Tag: cities

• Our fixation with height

  

  Last summer a development application was submitted for a 57 storey mixed-use tower on the south end of Toronto’s historic Distillery District. 

  It’s the tower on the right hand side of the picture above. The 2 towers on the left are existing, although they’re quite recent. The development site is currently a parking lot and it abuts a railway corridor to the south.

  The reason I bring up this project now is because I recently saw this notice go out from the Gooderham & Worts Neighbourhood Association. It’s an announcement for a public meeting that I believe just happened earlier this week (I think they meant to say 2015 instead of 2014).

  After I saw the notice, I decided to share the rendering on social media to see what people thought of the proposal. The general consensus seemed to be that the tower looked a bit cookie cutter (though to be fair it’s hard to tell from renderings like this) and that 57 storeys was simply too tall for the area. I got comments back like “enough is enough.”

  Now, I’m not here to say that 57 storeys is exactly the right height for this building and this location (though it might be), but I am saying that I don’t think it’s as important as most people think it is. I think we’ve become over-fixated on height, at the expense of other important design issues.

  Part of this has to do with how we communicate projects and how we tell the story. If you look at the city’s website for this project, you’ll see that this is how it’s explained:

  The City has received an Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning application for a 57-storey mixed use tower and a 5-storey commercial building containing 496 residential dwellings, 5,048 square metres of retail gross floor area, and 21,243 square metres of office gross floor area. The 5-storey commercial building is within the Distillery District, and the 57 storey tower is immediately south west of the Distillery District.

  About the only thing that I think most people (outside of the industry) would understand are the heights of the buildings. Everything else – from the Official Plan Amendment to the number of square metres of gross retail area – is likely lost. 

  So it’s actually not surprising that most people just look at one or two renderings and the number of storeys, and then make a judgement call about whether or not it would be a positive thing for the city.

  Now, I know why we communicate projects in such a clinical way. It’s to appear impartial. But there are so many other considerations when it comes to great city building. 

  How does the building meet the street? What are the first couple of floors like at eye-level? What’s the materiality? What would the experience be like for someone having a coffee on a patio outside of the building? What kind of commercial tenants will there be? Is there a unique leasing/programming strategy? What’s the overall vision for the project?

  Again, I’m not saying that height is completely irrelevant. I simply fear that we might be losing sight of the bigger picture. The Distillery District is a magical place in Toronto. It’s hands down one of my favorite places to be. In fact, I’ll be there this weekend for a Winterlicious dinner. But I honestly couldn’t tell you how tall the existing towers are. Are they in the 40s? 

  I could, however, tell you exactly what it’s like to walk down the Distillery’s intimate cobblestone streets and sit on a patio with a beer in hand. It’s a beautiful thing.

  Note: I have zero affiliation with this project.

  Image: City of Toronto

  2015.01.30

• 3 stages of intensification

  

  We all know that the Greater Toronto Area is growing and intensifying at an incredible pace. In fact, last year the region set a record with 25,571 new condominium units completed.

  If you listen to industry experts, such as George Carras of RealNet, they’ll tell you that this level of intensification — which usually means condominiums — is really a decade in the making. That’s when the government set out to explicitly encourage this type of growth.

  But in the decade since that decision, we’ve seen both government and the market evolve in terms of what that intensification should look like. It started out with a largely high-rise building typology. Tall buildings were to be allowed in the downtown, as well as in specific growth nodes throughout the region. But for everything in between — the officially designated “neighborhoods” — there was to be no development.

  This is what I’ll call the first stage of intensification.

  Then, we started to think about mid-rise intensification along the avenues. Most of these “avenues” (also an official term) cut through those same stable neighborhoods, but the main streets were seen as an appropriate place to allow additional growth. It makes perfect sense and so guidelines were created to help dictate what this new building typology should look like.

  This is what I’ll call the second stage of intensification.

  And it’s one that I’d argue we’re currently living through with new mid-rise projects like DUKE in the Junction (TAS project), Kingston&Co in Kingston Road Village (another TAS project), Abacus Lofts on Dundas West, and The Hive in Etobicoke. These are all mid-rise buildings going up in established neighborhoods.

  With the recent decision to also allow wood frame buildings up to 6 storeys in Ontario (instead of 4), we’ll probably see an even greater surge in mid-rise buildings once the private sector gets its head around this shift.

  So what’s next?

