You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Buildings
  • Article
  • Open Access

5 July 2022

Hierarchical Quantification of Utilization Rate and Related Indicators of Mixed-Use High-Rise Buildings

,
and
1
School of Architecture, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China
2
College of Architecture & the Built Environment, Thomas Jefferson University, 4201 Henry Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19144, USA
3
Architectural Design and Research Institute of SCUT, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Sustainable Vertical Urbanism

Abstract

Mixed-use high-rise buildings are vertical superpositions of various business types in the category of mixed-use development. It has become a highly intensive organizational form in the urban high-density environment. Under China’s “height limit” policy, the simple superposition of business types does not meet the government requirements for planning, construction, and management, and does not fully utilize the advantages of the mixed development mode. The single utilization rate index used in the past could not accurately describe such buildings’ usage value and spatial variation characteristics. In this study, a quantitative analysis of data from eight construction projects was carried out, and a utilization rate index system was established at three levels, namely, the typical floor utilization rate k1, business utilization rate k2, and building utilization rate k3. In terms of k1, the emphasis was placed on the design elements of the mixed-use development and the variation of relative indicators. In k2 and k3, it was found that the business type, floor area, and utilization rate were negatively correlated. In conclusion, by establishing a hierarchical utilization rate calculation method, the efficiency values and design characteristics of mixed-use high-rise (MUHR) buildings were explored, which provide references for the future design of such buildings.

1. Introduction

The mixed-use high-rise building (MUHR) is a design concept proposed under the compact city theory according to the development trends of high-rise buildings, the development mode of modern commercial real estate, and the mixed use of land [,] (The concept of “mixed use” was first proposed by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) in 1976 in the book Mixed-Use Development: New Ways of Land Use. “Mixed use” originally belonged to the category of urban design. With time, the concept itself has undergone changes, and the scope of application has become increasingly extensive). It was formally proposed at the 2020 “Sustainable Supertall Buildings” forum held by the World Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) in Guangzhou.
In 2020, the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MoHURD) and the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) of China jointly issued the “Notice on Further Strengthening the Management of Urban and Architectural Features”. In October 2021, the MoHURD and the Ministry of Emergency Management (MEM) jointly issued the “Notice on Strengthening the Planning and Construction Management of High-rise Buildings”. Both notices provided clear instructions on the planning and construction management of high-rise buildings and the control of urban features. They also established demonstration requirements for projects to be constructed. However, the relevant evidence and theories are currently scarce, and thus, it is very important to promote the concept of the rational construction of high-rise buildings, as well as research on the efficient use and development of such buildings.
Most of the super high-rise buildings in China were built in the pursuit of economic benefits and also to be recognized as iconic/famous buildings due to their height. However, there are limited studies on the utilization rate of those high-rise buildings. In MUHR buildings, the overall efficiency is usually used to reflect the utilization rate of the building, and the utilization rate has not been directly analyzed from the point of view of individual components to the whole, in combination with the business types, the combination modes, and the vertical space layout. This study proposes efficiency values at different levels and relates key indicators in MUHR buildings. The data will guide future building design and provide a great reference value for the understanding and decision making of MUHR buildings.

1.1. The Development of Mixed-Use High-Rise Buildings

Over the past two decades, there has been unprecedented growth of high-rise buildings worldwide. By the end of 2020, the total number of high-rise buildings in the world, of higher than 250 m in height, reached 510, representing an increase of 192% compared with the 23 high-rise buildings reported in 2010. In particular, the proportion of MUHR buildings has seen a steady increase, as shown in Figure 1. In fact, the Chinese government issued several notices regarding the height of newly constructed buildings in second- and third-tier cities. However, as one of the highly intensive organizational forms of urban cities, the mixed-use development model in China’s first-tier cities not only promotes the rational use of urban land, but also provides a more convenient and richer work and life experience for the high-density population. MUHR buildings have become an important carrier of urban life due to the aggregation of different businesses in a vertical space [,,].
Figure 1. Number of completed high-rise buildings higher than 250 m and Variation of the proportion of mixed-use buildings in high-rise buildings.

