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

  • New web property: brandondonnelly.me

    I’ve just created a new web property at brandondonnelly.me. It’s a true tumblelog or microblogging site (using Tumblr) that I plan to make more casual and free flowing than this, long-form, text blog. I’ll likely post things related to design, technology, real estate, snowboarding and wine.

    Initially, that’s what this blog (brandondonnelly.com) was. It existed that way from 2012 to 2013. But then I decided to dedicate myself last fall to blogging about cities in long-form (mostly text). As the blogging saying goes, “narrow your focus to broaden your audience.” And for bloggers who aren’t celebrities, that seems to make sense.

    But I found myself wanting to post other things and more quickly. I also look at domains as virtual real estate. So I decided to buy and setup brandondonnelly.me. Now I have brandondonnelly.com (or architectthiscity.com) as my cities blog and brandondonnelly.me as my place for personal expression.

    Check it out and, if you’re on Tumblr, follow me up. Have a great day.

  • Dealing with condo complaints

    I’m on the Board for my condo in the St. Lawrence Market. I am one of three Directors. Although, the building is split up into 2 phases and so, in reality, there are other Directors involved. Sometimes developers phase their buildings (even if it’s physically one structure) in order to mitigate risk. That’s what was done here.

    As a result of sitting on the Board, I get to see every single resident complaint. They all go to the management office, but then they get circulated to all of the Directors so that we can address them at our next monthly meeting. We try our hardest to address all complaints but some, quite honestly, can be really hard to resolve.

    The most difficult to address are the ones that stem from people being inconsiderate. They’re related to noise, garbage being thrown off balconies and so on. These are tough because they have nothing to do with the building or the management. They have to do with the people. And it’s bound to happen in any environment where you have a lots of people living in close proximity to one another. In a low-rise neighborhood, it’s dogs pooping on your front lawn.

    We’re constantly trying to come up with different solutions that go beyond just sending out letters–including knocking on doors. But none of them are ideal. It’s often hard to pinpoint who’s doing what and letters are slow. 

    But here’s another idea.

    I think, the answer could be in some sort of private social network for apartment and condo buildings. Think Nextdoor.com for multi-family dwellings. This would personalize the complaints (as opposed to just using management letters) and it could create some societal pressure to better behave. If you threw garbage off your balcony you would then run the risk of getting called out, on the network, in front of the entire building.

    Nextdoor.com says it needs at least 50 households to make a neighborhood viable. That would be easily achievable in a lot of the condo buildings in Toronto. Neighborhoods probably scale better in general, but maybe it would also work for buildings. There’s certainly a need.

  • Invitation to guest blog

    I have a secret to tell all of you.

    When I rebranded this blog a few months and renamed it Architect This City, it wasn’t just to come up with a more interesting name (initially this blog was just called “Cities”). That was partially the reason, but it was also so that I could begin to create a brand that was independent of myself.

    I wanted to do this because I’ve been thinking for a while that I would like to open this blog up to guest bloggers and eventually turn it into a much larger conversation around cities—one that me alone would never be able to provide.

    I also keep hearing from a lot of readers that—time permitting—they would “love to start their own blog” and create something similar to ATC. Well, here is your opportunity. If you’re passionate about cities and would like to write a post or two, shoot me an email. Let’s work together to architect awesome cities.

  • Risk-oblivious, risk-aware and risk-adverse

    image

    Yesterday when I was researching for this post on Lean Urbanism, I came across a really interesting way of describing and classifying the groups typically involved in the emergence of a new neighborhood.

    It came from New Urbanist Andres Duany, who explained the process, here, using 3 groups of people: those that are risk-oblivious; those that are risk-aware; and those that are risk-adverse. 

    Risk-oblivious are people like the artist, who go into a crappy neighborhood and magically make it hip. They’re the ones that give the neighborhood its character. They’re the first catalyst.

    Risk-aware are people like real estate developers. They know risks exist, but they believe they can manage it, as well as profit from taking it on. They take the neighborhood to the next level.

    And finally, risk-adverse are the boring people who only come to a neighborhood once it’s absolutely clear that it’s a safe investment. Duany typecasts this group as the “dentist from New Jersey.” There’s much less value creation at this stage.

    Most of you have probably heard of this cycle of urban renewal, but I thought it was really interesting to frame it in terms of risk tolerance.

  • New urban planning buzzword: Lean Urbanism

    The term “lean” is well known in technology and startup circles. Thanks to people like Eric Ries and Steve Blank, it’s become all about starting up lean and not investing a lot of time and money before you’ve really tested your business assumptions in the marketplace.

    But keeping it lean isn’t unique to just tech companies. Its origins are actually in manufacturing—mostly from Toyota’s celebrated production system. Lately though, it has been starting to make its way into cities with a new buzzword called “Lean Urbanism.”

    Championed by New Urbanist Andres Duany—who is actually in the midst of writing a book on the topic—the methodology seems to be gaining awareness in cities spanning from Detroit to San Diego. Here’s an article that a friend of mine (currently working in San Diego) sent me yesterday on the topic.

    At first, the article gave me the impression that the movement was all about building as-of-right. That is, build what’s allowed and stop asking for special discretionary permissions, which is often how real estate development works.

    But then I started to do a bit more research.

    And it turns out that Lean Urbanism is about something much deeper. It’s about empowering incremental urban growth:

    “Lean Urbanism…focuses on revitalizing cities by finding ways for people to participate in community-building — specifically, by enabling everyday people to get things done.”

    What Lean Urbanism hopes to do is create tools and techniques that will help local communities avoid and workaround overly onerous regulations. It’s about removing the barriers to entry—whether that be a business permit or a building permit—so that more people can participate in shaping their own community.

    What I like about it is that it’s building upon the renewal cycle that has traditionally always powered cities. It hopes to empower the proverbial artist that moves into a neighborhood like New York’s Soho and magically makes it cool—then spurring an onslaught of investment.

    And so while the buzzword might be new, it’s a renewal cycle we’ve seen before. But, if it works, maybe not with so much frequency.

  • Entrepreneurship as economic development strategy

    It’s no secret that a lot of cities out there want to become the next Silicon Valley (or San Francisco, since a lot tech companies seem to be now setting up shop there instead). With the shift towards a knowledge/information/networked economy (pick your favorite name), cities around the world are betting that entrepreneurship is going to be the key to future economic growth.

    As an example, I was reading yesterday about a Buffalo-based business plan competition called 43North. It’s allegedly one of the biggest business plan competitions, ever:

    With $5 million in cash prizes, including a top award of $1 million, six $500,000 awards and four $250,000 awards, 43North is setting out to turn the best new business ideas from around the globe into reality.

    In addition to cash, winners will receive mentoring and free office space for a year. But while the competition is open to anyone in the world, you have to relocate to Buffalo for a minimum of one year if you win. 

    It’s a bold move. $5 million is a lot of money. But it strikes me as a step in the right direction to reinvent a city that was once the 8th largest in the US. I’m a big believer in the power of entrepreneurship.

    But 2 considerations do come to mind.

    The first is that this move can’t, or at least shouldn’t be, purely about business and economics. To create an entrepreneurial hub, I think you need to also ensure that you have a city that young people would love to live in.

    I’m not saying that Buffalo isn’t one of those cities (I don’t know it well enough to comment), but I am saying that it should be part of any economic development strategy. Why do you think more and more startups are moving from Silicon Valley to San Francisco?

    The second is that I worry we may end up with too many cities trying to become the next Silicon Valley. The industrial economy allowed for the creation of a certain number of thriving metropolitan regions (see: The Rust Belt).

    But I’m not so sure the networked economy will require as many. I could be wrong, but the data seems to suggest that we’re heading towards a spikier economic landscape—both within cities and across nations.

    In any event, here’s my question for the community: Would you move to Buffalo?

  • New York City on Market Street

    On my walk to the subway this morning I was confronted by a transformed Market Street in Toronto’s St. Lawrence Market area. New York City had taken over.

