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

  • Pier 27 and transparency in the real estate industry

    One of my favorite development projects going up in Toronto right now is the Pier 27 complex at the base of Yonge Street.

    What I love about it is that it’s trying something different. The two sky bridges that sit atop the two phases—currently under construction—are going to create a remarkable new focal point along the waterfront. It’s not just another condo.

    And as I watch the buildings go up, I’ve also been impressed by the materials used on the project. In particular the curtain wall (glazing) system used on the eastern most buildings. It’s a clear glass installation with white accent pieces. It’s beautiful. Here are a few photos.

    But as much as I love this project, it’s been slow moving. This project, like many others in the city, has been subject to a number of delays. They went to market in 2006-2007 and occupancy isn’t expected until next year—a good 7 years later.

    But more than the issue of time, my real concern is the lack of transparency. Why was it delayed? Were sales slow? Were there dewatering issues being on reclaimed land along the waterfront? Was the soil contaminated? As a consumer, it’s frustrating being in the dark.

    I do, however, acknowledge that this is a larger issue facing the real estate industry. We’re certainly not known for radical transparency. We’re a closed and insular industry. But over time I do believe that will change. It’s inevitable. And the best thing you can do today—as an organization or as an individual—is to embrace it.

    Full disclosure: I have a vested interest in this project and I’m currently having a fight with the developer over a small amendment I would like to make to the agreement of purchase and sale. They have been unwilling to cooperate.

  • The Toronto font

    Susan Kare was the screen graphics and font designer for the original Apple Macintosh computer in the 1980s. Being from Philadelphia’s affluent Main Line, she initially proposed that the various fonts be named after the railroad stops along it.

    However, when Steve Jobs asked where the names had came from, he contested that, if the fonts were to be named after cities, they should be named after “world-class cities”, rather than small ones that nobody had ever heard of.

    image

    And since that’s what Jobs wanted, that’s what Jobs got. The fonts were renamed: Venice, London, Athens, Toronto, Chicago, New York and Geneva. Some of these font names you’ll probably still recognize but some, including Toronto, were eventually abandoned. 

    The Toronto font was removed from System 6 onwards. So from 1988 onwards.

  • Car or smartphone?

    I was browsing my Tumblr feed this morning and I found a link to an interview with Marc Andreessen posted by Fred Wilson.

    I liked Marc’s response to a question relating to people’s love of cars and so I decided to post it to Facebook. I then received an email notification from Fred Wilson’s AVC blog titled “The New Freedom.” Turns out that he liked the quote as well. With so much love for this quote, I figured it was worth reposting here.

    The interviewer started a question to Marc with, “But people love their cars.” This is his response:

    “Ask a kid. Take teenagers 20 years ago and ask them would they rather have a car or a computer? And the answer would have been 100% of the time they’d rather have a car, because a car represents freedom, right?

    Today, ask kids if they’d rather have a smartphone or a car if they had to pick and 100% would say smartphones. Because smartphones represent freedom. There’s a huge social behavior reorientation that’s already happening. And you can see it through that. And I’m not saying nobody can own cars. If people want to own cars, they can own cars. But there is a new generation coming where freedom is defined by “I can do anything I want, whenever I want. If I want a ride, I get a ride, but I don’t have to worry. I don’t have to make car payments. I don’t have to worry about insurance. I have complete flexibility.” That is freedom too.”

    This ties in well with the return to city centers and downtowns. When people live in walkable neighbourhoods, cars can be more of a liability (car payments, insurance, parking, and so on). In fact, I think of them as a liability all around. Banks think of them as an asset, but I like my assets to increase in value.

    The other interesting point that Marc makes about cars is that supply and demand are not very well matched using the current model. If you only use your car to drive to and from work, it sits idle 90% of the time. This is where the sharing economy comes into play: How can people better optimize that 90%?

    My smartphone certainly doesn’t sit idle 90% of the time.

  • The return of the city-state

    I’ve written before on how Toronto needs more autonomy and how I think there’s a huge opportunity to create a Third Coast Megaregion spanning from Chicago all the way to Quebec City—a region that could compete with the rising urban agglomerations of Asia and elsewhere.

