Tag: atc

• Introducing The Spaces

  

  At some point in the past, I preregistered for a site called The Spaces. I don’t remember doing it, but I’m sure that the site seemed promising when I landed on it and so I gladly handed over my email address. I’m always on the lookout for new and interesting things.

  Today that site has (soft) launched. And if you like architecture, design, art, and/or property, I am certain you will love it. I am already a fan.

  Based in London, The Spaces is about exploring the new ways in which are we living and working. Spaces ranging from residences to coworking spaces and everything in between. It’s about unique and progressive spaces and the people behind them. I love the concept.

  Since this is still a soft launch, I am sure the team is looking for feedback from the market. So if you have some, please share it in the comment section below. I will make sure they read it.

  Click here to check out The Spaces. Happy Friday all 🙂

  2015.04.17

• Imagining the way things could be

  

  Old in new by Andrew Johnston on 500px

  I was out for lunch with a colleague of mine yesterday afternoon and he said to me: “Brandon, I’m really surprised that you’re so interested in technology. It just seems so different compared to real estate and architecture.”

  And I’ve certainly heard that exact same comment from a number of people before. But I don’t see it that way and here are a few reasons why.

  The common thread for me between architecture, real estate development, and technology is that in all of these cases it is about imagining the way things could be in the future and then creating it. It’s about change. It’s about growth. It’s about creation. And I consider myself a builder in practically every sense of the word.

  At the same time, each of these disciplines is about creating engaging spaces for people. Architects and real estate developers do it in the physical world, but many technology products strive to do exactly the same thing in the online world.

  In fact, a couple of years ago I was fascinated to learn that Facebook has and continues to draw inspiration from many of the same books and philosophies that architects, planners, and developers rely on when it comes to creating engaging communities. The medium might be different, but it’s still about people.

  Finally, as I’ve said many times before here on Architect This City, I think that the distinction between tech and non-tech companies and industries is quickly evaporating. Is Airbnb a tech company or a hospitality company? Is Uber a tech company or a taxi company? Pretty soon we’ll be saying that about many other industries.

  Maybe it’s because I’ve always been interested in wading through the overlaps between disciplines, but this is just the way I see it.

  2015.04.16

• Condo or rental apartment — does it matter?

  

  Community by Evgeny Tchebotarev on 500px

  Toronto is the condo capital of North America. For a number of years now, there have been more condos under construction in this city compared to any other in North America, including New York.

  But recently the real estate community has become incredibly interested in building multi-family apartments (also known as purpose-built rental buildings). Which is why about 7 months ago I wrote a post called, Rise of rental.

  It has been decades since Toronto built rental apartment buildings at any sort of scale. That means that our existing stock is generally pretty old and that condominiums – rented out by individual investors – have been almost exclusively fulfilling the need for rental apartments in this city.

  But given that purpose-built rental apartments are on the rise, I’ve been thinking a lot lately about them and about the consumer perspective. 

  And so here’s my question to you:

  If you were looking for a place to rent, would it make a difference whether it was a condominium (rented out by an individual investor) or whether it was a professionally managed apartment building? You can assume that the suite itself is identical.

  There are obviously many differences between both forms of tenure, but I’m curious to what extent that factors into the decision making process for consumers. It hasn’t really been an option in recent years, but that seems destined to change.

  I hope we can have a discussion in the comment section below.

  2015.04.16

• What Rio de Janeiro looks like through an 80 megapixel camera

  Here’s a stunning time-lapse video of Rio de Janeiro that was shot with an 80 megapixel camera. It was done by LA-based photographer Joe Capra.

  [vimeo 119343870 w=500 h=281]

  10328×7760 – A 10K Timelapse Demo from SCIENTIFANTASTIC on Vimeo.

  Make sure you watch it full screen.

  As far as videos and photos go, it’s probably as close as you’re going to get to actually being there. And if you’ve never been to Rio de Janeiro (which I haven’t), it’s a great way to see and understand the city’s built environment. I loved looking at all of the details.

