West Merrill sketch rendering

July 25, 2007
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
By popular demand, here's the other rendering of West Merrill Tower. You can also see it here. This is the side of the building that would face downtown: West Merrill Tower
ADVERTISEMENT
  • kcfloodJuly 26, 2007 12:25 AM
    so which one are they using? This one has more character, but looks like it belongs down south
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • bobJuly 26, 2007 8:46 AM
    Are you sure this is not a building for Vegas? It has that fake “feel” look to it. Looks like they took an old showneys restaurant and added floor under it.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • indyJuly 26, 2007 9:42 AM
    I agree Bob, it has the same fake look that the Villagio has. What did Indianapolis do to deserve all this terrible architecture?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • daveJuly 26, 2007 10:11 AM
    I like the rendering. I would love to see it come to fruition. This type of architecture adds brightness to the skyline.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • KatieJuly 26, 2007 10:35 AM
    That's the kind of architecture that's popular these days...check out other developing cities and you'll see the same (for example, Charlotte)
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • CorrNDJuly 26, 2007 10:35 AM
    The top of this is much better than the Villagio. The Villagio is basically designed to only be viewed on one side. Merrill Tower may be fakey, but at least this is a 360 degree design.

    If they hid the garage better and had some inviting ground-floor space, I wouldn't hate this as much.

    One strange thing I see is that the upper portion appears to be 15 or 16 stories, indicating that the garage area below is 8 to 9 stories. Is that possible?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ianeckJuly 26, 2007 11:03 AM
    I'm just happy to see the prospect of some development south of the railroad tracks. The stadium is bringing a lot of life to a rough section of downtown that has long been in need of revitalization (or just vitalization, really). I used to work on Capitol just south of where the stadium is going. While somewhat bitter the building I worked in was swallowed up by eminent domain, it's nice to know they now feel comfortable building a building down there without bars over all the windows (or with windows at all for that matter).
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Jim BJuly 26, 2007 1:44 PM
    I agree with CoryND. This is much better than Villagio. Don't look at that building from the south, only from the other three directions. Also, put some ground level retail; that will help Merrill Tower a lot. Will the project ever get off the ground? Good question, but I sure hope it does.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • BabbageJuly 26, 2007 3:51 PM
    Is the garage going to be less visible on the front side (i.e. glass on that part garage in the back facing dt)? The architecture isn't incredible, but I like the terraces above the garage and at the top. Hope it gets built, maybe the developer can put in more condos instead of hotel rooms and advertise as close to dt, stadium, and eli lilly, seems as if there's just such a huge amount of hotel construction. I wish the hotel deveolpments on the west side of the stadium would've been less suburban in nature.

    I think it will make much more of an impact if it gets built as it is further from the circle.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • DirtyDragonJuly 26, 2007 4:05 PM
    Again, this will never see the light of day. Would love to see it happen...but it won't.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Indiana JonesJuly 27, 2007 7:13 AM
    It would be nice to see this view of the proposed building in as tight a rendering as that of the southern face published in IBJ.(http://www.ibj.com/html/detail_page.asp?content=03221)

    It surprises me that a tower that has a decent amount of flair starts out so utilitarian at the pedestrian vantage point.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • JAKJuly 27, 2007 10:24 AM
    I think what needs to happen to support the amount of hotel development that we have recently seen proposed is a commitment of companies to move in from the outlying areas to downtown to start filling some of these office buildings with high vacancy rates. Downtown development can't feasibly continue to be so heavily residentially oriented. Something has to happen other than a new convention center and stadium to diversify development and promote new ventures like this.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • CoryWJuly 27, 2007 10:39 AM
    JAK-

    I certainly understand where you are coming from; however, there are over 120,000 people that work downtown. That is a huge number for a city our size. Yes, we have a high vacancy rate, but all of the IUPUI, Lilly and Government jobs really helps.

    Therefore, I think that the residential boom is just catching up to all oof the office developmment that happened in the late 1980's.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ChrisJuly 27, 2007 3:15 PM
    Does anyone know if the garage space with this particular building was designed to accomodate additional parking beyond what is needed to service the hotel/residences?

    It is my understanding that the Stadium Authority needs an additional 1000 parking spaces. Is it possible that this project has worked with the Stadium Authority to satisfy the additional spaces required by the Colts?

    Any thoughts?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • DanielJuly 27, 2007 3:21 PM
    i hope they find a developer to build the parking garage uhhh that bean company makes me so mad
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ryanJuly 27, 2007 3:31 PM
    i'm glad the bean co. fought and won...they have a neat historic building that would have been torn down. i think it will give a little character to the area. maybe one day it will be converted into a cool bar (a la slippery noodle). i still think it's a shame that the stadium is tilted in it's footprint like some suburban afterthought....
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • JiggaJuly 29, 2007 11:33 AM
    Ryan, what in downtown Indy ISN'T a suburban afterthough?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MarshallJuly 31, 2007 11:08 AM
    Ryan, now that tilted footprint is hardly a suburban afterthought. The stadium is intentionally angled as such in order to take advantage of the skyline view through the huge sliding gas window at the north end-zone. I really feel that, when complete, this stadium will be one of the most distinguished in all of the country, much like Conseco Fieldhouse which still is considered one of the very best facilities in perhaps the world.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ryanJuly 31, 2007 12:12 PM
    jigga - totally agree! marshall - i agree wholeheartedly concerning the stadium. beautiful throwback design and the roof/endzones being able to retract are awesome. i'm just concerned about going away from the traditional street grid. in essence it creates a jewel surrounded by a sea of parking. i know they are trying to take advantage of the skyline, but wouldn't the skyline eventually have caught up? instead of placing the stadium directly on the corner/on the streetgrid, we now have a huge parking lot dissected into four parts. i guess the northeast section will be a plaza. but i would have much rather had a large block to the south/southwest in which to park/tailgate. now we have roughly three odd triangular areas that just doesn't seem to make sense. not to mention the pedestrian will have to wald across all kinds of pavement (a la the suburbs) to reach a majority of the building...but - as a building in itself? it's going to be awesome!
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • RequitusAugust 3, 2007 2:05 PM
    Marshall, that's not really true. The stadium plan was actually rotated to avoid the Pogue's Run. The view of the skyline was an afterthought, and some people high up liked the concept.

    In the end, though, it was a cost issue. Mitigating the environmental impact of re-coursing PR was going to be incredibly expensive.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • RequitusAugust 3, 2007 2:08 PM
    And I disagree about the current project regarding aesthetics. I think it is terribly ugly (apologies to the architect) and that it will be built. But it will also be a painful lost opportunity to do something important in this city.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ianeckAugust 5, 2007 3:47 PM
    Yeah, I don't have any problem with the design of the stadium. I can certainly understand why others do, but I think people in other cities watching football on TV will appreciate the 'throw-back' design of it. At least you can't call it 'inappropriate' for Indy. The OTHER rendering of this building looked sensitive to that design...I'm not sure what's up with this one, but at only 80m in a developing area with lots of open parcels, I'm not all that worried about it (save for some concern at the pedestrian level). Keep an eye on Penn Center. Its design looks more promising.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT