Building February March 2020

Urban Development / Architecture & Design / Innovation

PM#43096012

BLD FebMar20.indd 1

building.ca February/March 2020 CDN $7.95

Inclusionary Zoning Due Diligence LRT Woes

Next-Gen Cities Must Find a Way Forward

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

REGISTER NOW INSCRIVEZ-VOUS DÈS MAINTENANT

BLD FebMar20.indd 2

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

FEATURES

Departments

13

20

24

The Big “Now What?”

Montréal’s Olympic Stadium is a monument, though to what is open to interpretation.

By Taylor C. Noakes

Beyond Public Subsidy Toronto is looking at Inclusionary Zoning as a tool to help its affordable housing problems, but the way forward is anything but clear.

By Rhys Phillips

Due-ing It Right Why architects should play a role in the due diligence phase for developers.

By Kyle A. Lewkowich

05 06 08 10 11 27 30

Editor’s Notes Market Watch Legal Briefs Powers That Be City Agenda Site Visit From the Bullpen

Building.CA Read Four Ways Smart Mobility Will Make Our World A Better Place Stantec’s Rod Schebesch discusses solutions that will change the way we travel and live.

explore Drummondville Public Library Helps turn a Québec town with a farmer/soldier history into a citizen of the 21st century.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 3

3

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Maintaining your building’s fire alarM systeM Made easy with eCao registered fire alarM ContraCtors What Building Owners, Property Owners and Managers need to know There are a lot of fire regulations and practices for which building owners and property managers are responsible. ECAO is offering an exclusive seminar for you to learn about your responsibilities under Fire Code regulations to keep your buildings safe.

Everyone knows that fires are costly for building owners and property managers. The Electrical Contractors Association of Ontario (ECAO) hopes it can help support property owners and managers by ensuring buildings have properly installed and maintained fire alarm systems.

This is done by hiring an ECAO Registered Fire Alarm Contractor (RFAC).

By using an RFAC, accredited Cert-Fire electricians can cover installation, fire alarm maintenance, testing and verification; and they also can also perform all your electrical needs for your building. One stop electrical services!

ECAO is offering a complimentary half-day session exclusively for Building Owners and Property Managers on May 26, 2020 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. This session covers: • enforcement and penalties for non-compliance • requirements for regular system checks • responsibilities of building and supervisor staff • how to hire a qualified RFAC Contractor • review requirements under the Ontario Fire, Building and Electrical Safety Codes For more details and to register, please contact Phyllis Lee at: contactus@certifire.org

“DiD you know that a Certi-Fire eleCtriCian is one oF only two, reCognizeD by the ontario Fire Marshal, alloweD to install, test anD veriFy a Fire alarM systeM?” Electrical Contractors with the ECAO are your one stop service professionals for all your skilled electrical work and fire alarm needs. Our members have years of recognized experience & extensive training in all aspects of electrical construction work including: • Commercial • Industrial • Residential

• Communications • Fire Alarm specializing in Installation, Testing, Verification & Repairs

CONTACT US: CONTACTUS@CERTIFIRE.ORG 416-572-8509 416-675-3226 WWW.CERTIFIRE.ORG

BLD FebMar20.indd 4 ECAO.indd 2

Follow us on Twitter & Facebook @ ECAOntario

2020-02-06 AM 2020-01-31 10:45 1:13 PM

31 1:13 PM

Volume 70 No. 1

Editor in Chief Peter Sobchak Art Director Roy Gaiot Legal Editor Jeffrey W. Lem Contributors Mark Hannah, Cem Kayatekin, Megan J. Lem, Kyle A. Lewkowich, Shannon Moore, Ben Myers, Taylor C. Noakes, Rhys Phillips, Kevin Powers.

Customer Service / Production Laura Moffatt, 416 441 2085 x104 Press Releases pressroom@building.ca Circulation Manager circulation@building.ca Associate Publisher Faria Ahmed, 416 441 2085 x106 fahmed@building.ca Vice President & Senior Publisher Steve Wilson, 416 441 2085 x105 swilson@building.ca President, iQ Business Media Inc. Alex Papanou Design Consultation BLVD Agency

Building magazine is published by iQ Business Media Inc. 101 Duncan Mill Road, Suite 302 Toronto, ON M3B 1Z3 (416) 441 2085 x104 info@building.ca www.building.ca SUBSCRIPTION RATE: Canada: 1 year, $30.95; 2 years, $52.95; 3 years, $64.95 (plus H.S.T.) U.S.A.: 1 year, $38.95 USD. Overseas: 1 year, $45.95 USD. BACK ISSUES: Back copies are available for $15 for delivery in Canada, $20 USD for delivery in U.S.A. and $30 USD overseas. Please send prepayment to Building, 101 Duncan Mill Road, Suite 302 Toronto, ON M3B 1Z3.

Subscription and back issues inquiries please call (416) 441 2085 x104, e-mail: circulation@building.ca or go to www.building.ca Please send changes of address to Circulation Department, Building magazine or e-mail to addresses@building.ca Building is indexed in the Canadian Magazine Index by Micromedia ProQuest Company, Toronto (www.micromedia. com) and National Archive Publishing Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan (www.napubco.com)

Building is published six times a year. Printed in Canada. The content of this p ­ ublication is the property of Building and cannot be reproduced without permission from the publisher.

Funded by the Government of Canada

H.S.T. #80456 2965 RT0001 ISSN 1185-3654 (Print), ISSN 1923-3361 (Online) Canada Post Sales Agreement #43096012

Lock and key “Many cities are locked in. Both in terms of environmental responsibilities, and in terms of issues of equity,” says Cem Kayatekin, a professor at the IE School of Architecture and Design in Madrid, in a guest column appearing in this issue. He uses that phrase — “locked in” — several times in his op-ed, and it has been popping up quite a bit on my radar lately, mostly from people using it to describe the relationships between cities and the fight against climate change. As we all know, climate change touches every aspect of life, and every aspect of life is in some way contributing to climate change, so whether they realize it yet or not, cities are “locked in” to their infrastruc­ tural design and planning like never before.

Take, for example, how we move. “Transpor­ tation is one of the leading contributors of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution worldwide. Given the role that cities play in climate change, we need to re-think and plan for a future in which cities work intentionally to direct change,” says Shauna Brail, an Urban Studies Program associate professor at the University of Toronto in her recent article for The Conversation. As she points out, 64 per cent of all vehicle kilometres travelled on a global basis are in cities, and this is anticipated to grow exponentially. “To address the stubborn challenge of reducing transportation-based emissions, cities need to lean on car-free alternatives such as public transit and active transportation,” she says.

Cities are waking up to the realization that “this means implementing mobility solutions that are accessible, autonomous, connected, electric, and shared,” says Rod Schebesch, who leads Stantec’s international Smart Mobil­ ity Program. It also means finding solutions to the transportation landscape we already have.

Researchers at the University of British Col­ umbia recently published results of a study that provocatively suggest living near major roads or highways is linked to higher incidence of dementia, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease and multiple sclerosis (MS).

Just as REN21’s report that I referenced in my last column shows that it is cities driving

Peter Sobchak Editor in Chief We welcome your feedback. Send your questions and comments to psobchak@building.ca

the transition towards renewable energy, a similar drive has to happen to transportation.

“Communities can achieve the greatest gains by considering the entire range of smart mobility options,” says Schebesch. “Getting the mix right will mean helping everyone move about in the way that’s right for them.”

But in a place like Canada, where cities rely on complex funding arrangements between higher levels of government in order to invest in major infrastructure projects, this is far from easy. The share of municipalities’ funding from the federal and provincial governments has decreased from nearly 50 per cent in the 1970s to 12.3 per cent in 2018, making it difficult for municipalities to invest in major infrastructure projects without partnering with other levels of government or private investors.

Ultimately, it will be partnerships that will make or break urban mobility. Cities “need to effectively engage with private firms to leverage disruptive transportation technologies, such as ride-hailing apps,” says Brail, acknowledging that there is tension amongst urban pundits about these technologies and their usage. “Only with intentional and strategic effort can we hope to move the needle on transportation-based emissions while also ensuring that people have access to the mobility resources they need.”

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 5

5

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

market watch Spotlight: Industrial Property

Mark Hannah is Managing Director, Real Estate at Nicola Wealth Real Estate.

