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.
Last Tuesday the app launched in 10 cities across North America. So if you’re in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Toronto, Vancouver, or Washington D.C., you can go ahead and download it right now.
The biggest “wow factor” is probably the augmented reality feature that allows you to hold your phone up and see transit information overlaid on top of the street in front of you.
But more fundamentally, the real potential lies in the platform’s ability to collect data on the way people move in cities and on how transit lines are performing, so that it can be fed back to improve overall efficiency.
That’s why the company is also working with cities to give them 24/7 analytics and reporting on how every bus, car, and train is performing in their networks.
My hope is that with better data at our disposal, we’ll be able to elevate the discussions around transit and transit planning. Without great data, it’s too easy for these discussion to become political.
Back in 2006 when I was fresh out of architecture school and looking for work, I knocked on the door of a design company based in London with my polished resume in hand. I was sleeping on a friend’s couch at the time and the company seemed like a perfect fit for me – so I went for it.
There’s no happy ending to this story though – because I didn’t get past the front door that day – but there’s never any harm in trying. As my friend told me the morning I went: fortune favors the bold.
They call themselves “a residential and hotel design company”, but their model is actually more unique than that. Founded in 1999 by John Hitchcox (a property developer) and Philippe Starck (a rockstar designer), the firm partners with local real estate developers around the world and creates value through design, branding, and marketing expertise – as well as through celebrity names like Philippe Starck and Jade Jagger.
What makes their model interesting is that, unlike the real estate developers they partner with, they’re not assuming the same level of risk (unless, of course, they co-invest). They get paid (well) for the design services and marketing expertise they provide, as well as the brand equity that they bring.
This is similar to what Donald Trump does with some (most?) of his developments now. Want the Trump name on your building? Pay $X. Want Philippe Starck at your condo sales launch? Pay $Y.
When I was in architecture school, I used to wonder why we didn’t talk about the importance of branding and marketing. I thought we should. Which is probably why I ended up in business school afterwards.
I think there’s a lot of potential in overlaps and hybrid business models, which is why I was excited to learn today that YOO has just launched a new architectural practice called YOO Architecture.
Though this blog is focused on cities and geared towards city builders, I cover a lot of different topics.
I talk about real estate, architecture, planning, transportation, technology, and even personal topics. My primary goal is to create a worldwide community of people passionate about building great cities, but at the same time it’s still a personal blog.
Usually I just write about whatever is currently on my mind. I never queue up posts and so each post is written the day of. But sometimes I wonder if I’m delivering on what you, the readers, really want to read and talk about.
So today I thought I would simply ask: what would you like to see more of on ATC in 2015? Let me know in the comment section below and I’ll try my best to deliver.
The title of this post is a line from a Medium post that Biz Stone wrote back in August 2012. For those of you who might not know, Biz Stone is one of the cofounders of Twitter, as well as the cofounder of something called The Obvious Corporation.
Obvious is a “company” that I’ve been following on and off for a number of years – I’m fascinated by the model and how it has evolved. It was founded back in 2006 by Biz Stone and Ev Williams (another Twitter cofounder) as a kind of “product lab” for new ideas. But since then it has gone through a number of iterations.
Though I suspect that most people haven’t heard of Obvious, it was actually the parent company of Twitter before Twitter took off and became independent.
But even more interesting is the fact that Twitter was actually a side project for a company called Odeo (a failed podcasting startup) that in turn was owned by Obvious. So specifically, Twitter started as a side project of one of the companies within a larger “product lab.” Nobody said innovation was straightforward.
When Twitter eventually took off, their focus naturally shifted away from Obvious to it. They had a rocket ship of a company to build and run.
But in 2011, Ev and Biz, along with Jason Goldman (of Twitter), decided to “reboot Obvious.” The most notable outcome of this reboot has been the creation of writing platform Medium, which I believe still technically sits within Obvious. (Click here if you don’t know what Medium is.)
Then in December of last year (2014), Ev Williams announced the third chapter of Obvious – now called Obvious Ventures – with this post called: It’s Obvious. Again. In short, they’re a venture capital firm with an approach that they call #worldpositive:
We’re entrepreneurs. We’ve helped a lot of companies launch, grow, and generate great financial returns. A few of these companies also deliver positive social and environmental benefits with every dollar of revenue they earn. We want to fund and build more of those. That’s what we call #worldpositive venture capital.
Already they’ve publicly announced investments in 10 companies, one of which I’ve written about before on Architect This City (Flux.io).
I decided to tell this story today for 3 reasons.
It shows you how non-linear innovation and careers can be. I love the idea of #worldpositive investing. And finally, because some of the startups that Obvious Ventures has invested in – such as Flux.io and Loup – are directly related to the future of cities.