    The central theme around these arguments is that there’s clear evidence in support of a return to city-states.

    Today, the 388 metro areas in the United States make up 84 percent of the nation’s population and an astonishing 91 percent of gross domestic product. The top 100 metro areas alone total two-thirds of the U.S. population and three-quarters of GDP.

    And the reason why I say “return” is because, if you think about it, this is largely how the world used to operate before the shift towards nation-states. 

    Ironically, given the nature of our high-tech, super-connected age, the future will look more and more like the city-states that ruled the world for millennia, from the days of Athens, Sparta, Carthage, and Rome, and that were last dominant 500 years ago, in such places as Venice and Florence, before the formation of most modern nation-states. Today, the shining example is Singapore, the city-state of 5.2 million people that, all by itself, has become an Asian tiger. The city-state of the future will not be sovereign, of course, but instead will act largely independently. “What we are experiencing is a metro-centered driving force of change. This is the center of the economic universe,” says James Brooks, program director of the National League of Cities. “The United States is not one national economy but a series of smaller metropolitan economies.”

    If you’re interested in this topic, here’s the article by Michael Hirsh from which the above excerpts are taken. It’s called, “The Nations’s Future Depends on Its Cities, Not on Washington.”

  • Who knew Gherkins were so aerodynamic

    Lately I’ve been learning a lot about wind and how certain building forms can create dramatically different microclimates.

    In light of this, I’ve gained a new appreciation for the 30 St Mary Axe tower in London (colloquially known as “the Gherkin”). I’ve always been a fan and I was well aware of its sustainability initiatives, but I didn’t fully grasp how much wind played a role in its design.

    Because of its cylindrical shape and the fact that the tower tapers as you move towards the top, the bulk of the wind hitting the building either flows around it or gets pushed upwards, towards the sky. This is in contrast to a typical square or rectangular building where the bulk of the wind often gets pushed down towards street level.

    image

    The benefit of this is that it obviously creates a more pleasant environment for pedestrians at street level. However, in addition to this, it also means that the wind loads against the building were brought down to a minimum and so the structure of the building could also be reduced. 

    This is the kind of architecture I love: architecture that performs.

  • Closing the homeownership affordability gap

    Through TAS, I’m involved in an affordable homeownership seminar at Ryerson University. The goal of the semester is to develop a comprehensive policy document for how best to deliver affordable homeownership units in Ontario. 

    The students are still working on their final report, but I wanted share one thought that came to mind as I was reviewing the draft.

    As a first step, I think the question of affordability needs to begin with a broader look at the market rate housing market. Have we optimized for the delivery of new housing or are we operating in a state of perpetual supply deficits?

    The reason for this question is that—as I’ve written before—I subscribe to Edward Glaeser’s argument that easing housing regulation and increasing supply can go a long way to broadly improving housing affordability. It won’t make New York as affordable as suburban Houston (Glaeser says), but it will help to avoid some of the outrageous pricing that can occur in severely supply constrained markets like San Francisco.

    Once this has been addressed, it then comes down to deciding how you want to make up the shortfall. If you want to provide housing below its costs (the market rate), somebody is going to have to pay for the difference. However, if you’ve optimized around the market rate, it means that the required subsidies should be less than they otherwise would have been. This makes it more cost effective for governments, or whoever else is providing the subsidy.

    So my point is to not take the market conditions as a given when looking at affordability. Are there structural changes that could be made to improve affordability more broadly?

    There’s certainly no easy answer, but it’s an important discussion to be having. Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

  • Minimal effort; maximum engagement

    I’ve been blogging almost every day for 3 months straight. It’s been a hugely rewarding process and I absolutely plan to continue. Though some days it’s hard to find something to write about. And some days it’s hard to find the time.

    One of those days was 5 days ago. I was busy and so I decided to post a video instead of spending a lot of time writing a post. I posted a video explaining how the Dutch design their street intersections to accommodate cyclists. You can find that post here.