Inflated Rents, Lack of Options

square foot (psf) net range and have recently escalated to the $8 to $12 psf net range (depending on the unit size). In Vancouver, rental rates were stagnant in the $6 to $7 psf net range for the similar time frame and have also experienced similar rent inflation in the $8 to $13 psf net range (depending on the unit size).

Why have escalating rents become the current standard? The increase has happened organically for several reasons. First, diminishing land supply, due to the previously mentioned causes, and strong demand resulted in an extreme rise in price for the remaining properties available for industrial use. Next, new construction provides some supply to the market but at significantly higher rental rates in order to compensate for high land prices, GST, government development cost levies, and the increased cost of labour and materials. This has in turn had a trickle-down effect to standing inventory whereby both new and existing supply are experiencing considerably higher rents.

On a positive note, the economy appears to be robust with many industrial user groups such as e-commerce, food production, film production, third party logistics, distribution, cold storage, cannabis and last

Net absorption / overall asking rent Greater Vancouver

Greater Toronto $8

3,000,000 2,500,000

7.5

2,000,000 1,500,000 1,250,000 1,000,000 750,000 500,000 250,000 0

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Q2 2019

$14 12 10 8 6 4

7

1,500,000 1,000,000

6.5

500,000

6

0 5.5

-500,000 Net Absorption, SF Asking Rent, SPSF

6

5

-1,000,000 2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Q2 2019

Source: Greater Toronto Cushman & Wakefield Q2 Industrial Report

By Mark Hannah

Canadian businesses requiring industrial real estate are feeling the pinch these days. Soaring land prices in Canada’s major markets are resulting in limited rental opportunities, ultimately forcing industrial users out of urban sub-markets and into outlying locations. According to CBRE’s third quarter report, the national industrial vacancy rate is 2.9 per cent. Toronto and Vancouver lead all major markets in Canada with record-low vacancy rates of 0.7 per cent and 1.4 per cent respectively.

Through the 1990s and 2000s, rental rates were flat with plenty of options for tenants to choose from in Canada’s urban epicenters, Toronto and Vancouver. This allowed industrial users and businesses to reasonably afford “market rent” without impacting their businesses. Over the past eight to 10 years, the diminishing industrial zones neighbouring metropolitan areas, coupled with the push to re-zone industrial properties for higher density buildings, has forced users out notwithstanding the desire by many municipalities to preserve their industrial inventory. As a result, rental rates have more than doubled.

Prior to 2010, Toronto rental rates historically trended in the $5.00 to $6.00 per

Source: Greater Vancouver Cushman & Wakefield Q2 Industrial Report

The Industrial Property Crunch in Canada

February / March 2020

BLD FebMar20.indd 6

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

mile delivery of products flourishing, fuelling the need for more industrial inventory over the long-term. These businesses contribute substantially to the demand for industrial spaces of all sizes. The swelling interest is causing a major problem for tenants.

Availability is limited and economic rents rose by 12 per cent last year alone, according to JLL’s recent Q3 2019 Industrial Report.

There appears to be no relief in sight as the primary culprit is soaring land prices.

There is a general shortage of all industrial space, but the lack of supply is particularly apparent in the small (2,500 to 7,000 sf) and mid (7,500 to 20,000 sf) bay size ranges where opportunities are scarce.

Properties that have excess land/yard area are being marketed for sale at inflated prices based on a “higher and better use,” making it uneconomical for the traditional owner and/or user. This has priced many of the small to mid-bay users out of the market forcing them away from urban locations and into outlying markets.

Meeting the demand of industrial users in major markets, primarily Toronto and Vancouver, is a challenging issue. According to Avison Young’s Q3 2019 Industrial Report, three million square feet of new inventory will be completed this year in Vancouver and Toronto will add 9.5 million square feet. While this new supply is good news, it is not enough to meet the demand.

The Challenges and Solutions Government at all levels (Federal, Provincial and Municipal) cannot be expected to con-

There appears to be no relief in sight as the primary culprit is soaring land prices.

areas including eliminating the Property Transfer Tax (PTT ) on land acquisition for development. They could also offer attractive low interest rate construction financing as it does with multi-family rental apartment buildings, to help encourage developers to build new product.

The Federal government can have a big impact encouraging new supply of industrial product by eliminating the GST on new buildings as this cost is passed along to the tenant in the rental rate. In many areas of the United States, the local governments have established “Opportunity Zones” and “Property Tax Holidays” to help encourage new development.

As a result of these conditions, there has been a movement by developers to build multi-level (vertical) industrial projects for both small and large bay distribution users to meet the demand from both strata/condo and lease requirements.

trol land prices but they can contribute in other areas. Developing new product is imperative to ease the stress on the market but there are considerable barriers to doing so, very high development cost levies (DCL’s) being one of them. These costs could be lowered to offset the upfront cost of a new project. For example, in Mississauga, Ont. the DCL’s are as high as $25 psf whereas in Richmond, B.C., they are as high as $12 psf. This is a significant burden driving up construction costs and resulting in high rental rates being required to warrant new construction.

Municipal governments can help by improving the inefficient approval process for devel­ opers. Land prices are already very high, and the drawn-out approval period adds consid­ erably to the overall project cost for developers. Fast tracking approvals will ensure there is ample supply to meet the demand. Provin­ cial governments can contribute in several

Source: Greater Toronto CBRE Q3 2019 Industrial Report

Source: Greater Vancouver CBRE Q3 2019 Industrial Report

Supply & Demand Greater Vancouver

Greater Toronto

(MSF) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1

14% 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Net Absorption

Vacancy Rate

New Supply

Availability rate

2015

2016

2017

2018

YTD 2019

10-year average Availability rate

(MSF) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

YTD 2019

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 7

7% 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3

7

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

legal Briefs Paradigm Shift

An obscure British case paves the way for the adoption of automated facial recognition worldwide.

By Jeffrey W. Lem and Megan J. Lem

Jeffrey W. Lem is Editor-in-Chief of the Real Property Reports and the Director of Titles for the Province of Ontario. The opinions expressed in this article are personal to the author and not attributable or referable to the government of the Province of Ontario.

8

Megan J. Lem practices corporate securities law at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and is called to the bar in New York and Ontario.

This column in Building has, for almost three decades now, chronicled new cases and legislative developments affecting the real estate, development, construction and municipal industries. In that vast time, we’ve covered a wide range of legal developments — construction; mortgage financing; zoning by-laws; building codes; leasing; property management; liens; and so on — with most of these topics coming as no surprise to our readers. That said, every now and then, we come across a legal development that might have huge implications for our businesses yet goes totally unnoticed by the entire industry.

We saw such a legal development recently in the Queen v. Edward Bridges case.

In this case, the court had to decide whether the local police force could use automated facial recognition software to capture and analyze the faces in crowds to identify potential criminal threats. This was more than just the taking of surveillance video: it included the application of modern facial recognition artificial intelligence algorithms, a relatively new technology that operates in real time and with outstanding accuracy on a population that is in full motion and wearing varying degrees of obscurity.

The case itself was set in Cardiff, England, where the local constabulary had been using this facial recognition technology by parking camera-laden vans, duly marked as police vans, at public venues likely to attract hooliganism (football games, rugby matches, concerts, etc.). The Welsh police have used this technology at over 50 large events since January 2018, having scanned and analyzed, in real time, an estimated half a million faces!

Ed Bridges, a local resident, was one such face at one such events. Now, as it turns out with a lot of these civil liberties cases, nothing happened to him — he wasn’t falsely accused or arrested or even questioned by police — he was simply upset that his biometric facial data was analyzed by police software without his consent. He sued to stop the South Wales police from using this “unjustified and oppressive” new surveillance technology to breach his human rights.

Why such a case is relevant, let alone ground-breaking, to our industries might not be immediately apparent to Building readers.

However, imagine the impact that real-time, ultra-accurate facial recognition of individuals within large moving crowds can have on technical solutions for crowd control, facilities management, building security, access control (both in and out), retail opportunities, and so on. The possibilities are endless if all it takes is a few well-positioned cameras and the right algorithms to have full control of all human interaction with physical facilities within a given space. This is more than mere CCTV surveillance footage (which at best provides an after-the-fact record of who went where when). This is real time recognition technology, which can be adapted to all sorts of controls and other mechanical elements.

