorb your space. And if it is there, at what price?

    Nobody really knows, and that’s what makes it non-consensus. But as always, non-consensus bets are where the greatest opportunities exist. That was true when the market was booming, and it remains true today.

    Cover photo by Alfan Ziyyadan on Unsplash

  • From 10 free hours to zero marginal cost

    November 28, 2025 · View original


    The first time I ever used dial-up internet was sometime in the 1990s. Some of you will remember that a company called CompuServe used to mail out floppy disks with “10 free hours.” And I still remember the feeling of amazement the first time I tried it. Suddenly, I could chat with people from around the world. Remember a/s/l? It was so enthralling that those 10 free hours certainly didn’t last very long.

    Fast forward to more recent times, and I got that exact same feeling of amazement when I started diving into crypto. The first time I created a wallet, logged into to a service (using only the wallet), and then transferred funds around, I thought to myself, “Wow, this is a fundamental shift in how the world works.” A lightbulb went off. And I still feel this way about crypto, which is why I remain long ETH.

    But now I’m also excited about AI (along with the rest of the world). With every new model release, it gets that much more impressive. Last week I wrote about Gemini 3 and, since then, I decided to cancel my ChatGPT subscription and move all my activity over to it. I’m sure that a better model will get released before we know it, but for right now I’m having a lot of fun creating just about everything.

    Here’s a cartoon isometric of Toronto that I prompted to include “landmarks” and the day’s weather.

    Here’s a photo of a woman standing in the middle of a street in Tokyo wearing a trench coat and holding an umbrella. My prompt also asked it to make it look like a “grainy digital photo.”

    And here’s a knolling shot (new word I just learned) featuring the gear of a global citizen (or globizen if you will). I prompted each of the objects, down to the white panel on the Blue Jays hat.

    It’s not perfect. Text remains an issue. If you look closely at the front of the passports or the text on the Fujifilm camera, you’ll see that it’s AI. But it’s only a matter of time before this goes away. These kinds of images used to require a lot of time and effort. Now I can create them with one hand on my phone while I’m eating a bowl of cereal and having a morning coffee. There’s zero marginal cost.

    Thank goodness I’ve got more than 10 hours of usage.

  • Waymo surpasses 1 million monthly rides in California

    November 27, 2025 · View original


    September 2025 was a milestone month for Waymo in California: It reached 1,000,000 paid driverless rides. This represents a year-over-year increase of ~182%, which is a pretty good sign that the technology works and that customers like it.

    (Note: The dramatic falloff in rides in June 2025 was because of anti-ICE protests and vandalism taking place in Los Angeles and San Francisco. The company decided to temporarily suspend operations.)

    This is still a small fraction of the traditional ride-hailing market, though. According to the California Public Utilities Commission, Uber and Lyft combined complete somewhere around 300-320 million passenger trips per year in the state. That averages out to roughly 25-27 million trips per month for context.

    Still, the writing is on the wall. AV usage is growing rapidly and I think it’s only a matter of time until it supplants traditional ride-hailing, and perhaps even car ownership.

    Chart via Charlie Bilello

  • Thinking makes it so

    November 26, 2025 · View original


    There is a great quote in Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”

    The point of this quote is to argue that the universe is fundamentally neutral. When an event happens, it is neither good nor bad; the label is determined by the judgment we ultimately bring to it.

    Take snow, for instance.

    Here in Toronto, I find that when it snows, people tend to look at it as a bad event. They think of the traffic that will ensue and the work that will be required to clear out walkways and driveways. But I love snow (maybe because I don’t have a driveway). Snow is good. As an avid snowboarder, it gets me excited for the winter season.

    And right now I can tell you that I’m praying to the snow gods for a dumping or two in Northern Utah. The entire Mountain West region is off to a slow start this season and has had to delay resort openings. My judgment tells me this is “bad.”

    Now, let’s consider the real estate development market.

    The prevailing narrative right now is that it’s bad. But Hamlet would say that only thinking makes it so. An alternative way to think about the market is that it’s presenting a generational buying opportunity.

    Like snow, I would call that a good thing.