  I think it’s inevitable that we’ll eventually see low-rise intensification within our established neighborhoods. We started by avoiding them altogether, and then deciding that it was desirable to build along their periphery. But as demand for urban housing continues to increase, I believe it’s only a matter of time before we start to loosen the reins on our single family neighborhoods.

  Some of you might be thinking that this is going to be a bad thing, but I actually think the opposite. Projects such as Vancouver’s Union Street EcoHeritage prove that it’s entirely possible to intensify existing neighborhoods through sensitive and beautiful infill interventions. And of course, let’s not forget about laneway housing.

  The fact of the matter is that Toronto has already been intensifying its neighborhoods for a very long time — likely since the beginning — by converting single family homes into duplexes, triplexes, and other multi-family dwellings. We just haven’t been doing it in any sort of structured way.

  I don’t know when this will change, but I think it’s only a matter of time. And that will be the third stage of intensification.

  Image: Flickr

  2015.01.27

• The hard things about retail

  

  Retail is one of the hardest – if not the hardest – real estate category to get right. If you don’t have the right setup, the right location, and the right tenant mix, you can fail pretty easily. It’s a bit of an art. And that obviously applies to both landlords and tenants. I mean, we all know what recently happened with Target Canada.

  This past weekend I had the opportunity to visit the Aura Condos in Toronto, which is supposedly the tallest and largest residential condominium in Canada. There’s about 1.1 million square feet of residential space across 79 floors and somewhere around 150,000 to 180,000 square feet of retail space (the estimates I found online varied). The main anchors include Bed Bath & Beyond, Marshalls, and Hard Candy Fitness (which also serves as the gym for the residences above).

  

  But what’s probably most unique about the retail component of this building is the P1 level (the first underground level). It’s made up of small retail condos, some of which looked to be about 90 square feet. That means that each retail unit is individually owned, just like a residential condominium, and there’s no singular landlord focused on curating the tenant mix and ensuring the entire retail center does well.

  Now, I’m told that this approach works perfectly well in other parts of the world and I know that we’re trying it in other parts of the Greater Toronto Area, but I worry about the long term viability of this (P1) space in particular. When I was there on Saturday there was almost no foot traffic and probably half of the retail units were vacant.

  Maybe it’s because there isn’t enough employment density in the area. Maybe it’s because it’s not well connected to other P1 level retail. Or maybe it’s because the anchors all sit above this space, as opposed to around it (as they do in traditional malls). Whatever it is, I wasn’t feeling product/market fit.

  I hope I’m wrong.

  Images: P1 Retail at Aura Condos

  2015.01.26

• How are you attracting and retaining top talent?

  Yesterday I received a comment on my post about service and product companies with a suggestion to check out an interesting Fast Company article talking about the future of work (thank you Amy). The article was based on a research report – commissioned by CBRE and a real estate developer in China (Genesis) – called Fast Forward 2030: The Future of Work and the Workplace.

  This is a topic that’s getting a lot airtime right now because Millennials are starting to impact work in a big way. But what’s interesting about it is how broad these impacts will be. Changes in how we work will affect the way we design our cities; the way architects and developers build and lease space; the type of people and roles companies will need to hire and create; and so on.

  Here’s a snippet from the report:

  “Providers of commercial buildings and places to work will need to develop new, sometimes counter intuitive, business models and work with partners who understand service and experience in order to compete with emerging workplace competitors. Successful providers will work with tenants to unlock ‘win win’ solutions that reduce occupier costs, increase flexibility, and simultaneously provide enhanced levels of community, amenity and user wellbeing. Cities will have a role to lead and nurture changes that will support the changing landscape of work.”

  I plan to go through the report in more detail this weekend, but I did want to point out one thing. When business leaders from around the world were asked what their biggest competitive advantage would be by the year 2030, the top choice was: the ability to attract and retain top talent. This topped organizational vision and even the ability to innovate.

  This might not come as a surprise to some of you, but it’s worth repeating. And in many ways, it’s a chain that begins first with cities. 

  If you’ve ever watched The Startup Kids documentary, you’ll know that when Alexander Ljung (CEO of Soundcloud.com) was about to found his company, he actually started by first traveling around Europe looking for the coolest city in which to base his company. The last city on his trip was Berlin and that just so happened to be the team’s favorite. So that’s where Soundcloud was founded.

