Co-Housing Plan for Empty Office Buildings

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. No doubt that housing is one of the top issues facing New York City. As of this year, the City has become the most expensive city to live in, in the country, according to CNBC, with housing costs at the crux of this unaffordability crisis. Currently in Manhattan, the median rent for a studio apartment is $3,400. Another stat, only 2% of Manhattan apartments rent for under $2,000. Both stats coming from the 5Boro report, which we're about to talk about. Even those who have a steady income from a professional job can find these costs to be far out of reach as many of you know too well. The results of this lack of affordable housing have led to the City hitting another devastating milestone. As of June of this year, the City hit a record number of 100,000 people sleeping in homeless shelters.

Meanwhile, the prevalence of remote work, since the pandemic era, has created another issue in real estate in this city. Office buildings in our busiest commercial districts are much emptier than they've ever been. This seems like an opportunity to fix two issues, perhaps. Well, the New York City think tank called 5Boro Institute has released a report promoting a pilot project to convert these empty offices into communal living spaces.

Joining us now to share how this kind of plan could work in the context of our city is Grace Rauh, executive director of the think tank, 5Boro Institute, and Howard Slatkin, executive director at the Citizens Housing and Planning Council. Grace, welcome back. Howard, welcome to WNYC. Hello.

Grace Rauh: Hi, Brian. Thanks for having us.

Howard Slatkin: Hi. Thanks.

Brian Lehrer: There's undoubtedly a crisis of affordability in New York City housing currently, but let's go a little bit deeper. Howard, who is currently most underserved by our current housing market?

Howard Slatkin: Well, clearly, if you look at 100,000 people in New York City's shelter system, these and the people who are unsheltered on the streets are the most underserved. We have an extensive set of subsidized housing programs, supportive housing that's available to people with very low incomes. It's inadequate to meet the full demand. It's really important that we continue to deliver resources to those, but it's really important to keep in mind that these people are underserved in part because we are all underserved.

Housing is really a game of musical chairs, and when there just aren't enough chairs, there are going to be people who are left unhoused. That affects everybody. The more we can house everyone throughout the system with more options, the more it's going to help with every aspect of those issues.

Brian Lehrer: Many in that record 100,000 in homeless shelters, are among the recently-arrived asylum seekers, but tens of thousands are not. That number has been rising since the eviction moratorium ended at certain point in the pandemic.

I mentioned broadly that office buildings are facing a high vacancy rate now. I'm seeing a 22% vacancy rate right now. What does this look like in the different areas of Manhattan? Where are the most vacancies, and how does this affect the commercial districts surrounding these empty offices? Howard, I'll stay with you on that.

Howard Slatkin: Well, obviously, without people in the offices on a day-to-day basis, it's the ground floor retail that suffers. It's the neighborhood activity and the overall business climate that has fed the viability of these office markets that is challenged, and so having more people there on a 24/7 basis is one way to help enliven office districts. I think you see this in places like Third Avenue on the East Side, some areas that are not in the center of the business district, but might for instance, be very close to established residential neighborhoods and create a borderline district that really works well for a mix of housing and offices.

Brian Lehrer: Grace, your institute's plan is to convert these office buildings into housing. As I'm sure you know, a lot of people have floated this in theory. It's come up on this show so many times. Oh, there's all this empty office space. There's all these people who need housing, and a housing shortage in the City. Let's make a match and convert. Then so many people step up and say, "Yes. Well, that's a lot easier said than done. Those office buildings are not configured like apartment buildings, and it's just not easy to do." Tell us about your plan. What would this housing look like? Can you provide a visual, for example, for listeners?

Grace Rauh: Sure. As you said, Brian, it is incredibly complicated and it's incredibly costly to convert offices into traditional apartments. Many offices have what are known as very deep floor plates. They're much wider, deeper buildings designed to house a lot of desks. When you're building apartments, you want to have much narrower buildings where more people have access to windows more easily.

The idea that we've put on the table here, we're calling flexible co-living. We think it's a new model for housing in New York City, that the City should pilot and test out and experiment with. Essentially, it combines three unique design elements. The first is that we have put this forward as a specific solution to office-to-residential conversion. We think that while this could be applied elsewhere, it is a particularly smart and innovative idea that would allow us to maximize housing and affordability in these conversions.

The second piece is co-living, the idea that renters would be able to lease an individual bedroom, and they would share communal spaces like bathrooms, kitchens and lounges. That's really key because part of this idea means that the existing plumbing infrastructure in an office building, which is most commonly centralized in the middle of a floor plan, if you built on that existing infrastructure, that existing plumbing system, you wouldn't need to run it to every corner of the building. That's where you would have your shared kitchens and your shared bathrooms, which would cut down considerably on renovation costs.

Then the third piece of the puzzle is what we're calling interior window flexibility. This is a design concept that is very much in play and used in other cities, places like Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., where bedrooms are allowed to have interior windows where they can capture natural light at a distance from an exterior window. The interior window means you don't peer out of your window and look outside. You have access. It's some removed to natural light.

