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.
So what? The market decides what is needed or not. Business need to stop whining, stop with the silly ‘return to office’ mandates that are killing their productivity and reducing their quality of talent, and adapt.
It’s business. Adapt or die.
socialism for the capitalists, harsh rugged capitalism for the rest of us
Socialize the losses, privatize the gains
Damn rent-seekers
I (don’t really) like to imagine how if someone were to invent a star trek-esqe teleportation device that beams people from place to place, how the auto manufacturers, road infrastructure organizations, and a probably countless other industries would be up in arms about their “losses” without realizing how stupid and short sighted that stance would be.
It’s like we’re unable to outgrow anything as a society without toddler-tantrum-like backlash from those who have benefitted from us being beholden to the current status quo.
You should look at the history of public transit in Detroit, and trains more broadly in the US. Its the same thing.
I feel @glitches_brew is sooo close to getting orange pilled. While it’s not teleportation, we have the technology for high speed rail. Even my weekly commute of ~110km on conventional rail is about the same time as driving and I can get work done/watch videos/sleep instead of focusing on driving!
Most of the people I see commuting by car, at least in America, are also not focused on driving.
I ride a motorcycle and I can confirm.
I saw someone eating a bowl of cereal in the driver seat a few days ago. It’s terrifying out there.
I’ll take that over the guy watching porn in stop and go traffic on a busy, high speed, narrow road outside Boston…
Look into the history of Robert Moses and why the bridges are so low in Long Island
Hint: it has to do with busses and racism
The Great American Streetcar Scandal comes to mind.
I used to live in a tiny rural town of about 3,000 people, and even it used to have a trolley line. They tore it up when they built the highway, and now the only public transit available is one bus twice a day, and only for people who are disabled.
One of the old trolleys is still sitting next to the fire station, mocking everyone who drives by.
Yeah just like all the astroturfing done on EVs
The internet largely killed high speed commercial flight.
It should’ve kill the cubical a long time ago. But middle management culture is so entrenched it took a deadly highly contagious virus to kill it.
Teleporting is just one small conceptual step beyond (and unlikely large technical leap) what we already have.
Given that the star trek teleporter most likely atomizes and simply copies the individual. Id have to agree with the auto manufacturers on that.
I don’t think that is settled science amongst the fanbase.
It may not be “settled science” in the series’ canon but it’s the only logical conclusion one can come to when applied to the real world. That’s how all our current information transfer works. It’s dissected and a copy is sent bit by bit.
The argument against it is that if you believe in philosophical materialism, and the transporter reconstructs the person exactly as they are on the other end, then they are exactly the same person as before. They may be “dead” in the medical sense in between, but people do get resuscitated from being technically dead, and we don’t consider them to be separate people afterwords. Without invoking some kind of soul that’s separate from the body, it’s difficult to argue that they are anything but the same person.
Removed by mod
If they hadn’t specified it as being Star trek I wouldnt have had a problem. 40k teleportation may send you through literal hell but it doesnt kill the original. And stargates are basically wormholes.
Removed by mod
The market decides what is needed or not.
Silly thing. Capitalism only matters when it’s good for business.
Business is risk, highness. Anyone who says different is selling something.
And business is always selling something. They’ll never admit they’re bad for us.
Oh no, more space that could be transformed into housing.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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!)
deleted by creator
Less traffic and pollution 😔
What about how much pollution, stress, accidents leading to insurance claims, that will eventually be saved by not having millions drive and live in traffic everyday?
What about that McKinsey?
We don’t care about that because that doesn’t make rich companies happy.
McKinsey is a bastard man
Oh no. Anyway
Won’t you think of the long term consequences?! Something like twelve yachts might never get built now! And that one yacht company’s CEO might have to pull the ripcord on his golden parachute!
They could use them for retail or…they could re-zone these areas for residential housing and reduce the cost of renting or buying a home, but that would make too much sense.
There isn’t enough profit for the capitalists.
Exactly. 100 year leases with year on year increased service fees go brrrrrr
Rezone to multi-use zoning. Brownstones are a good way to build cities.
To be fair, commercial and office spaces often lack a lot of amenities that residential spaces have (lots of access to natural light, sufficient water supply and sewage capacity, etc.) but that will be incredibly dependant on the building for how much that complicates the conversion
sleeping in the street has plenty of natural light. I think you’ll find some people are willing to make the sacrifice.
I would imagine there are a lot of challenges around converting high rise commercial buildings into housing. Many buildings only have a handful of toilets per floor, maybe a few sinks, and no showers. I’m also sure there are no gas lines in many of them (electric heating and cooking might suffice). But for sure, water delivery will be one of the biggest challenges.
Then there are even lame laws regarding parking requirements for a building with so many residents.
