Working from home could wipe $800 billion from office values globally
Working from home could wipe $800 billion from office values globally
Remote work risks wiping $800 billion from the value of office buildings in major cities worldwide by 2030 as the post-pandemic trend pushes up office vacancy rates and drives down rents, according to a new report.
McKinsey said cities could adapt to the declining demand for office space by “taking a hybrid approach themselves,” developing multi-use office and retail space and constructing buildings that can be easily adapted to serve different purposes.
You're viewing a single thread.
Oh no, more space that could be transformed into housing.
Permanently Deleted
Seriously... I don't care if I had to use a communal bathroom as long as there was an agreed upon cleaning plan. Hell, it could continue to be office cleaning services that get paid by a tenant fund for all I care. Keep them employed in some capacity, why not.
Having ten apartments on one floor requires less toilets and plumbing than having 100 people working on one floor.
Installing a bathroom is easy. Installing ten bathrooms is easy.
These buildings aren't being converted because it's impossible to do or because living conditions would be harsh if they were converted - these buildings aren't being converted because people calling the shots don't want to miss out on those fat profits they're still hoping to make.
I agree. My comment was more to imply, "I don't even care if they convert it, just let it happen."
Some buildings already have showers and shitty gyms, too. Some even have full kitchens already. Some are logistically fully livable as-is, maybe with with very minor tweaks and some compromises on living style.
If some buildings are THAT close to fully usable, it's obviously bullshit to say it's not a viable solution. It wouldn't solve all problems, but no solution solves all problems.
(also it's not like office buildings are fucking DESIGNED to be easily remodeled or something...)
My guess is that developers don’t think enough people would accept a communal bathroom for it to be profitable. It’s also possible they don’t think low income people are deserving of housing, so they won’t spend money to benefit them.
Developers would love to have the business, they make money by building more and converting more.
It's NIMBYs, government beaurocrats, and others that are fighting housing developments, and usually their biggest opponents are the developers.
I've seen multiple factories and churches in multiple places get turned into apartments. I almost rented a loft in an old flour mill in L.A. If they can do it with a flour mill, they can do it with an office building.
Modular bathrooms and cabins are easily manufactured and easy to install in an open plan area that is stripped back.
Same as the ones used in ships.
https://cruiseshipinteriors-expo.com/prefab-cabin-design-in-cruise/
These are flash cruise ship ones but much simpler bathroom and cabin arrangements are available for commercial shipping.
It would be straight forward to strip down an open plan office. Do a 3D laser scan. Do some algorithms ….then cram as many prefabricated modules in as the HVAC and plumbing allows.
A more serious problem than getting per-unit plumbing into buildings is the fact that commercial real estate is designed fundamentally differently than residential - as in the fact that there's a large amount of interior space which would be entirely without windows. This is often illegal, but even if permitted it's quite undesirable. Just look at what happened to Munger Hall - it was considered cruel enough that they cancelled the plans for it.
99% Invisible did a great episode on this subject which I highly recommend that you listen to: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/office-space/
99% of the work done?! Tell me you have never been involved in residential vs. commercial construction.
The structural and civil engineering, HVAC, electrical, plumbing, telecom, my god... it's full of fail.
And let's not forget permitting for all that. Ya' know, because of the difference in safety and privacy concerns in those two wildly different environments? And BTW, we'll have to get buy-in from local government to bypass or ease a thing or three. Or 20.
LOL, notions like this are the exact inverse of conservatives saying, "government should be run like business". Private enterprise and government have very different goals and roles. We don't have a magic wand to convert one to the other.
And letting either one win out? Well, we see how capitalism is going for the private sector. Happy with that? I ain't. Rather do a 180 and let the government run it all? Nah, I lived the Cold War. A strongly legislated balance is the only sane thing idea we got at the moment. Europe, despite differences and faults, seems to have a handle on these ideas.
You can take a business building and convert it to residential, but how much you want to spend? And that spend is not just in dollars, it's in energy. "Stop the wasteful pollution! Let's waste MORE on stuff!" I'm not an engineer, outside of IT anyway, and that counts for fuck all in this discussion, but maybe it would be cost and energy efficient to tear down and start over? I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I really don't know.
I ain't got answers, but back on point, making commercial buildings into residential? I have serious doubts and concerns.
(Not on your ass OP! Just using your comment as a jumping off point for more discussion!)
99% of the work done?! Tell me you have never been involved in residential vs. commercial construction.
The structural and civil engineering, HVAC, electrical, plumbing, telecom, my god... it's full of fail.
LOL, notions like this are the exact inverse of conservatives saying, "government should be run like business". Private enterprise and government have very different goals and roles. We don't have a magic wand to convert one to the other.
And letting either one win out? Well, we see how capitalism is going for the private sector. Happy with that? I ain't. Rather do a 180 and let the government run it all? Nah, I lived the Cold War. A strongly legislated balance is the only sane thing idea we got at the moment. Europe, despite differences and faults, seems to have a handle on these ideas.
I'm not an engineer, outside of IT anyway, and that counts for fuck all in this discussion, but maybe it would be cost and energy efficient to tear down and start over? I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I really don't know.
I ain't got answers, but back on point, making commercial buildings into residential? I have serious doubts and concerns.
(Not on your ass OP! Just using your comment as a jumping off point for more discussion!)
None of this is actual reasons it wouldn't work, just a rant that avoids specific issues.
And let's not forget permitting for all that.
And that spend is not just in dollars, it's in energy.
So permitting and "energy" are the only two reasons I can actually find in all of that.
Permitting may be an issue, but if it's expensive and takes a long time, that's an issue artificially created by the local government.
The technical aspect of installing a shower and getting the paperwork to check the plumbing isn't really that complicated.
As for "energy", the electrical costs are low, and if you mean labor costs it's really not much considering a vacant building can now bring in high residential rents. It would pay for itself quickly.
Less traffic and pollution 😔