It's disturbing the degree to which this article paints good things as bad.
> In Austin and Denver—metro areas where 23% of workers usually work from home—more than a quarter of city office space is vacant, the highest share among big cities in America.
Excellent, replace it with housing.
> Austin expects commercial- and residential-property values [...] to fall by 10% next year, to $212.7bn.
Good, it's becoming cheaper to buy property.
> Quieter cities also mean less spending on transport, food and services.
Excellent.
> San Francisco has had one of the slowest recoveries in foot traffic to offices
Why in the world would we want to "recover" this? The article acts like there's something wrong here.
> Before covid the city’s transport agency got more than half of its budget from fares and parking fees. But now those revenues account for around 30%,
Cities are experiencing less traffic and parking, that's great.
I own a home. I plan to sell it in the not too distant future. It's unfortunate for me that I might not get as much when I sell it, but so be it. Houses are not an investment; they're a place to live.
This whole article rhymes with other attempts to frame spending less as a horrible thing. It's a good thing, and cities should be adapting to it rather than treating it as a bug to be fixed.
Converting no longer viable office space into housing would solve a lot of problems. It would, of course, create problems for those who profit from housing shortages, deliberately engineered or naturally occurring, and those entities will do whatever they can to prevent any housing surplus.
Converting office space to housing is easier said than done.
Offices are looking to maximize floor space for workers. This means central controls for HVAC, centralized kitchenettes and bathrooms (plumbing), and very few people are near a window. Someone looking for a place to live will want control of their HVAC systems, personal bathrooms, a full kitchen, and a decent amount of natural light… as well as windows that can let in some outside air. Trying to retrofit all the plumbing and ductwork may end up looking ugly, maybe it could be done. The window issue can be an impossible one to solve. Commercial and residential building have fundamentally different bones.
I imagine a conversation would end up being better for very low income housing if was done simply and on a budget. I visited a place like this once. It wasn’t a converted office, that I know of, but it was low income housing that was dorm style. There was a galley kitchen in the hallway of the floor and a shared bathroom for everyone. Each room was maybe 8’x10’. Not somewhere most people would choose to live, but better than nothing.
At some point it’ll be cheaper to convert than to leave the property unused. Raising taxes in vacant property is also an option to drive such conversions.
I agree not all property will be easy to convert, and plumbing and AC will need some adaptation, but any conversion reduces both office oversupply and housing shortage.
I think the big question might be if it’s better to convert or rebuild.