I imagine these would end up more like condos that tenements. Maybe 3-5 large units per floor. I dont think the plumbing retrofit would be a huge deal…nor the parking since an office that large would likely have had parking already. Mixes use zoning could lead to some pretty cool buildings potentially. Imagine living in a condo that had a grocery store and maybe some bars or restaurants on the lower floors.
Imagine living in a condo that had a grocery store and maybe some bars or restaurants on the lower floors.
That’d be pretty cool.
Live on the 10th. Coffee shop on the 5th and groceries on the 12th. A bar on the 15th and a 24h gym (open to anyone gym) on the 3rd.
I wonder how many floors you’d need to convert to residential to support the remaining commercial.
electric heating and cooking might suffice).
It would easily suffice. All these buildings have heating already so that’s no issue, and electric cooking is safer anyways
If they can split old churches into apartments, I’m pretty sure they can do the same to abandoned office buildings.
You can’t turn them into accomodations unless there’s at least one egress window in the bedrooms
Ok so for the pros of working from home that’s:
- lower demand for prime real estate downtown
- less environmental impact due to daily commutes
- less employee time wasted due to daily commutes
- more comfortable and familiar work environments
- less business overhead associated with running a permanent office
- more reasons to do company events or retreats in interesting environments
- better accesses to a broader pool of talent
- more/cheaper housing options for people to live outside of cities
- less traffic and traffic accidents, with lower demand for cars and parking in city centers
But let’s not forget the big cons of work from home too!
- your inferiority complex-having superviser/boss/manager doesn’t get to feel powerful and important by performing workplace theater while breathing down your neck constantly or counting your keystrokes.
- you don’t have to pretend to like the people you work with every day, but only some days.
There are pros for working in the office. They don’t outweigh the cons, but let’s not pretend there are 0 benefits.
I could see a day-a-week thing being positive, but why the hell would we pay for the real estate? Just can’t see it working out for a net positive.
Maybe shared office space that’s network/security agnostic? We had a thing going like that in Seattle for a bit. Not sure how it worked on the ground, wasn’t there.
There are coworking spaces that facilitate this quite well and they could absolutely be scaled up for mid to large organizations.
I do 3 days a week in the office, 2 from home which works pretty well for me. I do enjoy going to the office because it gives me an excuse to leave my miserable apartment. They also have snacks and such, and it’s easier to plan with colleagues over coffee than setting up a virtual meeting.
But then I still get the benefits of wfh two days a week
Another con to add to your last paragraph. Acting skills will dip, dashing the hopes of some Apple employees that wanted a part to the snuff film… Rust 2.
I don’t understand why corporates are so against the idea of savings millions of dollar in office spaces. More people working remotely mean smaller office required, cut on office supplies and utilities bills. Higher employees moral, motivation, and productivity.
What are so bad about all that? Just because the boss can’t spy on their employees and assert their authority ?
The guy next to them in the circle jerk is a commerical real estate Holder and they don’t want they dick goin soft
Sunk cost fallacy. They have the space, and dammit, they need to use it. This will continue for the next few years when the leases begin to expire.
Definitely true for the company I work for. They own the buildings. Great idea when people can’t in an the time. No dealing with lease increases and other landlord BS. Not so great when everyone is WFH and is difficult to sell.
Insert the “it’s free real estate” meme here
Damn you. Take your upvote and get out. 😆
He got that lemmy gold
I had to look at that twice to get it… well done!
And this is exactly why board rooms are demanding a return to office. The wealthy people who run companies are invested in commercial real estate.
“So yeah, if all you peasants could get back in the office, that’d be greeeeeeat.”
I see this as an absolute win
If businesses can run without $800 billion tied up in assets, not only should they, the market dictates that they have to. Sorry landlords, sucks to suck.
Do they really still have that value if we have to reorganize our comfortable lifestyle in order to keep it? Seems like that value was already lost during the pandemic and they are trying to pass the loss on to the workers
The issue is who they have value to. Investors? Companies? Cities? Society as a whole?
The fact is that the absurd real estate prices in big cities really serve nobody except developers and landlords and real estate investors. For everyone else, they’re just a useless tax- the people can’t afford the quality of life their salary should command, companies pay through the roof for office space they don’t need, support business (IE starbucks) pay through the roof for their own locations, etc.
The fact is real estate as a whole is LONG overdue for a SERIOUS correction. Actually it should have years ago, but a lot of people were hoping/pushing for pandemic to be a temporary blip. So you have empty buildings with sky-high rents because the landlord doesn’t want to sign a 20yr lease at anything below top dollar, makes more sense to wait for the blip to end than accept a lower rate for 20 years.
But sooner or later those landlords are gonna have to accept the new reality. And so will developers and investors.
Oh darn. All those REITs and capital funds.
Will someone think of the poor shareholders?!