1.2. Business Types of Mixed-Use High-Rise Buildings

The concept of “mixed-use” in mixed-use super high-rise buildings originated in the pursuit of their mixed use. Initially, it was proposed by the United States, then a large number of examples and extensive construction experience were achieved in Europe and America, and some books were published summarizing the experience. Generally speaking, the research in the USA is relatively comprehensive and complete. In 1977, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) published the first professional book on mixed use, titled Mixed-Use Development: New Ways of Land Use [], in which the concept of mixed use was first formally introduced. In the same year, Dimitri Procos wrote an article titled Mixed Land Use: From Revival to Innovation []. The article explored the historical development of mixed use and investigated many aspects of socioeconomics, urban mega-configuration, and legal policy. In 2003, the Urban Land Institute published Mixed-Use Development Handbook [], a theoretical summary of mixed use in urban design. This book introduced the whole process of mixed-use development and presented a dozen completed cases in recent years in the introduction. Reclaiming The City-Mixed Use Development [], edited by a British scholar named Andy Coupland, presented the latest results of mixed-use development in the European region and the UK. Similarly, Building Research Association of New Zealand (BRANZ) published Mixed-Use Urban Planning and Development [], intended for transport and urban planners as well as developers and architects involved in the design and planning of mixed-use development projects in New Zealand, in particular in Christchurch. The research on mixed use in China is still in its early stage, mainly focusing on the introduction of foreign theories and practices and the study of individual elements, with less systematic research discussions. In the results of the literature search, more journal articles and master thesis literature at the planning level and urban level were apparent [,,,], but at the building level, only Research on Mixed-use Super High-rise Building Design on the Perspective of Synergy Effect [] proposed by Dr. Jianhe Luo was available. In response to the shortage of hybrid development models in the interdisciplinary research of super high-rise building development, design, and operation, Dr. Jianhe Luo conducted systematic research on the more complex vertical-oriented business combination model and presented the research results at the international conference of the Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH). Other research results have been proposed to a lesser extent.
MUHR buildings refer to the type of high-rise buildings that integrates multiple business types in the vertical dimension, and it is often used to indicate an individual building or the main tower in a building complex []. When the building height reaches a certain limit, the building is not simply a superimposition of typical floors. The spatial characteristics and supporting service spaces of different business types change with the building shape and height, showing vertical distribution characteristics. Therefore, according to different development modes, a combination of various business types (e.g., office, hotel, apartment, business, etc.) is used, forming a complex development model [,,,]. In relation to sharing infrastructure, most developers claim that operating a mixed-use building can save up 20% of the overall operating cost compared to a separate building venture [].
The main business types of MUHR buildings include commercial, office, hotel, and residential (apartment). Typical combinations of these business types include “office + hotel”, “office + residential”, “hotel + residential”, and “office + hotel + residential”. Because of the unique development model, the model has strong adaptability to the urban business environment, and there is a strong synergistic relationship between the main business types and the auxiliary business types, as detailed in Table 1 [,,,,].
Table 1. The degree of the synergy of different business types.

2. Indicators of the Utilization Rate of Mixed-Use High-Rise Buildings at Three Levels

2.1. Research Background

The main literature surveyed in this study includes the Council of Tall Building and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) [,,,] database (www.ctbuh.org, accessed on 29 October 2019), peer-reviewed-research, M.Sc. theses and Ph.D. dissertations, proceedings, fact sheets, architectural and structural magazines, photographs, and videos. Super high-rise building heights have been competing for years, leading to higher construction and operating costs as the height of super high-rise buildings increases. Among them, a very interesting and important phenomenon is that current super high-rise buildings have less space available on their typical floors than traditional super high-rise buildings [,,,]. Thus, the study of spatial efficiency has invited more attention. In order to maximize the return for investors, more researchers have focused on the input-output ratio of super high-rise buildings with space efficiency and started to systematically study the building space efficiency and return on investment [,,,,,]. For example, Sev and Özgen [] studied space efficiency mainly in the case of 10 office buildings in Turkey and many super high-rise buildings around the world. Mixed-function super high-rise buildings were first generated by Kim and Elnimeiri [], who studied the design parameters of this building type, such as function, lease span, floor-to-floor height, and other design elements. Su Jian [] systematically proposed strategies for designing the efficiency of typical floors in super high-rise buildings. The studies of these researchers clearly elaborated the factors related to space efficiency in super high-rise buildings. The following results were presented: (1) space efficiency is determined by the functional distribution of mixed-function super high-rise buildings; (2) the space efficiency of single-function buildings is generally higher than that of multi-purpose buildings; (3) the improvement of building structure technology greatly enhances the space efficiency of super high-rise buildings.
This research paper mentioned decision elements that affect the space efficiency of super high-rise buildings, which include (1) the core layout at the typical floor [,,,], (2) structural forms and structural sizes [,,,,,], (3) the choice of building sustainable materials for the building structure [,,,,,,,], (4) the space rentable on the typical floor of the building [,,,,,], (5) factors such as depth, floor height, vertical traffic, etc., in building floors [,,,], and (6) factors such as HVAC, elevators, water distribution, fire safety, etc [,,,].
Through the study of existing literature and combined with the research objective of this paper, the shortcomings of existing research results are as follows.
(1)
In previous studies, one typical floor was usually used as a sample for a building interval, and this calculation is only applicable to cases with low building heights. However, when the building height reaches 250 m or more, each typical floor will produce changes. In this case, using the previous calculation method may produce a large error.
(2)
Although previous studies considered factors such as building lease span, floor-to-floor height, elevators, etc., which can affect the space efficiency of buildings, these factors can also vary in mixed-use super high-rise buildings due to the different types of businesses and different needs. These factors will affect the vertical layout, space design, and space efficiency of the business.
(3)
Previous studies usually used one dataset to represent the efficiency value of a building. However, for mixed-use super high-rise buildings, this approach ignores the relationship between changes in building height and business type, and spatial efficiency. At the same time, it also ignores the impact on spatial efficiency that occurs with increasing building height as the building’s load and vertical traffic demand decrease. These are also the reasons for the study presented in this paper.

