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.

Tag: architecture

  • Morphosis proposes tallest building in Europe — in the Swiss Alps

    image

    A controversial design proposal for the tallest building in Europe has been making the rounds online over the past few days. Designed by Morphosis Architects, the 381 meter-tall tower is being proposed in Vals in the Swiss Alps. 

    And pretty much everyone seems to hate it.

    When I first came across the design, I truthfully had to do a double take to see if it was actually a real proposal. But it seems to be. Everyone is writing about it.

    Clearly there are some interesting tensions at play here. You have a hyper-urban building typology in a mountain town setting, but with materials that are intended to make it dematerialize into the landscape.

    So I thought we could have a discussion about it in the comments.

    Is a small mountain town the right place for the tallest building in Europe? Could it work as a one-off tower?

    Image: Morphosis Architects via ArchDaily

  • I’m giving away a free Architect This City t-shirt

    I’m giving away a free t-shirt on April 1st, 2015 exclusively to Architect This City subscribers. There’s no catch. And no this is not an April Fool’s joke! I just want to say thanks to the people who read ATC on a regular basis. It’s that simple.

    So how does it work?

    1. You need to be an Architect This City email subscriber (either daily or weekly). If you’re not yet a subscriber, you have until midnight on Tuesday, March 31st, 2015 to make that happen. You can do that by clicking here. It’s free.
    2. You need to visit architectthiscity.com and pick the t-shirt you want. There are currently 5 different ones to chose from (the original ATC tee comes in both ATC orange and black).
    3. Finally, you need to leave a comment at the bottom of this post telling the community 2 things: which t-shirt you want and your favorite thing about your own city. That’s it.

    On April 1st I will randomly select somebody from the comments, check to see if they’re a subscriber, and then send them a free t-shirt.

    Simple, right? I’m really looking forward to giving away a t-shirt.

  • Cities without people

    Some people believe that cities are all about bricks and mortar. While other people believe that they are first and foremost about people. Though I wholeheartedly believe that our built environment has a profound affect on our lives, I am in the latter camp. 

    Real estate to me is an outcome. It is the result of people needing space. A new condominium is built because people need a place to live. A new office building is built because somebody built a great company and it needs to house its growing workforce. So at the end of the day, what is a city without people?

    Perhaps the best way to demonstrate this point is to show you what cities look like without them. This morning I stumbled upon an interesting series of city photographs where almost all of the people have been removed. They are by artists Lucie & Simon and the project is called Silent world.

    The top image is Times Square and the bottom image is Queensbridge in New York.

    Images: Lucie & Simon

  • Reading between the lines of a midtown triplex

    A few days I retweeted the above home from Dwell Magazine. Then yesterday I was driving through midtown Toronto and I stumbled upon it. And that got me thinking more about this kind of project.

    The house is a triplex with, presumably, one unit in the basement, one unit on the main floor, and one unit across the 2nd and 3rd floor. The existing detached house was only 2 storeys and so a third floor was added to create what is likely the “owner’s suite.”

    It’s not uncommon for many of the houses in central areas of Toronto to be converted into duplexes and triplexes or to flip back into single family homes after being subdivided for rentals. It goes to show how adaptable the single family house can be.

    But it’s not everyday that you see such a high end triplex being built as, what seems to be, a permanent residence and kind of dream home for the owners. Historically, when people built their dream home it has meant a single family home.

    This might not seem like an important distinction, but I think it demonstrates a growing acceptance of intensification within low-rise single family neighborhoods.

    Part of this I’m sure has to do with rising housing costs. But I think it also has to do with valuing location over raw space and with an acceptance of urban density.

    I don’t know about you, but I would have no concerns with permanently laying down roots in a house like this. It’s beautiful.

    Image: Dwell

  • 5 designs (and my pick) for Jack Layton Ferry Terminal in Toronto

    Earlier this week, 5 design proposals were unveiled for Jack Layton Ferry Terminal & Harbour Square Park along Toronto’s waterfront. They are part of an international design competition being organized by Waterfront Toronto – the arm’s length agency in charge of revitalizing this city’s waterfront.

    The first proposal – called Cloud Park – was submitted by Stoss Landscape Urbanism, nARCHITECTS, and ZAS Architects.

    image

    I really like how they integrated water features, pools, and hot tubs into the park and lake. Their proposal made me realize how great it would be to have these functions along the water. It has been done in many other cities around the world. And I think a hot tub could be a big draw during the winter.

    The second proposal was submitted by Clement Blanchet Architecture, RVTR and Batlle i Roig.

    image

    The big ideas here are a grand staircase (”social carpet”) that runs in line with Bay Street and an elevated east-west platform that runs from York Street in the west all the way across the Yonge Street slip in the east. 

    When I first saw this proposal I thought it was by Rem Koolhaas (OMA) and I doubt I’m the only one with that feeling. That’s not a criticism though. I like the work of OMA. But I think that many Torontonians have an intrinsic aversion to things that are elevated near our waterfront. (We’re currently pontificating about whether we should tear down a portion of our elevated urban highway.)