I was on CBC radio this morning talking about the revitalization of Dovercourt Village and Geary Avenue in Toronto.
The funny thing about this topic is that it’s one I actually held off writing about. I’ve been thinking about this street and area for probably about 5 years now. However, I do have to keep some secrets to myself 🙂
But then I started feeling like the cat was already out of the bag. Everyone in my circle was talking about it. So I wrote a post calling Dovercourt Village the next Ossington. I had no idea it would get the traction that it has gotten, but in hindsight it makes total sense. It makes a great headline: “Toronto’s ugliest street to become the next Ossington.” Boom.
The tough question that Matt Galloway asked me this morning was: What happens to all the blue collar businesses when/if Geary Avenue and the area really takes off? My response – given that it was only a 5 minute radio piece – was that it comes down to preservation vs. progress.
This is a topic that I’ve written about with respect to heritage buildings, but the same concept applies to communities as well. How do you allow neighborhoods to receive new investment while at the same time not erasing its past and the things that made it interesting in the first place?
It’s not easy, that’s for sure.
I absolutely believe that there are things that developers can do to respect the neighborhoods in which they build in. But at the same time there are economics at play. In business school, they teach you this:
It’s the lifecycle of businesses and industries.
The key takeaway here is that the rise and decline of businesses is actually quite healthy for markets. History is littered with examples. The word processor replaced the typewriter. The mobile phone replaced the landline. Air travel replaced rail travel. And the list goes on.
Today, I think we’re at a moment in time where our relationship to cars is changing dramatically. How we get around and how we own and operate them is being called into question.
So just because there’s auto shops on Geary Avenue today, doesn’t mean they’ll be there tomorrow regardless of whether the area takes off or not.
Despite being rainy and unusually warm, I had a great time in Revelstoke, BC. I first heard about the city a few years ago when I told a close friend of mine (who is an avid snowboarder) that I was going to Whistler. He told me: “Forget Whistler. Go to Revelstoke.”
Revelstoke has been on the map for skiers and snowboarders for decades. Some consider it to be the helicopter skiing capital of the world. But there are only so many people who can afford $1,000+ per day skiing, so it wasn’t until 2007 when the first gondola opened up on Mount Mackenzie that people started calling Revelstoke the next Whistler, the next Jackson Hole, the next Zermatt, and so on.
As both a snowboarder and a real estate developer, this is of course exciting. Everybody wants to be a part of the next big thing and they want to call it before anyone else. That’s how you make money – by being right about things before the masses catch on and/or when everyone else thinks you’re wrong.
But 2007 happens to come before 2008. And 2008 wasn’t a kind year to the real estate community. Revelstoke was no exception.
The condos at the base of the mountain weren’t selling (about half of the ones that did sell were sold to Canadians I was told). Expansion plans to become the largest ski resort in the world were scaled back. And the resort teetered on the brink of bankruptcy. But since then, new ownership has taken over the resort and the sentiment on the ground seems to be that Revelstoke – as a real estate play – is somewhere near the bottom.
But something even more interesting is happening in Revelstoke, beyond just luxury condos at the base of a mountain. And since I was on the disabled list for the second half of my vacation, I had time to explore.
I was fortunate enough to meet a local entrepreneur (who happened to also be from Toronto) and his message to me was clear: Ontario is moving in. Both talent and capital from Ontario are starting to flock to this small mountain town of almost 8,000 full-time residents (it’s technically classified as a city). And from my experience at the bars and restaurants in town, he appears to be right.
Now, you might be thinking these people are just ski bums looking for an excuse to live in a mountain town. But is that such a unique and bad thing? Today’s up and coming generation is looking for lifestyle + career. And so if your city or community can offer both, you have a competitive advantage when it comes to attracting talent.
Revelstoke knows they have the outdoor amenities and the “epic pow”, so now all they need to do is bring the businesses. And that’s exactly what Revelstoke wants to do. If you’re an entrepreneur or business owner, Revelstoke wants you to move there. I’m serious. The vision is to create a sustainable live, work, and play mountain community in the BC interior.
I hope that happens.
Drop me a line if you want to talk mountains and business.
Post Update: The beautiful photo of Revelstoke at the top of this post was taken by Ian Houghton out of BC. This is his business website and this is his Facebook page.
I’m sitting in Calgary International Airport right now waiting for my flight back to Toronto. This marks the end of the 6th Penn Annual (our annual ski and snowboard trip). We all had an amazing time and I can’t wait until next year’s annual. We’ve already (pretty much) decided that it’s going to be in Park City, Utah.
As you can probably tell, I like traditions and routines. As boring as that might sound, I think there’s a lot of value in doing the same thing over and over again.
