The Mercer: Condominium High-Rise At 3388 Sage Rd.

[Guest KOKON Steel]

Anyone seen that nasty yellow skinny building near Richmond and the loop 610? That thing is way too skinny. Typically the buildings height shouldn't be more than 6 times the length of its base. I believe that building has about a 10:1 ratio.

What do you guys think the over/under is on how many days before that building falls to the ground due to inadequate structure?

I say about.....650 days... a little less than 2 years from the building's date of substantial completion. Well, we'll say from the date the owner received his/her Certificate of Occupancy.

Thoughts? Comments?? Compliments???

LATER,

The big KOK-on Steeeeeeeeel, baby!

[gwilson]

Just NOW got the Cert? I could have sworn the building has had residents for over a year.

[kzseattle]

Anyone seen that nasty yellow skinny building near Richmond and the loop 610?  That thing is way too skinny.  Typically the buildings height shouldn't be more than 6 times the length of its base.  I believe that building has about a 10:1 ratio. 

What do you guys think the over/under is on how many days before that building falls to the ground due to inadequate structure?

I say about.....650 days... a little less than 2 years from the building's date of substantial completion.  Well, we'll say from the date the owner received his/her Certificate of Occupancy.

Thoughts?  Comments??  Compliments???

LATER,

The big KOK-on Steeeeeeeeel, baby!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I assume you are talking about Mercer Tower (or is Mark II ? ). It is too ugly for anyone NOT to notice it. And, yes, it has been bashed several times on this forum.

[The Great Hizzy!]

The simple solution would've been to take Mercer I and Mercer II and put them back to back. This way, the facades of both buildings would be facing outward, hiding the hideousness of its rear.

As it stands, the two buildings will essentially look like a single building that was dissected, as if a lesson to designers on how not to do anything half-a**ed.

[Gary]

The simple solution would've been to take Mercer I and Mercer II and put them back to back. This way, the facades of both buildings would be facing outward, hiding the hideousness of its rear.

As it stands, the two buildings will essentially look like a single building that was dissected, as if a lesson to designers on how not to do anything half-a**ed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't tell me they are building two of those things?

[Metro Matt]

Yes sir, the one standing now was completed in 2003.

[Gary]

Yes sir, the one standing now was completed in 2003.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And when and where are they building #2?

[kzseattle]

And when and where are they building #2?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would be right next to the first one (so the two would be side by side).

[Gary]

It would be right next to the first one (so the two would be side by side).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So that's what everyones been talking about (the back side). The people that designed that albatross should be strung up, I have never seen an uglier building. And now there building another one, derrrrrr.

Someone with the city should have stopped this thing until a revamped design for the back was in place. I remember when it was going up and I thought, "Man that's the tallest storage building I've ever seen". Talk about not caring about your work.

[kjb434]

The reason that no large windows were placed on the southside of the building is because the in that direction is not one that would sell these condos at their prices.

The north view gives all of Uptown and acess to look to downtown.

I think the second building should face east instead of north again. East views will give the TMC, Greenway, Downtown, and Uptown.

[Gary]

The reason that no large windows were placed on the southside of the building is because the in that direction is not one that would sell these condos at their prices.

The north view gives all of Uptown and acess to look to downtown.

I think the second building should face east instead of north again.  East views will give the TMC, Greenway, Downtown, and Uptown.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah i understand that but to just not give a damn about the aesthetics of the back is inexcusable.

[kjb434]

Who says they didn't give a damn about aeshtics to the back? The perception of beauty is just that: a perception. I like how the height plays into the skyline from US 59 and the Wespark Tollway. Actually, with that wall being so blank and simple, it is the perfect canvas for a mural. Someone just needs to create a proposal and offer it to the building owners and managers.

[Gary]

Who says they didn't give a damn about aeshtics to the back?

[MidtownCoog]

I thought there were supposed to eventually be four mercers.

That way they hide the back.

[kjb434]

Well, the website only shows two.

Also, if you can name any residential or commercial tower that wasn't made for a buck, I'll be glad to hear it.

[Gary]

Well, the website only shows two.

Also, if you can name any residential or commercial tower that wasn't made for a buck, I'll be glad to hear it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

C'mon that's not what I meant. I'm more than aware that businesses have to make a profit which includes every skyscraper in any city in the world. I'm talking about a blatant disregard for even the simplest designs on the back side of the building.

You can't possibly think that the architect designed the back of the Mercer, stood back, took a look and said "yeah I like this". It was done for a buck. I think it's obvious.

