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 don’t know who is behind the guerrilla art project AusterityTO, but it is exceedingly clever. Whoever it is, they are going around Toronto and tagging various objects and moments with museum labels — all of which cite mayor John Tory as the artist. Here is one called “Urinal.”
And here is the installation description from the website:
A clever subversion of the seminal work “Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp. Water does not flow from this fountain due to neglected maintenance and lack of attention. It is a sculpture which asks the viewer to imagine what it could be, and to ponder why it isn’t. However, the artist’s title also challenges the viewer, much as Toronto challenges the citizen to find ways to make the most out of what we have: the washrooms are frequently locked, and perhaps this fountain can be repurposed for something else.
There is growing frustration in Toronto around the quality of our public services and spaces. I can’t open Twitter these days without coming across at least one photo of a busted and/or overflowing garbage bin. And now these sorts of posts are all being tagged with #AusterityTO.
I have written before about how Lisbon’s kiosks both anchor and beautify the city’s public spaces. I have also written about how Toronto should have something similar — #KioskTO anyone?
Some of you might remember an expanded street food program that the city piloted many years ago. It was a complete and utter failure. In my opinion (and from what I can remember), it was too heavily regulated. The food ended up being far too expensive and, frankly, none of it was very good.
That’s not how this should work. The entire point of things like food trucks and street kiosks is that they are cheaper alternatives to a conventional physical location. You can also more easily place them in locations where demand is being underserved.
The one pictured here is in Catania, Sicily. I carried my beer over from a panini shop down the street and then we ordered three espressos for a total of 2€. I tried to sit on a crate they had lying on the ground but I ended up breaking it. Sorry, guys. So we stood instead. It was all rather civilized.
Let entrepreneurs figure out what to sell and where. It will be a boon for both small business and for our public spaces.
P.S. I tweeted this photo out earlier today and it elicited a good discussion on Twitter. Toronto wants this.
This afternoon a few people from our team toured two of Fitzrovia’s recently completed rental apartment buildings here in Toronto. For those of you who may not be familiar, Fitzrovia is a relatively young company, but they have quickly become one if not the most active rental developers in the city. They are also ushering in an approach to purpose-built rentals that is more common in the US, but that is still fairly nascent in Canada. Part of this has to do with the fact that Canada took a few decades off from building rental apartments and instead focused on condominiums.
One of the first things you’ll notice is that they have programmed all of our lobbies with a coffee shop and bar called No. 10 Dean. This is their own brand. They operate it. And it serves as both an amenity for residents, as well as a cafe for the general public. This really helps to animate their lobbies, particularly at The Waverley, which is situated next to the University of Toronto and feels more like a co-working space in a cool boutique hotel than the lobby of an apartment building. I like this idea a lot. But it’s also an idea that is a lot easier to execute in an apartment building than in a condominium building.
Some of their other usual amenities include a rooftop pool (called LIDO), a gym (called The Temple), a signature amenity terrace (called STOA — which I’m assuming is a Greek architectural reference), and a pet spa (called Beauty for the Beast). When we went through this afternoon it was raining pretty heavily, but the pool was so great that I still felt a deep urge to pose and take multiple selfies. That’s how you know it’s doing what it’s supposed to. But perhaps more importantly, these amenities are all consistent brand offerings. Go into any Fitzrovia building and you’ll find a LIDO (pictured below).
Generally speaking, real estate companies usually aren’t as good at driving their brands in the same way as other consumer-facing companies. So it’s great to see this kind of design-forward and consistent brand offering being developed here in Toronto. Thanks for the tour and for hosting our team, guys.
I went out this morning to grab coffee from around the corner and, on my way back home, I ran into two people in the elevator that, from what I could glean, had hit the same button in the elevator and then struck up a conversation. He asked if she had just recently moved into the building. She responded with no, and that she usually doesn’t see anyone else on their floor. He was surprised by this response and said that he knows everybody on the floor.
Nearly a hundred years ago, architect Le Corbusier, as well as others, had the idea of creating “streets in the sky.” Perhaps the most famous example of this concept is his Unité d’Habitation in Marseille (pictured above). Now a UNESCO World Heritage building because of its role in the development of modernist architecture, the building houses five “streets”, two of which were intended to be fully-fledged shopping streets. These streets house(d) things like shops, restaurants, galleries, and even a hotel.
Le Corbusier was famous for his desire to create machines for living in. And these streets in the sky were part of this philosophy. The idea was that by having all of the things you needed under one roof, you would then be able to live an efficient, productive, and enjoyable life. Architecture and design could do that for you.
Of course, the other reason for this thinking was that we needed to get people away from cars. As the car became more commonplace in cities, conflicts arose. And architects began to grapple with how best to separate people and cars. One obvious solution was to simply lift people up and off the ground so that the street could be freed up for cars to do their thing. This was going to be the future.
