A company has come up with a bold solution to affordable housing in London – by transforming Buckingham Palace.

German architecture firm Opposite Office believe their redesigns for the Queen’s home would provide living arrangements for a staggering 50,000 Londoners.

Named Affordable Palace, the company’s designs would completely transform the 775 rooms that currently make up the palace, which was opened in 1703.

There is a downside though – in order to squeeze so many residents into one place, the designs include no corridors and barely any circulation areas, while folding screens and walls would allow for certain spaces to be repurposed as needed.

Mandatory Credit: Photo by Bruce Adams/ANL/REX/Shutterstock (3369816a) Prison Officers Walk Out Of Hmp Risley Near Warrington Cheshire In Sympathy With Prison Officers From Hmp Walton In Liverpool. Picture Shows Risley Prison Sign. Prison Officers Walk Out Of Hmp Risley Near Warrington Cheshire In Sympathy With Prison Officers From Hmp Walton In Liverpool. Picture Shows Risley Prison Sign.Prisoner, 23, arrested after fellow inmate stabbed to death in jail

Private single and double bedrooms would have access to shared living rooms and dining areas.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Apartments within the palace would be connected by eight staircases, and part of Opposite Office’s plans would involve a multi-story extension that would be placed on top of the structure.

Founder of the Munich-based company Benedikt Hartl, who also wrote an open letter to the Queen about the proposals, said: ‘For us, it is important that you live together with people, not next to each other.

‘The Affordable Palace should be a collective space for living, meeting people, cooking together, and drinking tea with the Royal Family – a democratic house.

‘All men are created equal – that’s why all rooms are the same size. A normal earner can no longer afford to live in many large cities.

‘Rent explodes and people live in precarious conditions. We live in a time of madness, a time when everything seems to be possible.

‘Why shouldn’t it then be possible to transform Buckingham Palace, a symbol of royal power and wealth, into social housing?’