Tag: development

• Aman New York’s $180 million penthouse

  

  This morning I was reading about Aman’s new condo and hotel project in New York, which is planned for the 100-year-old Crown Building at 730 Fifth Avenue. It will have 83 hotel rooms and just 22 homes, and be the first urban condominium for the resort company.

  Owned by OKO Group, the hospitality company is mostly known for their “sleek, minimalist hotels in secluded, far-flung destinations,” according to the WSJ. Rooms go for upwards of USD 2,500 per night and they, supposedly, have a rabid customer base known as “Amanjunkies.”

  What’s interesting about this project is that (among other things) it’s a bet the Aman brand will translate to an urban context and drive above-market pricing. And it will do it at a time when the ultra high-net-worth segment of the market in NYC has been cooling because of a new “mansion tax” and probably other factors.

  The five-storey penthouse, which will be built into the building’s “crown,” is asking USD 180 million. If/when it sells, it will break the record for the most expensive home ever sold in the city on a square foot basis at $14,358 psf.

  If you subscribe to the WSJ, you can read the full story here. I find it valuable to see how projects position themselves.

  Rendering: Aman

  2019.06.16

• San Jose approves 800-unit co-living project

  Earlier this year, an 800 unit co-living project was approved in downtown San Jose. The developer is Starcity. And it is said to be the largest co-living project in the pipeline in the United States right now.

  A few months later (presumably because of this project), San Jose also created a new “co-living” land-use classification. It is similarly thought to be a first for US cities.

  I think it still remains to be seen how broad the market can be for co-living. Do older generations also want to go back to dorm-like living? Or is this a housing solution mainly for twenty-somethings?

  At the same time, it’s not an entirely new housing idea. I like the parallel that Sarah Holder of CityLab draws between today’s co-living and yesterday’s single room occupancy buildings (SROs).

  There are, of course, many differences, including the amount of space dedicated to common areas (the community aspect). But in both cases, part of the value proposition is about affordability.

  Where do you see co-living going?

  2019.06.14

• What I like about Sidewalk Labs’ generative design tool

  Last week I went for a tour of Sidewalk Labs’ “307” workshop here in Toronto. In it they have a generative urban design tool that allows you to toggle things like density, building shape, building height, the amount of green space, the distribution of green space, and so on.

  Perhaps some of you have seen it or used it before. The controls look like this:

  

  

  After you’re done playing around with the dials, you are then able to provide feedback on the design that you’ve birthed through two very simple feedback buttons. One is a happy face. And the other is a sad face. (I wonder if the placement of these two buttons has any impact on responses.)

  

  What I like about this tool is that it immediately imposes a certain degree of reality and it forces you, the participant, to acknowledge the various trade-offs that need to be considered when you’re designing and planning a city.

  For example, if you want lots of parks and public spaces, but you want to hold population density constant — perhaps because you’re trying to make use of an investment made in transit infrastructure — well then you’ll need to accept taller buildings.

  A very similar thought process goes into each and every development pro forma as we all try and manage the myriad of competing interests. But I guess this is also true of life in general. There are gives and there are takes.

  2019.06.11

• OMA’s first ground-up project in Manhattan finishes construction

  121 East 22nd — which is OMA’s first ground-up project in Manhattan — recently finished up construction at the corner of E 23rd St and Lexington Ave (the site continues through to E 22nd St, where there is basically a 2nd building). I wrote about the project over two years ago, here.

  Below is a photo by Laurian Ghinitoiu, via Dezeen, of it completed:

  

  The defining feature is its “prismatic corner”, which, I understand from this interview with David Von Spreckelsen (President of Toll Brothers City Living), was largely an outcome of the site’s restrictive zoning. There was a requirement to have constant street walls. That minimized what could be done architecturally on the project’s main elevations.

  The solution is two contextual street walls — the punched windows are designed to match the rhythm of their adjoining buildings — coming together and creating dramatic visual interest only at the point where they intersect. Below is a rolled out elevation from OMA. Note the gradient created by the windows as they converge toward the corner (center in the drawing below).

  

  The other interesting thing about this project is that it reminded me just how different the built form of Manhattan can be compared to Toronto. In the case of 121 East 22nd, the streetwalls rise 150 feet without any stepbacks. There is then a 10 foot stepback before the building rises another 60 feet — similarly without any additional breaks.

  I love the grandeur.

  2019.06.07

• The investment case for mid-rise condos

  Shane Dingman’s recent Globe and Mail article about “the investment case for mid-rise condos” is a good summary of why this housing type has become so popular in Toronto.

  Mid-rise buildings tend to attract more end-users because of their boutique scale. That is, they attract people who plan to move into the building once it is built, as opposed to buyers who plan to rent out their unit. We are certainly seeing this with purchasers at Junction House.

  Because of their generally smaller scale and because they are often built in mature neighborhoods with few opportunities for new construction, supply of new mid-rise housing also tends to be limited. That bodes well for future price appreciation.

  Here’s a quote from Shaun Hildebrand (President of Urbanation), taken from the above Globe article. (Sorry, it’s behind a paywall.)

  “Price growth between the two building types [mid-rise and high-rise] began to converge in 2018, and in Q1-2019, buildings under 12 storeys saw average resale prices per square foot grow 10 per cent year-over-year, compared to 6.5 per cent for buildings of 12 or more storeys,” Mr. Hildebrand said. “We may be now entering back into a period of outperformance of mid-rise buildings as the market is shifting.”

  2019.06.01

• Toronto’s first all-female condo project

  

  Real estate development has historically been, and unfortunately still is, a male dominated business. (The story of Florence Casler is, however, a great outlier.) If you want some empirical evidence for this, pay attention to the length of the line for the men’s bathroom the next time you’re at a real estate conference or event.