The pitfalls of this line of thinking have since then been widely documented. And today, I think it’s pretty clear that most cities are in fact taking the opposite approach. Instead of removing people, they are removing cars through pedestrianization projects. Some of these projects are temporary, but many are also permanent. This happening almost everywhere from Toronto to Sao Paulo.
The other problem is that it’s extremely challenging to make retail uses work way up in the sky. And that’s why even second floor retail spaces often struggle compared to those on the ground floor. As I understand it, the non-residential tenancies in Marseille’s Unité d’Habitation have naturally evolved from being retail-centric to being more office-like. Supposedly you’ll now find architects and medical offices, which is not at all surprising.
But that doesn’t mean that Le Corbusier’s instincts weren’t directionally right. We now have lots of examples of tall buildings housing an intense mix of uses and public functions. And in the case of multi-family buildings, the corridors do often serve as a kind of street. I happen to live off of one that houses our building’s amenities. And so in addition to just running into neighbors, I’ll often run into the odd birthday party or Sunday afternoon sumo-suit party. True story!
It may not be the Champs-Élysées, but it is a kind of street for living.
Greg Isenberg recently wrote about what he refers to as the fast-foodification of everything — including cities. His arguments are that (1) we have reached peak sameness (Toronto is largely indistinguishable from, say, Sydney) and (2) the best brands and companies going forward will be local, unique, and community-driven.
I don’t know how to assess whether we have reached peak sameness, but I do know that, whatever we are experiencing right now, is at a minimum 100 years in the making. The International Style (of architecture), which emerged after WWI, is exactly what the name suggests. The intent was to fashion an approach to architecture that worked anywhere in the world. Location, climate, and context were all irrelevant.
This approach has been widely criticized for the reasons you might expect and for the reasons that Isenberg outlines in his post. But sameness is not exclusively the result of European architects who wanted to eschew ornament and local flourishes. As the world continues to globalize and become “smaller”, there is an inevitability to this growing and continued sameness. Business wants economies of scale.
But there is no question that, more than ever, people are craving unique and local experiences and places. And if you can create that in our globalized world, you are going to win.
A recent development proposal at 1925 Victoria Park Road (Toronto) by Well Grounded Real Estate (developer) and Partisans (architect) is noteworthy for a number of reasons:
The 12-storey, 168-suite residential mid-rise building is proposed to be built out of mass-timber.
It is targeting Toronto Green Standard Tier 4, which is a voluntary, difficult-to-achieve, and expensive sustainability target. It is the equivalent of net-zero and I believe the only projects to date that have achieved this level in the city are public projects.
The circulation spaces are exterior single-loaded corridors that face an internal courtyard. This approach is very common in some cities, but almost non-existent in Toronto. Usually because someone will cite our winters as being a problem and because double-loaded corridors are typically the most efficient (rentable area / gross construction area). But the benefits are that you don’t need to heat/cool these corridor spaces and you open up the possibility of suites with windows on both ends.
The design doesn’t generally follow the typical “pyramid-shaped confection” that has come to define Toronto mid-rise buildings, though it does seem to generally conform to the 45 degree angular planes that we love to obsess over. Instead, it is starting to resemble a typical European courtyard building. Good. For some more commentary on this, check out John Lorinc’s recent piece in the Globe and the Mail.
This is unquestionably an ambitious project. And ambition is what cities need. So I am pleased to write about it today on the blog. If you’d like to learn more, check out their project website.
Back in May, I wrote a post about time to market and managing costs in condominium projects. What I wrote then remains true and equally, if not more, important today. But given all the uncertainty that we are continuing to see in the market, I thought I would elaborate on a few points.
It used to be the case, when I first started working on condominium projects back in 2007 or so, that you would go pens down on your design drawings while you launched pre-sales and worked toward meeting your construction financing requirements.
Once you hit 50% sales, or maybe once you completely reached your financing hurdle, you would then call your architect back up and kindly ask them to get started on working drawings.
And the reason you did it this way was because working drawings are kind of expensive and so you wanted to make sure that your sales were going to be there. You were also trying to push as many of your costs out to after you had your construction loan in place so that you had a lower peak equity requirement.
You can’t do this today.
Since the beginning of this year, we have seen average high-rise construction costs increase by about 12% in the Greater Toronto Area and, for the balance of this year, some are predicting as much as 4% per month. What this means is that if you wait like the old days, you will likely see costs run away from you and you won’t be able to finance your project based on the sales you do have in place.
So what you want to do is not go pens down. Keep going on drawings. Start buying construction (i.e. tendering). And work toward locking in as many of your costs as possible.
How much is ultimately up to you and the exact market conditions at the time. But I know a number of condominium developers now targeting at least 50% tendered, which means securing most of your key contracts: formwork, concrete & rebar supply, windows, M&E, and so on.
