THE WASHINGTON POST: Renovated Buckingham Palace will be a very royal office building

The world’s most famous palace is becoming one of Britain’s fanciest office buildings.

Buckingham Palace has 775 rooms, 78 bathrooms, priceless art and gilded ceilings and one notable drawback: King Charles III doesn’t want to live there.

For years, palace officials suggested that Charles and Camilla’s residence at nearby Clarence House was temporary until a renovation project at a cost of 369 million pounds - roughly $711 million - is completed. They have now acknowledged it’s permanent.

“The King and Queen have decided not to adopt Buckingham Palace as a personal residence and will instead continue to use Clarence House as their London home,” James Chalmers, whose real-life title is keeper of the privy purse, recently told reporters.

In other words, there are no plans to move the royal slippers to Buckingham Palace.

Buried in the monarchy’s annual finance report was an announcement that dominated the British tabloids. “Palace not fit for a king,” the Daily Express declared. A snap poll in the Sun asked readers: “Is King right to quit Buckingham Palace? VOTE NOW.”

Palace officials said Charles’s decision was made in part to allow greater public access to Buckingham Palace. But the decision marks a sharp break with nearly two centuries of tradition.

Since Queen Victoria made Buckingham Palace her official residence in 1837, every British sovereign has lived there. Charles, who was born at the palace, is the first monarch to opt out.

The King is not the only senior British figure to reconsider the old British tradition of “living above the shop,” as Margaret Thatcher memorably called it.

Andy Burnham has said that if he becomes the next British prime minister, as is widely expected later this month, he will split his work week between London’s Downing Street and Manchester, where he served as mayor.

In each case, the men are treating Britain’s most famous addresses more as places of work than home.

Officials insist Buckingham Palace will remain the headquarters of the monarchy and will still host big ceremonial moments, from balcony appearances to state banquets.

Hundreds of people still work at Buckingham Palace, including Charles. During the last financial year, it hosted 827 official events attended by almost 97,000 guests, according to recently published annual accounts.

Foreign leaders are welcomed there. Honours are bestowed there. Garden parties, where men in top hats and tails mingle with women in elaborate headpieces, fill the lawns.

The palace stressed none of this would change.

“The Palace will continue in every traditional way to be the beating heart of the monarchy, just not its resting head,” a spokesman for Buckingham Palace said, speaking on the conditional of anonymity in accordance with royal custom. “It will be a buzzing hive of activity in every other way.”

The distinction between palace as home, and palace as workplace, was underscored last week when Prince Harry’s team briefed that he would be staying at Buckingham Palace during a visit to London.

Minutes later, palace officials effectively sent a correction to a breaking news alert when they clarified that he would not be staying there. They said Harry had initially declined an offer of accommodation and then sought to accept it too late for the necessary staffing and hospitality arrangements to be put in place.

It was less “no room at the inn” than “sorry, reservations closed.” In a private home, someone might simply make up a spare bed. Buckingham Palace, by contrast, requires intricate planning and staff procedures.

The palace might never be a royal residence again. Prince William has also gravitated away from London’s royal palaces, making Forest Lodge in Windsor Great Park the family’s primary residence. William reportedly has described it as his family’s “forever home.”

There may be another, simple reason for Charles’s decision: Generations of royals have never seemed to like living at Buckingham Palace.

Set in the middle of London and surrounded by tourists, the building does not offer much privacy. Even the garden, once secluded, is now overlooked by tall buildings.

Most weekends, Queen Elizabeth II escaped to Windsor Castle, about 40km west of London, which gave her space for activities such as walking her dogs and riding her horses, which she did into her 90s.

Charles, too, has long preferred the seclusion of Highgrove, his private country residence in Gloucestershire. Indeed, it was there - not Buckingham Palace - that he hosted Harry, Meghan and their children, Archie and Lilibet, during their UK visit.

In Romania, Charles bought a house in the centre of a Saxon village and helped turn it into a showcase for traditional architecture. But when it came to overnight accommodation, he opted for a far more secluded farmhouse at the end of a three-mile dirt road, where the nearest neighbours are more likely to be bears than sightseers.

Historians said that Queen Elizabeth II never wanted to move into Buckingham Palace when she became queen and that, like Charles, she would have preferred to stay in Clarence House, which is a fraction of the size.

Clarence House, a white stucco mansion, has five bedrooms; Buckingham Palace, by contrast, is 15 times the size of the White House. But Queen Elizabeth II was in her 20s at the time, and Winston Churchill insisted that she move in.

Dickie Arbiter, a former press secretary to Queen Elizabeth II, told The Washington Post that the palace doesn’t have a homey feel.

“It’s enormous,” Arbiter said. “At nighttime it’s quite eerie. It feels more like a hotel.”

By the time Charles was crowned king, he was in his 70s and he and Camilla had spent two decades making Clarence House their home.

Officials say Charles is in and out of the Buckingham Palace all the time and note that it’s just a five-minute walk away.

At the time of Charles’s coronation, palace officials cited the renovations to explain why the monarch wasn’t moving into the palace, telling The Post: “It remains the expectation they will do so when the work is complete.”

Officials have yet to disclose how the palace will increase public access once renovations are finished in March 2027 - whether East Wing tours will be expanded, for instance, or picnics on the lawn will make a comeback.

Tourists mingling outside of Buckingham Palace on a recent weekend had ideas of their own.

Sheree Urquhart, 38, who works in administration, suggested it could function more as a museum or art gallery or a venue for opera. “Airbnb would be cool,” Ms Urquhart said, before adding, “but I don’t think I earn enough for that.”

Nairne Duncan, 19, a cafe worker, and her friend Alisa Wishart, 19, a university student, were even more ambitious. They envisioned an experience where visitors could try on clothes and jewels, enjoy afternoon tea and then finish the day with a Harry Styles concert.

Mr Chalmers, the palace official, said that the royals will still have private rooms they can retreat to during the day, but stressed that “in all other ways the Palace will continue to be both the ceremonial and operational centre of royal life.”

But after nearly 190 years of Buckingham Palace as a royal residence, Charles has decided he doesn’t want to work from home.