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

  • The link between ancestry and foreign direct investment

    Below is an interesting example of how international migration – and being open to it – can have positive economic impacts by way of increased foreign direct investment (FDI). The excerpt is from the World Economic Forum.

    “…we document that FDI follows the paths of historical migrants as much as it follows differences in productivity, tax rates, education, and other conventional determinants of economic competitiveness – for the average US county, doubling the number of individuals with ancestry from a given origin country increases by 4 percentage points the probability that at least one firm from this US county engages in FDI with that origin country, and increases by 29% the number of local jobs at subsidiaries of firms headquartered in that origin country.”

    Their study also found that these ties are long lasting. That is, even after a few generations of assimilation, ancestry still has an effect on FDI patterns. 

    There are of course many other benefits to open borders. But our collective tolerance toward immigration has ebbed and flowed greatly over time. And my sense is that if often has a relationship with prosperity.

    As long as times are good and I – the incumbent – am winning, then immigration is accepted, if not welcome. But as soon as times become scarce, then I – the incumbent – need to start protecting my nest.

    This may be one of the reasons why Canada seems to fair so well when it comes to diversity. We optimize for the middle more than countries like the US.

    An example of this phenomenon can be found in the mid-19th century California Gold Rush. By 1876, the United States had approximately 151,000 people of Chinese ancestry and about 116,000 of them were in the state of California.

    In the early days of the rush, when gold was abundant, it has been said that the foreign Chinese laborers were well received. But as gold became more scarce and difficult to find, Californians began to believe that the Chinaman was stealing their wealth.

    In 1882, the US signed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which flat out prohibited the immigration of Chinese laborers. It was not repealed until 1943. However, the Chinese still found other creative ways to enter the country (see Lo Mein Loophole).

    I say all this simply to provide a bit more context. We can talk about how disruptive technologies are squeezing the middle class in new and profound ways. But in many ways, we’ve all heard this story before.

  • What could a connected lockbox mean for the residential real estate business?

    image

    I just discovered an interesting Dallas-based startup this morning called TOOR. They were on Shark Tank and haven’t yet launched their product, but it’s essentially a connected lockbox. Lockboxes are a mainstay of the residential real estate industry (they hold the keys so that co-operating agents can show a property) and they are becoming even more common nowadays because of Airbnb rentals.

    What caught my attention about TOOR is the app that goes along with the lockbox that also allows people to search for homes. Once you’ve found a home you can even find an agent for an escorted tour. I’m not clear on the exact workflow, but I am thinking that if you buy this connected lockbox you then have the opportunity to put your home up for sale on their platform.

    This is interesting because the app will also verify user identities and scan people’s IDs, so it helps to solve the security problem that agents today now solve. I could imagine the app storing my credit card so that if I go into a home unescorted and I do something mischievous, it then charges me. It also makes it really easy to just drive around and pop into homes by instantly scheduling appointments.

    In any event, I may have the exact user flows a bit wrong, but it’s fascinating to think about how something as simple as a connected lockbox could start to chip away at the status quo.

  • The Human City

    As a follow-up to yesterday’s post about fluid labor markets and urban density, I thought I would present an opposing view.

    Joel Kotkin is a well known geographer and author. He has published a number of books, the most recent of which is called, The Human City: Urbanism for the Rest of Us. He is also well known as a supporter of the suburbs, which is a somewhat contrarian view in today’s urban-centric world.

    Here is a recent interview he did with Aaron M. Renn (click here if you can’t see it below):

    [soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/257309155″ params=”auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true” width=”100%” height=”450″ iframe=”true” /]

    One of his messages is that the urban core is great for young people without kids, but that we shouldn’t expect it to serve everyone’s needs and wants – particularly those of families. Families need space and affordability, and urban cores are simply not engineered for that.

    Long live the suburb.

  • Your own signpost

    Work Market is an “on-demand talent marketplace.” They connect companies who need work done with skilled freelancers who are looking to do work. Conceptually, we’ve seen this before.

