Tag: condo

• Unpacking the family condo

  John Lorinc has a piece in the Autumn 2018 issue of University of Toronto Magazine that is worth a read. It covers families in Toronto being priced out of the low-rise housing market and/or making the conscious decision to live in an apartment or condo.

  He raises an important question:

  The big question hovering over this generational transition is all about city-building, and whether increasingly dense metropolitan regions such as Toronto and Vancouver can figure out how to turn all those newly sprouted forests of highrises into true communities that are both affordable and appealing to the wide range of people who call these cities home.

  The reality seems to be that more people in this city – out of economic necessity and/or because of a lifestyle preference – are choosing to raise a family in multi-dwelling housing. I live in a condo and my neighbors are raising a child two doors down from me.

  I am sure that we will continue to see more of this and I am sure that we will get better at designing for families. We are trying to do our part with the 2-storey homes that we have incorporated into our Junction House project. 

  I would, however, like to respond to the underlying tone in the article that but for developers being stubbornly resistant to larger 3-bedroom apartments in this city, we would have a myriad of new condominiums filled with families.

  The reality is that there are market and structural forces (including cultural biases) that steer what gets built.

  There are affordability considerations. Larger condos cost more money than smaller condos. And that prices out many families, particularly if there are cheaper alternatives available in the form of low-rise housing. 

  The reason we appear to be at an inflection point today is because the cheaper alternatives are disappearing. (This of course returns us to the broader question of overall housing affordability.)

  There are also timing and financing considerations that likely create a supply-side bias. Most lenders require that a certain number of condo units be pre-sold before construction starts. 

  This means that, as a developer, you need people that can both afford what you’re selling and that are willing to buy three to five years out, and perhaps even longer. That can be difficult for many families.

  Lastly for this post, there’s the GST/HST New Housing Rebate in Ontario, which I have argued before on the blog could be incentivizing smaller suite sizes and could use a refresh for today’s home prices.

  All of this is not to say that we shouldn’t be designing for urban families and that we shouldn’t be focused on delivering more affordable housing to this and other cities. Those are two very important things.

  It is simply to say: there’s a lot going on here that needs to be unpacked. 

  2018.10.02

• Tridel unveils smart condominium in South Core

  

  A few weeks ago, Canadian developer Tridel unveiled its first “smart condominium” at Ten York – a recently completed 69 storey building in the South Core neighborhood of Toronto. Above is an archive photo of the building under construction. I chose this one because its siting between the Gardiner Expressway (left) and Harbour Street (right) is also noteworthy.

  Smart anything is one of those tech buzzwords that is, I know, starting to feel vapid. But Tridel has done some interesting things here with their Tridel Connect platform (a collaboration with SmartONE Solutions). And if you happen to also be in the business of designing and constructing multi-family buildings, I think you’ll find it to be a useful case study.

  At Ten York, you can now use your phone as a key fob. People buzzing up are shown to you on your wall pad so you can confirm identity. The suite entry doors use digital locks, which means you use an access code instead of a key. Additional codes can be created for family and friends or for service providers like dog walkers and cleaners. You’re also given a log of who has come and gone. And of course there’s an automated parcel delivery system.

  If you’d like to see all of the features in the live, I suggest you take a look at the “b-roll video” that was included as part of their press release. Tridel is excellent at implementing new technologies and I know that they frequently reserve test suites in their projects to try some of them out. This is a great thing for the industry and for consumers.

  Image: Tridel

  2018.09.09

• Unzipped wall on King Street West

  

  Last night I checked out the Unzipped Toronto exhibition, which is the relocated Serpentine Pavilion (pictured above) that was designed by Bjarke Ingels Group in 2016. 

  It was initially housed in Hyde Park London, but it’s now on King Street West Toronto. Westbank purchased the “unzipped wall” after it was installed in London and supposedly it will eventually find a permanent home in Vancouver.

  The official opening of Unzipped Toronto is September 15th, 2018. It will be free and open to the public. If you’d like to get a complimentary ticket, you can do that here. 

  The timing of all this lines up with condo sales for Bjarke Ingels’ first project in Toronto. I believe that will be starting this fall. And I am sure they will end up setting some new records for the King West submarket.

  2018.09.09

• Limits of housing affordability

  

  The San Francisco Chronicle recently published an article called, “SF residential projects languish as rising costs force developers to cash out.” It talks about the impact that rising costs (both construction and other) are having on new housing supply. Some developers aren’t building even though may have entitled sites. And that’s because the math doesn’t work, even though we’re in a market with a severe housing shortage.

