7 ms·

One common occurrence where I live is that county and cities are buying up the old office parks and even strip malls to convert them into government buildings.

One common occurrence where I live is that county and cities are buying up the old office parks and even strip malls to convert them into government buildings. Most are ideally located as well as being offered up for sale cheaply. Seen even a few charitable organizations buy up parts of a strip mall for the cheap space by square foot. Besides the age a lot of REITs cashed out awhile ago and I am not sure the market is there. Plus people are even further out and those who tended to move had the means to do so and their spending went with them. Suburbia certainly isn't dieing.

wh-uws 11y ago
I've seen this also. Also community colleges (for example Austin community college in Austin Texas) are doing the same.
termain 11y ago
Medical malls, too, perhaps?
ChuckMcM 11y ago
Unfortunately for some zoning prevents you from living in those spaces. A friend of mine tried to get a zone variance to turn an office building into essentially a multifamily dwelling and the city turned him down flat. They suggested he could buy the property, tear down the building, get it rezoned, and then build dwellings there. But not go in and convert a perfectly usable space into a livable space. Sigh.
- spiritplumber 11y ago
  Similar issue here. What I wanted to do was take a warehouse (zoned light industrial), essentially cut it in half, and live next to my workshop. Explaining that this is common in my home country, it'd take at least one car off the road during commute hours (mine), etc. was in vain.
  - djrogers 11y ago
    Lots of people do that type of thing here too, but un-permitted. If you wanted to be really particular, you could probably get a permit for the work itself (plumbing, kitchen, etc) as long as it wasn't specified as residential. This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits.
    - icelancer 11y ago
      >This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits. Perfectly stated. Perhaps especially in this case with "zoning" laws. Dealing with a bunch of crap myself in trying to find commercial properties. Unbelievable the number of codes and rules...
    - gph 11y ago
      >This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits. Ah yes, my inalienable right to zone property as I see fit because I want to redevelop it. So often forgotten. /s Yea most local governments are slow and obtuse with zoning, but it's not as if the concept of zoning is a violation of your rights, or even that bad of a thing. Criticism is fine, but using hyperbolic statements about how the government is stealing our rights is just asinine.
      - rhinoceraptor 11y ago
        The government is telling you that you cannot use your own property as you see fit (with the threat of being kidnapped or stolen from). Zoning is to prevent a paper factory from opening up shop next to an elementary school, not to give themselves a job by creating arbitrary rules.
        gph 11y ago
        So what is it; Can I build whatever I want on any property I own, or can the government stop me from building a paper factory next to an elementary school? You've thrown out two contradictory statements. If you agree with zoning in certain circumstances then you can't hold that property is a right for use by owner as they see fit(without the threat of being kidnapped or stolen from). Just because the current zoning system in most locales is overly bureaucratic, or even corrupt, doesn't mean the idea of zoning should be done away, or that property is a right the government can't interfere with. Criticism is one thing, but framing this as an issue about the government taking away our rights is not productive.
- brudgers 11y ago
  Taking your description literally, there is no legal way under any reasonable zoning code that a zoning department could issue a variance to allow a prohibited residential use on a property zoned and currently occupied by an office building. The variance is a mechanism for relieving a hardship that runs with the land by allowing limited non-conformity (e.g. setbacks on a non-conforming lot or the continuation of a previously legal but currently non-conforming use). On the other hand, though local regulations can vary, it is unlikely that tearing down the building would be a prerequisite for a rezoning application. It sounds more like just ordinary planners doing their job and seeing what they can get a developer to do...their job is a bit like a cop trying to get a confession: they're allowed to mislead to maximize results. In fairness, an office building probably puts more money into the city coffers [the term of art is "highest and best use"] than a residential development and thus discouraging downzoning is not unreasonable. Finally, planning departments are a bit like compilers: using the right or wrong terms to describe something is often the difference between being able to do something by right and flat out denial. Every city seems to have their pitbull real-estate attorney who gets stuff through the planning commission via their craft where out of towners and novices will fail. The public access channel makes them easy to identify.
  - gregpilling 11y ago
    Agreed. I spent two years getting a piece of property split in an unusual way. It was totally legal, just weird enough that it encountered friction at every imaginable level. Everyone at the city, county level, even attorneys that should have understood reacted with "whoa, wait a minute" at each stage. At the end it was worth it, a nice return for the time spent. But not easy, and certainly not clearly understood.
    - eru 11y ago
      Care to elaborate?
    - girvo 11y ago
      I'd love to know more about what you did, if you'd be willing to share the story? Sounds fascinating.
- _delirium 11y ago
  Even without zoning it's not entirely straightforward, although at least possible. Houston has no formal zoning, but there are building/safety codes, so you can't just live in part of a warehouse as-is. You have to redo the whole thing to be up to residential code.
shiggerino 11y ago
>dieing Just curious, this is the second time I see this today. Is this a mistake, or is it a regional alternate form from somewhere?
gioele 11y ago
> county and cities are buying up the old office parks and even strip malls to convert them into government buildings. Most are ideally located as well as being offered up for sale cheaply. The point of the grandparent comment is that these buildings are old and in need of expensive maintenance. Why should any government body move in such a building? Can they provide the needed maintenance cheaper that the current owner would do? Or will they move their offices in a decrepit building?

wh-uws 11y ago

I've seen this also. Also community colleges (for example Austin community college in Austin Texas) are doing the same.

termain 11y ago

Medical malls, too, perhaps?

