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 story of a symbol of belonging

    image

    I’ve been following Airbnb pretty much since the beginning. The company has always fascinated me because I saw it as being less about technology and more about travel, hospitality, community and, in my view, real estate.

    An office building is just a set of spaces that get rented out on long term leases. A hotel building is just a set of spaces that get rented out on short term leases (one night at a time). And Airbnb spaces are simply extra or “found spaces” – such as an extra bedroom – that could never really be rented out at any sort of scale before. But then Airbnb came along, built a community around it, and empowered everybody to make money off that found, extra space. I think that’s pretty neat.

    Well today, Airbnb unveiled an entirely new logo, brand, and expression. It’s all about belonging, and their new logo is called the Bélo. Here’s a quick video that they call “the story of the symbol of belonging”. If you can’t see it below, click here.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hs0C2UvVBY?rel=0]

    What’s interesting about this new expression is that it’s a perfect example of Simon Sinek’s belief that people don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it. And in this case, Airbnb’s why is community, trust, belonging, and a sense of place. Talk about emotive.

    In both the above video and in CEO Brian Chesky’s blog post today, reference is made to our cities and towns, and the fact that as they continue to get larger, we’re also becoming increasingly more disconnected. Things have gotten impersonal. But Airbnb is bringing back that sense of belonging.

    On a less emotive level, what it also does is set Airbnb up for expansion.

    Chesky has said before that the company wants to own the entire travel experience – from the moment you leave your home to the moment you return. So presumably a big impetus behind the rebrand was to develop something that could become ubiquitous across a number of different products and services. Which is why it makes perfect sense that they would encourage people to design their own versions of the logo.

    So while the rebrand has received a lot of criticism today – some people say it looks like a vagina – I wouldn’t discount it just yet. There are bigger plans in store.

  • The top 10 mega-cities by 2030

    One of the reasons I’m so fascinated by cities is that it’s becoming increasingly more important to get them right. From about 1831 to 1925, London was the largest city in the world. Its population went from somewhere around 1.5 to 2 million people to nearly 7.5 million. London surpassed Beijing as the largest city and was then surpassed by New York.

    Today our largest cities are significantly bigger. Tokyo has almost 40 million people and London doesn’t even make the top 10. But there’s also a broader shift taking place. According to a new report by the United Nations, most of the world’s largest cities will be in Africa and Asia by 2030. Here’s a chart from Quartz:

    image

    And the reason for this shift is because Asia and Africa are newly urbanizing, whereas the rest of the world has already urbanized. In North America, over 80% of people already live in cities.

    image

    But even though Asia and Africa are following a trend that has already taken place in the rest of the world, it doesn’t mean we should assume we know what we’re doing. Having spent time in cities like Dhaka, I can attest to the many challenges that these mega-cities are facing and will continue to face as people flood in from the rural areas looking for economic opportunities.

    So while it’s important that we talk about strategies for reviving cities like Detroit – which has a population somewhere around 700,000 – 800,000 people – we should also keep in mind that we have some significant challenges ahead of us in terms of creating a sustainable urban planning agenda for the world.

  • Mirvish + Gehry gets nod from City Council

    image

    Last week Toronto City Council voted to support planning staff’s recommendation to approve the landmark Mirvish + Gehry development on King Street West in the Theatre District. 

    The revised design now includes 2 towers (as opposed to 3) at 82 and 92 storeys tall. As a result of this change, 3 of the 5 existing buildings on the site will now be retained. I think this represents a good balance between (historic) preservation and progress.

    If you’re interested in a bit more of the backstory, Toronto Life published an article today called David Mirvish on the Edge. It talks about his father (Ed Mirvish), his upbringing, and how he got into the real estate development business.

    I thought you all might enjoy it.

    Image: Projectcore

  • The role of the private sector in city building

    image

    The New York Times published an interesting and popular article last Friday called The Post-Post-Apocalyptic Detroit. It of course talks all about the efforts of billionaire Dan Gilbert, but it also talks about the initiatives of many small and local entrepreneurs who are doing their part to help revive the city – while at the same time making a profit.

    One thing that I found interesting about the article is the extent to which the private sector has taken over the responsibilities of the public sector. With only 35,000 of the city’s 88,000 streetlights actually working, the city simply doesn’t have the money to pay its bills. When I visited the city last fall, I was told that the city couldn’t even afford batteries for its parking meters. 

    So the private sector has stepped up. 

