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: atc

  • When rent control goes too far

    I was catching up with a friend of mine over coffee this morning and he was telling me about his recent trip to Porto, Portugal. I’ve never been, but it’s fairly high up on my list of places to visit.

    He was telling me about how beautiful the center of the city is and how it’s a UNESCO World Heritage Site. But he was also telling me how eerie it was to see so many abandoned and decaying buildings.

    And part of the reason for this – I learned – is that up until fairly recently, Portugal had some incredibly onerous pro-tenant rent controls in place that dated back to the beginning of the 1900s.

    In fact, they were so onerous that, by some estimates, roughly 150,000 households in Portugal were paying less than €50 per month in rent before the laws were changed!

    Because of this, landlords in many cases could not, and cannot, actually afford to maintain their properties. Buildings were left to decay, and in some cases they were completely abandoned. That was their only option. And it led to a virtually non-existent rental housing market (according to the IMF).

    Clearly, this is a problem. If you have a market distortion as serious as this one – where there’s virtually no incentive to invest – you’re on a highly unsustainable economic trajectory.

    Which is why when Portugal received its bailout package from the International Monetary Fund and European Union following the 2008 financial crisis, it was asked to reform its rent control laws – which it agreed to do.

    The hope was that the reforms would allow Portuguese landlords to charge more reasonable and market-oriented rents, as well as do other crazy things like evict tenants that don’t actually pay their rent. Not surprisingly, many fought the changes.

    I don’t know precisely how these reforms have ultimately played out in the market over the past few years (if you do, I’d love to hear from you in the comments below), but I do believe that liberalization of the market was, and probably still is, needed.

    While paying €5 a month for a 4 bedroom apartment in a desirable central neighborhood might be great for that one individual family, it’s not so great for the economy as a whole. And ultimately that comes around to impact even that household.

    Image: Flickr

  • A walk down memory lane in the St. Lawrence Market

    I recently got lost looking through the Toronto Archives for old photos of my neighborhood. I’ve blogged about what the St. Lawrence Market neighborhood looked like in the 70s, but I wanted to go back even further. I wanted to see what exactly had been demolished and lost over the years.

    But by the end of it, I was just sad. As a lover of cities, it always makes me upset to see great buildings disappear. I think you too will be surprised at what I found.

    The following picture depicts the north side of Front Street East, about 2 blocks east of Yonge Street. I don’t know what year it is, but look at how stunning these buildings are. It looks like Soho, New York meets some glamorous European capital.

    Can you imagine what we could do with these buildings today?

    image

    If there’s any doubt in your mind that this is Toronto or that it’s Front Street East, take a look at the spire in the far left hand side of the picture. It belongs to the Toronto Board of Trade Building, which used to sit at the north east corner of Yonge Street and Front Street. When it was built in the late 1800s, it was considered one of the first “skyscrapers” in Toronto. It was demolished in the 1950s.

    Here’s a picture of the Board of Trade Building so that you can compare. Again, take a look at the spire.

    image

    For those of you who might not be familiar with the area, here’s a map to help you out. The Board of Trade Building is shown on the bottom left hand corner. And the buildings in the first picture are in the triangular land area between Wellington and Front.

    image

    Now, let’s fast forward to the late 1960s. Those same buildings shown in picture number one have been demolished and in their place is the following parking lot. It’s a bit less glamorous looking. There are still heritage buildings on the south side of Front Street, but the balance of the area seems to have been blown out. What a shame.

    image

    Finally, here’s an aerial view of the area. It’s also from the late 1960s or early 1970s. You can see the same triangular land area, with only the Flatiron Building still standing at the very tip of it.

    image

    Obviously the St. Lawrence Market has come a long way since the 70s. That triangular area has since become Berczy Park, which is actually in the midst of being completely revitalized, and all of those parking lots have been filled in. But I still can’t help but wonder what the neighborhood would be like today had we preserved all of those heritage buildings. 

    I think cities work best when you can figure out that delicate balance between preservation and progress. It’s not always the simplest approach, but as most things in life, the right decisions are often the toughest ones to make.