A lot of us are hoping that costs will eventually come down and follow certain commodities in the near term. But as our cost consultant effectively said to me this week, “just because the price of cold-formed steel has come down, do you really think you’ll be able to walk into a BMW dealership and ask for a deep discount?”
As many of you know, I have been keeping a close eye on the pedestrian-only pilot that is currently underway on Market Street. And judging from all the engagement that my tweets usually get, a lot of you would love to see a lot more of this kind of urbanism both here in Toronto and elsewhere. (When Kensington Market?) The below photo was taken on Friday evening and Cirillo’s Academy, which is a culinary event space at the foot of the pedestrian-only stretch, was running some sort of event. All of the tables were filled with diners and it was basically a full fledged restaurant in the middle of the street. It was great to see.
Market Street on a Friday night. We got rid of the parking and somehow all the restaurants didn’t close down. pic.twitter.com/xhd3xpj4Ue
But the question that always comes up with these sort of initiatives, particularly here in North America, is: Will it hurt the businesses? To answer that, here’s a study that @economistcarson shared with me on Twitter that looks at the economic impact of street pedestrianization in Spanish cities. What the researchers did was essentially look at card transaction data from a major Spanish bank and then overlay it on top of land-use changes from an Open Street Map dataset. In doing so, they discovered some pretty important takeaways.
Geographic location within a city tends to be insignificant
The two key factors for driving revenue are: (1) store density and (2) store category
For store category, the largest positive effect was observed for cafes, restaurants, bars, and other non-tradeable, local consumption activities
What this last point is saying is that people, at least in Spanish cities, tend to prefer pedestrian-friendly environments when it comes to experience-based activities. And that makes complete sense. On the other hand, if you’re just running out for a little toilet paper and hemorrhoid cream, having a nice pedestrian-first experience is less critical. And this also makes sense.
Some of you, I’m sure, will correctly point out that Spain has, on average, better weather compared to a place like Canada. And that their store densities and overall densities are likely higher, and that they have deep historic urban fabrics to rely on. All of these things are certainly factors. But I don’t think any of this should stop us from working to better optimize our cities for pedestrians. There are lots of successful examples all across Canada. It can work. Just look at Market Street.
I love High Park. It’s the second largest green space in the City of Toronto and right beside the Junction neighborhood. But there are some problems. Despite having a subway line on its northern boundary, we’ve gotten the built form along its edges all wrong.
There’s very little functioning retail. The densities and heights are not nearly high enough. The streets aren’t great walking streets. And we’ve even gone and created undignified bus stops like this one here.
On top of all this, we’re now doing this silly thing where police are ticketing cyclists for riding around the park with too much vigor and enthusiasm. I’m sure somebody called to complain and this is all reactionary politics, but an even bigger reaction has now been set off.
The Globe & Mail then followed it up with this important piece calling for an end to cars inside the park. The boundaries currently house about 5 km of roads and almost 600 parking spots.
Given all this, I figured now is probably a good time to revive one of Casey Neistat’s original YouTube videos called “bike lanes.” The story is that he gets a ticket for not riding in a bike lane. And so he films a video of himself only riding in bike lanes — even if there are obstacles in his way.
It’s an awesome video with nearly 30 million views. And I’m sure that many of you have felt like doing exactly what he does when faced with this same situation. I know I have.
We talk a lot about congestion charges and road pricing on this blog. Here’s a list of some of those posts. I found 46 that were tagged with “road pricing.”
I continue to believe that it’s the only way that big cities can effectively solve the problem of traffic congestion. It’s not being caused by the bicycle lanes that were just added to your street. It’s not the new COVID street patios. And it’s not the new apartment that was just built with too many parking spots.
The problem is mispricing.
If you want free roads, then you don’t get free-flowing traffic. That’s how this equation works, which is why I have always thought it a good idea to dynamically price roads based on demand, and then to direct those funds toward more efficient forms of mobility — such as transit.
Despite all this, it’s not a very popular approach in this part of the world. Toronto looked at road pricing back in 2016, but we got nervous and backed away from it. New York City has also been looking at a congestion charge for Manhattan south of 60th Street for at least 4-5 years. But this one appears to still be on the table.
According to this recent CityLab article, New York’s congestion prices could look something like this (note that this chart includes other pre-existing tolls):
But with some exceptions (I think this is an interesting approach):
Primary residents of the Manhattan central business district, which is south of 60th Street, and New York State residents with adjusted gross income of less than $60,000 would be eligible for a state tax credit equal to the amount of the new tolls, paid during the taxable year.
In total, this current pricing scheme is expected to generate an additional $1 billion in annual revenue for the city’s transportation authority. The MTA also plans to bond against this revenue and raise an additional $15 billion for new transit projects.