    In downtown, Dan Gilbert pays for his own security force to patrol the area 24 hours a day both on the ground and through 300 surveillance cameras. And in the Jefferson East corridor, John Stroh III – of the Stroh Brewery Company – is paying for 3,500 hours of private security in order to help transform the area into a walkable retail strip.

    It’s a model that relies on the funding and vision of rich people to catalyze change. And it strikes me as a quintessentially American way of going about it. In Canada, I’m not so sure it would be approached in quite the same way, which I think is both good and bad. I think in Canada there would be more government involvement.

    If the rich people are there and willing to step up (like they are right now in Detroit), then I would assume the capital would be deployed more efficiently and that change would happen more quickly. But if the rich people aren’t willing to step up, then nothing happens and the place declines.

    That might be an oversimplification, but I think there are differences.

    To end, I’m going to leave you with this Bloomberg video about Steve Case’s (former AOL founder) “Rise of the Rest” road trip to Detroit. If you can’t see the video below, click here.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RUG0H4VThM?rel=0]

  • The death of driving

    image

    Last night my father and I were walking to dinner and he commented to me that he thinks my generation will be a lot healthier than his–at least on average–given how much more my generation walks. I responded by reaffirming to him how little I drive these days and how much I enjoy that.

    Then today, I was watching this short clip of the The High Road with celebrity chef Mario Batali, where he interviews venture capitalist Fred Wilson. During their tour around New York City, Mario asks Fred what he thinks the future of transportation will be. Fred responds by saying that nobody will drive anymore. He then went on to say that the technology for driverless cars is already ready, but that we as a society just aren’t ready for it, yet.

    Finally, on my way home from wakeboarding today, I stumbled upon this Guardian Cities article talking about Helsinki’s ambitious plan to make owning a car pointless. By 2025, the goal is have a “point-to-point mobility on-demand system” that will integrate all forms of mobility into one booking and payment platform. Think everything from public transit to carpools to taxis. 

    As I read on, I then discovered that Helsinki is already offering on-demand public minibuses that allow people to specify their own routes on their smartphone. The system then aggregates all of the requests and establishes the most efficient route based on the immediate demand. Coincidentally enough, it’s quite similar to a use case I wrote about for driverless cars.

    All of this got me thinking that one day we’ll probably look back at that time when people used to drive their own vehicles around as some antiquated and hilarious moment from the past.

    Image: Observatoire

  • What we could do to improve traffic in Toronto

    This morning The Guardian Cities published my one-minute video talking about how much traffic sucks in Toronto and why we should be considering bold initiatives like dynamic road pricing.

    The video was shot on the sundeck of my building on a holiday Monday (meaning traffic volumes should have been less). The dirty glass makes the city look a lot smoggier than it really is, but it felt appropriate for the topic I was discussing.

    I’m sure many of you will disagree with what I’m advocting for, so let me know your thoughts in the comment section below.

  • The importance of storytelling

    Last night I was out for drinks with a friend of mine who runs an architecture firm in the city called Reflect Architecture. We started talking about the importance of marketing and storytelling in city building and then got onto the topic of Danish architect Bjarke Ingels and his firm BIG.

    At only 39, Bjarke Ingels has become a celebrity architect at a relatively young age. He’s working on projects all over the world from Vancouver to New York to Shenzhen. And he describes his work as a combination of “shrewd analysis, playful experimentation, social responsibility and humour.” But what has always interested me about BIG is their use of dead, simple, diagrams (see above for an example).

    A diagram is just a graphic way of communicating information. And lots of architects use them as a design tool. But what BIG does is use them to create a narrative around each and every project. If you look at their website you’ll see that every project is presented using a series of diagrams that outline the process used to arrive at the final design. You’ll never just see the final product. You always see the steps involved. Click here for an example from Vancouver.

    What’s powerful about this approach is that it demonstrates that there’s a logic behind every design outcome (even if sometimes it might be contrived or done after the fact). It’s not form for the sake of form; it’s form as a result of the uses in the building, the urban context, and so on. 

    But at the same time, I think it taps into a deeper psychological phenomenon: people love stories. In fact, research shows that when we’re told stories, our brains actually become more active. We pay closer attention.

    I mean, just think about how much people enjoy hearing about rags-to-riches stories. Nobody likes to talk about some rich person who was born rich. That’s not an exciting or interesting story. And it changes how we perceive that person. We want to hear about that guy or girl who came over from a war torn country and built an empire from nothing. Now that’s a good story.

