Quote:
Originally Posted by Mappy
technically there is a mix of uses (retail, office, hotel, restaurant), but the purest meaning of mixed-use intends for it to apply to live/work structures. Eventually that will become more evident as the jargon gets clarified by planners putting mixed-use into practice in the future. Since nobody will be living in this building, I wouldn't consider it "mixed-use," but I also wouldn't take on the challenge of telling people not to call it that.
|
Don't want to descend into a semantics battle here, but mixed use pertains to a variety of uses within the main tower. In other words, the Willis Tower (nee Sears Tower) is considered an office building even though it has retail and an observation deck all open to the public. The main use in the tower is offices. The Hancock is considered mixed use because it has both office and residences in the tower. Even a building with office and hotel is considered mixed use. it doesn't matter that the other function isn't full time residences, it's another use other than offices. Hence the name, mixed use. Even if it were a residential building with a hotel component it would be considered mixed use.