10 ms·

The main advantage of living in a converted factory (there are a lot of these in the rust belt) is that you end up with an absolutely enormous space made out of

by hedora 3y ago

The main advantage of living in a converted factory (there are a lot of these in the rust belt) is that you end up with an absolutely enormous space made out of cool materials. I was finding it hard to imagine that there are inner-city office buildings (high rises) that have floors so large that they couldn't be cut into, say 1/4'ths, with four residences on each floor, and each unit having 50% windows along its perimeter. People build McMansions that are > 10K square feet, so for a building footprint to be too big for this (i.e., so big that buyers would balk at the size), then you'd need a high-rise with ~40K sq ft floors before this became a problem. A standard city block in Manhattan is apparently 237,000 square feet, so if you had a building that took up a whole block, there'd be a big problem. Now I'm wondering how many office buildings there are in a typical city block.

bandyaboot 3y ago
I doubt that people in the market for a downtown apartment share the same priorities for selecting a home as people who would buy a McMansion. I also don’t think you can equate 10,000 sq ft over multiple floors with the same area on a single floor. I don’t know how that space would be designed in any practical manner that wouldn’t turn it into a labyrinth. I guess if someone wants a ballroom or a basketball court in their apartment?
- bombcar 3y ago
  Rural areas are replete with relatively average 2k sq ft houses with 10k sq ft+ “workshops” or “barns” - which often are just big areas that never actually did any farming, but are used for storing toys or hobbies.
- HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
  > 10,000 sq ft over multiple floors with the same area on a single floor My neighbor's house is, IIRC, 11,000 sq-ft all on a single floor. Just a lot of very big rooms.
onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
Due to fire code, to divide a high-rise into 4 corner units, you need to take up almost ~50% of the space for elevators, stairs and hallways. So you'd probably end up with close to 5k square foot condos - which isn't too ridiculous. You'd probably do 4 corner units and 4 non-corner units for a total of eight, and end up with each being between 2000 and 2500. The problem is, they'd be ridiculously expensive for a number of reasons. And when you're paying that much money, you probably don't want to live in a building that wasn't even designed to be lived in...
- NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
  >The problem is, they'd be ridiculously expensive for a number of reasons. And when you're paying that much money, you probably don't want to live in a building that wasn't even designed to be lived in... <owners of $5 million Tribeca lofts have entered the chat>
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    Exactly, I live in a former noodle factory... many such cases.
- lovich 3y ago
  Given the Boston market this will still help everyone. My household is making north of 300k and was still having trouble bidding on home where there were dead cockroaches visible during the showing. It feels wrong to build luxury housing when regular folk are suffering but if you build luxury housing to the point that the rich stop bidding on regular housing, or even better there’s so much luxury housing that everyone can get a good living space, it’s a net improvement for all of society
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    It's not clear that you can meaningfully effect availability of "regular" housing by building any reasonable number of luxury homes. Slightly reducing the cost of luxury apartments may attract more buyers from outside the city, average the rate of vacancy may increase without the price going down much. They can be purchased by the rich to be used as unlicensed hotels aka airbnb. They can be ought up as "investments" and not effectively rented out effectively enough as long as you don't build so much you literally flood the market. Even if the price of expensive apartments does go down a little because more people are able to afford "luxury" you don't necessarily have to let the little guy in on the savings you can as an industry collude to keep the price as high as the market can bear without literally becoming homeless. You don't even have to actually collude in an illegal fashion if your interests are actually sufficiently aligned that you all act in lockstep without overt coordination. Any real savings can be virtually entirely absorbed by the owner class.
TheBigSalad 3y ago
At 10k square feet you can safely drop the Mc.
- brewdad 3y ago
  Picturing an old Bed Bath and Beyond with faux Greek columns.
- skyyler 3y ago
  McMansion is about taste, not size.
nradov 3y ago
Concrete and exposed metal are hardly what most of us think of as "cool materials". The notion of living in an abandoned factory is just dismal. Tear them down and start over.
- FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
  Haven't you seen all those hip buildings with high ceilings and exposed brick? They used to be factories and warehouses. Many of them are from a time of much sturdier construction. If the alternative is balloon-frame Mc-residential, then you want to renovate the old brick mill.
  - nradov 3y ago
    Those buildings look like crap. Hardly the kind of place where I would want to live or work if I had any choice.
    - unethical_ban 3y ago
      Many people have different opinions about it. If sheetrock or a log cabin is your thing, great.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      I guess tastes vary. The old brick factory buildings converted to residential can look really cool. Our city office is also an old factory building. I'll take it over our suburban office park building anytime.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
      Tastes do indeed vary. Part of the reason I took my last job was because the building used to be a 19th century factory and there was so much cool looking exposed brick and timbers. The atmosphere was so different from the cubicle hell of the last job that I actually felt energized going into the office every morning. Of course, more money didn't hurt either ;-)
    - FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
emmelaich 3y ago
High-rises are not good for residential purposes. They are seriously isolating.
- freeone3000 3y ago
  Versus what?
  - ghaff 3y ago
    Shorter buildings, multi-family homes, etc. I worked for someone (with plenty of money) who had a house in a nearby small city but wanted a place in Boston. He lived in one of the luxury high-rises for a time but he really didn't care for it. I forget if he used the "isolating" word but he definitely said he felt apart from the little people scurrying around on the streets below. He ended up buying a condo in one of the old brownstones in the city.
Projectiboga 3y ago
Very few whole block buildings in NYC. The street block length is ~250', with about 50' cross street & sidewalk. Avenue to avenue is closer to 1,000. A big building is usually 100×125. Even the Empire State Building isn't a full block. Area of Site: 79,288 square feet (7,240m) or about two acres. East to west, 424 feet (129m), north to south, 187 feet (56.9m). Height: The base of building rises five floors above the street. The entrance is four floors high.