  Here is an excerpt from the article that talks about the kind of pricing that is needed in order to make a project work:

  Chris Foley, a real estate investor and partner in brokerage firm Polaris Pacific, said that in the current construction environment a condominium developer needs to sell units for at least $1,400 a square foot for a wood-frame building and $1,800 a square for a taller, steel-frame midrise or high-rise. Even in a city where more than 80 percent of the population is priced out of the market, those numbers are a stretch, Foley said.

  San Francisco also has inclusionary zoning, which requires a certain percentage of units in any new development to be priced below market. According to the article, it is 18% for new rental projects and 20% for new condo projects. That’s a cost that needs to be absorbed by the remaining market rate units – so price accordingly. 

  The MIRA tower designed by Studio Gang is currently under construction and has 156 affordable units and 393 market rate units. The market rate pricing looks something like this:

  That’s the case with three buildings rising near the new Transbay Transit Center: Mira, the Avery at 400 Folsom St., and One Steuart Lane, which overlooks the Embarcadero at the foot of Howard Street. Unless there is a remarkable drop in the market, units in all three of those buildings will probably have an average sales price of more than $2,000 a square foot and penthouses could fetch $3,000 or even $4,000 a square foot. A 3,326-square-foot penthouse at 181 Fremont St., which opened last spring, recently sold for $15 million, or $4,500 a square foot.

  Projects being squeezed by rising costs is something that we are also seeing here in Toronto. And I don’t believe that the general public fully appreciates that there are limits to the costs that can be shouldered by new development. And the reason for that is because there are limits to what people can afford to pay for new housing.

  Photo by Jamie Street on Unsplash

  2018.09.07

• The real reason people oppose new development

  

  A good friend of mine just sent me this fascinating research paper called: Opposition to Development or Opposition to Developers? Survey Evidence from Los Angeles County on Attitudes towards New Housing. It is a study out of UCLA that was published earlier this year by Paavo Monkkonen and Michael Manville.

  For the paper, they conducted a survey-framing experiment with over 1,300 people in Los Angeles County to test how strongly they felt about a number of common anti-housing sentiments; arguments such as traffic congestion, neighborhood character, and strain on local services. 

  However, they also introduced another argument: large developer profits. And interestingly enough, they discovered that respondents were 20 percentage points more likely to oppose a new hypothetical housing development when the survey was framed around the developer making a lot of money.

  Here is a table from the paper showing the various frames, as well as the percentage of people who supported, had no opinion, and who opposed. Note that under the “developer” frame, the opposition number is 48%.

  

  So their “takeaway for practice” is as follows: “Housing opposition is often framed as a form of risk aversion. Our findings, however, suggest that at least some opposition to housing might be motivated not by residents’ fears of their own losses, but resentment of others’ gains.”

  Photo by Cameron Stow on Unsplash
  

  2018.08.29

• Photogenic neon in the Junction

  We just finished putting up some additional signage at the future sales office for Junction House. Clean and minimal, but fun. I am pretty pumped with the way everything turned out. Creative and photos by Vanderbrand. Instagram story mashup and failed neon photo by me.

  

  This week I learned that properly photographing neon takes a bit of work. The neon “Junction House” sign is actually all white when you see it in person. Apparently it has something to do with the frequency. 

  I’m going to go back one evening with my tripod and Fuji and see if I can do better.

  2018.08.23

• Condo rents in Toronto are up 11.2% from last year

  Yesterday Urbanation released its Q2-2018 rental report for the Greater Toronto Area. It tracks both purpose-built rentals and condominium rentals, the latter being condominium units that are listed for rent on MLS. The average condo rent, for all unit types across the GTA, is up 11.2% year-over-year to a face rent of $2,302 per month.

  Here is a chart from the Globe and Mail:

  

  The former City of Toronto, which includes downtown, is actually up 13.5%:

  

  But here are the stats that I really wanted to draw your attention to today (figures from the Globe).

  According to Urbanation, there were some 384,000 condo apartments in the Greater Toronto Area in 2017 and nearly 1/3 of them were rented out. Given that the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation pegs the total number of rental apartments in the GTA at approximately 311,596, condo apartments represent about 40% of all our rental housing stock.

  So condo buildings are actually doing quite a bit of heavy lifting when it comes to providing rental housing in this region.

  2018.07.14

• More on One Delisle and the block

  

  Now that things have quieted down from last night, I would like to say that we are thrilled by the response to One Delisle and the broader ideas for the block. There was a lot of positivity last night at the open house and today the project team received countless emails and messages from people telling us that they are excited and/or looking forward to working with us over the coming years. Many were from the local community.