    What I’m getting at is that I think a big part of Bjarke’s success has come from his ability to masterfully storytell and market both himself and his projects. Architecture schools don’t usually teach you how to market and sell; they teach you how to design. But the reality is that you need to sell. And storytelling is a great way to do that.

    If you liked this post, I recommend you check out this TED talk by Bjarke Ingels and this short interview with marketer Gary Vaynerchuk where he talks about how he used storytelling to sell wine.

  • Further evidence that laneway housing is going to happen

    image

    Earlier this week Fast Company ran a piece talking about “the next big thing in urban planning” – backyard cottages. As the name suggests, backyard cottages are basically accessory dwellings built in the backyards of existing single family homes. And the idea is that they’ll provide new affordable housing options in competitive and supply constrained markets such as the Bay Area in California.

    While somewhat different than laneway housing–which you probably know I support here in Toronto–they do share many similarities. We’re talking about the intensification of our residential neighborhoods at the scale of the single family home. And the potential benefits go beyond just affordability. It would also make our communities more sustainable, more walkable, and more conducive to transit.

    But there are challenges. I don’t know about the Bay Area, but many municipalities don’t allow a “house behind a house” and many communities don’t want to see their neighborhood itensify. However, we are seeing companies, like New Avenue, emerge to help homeowners navigate the process of building a backyard cottage. This company in particular claims to have worked with over 90 homeowners. 

    So I think we’re going to see more, not less, of these types of housing solutions. Vancouver is already doing it. And so is Portland. 

    Now here’s a question for you. If you owned a house in a single family neighborhood, would you be fussed if your neighbor erected a backyard cottage or laneway house? I’d love to get your opinion. Let me know in the comment section below.

    Image: New Avenue

  • Architect This City is The Guardian Cities blog of the week

    image

    ATC was featured in The Guardian Cities today as the city blog of the week. It’s a Q&A about Toronto and the idea is for it to be an “urbanist’s guide” to the city. They asked me to be playful and humorous in my responses, and so I tried to do just that.

    But my underlying message was that–despite being an awesome city–Toronto needs to get its act together with respect to mobility and transportation. I also recorded a video talking about this problem, which I believe will be released in the next week or so.

    A big thanks to The Guardian Cities for asking me to participate and to Athlyn Cathcart-Keays for continuing to be an avid supporter of Architect This City.

  • Opendoor.com raises $9.95M to make selling your home as easy as a few clicks

    image

    If you’re a regular reader of ATC, you’ll know that I’ve been following the startup Opendoor.com for a few months now. I first wrote about it when it was codenamed Homerun and I just recently wrote about them as preface to a real estate survey I was conducting.

    Well, about an hour go it was announced that they’ve just raised $9.95M in venture funding from everyone and their grandmother. Here’s the list of investors (via TechCrunch):

    Paypal co-founder Max Levchin, Former YouTube and Facebook CFO Gideon Yu, Eventbrite co-founder Kevin Hartz, Y Combinator’s Sam Altman, Quora CEO Adam D’Angelo, Yammer co-founder David Sacks, Angelist’s Naval Ravikant, Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman, Box CEO Aaron Levie, Initialized Capital’s Harjeet Taggar, Garry Tan and Alexis Ohanian, Former Twitter vice president Elad Gil, Blippy co-founder David King, Flixster co-founder Joe Greenstein, Angel investor Mike Greenfield, Quora co-founder Charlie Cheever, Path’s Dave Morin, Facebook vice president Dan Rose, Trevor Traina, Resolute Ventures’ Mike Hirshland, Caffeinated Capital’s Ray Tonsing, Felicis’ Aydin Senkut, True Ventures’ Om Malik, Thrive Capital’s Josh Kushner, Crunchfund’s Michael Arrington (who disclaimer: founded TechCrunch) and SV Angel.

    Not surprisingly, there are quite a few people who see an opportunity in the $20 trillion US residential real estate market – which I think is a good thing. This is a space that–despite its size–hasn’t seen an awful lot of innovation.

    There still isn’t a lot of information about the product, but there’s a clear focus on creating liquidity in the marketplace. Despite being located in San Francisco, the company will be launching in 3 markets outside of California – where liquidity isn’t as great for homeowners.

    The goal is to transform the typical 90 day selling process into a few clicks online. Homeowners submit their home to the platform and then Opendoor makes an instant offer to buy. Done.

    What I wonder then is if it’s going to be an arbitrage play. They buy the homes below market (because they’re offering total liquidity) and then they turn around and sell them at market.

    Do you have any guesses as to their business model?