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: athiscity

  • 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

  • John Maeda’s #DesignInTech Report from SXSW

    One of the most interesting talks that I attended while I was in graduate school at Penn was by John Maeda

    John operates at the intersection of design, technology, and business, and I find his work fascinating. He’s probably best described as a graphic designer, visual artist, computer scientist, academic, and author. And when I heard him speak in 2008, he was also President of the Rhode Island School of Design.

    More recently though, John has entered the world of venture capital by becoming a “Design Partner” at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB) in Silicon Valley. But what’s really interesting about this move is that when he joined KPCB in January 2014, he was the first designer to arrive on Silicon Valley’s legendary Sand Hill Road. No other VC firm had a designer in-house.

    And that’s because design hasn’t, at least historically, been considered that important. In fact, in some cases it was seen as being detrimental. Brian Chesky – cofounder of Airbnb – has gone on record saying that when they were first starting out, Silicon Valley didn’t think that a bunch of designers from RISD could build and run a company. Boy were they wrong.

    So that’s changing. As of this month (March 2015), there are now 6 other designers on Sand Hill Road. The venture capital community has seemingly woken up to the value of great design.

    John Maeda has branded this shift, #DesignInTech. And he recently gave a presentation on the topic at SXSW. It’s a great read, particularly if you’re somebody who cares about design. Click here if you can’t see it below.

    //www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/kleinerperkins/design-in-tech-report-2015

  • 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

  • Why brick-and-mortar stores should be scared of same hour delivery

    Venture capitalist Fred Wilson wrote a post on his blog today called, Same Day/Same Hour Delivery.

    The post is about why he believes that Walmart could get the “most disrupted by the Internet.” And it has to do with the rapid rise of same day and even same hour delivery from ecommerce companies. If you can order it online and receive it within an hour, why bother going to a brick-and-mortar store?

    His post reminded me of one I wrote towards the end of last year called, The threat to big box retailing. But since Fred is in the business of making bets on technology companies and he has accumulated a significant amount of wealth doing that, I thought you might like to also hear it from him.

  • 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.

  • A self-fulfilling prophecy in the 6

    [soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/190951409″ params=”auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true” width=”100%” height=”450″ iframe=”true” /]

    More so than any other genre of music, there seems to be a longstanding tradition in hip hop of promoting the city in which you’re from. From Los Angeles to Atlanta to New York, I’ve always admired the way that hip hop artists promote and showcase their cities.

    For a long time in Toronto we didn’t have that. Our hip hop scene was too embryonic and we just didn’t have artists who were both big enough and willing to take the lead. Or at least, that’s what I was lead to believe as an outsider who candidly doesn’t really follow the scene.

    But all that has changed.

    Earlier this month, Pitchfork published an interesting article by Jamieson Cox called: Views From The 6 – Inside Drake’s Toronto. It talks all about Drake’s love affair with this city and it even has a map of all the areas of Toronto that have been featured in his videos.

    But at one point in the article Jamieson argues that – like many hip hop cities – Drake’s depiction of Toronto is more fantasy than reality:

    His mythological Toronto is a metropolis where everyone knows your name and exes are always lurking around the corner, a forest of penthouses with a panoramic view, a park-studded playground where the skies are free of ambient light and the highways are always clear. Like many hip-hop locales, it’s a city closer to the realm of theory—and fantasy—than reality. 

    However, at the end of the day, I don’t think that matters. Similar to how your mind actually believes that wine tastes better out of an expensive glass, I think a big part of city branding has to do simply with how you’re supposed to feel. What is Toronto supposed to be like? How am I supposed to experience this?

    I love what Drake is doing. Because if everyone thinks it’s supposed to be a certain way, eventually that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • Are we becoming more or less entrepreneurial?

    Aaron M. Renn of The Urbanophile, recently wrote an interesting article in Governing called, Where’s America’s Entrepreneurial Economy? In it, he argues that despite the fact that there’s a perception that entrepreneurship is on the rise, overall rates are actually declining.

    The Brookings Institution found that so-called “firm entry rates” have declined since the 1970s and that they suffered a steep fall post-2005. And though millennials are often seen as an entrepreneurial generation, The Wall Street Journal reports that business ownership among those under the age of 30 recently hit a 24-year low. Self-employment has seen a similar downward trend. A study by Economic Modeling Specialists International found that both the total number of self-employed and their share of jobs have fallen since 2006.

    His argument is that outside of tech — where yes, the barriers to entry have fallen significantly over the years — it has actually become harder to start a company in a lot of other cases. And he specifically mentions two industries where he believes that is very much the case: construction and real estate.

    Why is that?

    Well, he cites a number of possible factors, one of which is increased licensing requirements for many industries. But the two most interesting for me are slow disruption cycles and the presence of large dominant firms.

    Real estate has both of those. 

    It’s also a capital intensive industry. And it’s becoming harder for smaller private players to compete with larger institutions and pension funds who struggle with “moving the investment needle”, not with access to capital. Real estate is no longer the fringe asset class it once was.

    In contrast, you have the tech space with fast disruption cycles and low barriers to entry. Yes, you also have large dominant players (Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, and so on), but even they don’t have complete immunity in an environment where new ideas frequently trump access to capital.

    A culture of entrepreneurship across all industries is important for our society. I hope we never lose that.

  • The value of cheap housing

    Photograph Houston Sunrise by Cliff Baise on 500px

    Houston Sunrise by Cliff Baise on 500px

    Urbanists generally don’t like to talk about cities like Houston. It sprawls. It’s car oriented. It’s over air-conditioned. In other words, it’s the antithesis of the dense and walkable cities that urbanists today like to tout as being exemplary. 

    But despite all this, Houston is one of, if not the, fastest growing city in America. According to The Economist, the population of the Houston metro area grew faster than any other city in America between 2000 and 2010. And between 2009 and 2013, its real GDP grew by 22%.

    So why is that? Here’s a snippet from that same Economist article (“Life in the sprawl”):

    Paradoxically, perhaps the city’s biggest strength is its sprawl. Unlike most other big cities in America, Houston has no zoning code, so it is quick to respond to demand for housing and office space. Last year authorities in the Houston metropolitan area, with a population of 6.2m, issued permits to build 64,000 homes. The entire state of California, with a population of 39m, issued just 83,000. Houston’s reliance on the car and air-conditioning is environmentally destructive and unattractive to well-off singletons. But for families on moderate incomes, it is a place to live well cheaply.

    So while Houston may not check off all of Jane Jacobs’ boxes, it does provide one important thing: cheap housing. And that’s clearly valuable for a huge number of people.

    But the other interesting thing about the snippet above, is that it starts to illustrate how frequently supply constrained markets operate with housing deficits. 

    The fact that the entire state of California issued only about 30% more building permits than the Houston metro – which you could easily argue is closer to a “perfect market” – tells me that there’s probably a lot of people bidding for the same housing in California.

    That’s less so the case in Houston.

  • 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