Mercier House, Lausanne

Feb 2009

Architects: Francis Isoz
Location: Rue du Grand Chêne 8, Lausanne, Switzerland
Project Year: 1898-1900
Client: Jean-Jacques Mercier

In the late XIX century, most of the cities underwent big changes: new avenues were opened through the city center, public transport network were implemented, and the first skyscrapers were built. These changes were promoted by the emerging entrepreneur class, which was able to travel, see the novelties around the world, and bring them back home. One of these entrepreneurs was the swiss Jean Jacques Mercier. One of the leaders in the leather industry, Mercier was also a real estate manager. He was active in Lausanne and, with his interventions, created a new, modern image for the city. In the city center, between 1870 and 1900 he promoted the development of the Flon valley. His project included:

Docks on the former riverbed,
An underground railway line, linking the docks to the railway station and to the port,
A mixed-use building (Mercier House), between the city center and the docks area.

Almost all buildings were shorter than the valley shoulders, invisible from the city center, the only exception being Mercier House.

From the city center, Mercier House looks like any ordinary building.

The entrance. Doors and windows are taken from Italian and French Renaissance.

From the Flon Valley, Mercier House becomes a real skyscraper, with no less than 11 floors.

Smaller buildings gather around it, linked between them by a series of bridges, elevators and walkways. Inside, lots of different activities are gathered: houses, shops, depots, offices, religious communities, sport halls…

The small lane between Mercier House and the surrounding buildings.

View from a walkway. Towers and pinnacles are inspired from French and Flemish Gothic.

One of the towers, hosting balconies and bow-windows.

Detail of one of the balconies.

26 comments »

Bo says:

Вот это я понимаю архитектура!
а то все конструктивизм-онанизм.

# February 5, 2009 at 07:55

John says:

so???? the library is full of history books, don´t begin with this please.

# February 5, 2009 at 08:04

ornament and crime says:

*Y*A*W*N*

Next time hire a real photographer and make a point with the writing … why is this on ArchDaily ?

# February 5, 2009 at 08:39

j says:

nnooo, don’t go there, archdaily!

# February 5, 2009 at 10:12

pi says:

…i’m also surprised!

# February 5, 2009 at 10:18

Ronoc says:

This is wonderful. There needs to be much more of this kind of stuff on ArchDaily, to remind me of the kinds of things I DON’T want to do.

# February 5, 2009 at 10:57

Vladimir Konovalov says:

не, ребята, это не сюда…

No fellows, don’t begin posting such images that I can easily find in every second architectural book.

# February 5, 2009 at 11:07

Luis says:

I agree with all of you. Is there a need?????

# February 5, 2009 at 14:37

Rokas says:

Agree 100% with Ronoc :D

# February 5, 2009 at 15:24

"онанист-конструктивист" says:

bull shit…в)
кто понимает по-русски в перевеоде не нуждается…в)))
к этому разделу архитектуры есть все постсоветские универы и учебники архитекторов,которые ничего кроме “псевдонеоклассицизма с элементами ампира” и т.п. не понимают…не надо засорять сайты современной архитектуры таким “shit” ом…в)

# February 5, 2009 at 15:56

M says:

?????????????????
i dont get this post

i will pray tonight so that i wont see such a thing again in Archdaily :)

# February 5, 2009 at 16:11

This structure is a beautiful building, and has a lot to offer aesthetically for its time and the future. You all sound like bitches.

# February 5, 2009 at 16:36

Patriot says:

Where´s the project??? I can´t find it.

# February 5, 2009 at 18:05

johanirae says:

“From the city center, Mercier House looks like any ordinary building.”

Usually statements like this should be followed by “But from *insert location here*, it is in fact an extraordinary…”, otherwise, you know, you are stating that IS an ORDINARY building O_o

It’s a lovely historical building, but I think the post could have benefitted from some photos and statements showing why this is interesting and worth sharing. Maybe some details or some interior views.

# February 5, 2009 at 21:47

Sander says:

Not only am I surprised by the post, I’m also quite surprised to see comments in Russian.

# February 6, 2009 at 05:11

Artem says:

ну незнаю незнаю! всему своё время думаю сдесь многие незнют что из себя представляет подобная архитектура!hotja sam priderzivajusj konstruktivnogo te4enija
крaйне удивлён подобному посту :)

# February 6, 2009 at 06:07

у нас в Риге полно подобного! время подобного ушло безвозвратно(слава богу):)))

# February 6, 2009 at 06:19

…Артем,я Вам почти завидую…в))) у нас это еще не ушло к сожалению…причем,был бы настоящий классицизм – ладно уж, так у нас не так ведь все…

# February 6, 2009 at 06:28

А у вас енто хде? :)

# February 6, 2009 at 06:47

зато в латвийской архитектуре идеи напрч отсутствуют исе клоны и клоны ничего своего :\

# February 6, 2009 at 06:52

lbessard says:

What is the interest to show such a building? If there is a good project in it, you must show it.

# February 6, 2009 at 07:47

Arman says:

mcastroni, the building could be significant in many ways… social and cultural context, size, artistic value… Yet, you’ve failed in presenting any of them. There’s only: Long time ago; big entrepeneur; biggest building; don’t-mind-the-poor-pictures-just-look-at-the-pretty-pastiche! Even if I leave the whole pertinence of the post aside (if there was any), the design is irrelevant, except for the “Italian and French Renaissance” doors and the “French and Flemish Gothic” towers and pinnacles? If you want to post historic buildings here, please don’t. But if you really must, make a proper article and justify it.

# February 6, 2009 at 09:04

Steven says: