Errr...no. Re-use is a common theme in a lot of urban renewal. You might wish to Google on the subject. In all fairness, I didn't fully qualify my use of the term "replace". I meant in terms of facade. And that really only pertains to the lower section, the upper section just needs a facile touch-up and perhaps more modern, efficient windows.
"Thusly"? lol....careful you don't trip over your pretense. The term is "thus" and you really haven't used it in the right context, but whatever...
Mmmm...you're right there.
http://www.oaa.on.ca/professional resources/sustainable design/reusing buildings and componentsReusing Buildings and Components
DR. MARK GORGOLEWSKI
The University of Waterloo School of Architecture in Cambridge, ON. Levitt Goodman Architects Ltd. Photo: Ben Rahn / A Frame Inc.
Originally published in OAA Profiles 2009.
ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS of sustainable design is a focus on getting more out of the resources we use. Be it energy, water, materials, components, whole buildings or urban infrastructures, we need to get more useful service from the resources we put in. At present we have a mentality of consumerism which leads to massive use of nonrenewable, primary resources, which are often extracted with great environmental damage, and create a huge amount of waste. Construction and demolition waste (C&D) contributes about 35% of the total waste stream in Canada1, and the Worldwatch Institute estimates that by the year 2030 the world will have run out of many raw building materials and we will be reliant on recycling and mining landfills.
Yet the concept of waste does not really exist in nature. In a biological ecosystem all material is used in some way; the residual products from one species or process are utilized by another. In an ideal industrial ecosystem, resources would not be depleted any more than those in a biological ecosystem; a piece of steel could potentially show up one year in a drinks can, the next year in an automobile and 10 years later in the structural frame of a building.
Existing buildings and infrastructure are a huge store of potential resources, not something to be thrown away. In Europe, the expected life of a building is usually at least 60 to 100 years and many buildings last considerably longer. In North America, much shorter time periods are typical! Buildings are long-term resources that need to be allowed to evolve and change with societies’[...]
Very analogous, but a valid case in point when catering to whim over function in design: (there are some ergonomic studies on-line, I'll find and reference them later, that make the case against island kitchens, and how incredibly inefficient they are, both for human exertion and cost of utilities to run them )
http://www.treehugger.com/kitchen-design/closed-separate-kitchen-makes-comeback.htmlThe closed separate kitchen makes a comeback
Lloyd Alter (@lloydalter)
Design / Kitchen Design
June 1, 2016
The New York Times real estate section says the closed kitchen is making a comeback. After a couple of decades where every new apartment had big open kitchens,
Kitchen size aside, the pendulum has started to swing back toward enclosed kitchens. Several new residential buildings in Manhattan have offered separated kitchens — a nod to prewar apartment design, but also to the growing demand from potential buyers looking for separate cooking and entertaining spaces.
[...]
It's healthier
As Ellen Himelfarb noted in her article on eat-in kitchens, quoted in TreeHugger:
Dr. Brian Wansink, director of the Food and Brand Lab at Cornell University, argues that our eating habits are much more influenced by our surroundings than our appetite, and some modern kitchen comforts are the biggest culprits. Families with comfortable seating and TVs in the kitchen tend to snack more...“The first thing I suggest if you’re giving your kitchen a makeover – make it less loungeable,” he says. “Recent research shows that one of the biggest determinants of low BMI in children is sitting at a table with the TV off.”
In a separate, closed off kitchen, the food is out of sight and out of mind.
© In China, even open kitchens are closed because of air quality
The air quality is better
In an MNN post, Worrying about kitchen fans is exhausting, I quote engineer Robert Bean:
Since there are no environmental protection regulations governing indoor residential kitchens, your lungs, skin and digestive systems have become the de facto filter for a soufflé of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, formaldehydes, volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, fine and ultra fine particles and other pollutants associated with meal preparation. Toss in the exposed interior design features and what is left behind is an accumulation of contaminants in the form of chemical films, soot and odours on surfaces, similar in affect to what one finds in the homes of smokers.
A closed kitchen can keep all that stuff in the closed kitchen and can design the appropriate ventilation system that doesn't have to change all the air in the house or apartment.
Wolf/ There is no way that range hood is going to anything. /Promo image
You don't get those silly giant islands with useless hanging exhaust hoods
These just don't work. A stove should be against a wall, an exhaust hood should be not much more than 30 inches from the range, and properly sized for the appliance. Read more on MNN: Hyperventilation about kitchen ventilation, where I learned that there is no real consensus on this issue. But in the absence of one, it still makes sense that a big stove should be in its own space.
[...]
