Moderated by Van Stults, the Founding Partner and Managing Director at Orion Capital Management as well as the Co-Chair of the Office and Mixed-Use Council, the roundtable on 11th December with Gene Kohn – one of the world’s most prominent architects and the Founding Partner of Kohn Pedersen Fox (KPF) – took the attendees on an incredible journey through the evolution of mixed use buildings over time and around the globe. Essentially, it has proven not only their financial value (greater for the whole than for the sum of the individual parts) but also their unique contribution to shaping city skylines and changing citizens’ lives.

The essential idea behind mixed-use buildings is that they contain such a wide range of uses within them – from offices and homes, through shops and leisure facilities, all the way to schools and public transit stations – that their residents would not need to leave them for substantial lengths of time. However, due to practical and financial considerations, it is also the concept of mixed use areas – almost like small cities within cities – with a number of buildings in them and each of those containing 2 or 3 different uses that has been explored by architects and urban planners around the globe. Not only are such buildings or areas vibrant with activity at all times of the day and night – they often tend to become iconic landmarks and popular tourist destinations.

The earliest example of a mixed-use building that Gene referred to was the Trajan’s Market in Rome – which demonstrates that already in 110AD people recognised the benefits of having a variety of different uses in close proximity. On a much grander scale, the idea of mixed used buildings (in this case shops, offices and apartments) was picked up in the USA – from the John Hancock Centre in Chicago in 1969 to the Time Warner Centre in NYC in 2004. The Hudson Yards masterplan on Manhattan’s New West Side also emphasises mixing uses in one neighborhood. Built over the train tracks, by a brand new subway station on Line 7 and overlooking the river – when completed in 2018 it is to be home to 16 skyscrapers containing offices, retail, restaurants, cafes, markets, bars, a hotel, a cultural space, 5000 homes, a school for 750 pupils, underground parking and 14 acres of public open space.

More recently, there has been a substantial number of mixed-use skyscrapers designed and constructed in South East Asia. Those generally tend to require architects to think outside the box to either adjust the buildings to local culture and expectations or to satisfy client requirements. For instance, the concept of multi-level shopping has been elevated to new heights in Hong Kong where Hysan Place houses 17 storeys of retails. Even then, however, some of the basic rules of design and construction need to be complied with – such as placing retail on the lower floors of mixed-use buildings (below office and below residential & hotel uses which should have the smallest floors in order to avoid problems with natural light), or using concrete for residential & hotel sections as opposed to steel which is most suitable for offices. In addition, the key to success is a clear separation of uses (for instance separate elevators and lobbies for residents and office workers) in order to avoid management and security issues – even if such a solution is costly and makes a building less flexible.

Although all uses in a mixed-use building or neighbourhood might suffer during a major financial downturn, the idea is nevertheless attractive from the investment point of view due to the potential to diversify into different classes of the real estate product as part of one opportunity. The success of such projects has led many developers to give something back to the cities and their citizens as part of their schemes. Most notably, the Roppongi Tower in Tokyo attracted 43 million visitors in its first year of operation – drawn by the arts museum and observation gallery with stunning city views on the top floors of this 54 storey mixed use tower. The question then arises as to the extent it should be the developer’s obligation to provide some public amenity space or other addition to the quality of life in the city – and to what extent this should be the role of the municipal government, in particular where planning obligations (e.g. s106 contributions) are in place.

A question from the audience then focused the discussion on reasons behind the lack of such prominence of mixed-use buildings in Europe. Apart from some examples (e.g. The Shard; offices, retail and residential towers in Frankfurt, Germany) and in general outside of combinations of high-end residential with high-end hotels, planning restrictions along with the lack of sufficient critical mass to mix too many uses within one building have meant that mixed-use neighborhoods are the dominant urban form. This can be well illustrated by Argent’s regeneration at Kings Cross, essentially containing every single use class – including an urban pond!

When designing and creating such mixed-use buildings or neighborhoods – many of which will become icons attracting locals and visitors alike – the emphasis should always remain on functionality. The structures are supposed to survive and be used for decades (hence their design should be timeless and at least to some extent in line with their surroundings) as well as they are an investment (hence should aim to be deliverable on time and on budget, with the client brief for the development as well as the context and end users firmly in mind). While innovation in design is crucial and without it cities could be boring to look at (e.g. Empire State and Chrysler Buildings would not be as well-known as they are today without their uniquely shaped roofs and spires), “architects should play the role of architects, not sculptors”. Hence, some of the more unusual shapes recently proposed by architects for buildings around the world might be beautiful to look at – but will either suffer construction / structural problems, or disrupt existing city skylines, or lead to such a substantial loss of usable space that they will be no longer viable from the financial point of view.

Finally, when asked about how he has managed to establish KPF as a leading architectural business over 40 years ago and stay on top of the industry ever since, Gene referred to teamwork as a key factor. Collaboration on the individual projects KPF work on in offices in 41 countries and constant exchange of ideas have helped build loyalty and dedication – both of which then result in some most excellent, not just mixed use, buildings.

Many thanks to Gene for an inspiring presentation, to Van for helping direct the discussion and consolidate the lessons learnt, and last but not least to KPF for hosting the event.

Words by Aleksandra Zolyniak