  • Rise of rental

    image

    Last month Oxford Properties submitted a site plan application for the redevelopment of the rundown Cumberland Terrace in Toronto’s Yorkville neighborhood. If you’d like to browse the full application (including all the drawings), you can do that here.

    The proposal is a departure from previous plans and now includes 3 buildings: a 4.5 storey building, a 2.5 storey building, and a midblock 54 storey residential tower (the lobby is shown above). There will be both retail and residential uses.

    For those of you familiar with the mall, it should go without saying that Cumberland Terrace is in desperate need of redevelopment. So I’m not going to talk about that today. Instead, I’d like to mention 2 other points that stood out to me about the application.

    The first is the 2 midblock connections on either side of the tower, running from Cumberland Street to Mayfair Mews in the rear (see below). Yorkville has a history of intimate laneways, and so it’s nice to see some of this being carried through in a new development. It also opens up the opportunity for an improved Mayfair Mews.

    image

    Secondly, it’s somewhat surprising to see that the 54 storey residential tower is being proposed as rental. Toronto doesn’t build a lot of purpose-built rental apartment buildings. There are some (from the likes of Morguard and Concert Properties), but we haven’t done it at scale for decades. And that’s largely because the demand for condos has been so great.

    But recently I’ve been noticing a renewed interest from the real estate community in multi-family rental assets. Cadillac Fairview also proposed a 65 storey rental building at the north west corner of Yonge Street & Queen Street last year – though they later withdrew their application.

    image

    In the US, rental apartments as a share of all new housing is also at record highs – over 30%. And that’s partly because credit remains tight (certainly compared to pre-2008) and economic growth has been tepid. But also because of demographic changes. People are having fewer children, later in life, and so many are putting off buying.

    So I think we’re going to see even more rental apartments being built in Toronto in the coming years.

  • The demand for character office space

    Last Friday the Toronto Star published an article talking about the growing demand for character office buildings in submarkets outside of Toronto’s core. Specifically, it was talking about the Downtown West and Liberty Village submarkets (citing a report from CBRE).

    I’m sure this isn’t news to most of you. Cool loft spaces have been popular for years. But it’s interesting to look at how rents and vacancy rates have changed for these submarkets and product types over time.

    Since 2002, average (net) asking rents for brick-and-beam buildings in the west end have gone from $16.12 to $22.23 per square foot. Almost a 38% increase. By comparison, office space in the core has gone from $28.40 to $32.38 per square foot. A 14% increase.

    And if you look at vacancy rates since 2007, you’ll see that the character office market has really tightened up over the past 4 years or so. There’s growing demand for a limited amount of supply.

    With the growth that the downtown core is seeing and with the rise of Toronto as a creative startup hub, I’m sure we’ll continue to see strong demand for this type of space. But there’s only so much of it to go around. So I think we’ll also end up seeing greater interest in the east side of downtown and also more interesting new builds.

    Images/Charts: CBRE

  • Should you own or rent your home?

    image

    I was at a good friend’s wedding last night (congratulations again to Adrien + Rachel!), and one of the topics that came up at our table was whether it is better to own or rent your home. Now, in North America, conventional wisdom would suggest – almost mandate – that you have to own your place. If you’re still a renter, well then you’re “throwing away your money” my friend.

    But are you really? 

    A big part of the value of owning your home is that it’s forced savings. Every month when you make those principal and interest payments, you’re paying down your mortgage and socking away money for the future. And this can be a great thing for a lot of people, particularly if you’re not disciplined enough to save otherwise.

    But when you own a home, you’re also spending time and money on maintaining that home, and you’re also tying up capital that could be used elsewhere. So consider this: what if, instead of putting your savings towards a downpayment, you simply continued to rent and created an investment portfolio that you then contributed to on a regular basis just as you would a home?

    Depending on your assumptions, renting could turn out to put you further ahead financially. Here’s an example of that scenario from the Globe and Mail.

