Marghanita writes,

> Subject: Re: [LINK] Remote Work Is Poised to Devastate America’s Cities
>
> This was felt here too during the Pandemic.
>
> The CBD was dead while the Inner West was a buzz with Remote workers
> going out to lunch, libraries, pool, gym and parks.
>
> Public Transport still feeds into the CBD and there is still some value
> in meeting in person but at this stage it is still intangible.
>
> What we don't hear is the provision of remote office space. Not everyone
> has a suitable home office. Marghanita


Agree with everything you say here Marg

Regarding a lack of availability of remote-office spaces, one imagines that
compared with considerable pressure probable from existing CBD business
property owners for some form of government assistance, there would not
be much organized-group political pressure for out-of-town remote-offices?

Cheers,
Stephen













On 5/1/23 01:44, Stephen Loosley wrote:
> Remote Work Is Poised to Devastate America’s Cities
>
> In order to survive, cities must let developers convert office buildings into 
> housing.
>
> By Eric Levitz, senior writer for Intelligencer. 
> https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/12/remote-work-is-poised-to-devastate-americas-cities.html
>
> The “work from home” revolution has been very good for political columnists 
> who like to write shirtless in pajama pants and share too much personal 
> information with their readers. But the phenomenon hasn’t been so great for 
> America’s cities.
>
> The nation’s office buildings aren’t as empty as they were before COVID 
> vaccines became widely available in spring 2021. But they’re still far less 
> populated than they were in 2019.
>
> A recent analysis of Census Bureau data by the financial site Lending Tree 
> found that 29 percent of Americans were working from home in October 2022. In 
> New York City, financial firms reported that only 56 percent of their 
> employees were in the office on a typical day in September.
>
> Full-time remote work has grown less prevalent since the worst days of the 
> pandemic. But flexible work arrangements — in which employees report to the 
> office a couple times a week — are proving stickier.
>
> A recent paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research estimated that 
> 30 percent of all full-time workdays would be performed remotely by the end 
> of 2022.
>
> As Insider’s Emil Skandul illustrates in an excellent piece, these surveys 
> and projections are buttressed by mobile phone data showing that, in 
> virtually all major U.S. cities, foot traffic in central business districts 
> is down substantially from 2019.
>
> And collapsing office attendance rates are taking cities’ tax revenues down 
> with them.
>
>
> When only 50 percent of a company’s staff leave their homes in the morning, 
> that firm’s desire for floorspace plummets. If storm-clouds appear on the 
> economic horizon — like, say, a central bank dead set on slowing the economy 
> to kill inflation — downsizing your office becomes the easiest way to cut 
> expenses. Thus, as rising rates have laid tech low, San Francisco’s signature 
> office towers have emptied out. In New York, meanwhile, Meta has ditched 
> 450,000 square feet of office space. Across the nation as a whole, only about 
> 47 percent of offices are occupied.
>
> All this translates into plummeting demand for commercial real-estate, which 
> translates into plummeting property values, which translates into plummeting 
> tax receipts. A recent study from New York University’s Stern School of 
> Business found that office values fell 45 percent in 2020, and are likely to 
> remain 39 percent below pre-pandemic levels for the foreseeable future. If 
> that projection proves true, it would wipe $453 billion in property values 
> off American cities, thereby slashing a critical source of municipal revenues.
>
> In New York City, property taxes are the single largest source of public 
> funds, supplying one-third of the city’s tax revenue. Office buildings 
> account for one-fifth of that sum. The declining market value of Manhattan’s 
> major office districts alone cost the city $5.24 billion in revenue.
>
> Remote work’s toll on cities does not end with its implications for property 
> tax revenue. Enable suburban commuters to work from their dens several days a 
> week, and you transfer all manner of smalltime commerce — lunch orders, 
> after-work drinks, etc. — from the urban core to its periphery. And lost 
> transactions mean lost sales taxes. U.S. cities expect their sales tax 
> revenues to decline by an average of 2.5 percent in 2022, according to a 
> survey from the National League of Cities. Last year, New York City 
> Comptroller Scott Stringer estimated that remote work would cost the city 
> $111 million in sales tax receipts annually.
>
>
> Meanwhile, emptier office towers also mean emptier subways and buses. 
> Although mass transit ridership has recovered from its COVID-era lows, it’s 
> plateaued at roughly 70 percent of pre-pandemic levels. That poses an 
> existential threat to municipal transit systems, many of which were 
> struggling to operate on budget even before the COVID crisis. In New York, 
> the Metropolitan Transit Authority is poised to see a widening gap between 
> its revenues and operating expenses as this decade progresses.
>
>
> The great danger for cities is that these trends could become 
> self-reinforcing. Falling revenues could translate into lower-quality public 
> services (e.g. less reliable subways, less well-maintained infrastructure, 
> lower performing public schools, stingier safety nets), which render cities 
> less attractive to high earners, who then decamp for the suburbs in greater 
> numbers, thereby depressing revenues further. Meanwhile, underpopulated 
> downtowns are less conducive to successful small businesses and more 
> conducive to crime. As central business districts become home to fewer 
> restaurants and more criminal activity, more firms will flee them, leading to 
> even more underpopulated office towers.
>
> For now, the American Rescue Plan’s copious aid to states and municipalities 
> are keeping cities out of this vicious cycle. But those funds will dwindle in 
> the coming years. In the National League of Cities recent survey, nearly 
> one-third of cities said that they will confront financial challenges next 
> year, as relief funds grow thin.
>
> It is possible that work from home will simply fall out of fashion as the 
> pandemic recedes into history. But given the myriad advantages that flexible 
> work arrangements have for both employees and firms, cities shouldn’t count 