  2015.04.15

• Why Toronto-Waterloo needs all-day two-way urban rail service

  

  This morning I stumbled upon an interesting Medium article talking about the need for an all-day two-way urban rail service between Toronto and Waterloo. 

  The argument is that along this corridor sits a technology ecosystem that is second in size only to San Francisco-Silicon Valley and that current connectivity levels represent a missed opportunity of epic proportions. Presently this rail service will feed you into Toronto during the morning rush hour and take you back out in the evening rush hour. But that’s it.

  According to this report prepared by the City of Kitchener (which is beside Waterloo), efficient train service would stitch together an ecosystem of approximately 12,800 technology companies, 2,800 startups, and 205,000 technology employees. It would also connect 6 universities and 4 colleges, many of which are ranked top in the world.

  There’s an argument here that this is exactly the sort of thing that governments should be doing to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship. Rather than trying to be heavily involved in actual startups, they should be creating an environment that maximizes output and then getting out of the way. 

  I think this makes a lot of sense. Don’t you?

  Image: The Innovation Express

  2015.04.13

• Moving downtown

  Last month it was announced that Amazon will be taking 127,000 square feet across 5 floors in a new office tower in Toronto’s emerging South Core neighborhood. The space will be used for about 800 employees and they’re expected to take occupancy this fall.

  At the same time, I learned that Amazon will be joining Apple (positioned 6 floors below them in the same tower) and Cisco in South Core.

  On top of all this, a friend of mine then tweeted out a list of major tenant re-locations here in the city. The data is from CBRE and the timeframe is from 2009 to 2014 (Q1).

  The first thing I noticed when I looked at the data is that there’s a clear trend towards downtown. Perhaps that was the point of the study, but it’s still interesting nonetheless. 

  From Google and Deloitte to eBay and Aol, every single tenant in the CBRE list is or will be moving downtown (or to the shoulders of downtown).

  Here’s what that looks like from a regional scale (red marker is where they were; green marker is where they are going):

  

  And here’s what it looks like zoomed in closer:

  

  This, of course, is a trend that has been happening for years. But I still think it’s worthwhile repeating how clearcut it seems to be. 

  Companies know that their greatest asset is human capital. And they have quickly realized that a lot of young smart people want to live and work in dense walkable communities. They’re simply moving to where people already want to be.

  So here’s a question for the Architect This City community: On a scale of 1 to 10, how important is a company’s location when determining whether or not you’d like to work for them? Let’s talk about it in comment section below.

  2015.04.12

• A comparison between low-rise and high-rise housing costs

  Earlier this week the Globe and Mail reported that the average price of a house in Toronto has risen to $613,933 and that the average price of a detached house has risen to $1,042,405. Those are a big numbers.

  Low interest rates are a big part of this story. But there’s also a supply story at play here. The low-rise housing market in this city is heavily supply constrained and so we have an environment where people with more money simply outbid those with less money.

  The high-rise side of the market, on the other hand, is creating lots of new supply. And in my opinion that’s why its price growth has been more moderate in recent years and why the pricing spread between low-rise and high-rise housing continues to widen.

  Assuming these trends continue, one of the things I’ve thought about and written about in the past is whether we’ll eventually seeing a point where high-rise housing actually becomes a more affordable option for families. Because right now, if you’re in the market for a 3 bedroom home, a low-rise house is likely your most affordable option.

  Here’s a quick comparison that I did up this morning between a detached house and a high-rise condo:

  

  For the detached house, I assumed 1,800 square feet at a price of $1,042,405. That’s the average price mentioned above. 

  For the condo, I assumed a 1,500 square foot 3 bedroom home. I priced it at $650 per square foot (which would be above average for the city) and then added $40,000 for a parking spot. Here you have a slightly smaller condo, but it’s also priced slightly less.

  I then compared operating/maintenance costs. For the condo, I assumed a maintenance fee of $0.59 per square foot (which I think is reasonable) and then added $100 per month for electricity. Typically electricity is billed outside of maintenance fees.

  For the detached house, I tried to create a similar living situation. I assumed that the owner wouldn’t be cutting their own grass or shovelling their own snow. I assumed that money would be put away each month as a capital reserve for future house expenses (similar to the reserve fund in a condo). And I assumed a gym membership since most condos have a gym. I ignored property taxes and insurance.