In our report, which we encourage people to check out on our website, fiveboro.nyc, we have a bunch of renderings. We worked with an architect who helped us really bring this idea to life and show that there's a lot of different configurations that could be used in flexible co-living. This would really provide a way forward for the City to create a lot more housing through these conversions, and do it in a much more affordable way, so that a lot of that savings could be passed down to tenants who, as Howard noted, are so desperately in need of new options and more affordable options in the housing market.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, would you consider living in a single-room occupancy created out of a converted office building that looked and felt like Grace Rauh was just describing? Do you have any reservations that would keep you from considering this kind of solution? If you currently have roommates, say, would this be an option you might prefer to your current situation? We'll also take your questions for our guests. 212-433-WNYC for Grace Rauh, executive director of the think tank 5Boro Institute, and Howard Slatkin, executive director of the Citizens Housing and Planning Council. Call or text 212-433-9692.

Grace, to follow up on what you were just describing, I can imagine sharing personal spaces like bathrooms or kitchens could give a lot of people the ick. Dirty dishes in the sink, hair in shower drains, lots of hygiene issues could arise. How do you see common spaces being maintained under your plan?

Grace Rauh: Well, that would need to be a key piece of this. Obviously, managing a building like this would be very different than managing a traditional apartment, but we know that it is possible. All sorts of college students or graduate students live in dormitories where they share bathrooms. They may share lounges. This is not unheard of as a concept, and so we do think that there is a way, if managers and developers are very mindful about assembling the right team and creating the right set of rules and guidelines for these developments, that this can be done in a way that is really positive for tenants.

Although we don't go into this issue in our report, we've heard a lot of talk, Brian, about the loneliness epidemic, that many people feel disconnected from their peers or their community. I really think that you could find a receptive audience not only because of the rent savings that this model would provide tenants, but also from just the community building aspect of it. A lot of people who want to get to know their neighbors, and obviously, if they're sharing some of these spaces, they'd really have an opportunity to build deeper connections and community with the people that they're living amongst.

Brian Lehrer: Our phones and text feed are blowing up. Let me start with a text message that simply says, "Dorms. What she's describing is dorms." Would you put it that way?

Grace Rauh: You could put it that way. I think that may be a way for people to wrap their heads around this concept, sort of dorms for adults. I will say that I think that may be a good term to use, in part because so many of us are familiar and perhaps at some point in our lives lived in a dorm. I heard from a number of people when our report came out, and even in the development of this, who said, only a young person would want to live in a place like this. Only someone who's just graduated from college or they're beginning their career in New York would be drawn to this type of model.

I think that this is a model that would appeal to a lot of young people, but since the release of it I've heard from a number of folks who are older and are thinking of downsizing, who were seniors who said this is a model that would appeal to them. You could almost imagine, Brian, that depending on the developer, something like this could be marketed to different segments of the population, people at different life stages. Again, it's not for everyone, but we have a huge number of people in New York who need housing that is safe and secure. This could be a great option to be part of the mix.

Brian Lehrer: Would the cafeteria have better food than my dorm? I'm just kidding. This is WNYC FM HDNAM, New York, WNJT FM 88.1. Trenton, WNJP 88.5, Sussex, WNJY 89.3, Netcong, and WNJO 90.3, Toms River. We are New York and New Jersey Public Radio and live streaming @wnyc.org. As we talk with our guests for another few minutes about this proposal for converting some underused office space in New York City into housing, which is, of course, in short supply. It looks like Acacia in Greenpoint has some experience with maybe something similar. Acacia, you are on WNYC. Thank you for calling in.

Acacia: Hi. My friend lives in an apartment in Bushwick that was converted into one of these type of co-living places. We looked it up. It was previously a rent-stable building. I know that doesn't really apply when we're actually converting office space, which I think is great. I think we really need to focus on the affordability aspect because here, she lives in this co-living place. She doesn't know her roommates. They come and go a little bit, which so far she hasn't had too bad of experiences, but they all pay like $1,200 each. She pays $1,200 and she found out another one was paying even more.

It's still like a four-bedroom apartment for $5,000 so it doesn't fix the affordability crisis at all. I find when they make these spaces, people are still paying very high market rates, even though they're giving up the ability to choose their roommates or currently with the laws, lock their door.

Brian Lehrer: Howard Slatkin, executive director at the Citizens' Housing and Planning Council, can you weigh in on that?

Howard Slatkin: Absolutely. I think this highlights the reason why we have to look at solutions that are additive. We need more; not just more quantity of housing, but we need more types of housing that are going to fit the needs of different people. It's not the hunger games of cannibalizing the existing supply we have and giving it over to other users so much as adding more and making it serve as many of the different needs as we have. We have to think of it as let 1,000 flowers bloom.

There's not one kind of housing that fits the needs of New Yorkers any more than there's one kind of dinner that fits the need of every New Yorker, but we all agree that everyone should be having dinner, and we all agree that everyone should have housing and should have a kind of housing that meets their needs. This is one additional flavor that could really be an important addition, I think.