  

  Following yesterday’s Globe and Mail piece by Alex Bozikovic, One Delisle was also covered in Urban Toronto (read the comments), designboom (they’re allergic to capital letters), ArchDaily, Canadian Architect, Dezeen, The Architect’s Newspaper, and probably other places that I am missing. The comments have been interesting to read and there seems to be a fatigue around boring glass boxes. This project team does not want to do that.

  Though the project has been making the rounds, there are two images that I don’t think have been widely shared and so I would like to do that today (below). Both were presented at last night’s open house. And they are intended to show the relationship between One Delisle and Delisle Park, which is proposed to be revitalized and expanded by ~50% as part of the project’s block and enhanced public realm strategy. Credit to ADHOC Studio for these renderings.

  

  In fact, it is important to keep in mind that while a lot of attention is being paid to the architecture of the building, there’s a broader city building strategy that is attached and integral to it:

  • Revitalize and expand Delisle Park by 50%
  • Add residential uses to a block of office buildings
  • Reduce the number of vehicular access points across the block from 5 to 3 in order to improve traffic flows in the area
  • Create below-grade vehicular connections across the block to consolidate and legitimize access/loading and once again improve traffic flows in the area 
  • Significantly widen the sidewalk along Yonge Street to eliminate existing pedestrian pinch point
  • Significantly widen the sidewalk along Delisle Avenue to strengthen connection to Delisle Park
  • Introduce pedestrian laneway with art canopy to connect St. Clair Avenue West back to Delisle Park
  • Create a unified and consistent public realm across the block and provide retail animation along its edges
  • Retain Art Deco facade along Yonge Street
  • Target the 2nd tier of the Toronto Green Standard (voluntary sustainability target)
  • Continue to explore the feasibility of district energy solutions across the block to take advantage of the different energy demand curves for office, retail, and residential uses

  Once again, a big thanks to the ~300 people who came out last night – in the rain – to engage with the project team. And a big thanks to the full project team who worked tirelessly to prepare for this week’s community open house. But as was said on Thursday night, in many ways this is really just the beginning. To stay informed about the project and to provide your feedback to the team, stay tuned to yongedelisle.ca.

  Photos: Khristel Studios

  2018.07.07

• Everything delivered on demand

  

  Last week I had something delivered from Amazon almost every single day. They weren’t necessarily big things though. One day it was a new corn broom for the patio. Another day it was a small set of hooks that I wanted to hang some lights. And the list goes on. 

  This is what Amazon wants us to do. Order every little thing, instantly, as soon as you think about it. And it’s magically convenient.

  Developers and architects are of course thinking about the implications of this shifting shopping habit on new residential developments. Usually it comes in the form of a large “Amazon room” and/or a parcel locker system. 

  I recently measured the package room in my building (geeky, I know). It’s about 10′ x 6′ and it sometimes isn’t enough for the volume of daily packages generated by ~360 units. 

  The other thing that happened last week is that my concierge said to me: “Brandon, we have become a full fledge post office with the amount of packages that come through here every day.” Every evening there’s a lineup of people waiting to collect their packages. 

  That immediately signaled to me that simply providing a larger room probably isn’t enough. This trend is only going to continue. How could we better design and optimize for this shift?

  I am sure that there many companies working on this problem. Hopefully they will surface in the comments and in my inbox following this post.

  Photo by Maarten van den Heuvel on Unsplash

  2018.05.06

• A unique taste in buildings

  

  A condo developer friend of mine once told me something along the lines of this: “Brandon, I have generally learned over the years that if I like something, it probably means the general public [our purchasers] isn’t going to like it. And that’s because if I like it, there’s probably something unique or quirky about it.”

  When he told me this it made perfect sense to me, because there’s a well documented taste divide that seems to exist between architects and design-types and non-architects and non-design-types (whatever this latter categorization means).

  A few years ago The Architects’ Journal published an article referencing a 1987 study that took a group of students – some architecture students and some non-architecture students – and asked them to rate the attractiveness of a series of photos containing both unfamiliar people and buildings.

  What they discovered was that most people had similar views on the attractiveness of the people. I guess hotness is somewhat universal. But when it came to the buildings, the viewpoints were completely opposite. The architecture students’ favorite buildings were what everyone else disliked the most.

  The conclusion in the article: “Professionals are, empirically, the very worst judges available of what people want or like in the built environment.”

  Photo by Simon Goetz on Unsplash

  2018.04.28