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.
I went snowboarding today. As always it was a lot of fun. If only Toronto had mountains.
Here is a Canadian video about snowboarding from 1985 that, I think, does an excellent job demonstrating how resistant to change we humans can sometimes be.
The video sure sounds silly today, but it probably didn’t in 1985. It aired on the CBC.
I am writing this post on my iPad and there doesn’t appear to be a way to embed the video. The Tumblr app isn’t great. So all you’re getting today is a link.
The CBC published a piece this morning on my laneway house proposal. The subheadline: Real estate developer believes time is right to build a laneway house he planned five years ago.
It’s true. As many of you already know, this proposal has been in the works for a number of years. But right now feels different. I continue to be encouraged by all of the interest and support surrounding laneway housing in this city.
Thank you Michelle Cheung for covering this.
I’m hijacking Architect This City today to help my mother out and try something new.
She is looking to sell her 1 bedroom condo in the Radiocity Condominiums, located at 285 Mutual Street in Toronto. It’s called Radiocity, not because the developers thought New York was cool (my pet peeve), but because the site used to be the headquarters of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) way back when.
The 2-tower complex is located north of Carlton Street, between Church Street and Jarvis Street, and is adjacent to Canada’s National Ballet School (designed by KPMB Architects). It’s close to College Park and Yonge & College.
It was completed/registered in 2005 and won a number of design awards, including one from the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada. Notable about the design is the way it integrates townhouses at the base, a public courtyard (with public art) between both towers, and the Ballet School. (A deal struck with the developer and the CBC allowed the school to buy their portion of the land for $1).
The buildings were developed by Context Development and designed by architectsAlliance, which is actually the same developer-architect duo behind the building I currently live and own in. I’m clearly a big fan.
The suite is about 560 square feet. It has 9’ exposed concrete ceilings. It has one full bathroom (tub), with a stacked washer and dryer. The bedroom is about 10’ x 10’ and is setback from the outside windows and enclosed with 3 x translucent sliding doors from C-Living. (I had them installed myself and they’re much better quality than the sliding doors you’ll find in most new builds.) The kitchen and living area is open concept, and there’s a north facing balcony that overlooks a quiet private courtyard. You basically get a view of trees, greenery, and the city. The suite is located on the 7th floor.
Here’s the floor plan:
And here are a few photos. They are all the right proportions and haven’t been stretched to make the space look bigger 🙂
The building has 24-hour concierge, visitor parking, and 3 floors of amenities. The amenities include a gym, aerobics room, party room, saunas, media room, boardroom, multiple lounges, 2 x guest suites, a party room, and a billiard room.
College subway station is a 7 minute walk (600m).
The Loblaws grocery store at Maple Leaf Gardens (which is awesome and also includes an LCBO) is a 5 minute walk (400m). Though I’m fairly certain you could do it in 4 minutes.
And you’re a 6 minute walk to Ryerson University (500m).
The asking price is C$349,900. The maintenance fee is $426.64 per month and the property taxes are $2,039.19 per year.
It’s a private sale, but she is willing to cooperate with buyer’s agents (2.5% commission). It’s currently furnished, but you can have it either way you want (unfurnished or furnished).
If you have any questions or would like to book a viewing, please send her or me an email. If you’re an agent just looking for a listing, please don’t. Thanks for reading. Regularly scheduled programming will resume tomorrow.
Image at the top of this post is from architectsAlliance.
dupont survivor by Josemaria de Churtichaga on 500px
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.
A few years ago, I was touring a friend from the US around Toronto’s Financial District and the first thing he said to me was: “You have no retail.” And that’s certainly what it might look like at first glance.
But there’s actually lots of retail. It’s just all underground in an over 30 kilometer long network of walkways called the PATH.
Initially conceived of as the antidote to Canadian winters, “underground cities” are a kind of uniquely Canadian form of urbanism. Toronto and Montreal have the largest ones in the world and they continue to grow. As new towers are built, new connections are added.
