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. :-)ReplyDelete
A merging of old and new styles often works beautifully. Nice to see more imagination being used these days.ReplyDelete
Hoping they will preserve as much as possible of the old building...ReplyDelete
It 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.ReplyDelete
I 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 buildingsReplyDelete
The coming together of old and new. Good compromise, if it works. Time and $$$$$$ will tell.ReplyDelete
Sometimes 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.ReplyDelete
I always hate to see historical places destroyed. At least they saved part of facade.ReplyDelete
i prefer when they keep the old & jazz it up a bit! ( ;ReplyDelete
have 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.ReplyDelete
Sometimes this works really well and other times ......!ReplyDelete
I like it when the facade is restored not just replacedReplyDelete
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.ReplyDelete
It'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.ReplyDelete
Saving some of it is better than nothing I suppose.ReplyDelete
I really liked those very old style department stores you never knew what you might find..ReplyDelete
I s'pose it'll look ok as in not too bad...ReplyDelete
I'm glad they are honoring and restoring something of the historic!ReplyDelete
How interesting! I'm watching a building in town. Supposedly a senior's residence, RIGHT BESIDE A TRAIN TRACK!!!ReplyDelete
It is often nice to blend old and new construction :)ReplyDelete
Bet 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).ReplyDelete
I think it worked in this case. All this time later and I haven't actually photographed the end result.Delete
An interesting construction project.ReplyDelete
It was well done.Delete
That's an odd name, says me.ReplyDelete
The name has a lot of history here.Delete