    That said, I think the connection over the Yonge Street slip is an important one. The larger opportunity with this project is to use it as a mechanism to better stitch together our waterfront. I hope we take advantage of that.

    The third proposal – called Civic Canopy – is by Diller Scofidio+Renfro, architectsAlliance, and Hood Design.

    image

    This proposal immediately caught my eye. It’s one of the more sculptural designs and it reminds me of something you might find in Barcelona or Madrid. It also includes a beach (#10 on the site plan shown below).

    image

    The fourth proposal – called Harbour Landing – was submitted by KPMB Architects, West 8, and Greenberg Consultants.

    image

    It consists of an undulating green roof terminal building and a more natural surrounding at the foot of Bay Street.

    Finally, the fifth proposal was submitted by Quadrangle Architects, aLL Design (Will Alsop), and Janet Rosenberg & Studio.

    image

    This proposal consists of a hot pink terminal building running east-west along the water (shown above) and many other features that will strike you as being quintessentially Will Alsop.

    My favorite part of this proposal though is the patterning of the surrounding urban park and the pool located towards the bottom left of the site plan shown below. Can you tell that I would really like to see usable water features along the lake?

    image

    When I first set out to write this post I was determined to pick one design to recommend. And if I were asked to do that I would pick Civic Canopy by Diller Scofidio+Renfro, architectsAlliance, and Hood Design.

    However, as I was going through the designs, I instead found myself taking from all of the proposals and mentally accumulating a list of things that I would love to see happen on this site.

    • Connections to the surrounding area (such as across the Yonge Street slip)
    • Usable water features along and in the lake (pools, hot tubs, fountains, and so on)
    • An iconic terminal building that you can see when you’re out in the lake and on the Toronto Islands
    • Urban spaces that could be truly used and programmed in all seasons

    Do you have a favorite proposal? What are the most important design elements in your opinion?

    Images via Waterfront Toronto

  • 3 risks that real estate developers face

    Photograph 'Jailhouse Rock' by Michael Hill on 500px

    ‘Jailhouse Rock’ by Michael Hill on 500px

    Real estate development is a risky game. So much so that some people in the business like to say that their primary function is to mitigate risk. 

    Today I’m going to focus on 3 risks that developers face. There are, of course, others risks, but these are some of the biggest. Some people might also categorize them differently, but this is my simplified way of thinking about it.

    The first risk is approvals. Oftentimes in development you need some sort of special permissions to build what you hope to build. These permissions come in many different forms, but whatever the case may be, there is risk associated with this part of the process. 

    What happens if you’re not able to build what you were hoping to build? Is the project still feasible? Do you have a viable plan B? Did you budget for a redesign? Have you now overpaid for the land? There’s a lot of uncertainty in this phase and uncertainty generally means risk.

    Assuming you’re able to obtain your entitlements (this is more of an American term), the next big risk factor is the market. Can you sell or lease out the space that you’re about to build and can you do it at the rates you were assuming when you acquired the site? 

    In a bull market this isn’t usually a problem. In fact, prices and rents may actually exceed your early assumptions. But what if you bought the site in 2006 and now it’s 2008 and you’re hoping to go to market. Now you might be in trouble. In business school I learned to do sensitivity analyses and stress tests. How far does the market need to drop before I lose my shirt? Those are good exercises to do in development.

    Assuming though that the market holds up and you’re able to pre-sell and/or pre-lease your new project and obtain financing, you would then be ready for construction – another big risk. This is why many developers bring construction in-house. It’s them trying to exercise more control over the process and mitigate risk.

    Construction is messy both literally and figuratively. There’s a lot to consider. 

    Are the drawings that you’re using to buy construction properly coordinated? Because if they’re not, you’re going to pay for it later. Is that Chinese curtain wall a great bargain or are you going to end up on a flight to China when it never shows up on your construction site? Are the trades hungry for work or are they busy? If it’s the latter, you’re going to get higher prices. And oftentimes there’s nothing you can do about it. You’re just buying construction at the wrong time.

    But we all know that with risk there’s reward. So if weren’t for all these risks, real estate development just wouldn’t be the same. 

    If you’re in the business, what keeps you up at night? Did I miss something? Let us all know in the comment section below.

  • Project Profile: Fashion House in Toronto by CORE Architects

    image

    As Architect This City continues to grow in readership, I’m starting to get pitched more and more. People email me with something they want promoted and they try and convince me to write about it. Everybody is looking for distribution. I get it.

    I have no qualms about people and companies reaching out. In fact, I welcome the suggestions. But the vast majority of these “pitches” don’t make it onto ATC. 

    When it comes to these sorts of things, I have two simple rules: (1) I have to like it myself. If I don’t think what you’re pitching is interesting or cool, I’m not going to write about it – even if you’re offering up money. (2) I need to be able to be transparent about it. More on this second point in the coming weeks.

    Recently I was asked to do a post about the Fashion House Condos in Toronto’s King West neighborhood. 