by hedora 3y ago

bandyaboot 3y ago

I doubt that people in the market for a downtown apartment share the same priorities for selecting a home as people who would buy a McMansion. I also don’t think you can equate 10,000 sq ft over multiple floors with the same area on a single floor. I don’t know how that space would be designed in any practical manner that wouldn’t turn it into a labyrinth. I guess if someone wants a ballroom or a basketball court in their apartment?

bombcar 3y ago
Rural areas are replete with relatively average 2k sq ft houses with 10k sq ft+ “workshops” or “barns” - which often are just big areas that never actually did any farming, but are used for storing toys or hobbies.
HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
> 10,000 sq ft over multiple floors with the same area on a single floor My neighbor's house is, IIRC, 11,000 sq-ft all on a single floor. Just a lot of very big rooms.

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

Due to fire code, to divide a high-rise into 4 corner units, you need to take up almost ~50% of the space for elevators, stairs and hallways. So you'd probably end up with close to 5k square foot condos - which isn't too ridiculous. You'd probably do 4 corner units and 4 non-corner units for a total of eight, and end up with each being between 2000 and 2500. The problem is, they'd be ridiculously expensive for a number of reasons. And when you're paying that much money, you probably don't want to live in a building that wasn't even designed to be lived in...

NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
>The problem is, they'd be ridiculously expensive for a number of reasons. And when you're paying that much money, you probably don't want to live in a building that wasn't even designed to be lived in... <owners of $5 million Tribeca lofts have entered the chat>
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Exactly, I live in a former noodle factory... many such cases.
lovich 3y ago
Given the Boston market this will still help everyone. My household is making north of 300k and was still having trouble bidding on home where there were dead cockroaches visible during the showing. It feels wrong to build luxury housing when regular folk are suffering but if you build luxury housing to the point that the rich stop bidding on regular housing, or even better there’s so much luxury housing that everyone can get a good living space, it’s a net improvement for all of society
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  It's not clear that you can meaningfully effect availability of "regular" housing by building any reasonable number of luxury homes. Slightly reducing the cost of luxury apartments may attract more buyers from outside the city, average the rate of vacancy may increase without the price going down much. They can be purchased by the rich to be used as unlicensed hotels aka airbnb. They can be ought up as "investments" and not effectively rented out effectively enough as long as you don't build so much you literally flood the market. Even if the price of expensive apartments does go down a little because more people are able to afford "luxury" you don't necessarily have to let the little guy in on the savings you can as an industry collude to keep the price as high as the market can bear without literally becoming homeless. You don't even have to actually collude in an illegal fashion if your interests are actually sufficiently aligned that you all act in lockstep without overt coordination. Any real savings can be virtually entirely absorbed by the owner class.

TheBigSalad 3y ago

At 10k square feet you can safely drop the Mc.

brewdad 3y ago
Picturing an old Bed Bath and Beyond with faux Greek columns.
skyyler 3y ago
McMansion is about taste, not size.

nradov 3y ago

Concrete and exposed metal are hardly what most of us think of as "cool materials". The notion of living in an abandoned factory is just dismal. Tear them down and start over.

FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
Haven't you seen all those hip buildings with high ceilings and exposed brick? They used to be factories and warehouses. Many of them are from a time of much sturdier construction. If the alternative is balloon-frame Mc-residential, then you want to renovate the old brick mill.
- nradov 3y ago
  Those buildings look like crap. Hardly the kind of place where I would want to live or work if I had any choice.
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    Many people have different opinions about it. If sheetrock or a log cabin is your thing, great.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    I guess tastes vary. The old brick factory buildings converted to residential can look really cool. Our city office is also an old factory building. I'll take it over our suburban office park building anytime.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
    Tastes do indeed vary. Part of the reason I took my last job was because the building used to be a 19th century factory and there was so much cool looking exposed brick and timbers. The atmosphere was so different from the cubicle hell of the last job that I actually felt energized going into the office every morning. Of course, more money didn't hurt either ;-)
  - FooBarBizBazz 3y ago

emmelaich 3y ago

High-rises are not good for residential purposes. They are seriously isolating.

freeone3000 3y ago
Versus what?
- ghaff 3y ago
  Shorter buildings, multi-family homes, etc. I worked for someone (with plenty of money) who had a house in a nearby small city but wanted a place in Boston. He lived in one of the luxury high-rises for a time but he really didn't care for it. I forget if he used the "isolating" word but he definitely said he felt apart from the little people scurrying around on the streets below. He ended up buying a condo in one of the old brownstones in the city.

Projectiboga 3y ago

Very few whole block buildings in NYC. The street block length is ~250', with about 50' cross street & sidewalk. Avenue to avenue is closer to 1,000. A big building is usually 100×125. Even the Empire State Building isn't a full block. Area of Site: 79,288 square feet (7,240m) or about two acres. East to west, 424 feet (129m), north to south, 187 feet (56.9m). Height: The base of building rises five floors above the street. The entrance is four floors high.