Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 280

“If I’m an advocate for anything, it’s to move. As far as you can, as much as you can. Across the ocean, or simply across the river. The extent to which you can walk in someone else’s shoes or at least eat their food, it’s a plus for everybody. Open your mind, get up off the couch, move.”

--Anthony Bourdain

My general recipe for travel is as follows: I want to see cool architecture, I want to eat good food, and I want to get a local sense for the place. Meaning, I'd ideally like to hang out with locals and learn from them. What's it really like, here?

Because of this, I've never been one to over schedule on trips. There will be things I absolutely want to see and do, but I always want to make sure that there's time for the unknown.

I think you want to walk into places that you don't have on your list, sit at the bar, and have a conversation with the person behind it. You will learn things, and maybe it'll set you on a travel journey that you couldn't have possibly planned back home.

That said, guides are still helpful for things like architecture and food. But I have never found general purpose guides -- like the ones from Frommer's -- to be of any use. They have too much information that isn't curated.

When I was in my early 20s, I used to use the Wallpaper* City Guides. They were small. I would mark them up as I went. And they gave me the list of must-see architecture. More recently, I've been relying on Monocle's Travel Guides. They're great too.

But I am now also a fan of Toronto-based ÅVONTUURA and the architecture guides that they produce. They are simple and beautiful pamphlets that give you a map of each city; a breakdown of contemporary, modern, and historic architecture; a recommended route through the city; and a full list of the important buildings, including their architects.

The founder of Avontuura, Karl van Es , was kind enough to send me their entire set, which as of this month includes new guides for Amsterdam, Berlin, Singapore, and Toronto. Thank you, Karl.

I'm now looking forward to trying one of these out on a future trip. I'm going to use it to decide what architecture I want to visit and, for the rest, I'll just do what I normally like to do -- wing it.

P.S. It took me multiple attempts of tossing these guides onto my kitchen counter in order to arrive at the above photo. I hope you like it.

One argument that you might be able to make is that home prices follow urban density. New York City, for example, is dense. And homes in New York City tend to be more expensive than those in, oh I don't know, rural Canada. So with this, you might conclude that development and density are bad -- it makes housing more expensive. But then there's places like San Jose, California. It's not very dense, and yet it has some of if not the most expensive housing in the US.

Well, it turns out that housing density and median housing values don't actually exhibit a particularly strong correlation. A better and much stronger relationship can be found in what Kasey Klimes explains, here, in this excellent post , which is that home prices more accurately follow incomes. In other words, the more high paying jobs that exist in a market, the more likely that housing will be expensive.

Here is what that looks like for US metros over 1 million people:

The above chart compares median home value to aggregate income per unit of housing. And here, Kasey discovers an r-value of 0.9, which suggests that "over 81% of median home values in large metros can be attributed to aggregate income per unit of housing." This explains why San Jose, and San Francisco, are such outliers. They have very high incomes for every unit of available housing, despite the former being not all that dense.

Okay, so now that we know this, how do we make housing more affordable? One option is to just make people poorer. If you reduce incomes per unit of housing, then home prices will, almost certainly, go down. And this is why poorer cities tend to have more affordable housing. But this is obviously suboptimal. The better option is to keep people wealthy and simply increase the denominator in "aggregate income per unit of housing."

Meaning: build more housing!

Chart: Kasey Klimes

My friend David Wex recently opened up a new bar called Lisbon Hote l, and this evening I went to check it out with him. It's not in Lisbon. And it's not a hotel. But it is deliberately designed to feel like a hotel lobby bar, and it is a great place for drinks and snacks. I recommend both of the dishes pictured above -- especially the cucumber and dill one.

It's also housed in the River City community , which his firm Urban Capital developed. And I think that's something. Developers are often criticized when they put in boring (yet profitable) uses in the ground floors of their buildings. And this is not that (though hopefully it's still profitable). This is him and his partners wanting to do something cool and help create a "place."

Who said new ideas need old buildings? Rhetorical question. It was Jane Jacobs who said this.

For more on Lisbon Hotel, check out this profile in Toronto Life .