Tag: development

• Architecture’s great injustice

  This morning Jeanne Gang of Studio Gang published an op-ed in Fast Company detailing how her architecture and urban design practice closed the gender wage gap. 

  It is also a call to action and an example of something the firm calls “actionable idealism.” Here is an excerpt from the article:

  What we discovered was that, despite our ideological commitment to equality (and though our numbers were significantly better than all the U.K. architecture firms reporting, in all categories), a small pay gap nevertheless existed between the women and men in my office. We fixed that with this year’s raises and now have no wage gap as an organization.

  To learn more about how they accomplished this, check out the full article. And if you’d like to meet Jeanne Gang in Toronto this week and learn more about what we’re up to at Yonge + St. Clair, click here.

  2018.07.04

• Blackstone enters Canadian multi-family sector

  

  A few days ago it was announced that Blackstone has entered the multi-family space in Canada through a JV with Starlight Investments. They are buying 6 undisclosed multi-family buildings. 5 in Toronto. And 1 in Montréal. The total is 746 units.

  The message in the press release is that apartment buildings in Canada are difficult to find and buy at meaningful scale. Most are held by small private investors and those owners are reluctant to sell. 

  At the same time, places like Toronto and Montréal have built relatively little purpose-built rental over the past few decades. Supply is restricted. 

  This is an interesting stat from the announcement: The Canadian rental market is about 2 million housing units. Dallas, alone, is 500,000 units. But this must only be purpose-built, investment grade, and/or some other subset of units. Because there are over 14 million private households and over 4.4 million rented households in Canada (2016 data).

  They also hint at a longer-term relationship between Blackstone and Starlight. Perhaps that will translate into some purpose-built rental development in the future.

  On a related note, I recently picked up the book, King of Capital: The Remarkable Rise, Fall, and Rise Again of Steve Schwarzman and Blackstone. It was published in 2012, so it’s not new. But as soon as I stumbled upon it, I picked it up. It was new to me.

  Once I’m finished it maybe I’ll report back here on the blog.

  Photo by Warren Wong on Unsplash

  2018.06.30

• Airbnb and affordable housing

  

  Fred Wilson published a good post last weekend on the proposed bill that went to New York City Council this week regarding new reporting requirements for Airbnb and their hosts in NYC. You can read more about his position on his blog, but he is in favor of a comprehensive bill that would properly legitimize short-term rentals. He is also not opposed to city and state taxes on the service.

  What I wanted to focus on today were his comments around housing. This is already sounding like a broken record, but Fred draws attention to the severe supply-demand imbalance that is occurring in the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx, precisely because many/most young people were priced out of Manhattan long ago and want to live in these places.

  But I particularly like his comments around what makes for good policy and what makes for good politics. I agree with his view that it is often a case of the latter over the former. I think a lot of the excitement around Airbnb is a red herring. For me, it’s akin to the fixation on foreign buyers and their impact on the local housing market in places like Toronto and Vancouver.

  Yes, they are factors. But the data suggests they are marginal ones. As Fred points out, they are almost certainly not the root cause of the problem. The reality is that we need a lot more housing – both market-rate housing and subsidized housing. The challenge is that nobody wants to pay for the latter and so we’ve instead decided to focus on things that sound like they’re going to help.

  Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

  2018.06.29

• Construction costs are no joke right now

  

  I don’t know what it’s like in your market, but everyone is talking about it in the industry here in Toronto. Combine these rapidly rising hard costs with higher development charges and inclusionary zoning and you get significant upward pressure on condo prices and apartment rents. 

  This is also one of the reasons – perhaps it is the main reason – why you’re seeing some projects get cancelled. These are projects that maybe sold in one market (lower revenues) and are now trying to build in another (higher costs). The math no longer works. Sorry.

  I mention this today not to complain, although I’m always up for a good industry commiseration over beers, but because I often hear people lament that Toronto needs better design. Why aren’t developers using triple-glazed windows? Why aren’t developers thermally breaking the balconies?

  I will always advocate for better design. That is core to my belief system. But everything costs money. There are very real limits in this equation. And markets have a funny way of telling you exactly what those are.

  Photo by Filip Mroz on Unsplash

  2018.06.28

• An open house with Jeanne Gang

  

  On Thursday, July 5th, Slate Asset Management, Studio Gang, and the rest of the project team will be hosting a community open house where we will introduce designs for a new block plan and mixed-use building at Yonge + St. Clair. This will be Studio Gang’s first project in Canada. We’re pretty excited.

  It’s important to note that while the proposed design has been influenced by some of the early discussions we had with city staff and the local Councillor, we are still very much at the beginning of this process. Which is why alongside this community open house, we are also launching yongedelisle.ca.

  This will be our “neighbourhood engagement” website as we go through the planning process. You’ll find updates from the project team as they become available, and you’ll also have a direct way to get in touch. We’re also testing out this interactive page where you can vote on the city building principles that matter most to you.

  So hopefully we’ll see you on Thursday, July 5th. Invite details above. Please RSVP, here, if you can. But if you forget to do that, don’t worry, you can still just show up. For more on Jeanne Gang, click here.