  My point with that story is simply that the “workplace” of today – forget the future – means so much more than just your rentable area. Yes, that’s important. But there’s a lot more to consider when trying to get the best people. Cities play a huge role.

  2015.01.22

• Two thoughts on reviving post-industrial cities

  

  Yesterday Adam Radwanski of the Globe and Mail published an interesting article called, Rust Belt revival: Lessons for southwest Ontario from America’s industrial heartland. 

  The article talks about some of the things that the Rust Belt is doing to revitalize their cities and the lessons that many cities in Ontario – which are facing similar fates – could learn from. It’s worth a read.

  I’m not going to summarize his article, other than to say that some of the key points were around tax increment financing, tax incentives, University connections, a DIY/entrepreneurial culture, and the American tradition of philanthropy – which Radwanski points out is probably the least imitable for Canada.

  And it’s this last point that I would like to focus on first. The US has a deep history of people getting rich and then giving back – certainly more so than in Canada in my opinion.

  If you think about the resurgence of cities such as Detroit, you’d be hard pressed not to think of people like Dan Gilbert. He has become the poster boy for Detroit’s resurgence by moving his companies to downtown and buying up most of the office buildings. If and when Detroit comes back (I think it’s a when), Gilbert will easily be one of the biggest beneficiaries.

  Now, you could argue that this is made possible because of greater income inequality, but there’s something to be said about powerful individuals acting on intrinsic passion. Gilbert is investing in Detroit because he personally wants to see his home city come back. And that’s hard to replace.

  The second point I would like to focus on has to do with this snippet:

  With oil’s current slide, Canada really can’t afford for it to remain a drag – and in fact there is some expectation that Ontario will instead reclaim its old role as the leader of Canada’s economic growth. Its premier, Kathleen Wynne, recently expressed optimism that plummeting oil prices and a sinking dollar will prove a boon to manufacturing. “I don’t wish for low oil prices and a low dollar for Alberta,” she said earlier this month. “But at the same time, we want our manufacturing sector to rebound. So if that [low oil price] helps, then that’s a good thing.”

  I don’t know what context this was said in, but I continue to feel strongly that we cannot rely on low oil prices and a low Canadian dollar for Ontario’s competitiveness. That is a terrible business model, and an unsustainable one. We need to figure out ways to create value and grow the economy without relying on currency differentials and other macroeconomic factors. Radwanski is right to point that out in his article.

  So let’s hope we don’t let any short term benefits go to our head. There’s lots of exciting work to be done.

  Image: Old Detroit auto factory via Flickr

  2015.01.17

• Fun Friday: How Montreal makes winter awesome

  //player.vimeo.com/video/113321361

  It’s wintertime in Canada and that means people complaining about the cold and/or the fact that in our climate there are certain things that simply can’t (or shouldn’t) be done when it comes to city building.

  But I don’t buy that.

  A great counter example is Igloofest in Montreal. Unless you’re into electronic music (OK, fine, young people call it EDM today), you probably haven’t heard of it. But it’s basically an outdoor dance party on Montreal’s waterfront in the middle of the winter.

  The opening night is tonight and the overnight low is expected to hit -27 degrees celsius. Take a look at the video at the top of this post though (click here if you can’t see it). That’s how many people are going to crowd outside in the cold and dance their hearts out this evening.

  And so whether you’ve got harsh winters or summers, there are always creative ways to make it work for you. You just have to own it.

  If anyone would like to take a trip to Montreal this winter, I promise to stand by my words and dance outside in the cold. Have a great weekend everyone.

  2015.01.16

• Thanks for visiting Canada, Target. Now what?

  

  The big news in the (Canadian) retail world this morning is that Target has confirmed that it will be shutting down its entire Canadian operation. That means 133 stores will close and about 17,600 employees will soon be out of work. Here’s what the CEO had to say:

  “After a thorough review of our Canadian performance and careful consideration of the implications of all options, we were unable to find a realistic scenario that would get Target Canada to profitability until at least 2021,” said Brian Cornell, who became the new chief executive officer last summer.

  I can already hear the keyboards typing as business schools across Canada and the world prepare this case study: Why did Target Canada fail after not even 2 years?

  I don’t really want to focus on that in this post, but my initial sense is that they came in too big and too undifferentiated. Maybe they underestimated the particularities of the Canadian market and shopper, but they certainly didn’t come in lean.