  This needs to change. Which is why my good friend Taya Cook (of Urban Capital) has just announced, in partnership with Sherry Larjani (of Spotlight Development), the first all-female development project in Canada. It’s called Reina and it’s planned for a vacant site at 689 The Queensway, Toronto. Here is an excerpt from a recent RENX article:

  “We’re embarking on this project to create more visibility for women in real estate development, and to inspire younger women to see career possibilities,” said Cook, the director of development at Urban Capital, in a release announcing the project. “It’s a huge industry and a massive economic driver for the region. For some reason it has been seriously lagging behind in gender equity.”

  Two things are probably important to mention about the team and project.

  Firstly, the women developing Reina are all leaders and key decision makers. This is important for the project’s broader mission, but also because it will likely remove male biases from the design process. Everything from architecture to construction will be led by women and will incorporate a “female perspective.” Secondly — and this just makes the narrative even better — the site used to house a strip club.

  Congratulations Taya, Sherry, and the rest of the project team on a terrific development and initiative: “Condominiums designed by women. Developed by women. Built for everyone.” Follow Reina on Instagram, here.

  Image: Reina Condos

  2019.05.28

• Toronto should placemake a “sports alley”

  Being a sports fan is like having a bipolar disorder. The highs are high. And the lows are low. But right now — with the Toronto Raptors having clinched their first ever NBA Finals appearance — we are all on a high. Though the job is far from over, this city has waited 24 seasons for this moment. Turns out, all we were missing was one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

  Jurassic Park, 1999 #WeTheNorth pic.twitter.com/mnnUPia60L

  — Brandon Donnelly (@donnelly_b) May 26, 2019

  It’s pretty amazing to see how far we have come both as a franchise, and as a global city. When Scotiabank Arena was completed in 1999, it, and the surrounding area, looked like this. On Saturday night after the win, it looked like this, a veritable “sports alley.” I have long thought that Bremner Boulevard should be placemade into a sports alley connecting Scotiabank Arena (on the east) and the Rogers Centre (on the west).

  

  From now until this Thursday, all is right in the world. Enjoy it Toronto, and Canada. Masai Ujiri made a bet that I think most, if not all, of us would agree has paid off. Had it not, Raptors fans across the country would be criticizing him for trading away our franchise player. But that’s par for the course in this bipolar world of sports fandom.

  2019.05.26

• How developers shape public life

  

  The most recent episode of The Urbanist is about the role of private developers in shaping public spaces and public life within our cities. How do you balance private and public interests?

  Much of the discussion focuses on the redevelopment of King’s Cross in London, which is generally considered to be a successful example of large-scale, developer-led, urban regeneration. Andrew Tuck is less complimentary of Hudson Yards in New York.

  One point that I found interesting was the remark that modern zoning tends to force buildings apart. It creates more in-between space. The result is that we are losing some of the more intimate public spaces found in older neighborhoods.

  To listen to the full 30 minute episode, click here.

  Photo by Josh Edgoose on Unsplash (King’s Cross, London)

  2019.05.24

• Beautiful cities are growing faster than ugly ones

  People move to cities for a whole host of reasons, whether it be for more money, more affordable housing, and/or better weather. The fastest growing cities in the US, for example, tend to be in the south where it’s warmer and where housing supply is more elastic. However, we also know that “consumer leisure amenities” increasingly factor into this decision.

  A new research paper by Gerald A. Carlino (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia) and Albert Saiz (MIT) has tried to quantify this relationship by looking at the perceived beauty of a place. To do this, they analyzed the number of tourist visits and the number of “crowdsourced picturesque locations” in a metro area. Read: Instagrammable moments.

  What they found was that beauty, not surprisingly, matters (much like it does in other facets of life). Between 1990-2010, metro areas that were perceived as being “twice as picturesque” experienced greater population growth — about 10 percentage points higher. These metro areas also attracted a higher percentage of educated individuals and experienced greater housing appreciation.

  If you’d like to download a copy of Beautiful city: Leisure amenities and urban growth, click here.

  2019.05.19

• These 3 things happened after Portland enacted inclusionary zoning

  On February 1, 2017, an inclusionary zoning ordinance came into effect in Portland, mandating that all new residential projects with 20 or more units dedicate a portion of the building to affordable housing.

  For the first year, the requirement was 8% of all units for households earning 60% of the Area Median Income or 16% of all units for households earning 80% of the AMI. I’m not sure if it was or is possible to do a blend of the two income levels.

  After the first year, the requirement was supposed to step up to 10% and 20% of all units, respectively. But that step up was never enacted, which had many industry analysts arguing that it was a clear signal the ordinance was not performing as intended.

  According to Joe Cortright of City Observatory (which is based in Portland), the new ordinance largely resulted in 3 things happening:

  (1) Developers rushed to get new applications in during the transition period so that they would not be subjected to the new IZ rules; (2) applications increased for projects with less than 20 units (avoid the rules by building smaller); and (3), following the initial transition surge, building permit applications, as a whole, dropped off.

  This last point is what usually comes up in debates around inclusionary zoning. Does the requirement to build affordable housing actually reduce overall housing supply?

  I’ve written about this before, but the math is pretty simple. Inclusionary zoning policies are a drag on revenue and a direct cost to the project. What that means is that something else will need to give in order for the numbers to balance.

  That could come in the form of lower costs (such as an impact fee abatement) or in higher rents on the balance of the units. But this latter approach is easier said than done. Sometimes you need to wait for the market to “catch up”, which could be what some developers in Portland are doing.

  They’re waiting for housing to get more expensive — overall — so they can then offset the pro forma drag from the affordable units.

  2019.05.17