    Similarly, I remember being told in business school that companies that own their own real estate tend to under perform those that do not. And the rationale is that owning lots of real estate ties up capital that could otherwise be reinvested in the core business. In other words, if your core business is making widgets, then invest your money in making better widgets, not in real estate.

    But this is not to say that everybody should rent. Obviously I’m a big believer in real estate. And for a lot of people, owning may make sense. This post was really just to say that the owning vs. renting decision may not be as black and white as you might think.

    Image: Flickr

  • Seattle’s first protected bike lane makes a quick adjustment

    Seattle recently installed its first protected downtown bike lane on Second Avenue. Here’s a short video of it in action (pay attention to the signalling setup and the pedestrians that walk into the bike lanes). Click here if you can’t see the video below.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2iQCCHlR0s?rel=0]

    Shortly after it opened, they quickly discovered that the left green arrow and solid green circle (shown above) were confusing drivers. The intent was for the left green arrow to signal that you could turn and for the solid circle to signal that you could drive straight ahead.

    But even with the accompanying sign, drivers kept getting confused and thought a green circle meant you could go wherever you want.

    So the Seattle Department of Transportation quickly adjusted and changed the green circle to a north arrow. And it seems to have fixed the problem. I think it goes to show how important the details can be with these things. 

  • Fun Friday: Skateboarding city tours (Brisbane & Porto Alegre)

    Some of you told me that yesterday’s post on careers was actually quite sad. That it came across as if I were advocating for people, not to do what they love, but to instead do what makes them the most money. But that was not my intention. 

    There were a lot of reasons why I got into real estate development, and perhaps I oversimplified yesterday. But a lot of it actually came down to the fact that I’m passionate about building great cities (hence this blog).

    And I thought it was ultimately unfair that some investment-banker-turned-developer, who doesn’t really care about cities, might end up having more say over the built environment than me, the architect. 

    So I decided to sacrifice designing individual buildings in the hope that I’d one day be able to give back to cities on a much larger scale. And I still hope to be able to do that.

    In any case, to end the week on a more fun note, I thought I would do a post called Fun Friday and link to 2 city tours: one of Brisbane, Australia, and one of Porto Alegre, Brazil. 

    But these aren’t just any city tours. They are by local skateboarders showing you their city. I posted one for Toronto about 8 months ago, so some of you might be familiar with the series.

    I love how differently skateboarders look at the urban environment. I hope you can appreciate it as well. 

    Brisbane, Australia:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEFQLjnhKT4?rel=0]

    Porto Alegre, Brazil:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taF71igPZY0?rel=0]

  • Trying out the Oculus Rift virtual reality headset

    image

    This week on Architect This City is turning out to have a big focus on technology. And it’s not going to stop today, because this evening I had the chance to try the Oculus Rift virtual reality headset for the first time (many thanks to Dave Payne of Invent Dev for the demo). As a reminder, Oculus is the company that Facebook recently acquired for $2 billion.

    Now virtual reality certainly isn’t a new idea and lots of people have been promising – for a long time – that it was going to revolutionize the world. Which may be why I had somewhat low expectations going into this. But I have to say that I was blown away. Despite being a bit choppy (to get good visuals it ran at around 15 frames per second), I was shocked at how immersive the experience was.

    Here’s a picture of Rick exploring the (virtual) space behind him:

    image

    It was actually really strange watching somebody move around as they explored another world. The demo that Dave showed us was of an apartment suite. You could walk around the living room. Turn around and see the front door. Walk up to the window and admire the view outside. It was incredible, but somewhat scary at the same time.

    Obviously there are ton of potential use cases for this. I’m imagining a buyer touring a condo suite and picking their finishes before it’s even built. I’m imagining an architect designing a building in 1:1 scale by waving their hands around in a virtual world. I’m imagining “traveling” to a beach to treat seasonal affective disorder. And the list goes on.

    This isn’t going to happen overnight. I actually got a bit nauseous because of how choppy the video got at times. But I can certainly see the potential. Virtual reality is coming. It’s clearly the future of gaming. And I’m sure it’ll get applied to many other areas of the economy. I guess that’s why Facebook bought these guys for $2 billion.