2.2. Research Purpose

In China, a building with a building height of 100 m is called a super high-rise building, and a super high-rise building with a building height of 100 to 250 m usually contains only one type of business. Therefore, the design of the plan function, the choice of building technology, and the needs of the users are unified, and there is no major conflicts in terms of use. For the designers, they only need to focus on the design method of one type of business, and only need to meet the requirements of the business itself in the study of space efficiency. Therefore, it is comparably less difficult to design, and the efficiency index is individual and simple to calculate. However, super high-rise buildings over 250 m, as landmarks of the city they are in, are often formed by the superposition of multiple business forms and their supporting functions in order to meet the city’s commercial needs and increase the economic value. The vertical mode of multiple businesses requires designers to pay attention to the relationship between the space requirements of different businesses and the reasonable organization of the businesses, so as to avoid the wastage of space due to unreasonable design and even a failure to meet the needs of users.
For a single business type building, a set of data is sufficient to describe the overall utilization rate of the building. However, for super high-rise buildings with mixed business modes and a scale of 200,000 m2 or more, this calculation method is not suitable and the error is larger. The utilization rate of mixed-use super high-rise buildings is not only influenced by the design elements of the industry itself but also by the interaction between the industries. Therefore, the utilization rate of mixed-use super high-rise buildings is influenced by many factors, and it will be variable and unpredictable with the change in the business mode and increase in the number of floors.
By summarizing the references and literature and combining them with the research object of this paper, it can be concluded that the single data value cannot intuitively reflect the dynamic change rule and real usage rate of mixed-use super high-rise buildings, and the reference value for designers is relatively low. Therefore, this paper proposes a multi-level utilization rate calculation method based on the international calculation method and China’s calculation standard and uses the unified measurement standard to quantify the typical floor area index, the business area index, and the tower area index at different levels. This is useful to explore the regularity of the utilization rate of mixed-use supertall buildings more clearly and the range of values of important indicators, to provide valuable reference data for designers and decision makers, and to help foreign architects to better understand the standards of China regarding the calculation of core, floor area, and other indicators when they participate in China’s supertall building projects, and to contribute to the exchange and development of the industry.

2.3. Three-Level Indicators

In order to demonstrate the difference between MUHR buildings and single-use buildings, the calculation method of the architectural utilization rate was introduced. That is [,,,]:
Utilization Rate (k) = Utilization Area/Building Area × 100%
Based on the utilization rate, as well as the characteristics of the vertical superposition of business types, research indicators at three levels were proposed in this study, namely, the typical floor, business, and building, as shown in Figure 2, which helps to explore the efficiency value of MUHR buildings and its change.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the three research indicator levels (i.e., typical floor, business, and building).
(1)
The typical floor utilization rate (k1) refers to the efficiency value of each floor from the building’s ground floor to the top floor. It is calculated based on the basic information of the typical floor of each business type.
k1 = (c + b)/f
where f is the typical floor area (f = a + b + c), a is the core area of the typical floor, b is the typical floor traffic area, and c is the typical floor rentable area.
(2)
The business utilization rate (k2) refers to the overall efficiency value of each business and its supporting function. The calculation of the business utilization rate is based on the data of the typical floor utilization rate for a certain business type.
k2 = (C + B)/F
F = ∑ fi (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n, B = ∑ bi (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n), C = ∑ ci (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n)
where F is the sum of the area of each typical floor of a certain business type, B is the sum of the traffic area of each typical floor of a certain business type, C is the sum of the rentable area of each typical floor of a certain business type, and n is the number of floors of the building.
(3)
The building utilization rate (k3) refers to the overall efficiency value of all floors of the building. It is a study of the utilization rate of the entire building (i.e., superimposition of the typical floor, equipment floor, refuge floor, etc.).
k3 = [S(c) + S(b)]/S(f)
S(f) = ∑ fi (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n), S(b) = ∑ bi (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n), S(c) = ∑ ci (i = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n)
where S(f) is the sum of the area of each floor of the building, S(b) is the sum of the traffic area of each floor of the building, and S(c) is the sum of the rentable area of each floor of the building.

