Adaptive reuse of self-storage facilities?

[eschaton]

So, something I've been pondering a lot over the last few years is the rise of purpose built self-storage spaces. Here are a few examples from Pittsburgh:

1 - All New Build

2 - Mostly New Build

3 - All New Build

These sort of buildings - at least in urban areas - tend to have a couple things in common.

1. They're fairly tall.
2. They're pretty well-constructed (I've yet to see a stick/drywall one, they're always steel - probably due to fire codes).
3. They have big, wide floor plates.
4. At least in urban areas, they're built with urban street orientation (no setbacks, etc.)

What's notable to me is they get built even locally, where there's relatively little steel-frame residential construction (and what is built is much taller). I have to presume that in areas where there aren't still big old multi-story warehouse buildings, even more of them are constructed.

I'm left wondering if we're actually seeing the bones of a future adaptive reuse wave. They seem to be really well-suited to office conversions, or even perhaps residential in the case of some of the narrower buildings.

Anyway, just curious what others (who may have some experience in construction) can add to my musings.

[montréaliste]

As the aging demographic grows, the need for hoarding outlets will continue to grow and perhaps blossom into something more beautiful and intense. It may even replace meds and pets for the aged.

[JManc]

These things strike as having the same build quality of those extended stay hotels that go up in a week and have a shelf life of about 20 years before they fall apart.

[mhays]

I imagine they'd need to be taken down to structure in nearly all cases. There are few windows. They have loading docks but little parking (fine for small units in urban areas). Their fire protection and electrical may be adequate/adaptable but other systems like water and sewer would need to be new. Most interior construction would need to be ripped out entirely. It might be more cost effective to build from scratch, with more livable results.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by JManc

These things strike as having the same build quality of those extended stay hotels that go up in a week and have a shelf life of about 20 years before they fall apart.

They do not because they are governed by different building code requirements, regardless of jurisdiction. Even extended stay hotels have to be constructed based on occupancy type, construction type, a variety of structural loading requirements, etc, etc, for people to reside there, even if for relatively short periods of time, unlike a SFH, townhomes, apartment/condo buildings, etc.
Self-storage facilities also have to be constructed based on a minimum of building code requirements for that type of building, regardless of differences between the two, but those code requirements are very different, especially related to structural loading, exiting/egress requirements, allowing fresh air and natural light into the facility, as well as very specific MEP needs.

It would make far more sense to convert or do adaptive re-use of extended stay hotels instead of storage unit facilities, at the very least because of building code differences between the two, the former already being much closer to residential use, in terms of how they're designed and constructed.

[llamaorama]

I see the exact opposite scenario happening. Old office buildings are being turned into self-storage facilities.

Houston, Beltway 8 at 45. Two 70s-80s era 6 story office towers are now a U-Haul outlet:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BwiWPqWe9TyDdca39


Fort Worth, Loop 820. This was a counterpart office building to the Wells Fargo across the parking lot that was never actually completed and sat as a metal frame for decades before getting turned into a Public Storage

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5i9aRKDhTNVKHVMb7

There are a few others that I've seen locally which I suspect started out life as something other than a storage facility but I don't have proof they were anything else and Google streetview only goes back to around 2008.

[plinko]

Only if you are talking multi-story. Then at least there are some code requirements that might yield a good base frame (high structural live and dead loads). But you would absolutely have to strip it entirely down to the frame and then redo all of the vertical circulation and exterior envelope.

The single story locations though? In most places they are almost always extremely high ROI properties. I've never had any of my clients who own one of these tell me they are failing. Maintenance is at a minimum (pest and rodent control), you can hire someone with carnival skills to live in the crappy little apartment that comes with it, and generally they are easy to repair because of the simple metal wall panel construction.

[Steely Dan]

In Chicago, many of these multi-story storage places are built right to the lot lines with zero side yard setbacks. This is fine for these facilities because they do not require windows. But any conversion to residential would obviously require windows for light/vent requirements, which could be problematic.

[TempleGuy1000]

"Hiro Protagonist and Vitaly Chernobyl, roommates, are chilling out in their home, a spacious 20 by 30 in a U-Stor-It in Inglewood, California. The room has a concrete slab floor, corrugated steel walls separating it from the neighboring units and - this is a mark of distinction separating it from the neighboring units - a roll-up steel door that faces northwest, giving them a few red rays at times like this, when the sun is setting over LAX.

But there are worse places to live… slum housing, 5-by-10s and 10-by-10s where Yanoama tribespersons cook beans and parboil fistfuls of coca leaves over heaps of burning lottery tickets." - Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash.

In one of the most famous cyberpunk books, Snow Crash, the main character lives in a storage unit. So I've always kind of wondered if we were headed towards that future. U-Haul and the other storage companies have built many storage units throughout the city.

They're ugly as hell
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9396...5410&entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9901...5410&entry=ttu

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9901...5410&entry=ttu

I actually find ones like the latter funny, in that those big windows have no real function in self-storage places. I suppose it cuts down on the need to have internal lighting a bit, and helps with making the building noticeable, but that's about it.

[benp]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

I see the exact opposite scenario happening. Old office buildings are being turned into self-storage facilities.

Houston, Beltway 8 at 45. Two 70s-80s era 6 story office towers are now a U-Haul outlet:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BwiWPqWe9TyDdca39


Fort Worth, Loop 820. This was a counterpart office building to the Wells Fargo across the parking lot that was never actually completed and sat as a metal frame for decades before getting turned into a Public Storage

https://maps.app.goo.gl/5i9aRKDhTNVKHVMb7

There are a few others that I've seen locally which I suspect started out life as something other than a storage facility but I don't have proof they were anything else and Google streetview only goes back to around 2008.

In Buffalo there are places that have gone full circle - from warehouses to storage facilities and then to market rate apartments.

Niagara Street:
Before / After

Main Street:
Before / After

[mhays]

Since they typically don't have parking below, they're rarely going to be good urbanism. If it's an urban concept with no parking except a loading area off the alley, great. Otherwise, they'll typically need parking next door. Whether it's an above-grade garage or surface parking, it's not a good result.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by mhays

Since they typically don't have parking below, they're rarely going to be good urbanism. If it's an urban concept with no parking except a loading area off the alley, great. Otherwise, they'll typically need parking next door. Whether it's an above-grade garage or surface parking, it's not a good result.

I'm a bit confused by this, as a lack of parking for urban buildings (whether commercial or residential) is a good thing, and certainly good urbanism.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

Since they typically don't have parking below, they're rarely going to be good urbanism.

I've never worked on a self storage facility project, so I don't know if typical column grid spacing would allow this or not in most cases, but perhaps part of the first floor could be turned into a garage with alley access?

In any event, I think the market for storage facilities would have to crash hard to make the numbers work for a residential conversion.

[mhays]

The best urbanism has no parking, just a spot on the alley for trucks to offload or not even that. But outside the better parts of the better cities, parking is usually part of the deal. I'm referring to that scenario.

I have no idea on column spacing either. And certainly in any densifying city there will be tons of demand for storage units so there's not much reason to go away from that.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by mhays

And certainly in any densifying city there will be tons of demand for storage units so there's not much reason to go away from that.

There will always be a demand for storage space, but neighborhoods can increase in desirability over time. If an area gentrifies, I don't expect that a multi-story self-storage space will remain the most lucrative use of a property.

[mhays]

The point isn't which has higher rents. You have to consider the value of what you're buying and tearing down. A successful self-storage property will cost too much.

There are exceptions, like if the site is zoned 500'.