  2018.06.26

• Toronto: 2000 vs. 2025

  Last week, Joe Berridge, Partner at Urban Strategies, gave a presentation at the Institute on Municipal Finance & Governance titled, Toronto: The Accidental Metropolis. I’ve seen Joe give similar presentations to this one before, and I always thoroughly enjoy his focus on Toronto’s position as a global city.

  Here is a slide from the presentation that projects out Toronto’s population to 2071 and compares it to the largest cities in the US.

  

  But the two slides that have been really making the rounds online are the following ones. The first is a rendering of what downtown Toronto looked like in 2000. 

  

  I remember this time clearly. Queen West seemed to end at Spadina. King West and Ossington weren’t things. And “Richmond and Adelaide” felt like the greatest club district in the world. (If you’re not from Toronto, these references will likely mean nothing to you. Sorry.)

  The second slide is a rendering of what Toronto will look like in 2025. The transformation is just incredible.

  

  I’ve seen some people comment that the Toronto of 2000 was relatively affordable; the Toronto of 2018 is unaffordable; and the Toronto of 2025 will be even more unaffordable with all of this new development.

  But I don’t understand that logic. Considering the growth rate shown in the first slide, imagine how unaffordable this city would be if we weren’t building new places for people to live and new places for people to work.

  For the full slide deck, go here. And for recent aerial photos of Toronto’s downtown core, check out my Instagram page.

  2018.06.24

• We’re new here. Find your home.

  A simple registration page is now live for our upcoming Junction House (condo) project. We also got this neat sign made:

  

  Of course, eventually there will be a full website, but this is for people who want to get on the early registrant list and tell us what they are looking for in a new home. Early registration. Early access to suites.

  

  We’re thrilled with the way the overall brand & identity is coming together for Junction House and we think it reflects the architecture and our project ambitions. 

  Hopefully you all like it as well.

  Photos by Vanderbrand

  2018.06.22

• 2720 Dundas Street West

  If you’ve been in the Junction lately, you have probably noticed some activity at the location of our proposed Junction House. Here is a photo that I took this morning of 2720 Dundas Street West. (Sidebar: What an absolutely gorgeous summer day in Toronto.)

  

  We’re giving the front a coat of fresh white to mark the beginning of the registration phase. Pretty soon you’ll be able to leave your name with us so that we can send you insightful emails and get in touch with you when condo sales begin. 

  At some point 2720 will become home to the Junction House sales office (maybe we’ll even call it something pretentious like a presentation gallery). But that point is not right now. 

  I can, however, tell you that in addition to superkül (architecture), we are working with Paul Johnston / Unique Urban Homes (sales), Dialogue 38 (interior design), and Vanderbrand (creative agency). 

  I am also personally spending a lot of time obsessing over kitchen details and other minutia. I think Charles Eames once said, “The details are not the details. They make the design.”

  If you’d like to be kept in the loop on Junction House, you can follow Slate Developments (nascent account), the Globizen Group, and myself on Instagram. And of course, you’ll also hear all about it on the blog. Have a great weekend friends.

  2018.06.15

• What to do about Hong Kong’s land supply problem?

  

  My friend Jeremiah shared this ULI article with me this morning, which talks about Hong Kong’s land supply problem. The interesting thing about this problem is that only 9.3 square miles of the city’s land (out of ~424 square miles) is actually developed (and about 60% of the region’s area is water). The rest has been preserved for parks, farmland, and so on. And that is certainly a remarkable characteristic of Hong Kong. It doesn’t take very long to escape its hyper-urbanism and be in the countryside.

  Preserving greenspace is of course vital. But at what point do population and growth pressures justify the unlocking of some of that land for development? This is the question that Hong Kong appears to be asking itself. At the same time, it is looking at developing other islands (such as Lantau, which I understand is a pretty lush place); reclaiming (i.e. creating) additional land; and positioning the city as part of a planned “Greater Bay Area.” 

  If it were up to you, how would you suggest that Hong Kong deal with these pressures? The city is already fairly adept at building up.

  Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

  2018.06.14

• An example of city building doublethink

  

  Earlier this month, Shane Dingman wrote a piece in the Globe and Mail talking about TAS’ proposed development for 2 Tecumseth Avenue here in Toronto – the former home of Quality Meat Packers, a slaughterhouse. In the article there’s a quote from Mazyar Mortazavi, which I posted to my Instagram (as a story), but that I have been meaning to also post to the blog. So here it is: 

  “It’s not a conversation about towers good, towers bad: Mid-rise is the most expensive construction typology and it delivers effectively luxury housing, so it doesn’t respond to the needs of affordability,” he said. “We didn’t buy Tecumseth to build a bunch of condos and move on. We bought it because we wanted to pursue a vision around city building. You need density … the question is how do we actually deliver density that’s relevant today and relevant 50 years from now?”

  He’s of course right about mid-rise construction costs. There are diseconomies of scale and other construction inefficiencies that we have talked about many times before on this blog. The result is one of the Catch-22s of city building. Mid-rise and small scale infill is often seen as desirable, but we also say that we need more affordable housing.

  It’s doublethink.

  Image: 2 Tecumseth by KPMB Architects for TAS

  2018.06.10