2.4. Definition and Calculation of Key Indicators

In the calculation of the utilization rate, we need to define the four basic concepts of typical floor area, core area, traffic space area and rentable area, so as to ensure the uniformity of definition and measurement standards. Meanwhile, the content of relevant technical elements in the core needs to be described, and the content of design elements within the core needs to be outlined. However, the technical elements are not the key point of this paper. This part has strong professionalism and technicality. The focus of this study is to explore the characteristics of the utilization rate of mixed-use high-rise buildings. There already exists extensive research on equipment rooms and tube wells of different business types. If the research detailed deviates from the framework of the article, it could skew the research focus. This paper only provides total data indicators. However, the relevant area data and information were measured and summarized, and will continue to be discussed in future research.
(1)
The typical floor area refers to the horizontal projection area enclosed by the outer wall and the outer edge of the column or the axis of adjacent walls, as shown in Figure 3. When the building is connected to a podium, the podium typical floor area is the projected area of the ground floor of the building. This definition is also referred to as the Gross Area (GSF), which includes exterior wall thickness, and all vertical penetrations (mechanical/electrical, plumbing, elevator shafts, stairwells, etc.), as well as basements, garages, and penthouses. It excludes parking lots and loading docks outside the building line.
Figure 3. Legend of typical floor area.
(2)
The traffic space area of typical floors refers to the space between the rentable space and the outer edge of the core, as shown in Figure 4. If the rentable space and traffic space are not divided in the CAD drawing of the office floor, the traffic space shall be calculated with a width of 1.8 m. China’s standard (Code for Fire Protection Design of Building) clearly stipulates the setting of the traffic space area and does not allow the area outside the core to be used as a rentable area. (Note: Lobbies and hotel facilities are included in the traffic space). This definition is also known as the Circulation Area (Primary and secondary), and the Circulation Area can be broken into the following two types: primary and secondary. Primary circulation is the main route connecting the building core and common spaces, such as elevator lobbies, exit stairs, and core toilets. Secondary circulation refers to the aisles between individual and support spaces. According to the Chinese standard, the traffic space area and primary circulation contain the same content.
Figure 4. Legend of Traffic Space Area.
(3)
The core area of the typical floors refers to the area enclosed by the outer boundary of the core structure, as shown in Figure 5. The core refers to the central part of a building, which consists of elevator shafts, stairs, ventilation shafts, cable shafts, public restrooms, and some equipment rooms. It forms a frame-tube structure with peripheral frames and is made of reinforced concrete. In all the studied buildings, the central tube design was adopted.
Figure 5. Legend of core area.
The size of the building core, which contains elevators, stairs, washrooms, and mechanical and service facilities, is a basic factor in determining the ratio of rentable space. Ideally, it should be the smallest possible size while still effectively accommodating the necessary functions. By rearranging the function components, core elements and structural system, the space efficiency can be increased. If the building acquires some areas of additional rentable space through the rearrangement of the core elements, the economic benefits over the potential building life can be considerable.
Here, some points are added.
➀ The space available for the rent and sale of the core is not included in the core area. When part of the space in the core can be used as a rentable area, this part of the space belongs to the rentable area.