Ben Su, a development officer with AIH Technology Inc., a Toronto-based company that specializes exclusively in facial recognition technology as a service, notes that this is not your parents’ facial recognition technology. Automated facial recognition has, through artificial intelligence machine learning, advanced to almost science-fiction like accuracy, speed and affordability. According to Su, the better algorithms can now identify faces, partially obscured by sunglasses, baseball caps, scarves (and, nowadays, surgical masks!) from within a sea of moving faces, almost instantaneously and with shockingly near-perfect accuracy.

Furthermore, while the facial recognition technology tested in the Ed Bridges cases was in a policing context (identifying potential hooligans, terrorists and other “bad guys” in large crowds), the technology has an unlimited number of non-policing applications. Retail comes to mind immediately, with probably every large mall already poised to deploy the technology to enhance the shopping experience. AIH already deploys its technology in long-term care facilities where residents are prone to wander, but the same technology would also work in schools and child day-care facilities that face the additional risk of intruders. Even in the most

February / March 2020

BLD FebMar20.indd 8

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

New facial recognition technology is achieving science-fiction like capabilities. mundane of processes, such as controlled building access (which currently uses notoriously unsecure keypads or pass-card/fob technologies) can be revolutionized overnight with automated facial recognition technology.

The Ed Bridges case is widely considered as the first legal challenge of police use of automated facial recognition in the world, and it is noteworthy that Ed Bridges resoundingly lost his court challenge, essentially opening the door to the use of automated facial recognition technology in public settings.

Now, some lawyers might note that the issue is not yet entirely settled, even in the U.K., since Ed Bridges has now appealed to the U.K. Court of Appeal. That is true, but if these authors were to hazard a guess, the judgement of the Divisional Court was so comprehensive and robust that a successful overturn on appeal is unlikely. Other legal pundits might also suggest that the Ed Bridges case has very little relevance to us since the privacy laws of England are quite different than those on this side of the

PIONEER STEEL BUILDINGS Residential • Commercial • Industrial

Pioneer Steel has been manufacturing steel buildings in Canada since 1980.

Our premium quality, preengineered steel buildings have been in use for a wide range of industrial, commercial, residential, agricultural and recreational applications.

Pioneer’s clear span, no trusses, no beams, no posts designs are today’s leading edge steel building solution.

You’ll get 100% usable space that’s affordable, eco-friendly, easy to install, maintenance-free, weather and stormresistant and, above all, long-lasting.

PIONEERSTEEL.CA

855-212-3005 Steel Buildings since 1980

Atlantic, and because the legalization of the police use of such technology does not necessarily translate to private sector use of the same technology. Again, we disagree.

While it is trite to suggest that English privacy laws are different than those in Canada, the European (including the English) privacy laws are actually stricter than those here.

If automated facial recognition can be legal there, well, frankly, it can legal anywhere!

Furthermore, while the Ed Bridges case did involve public sector protagonists, the privacy issues are largely the same whether the technology is deployed by public sector authorities or by private sector owners.

The phrase “paradigm shift” is over-used and tired, and we are loathe to adopt it, but this new automated facial recognition may be just that, a real “paradigm shift” in the way property and people are managed in the 21st century. Furthermore, Ed Bridges’s attempt to quash the use of this technology in its infancy might just have done the opposite and opened the technology up to even broader applications worldwide.

Electric Vehicle Car Charging simplified.

One call and we do it all.

We have EVerything you need.

sparkev.ca Contact: (416) 931-7944 sales@sparkev.ca

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 9

9

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

powers that be The Third Rail of Municipal Politics

Meant to move people, light rail often just slows everything down.

By Kevin Powers

Kevin Powers is managing principal of Project Advocacy Inc., a subsidiary of Campbell Strategies, and is focused on helping project developers facing public and government opposition.

Find him at www.projectadvocacy.ca or email him at kevin.powers@ projectadvocacy.ca

10

BLD FebMar20.indd 10

For urban areas across the country, light rail transit has emerged as something of a miracle cure, able to reduce traffic congestion and lower GHG emissions while increasing mobility and boosting economic development. But it has also emerged as something of a third rail onto which municipal politicians stumble and get burned.

Most recently, the City of Hamilton’s LRT miracle crashed in gruesome fashion when the Ontario government unexpectedly announced it was pulling $1 billion in funding for the project. That chaotic afternoon included a hastily cancelled news conference, city councillors confronting police, and the Minister of Transportation fleeing the city under police escort. It was an epic end to a project once so full of promise one councillor had described as not just a train, but “a cultural shift for the city.”

Estimates had pegged the amount of GHGs to be saved at more than 8,500 tonnes a year. The LRT promised up to $15 million in direct and indirect employment and income impacts, and a spike in land values of up to $106 million. Mayor Fred Eisenberger, who ran for office multiple times on his support for the LRT, called the pullback “a personal betrayal.” Shortly afterwards, he applied to have his dog accompany him to the office as an emotional support animal.

Though the project ultimately died at the hands of the provincial government, it had been on life support at the local level for the nearly 13 years since its inception. Support for the LRT in Hamilton was always touchand-go. In a city with up to 16 wards at one point, the LRT would only run through five of the most densely populated. For many in the 11 wards outside the track, it seemed like a waste of money in a city where everyone drives. For many in the downtown, the project spelled blocked lanes, traffic diversions, and five years of noise and dust.

As a result, debate around the LRT dominated four municipal election cycles and

killed as many political careers as it made.

The drawn-out debate on everything from routing to stops divided the city. And Hamilton was just the latest casualty of light rail transit. Ottawa’s initial plans for light rail got bogged down in politics in 2007. After many more years of debate, it was finally approved in 2012. Now built, the battle has resumed around its extension. Approving an LRT in Kitchener-Waterloo took 12 years and three election cycles, and in Toronto, a city where everyone can agree on the pressing need for more transit, no one can agree on where it should go and what form it should take. The city politics around the issue was so messy, slow and fractious, the province infamously swooped in and took control of the transit network.

It’s a move so crazy it might just work.

Because at the heart of the challenges that plague light rail transit is the fact that these are linear projects. Like pipelines and transmission lines, light rail transit isn’t contained to one political jurisdiction. It requires agreement among politicians, each serving different interests. The LRT in Hamilton was going to cut through wards that included a university, the business district, gentrifying neighbourhoods and some low-income areas.

Each ward was very different, and the views — and votes — of each councillor reflected that difference.

Complicating matters is the fact that LRTs are about more than just moving people. LRTs are also about the future shape of a city. The path of an LRT line will bring investment and development that will affect the look and feel of a city for decades to come. And while most can agree on the need to move people, few can agree on what a city should look like in 50 years.

This is especially true when an election cycle is only four years. As Hamilton has shown, when the debate over transit is left to municipal politicians, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Unfortunately, it’s often the headlamp of an oncoming train.

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

city agenda The Inclusive City; the Sustainable City; and the Missing Urban Developer

By Cem Kayatekin

Cem S. Kayatekin is a professor at the IE School of Architecture and Design in Madrid.

He holds a Bachelor of Architecture from Auburn University, a Master of Architecture from Cornell University, and a Ph.D. in Architecture from the University of Oregon, completed under the tutelage of Howard Davis.

In June of 2019, New Yorkers bore witness to a rather unfamiliar historic moment.

In the persistent urban struggle between real estate lobbies and tenant protection organizations, surprisingly it was the latter who found their hands raised. As a result, a substantial range of rent control and tenant protection mechanisms were set in motion throughout the city. New York City real estate recoiled. The achieved rent reforms were deemed an “investment moratorium” on projects with affordable housing components. The market for multifamily housing plummeted.

For the real estate sector, this was seemingly a death knell. And yet for housing reformers, this was a starting point. A miniscule gain in a much further reaching agenda of urban equity. With new and deeper reforms on the horizon, renewed and deeper recoils from the real estate sector can be expected. And yet, this is just one layer of the urban fabric.

Just as many cities seem to be accelerating how they are addressing issues of equity, many are also accelerating how they are addressing issues of sustainability: incentivizing, and in many cases requiring, new urban projects to be more energy efficient, more carbon neutral, more supportive of biodiversity, more active in environmental infrastructure, and so on.

Consider for instance, Toronto’s green roof bylaws; Barcelona’s urban planning measures concerning green infrastructure and biodiversity in the city; New York City’s green infrastructure grant program; the city of Frankfurt’s push to achieve passive house standards within social housing projects; to name a few.