It’s why I do an annual ski and snowboard trip every February with some of my closest friends (to a mountain we’ve never been to before). It’s why I write something – no matter how short it might be – every day here on Architect This City. It’s why I lift weights 3-4 times every week. It’s why I’m interested in brand building (creating equity takes consistency and time). It’s why I love the permanence of real estate. And it’s also why I like dollar cost averaging when it comes to investing.
I guess you could say I like the long game. I enjoy having “disciplines.”
And that’s because I think there are very few substitutes for hard work and sustained efforts. We all love to talk about those overnight success stories, but in reality they’re often the farthest thing from overnight. I know that it takes time to get great at something. And I also know that I’m not always going to be right. But the simple act of not stopping can take you pretty far.
In any event, I hope you enjoyed all the mountain town talk (I have a few more ideas I want to write about) and my Snapchat stories (if you followed along). I got really into Snapchat on this trip. And that’s because I think the platform is at a tipping point where brands are going to start thinking of it as a legitimate marketing channel – and not just an app for teens.
Do you have any routines or disciplines? If so, feel free share them in the comment section below. Or if you hate routines, tell us why.
For Alex’s article, the Globe asked “prominent urbanists, architects, and scholars” from around the world to comment on what Canadian mayors should be focused on right now as we build the cities of tomorrow.
Here’s a list of what they said:
Make people, not cars, happy
Decrease speed limits
Empower city governments
Leverage density
Embrace the science of big data
Mix residences and workspace
Turn streets into destinations
Redevelop the inner suburbs
It’s a great set of recommendations. So I would encourage you to check out the full Globe and Mail article.
Today’s Architect This City post is being brought to you live from the mid-base lodge at Revelstoke Mountain Resort on Mount Mackenzie in British Columbia.
It’s currently foggy, rainy, and about 2 degrees celsius — which I’m told is fairly anomalous for this area. It’s unfortunate for my friends on the slopes, but it makes me feel somewhat better about hanging out all day to rest my back and shoulder.
The town of Revelstoke was founded in the 1880s when the Canadian Pacific Railway connected the area. And traditionally its economy has been closely connected to that rail. However, with amenities like the resort I’m currently sitting in, its economy now increasingly includes tourism.
One of the most interesting reminders for me on this trip through the Canadian Rockies is how instrumental rail was in unifying and then building this country. But in actuality, it wasn’t just rail. It was rail plus property.
Within the Canadian Pacific Railway was a division called Canadian Pacific Hotels, which built and operated both urban and rural hotels such as the Banff Springs Hotel and the Chateau Lake Louise (both of which I visited for the first time on this trip). And today, these railway hotels are absolutely some of Canada’s most inspiring landmarks.
The model at the time was simple.
Sir William Cornelius Van Horne — who was president of CPR in 1888 — believed: “If we can’t export the scenery, we’ll import the tourists.” He knew that it was all about moving as many people as possible. And to do that he needed to create accommodations and destinations all along the rail. In other words, rail alone wasn’t going to cut it. It had to be rail plus property.
This of course is a model that still persists today. Many public transit authorities, such as the MTR in Hong Kong, have been hugely successful by adopting a rail plus property model.
However as the case study of the Canadian Pacific Railway demonstrates this is not a novel approach. It’s actually a tried a true model. Rail, and infrastructure in general, goes really nicely with property development.
So why don’t all transit authorities adopt a rail plus property approach?
I’m writing this post from the Lakeview Lounge at the Fairmont Chateau Lake Louise. The view of the (frozen) lake and mountains is absolutely stunning (see above). I can totally see why people move to the Rockies and never leave. Frankly, I’m not sure how I’m going to ever go home 😉
This Chateau was first built up in the late 19th century by the Canadian Pacific Railway. Developed as a way to encourage ridership and fund railway expansion, its position on the eastern edge of Lake Louise was probably a fairly obvious choice (although only when accompanied by rail). It’s designed to take full advantage of the views of the lake and the mountains.
The interesting thing about Dovercourt Village – and specifically Geary Avenue – is that they seem like unlikely places for new investment. Many of the buildings aren’t particularly beautiful. And there’s a rail line and a set of power lines running through the middle of it.
But if the buzz around Dovercourt Village proves to be true, then it could very well end up as a new yuppy enclave in the city. I’m not going to debate the merits of gentrification today, but I think it’s interesting how change can seemingly emerge out of nowhere.
If you rewind 10 years to before Ossington Avenue became the hotspot that it is today, many of you would have probably classified it as an unlikely place for gentrification. Located beside the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), the area wasn’t considered desirable at the time. (CAMH has since undergone a lot of change.)
But oftentimes change can come out of nowhere. It just takes few enterprising pioneers who see something that nobody else does.