    If you have an interest or need in the 3D visualization space, I would encourage you to reach out to Dave at Invent Dev. He’s super passionate about the work that he’s doing and is looking to collaborate with more people in the design and real estate spaces. Thanks again Dave.

  • How smartwatches will augment location

    image

    So the rumors were right. Apple released a watch today. There will be 3 different “collections”, but lots of flexibility in terms of how each can be customized. There’s a big emphasis on health and fitness monitoring. Prices start at $350. And you’ll need an iPhone. Though you won’t be able to get one on your wrist until next year.

    Who knows whether or not it’ll catch on in the same way that iPod and iPhone did, but I think it has a damn good shot (more on this below). They’ve clearly put a lot of thought into both usability and the whole fashion side of the equation, which obviously needed to be done. Given that most people today use their phone for the time, the watch market strikes me as being heavily about style.

    In case you were wondering, here’s the watch market size as of 2013 (courtesy of Benedict Evans):

    image

    A lot of you might be skeptical about the need for a computer on your wrist (remember those watch calculators from the 80s?). But I think this time is different. Consider the number of people that now walk around with their phone in their hand and/or immediately pull it out whenever they have a free moment. We’ve become reliant (okay, addicted), to notifications and information.

    But in many of those cases, the smartphone isn’t the most efficient medium to be delivering those messages. Just like it’s not ideal to have to reach into your pocket to figure out what time it is, I think the watch could emerge as a new and better medium for a bunch of other pieces of information. And the big one could be location-aware or contextually-aware notifications.

    Here’s a tweet from Dennis Crowley – founder of Foursquare (Swarm) – talking about that exact thing:

    So what does this even mean?

    It means walking into a restaurant and having a tip pop up on your watch telling you what the best dish is (as shown in the tweet above). It’s driving down the street and having your watch notify you that there’s an open house 3 blocks away (and then giving you directions). It’s walking into a condo building and having your watch tell you that one of your friends is having a party on the 23rd floor. And so on.

    All of these notifications are currently already possible on your phone, but it’s not the ideal place for many of them. Which is why we’re all walking through life looking down at our phones. So while a computer strapped to your wrist may feel like we’re going further down that rabbit hole, it may actually free up more of our hands and our attention.

    And I’m sure there are many other possibilities that nobody has even thought of yet. Location just feels like a big one to me.

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Taxis just got 40% cheaper in Toronto

    UberX officially launched in Toronto today. Which means that Toronto’s taxi and limousine industry is about to get a lot more grouchy. For those of you who may not be familiar, uberX is Uber’s low-cost car service. Just like the regular version, you hail a car using your mobile phone. But this option will cost you 40% less than a regular taxi!

    Here are sample rates from the Financial District to Yonge & Eglinton (midtown):

    And from the Financial District to Pearson International Airport:

    image

    This is pretty exciting. Because as much as I think it’s great to use Hailo or Uber to hail and then pay for a car, the big problem in my mind has always been that cabs in Toronto are just far too expensive. The meter starts at $4.25 and shoots up faster than you can take a selfie in the backseat.

    But obviously there’s an entrenched industry here that is not going to be happy about a startup eating into their fares. So I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a lot more backlash here in Toronto – as has been the case in many other cities. However I don’t think that’s a viable long term solution for the incumbents.

    Uber is thought to be worth $18.2 billion right now. It’s probably not going to go away.

    So instead of protesting and trying to ban it, we should be figuring out how to adjust to this changing reality. For the incumbents, this might mean lowering fares or figuring out a better way to differentiate themselves. A 40% discount is a pretty compelling value proposition. For me personally, I don’t know why I would ever pay more for a regular taxi, unless there was no other option.

    On a side note, it’s worth pointing out that an uberX trip from downtown to Pearson is estimated to cost around $33 – roughly the same as what some people think the Union Pearson Express train will cost. That’s further evidence that charging a lot and targeting business travelers may not be the best strategy.