Brian Lehrer: Listener texts, "San Francisco tried things like this on a small scale. This is the same thing in an office building, and abandoned it." Howard, are you familiar with the San Francisco experiment that got abandoned? Does that refer to something you're aware of?

Howard Slatkin: I'm not aware of the specific example, but I think the nature of what Grace and 5Boro's report is talking about is piloting, is trying new things, and the City is already trying new forms of shared housing. There's a pilot program called Share NYC that the Department of Housing Preservation and Development has started looking at affordable unit models that can take advantage of this. There are regulatory hurdles to making this work. Today, there's a lot of improvised solutions that are filling gaps, but we really need more options on the table so that we can find out what really does work.

Brian Lehrer: Listener texts, "This model reminds me of a YWCA that an elderly friend of mine says she moved into when she first moved to New York City from the Caribbean, probably in the '40s or early '50s. It was a welcoming and safe place for a newcomer to the City to land and get her bearings." Another text says, "I am a senior and would be interested in this proposal." Another listener asks in a text, "What if there's another pandemic?" Here's an objection that's coming from a few people. I'll let Rebecca in Ridgewood voice it. Rebecca, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Rebecca: Hi. I was calling because I've been hearing about this plan to get rid of the requirement to have windows in the bedrooms and to just use interior windows. I think it's outrageous. I wonder if any of the people proposing this have lived in a room like that. A lot of people in New York, their bedroom is their private space if they don't know their roommates very well. They spend a lot of time in there. I remember hearing the mayor say that, what do you do in your bedroom you just sleep. You spend so much time in your bedroom when you don't know your roommates. To not have a window, it's just outrageous in my opinion.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Rebecca. Grace?

Grace Rauh: Sure. Rebecca, the window piece of this, obviously for a lot of people, means that this would not be an appealing place to live. I fully respect Rebecca's opinion on this. I think what was really enlightening to me was my own experience seeing some of these interior windows in practice and in apartments in other cities. I went and toured a former factory in Philadelphia that's been converted into apartments. This is a high-end market-rate development. A number of the apartments that I visited had bedrooms with interior windows. We have some pictures in our report from that building in particular.

The real estate agent that took me around said they've had no problem at all renting these units. They're running out of them because demand has been so high. I think that it speaks to the broader demand for good housing. I think with the right architects, the right design features, this can be a model that works for some people. It doesn't need to work for everybody, but the rental savings that we project could be passed on to tenants through this model.

Based on some Furman Report study that came out from NYU a few years ago, they said there would be about a 40% savings in rent when it came to developing an efficiency unit with shared bathrooms and kitchens versus a small studio apartment. If that kind of savings could be passed down to people, they might make a different calculus about what kind of housing they want and what's acceptable to them.

Brian Lehrer: We're running out of time, but Howard, I want to note that as our calls and texts really blow up on this, so many calls, so many texts, people are really divided. There are a number of people who are relatively older who seem enthusiastic. Of course, this is an extremely unscientific sample, but we're getting a number of these. Listener writes, "I am in my 60s and would happily take the arrangement." Another listener writes, "As a 56-year-old empty nester who recently sold her co-op, yet can't afford a new home to house my three kids when they are home, this co-housing is very appealing."

Other people are writing things like, "This Proposal is absurd. We're going to propose Soviet-style housing solutions to appease developers." Several people cite appeasing developers and concentrating wealth. Are surprised by the responses being as varied as they are. Does that indicate a way to move forward with this or not?

Howard Slatkin: I'm absolutely not surprised that you have a range of views among New Yorkers on a pressing issue. Certainly, we talked about how there's not one kind of housing that fits everyone's needs. I think sometimes we lapse into decisions about housing that are made by, often, people who themselves are very well housed and say that other people shouldn't be allowed to live like this when we should be listening to the way people want to live as well.

You had several people responding on texts and in your messages that say that they think this is an interesting option. This isn't supposed to be for everyone. Every low-income family that's looking for a family-sized apartment is competing against the set of roommates that might live in a shared housing arrangement but because those things aren't available, they're splitting a family-sized apartment amongst themselves.

It's again the hunger games. If we're all fighting over the same supply of housing, we're never going to house everyone adequately. We need more choices for the very diverse needs of New Yorkers.

Brian Lehrer: Grace, quick last word. This is a proposal from your think tank. Is anybody carrying this in City Council?

Grace Rauh: Not yet, but we'd be thrilled if they did. We think that this should be piloted by the City of New York. In August, the City announced that they're creating an office conversion accelerator program that's being supported by a number of city agencies including the Department of Buildings, Planning, and others.

We think this could live within that office conversion accelerator. We're calling for it to be adopted as part of the City Hall's broader housing agenda. Some of the regulatory changes that would be required for this to work on a pilot basis would need buy-in and support from Albany. We think this should be part of the conversation in the legislative process as part of the budget negotiations in the spring.

Brian Lehrer: Grace Rauh, executive director of the think tank 5Boro Institute, and Howard Slatkin, executive director at the Citizens Housing and Planning Council. Thank you both so much.

Howard Slatkin: Thank you.

Grace Rauh: Thank you, Brian.

 

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.