  They bought up over a hundred Zellers leases and used that platform to obtain a critical mass quickly. But the problem with this approach is that it meant lots of upfront costs and fewer opportunities to adjust as they gained real feedback from the market.

  Regardless of what happened, I’m more interested in what the impact will be to the retail real estate industry going forward. Remember, Target is an anchor. And when it entered Canada, it was viewed as an opportunity to refresh some of our tired malls – many of which were already showing signs of dying.

  So what happens now? Who comes in to fill their shoes?

  Image: Flickr

  2015.01.15

• Why Dovercourt Village is the next Ossington

  

  Back in 2011, blogTO ran an article calling Geary Avenue one of the ugliest streets in Toronto. And it’s certainly up there. It’s an industrial street with a mixture of different building types (lots of autoshops), giant power lines running along the south side of it, and a railway disconnecting it from the city to the south.

  But as somebody who used to live around the corner from this street, I’ve had my eye on it for a number of years. Despite the fact that it was never very pretty, it always felt like an area with lots of potential. And sometimes it’s the areas that seem most unlikely to gentrify, that end up doing exactly that.

  Probably the first signs of hipness came with the opening of places like Kitch Bar on Geary Avenue and Actinolite on Ossington Avenue. More recently though, it was announced that Dark Horse Espresso will be opening on Geary and that Bellwoods Brewery will be opening their second location on Dupont Street in this incredible building:

  

  So whether you call it Dovercourt Park, Dovercourt Village, or some other name, I think it’s only a matter of time before Ossington cool moves north and the area in and around Dovercourt Road and Dupont Street becomes one of the hippest areas in the city. Get ready.

  Full disclosure: I own a house very close to this neighborhood.

  Images: Actinolite and Bellwoods Brewery

  2015.01.15

• How open are you to experiences?

  This morning Richard Florida published an interesting CityLab article that talks about how different personality types cluster within cities. The study he references was done by a team of psychologists that surveyed 56,000 people in the London metro area.

  Here is a summary of what they found (darker red indicates higher concentration of each personality trait):

  

  Probably the most interesting personality trait is the “openness to experience” one, as there appears to be a clear divide between people who live in the center of London and people who live in the suburbs.

  Here’s how Florida describes it:

  The most clustered personality trait the researchers found was “openness to experience” (bottom left map), which is concentrated in the center of London. Openness to experience, according to a wide body of psychological studies, is associated with creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. This type is concentrated in higher density neighborhoods, with higher housing prices, more ethnic and religious diversity and higher crime rates. Meanwhile, the blue concentrations at the periphery indicate that there are fewer people open to experience in metro London’s suburbs.

  It’s fascinating to think about the role of psychology in city building. It’s not something we often talk about, but it’s there.

  I live downtown and I would definitely classify myself as extraverted and open to experiences. How would you classify yourself?

  Maps via CityLab

  2015.01.14

• A look at One Spadina Crescent

  

  One of the projects that I’m most excited about here in Toronto is the renovation and addition to One Spadina Crescent. The building sits in the middle of a roundabout along Spadina Avenue and occupies what is easily one of the most ceremonial positions in the city.

  But for as long as I can remember, the building hasn’t been living up to its full potential. So much so that in the 1960s it was going to be demolished in order to make way for the proposed Spadina Expressway. That would have been an absolute tragedy. Thankfully, our friend Jane Jacobs stopped that one.

  Today, exciting things are happening at One Spadina Crescent. The Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design at the University of Toronto is in the midst of renovating and expanding the building, and will eventually relocate there from its current location on College Street.

  When it’s all said and done, One Spadina Crescent will look something like this (via Daniels).

  From the south:

  

  From the west:

  

  From the north:

  

  What’s most exciting to me about this project are the following 3 things:

  First, it’s an opportunity to connect One Spadina Crescent to the surrounding urban fabric. Today, it feels very much like an island in the middle of the street. 

  Second, it’s a wonderful example of the new layering on top of the old, which is something that I believe we should aspire to do in our cities. The University of Toronto has become quite good at doing that on campus.

  And finally, the intent is for this building and site to include a number of research centers and public facing functions devoted to architecture, design, and city building. And so One Spadina could become quite the hub in the city. That’s exciting.

  If you’d like to take a look inside the building (pre-renovation), check out these great photos by Peter MacCallum. The picture at the top of this post is his.

  2015.01.10