    There were NYC yellow cabs, NYPD cars, FDNY trucks and lots of film people milling about in Canada Goose jackets. Toronto, once again, stands in for New York.

    image

    But while I think it’s great that we’re (presumably) creating a bunch of local jobs, there’s also a part of me that hates to see this. I hate it because I want the Toronto brand to be strong enough so that movies actually take place here, instead of just being filmed here.

    I mean, who wants to be the stand-in? It’s much better to be the actor.

  • I <3 Toronto

    Yesterday I came across an article in the New York Times called “Toronto’s Ethnic Buffet.” It basically talks about how amazing and how diverse our city is, and so I wanted to share it with the Architect This City community this morning.

    It’s easy to take your own city for granted sometimes. You know about all the problems and all the things that you’d like to see happen. And so it can be easy to fixate on them. I just took a look back at my recent blog posts and I’ve certainly been doing my fair share of that.

    So today I’d—instead—like to say: Thanks for being awesome Toronto. You are one hell of a city.

  • Recommendation to remove the elevated Gardiner Expressway

    I’ve written a lot lately about the Gardiner Expressway East. First to argue that I think it should be torn down and, second, to provide a counter argument as to why some people think North America’s urban freeways are here to stay. I wanted to avoid confirmation bias.

    Well a recommendation has been made to City Council and it is, indeed, to remove the eastern portion of the Gardiner Expressway. They are now asking Council to approve it. The item will first go to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee on March 4, 2014 and, subject to the results of that meeting, will then go to City Council on April 1, 2014. 

    The recommendation to Council identified the following 4 key features of the preferred “remove” option:

    1. Widening of Lake Shore Boulevard east of Jarvis Street by two lanes into an eight-lane landscaped at-grade boulevard;
    2. The lowest overall public investment at $240 million net present value (NPV) because of significantly lower lifecycle costs despite a higher upfront capital cost than Maintain;
    3. Public land disposition proceeds of approximately $80 to 90 million NPV from the release of about 4 hectares of land (which could support 260,000 square metres of development)
    4. Highest compatibility with Official Plan and Central Waterfront Secondary Plan principles and objectives as well as approved plans, such as the Don Mouth Naturalization and Flood Protection EA, Lower Don Lands Framework Plan, Keating Channel Precinct Plan and the Port Lands Acceleration Initiative.

    If you’d like to read more about what’s going to Public Works and City Council, click here.

    One thing I didn’t mention in my previous posts is the land disposition piece (item #3 above). By removing the Gardiner East, roughly 10 acres of public land will be freed up which, according to their estimates, could allow for 2.8 million square feet of new development. That’s roughly the size of our 72-storey First Canadian Place.

    I’ve been crystal clear about my position on the Gardiner East and so I’m delighted to see it seemingly move forward in that direction. I know a lot of people are concerned that the removal option could result in some commute times being 5 to 10 minutes longer by 2031, but I think we’ll have even bigger problems by 2031 if we continue with the status quo.

    Urban theorist Richard Florida has argued many times before that when cities get to around 5-6 million people they come to a point where they have to make tough decisions about the way they’re going to continue to grow and prosper. Toronto is at that moment. Our car dependent ways are already crippling productivity levels.

    What kind of city do we want to be by 2031? I don’t think that we can afford to just “maintain.”

  • Turning post into talk

    I’m going to be turning one of my blog posts (“Why Toronto should stop complaining about all its condos”) into a talk at Ryerson University’s Ted Rogers School of Management on March 10th, 2014 at 6:30pm. But since it’s an academic setting, they wanted me to make it more impartial and so the talk instead, asks a question, and is called: “Should Toronto stop complaining about all its condos?” 

    You can register for the event here. It’s primarily geared towards students, but I’m told it’s also open to industry and the public. I haven’t completely figured out what I’m going to talk about yet, but I plan to focus on the issues of supply and demand I raised in my blog post and then tie that into a discussion about the rise of midrise development—specifically through DUKE and Kingston&Co (both TAS projects).

    If you have any other suggestions, I’m all ears.