Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 394

The thing that we have been talking about for many months on this blog finally happened: Toronto City Council voted (18-7) in favor of allowing fourplexes as-of-right across all residential areas of the city. (If you're curious, here is a map of which Councillors voted yes and which ones voted no. It's not all that surprising.)

This is a major accomplishment and milestone for Toronto. So congratulations to everyone who has been working to make this happen. But of course, now is when the rubber hits the road: Will the market actually build this new housing typology (for Toronto) at scale? Is it actually feasible?

Jeremiah Shamess of Colliers came out this morning saying that the answer is no. These multiplexes aren't feasible and it is "not going to solve our housing crisis or even come close." He may be right, but I think a lot of people -- myself included -- are now looking closely at their feasibility.

In fact, this morning I ran into a lender on the street -- look what happens when you come into the office -- that is seeing if these can be built using CMHC financing. And this is just one example of the work happening all over the city right now.

There is also the question of scale. Small development projects are challenging. The general rule of thumb is that if you have the resources, you should build as big as you possibly can to drive economies of scale. So if these are actually feasible, who will want to build them?

The margins on a build like this are almost certainly going to be somewhere between negative and marginally positive. But I still think there's something to be said about being directionally right. There's more work to be done and these policies will likely get adjusted, but I think that's just fine as long as we're moving forward.

And that's what we're doing today.

I am sure that most people aren't going to feel bad for LVMH, but it is facing some opposition in trying to bring the first Cheval Blanc Hotel to North America. Last year, Beverly Hills City Council approved the hotel development on Rodeo Drive, but since then, enough signatures were collected that a special election is going to be held later this month for the ~22,000 residents who are registered to vote in Beverly Hills. And from the sounds of it, the results will decide the fate of the project.

As I understand it, there are two mains groups that are upset:

1. A union representing hotel workers

2. Local area residents

The official message from group #1 is that they want affordable housing. But there is speculation that they just want the hotel to be unionized. I don't don't, so let's move on to group #2. Why would residents be opposed to this project?

One way to think about this is that LVMH is trying to build a fancy new $2,000 per night hotel in one of the richest cities in the US, on one of its most luxurious streets. So, you would think that there would be a fit and that more than a few rich people would be excited about such a development. I guess this is true — and Council did vote in favor last year — but clearly there are other concerns :

...some people were unhappy a 109-room hotel, framed by Rodeo Drive, Little Santa Monica Boulevard and Beverly Drive, would rise nine stories on one side and tower over surrounding retail and commercial spaces sitting at three and four stories high. Four buildings would have to be razed, and the idea of more traffic coming to the area was unsettling.

It seems to be about scale:

...Cheval Blanc opponents want to keep that small town vibe. “The area is charming and beautiful right now, and, if and when they are able to put that project out there, it will not be. It is very nice to be around low-rise buildings. You can sit at a sidewalk café in Beverly Hills and look across the street and see the hills. It is a very good feeling,” said Darian Bojeaux, an attorney who has lived in the city for 35 years and signed the petitions launching a special election. “Let them build a code-compliant hotel that is three stories high. Let them build something nice that doesn’t ruin the city.”

Here's an aerial of said small town vibe for context (I've marked the number of proposed storeys):

What's interesting about this situation is that it seems to isolate the concerns. Because what is being proposed here is an obviously compatible use. It is a rich thing in an area for rich people. Residents don't seem to be saying that this is a problem. Instead, it is height that could potentially "ruin the city." (Ignore for a second that there's already an office building of similar height across the street.)

What this tells me is that if you're thinking about proposing nine storeys of Ferragamo and Balenciaga, that's probably not small town enough. Saint Laurent needs to be no more than three.

One of the things that I have wanted to do since I was in architecture school was visit the Venice Biennale . Partially because I would hear people say, " so and so exhibited at the Biennale this year", and that made it sound cool. But mostly because it's the oldest cultural exhibition of its kind in the world -- it was inaugurated in 1895 -- and because there's an entire section of it dedicated to architecture. So I'm excited to say that it looks like this month is going to be the month.

The way I am told the Venice Biennale of Architecture works is that there are two main components. There are the national pavilions in the Biennale Gardens, and there is the Arsenale, which is where lots of different nations exhibit under one roof. Canada is one of the 29 countries that has its own pavilion and, if you aren't familiar with its history, it's worth watching this short video :

https://youtu.be/gYdexDxFIzE

At the time of writing this post, it only had 277 views, so I'm guessing that most of you have not seen it. I felt patriotic when I watched it, because the purpose of these pavilions is that they host each country's official representation during the Biennale. It's Canada to the world and that makes me proud. This year, Canada is being represented by Architects Against Housing Alienation (AAHA) with an exhibit called " Not for Sale! "

Here's an excerpt from the project description:

Real estate speculation is a form of extortion. It converts homes into spatio-financial assets, changing the form, function, and aesthetics of housing to better serve the logics of wealth storage and speculation. The process is violent, resulting in an urban environment that is racist, sexist, and classist at a systemic level. This global phenomenon is nowhere more visible than in Canada, a country whose economy is now dominated by real estate.

In other words, it looks like the pavilion is going to be turned into a scathing criticism of what I do for a living: real estate development. How neat! The other neat thing about the Venice Biennale is that One Delisle is going to be featured in an exhibition called, "Reconceptualizing Urban Housing." Our team has been working on this project with Studio Gang since 2016, and so it's a great honor to have it recognized on such a global stage.

It also means that the Venice Biennale is going to simultaneously tell me that my work is doing some amount of good for Toronto, and that I'm also contributing to racism, sexism, and classism at a systemic level. I can't wait.