➁ Core is a broad definition. It is a comprehensive concept based on the building structure and contains technical equipment, such as public restrooms, fire protection, electromechanical aspects, air conditioning, elevators, and auxiliary spaces. This explains two main cases. One is in the plan design. For example, when the auxiliary space such as the bathroom is located outside the core structure or even out of it, these auxiliary spaces are still calculated within the core. In China’s area calculation, this part belongs to the public area (public use space) and is not included in the rentable area, as shown in Figure 6a. The other is arranged outside the core, even between the perimeter columns and the curtain wall, due to the technical needs of the equipment tube wells. This part is also considered to be part of the core area, as shown in Figure 6b. This definition allows the “core” to include all technical rooms, equipment tube wells, and ancillary services, and it can be applied to all cases to facilitate comparisons between cases.
Figure 6. Calculation legend of core area. (a) Public space is located outside the core structure, (b) Equipment tube wells arranged outside the core.
➂ In the calculation of the equipment room and equipment tube well area, it is necessary to identify which kind of business is served by these technical facilities. Especially in the area measurement of the equipment floor, it is necessary to know the purpose of the equipment room. When equipment such as fire-fighting pools and fire-fighting systems are shared by multiple businesses, the area of this part is calculated separately for each business by the ratio of the business area.
(4)
The rentable area refers to the building area on each floor where services are provided or rented to customers, as shown in Figure 7. (Note: Areas for rent and sale in the core and hotel facilities are all included in the rentable space). In the definition of this concept, there are some differences between China and other countries. Usually, in the international, e.g., US, calculation of the utilization rate (see Table 2 for the definition of area indicators in China and the USA), the utilization rate is the ratio of net floor area (NFA) to gross floor area (GFA) [,,,]. Net Area includes workspaces (office and workstations), dedicated support (conference rooms, supply rooms, etc.), shared support (shared copier rooms, break rooms, etc.), and special mission-critical support spaces (evidence rooms, laboratories, courtrooms, etc.). However, from the definition described, the rentable area in China is equivalent to the combination of both the Net Area and Secondary circulation area. This paper mainly focused on Chinese projects, and the target audience is domestic and foreign architects participating in Chinese architectural design. Therefore, in order to better suit the sales and operation mode of Chinese super high-rise buildings, the rentable area was measured and calculated according to Chinese standards in this paper.
Figure 7. Legend of Rentable Area.
Table 2. Definition of area indicators in China and the USA.
(5)
Definition and measurement of other important indicators, as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Name of technical indicators and Technical element definition.
In this study, a long-term evaluation of eight MUHR buildings was carried out (higher than 250 m). For the definition of building height in this study, the efficiency of the building area was explored. Thus, the building height was defined as the height from the ground level of the first floor of the MUHR buildings, or the ground level of the public entrance, to the highest space that people (users, workers, and maintenance personnel) can reach. This definition is different from the fire height defined in the “Code for Fire Protection of Building Design” (GB50016-2014) or the building’s appearance heigh. Different business combination modes were analyzed, as detailed in Table 4. By standardizing the measurement of the utilization rate and other indicators, the relative parameters according to the blueprint were measured, and on-site surveys and data verification on completed construction projects were performed, as shown in Figure 8.
Table 4. Building height and business combination mode of the eight high-rise buildings.
Figure 8. The eight MUHR buildings investigated in this study. (a) Dongguan International; (b) Guangzhou Fuli Yingkai; (c) Guangxi Jiuzhou; (d) Guiyang World Trade Center; (e) Guiyang International Financial Center; (f) Guangzhou International Financial Center; (g) Kingkey 100 Building; (h) Guangzhou Chow Tai Fook Financial Center.