  The detached house still works out to be a less expensive to operate in this scenario, but not by much. Overall, the two appear quite comparable. Which is why I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a tipping point in the future where all of a sudden families start finally adopting the mythical 3 bedroom condo.

  I have published my spreadsheet to the web in case you disagree with my assumptions and want to create your own.

  2015.04.10

• 10 ways that cities can take advantage of the urban manufacturing revival

  

  My good friends over at Distl here in Toronto have recently published their first Insight Report. It’s called, Make This City: The State of Urban Manufacturing, and it’s available via free download here. I like the title 😉

  The report is 39 pages and is really well put together. There’s research, case studies spanning San Francisco to Toronto, and some great takeaways for city builders.

  Since the internet likes listicles, here’s a preview of some of those takeaways – 10 ways that cities can take advantage of the urban manufacturing revival: 

  1. Preserve urban industrial areas
  2. Focus on the niche
  3. Public investment is a good investment
  4. Think mixed-use
  5. Diversify learning
  6. Redefine industrial assets
  7. Connect supplier & retailer
  8. Leverage your city’s brand
  9. Form supportive organizations
  10. Leverage partnerships with both the private and public sectors

  But it’s definitely worth a complete read and I plan to do exactly that this weekend. Click here to download Make This City.

  2015.04.09

• The new Toronto 2030 District

  

  Image: Financial District, Downtown Toronto, Canada by Yeonju SEONG on 500px

  Today I learned about something new called 2030 Districts. They are: “designated urban areas committed to meeting the energy, water, and transportation emissions reduction targets of the 2030 Challenge for Planning.”

  Toronto’s new 2030 District is downtown, which is bound by the lake in the south, Bathurst Street in the west, Dupont Street and Rosedale Valley in the north, and the Don Valley in the east. 

  It’s the first district outside of the US. The other established districts are in Seattle, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Denver, Stamford, San Francisco, and Dallas.

  The goals for Toronto’s district are as follows (quoted from 2030 Districts):

  • To cut district-wide emissions in half, including zero-emissions from new buildings by 2030.
  • Support a better understanding of where and why energy use, water use, and GHG emissions occur across the District.
  • Work in partnership with building owners, service providers and conservation groups to accelerate the adoption of best practices for building design and management.
  • Facilitate broad stakeholder dialogues to uncover and overcome systemic barriers to long term reductions in energy use, water use and GHG emissions.

  I’m looking forward to following and learning more about this initiative. I think many of us can agree that producing less, not more, GHG emissions in the future would be preferable. And we know that the bulk of it comes from both buildings and transportation.

  2015.04.08

• Why do more people in Quebec sell their home without an agent?

  If you ask most people, they’ll tell you that real estate agents will never ever disappear. 

  Despite the internet, mobile phones, social networks, and companies (here in Canada) such as comFree and PropertyGuys, the bulk of the market still employs an agent when it comes time to buy and/or sell a home. This is true both in Canada and the United States. And it may always be true.

  But there are lots of entrepreneurs and people in the real estate community experimenting with different models. OpenDoor and Open Listings are two new startups out of the US that I’ve been following closely.

  At the same time, there is a certain fraction of the market that is willing to go at it alone. By some estimates this number could be as high as 25% in Canada. Of course, this is a hard number to measure accurately since there isn’t just one method of selling a home privately and many transactions likely go untracked.

  But one thing that I’ve been wondering for awhile now is why the percentage of private home sales is seemingly so much higher in the province of Quebec. According to Wikipedia, this number might be greater than 50%. And a quick search on comFree (duProprio in Quebec) seems to suggest that this may indeed be the case.

  Here are the comFree search results for downtown Toronto. There are 62 properties.

  

  And here are the duProprio search results for downtown Montreal (notice I tried to maintain the same zoom level). There are 2,746 properties.

  

  If anyone has any insights on this phenomenon, I would love to hear from you in the comment section below. I don’t know why this is the way it is.

  2015.04.07