Part of this urban environmental trajectory is of course rooted in the Paris Climate Accord. While the United States is seemingly in the process of withdrawing from this international agreement, the parallel story is that 438 mayors in the U.S. have reaffirmed that they will uphold the Paris

Climate Accord in full. There are a range of other such municipal sustainability accords and networks to note: C40 Cities; the Global Covenant of Mayors; The Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance; the Climate Alliance; the Sustainable City Network, to name a few.

Many cities, in other words, are locked in.

Both in terms of environmental responsibilities, and in terms of issues of equity.

For such cities to hold the real estate sector to a higher level of responsibilities and accountabilities, this is not a choice.

This is a contractual obligation.

This is the unusual circumstance we find ourselves in. The dominant urban development model has tended to have a singular focus, specifically from the 1970s onwards: how to craft real estate in a manner that appeals to the high-end market. Now, in the stretch of just a few years, it is being pushed to achieve a high level of fluency regarding inclusivity and sustainability.

Forget luxury, it is being told.

The mold of the traditional urban devel­ oper does not seem to be capable of dealing with these relatively rapid changes. Its financial model seems unable to incorporate parameters of equity and environment, let alone forgo the high-end market as the core basis of profit. And yet, cities are locked in.

Contractual obligations are set in motion.

The circumstances seem to be calling for new mutations of the urban development model to enter the game. For novel innovative approaches to vie for the dominant positions within the domain of real estate. For more robust financial models, incorporating issues of equity and environment into their calculations, to challenge established frameworks.

Cities are locked in; change is here and on the horizon; and current sectors of real estate are recoiling in paralysis. Time for a change seems to be at hand. If the inclusive and sustainable city is the target, what is missing is the urban development model to match.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 11

11

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

A20 Ad Resizing Document.indd 1 BLD FebMar20.indd 12

1/23/2020 1:51:04 PM 2020-02-06 10:45 AM

The Big “Now What?”

Montréal’s Olympic Stadium is a monument, though to what is open to interpretation.

By Taylor C. Noakes

Building.ca

13

1:51:04 PM BLD FebMar20.indd 13

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

In a city well-known for its wide variety of historically and architecturally significant buildings, Montréal’s Olympic Stadium is truly in a league of its own. Like many of the city’s protected heritage buildings and landmarks, it satisfies the conditions for long-term preservation: its style and design are unique, and culturally significant events have occurred there. It is a monument, though to what is open to interpretation.

The recent passing of its architect, Roger Taillibert, provides a good opportunity to reassess the stadium’s history plus its form and function within Montréal’s contemporary urban environment. The stadium, in conjunction with the Montréal Tower, constitute his magnum opus, but it was the mayor at the time, Jean Drapeau, who deserves the credit for its development. It was Drapeau who pushed for the Olympics and chose Taillibert’s design. It is said the first sketch of the project was made on a cocktail napkin over lunch.

The story of the stadium intertwines with that of the Games it was built for, and that’s where things begin to get complicated. The Games weren’t a failure in their own right: it’s that they cost far more than what Drapeau had initially estimated. Furthermore, the promise of subsequent long-term economic stimulus never materialized.

Montréal’s mid-century modernization during Drapeau’s 30-year reign ran concurrent with suburbanization and de-industrialization.

As the stadium went up, the city was losing both people and economic activity to the suburbs and greener pastures elsewhere in Canada. The stadium became emblematic

14

(particularly to Anglophones) of Montréal’s decline. Even though the city fared far better than comparable American cities in the Great Lakes and Eastern Seaboard regions over the same period, the Drapeau years left Montréalers with considerable debts and a herd of White Elephant mega projects.

Problems Began on The Job Site Simply put, corruption, collusion and outright fraud ran rampant throughout the stadium’s construction and undoubtedly added hundreds

of millions of dollars to the bill. Materials were registered as being “delivered” to the site and then re-directed to private development projects elsewhere in the city. A great number of apartment towers are said to have been built with concrete intended for the stadium. In addition, labour disputes resulted in slow-downs, strikes and inefficient construction. A government inquiry later revealed the involvement of organized crime; the job-site union boss would be shot dead in his car years later, likely a mob hit. The situation

February / March 2020

BLD FebMar20.indd 14

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Its value is intrinsic, as well as practical, but its disproportionate public cost is also difficult to justify. was so bad there was serious discussion of postponing the Olympics until 1977. Ultimately, the provincial government would take over the project and succeed at least in completing the sports facilities in time for the Games.

The tower would have to wait another 11 years before it was completed.

The stadium’s legacy is further complicated by that of the Montréal Expos, another of Drapeau’s many efforts to make Montréal a more “American” city. Though the Major League Baseball franchise had more than a few great years, attendance was never particularly strong. The optics weren’t great either; the Expos moved into an unfinished stadium without a roof, and even when there were large crowds, the stadium’s massive size meant it always tended to look half-empty.

The innovative retractable roof design never worked properly either. Part of the problem is said to lie in Taillibert — more accustomed to working in France than Canada — not adequately accounting for the weight of snow and ice on the roof during winter. As the Expos entered terminal decline during the 1990s, the stadium began falling apart in spectacular ways. A massive concrete slab crashed to the ground after support beams snapped, and in another instance large sections of the roof tore and caved in. It was a miracle no one was killed in either case.

Despite these difficulties and the ultimate loss of the Expos in 2004, the stadium lives on. It is in form and function the equivalent of a de facto heritage building. Its value is intrinsic, as well as practical, but its disproportionate public cost is also difficult to justify.

Olympic Stadium, and the other installations managed by the Québec government’s Regie des installations Olympiques (RIO), aren’t preserved heritage buildings in a traditional sense, but similarly constitute an on-going cost to Québec taxpayers. The justification is that the complex serves the public while also being a work of art worth the upkeep costs. Politicians of all stripes, both municipal and provincial, simply cannot argue against it. There are too many political and professional legacies wrapped up in it, with a cost too big to be razed and redeveloped, no matter what some might pay for the site. To acknowledge the Big O was a mistake is to question the legacy of former mayor Jean Drapeau, a man many consider as a visionary city builder.

Public debt since 1977 caused by the stadium is in the $2-billion range, which includes a planned roof reconstruction or replacement estimated at $400 million. While the stadium has been paid for, it hasn’t yet paid for itself: RIO estimates peg stadium revenue on average at $20 million per year since 1977. Given these conditions, it might take 20 years before stadium-generated returns pay for the roof reconstruction.

Worth All the Cost?

Canada’s largest multi-sport complex is designed primarily to do one thing: host the Summer Olympics. Its secondary function: host a professional sports franchise. It currently does neither, nor is unlikely to ever serve these functions again. Professional leagues and international sporting associations are exercising ever-greater levels of control over requi-

site infrastructure, most insisting on new construction. Olympic Stadium can be used for exhibition games or as an over-size venue for some professional league play, but finding a new permanent tenant is doubtful.

The stadium’s history of torn roof segments, fallen concrete beams and a failed baseball team hasn’t left it with the best reputation, and reputation, ironically, plays an important role in why Montréal and Québec will keep pumping money into the stadium for the foreseeable future. Although the reputation of the stadium’s architect is well-deserved, his design was out of step with its surroundings and ill-suited for the particularities of a Montréal’s climate.

Though the stadium is iconic, it is far from being emblematic of Montréal’s architecture.

It is in truth an imposition, bearing no relation to its surroundings. It shares nothing in common with the innumerable tree-lined streets of handsome red brick or grey stone duplexes and triplexes that more accurately reflect the evolution of local design and construction.

So, is it a White Elephant or a particularly expensive piece of modern art that’s also useful as a sports or concert venue?

It’s worth considering there are about a million people living within a seven-kilometre radius of the stadium, so it’s a natural hub for public athletics and recreation activities.

The bulk of the city’s population lives within a short bus or Metro ride from the Olympic Park complex (indeed, it’s only about a 10-minute ride by subway from the major transit hub located at Berri-UQAM station).

About a quarter of the metropolitan region’s >>> 18

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 15

15

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

changing the

of architecture.

ARCHITEK | DESIGN, SUPPLY, INSTALL & MAINTAIN for Everything Living in Architecture.