But the downside to all of this is that it pulls street life down underground. And it can conceal a lot of the urban vibrancy that is actually take place. So maybe we need to come up with design solutions to better connect these subterranean cities back to street level and also not forget about the street.
I’m thinking about this today because of a CBC documentary I watched this morning called Life Below Zero. It basically argues that – unlike other cold climate cities and countries – the vast majority of Canadians actually hate winter. And underground cities are our way of trying to ignore it.
Well, I don’t hate winter. In fact, I love it because it signals snowboarding season for me. But I may be in the minority. What’s your position on winter?
Image: Flickr
Right now the Toronto International Film Festival is going on in the city. It’s actually one of my favorite times in Toronto. There’s so much going on and the city generally does things that it doesn’t normally allow, but that it should do all throughout the year, such as extending last call at bars and closing down streets to cars.
This year, King Street between University Avenue and Peter Street has been made pedestrian-only. It encompasses an area known as the Entertainment District and includes the Bell Lightbox, which is the TIFF HQ. The street was closed last Thursday and will reopen this Monday. So it’s a 4 day thing, that TIFF is calling “Festival Street.”
Some people – like me – are really excited about this. Here’s s picture I tweeted out on Thursday night. Given the engagement (retweets/favorites), I think there are others who feel the same way I do:
Pedestrian only King Street for #TIFF. Look at this magic! #athiscity pic.twitter.com/KVR7t2Irvs
— Brandon G. Donnelly (@donnelly_b)
//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
But there are others who are furious that their commute was disrupted last week and that we’re inconveniencing locals for the sake of hosting one of the top film festivals in the world. (King Street typically moves about 60,000 people per day on the streetcar and 20,000 vehicles.)
But when I walked the entire 650 meter stretch on Thursday night, it was completely full of people. There were people playing large-scale chess. There were people eating at picnic benches. And there were lots of people just enjoying a wonderful summer stroll in the city.
And all I could think about is that this is an unmet need in the city. King Street is a wonderful place to be right now and we don’t have an equivalent during the other 361 days of the year here in Toronto. So rather than be upset that we’ve closed down 6 blocks of downtown, I’m only upset that we don’t do more of this and make it permanent during the rest of the year.
I’m not necessarily saying that King Street is the best place to do this. Yonge Street initially strikes me as being a better place to start. But I am saying that if we have to reconfigure things to make our city more awesome for when guests come over, that maybe we should think about how to make it more awesome all the time.
Last night I watched CBC’s the Condo Game documentary. This is what it’s about:
“The Condo Game examines the forces at play behind the fastest moving condo market in North America – Toronto – and discovers that the glittering glass hides a sea of troubles.”
If you haven’t seen it, you can watch it here at CBC’s Doc Zone. It’s about 45 minutes long.
Generally, I found the piece to be overly sensationalized. (If you watched it and it left you worried about condos, contact me. I’d love to hear from you.) However, that’s not to say that the documentary doesn’t raise some important points. One that I absolutely think is worth discussing is the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
Many developers like “the board” because it provides recourse. If the city fails to take action on a development application within 180 days, developers have the right to appeal to the board.
While I do think it’s critical to have some sort of mechanism to unlock a gridlocked planning process, I also think that it’s fundamentally problematic to give the province ultimate decision making power over municipal planning decisions.
Real estate development is very much a local business and these decisions should be happening at the local level. However, with the OMB looming overhead, it has left municipalities disempowered. “We’ll deal with it at the board” always remains an option.
But what if there wasn’t a board? What if municipalities and developers had to figure out a solution between the two of them? We’d certainly end up with less wasted money (on expensive lawyers), but I think we’d also end up with better design and planning outcomes.
To do this though, the city needs to get their act together with respect to zoning. Almost nothing is zoned for what developers end up building. But I think this largely has to do with the fact that the city knows any dissenting decision will just get appealed. Again, they’re disempowered.
So I think it’s time we empowered cities. This may seem scary to some developers at first, but there’s a lot to be gained.