4. Conclusions and Limitations

4.1. Conclusions

In the present study, a multi-dimensional, hierarchical quantification system on the utilization rate of MUHR buildings was established, and the variation of the utilization rate of MUHR buildings and related indicators were analyzed from three levels, as well as the characteristics of MUHR buildings. This method added to the tools available to study the utilization rate of MUHR buildings.
(1)
First of all, the data of typical floor area, core area, and other indicators show that the typical floor-related indicators of mixed-use supertall buildings are in a dynamic process of change. This is not only influenced by the change of building form but also by a variety of internal factors, including structural load, vertical traffic demand, and change in business function. The findings of the study, such as the range of values and the variation pattern of the indexes, provide a valuable reference for designers of mixed-use supertall buildings for the first time and help them to better understand this type of building and improve the utilization rate of the building through rational design. Consider a 5000 sq ft of rentable space, representing a 1 percent increase in a 500,000 sq ft building. At a lease cost of $20 per sq ft, over the 20 years life, the additional income to the building owner would be $2,000,000 [].
Secondly, after analyzing the quantitative data of vertical traffic, it was found that the actual situation of mixed-use supertall buildings can be somewhat different from the commonly used design guidelines. For example, through the calculation of actual cases, it was found from the case that the ratio of floor area to the number of passenger elevators in the office business was greater than the number of elevators, and the main technical parameters in the Design code for office building, which is often referred to by designers were analyzed. There are two main reasons for this. On the one hand, the standards and codes such as “Design code for office building” are only suited to the type of office business and do not consider the actual impacts of building height and building technology. On the other hand, the vertical traffic in super high-rise buildings is usually systematically calculated and designed by professionals, including the selection of double car elevators, the elevator speed, integration with the transition level, etc. This is the result of a comprehensive consideration and finally allows for the elevator system to meet the needs of the users. If the design is only designed according to the standard of Design code for office building in the scheme design stage, it will undoubtedly add more elevator tube shafts. This conclusion not only reflects the lack of relevant design standards in China but also points out the design key points and difficulties of mixed-use supertall buildings. It reminds designers to pay more attention to the complexity brought by the height and mixed mode of mixed-use supertall buildings, and all these data indicators bring accurate and efficient reference data to the building design process.
Finally, through the horizontal comparison of the utilization rate k1 of the standard floor and related indexes in eight cases, it can be clearly seen that the indexes of the area of the standard floor, the utilization rate k1, and the depth of the building have the same change law in different cases (except Guangxi Jiuzhou International Building). At the same time, after analyzing the vertical combination pattern of the business mode of Guangxi Jiuzhou International Building, it became clear that the unreasonable vertical layout of business modes greatly influences the usage rate. After consulting with the person in charge of the project, we learned that the reason this is the rash decision of the developer in the design of this scheme. The authors also hope that the findings of this study can provide better guidance for decision makers.
(2)
The business utilization rate k2 and tower utilization rate k3 were calculated from the basic data of the typical floor utilization rate k1 study. Firstly, as mentioned above, the statistics of different cases, business types, tower utilization rates, and related data indicators can provide a high-value reference basis for designers who first encounter mixed-use super tall buildings. Secondly, after the k2 calculation and data analysis of the utilization rate of office business, it was found that there is an obvious negative correlation between the utilization rate of a business and the floor area of a business. The larger the total area of the office business, the higher the demand for the vertical transportation system, structural system, pipe well, supporting service space, and so on. Under the demand of a high-quality space depth of office business, the utilization rate of the office business will always decrease. Using the tower utilization rate k3, it was found that the number of equipment rooms and refuge floors in higher-tiered projects is higher, and the usable area of the business space is constantly compressed. The balance between these supporting areas is the complexity of mixed-use super high-rise buildings, which is also a difficult design point. How to improve the utilization rate through good coordination in terms of building and structure, equipment, and the reasonable arrangement of vertical traffic is an urgent issue to be solved in future research. In addition, the lowest point value appears in Figure 29. Does it mean that there exists a minimum value of floor area and utilization rate k3? This is a very valuable study. However, at present, due to the limited research sample, it is not possible to fully present this conclusion, and follow-up studies are required to confirm this conclusion.
(3)
The research method and findings of this paper on stratified quantification effectively verify that the existing calculation method of the utilization rate is not applicable to the study of the utilization rate of mixed-use supertall buildings, and reflect the advantages and purposefulness of this method. Although the statistical data take longer to obtain and the workload is larger, the precise index of stratified data can better reflect the characteristics and rules of mixed-use super high-rise buildings and proposes a new research perspective for this building type. It is expected that as my team and I accumulate practical projects and incorporate more excellent cases, we will be able to increase the scientific validity of the research findings and present clearer data-based conclusions so as to promote the sustainability of mixed-use supertall buildings.
In recent years, some construction projects have deviated from the actual demand, and rather have pursued building height or peculiar shapes, resulting in high construction costs and energy consumption. This is the reason why the study began from the perspective of the building utilization rate. The conclusion of the study clearly suggests that it is misguided to pursue building height. In the development of mixed-occupation super high-rise buildings, the party, the government, and the architect should seek a reasonable scale of business and the vertical combination of business according to the market demand, so as to achieve a highly efficient development mode. In the design and construction of MUHR buildings, modern development concepts need to be implemented, and status or aesthetic value should not be pursued alone. Instead, the process should be scientific, intensive, efficient, and humanized, pursuing spatial quality in the design, and improving the utilization rate of typical floors of different business types through cooperation between the building, structures, and equipment, and through a reasonable arrangement of vertical traffic, thereby improving the overall quality of MUHR buildings.