BLD FebMar20.indd 16

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Architek SBP Inc provides developers, architects and builders with full-service solutions pertaining to all aspects of green roof, living wall and site water systems including: design, system detailing and specification consultation, along with advanced product technologies, installation and maintenance services. As living architecture comes of age, having a competent partner, with the expertise to design, detail correctly and execute well, is key to a successful project.

Get us involved early and we’ll make you and the building look great.

www.architek.com | 1-888-317-9226

BLD FebMar20.indd 17

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Philippe Collard

15 <<<

four million people have more or less direct access to the RIO’s world-class fitness facilities, which include the former Olympic aquatics complex, and a variety of other venues, arenas, training centres and playing fields, all in one highly integrated public space.

The stadium is also at the centre of an impressive collection of local attractions, beginning with the Montréal Tower, a 165-metre tall tower inclined at 45-degrees, the tallest in the world of its kind. The tower in turn supports the stadium’s roof; the buildings are literally inseparable.

Adjacent to the stadium is the Biodome — a living nature museum with four distinct ecosystems housed in the former Olympic velodrome — as well as the city’s planetarium and a 20,000-person capacity professional soccer stadium (you read that right: a second soccer-specific stadium was built right next to the existing tenantless stadium).

Gathered around them are the city’s botanical gardens, an insectarium, a historic house museum and a large city park.

Granted some of these attractions predate

18

the stadium’s construction, and all the aforementioned could theoretically exist elsewhere and accomplish their public function. But it’s difficult to imagine half of these services and attractions existing at all without the stadium-tower complex. They anchor the whole sector. Moreover, despite the initial controversy of choosing to eliminate part of a municipal park and golf course to provide a location for the stadium, this is a relatively small loss given the sheer number of activities and their centralized location. And make no mistake, even though the stadium lacks an anchor tenant, the public still gets excellent use out of it and its related buildings.

Not Just What, But Where In this respect, one could argue Olympic Stadium was ahead of the curve in the sense that its location is surrounded by highdensity working- and middle-class neighbourhoods. Quite unlike many of the professional sports stadiums designed or built throughout North America from the 1960s through the 1990s — which tended to favour locations near highways with ample surface

parking — the Big O is instead located adjacent to established neighbourhoods and connected directly to mass transit.

And yet, a peculiar complaint arose over the years suggesting the stadium was too far from the city’s central business district, and that this in turn played an important role in the downfall of the Montréal Expos. This remarkably prevalent argument tends to inform more about Montréal baseball fans than the actual location and function of the stadium within Montréal city life. Baseball is ever-so-slightly more of an ‘Anglo’ thing in Montréal, and the Englishspeaking population is predominantly located in the city’s western suburbs, far from the densely packed, predominantly Francophone neighbourhoods surrounding the stadium.

This is just one of many paradoxes concerning Olympic Stadium and its legacy: it no longer meets the requirements of the major leagues, which tend to favour stadiums built in close proximity to the office towers, hotels and entertainment districts of the city centre, yet it does meet the accessibility to residential neighbourhoods and connections to mass transit also typically favoured. While Major

February / March 2020

BLD FebMar20.indd 18

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

THIS SPREAD From a certain angle, it looks like the mothership has landed. Speaking of angles, the tower, at 45 degrees, is the world’s tallest inclined structure (and at 556 feet is one foot taller than the Washington Monument). Olympic Stadium’s largest ever audience occurred on July 6, 1977 when 78,322 fans attended a Pink Floyd concert, which beat the previous year’s 74,223 attendees for the Olympic Games Closing Ceremony.

League Baseball in particular favours new stadium construction in which stadiums form the centrepiece to vast new urban development programs, the Big O benefits from immediate proximity to middle- and working-class neighbourhoods that have provided much of the cultural cachet of the league’s oldest stadiums, such as Boston’s iconic Fenway Park.

If antiquated stadiums work for Boston or Chicago, why can’t a retro-futurist stadium be the equivalent in Montréal?

Though it was derisively called Taillbert’s Stadium (or Drapeau’s mistake), nearly 50 years later it is Montréal’s challenge and celebration. Should the city ever consider another Olympiad it could theoretically save a lot of money simply by re-using existing facilities. Perhaps the governments of Montréal and Québec will be successful at least in convincing the promoters of the Montréal Baseball Project to seriously re-evaluate their commitment to new construction, though this is doubtful. What remains is a challenge for planners and builders alike, as the province will likely insist on keeping it and finding new uses for it. The recent decision by the

Desjardins Credit Union to move nearly 2,000 of its employees into office space located in the base of Montréal Tower provides both a strong indication of what may be in store for at least parts of the site, while proposed roof reconstruction and planned World Cup games provide an indication of what future role the stadium might serve.

Whether Olympic Stadium is a success, or a failure is entirely a matter of perspective.

While cities the world over may wish to take it as a cautionary tale (and the strongest possible justification for why public consultations are absolutely crucial), it is worth considering the story of the stadium’s survival as well. Those who’ve looked at the stadium as a challenge, as a series of solvable problems, have helped it survive and will doubtless find innovative future uses for it. Architects, planners and engineers, much like the citizens of Montréal and Québec, will likely have to contend with the stadium for the forceable future.

Whether it is treated as a monument or just another disposable sports venue will ultimately speak volumes about the society and culture that inherited it.

Taylor C. Noakes is a writer and public historian from Montréal.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 19

19

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Beyond Public Subsidy Toronto is looking at Inclusionary Zoning as a tool to help its affordable housing problems, but the way forward is anything but clear. By Rhys Phillips Canadians tend to smugness when

comparing our social safety net to our southern neighbour. But comparatively, our support for affordable housing is weak following the gutting of social housing expenditures in the late 1990s. Only the Federal Liberal’s Canada’s National Housing Strategy issued in November 2017 finally recommitted significant funding.

Beyond social housing, however, cities like Toronto and Vancouver have major challenges ensuring affordable housing for households who fall in the 30th to 60th percentiles incorporating lower middle-income workers, technicians and even professionals.

Toronto’s Housing Need and Demand Analysis (May 2019) produced sobering statistics. Renters now constitute 47 per cent of households and growing, with 40 per cent struggling near the bottom 30th percentile of household incomes.

As a result, 23 per cent pay a whopping 50 per cent or more of their incomes on housing while almost half pay over 30 per cent, according to the CMHC’s benchmark for affordability. (For homeowners the figures are better but still deeply troubling). Almost 20 per cent of renters also live in “unsuitable accommodation” defined as having inadequate bedrooms.

Supply trends are equally problematic with limited and much less affordable purpose-built rental coming on stream and most new rental stock limited to condo towers.

The sobering reality is even vigorously funded public subsidy programs are unlikely to provide enough resources to resolve this crisis. In the United States this has been

20

BLD FebMar20.indd 20

recognized for some time through inclusionary zoning (IZ) policies that are now being embraced by both Toronto and Vancouver.

Inclusionary Zoning and how it Works Inclusionary zoning is about ensuring a percentage of units in private sector residential projects constitutes affordable rental or ownership homes for lower to lower middle-income households. Over 500 jurisdictions in the U.S. enforce IZ provisions directed at household incomes, usually in the 30th and above percentiles. Although sometimes completely free of any public subsidies, taxes as well as parking and development surcharge relief may sweeten the pot. The primary incentive, however, is an increase in zoning density. Under “voluntary” inclusionary models, the requirement is triggered when a developer seeks a density increase for a site. In “mandatory” models, such as in New York City, the city proactively upgrades zoning in targeted areas and subsequently requires any development to provide affordable housing. Units may be rental or ownership, although rental appears to be favoured (a 75/25 split in New York).

As inclusionary zoning is an alternative to public subsidy, there must be an incentive for a developer to seek (or accept) density greater than the existing as-of-right zoning in exchange for affordable units. That incentive is increased land value sufficiently above the existing asof-right value to offset increased cost. A feasibility analysis determines which urban areas are developing strongly enough to support IZ

What is Inclusionary Zoning (IZ)?

•O fficial plan policy to require affordable housing in new developments •A uthority provided under the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 232/18 •U sed around the world: United Kingdom, Australia and about 800 IZ programs in North America

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Predictability for developers is a key requirement. as well as the appropriate ratio between zoning uplift and percentage of affordable units required.

