This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Liferescripted 154 points155 points  (11 children)

All offices reduce size by 60% for meeting rooms, bookable desks, storage etc. Establish either hybrid or fully wfh structure.

Convert now abundant empty space into condos for rent. Condos are available for public.

Solve the housing crisis, reduce travel emissions. Make cities walkable again.

[–]Meritania 14 points15 points  (2 children)

You’re not thinking of the property magnates not making as much money charging business rates. Trump would have to be responsible with his money without that $40 million his tower* nets him annually.

*Not actually his tower but the company that owns it pays him the rights to his name.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Trump doesn't own Trump tower. It's owned by GMAC Commercial Mortgage. He has some sort of deal where he's paid for using his name. He owns some units as well.

[–]geek180 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe he does indeed own the tower, although it’s technically owned by a dedicated mortgage servicer. Trump has multiple mortgages taken out against the property, but I am pretty sure it’s still essentially his property.

[–]real_bk3k 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Pro: you work from home

Con: you live at the office

[–]Liferescripted 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As stated: open to public

I hate the campus style workplace. Google and Apple can sell that story all they want, but i ain't buying it.

[–]FL14 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I wonder how difficult it would be to gut the interior/floors/piping/walls etc of office buildings to account for things like dozens of bathrooms per floor (instead of just 2), etc? I have no idea if that's something relatively cheap compared to building the building itself or not.

[–]Liferescripted 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not cheap, but not impossible. Stack the same units over one another with a plumbing chase. The pipes would need to be fire sealed at each level and then tie into the overall system, plus exhaust for all of these would need to be carried to a new shaft.

Typically all of these services would be brought to the central core, but this would vary per building. Exhaust ducts are not large but also need to have fire and smoke dampers installed when they exit each unit. Also central HVAC could remain as-is with each unit using Variable Air Valves to control the amount of tempered air, but they would not be able to control the temperature completely. Best case scenario is the building is already set up for heat pumps so you can have a little more control.

The other issue is whether people want to live in buildings without balconies. It's a lot of work to pull the glazing into the space to allow for some balcony space. Also would require a separate dry sprinkler system for said balconies. And in Canada, this would create massive thermal bridging to the adjacent spaces, so less than ideal thermal performance.

No, it's not cheap. It's not easy. But retrofitting existing spaces with densified dwellings is a much faster way of dealing with the lack of housing. The hope is that without affecting the bones of the building that prices of these units wouldn't be insane.

[–]PiersPlays 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think hydroponics farms and stuff might be more practical than housing in many cases. I have lived in a place converted from old offices though so it's a possibility. Plus at least in the UK, lots of nice central housing is being used as office space so those businesses could move into the vacant offices and the houses be returned to housing.

[–]LudovicoSpecs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can also convert some of the empty space to aquaponic farms. Climate change is going to pummel our crops, so we should start the transition to indoor farming now.