4.2. Limitations

This study has potential limitations, as follows:
(1)
In this study, the emphasis was on MUHR buildings with a height of over 250 m. Such buildings are usually important projects for the city and design institutes, and the relevant data are protected. The data of the eight buildings used in this study were those from projects the authors have been involved in recent years. Due to the long construction period of mixed-use super high-rise buildings and the limited number of studies, the sample size was small, and a reference range for the efficiency indicators could not be provided.
(2)
China’s high-rise building regulations have changed in recent years. The cases in this study implemented different fire codes during their design phase. The main regulations include “Code for Fire Protection Design of High-Rise Civil Buildings” and “Code for Fire Protection Design of Buildings”. Currently, the standard fire protection code in China is the “Code for Fire Protection Design of Buildings” (GB50016-2014), which was implemented on 1 May 2015, and the “Code for Fire Protection Design of High-Rise Civil Buildings” (GB50045-95) was terminated at the same time. Changes in fire regulations can lead to certain fluctuations in some research indicators.
(3)
MUHR buildings are key urban development projects, and each city has different land and real estate policies and regulations, which will influence the indicators such as development intensity, zone height, and building height.
These elements have a great influence on the design of super-tall buildings, thus also limiting case selection. To avoid these effects, the cases in this study were designed using the same code. Meanwhile, the geographical locations of these projects were not areas such as seismic zones. Therefore, the cases studied in this paper have certain generality, which greatly enhances the comparability of the study data across the studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.L. and Y.X.; methodology, J.L.; software, Y.X.; validation, P.D.; formal analysis, Y.X.; investigation, J.L. and Y.X.; resources, J.L. and P.D.; data curation, Y.X.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.X.; writing—review and editing, Y.X. and J.L.; visualization, Y.X.; supervision, J.L. and P.D.; project administration, J.L. and P.D.; funding acquisition, J.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The work was fully supported by research fund project of “Research on Design Strategy of Mixed-Use High-Rise Buildings” (Project No. x2jzD8185690).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors/We thank Architectural Design and Research Institute of SCUT and CTBUH for providing project drawings and data. All individuals included in this section have consented to the acknowledgement.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Witherspoon, R.E.; Abbett, J.P.; Gladstone, R.M. Mixed-Use Development: New Ways of Land Use; Amer Inst Planners: Washington, DC, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  2. ULI. Mixed-Use Development: New Ways of Land Use, 2nd ed.; Urban Land Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
  3. Luo, J.H.; Qin, S.Y.; Ding, Y.; Xie, Y.C. Research on the Development of Mixed-use Super High-rise Building. South Archit. 2019, 3, 89–95. [Google Scholar]
  4. Luo, J.H. Research on Mixed-use Super High-rise Building Design on the Perspective of Synergy Effect. Ph.D. Thesis, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  5. Xu, S.Y.; Chen, Z.G. Interpretation and Classification of the Concept of Mixed-use Development. Planner 2012, 28, 105–109. [Google Scholar]
  6. Procos, D. Mixed Land Use: From Revival to Innovation. Ecol. Law Q. 1977, 6, 691. [Google Scholar]
  7. Schwanke, D.; Al, E. Mixed-Use Development Handbook; Urban Land Inst: Washington, DC, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  8. Coupland, A. Reclaiming the City: Mixed Use Development; Spon Press: Routledge, London, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kusumastuti, D.; Nicholson, A.J. Mixed-Use Urban Planning and Development; BRANZ Study Report 481; BRANZ Ltd.: Judgeford, New Zealand, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhang, D.H.; Zhou, H.L. Urban Complex Development in the Thought of Mixing the Land Use. Huazhong Archit. 2012, 30, 30–32. [Google Scholar]
  11. Wang, Z.D. Research on the Synergistic Effect of Urban Complex—Theory, Case, Strategy, and Trend; Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ming, H.B.; Adrian, H.; Yu, Q.K. Functional Zone and Mixed Development. Foreign City Plan. 1989, 2, 24–26. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mei, H.Y.; Liang, J. Tall Buildings and Cities; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  14. Hsu, J. A Mixed-Use Development with a Super Frame Structure. Master’s Thesis, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  15. Lee, J. Quality of Life and Semipublic Spaces in High-Rise Mixed-Use Housing Complexes in South Korea. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng. 2011, 10, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Du, J. Research on the Business Combination of Real Estate Development Projects in China’s Large and Medium Cities. Master’s Thesis, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dong, J.S. Commercial Real Estate Planning and Investment Operation; The Commercial Press: Beijing, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Wang, Z.; Wang, Y. Research on Vertical Space System of Mixed-Use Complex. Int. J. High-Rise Build. 2015, 4, 153–160. [Google Scholar]
  19. Wang, Z.D.; She, Y. Research on Value of Synergy in Urban Building Complex under Dense Habitat. Urban. Archit. 2013, 7, 15–19. [Google Scholar]