Who manages the affordable units, how long to maintain a unit’s affordability and minimum threshold project size are other key issues.

What was heartily voiced at a Toronto presentation last November on this topic was the need for three core requirements for success: a defensible financial assessment of viability; predictability for developers; and strong accountability mechanisms to ensure ongoing compliance.

Search for a Workable Approach Over the last three years, Ontario has been wrestling with implementing inclusionary zoning, made more complex by a significant shift in the provincial government. But if

Toronto is currently marking time in a shifting regulatory haze, Vancouver appears to be out in front. Since 1998, Vancouver has required 20 per cent of land be set aside for social housing in large scale residential developments. Over the last 10 years, given the decline in senior government funding, the city also requires all new or amended community plans to require a minimum of 20 per cent of floor area to be social housing built and deeded to the city.

Based on the city’s estimate that 53 per cent of households are renters and 40 per cent of those fall within the $30,000 to $80,000 income range, Council concluded Vancouver was nowhere near generating enough supply of affordable housing. As part of its 2017 Cambie Phase III – Oakridge Town Centre Plan, in-

clusionary zoning provisions require 20 per cent of units in any all-rental buildings to be below market rents, affordable to households earning between $30,000 to $80,000 per year.

In condos, the required percentage of social housing must be from 20 to 30 per cent. The trade-off for developers includes greater density augmented by lower parking requirements and waiver of city development cost levies.

The Moderate-Income Rental Housing Pilot Program (MIRHPP) targets 20 requested rezonings and requires 20 per cent affordable units targeted again at maximum household incomes of $80,000. Relaxation of minimum unit size and configuration requirements as well as expedited processing are added incentives. “This pilot is aimed at addressing a critical gap in the local rental housing

Who does inclusionary zoning help?

Typically addresses needs of those who earn too much to be eliGIble for social housing but not enough to afford market rents or sale prices

Inclusionary Zoning Emergencey shelters

Supportive / traditional housing

Long-term care

Social housing

Affordable rental housing

Affordable home ownership

Market rental housing

Market home ownership

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 21

21

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Renter households spending more than 50% of income on housing

North York East Etobicoke North

Yonge Corridor North

North York West

Scarborough North

Sheppard Corridor Scarborough City Centre Don MillsYork Mills

Etobicoke Central

Scarborough Southwest

Toronto North

York

YongeSt. Clair

Toronto West

East York

Bloor-Yorkville

Downtown West

Etobicoke South

Scarborough Southeast

Etobicoke Waterfront

Downtown East

Toronto East

Downtown Core Waterfront

High: 490 to 1,625 Hhds (60 CTs, 10%) Moderate: 190 to 480 Hhds (170 CTs, 30%) Low: 0 to 185 Hhds (339 CTs, 60%) Suppressed (3CTs)

Source: 2016 Census, Statistics Canada, custom request Geography: 2016 Census, Statistics Canada, market area based on Altus RealNet and CMHC market area provided by NBLC Prepared by: Toronto City Planning, Research and Information - May 2019

market by encouraging the development of new rental units that are permanently secured at rates that match the affordability needs of local moderate income households,” says K irsten Langan of Vancouver’s Civic Engagement and Corporate Communications Branch. Last November, Council also approved its Below-Market Rental Housing Policy for Rezonings that covers the city more broadly while excluding the Oakridge and pilot areas.

In Toronto, Section 37 of The Planning Act has been used to enlist private sector developers in creating designated affordable units in the absence of funding from senior governments.

For example, Richard Joy, Executive Director

22

BLD FebMar20.indd 22

of the Urban Land Institute, credits ex-city Councillor and later Liberal MP Adam Vaughan, with achieving IZ using Section 37. While this January, the new Federal housing policy committed $200 million to produce 366 affordable units in Westbank Corp.’s five-tower Mirvish Village development, the big push is to move from an ad hoc Section 37 approach to a clearly legislated IZ model. This was initiated by the provincial Liberal’s Promoting Affordable Housing Act, (December 2016) and its enabling Regulation 232/18 issued in April 2018 (which just beat the June election win of Doug Ford’s Conservatives). Undeterred, Toronto forged ahead producing two required analyses to

Market areas (24)

kick-off public consultations over last summer.

The first was the Housing Need and Demand Analysis referenced above, a compelling case for action. The second, and this lies at the heart of the model’s feasibility, was the Evaluation of Potential Impacts of an Inclusionary Zoning Policy in the City of Toronto completed by N. Barry Lyon Consultants (NBLC) for the city.

NBLC’s Evaluation concluded “in most high-growth test locations, the IZ policy scenarios tested were found to be feasible,” particularly in the downtown and around transit stations. Also in May, however, the Conservative government proposed Bill 108 or More Homes, More Choice Act, signed into law in June 2019.

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

required update, says Christine Ono, a Senior Planner in the City of Toronto’s Planning Division.

Why does Toronto need IZ?

In the Works Eventually, the city may or may not reconsider several key parameters given feedback from last summer’s consultations. They include: • Scale of Development: Unlike the common

U.S. standard of 10, Toronto proposed thresh-

47% 0

of the city‘s households are renters

20

34

50

100

69

age of largest increase in renters

rental vacancy rates

1.6%

1.1%

1.7%

0.7%

2013

2018

2013

2018

Purpose-built rentals

condo rentals

olds of 100 units (downtown) and 140 (other areas) that would exclude two-thirds of midrise projects. This is unlikely to change, says Sharon Hill, manager of the Strategic Initiatives, Policy & Analysis section of Toronto’s Planning Division, as the city wants more mid-rises which IZ might discourage;

• Definition and Duration of Affordable: It is probable that affordable housing will be redefined as rent that is 30 per cent of incomes for the 30 to 60 percentile households. The recommended 25-year duration will almost certainly be extended significantly; • Number of Units/Application: The city may reconsider its original proposal requiring only 2.5 to five per cent affordable units in dedicated rental projects. Consensus suggests rates should be applied to the full project and not just the uplift component, a position endorsed by the industry, says Joy;

only 2% of housing built or approved in Toronto in the last 5 years has been affordable.

Subsection 5 limits inclusionary zoning to protected major transit station areas or where the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing orders a “development system order.”

Perhaps the most problematic new requirement, noted already by NBLC, is the obligation to update “out of date” zoning before IZ provisions can be applied. Joy supports this requirement, saying “the problem in Ontario is that it is very difficult to ascertain [a real advantage] when most of our municipalities deliberately under-zoned most lands and are, therefore, requiring almost all developments to go through a rezoning.” In other words, owners’/developers’ formal as-of-right land

value/zoning frequently does not reflect actual value, including the price paid by the developer. If revisions significantly increase value/zoning, it may limit the amount of uplifted density available to offset IZ costs.

Finally, the Act requires eventual substitution of what Joy calls the now-weakened Section 37 with a Community Benefit Charges (CBC) model. Both models reflect the idea of recovering value uplift when a municipality provides a benefit. There may emerge, therefore, a delicate competition between parks, community centres, other public amenities and affordable housing. Waiting to find out how this all plays out presents challenges to advancing the city’s

• Incentives: The current consultation policy provides no additional incentives or subsidization, but this may be revisited given industry input. In some cases, inclusionary zoning mixed with such sources as Open Door Program funding might be an option to achieve deep affordability housing.

Consultations re-enforced enshrining full integration of affordable units into projects such as common elevators/spaces and services. Off-site units will be allowed but payment-in-lieu is prohibited by the legislation.

In addition, partnerships with non-profit agencies for implementation and administration found considerable support.

In all, evidence-based IZ programing remains a committed part of Toronto’s affordable housing playbook, but Ontario’s current lack of regulatory clarity is slowing the implementation progress. Conversely Vancouver is moving ahead quickly and with more assuredness.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 23

23

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Due-ing It Right Why Architects Should Play a Role in the Due Diligence Phase for Developers. By Kyle A. Lewkowich

A key consideration for investors in the development industry is the principle of due diligence. People speak of due diligence with respect to the effort made to review and understand the conditions influencing the opportunities and constraints inherent in a potential development project, be it development on bare land, to development of brownfield sites, to redevelopment of existing buildings for new uses.