    But this morning, as I was reading this interview with the CEO, the following lines got me thinking:

    “By 2040, I’m pretty confident that every skilled worker will have their own signpost. You will be your own enterprise, in a much more meaningful way than the lip service of today.”

    We are already seeing this phenomenon play out. Social media, for instance, has made all of us our own media brands. So it’s not outlandish to believe that we will also see more, not less, of this in the labor market.

    But what I started thinking about is how this changing relationship between business and labor will ultimately manifest itself in our cities. 

    If we are indeed shifting toward a fluid and dynamic labor market where not only do people switch jobs more frequently, but they have their own signposts, then I have got to believe that urban density will only become more important. We’ll all need to be “plugged in” to the market – both online and offline.

    But what are your thoughts? I think this could make for an interesting discussion in the comments.

  • Snap Inc.

    Snap Inc. (Snapchat) nailed the launch of Spectacles. I want a pair.

    If you haven’t been following, it all started with a pop-up vending machine in Venice Beach. But like Snapchat itself, it was an ephemeral installation that eventually disappeared, moving on to Big Sur, California. At the time of writing this post, the countdown is on to discover where the vending machine will pop up next. It’s a viral marketing play that aligns very well with their brand.

    But there’s even bigger news.

    Earlier this week it was revealed that Snap Inc. has filed for an initial public offering. It plans to go public by as soon as March 2017 and expects to be valued somewhere around $25 billion. Remember when everyone flipped out because Evan Spiegel had rejected Facebook’s acquisition offer of $3 billion?

    Here’s their revenue story from Vanity Fair:

    Last year, Snapchat brought in $59 million in revenue—a low number that reflected the embryonic stage of its business. This year, however, Snapchat predicts it will generate revenues between $250 million and $350 million. And in 2017, the company estimates it will reach revenues between $500 million and $1 billion, based on “bullish sales targets.”

    I’ve been a Snapchat fan for awhile now, so I am thrilled to see the company going public. As Fred Wilson wrote on his blog this morning: “Snap is a great company led by a creative and ambitious founder and they have a loyal and growing use base. I think Snap can be an excellent public company.”

    If you’ve got people’s attention, you can figure out how to monetize it.

  • New political support for laneway housing

    There’s some great news in the Toronto Star this week.

    (Thank you Mike for bringing this to my attention.) 

    Two councillors – Mary-Margaret McMahon and Ana Bailao – have come out in support of allowing laneway housing in Toronto. Some cities call them detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs). 

    If you’re new to laneway housing, check out this post and this post (both are 2+ years old). I’ve been on this horse for over a decade.

    Because going beyond their small space cool factor, laneway housing has the potential to fundamentally alter the housing supply constraint that I wrote about a few weeks ago – namely the yellowbelt. It’s a way to gently allow for new housing, while at the same time preserving the character of our “stable” neighborhoods. 

    And frankly, I can’t think of any other way to add new ground related housing at any sort of meaningful scale within the city limits – not unless we’re willing to give up the “stability” of our neighborhoods. So this is it.

    If you’re on the same page, I would encourage you to reach out to Councillor McMahon and Bailao and let them know that. There’s also a public workshop scheduled for Monday, December 5th at 7pm at the Evergreen Brick Works (550 Bayview Avenue).

  • GLUE

    I am all booked for my annual retreat to the mountains, which means I now have snowboarding on the brain. This year we are headed back to Whistler (/Powder Mountain) so that we can all check heli boarding (and heli skiing) off the bucket list. That’s one goal – among a few others – that I plan to accomplish in 2017.

    If you don’t snowboard (or ski), this probably means nothing to you. It can be hard to explain the feeling. Thankfully, Christian Haller (Swiss snowboarder), Kris Lüdi, and Stephan Maurer have just released a short film that may very well be the closest approximation to the real thing. It’s called GLUE.

    The whole point of the movie is to portray, in an authentic and visual way, what it’s like to snowboard. To do that, a lot of the footage was shot using a “follow cam.” There are also a lot of close-up shots. I just love the perspectives when it kicks in at 1:50.