  20. Wang, Z.D.; Wang, Y.P. A Study on the Structure of Vertical Space in Urban Complexes Based on Synergy Theory. Archit. J. 2015, 2, 35–38. [Google Scholar]
  21. Parakh, J.; Gabrl, J.; Safarik, D. The Space Between: Urban Places, Public Spaces & Tall Buildings: An Output of the CTBUH Habitat/Urban Design Committee; Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat: Chicago, IL, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  22. Oldfield, P.; Trabucco, D.; Wood, A. Roadmap on the Future Research Needs of Tall Buildings; Lin, F.H., Translator; Tongji University Press: Shanghai, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  23. Ali, M.M.; Armstrong, P.J. Architecture of Tall Buildings, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat Committee 30; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kim, H.; Elnimeiri, M. Space efficiency in multi-use tall building. In Tall Buildings in Historical Cities—Culture and Technology for Sustainable Cities; CTBUH: Chicago, IL, USA, 2004; pp. 748–755. [Google Scholar]
  25. Jiang, L.T. Research on Typical Floor Design of Multifunctional High-Rise Buildings. Master’s Thesis, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  26. Su, J. Design Strategy of the Typical Floors of Super High-Rise Buildings. Master’s Thesis, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  27. Sev, A.; Zgen, A. Space Efficiency in High Rise Office Buildings. Middle East Tech. Univ. J. Fac. Archit. 2009, 26, 69–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hüseyin, E.I. Space Efficiency in Contemporary Supertall Office Buildings. J. Archit. Eng. 2021, 27, 04021024. [Google Scholar]
  29. Kim, H.I. Space efficiency in Mixed-Use High-Rise Building. Ph.D. Thesis, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  30. Nam, H.J.; Shim, J.H. An Analysis of the Change in Space Efficiency based on Various Tall Building Corner Shapes and Lease Spans. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Plan. Des. 2016, 32, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Trabucco, D. An analysis of the relationship between service cores and the embodied/running energy of tall buildings. Struct. Des. Tall Special Build. 2008, 17, 941–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wan, L.P. Core Design of Super High-Rise Buildings. Master’s Thesis, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ilgın, H.E. Potentials and Limitations of Supertall Building Structural Systems: Guiding for Architects. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Architecture, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ilgın, H.E.; Ay, B.O.; Gunel, M.H. A study on main architectural and structural design considerations of contemporary supertall buildings. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2020, 63, 212–224. [Google Scholar]
  35. Al-Kodmany, K.; Ali, M.M. An overview of structural and aesthetic developments in tall buildings using exterior bracing and diagrid systems. Int. J. High-Rise Build. 2016, 5, 271–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Ali, M.M.; Moon, K.S. Structural developments in tall buildings: Current trends and future prospects. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2007, 50, 205–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zils, J.; Viis, J. An Introduction to High Rise Design. Struct. Mag. 2003, 11, 12–16. [Google Scholar]
  38. Su, M.H. New Development of Supertall Building Structural System. Urban. Archit. 2013, 2, 66–67. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ko, D.; Elnimeiri, M.; Clark, R.J. Assessment and prediction of daylight performance in high-rise office buildings. Struct. Des. Tall Special Build. 2008, 17, 953–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Al-Kodmany, K.; Mir, A. The Future of the City: Tall Buildings and Urban Design; WIT Press: Southampton, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  41. Huang, S. A study of outdoor interactional spaces in high-rise housing. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 78, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Al-Kodmany, K. Eco-Towers: Sustainable Cities in the Sky; WIT Press: Southampton, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  43. Al-Kodmany, K. The sustainability of tall building developments: A conceptual framework. Buildings 2018, 8, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Al-Kodmany, K. New Suburbanism: Sustainable Tall Building Development; Routledge: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  45. Jia, C.H. Thinking about Sustainable Design of Super High-rise Building. Archit. Tech. 2013, 05, 144–149. [Google Scholar]
  46. Al-Kodmany, K. Sustainability and the 21st Century Vertical City: A Review of Design Approaches of Tall Buildings. Buildings 2018, 8, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Young Choi, A.; Choa, S.H.; Kim, J.T. Energy consumption characteristics of high-rise apartment buildings according to building shape and mixed-use development. Energy Build. 2012, 46, 123–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ye, Y.F.; Sun, X.Q.; Yang, X.D. Stair Layout Optimization for Super High-Rise Building. Fire Sci. Technol. 2013, 32, 268–270. [Google Scholar]
  49. Lundberg, H. Space Efficiency of Technical Installations in Tall Office Buildings. Master’s Thesis, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  50. Zheng, L.H. Discussion on Double-Deck Elevators and Double-deck Elevator. Urban. Archit. 2017, 8, 392–393. [Google Scholar]
  51. Yang, Z.S. Configuration Mode and Space of Vertical Passenger Elevators in Super High-Rise Buildings. Master’s Thesis, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.