    Here’s why I decided to do it:

    I like that the existing Silverplate heritage building was preserved and integrated into the base of the condo. It’s now tenanted to The Keg, which has gone into the base of a number of new condo buildings in the city. They’re a successful chain.

    image

    Each elevator lobby within the building has a unique mural designed by a different fashion designer – most of which are Canadian. The whole Fashion House theme is meant to speak to the area’s history as Toronto’s Garment District.

    image

    Many of the residential suites have red curtains (which are white on the interior). They form a “common element” and have to stay in the condo. It gives the building a dramatic and unique feel, though it means you have to be a fan of curtains.

    image

    My good friend designed the Mexican restaurant at the base of the building (Wilbur Mexicana). His firm is called Reflect Architecture.

    It’s also an example of cool startup businesses going into the base of a new development. As far as I know, Wilbur Mexicana is the group’s first venture.

    image

    There’s a rooftop pool that I’m hoping somebody will invite me to this summer.

    imageimage

    And finally, because I think the King West neighborhood is such a great example of urban renewal.

    image

    To end off, here are some stats on the project:

    • Address: 560 King Street West, Toronto
    • Developer: Freed Developments
    • Architect: CORE Architects
    • Project Timeline: 2008-2014
    • Construction Costs: $60M (estimate)
    • Site Area: 4,887 square meters / 52,603 square feet
    • Gross Floor Area: 27,107 square meters / 291,777 square feet
    • Floors: 11 and 12 storeys
    • Building Heights: 33m and 39.7m
    • Residential Suites: 334

    And here are the fashion designers responsible for each elevator lobby mural:

    • 2nd Floor – Beckermans
    • 3rd Floor – Dean Davidson
    • 4th Floor – Jeremy Laing
    • 5th Floor – Adrian Wu
    • 6th Floor – Jenny Bird
    • 7th Floor – Ashtiani
    • 8th Floor – Peach Berserk
    • 9th Floor – Smythe
    • 10th Floor – Jay Godfrey
    • 11th Floor – Bustle
    • Penthouse – Greta Constantine

    What do you think of Fashion House?

    Images: CORE Architects

  • What do you think of 1 Bloor West? [Poll]

    image

    Over the past few weeks I’ve been running a little experiment on Twitter where I tweet about a new development project in Toronto and I ask people to vote on it. If they like the project, I ask that they retweet (RT) it. And if they don’t like it, I ask that they favorite it (FAV).

    Here’s what it looks like in tweet form:

    As you can see from this experiment, about 69% of the people who participated seemed to be in favor of this project (at least at the time of writing this post). That said, the discussion following this tweet was a lot more negative than I would have expected.

    Somebody also pointed out that in my experiment I’ve created a bias towards supporting the project, since a retweet means the project gets shared, whereas a favorite doesn’t do that. I would argue that the more distribution the better for an accurate consensus, but point taken.

    So today I thought I would do this same experiment here on Architect This City. 

    At the bottom of this post, I’ve featured a comment from myself asking if you support the 1 Bloor West project. If you like the project, I ask that you “up vote” my comment. And if you dislike the project, I ask that you “down vote” it. You can do so by using the up and down arrows towards the bottom left of the comment.

    Hopefully this hack will create a more neutral voting framework. I hope you will participate. If you’re reading this via email, you’ll need to open up the post in your browser by clicking “read more” at the bottom.

    If you’d like to learn more about the project before voting, check out this article from the Globe and Mail. Happy voting!

  • 3 architects operating as developers

    image

    A reader recently shared with me an interesting article from Crain’s New York (2013) profiling three “architects as developers.” The three firms are DDG Partners (which I’ve mentioned before here on ATC), FLAnk, and Alloy.

    I’ve written a lot about these emerging business models and I continue to think that we’re going to see more of them in the coming years.  As evidence for that claim, I thought it was really interesting to read in the article that Vishaan Chakrabarti – who is director of the real estate program at Columbia University – made specific mention that there’s growing interest among his students to wear multiple hats. In other words, they don’t want to be just an architect or just a developer. They want do it all.

    In a lot of cases, these firms are made up of partners who have those diverse skill sets. There’s only so much that one person can do. But that doesn’t negate the fact that vertically integrated companies are being formed that handle everything from design and construction to property management and development.

    And if an increasing number of students today are interested and thinking about those models, then I think it’s a pretty safe bet that many of them will get out into the workforce and eventually create those companies in the future.

    Ultimately, I think that’s a great thing for cities. Developers tend to have a bad reputation for thinking only about money. But when you bring design and other disciplines in-house, you create tensions in the process. And tension can be a great thing for innovation and creativity.

    Image: 385 West 12th by Flank

  • Google’s new Mountain View campus [Video]

    Google wants to build a new campus in Mountain View, California. Their objective is to create a space where “people, nature and ideas” can thrive. The architects on the project are Bjarke Ingels and Thomas Heatherwick.

    Last week Google released a video talking about the ambitious project. It is a good watch and only 10 minutes. Click here if you can’t see the video below.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3v4rIG8kQA?rel=0&w=560&h=315]