    If you can’t see the video below, click here. And if snow and snowboarding aren’t your thing, check back tomorrow for regular scheduled programming.

    [vimeo 190544188 w=640 h=360]

    GLUE from Christian Haller on Vimeo.

  • re:Public + NXT City Night

    On Friday, November 25th, NXT City will be hosting a one-day symposium here in Toronto (re:Public) that brings together some of the top people, projects, and ideas in the world of public spaces. Following that will be an after party (called NXT City Night) that runs from 8pm to very late. 🙂

    Here are some of the organizations that will be represented at the symposium: City of Toronto, Uber, CivicAction, Monocle, Arup, STEPS Initiative, Breather, The Laneway Project, Oxford Properties, as well as many others. It will be a great event.

    For the full speaker list, the agenda, and to buy tickets, click here. There’s an under 35 / student offering for both the symposium during the day and the after party at night. If you attend during the day though, you automatically get a pass to the after-party. I hope to see you there.

    Here’s a time lapse video from NXT City Night (edition 2015). If you can’t see it below, click here.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i6R687sdk0?rel=0&w=560&h=315]

  • Are you T-shaped?

    image

    The world-renowned design firm IDEO is known for hiring people described as being “t-shaped.” Here’s a quote from an interview with CEO Tim Brown explaining what that means:

    “T-shaped people have two kinds of characteristics, hence the use of the letter “T” to describe them. The vertical stroke of the “T” is a depth of skill that allows them to contribute to the creative process. That can be from any number of different fields: an industrial designer, an architect, a social scientist, a business specialist or a mechanical engineer. The horizontal stroke of the “T” is the disposition for collaboration across disciplines. It is composed of two things. First, empathy. It’s important because it allows people to imagine the problem from another perspective – to stand in somebody else’s shoes. Second, they tend to get very enthusiastic about other people’s disciplines, to the point that they may actually start to practice them. T-shaped people have both depth and breadth in their skills.”

    For an interdisciplinary design firm like IDEO, I’m sure you can see why the above would be important. But I also think it’s hugely important for those of us who work in the arena of the built environment.

    City building projects don’t get accomplished by individuals, alone, or “I-shaped people” who don’t play well with others. They get accomplished by people with breadth in their skills and by large cohesive teams with vastly different core competencies. The notion of the individual genius is overplayed.

    New buildings, for instance, typically involve a coming together of the project team (hugely diverse in and of itself), the city, the community, and other stakeholders. You can try and bully your way through that process or you can try and navigate through with empathy.

    Based on the tremendous success of firms like IDEO, one could certainly argue that creativity and innovation seem to thrive more on empathy.

  • The spatio-temporal hierarchy of urban form

    I was recently introduced to the work of Brenda Case Scheer – specifically a journal article she wrote called The Anatomy of Sprawl. If you’re the kind of person who enjoys geeking out about cities, this is for you. (Thank you Oliver.)

    What she does in the article is break down the various components / layers of a city according to the rate in which they change. Her “spatio-temporal urban hierarchy” includes: site (slowest rate of change), superstructure, infill, buildings, and objects (fastest rate of change).

    The way to think about this is that the bottom layers of a city – the paths and roads we have chosen to establish – are incredibly persistent. They don’t change all that often.

    On the other hand, buildings do change. Old ones get demolished. New ones get built. There’s a cycle. They too probably feel pretty persistent in many cases, but in comparison to our roads, they change far more frequently.

    The reason why all of this has bearing is because the paths we choose to carve out at the very beginning will ultimately dictate the kind of city that gets built and rebuilt over time.

    The rectangular grid of Manhattan was planned out in 1811. Central Park was missing from this original plan, but it did establish the street network and ownership lots that are now so central to the identity of New York City. That was a 200+ year decision.

    It seems to have worked out just fine for New York. But what if you’re in a position where the existing street network is viewed as failing and/or inappropriate for the future success of the city? 

    Well that’s where things get interesting. Now you need to dig down to some of those base layers and work on changing the (frequently) unchangeable.