Would you mind living in a mixed-use skyscraper?

[ikops]

Or does it have to be totally residential? Speaking for myself I prefer a mixed-use. Maybe some offices and some commercial functions. Such like a cinema and a bookshop. Maybe a coffeeshop (Costa, Starbucks or you name it) as well.

[Jan]

Typically what they call "mixed use" is just multiple use, or better: stacked use, so the different usages don't really interact with each other. Think of a 200 meter tall building with 50% offices and 50% apartments. In these cases it doesn't really matter because basically it's just a case of two or three towers on top of each other. For this, I don't care.

It becomes more interesting when a multiple use building shares amenities, such as a swimming pool or a fitness room.

I think a true mixed use building is for example a residential building that also offers a little bit of office space so residents can work "from home" in the same building without doing that on your own sofa, or offers one or two guest rooms for residents to rent for the night (like a hotel room) when they have people over. Also a little convenience store at the bottom of your building would be great for that.

[ikops]

Speaking about shared amenities. Sometimes I stay in a hotel where the hotelguests share the swimming pool with residential guests. The hotelrooms and apartments are on the first twelve floors, from the 13th floor and up it's residential. I am not sure I would like such a situation if I were to live there.

[aarhusforever]

I would have no problem living in a 100-300 meter tall building with 50/50% offices and apartments. However I would prefer them to be clearly separated...no hotelguests in the residential swimming pool

[Jan]

^ it's a cost sharing thing, really. To me it wouldn't matter if that bloke in the pool is a hotel guest or a resident if that would shave some $15 in my monthly service charges. Plus a hotel is better equipped at maintaining it and keeping the area clean.

Having said that, I rather have a small roof top whirlpool than a full size swimming pool somewhere near ground level.

[VelesHomais]

It would not matter enough for me to play any role. If the building is where I want to live, due to its location, cost and design, then whether it's mixed use or not would have absolutely no impact on my decision whether to rent/buy it or not.

[Suburbanist]

I have a relative who lived for several years in a condo-hotel building. Technically it was a hotel that also rent rooms for more permanent (>1 year) residents. There was an upside in that the standard of maintenance of the building was of a hotel, not a residential property. However, there were several drawbacks, such as hotel guests (mostly business travelers) complaining about children in the pool or teens in the gym, frequent clashes about which level of services should be provided and how they should be shared, garage allocation issues etc.

I'd rather not have either mixed nor multiple use buildings, it is better that each property caters to its own costumer base, to speak of.

[AltinD]

Originally Posted by ikops

Speaking about shared amenities. Sometimes I stay in a hotel where the hotelguests share the swimming pool with residential guests. The hotelrooms and apartments are on the first twelve floors, from the 13th floor and up it's residential. I am not sure I would like such a situation if I were to live there.

The apartments you stay on that building, are privately owned and leased back to the hotel operator

[AltinD]

I understand Suburbanist's concearn about sharing pool/gym facilities, and indeed it can bee a problem. Otherwise, entrances and lifts are separate on such towers.

[Jan]

^ having the infrastructure separated is actually a drawback from multiple-use buildings as ground floor space is hard to come by, and rather should be used for urban amenities.

[ikops]

Originally Posted by AltinD

The apartments you stay on that building, are privately owned and leased back to the hotel operator

You know too much of me.

[Eric Offereins]

Originally Posted by Jan

^ it's a cost sharing thing, really. To me it wouldn't matter if that bloke in the pool is a hotel guest or a resident if that would shave some $15 in my monthly service charges. Plus a hotel is better equipped at maintaining it and keeping the area clean.

Having said that, I rather have a small roof top whirlpool than a full size swimming pool somewhere near ground level.

I agree. One could also think about sharing parking spaces. Extra services provided by hotels are welcome, restaurants also.

[SydneyCity]

I would prefer to live in an apartment block that is somewhat mixed, in that it has say a 7/11 on the ground floor, purely for the convenience factor. As for living in a building which has apartments leased out as hotel suites, i'm not too sold on that. Noisy guests staying in the hotel suites would be a big concern for me.

[chornedsnorkack]

Originally Posted by Suburbanist

as hotel guests (mostly business travelers) complaining about children in the pool or teens in the gym,

Completely unreasonably... surely they could not have complained of childrens and teens staying in the hotel with their families (even if they disliked them), so they could not fairly complain of permanently resident children and teens either.

[Eric Offereins]

Originally Posted by SydneyCity

I would prefer to live in an apartment block that is somewhat mixed, in that it has say a 7/11 on the ground floor, purely for the convenience factor. As for living in a building which has apartments leased out as hotel suites, i'm not too sold on that. Noisy guests staying in the hotel suites would be a big concern for me.

That could be solved by putting these on separate floors and the use of separate elevators.

[Jan]

True, but then again, it woundn't be a mixed use building any more. The essence of mixed use is sharing infrastructure, space and amenities. Some of these combinations work, some don't. The value in mixed use is in being able to offer these amenities that would be too costly in case they wouldn't be shared.

I also agree with SydneyCity that having a 7/11 in, or very nearby the building is a big plus. Sometimes these neighbourhood facilities are being forgotten in inner city development, but from my experience having a fun neighbourhood pub nearby is more valuable then living on top of the local opera house.

[AsianDragons]

imagine living with office workers, so one day you wanted to take out your rubbish but your in your pyjamas then you go by a white collar worker then they all start staring at you, then you say what? "this is my home"???

[Ribarca]

Originally Posted by AsianDragons

imagine living with office workers, so one day you wanted to take out your rubbish but your in your pyjamas then you go by a white collar worker then they all start staring at you, then you say what? "this is my home"???

I guess there would be separate lifts for the different users.

[xzmattzx]

I'd love to live in a highrise with a popular bar downstairs. Going out for the night would be easy, and bringing someone up would also be quick.

[Jan]

^ yes you're getting it. Getting shitfaced and still end up in de right bed definitely is an upside quality!

Originally Posted by AsianDragons

imagine living with office workers, so one day you wanted to take out your rubbish but your in your pyjamas then you go by a white collar worker then they all start staring at you, then you say what? "this is my home"???

Elevators are very seldomly used to cater both residents and office workers. Keep in mind that stacked use is usually being developed to spread the risk of development of large projects, and not to benefit from shared amenities, even thought doing so would be a plus.

Also, good residential skyscrapers have garbage chutes.