ChuckMcM 11y ago

Unfortunately for some zoning prevents you from living in those spaces. A friend of mine tried to get a zone variance to turn an office building into essentially a multifamily dwelling and the city turned him down flat. They suggested he could buy the property, tear down the building, get it rezoned, and then build dwellings there. But not go in and convert a perfectly usable space into a livable space. Sigh.

spiritplumber 11y ago
Similar issue here. What I wanted to do was take a warehouse (zoned light industrial), essentially cut it in half, and live next to my workshop. Explaining that this is common in my home country, it'd take at least one car off the road during commute hours (mine), etc. was in vain.
- djrogers 11y ago
  Lots of people do that type of thing here too, but un-permitted. If you wanted to be really particular, you could probably get a permit for the work itself (plumbing, kitchen, etc) as long as it wasn't specified as residential. This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits.
  - icelancer 11y ago
    >This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits. Perfectly stated. Perhaps especially in this case with "zoning" laws. Dealing with a bunch of crap myself in trying to find commercial properties. Unbelievable the number of codes and rules...
  - gph 11y ago
    >This is what we've come to though - the government has taken away our rights and sell them back to us with permits. Ah yes, my inalienable right to zone property as I see fit because I want to redevelop it. So often forgotten. /s Yea most local governments are slow and obtuse with zoning, but it's not as if the concept of zoning is a violation of your rights, or even that bad of a thing. Criticism is fine, but using hyperbolic statements about how the government is stealing our rights is just asinine.
    - rhinoceraptor 11y ago
      The government is telling you that you cannot use your own property as you see fit (with the threat of being kidnapped or stolen from). Zoning is to prevent a paper factory from opening up shop next to an elementary school, not to give themselves a job by creating arbitrary rules.
      - gph 11y ago
        So what is it; Can I build whatever I want on any property I own, or can the government stop me from building a paper factory next to an elementary school? You've thrown out two contradictory statements. If you agree with zoning in certain circumstances then you can't hold that property is a right for use by owner as they see fit(without the threat of being kidnapped or stolen from). Just because the current zoning system in most locales is overly bureaucratic, or even corrupt, doesn't mean the idea of zoning should be done away, or that property is a right the government can't interfere with. Criticism is one thing, but framing this as an issue about the government taking away our rights is not productive.
brudgers 11y ago
Taking your description literally, there is no legal way under any reasonable zoning code that a zoning department could issue a variance to allow a prohibited residential use on a property zoned and currently occupied by an office building. The variance is a mechanism for relieving a hardship that runs with the land by allowing limited non-conformity (e.g. setbacks on a non-conforming lot or the continuation of a previously legal but currently non-conforming use). On the other hand, though local regulations can vary, it is unlikely that tearing down the building would be a prerequisite for a rezoning application. It sounds more like just ordinary planners doing their job and seeing what they can get a developer to do...their job is a bit like a cop trying to get a confession: they're allowed to mislead to maximize results. In fairness, an office building probably puts more money into the city coffers [the term of art is "highest and best use"] than a residential development and thus discouraging downzoning is not unreasonable. Finally, planning departments are a bit like compilers: using the right or wrong terms to describe something is often the difference between being able to do something by right and flat out denial. Every city seems to have their pitbull real-estate attorney who gets stuff through the planning commission via their craft where out of towners and novices will fail. The public access channel makes them easy to identify.
- gregpilling 11y ago
  Agreed. I spent two years getting a piece of property split in an unusual way. It was totally legal, just weird enough that it encountered friction at every imaginable level. Everyone at the city, county level, even attorneys that should have understood reacted with "whoa, wait a minute" at each stage. At the end it was worth it, a nice return for the time spent. But not easy, and certainly not clearly understood.
  - eru 11y ago
    Care to elaborate?
  - girvo 11y ago
    I'd love to know more about what you did, if you'd be willing to share the story? Sounds fascinating.
_delirium 11y ago
Even without zoning it's not entirely straightforward, although at least possible. Houston has no formal zoning, but there are building/safety codes, so you can't just live in part of a warehouse as-is. You have to redo the whole thing to be up to residential code.

shiggerino 11y ago

>dieing Just curious, this is the second time I see this today. Is this a mistake, or is it a regional alternate form from somewhere?

gioele 11y ago

> county and cities are buying up the old office parks and even strip malls to convert them into government buildings. Most are ideally located as well as being offered up for sale cheaply. The point of the grandparent comment is that these buildings are old and in need of expensive maintenance. Why should any government body move in such a building? Can they provide the needed maintenance cheaper that the current owner would do? Or will they move their offices in a decrepit building?