This due diligence will commonly manifest in a review of the property ownership status of the building, a review of any liens or encumbrances that may be attached to the property title, environmental site assessments intended to reveal the risks associated with previous owners or uses of the property, a preliminary building inspection/walk through, and so on. Many developers, having made such a preliminary review, may believe that they have done all that they could reasonably do to assure themselves of the risks and constraints inherent in a site in which they may have an interest.

However, especially in the case of determining the opportunities and constraints of redeveloping existing buildings, architects with a specialty expertise can provide a vital service to the development community with respect to due diligence. In a recent example a developer, having purchased an existing building with main floor commercial space and upper floor residential tenants, for full conversion to commercial office purposes, was surprised to discover several unexpected constraints only after purchase. As it was

24

BLD FebMar20.indd 24

revealed, due to the significant number of major changes that were required to upgrade the building to current (and minimum) building code life-safety standards, not only was the conversion from one occupancy type to a new occupancy type so expensive as to render the return-on-investment unfeasible, but it was also discovered that the existing tenants had been occupying the building for many years without the local Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) ever having granted an occupancy permit for such use of the facility. The end result was ownership of a building that could not fit the pro-forma for conversion into new uses, and eviction of the existing rent-paying tenants on the order of the local building department, as the property had never been authorised for those types of tenant uses. The result: legal issues; tenant issues; building department issues; loss of revenue; diminishment of the initial investment; additional costs; and considerable stress for all involved.

In another recent instance, an owner/developer had purchased a light-duty industrial occupancy building for conversion into office and mercantile uses. After purchase, the intended conversion of the building to new uses triggered a rezoning application, which then triggered a significant increase in expensive parking requirements for the site (which the owner believed were superfluous to the concept as the new building occupants did not actually require any additional parking for their uses). In addition to the zoning/ parking issue, which was eventually resolved

at a variance hearing with a compromise where the local AHJ accepted installation of a smaller number of now unused parking spaces, the change of use from one occupancy class to another again triggered significant code-related upgrades that had been unanticipated by the owner, and which required substantial additional investment.

Avoidable Problems In each case, the new owners were surprised to encounter significant costs and impediments to the profitable use of their new buildings, even though they had completed, in their estimation, sufficient “due diligence” prior to acquisition of the property.

In the case of an institutional investor, with access to a significant portfolio of past projects and experience, or with sufficient capital to invest in professional architectural and engineering expertise, these examples may seem to be a case, albeit an extreme one, of “buyer beware.” However, especially for the small-scale investor, this flaw in the due diligence process can be the difference between success and significant financial loss.

So, what can be done to protect oneself from such additional building-related occupancy surprises ahead of time? The case can be made that architects can play an important role in assuring that additional due diligence concerns can be answered and addressed, which can allow for greater confidence that the prospective real estate development proposition will find success.

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Architects, especially those with a specialization in the development field, can be of significant benefit to prospective developers, either large scale or small scale, by providing a reasonable, often fixed-fee service, in reviewing the existing buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s code deficiencies with respect to change of occupancy or use. This service is related to the work typically provided in order to obtain a detailed facility condition report of an existing building but can be tailored to the proposed intended re-use. The degree of changes needed to convert a building from one occupancy type to another is highly dependent on both the occupancy classification of the existing building, but also on the intended use of the building in the future. In some cases, the proposed changes may be so profound the developer would be urged to revise their plans to minimize needed changes, reconsider the change of use proposition, or even be suggested that a different building might be more appropriate for the intended use.

In the case of review of the existing occupancies of the building, many jurisdictions have publicly searchable records of occupancy. While the information is generally available to anyone with a computer, it is not readily available unless one already knows that it exists and how to find it. Architects already working in this industry will be knowledgeable about such sources and can provide reporting to the owner of the implications of the information revealed in the research.

Architects can provide a reasonable, often fixed-fee service, in reviewing the existing buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s code deficiencies.

The benefit for prospective building owners in engaging an architect for this type of due diligence research is that the developer can proceed with greater understanding of the inherent constraints of their project.

The result could improve the potential return-on-investment by identifying additional impediments, constraints, and opportunities, long ahead of time.

Investors undertake the due diligence process largely on the principle that knowing the constraints of a project will allow for the owner to plan to mitigate those constraints. Eliminating the potential for future profit-draining surprises is the purpose of the due-diligence exercise, so it stands to reason that owners should consider engaging an architect for specially-focused architectural services, just as they do lawyers, environmental assessment engineers, and so on in the due diligence phase, for the purpose of clarifying the opportunities and constraints inherent in their redevelopment projects.

Kyle A. Lewkowich, MAA, MRAIC, is an architect and Senior Project Leader with the Government of Manitoba, as well as a principal at Magpie Architecture and Design. This article was written with contributions by Jason Robbins, MAA, MRAIC, principal, JC Robbins Architecture.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 25

25

2020-02-06 10:45 AM

Faria Ahmed appointed Associate Publisher of Canadian Architect and Building magazines iQ Business Media, publisher of Canadian Architect , Canadian Interiors and Building magazines, is pleased to announce the appointment of Faria Ahmed to the position of Associate Publisher of Canadian Architect and Building , effective January 1.

A 7-year veteran with the iQ Business Media, Built Environment Group, Faria has been instrumental in the growth and success of all the multiplatform brands that she works on. In addition to her new role on Canadian Architect and Building , Faria is also account manager on Canadian Interiors and Supply Professional magazines. Faria will continue to service all her current customers on all titles.

Throughout her career spanning more than 20 years in media sales and business development across a variety of platforms, Faria has earned an outstanding reputation for delivering highly effective integrated marketing communications solutions for her customers. Faria has established herself as a knowledgeable, passionate, and well-liked personality in all corners of Canada’s built environment.

For more information, please contact: Faria Ahmed fahmed@canadianarchitect.com 416.441.2085 x106

COMING THIS FALL!

CANADIAN MODERN ARCHITECTURE

NOW AVAILABLE Preorder now from your favourite bookseller!

“This fascinating and much-needed compendium will certainly be welcome universally, and particularly in Canada, where it will raise the consciousness of a country that has respected, but not celebrated, the wide origins of its populations and its culturally as well as physically different regions.”

— PHYLLIS LAMBERT, FOUNDING DIRECTOR EMERITUS, CANADIAN CENTRE FOR ARCHITECTURE

BLD FebMar20.indd 26

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

site visit New Life

At Stackt Market in Toronto, a critical design team transforms ubiquitous materials into unique new designs.

By Shannon Moore

THIS PAGE Stacklab’s intervention in the Stackt Market campus covered three main areas: the open-air Forme pavilion; upgrades to the beer hall with a lighting and plantbased installations; and outdoor benches throughout the marketplace, designed in collaboration with local outfit COFO. Photographers: Sean McBride (Pavilion) / Rajestha Julatum (Tyvek lighting and benches)

You’ve likely heard of it by now: the fashionable sea of jet-black shipping containers known as Stackt Market in downtown Toronto. The modular and ever-popular retail hub opened last April, offering a new kind of cultural experience for residents and visitors to the downtown core.

From the get-go, the market was intended as a short-term installation, located on a (temporarily) unused plot of land, and slated for deconstruction in 2021. Despite its expiration date, though, the project continues to grow.

Most recently, critical design group Stacklab unveiled a 5,000-sq.-ft. food and beverage pavilion, inspired by the impermanence and industrial nature of the surrounding site.

“Our pavilion responds first to the goal of the overarching project: to transform an

existing, derelict site into a temporary cultural hub,” said Jeffrey Forrest, founder of Stacklab.

“But, more importantly, it speaks broadly to the cultural potential of construction sites in the city of Toronto, transforming ubiquitous, anti-social materials into social ones.”

At the core of the Forme Pavilion is a collection of widely available, recyclable and reusable construction materials, like scaffolding, ratchet straps and concrete ballasts.

Reimagined in creative and accessible ways, the materials add personality and character to the pavilion’s design; while at the same time inspiring a lifespan beyond the project itself.

The roof, for example — the pavilion’s most distinctive feature — was constructed around a skeleton using recycled (and reclaimable) plastic shrink-wrap and basic, long-lasting

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 27

27

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

THIS SPREAD (Clockwise from the top of this page) At night, light is diffused through PET shrink-wrap to illuminate the food and beverage area.

Inside Forme, construction materials dominate, with communal tables made from standard scaffolding elements and the scaffolding structure itself ratchet-strapped to the ballasts. Strips of Tyvek hold LED lights in the brewery, and when folded multiple times form the seat for benches.