    Well, it turns out that the post I easily spent the least amount of time preparing has now become, by far, the most popular post I’ve ever done. As of today, I received 460 notes via Tumblr. That includes likes and reblogs. And, as a result, my engagement graph now looks like this:

    I can’t even make out what the numbers were before this post blew up. This is really interesting to me, because I remember questioning if I should even post the video in the first place. I thought it may be a bit dry and perhaps too technical.

    It just goes to show that sometimes you can’t predict what will catch on.

  • Turning St Clair and Spadina into LRT

    I’ve talked before about how Toronto doesn’t currently have any true light rail transit lines. LRT does not equal what we have on St Clair Avenue. The stops are spaced far too close together. It’s just a streetcar on its on right of way.

    This is better than a streetcar that doesn’t have its own right of way, but it could be better. So here’s an idea for better optimizing some of the transit infrastructure we already have: let’s convert the St Clair and Spadina streetcar lines into true LRT.

    Here are 3 things we could do.

    1.

    First, we need to get rid of some stops. Let’s take the stop spacing being proposed for Eglinton Avenue and apply it to St Clair Avenue and Spadina Avenue. By stopping less, it means performance goes up. Think about how much time is wasted every time the streetcar has to stop for people to get on and off. This is why New York has express trains.

    Alternatively—and instead of actually getting rid of some stops—we could also just operate two types of stops: rush hour stops and off-peak stops. In the case of off-peak stops, the streetcar would simply skip them during rush hour. The cost of implementing this would be signage and consumer education.

    2.

    Second, we finally roll out a better payment system. While tokens do give me a kind of 1960s nostalgia, I hate change and I hate fumbling with microscopic tokens in my pocket. Why isn’t there an app for this?

    But more importantly, if we had a better payment system we could transfer the point of payment from the actual streetcars to the stops themselves. This would mean that you’d need to pay in order to gain access to the stop itself. The benefit of this though is that it streamlines onboarding. Customers can now just walk onto the streetcar, like they do on the subway.

    And if you’re thinking about those times where you give up waiting for a streetcar and just hail a cab, well we could simply make the fare refundable if you leave at the same stop. This type of system would also open up the possibility of distance based fares (see London, Tokyo, etc.)

    3.

    Third, put the LRT lines on the subway map and operate them with the same rigour. Right now the customer experience gap between subways and streetcars is huge. Subways run on time and streetcars are completely hit or miss. There’s an excuse for streetcars that run mixed in with traffic, but I don’t see why we can’t make light rail (using its own right of way) just as predictable as subways. I used to take the LUAS in Dublin everyday and it was a fantastic experience.

    We really need to start taking transit more seriously in Toronto. I don’t know about you, but I’d much rather be known around the world for having the best transit system than for having a debaucherous mayor.

  • A Third Coast Megaregion

    The distance between Chicago and Quebec City is roughly 1,000 miles (or 1,609 km). There are 6 major cities and a population of over 25 million people. You have the 4th and 5th largest cities in North America (Chicago and Toronto); the largest city in Canada; the capital of Canada; 2 different languages; 2 different countries; and 5 different states/provinces.

    image

    Now imagine if all of these 6 cities—Chicago, Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City—were effortlessly connected through a high speed rail network, allowing you to travel from one end to the other in just over 5 hours. How would that impact the movement of people, goods and services across the region? How would it change our economies if you could wake up in Detroit and, without any lead time, travel 1 hour and 15 minutes to Toronto for a meeting?

  • [vimeo 70039050 w=500 h=375]

    The Great Lakes Century

    Since 2009, architecture firm SOM has been working on promoting awareness and developing a 100-year vision for the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Basin region. With 20% of the world’s surface fresh water and with over 50 million people living in the region, it’s an hugely important discussion to be having.

    The video above is called the Great Lakes Century and it’s a good overview of the region’s importance, as well as SOM’s goals. If you happen to be in Chicago, there’s also an exhibition going on right now at the Chicago Architecture Foundation. It’s called Great Cities, Great Lakes, Great Basin.

    (Source: http://player.vimeo.com/)