IMO a compromise is in order--don't demolish old buildings if we can reuse them, but don't prohibit exterior insulation retrofits either. All too often exterior insulation is prohibited to preserve historical aesthetics, even though 1) stucco on masonry retrofiting is perfectly historical process and 2) exterior insulation protects the structure from the more extreme future climate while interior insulation makes the structure more vulnerable to it. Save the structure, yes, keep it beautiful, yes, but don't insist on keeping the original aesthetics as is.
Whoever designed the proposed new store is obviously a plant from the preservation community. Nobody could seriously suggest replacing the existing, lovely building with that 70s inspired monstrosity.
There are empty buildings everywhere. Shopping centers, office buildings, and lots of opportunities. I did discuss that in another post. Don't be so negative!
IMO a compromise is in order--don't demolish old buildings if we can reuse them, but don't prohibit exterior insulation retrofits either. All too often exterior insulation is prohibited to preserve historical aesthetics, even though 1) stucco on masonry retrofiting is perfectly historical process and 2) exterior insulation protects the structure from the more extreme future climate while interior insulation makes the structure more vulnerable to it. Save the structure, yes, keep it beautiful, yes, but don't insist on keeping the original aesthetics as is.
Whoever designed the proposed new store is obviously a plant from the preservation community. Nobody could seriously suggest replacing the existing, lovely building with that 70s inspired monstrosity.
There are empty buildings everywhere. Shopping centers, office buildings, and lots of opportunities. I did discuss that in another post. Don't be so negative!