Photographers: Sean McBride (Pavilion) / Rajestha Julatum (Tyvek lighting and benches)

28

BLD FebMar20.indd 28

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

LED lights. “Expressing these materials in

this new way was a rewarding challenge,” said Forrest. “It was important that we partnered with standard skilled Canadian trades to do this, rather than, say, art installers. We wanted to make sure that the pavilion could be built by the same people working on any construction site in any urban environment.”

In addition to the food and drink pavilion, Stacklab also designed a series of

powder-coated steel benches in collaboration with furniture manufacturer COFO and provided enhancements to an existing beer hall. Here, Tyvek — a polyethylene-based house wrap used to protect buildings — is the construction material of choice.

“We deliberately left the branding on the Tyvek as a way to emphasize that this is a readily available building material that is simply elevated through design,” said Forrest.

“A material that you can access quickly, employ feasibly, and when the project’s life comes to an end, use as it was originally intended.”

With contributions from LRI Engineering, Safway, EllisDon and Yoon and Associates, the new Forme Pavilion not only demonstrates the versatility of construction materials but proposes new applications for them; and like the Stackt Market itself, inspires new life for the city’s dormant land.

Building.ca

BLD FebMar20.indd 29

29

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

from the bullpen Is Renting Better for the Economy than Owning?

A careful reading of it will show home buyer preferences and changing unit popularity.

By Ben Myers

Ben Myers is president of Bullpen Research & Consulting, a boutique real estate advisory firm that works with land owners, developers, and lenders to better inform them of the current and future macroeconomic and site-specific housing market conditions that can impact their active or proposed development projects.

Follow Bullpen on Twitter at @BullpenConsult or find Ben at www.BullpenConsulting.ca.

30

BLD FebMar20.indd 30

Every year there are articles written discussing the merits of owning versus renting. I have always been in favour of owning, but one could ask: which is better for the economy as a whole? Over the past decade there has been debate about the share of homeownership in Canada versus the United States, especially after their housing crash where the rate of homeownership hit a record high. Is 70 per cent ownership too high?

Are young Canadians getting into too much debt to own a home? Is it better to invest your savings in something more productive than a down payment on a house?

These are all extremely difficult questions to answer, but I look at it from the perspective of allocation and misallocation of a finite asset. In January, CMHC released their annual rental market data which showed that 13.6 per cent of Vancouver CMA rental apartments turned over in 2019, down from 14.1 per cent in 2018. In the Toronto CMA , the turnover rate was a meager 9.5 per cent, down from 11.2 per cent in 2018. One of the reasons units are not turning over as quickly as they have in the past is because market rents are appreciating much faster than the respective rent control cap in these two metro areas: average rent for all property types in Vancouver was up 10.8 per cent annually, compared to 8.9 per cent in Toronto.

Some may view low turnover as a positive thing: people stay in their neighbourhoods and invest in their communities without being forced out by high rents and prices. This is clearly important, but because housing is in such short supply in Canada’s major markets, we need apartments and dwellings to be properly allocated to ensure maximum productivity in the economy. As an example, if a couple is renting a three-bedroom unit downtown and their children move out, we want that couple to downsize and free up that three-bedroom unit for another family or for three or four roommates.

If someone is paying less than market rent

because of rent control, they’re less likely to downsize, move outside the city, or even take a new job in another part of town.

This leads to the misallocation of rental units.

But in the same vein, owning your home often does the same thing. There is a land transfer tax in many regions, realtor commissions to pay, lawyers fees, and myriad of other closing costs. There are thousands of seniors that are “overhoused,” preventing young families from getting access to larger homes, bigger backyards and top schools. Many properties are only used part-time as owners jet off to Florida during the winter and cottage during the summer. A single person keeping a four-bedroom home so that they have places for their kids to stay at Christmas is a major misallocation of housing, and very bad for our economic productivity and housing affordability. In many older neighbourhoods, primary schools are forced to close from lack of enrolment due to the aging local demographic.

B.C. has started taxing empty homes; Toronto is cracking down on AirBnB: these policy changes were made to ensure that housing is returned to long-term residents and not tourists or second properties for the affluent. It’s only a matter of time before a city implements an empty bedroom tax. Any city that has rent control capped at a rate below five per cent annually should change it: prices and rents help properly allocate housing (but we still want to prevent rent gouging).

Ownership housing has its benefits, but it contributes to our housing misallocation problem. Certainly, the interest from devel­ opers in building rental apartments has skyrocketed, and CMHC starts data also shows a national boom in rental construction. Unfortunately, there has been a negative stigma around tenants and renters for too long, but that’s changing as millennials embrace the freedom of renting. The freedom to properly allocate is a very good thing: it will help the economy, and ultimately help improve housing affordability.

February / March 2020

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

ADVERTISEMENT

Experience.

Innovation.

CASE STUDY

Great Lakes Center | Petoskey, Michigan

Great Lakes Center for the Arts In Harmony with the Local Environment When the Great Lakes Center for the Arts opened last year in Michigan, the $25 million facility featured state-of-the-art equipment, including digital sound technology that is found in only a few theaters across the country.

Further enhancing the sound quality are acoustical smoke vents manufactured by The BILCO Company. The facility, which is located in Petoskey, includes five smoke vents with both an STC and OITC sound rating that block outside noise to maintain the quality of the sophisticated sound system.

The acoustical vents are commonly used at concert halls, theaters and other venues that require limited noise from the outside. The vents also protect property and aid firefighters in bringing a fire under control by removing smoke, heat and gases from a burning building. The vents allow air quality and visibility to be maintained so that guests can safely exit the building and firefighters can enter.

“With the potential for more than 500 visitors for larger events, our team knew we would have a need for a dependable smoke ventilation system,’’ said Jason Novotny, the lead architect for TowerPinkster, the firm that designed the building. “With this being a high-performing acoustical environment, we designed a separate structure for the performance hall from the remainder of the building. This was solely for acoustical isolation of building elements. The BILCO acoustical smoke vents became a part of this ‘shell within a shell’ with their acoustical sound reducing characteristics.”

The Great Lakes Center for the arts is a 525-seat, 40,000-square-foot facility that is steps away from Little Traverse Bay, an offshoot of Lake Michigan. The Center will host audiences attending performances for classical music, ballet, intellectual dialogue, comedy, country music, jazz, cinema, and more.

Novotny said the architectural team went to great lengths to develop a theme for the space that was highly influenced by local colors and textures. “We included aged copper, Petoskey stone, natural sedimentary rock, and of course, the beautiful blue waters of Lake Michigan,’’ Novotny said. There is also a curvilinear wood ceiling which resembles waves and

Photo: Brooksie Productions

echoes the flow of the lake. There is also a large rooftop terrace with stunning views of Lake Michigan.

“The color palette and design features intentionally reflect the beauty of Northern Michigan, with blues, sands, grays, copper and patterns and textures that evoke the water of Lake Michigan,” said Jill O’Neill, Executive Director of the Center.

Besides the architectural splendor, technical components also distinguish the center. The theater designers, Fisher Dachs Associates and TowerPinkster, identified solutions that make the venue enticing for performers and patrons.

The multi-channel sound reinforcement system includes loudspeakers that meet the requirements of celebrity performers’ technical requirements, and electronic architecture that allows acoustics of the venue to be optimized to meet the varied requirements of the wide range of programming.

This building adds a space for world-class performers to stop that did not exist in Northern Michigan,’’ Novotny said. “It adds to the valuation of the performing arts community that was intended by the clients.”

Keep up with the latest news from The BILCO Company by following us on Facebook and LinkedIn. For over 90 years, The BILCO Company has been a building industry pioneer in the design and development of specialty access products. Over these years, the company has built a reputation among architects, and engineers for products that are unequaled in design and workmanship. BILCO – an ISO 9001 certified company – offers commercial and residential specialty access products.

BILCO is a wholly owned subsidiary of AmesburyTruth, a division of Tyman Plc. For more information, visit www.bilco.com.

BLD FebMar20.indd 31

2020-02-06 10:46 AM

eurOptimum.com design / develop / deliver

McMaster University Medical Centre Design: mcCallumSather Illuminated acrylic graphic panels with brushed stainless steel frame

BLD FebMar20.indd 32

2020-02-06 10:46 AM