When they started on this project I should have started taking pictures.
During my Doors Open visit to Mercury Court, one of the projects the architecture firm had a hand in was the work being done here on the expansion of the Rideau Centre mall. It required the destruction of the old Ogilvy building, an old department store back in the day. The architect I spoke with mentioned that she would have preferred saving the building entirely, but part of the building lives on- the facade of the building is being replaced where the building originally stood. The work involves restoration of the bricks and other details as they were originally placed, and the work on the expansion as a whole seems to be into its late stages. You can see what it looked like here.
That made me think of the building I saw under construction here yesterday where workers were applying some kind of mysterious coating to the building's exterior. Just WHAT were they doing, I wondered. :-)
ReplyDeleteA merging of old and new styles often works beautifully. Nice to see more imagination being used these days.
ReplyDeleteHoping they will preserve as much as possible of the old building...
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to see how much of the original they do keep in the end. Older buildings have much more charm than most newer ones.
ReplyDeleteI used to see a lot of buildings in various stages of construction or renovation when I worked downtown.
ReplyDelete@Revrunner: perhaps weatherproofing?
ReplyDelete@Mike: the architecture firm in question specializes in heritage architecture.
@VP: I hope so too. I know the mall's really expanding. I'd like to see the end result.
@EG: they certainly do.
@Norma: there's a lot of that here too at present.
It's nice that they're preserving the facade, it can be such a shame to completely lose the old buildings
ReplyDeleteThe coming together of old and new. Good compromise, if it works. Time and $$$$$$ will tell.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I think it would be much easier to just tear the building down rather than restoring it, but I really appreciate those who will take time and money to preserve history.
ReplyDeleteI always hate to see historical places destroyed. At least they saved part of facade.
ReplyDeletei prefer when they keep the old & jazz it up a bit! ( ;
ReplyDeletehave a good week!!!
It is nice to see something preserved, even if partially, for a change. So many old buildings are getting demolished these days, and personally, I find it a shame.
ReplyDeleteSometimes this works really well and other times ......!
ReplyDeleteI like it when the facade is restored not just replaced
ReplyDeleteMB
I guess what causes the destruction of old buildings is that they don't live up to modern building codes . It's good that they made an attempt to keep some of the look.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to believe that deconstructing and reconstructing the facade is cheaper than just keeping the original building. Good that some part of it was saved though.
ReplyDeleteSaving some of it is better than nothing I suppose.
ReplyDeleteI really liked those very old style department stores you never knew what you might find..
ReplyDeleteI s'pose it'll look ok as in not too bad...
ReplyDeleteI'm glad they are honoring and restoring something of the historic!
ReplyDeleteALOHA
ComfortSpiral
=^..^=
How interesting! I'm watching a building in town. Supposedly a senior's residence, RIGHT BESIDE A TRAIN TRACK!!!
ReplyDeleteIt is often nice to blend old and new construction :)
ReplyDeleteBet it will look nice when it's done.
@Aimee: and they don't build walls like that anymore.
ReplyDelete@Birdman: the company that owns the mall is putting a lot of money into the renovation and expansion.
@Linda: in this case, it was a good idea. I admire the architecture firm that had a hand in this- they really do wonderful work with heritage buildings.
@Lowell: what surprised me was finding out there was a time when so many of the department stores here in the city were independent. Now it's all chains.
@Beth: thank you!
@Linda: me too.
@RedPat: other times not so much. There's a place elsewhere in the core that I haven't photographed- I should, the same concept, but it didn't work at all.
@MB: me too.
@Red: that is true.
ReplyDelete@Halcyon: I think doing it this way would be more expensive, but if the owners felt it was doable, they had the right to run with it.
@Lois: I quite agree.
@Geoff: we had quite a number of these independent ones decades ago.
@Ciel: at this stage, it interests me, though I'll have to wait for final judgment when the scaffolding is gone.
@Cloudia: so am I.
@Jennifer: bad placement!
@Georgia and Julie: I hope so!
It's hard to tell until all is said and done but it does seem to have some of the look of the original. Projects like these can sometimes result in the best of everything (one hopes).
ReplyDeleteI think it worked in this case. All this time later and I haven't actually photographed the end result.
DeleteAn interesting construction project.
ReplyDeleteIt was well done.
DeleteThat's an odd name, says me.
ReplyDeleteThe name has a lot of history here.
Delete