> on it. Instead, major U.S. cities should capitalize on the one benefit of 
> commercial real-estate’s collapse: The newfound potential to create a ton of 
> new housing in already constructed, centrally located buildings.
>
> America’s most successful cities have long failed to expand their stocks of 
> housing in line with demand. The result has been a perennial crisis of 
> affordability that constrains urban growth, transfers vast sums of money from 
> workers to landlords, and displaces longtime residents. Restrictive zoning 
> codes — and community opposition to new construction that threatens to bring 
> more noise, traffic, and competition for parking spots — have helped entrench 
> this sorry state of affairs.
>
> But vacated office towers typically reside in districts already zoned for 
> both residential and commercial activities. And since the buildings are 
> already built, they tend to attract less community opposition. Their 
> centrality, meanwhile, makes them potentially attractive residences for 
> urbanites who wish to walk to work, and/or have virtually every good or 
> service one could ever want within a hop, skip, and a jump.
>
> Alas, converting office buildings into housing is easier said than done. 
> Commercial buildings tend to have far fewer bathrooms and kitchens than 
> residential ones require. Which means that any conversion demands 
> reconstructing a tower’s plumbing and electrical systems. Expenses add up 
> quickly, especially at a time of elevated construction costs.
>
> Meanwhile, many office buildings do not meet all of the standards that 
> municipal zoning codes require of residential buildings. Offices tend to have 
> much more interior space between windows, leaving much of their floor plans 
> without external light. Additionally, in New York City, residential buildings 
> are generally required to have 30-foot rear yards, in order to ensure a 
> modicum of light and air. Commercial buildings often have smaller rear yards, 
> while also running afoul of the parking minimums that many cities impose on 
> residential towers.
>
> Faced with the high costs and regulatory headaches of attempting a 
> conversion, many real-estate developers have resigned themselves to lower 
> revenues from their commercial properties, while nursing hopes that remote 
> work will prove to be a mere fad.
>
> If conversions don’t pencil out for private developers, however, they promise 
> profound benefits for cities as a whole. Turning thinly populated office 
> towers into apartment buildings would ease cities’ housing shortages, while 
> boosting both downtown commerce and property values and, therefore, tax 
> revenues.
>
> Thus, city and state policymakers would be wise to help lower both the 
> funding and regulatory hurdles to mass office-to-residential conversions.
>
> Cities have often sought to promote development by giving tax credits and 
> abatements to new projects. Yet one of the main objectives of promoting 
> office-to-residential conversions is to increase property tax receipts. So, 
> trying to spur such developments by doling out property tax breaks seems less 
> than ideal.
>
> Instead, cities should help finance new projects with revolving funds that 
> secure the public sector a cut of the ultimate proceeds. Montgomery County’s 
> Housing Production Fund in Maryland offers one model for this form of 
> public-private development. In simple terms, the county’s fund encourages 
> private investment in housing by providing partial funding for new projects, 
> thereby reducing the financial risk that developers must assume when pursuing 
> new construction. In exchange, developers agree to place income restrictions 
> on 30 percent of the units in a given building, and to share a portion of 
> their ultimate profits with the government. Through this mechanism, 
> Montgomery County has managed to catalyze the construction of new affordable 
> housing, at a negligible net-cost to the public sector.
>
> While providing capital for office-to-residential conversions, cities should 
> also exempt such projects from their most burdensome zoning requirements. 
> Residential towers in central business districts replete with transit options 
> should not have to comply with parking minimums. And they probably don’t all 
> need 30-feet yards either. Relaxing such standards will necessarily mean that 
> some new housing developments will offer residences with unusually poor light 
> and limited windows. But they will also offer renters and buyers the myriad 
> amenities of a city center and benefits of new construction. Having 
> poorly-lit new housing is not ideal. But having an acute shortage of 
> affordable housing — and a superabundance of downtown office space — is even 
> worse. New York, Los Angeles, and myriad other cities have offered regulatory 
> exemptions to conversion projects in the past, and have rarely regretted 
> trading stringent standards for more housing units.
>
> Indeed, the benefits of office-to-residential conversions are so significant, 
> cities should consider exempting them even from the requirement that all 
> legal bedrooms have windows.
>
> Given the massive core-to-window depths of contemporary office buildings, 
> converting many such towers to residences will require tolerating some deeply 
> weird floor plans. The real estate developer Bobby Fijan recently tweeted 
> this example of how a typical modern office could be refashioned into a 
> spacious yet bizarre home:
>
> Not everyone is going to want to live in a 2,500 square-foot apartment with a 
> massive common area and 4 windowless bedrooms. But as Matt Yglesias argues, 
> some people probably would. Personally, I’m a very light sleeper who is 
> routinely awakened by city noise and morning light. So the idea of having a 
> bedroom insulated from both by solid walls has some appeal. If cities are 
> faced with a choice between letting office towers sit vacant, or letting 
> photophobic bargain hunters live in windowless bedrooms, they should opt for 
> the latter.
>
> The liberation of America’s white-collar homebodies need not come at cities’ 
> expense. The remote work revolution could devastate municipalities’ downtowns 
> and finances, or it could help resolve their housing crises. If they can 
> summon the requisite policy imagination and flexibility, city officials can 
> make “work from home” work for everyone.
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

--
Marghanita da Cruz
Telephone: 0414-869202
Email:  [email protected]
Website: http://ramin.com.au

_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to