[kjb434]

Maybe he just saw it from the other side where the majority of the Uptown district sees it.

[Gary]

Maybe he just saw it from the other side where the majority of the Uptown district sees it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If your refering to me, yes I have seen it from the front which is obviously much more acceptable, although cookie cutter. I will still stand by my words and be willing to bet that most agree with the point of this thread in the first place.

[MidtownCoog]

The "M" painted on the back is just like in the Mario Game, where Mario fights the mad artist.

[Gary]

I think a mural of what windows would have looked like had they installed them on that side would be a fitting gesture. How about a giant mural of a spaceshuttle?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You know, they have painted windows on the back of a shopping center in Cinco Ranch and man it looks cool. Unfortunately these guys will probably do nothing to enhance the building.

[VelvetJ]

C'mon that's not what I meant. I'm more than aware that businesses have to make a profit which includes every skyscraper in any city in the world. I'm talking about a blatant disregard for even the simplest designs on the back side of the building.

You can't possibly think that the architect designed the back of the Mercer, stood back, took a look and said "yeah I like this". It was done for a buck. I think it's obvious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You bet your bottom dollar it's obvious it was for a buck. We know every developer wants to make a profit. I think that goes without saying. But despite what anyone here says, it is my opinion that in many cases, developers that enter Houston have a slightly different mindset because they know that Houston is a city with a "anything goes" type of environment when it comes to development. Which is why I wonder if this monstrosity could have been designed and built in the heart of the Buckhead area of Atlanta? Or if a highrise with a blank wall facing such a highly visible area would have even been CONSIDERED for Buckhead, or even Uptown Dallas for that matter.

How anyone could defend or make excuses for the appearance of this eyesore, despite individual personal taste, is beyond me. The architect of that building knows how ugly it is but doesn't care, and IMO it is partly due to the fact that he KNOWS he doesn't HAVE to care........not in Houston at least.

[Trophy Property]

How anyone could defend or make excuses for the appearance of this eyesore, despite individual personal taste, is beyond me. The architect of that building knows how ugly it is but doesn't care, and IMO it is partly due to the fact that he KNOWS he doesn't HAVE to care........not in Houston at least.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to admit to no liking this building at all, but I think it will look allright if in fact a second tower is built that backs up to the first. The building is very lean. I would have rather seen a larger (in width) building instead of two leaner ones. Oh well, it is there, nothing we can do about it now.

[kzseattle]

I have to admit to no liking this building at all, but I think it will look allright if in fact a second tower is built that backs up to the first.  The building is very lean.  I would have rather seen a larger (in width) building instead of two leaner ones.  Oh well, it is there, nothing we can do about it now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what I have heard on this forum, the second building would be build next to the first one, not behind it. Talk about putting salt on a wound.

[Gary]

From what I have heard on this forum, the second building would be build next to the first one, not behind it. Talk about putting salt on a wound.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. What a shame.

[VelvetJ]

Exactly. What a shame.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, unfortunately there is already a CVS drug store south of the building, so the chances of the second tower being built to the back of the first, are very slim. Facing the building from the Southwest Freeway, the second building will be to the left of the current one. And if I'm not mistaken the groundbreaking shouldn't be too far off. I know there is a billboard on the westloop advertising it.

It really breaks the heart to know the scar on the Uptown Skyline is about to become even deeper by adding a twin to the current eyesore. But like Trophy Property stated, what can we do about it now? If nothing was done after Channel 11 did a news report based soley on the "ugliness" of this building, it's not going to happen with a few of us here thinking it's ugly.

[Gary]

Yes, unfortunately there is already a CVS drug store south of the building, so the chances of the second tower being built to the back of the first, are very slim. Facing the building from the Southwest Freeway, the second building will be to the left of the current one. And if I'm not mistaken the groundbreaking shouldn't be too far off.

[LTAWACS]

i will not move there?

[Gary]

Well, we can only hope that they'll paint a mural then, right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, good luck. These guys aren't going to do a damn thing. By the way sorry for all the damns, this thing just ticks me off. I guess I need to get over it.

[LTAWACS]

Yeah, good luck. These guys aren't going to do a damn thing. By the way sorry for all the damns, this thing just ticks me off. I guess I need to get over it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps some tasteful graffitti would be nice on it.

[YakuzaIce]

The best thing we can hope for is that the developer will change his mind, or once the uptown area begins to get built out, then it may be at least partially hidden.