Everyone wants their shot at fame these days (ie. your plan to write a book before you even know anything), and the appeal of the starchitect has many people fooled.

I find this frustrating because you risk mis-informing people, and as a media representative you have a highly influential position, but due to your inexperience you are not presenting all of the facts. This is not entirely your fault, but because you have taken on the high profile project, it becomes your responsibility. Building a new “green house” is not just a fun game, and you risk trivializing this.

Sustainability is a complex topic, its not some solar panel that you strap onto the roof at the end of a project – the word itself refers to a closed loop system that can sustain life without having to tax the land and the earth.

I appreciate what you’re doing – trying to enter into the dialogue on “green building”, but the way you’ve approached it is very risky. As soon as one begins advocating for the demolition of buildings its a slippery slope. I’m sure you’ve learned a lot while completing your house project and I hope that you work to better represent the holistic and fundamental aspects of sustainability (use less), rather than just the cosmetic – which is what is problematic with “green washing” happening today.

Furthermore, incredible things can be done with existing homes and buildings these days – there are entire architecture firms dedicated to the art of “adaptive re-use” where buildings/structures are retained and upgraded/added to/modified for a new use. This can also be done with homes, but you must find the right people who can think of creative solutions to your problem. Too many architects today (especially in Toronto) have become lazy and they find it easier to start with a clean slate and empty lot than to solve the existing problems of an older home. In the greater scheme this is reflective of the North American throw-away culture, where we throw something out when it no longer serves its purpose. The reality is that we need to think for the long term and build in a way that can be modified later which ultimately uses less overall – this is what sustainability is really about.

Cheers,
Tyler Rozicki

Post Script: If one wants to build new, there are options in Toronto to use existing lots, I don’t buy your argument that you had to demolish your house because of lack of space/no lots. Below are a few links exploring different approaches in Toronto.

Using small left over spaces on adjacent property (ie, driveways next to houses):
http://www.spacesbyrohan.com/Coxwell.html
http://www.spacesbyrohan.com/1294-College.html
http://www.spacesbyrohan.com/1292-College.html

Building in laneways (there is a whole book written on this subject by Bridgitte Shim and Donald Chung called “Laneway Architecture and Urbanism in Toronto”).
:
http://www.canadianarchitect.com/issues/ISarticle.asp?id=164891&story_id=82091113137&issue=06012005
If you want to make a real change (and I believe that you do) you can start using your media position to gather troops and lobby the city to make building in lane ways easier. This would be an incredible contribution to sustainability in the city. Then you can build another home in a laneway correcting all of the things that you learned while completing the first one!

At no point have I ever said that our primary goal was to build the greenest house possible. On the contrary, the goal was to build a LARGER home. But instead, we decided to build something smaller than anticipated and we wanted to build it as green as possible.

And I’m not sure what city you’re referring to, but Toronto doesn’t have “plenty of empty lots” to build on. You’re delusional. They DO NOT exist.

Here’s a little something I wrote in the Globe and Mail a few months back:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081031.WINNETT31/TPStory/

Have you encountered the term “embodied energy” before? I’ll assume you havent based on decisions you’ve made; It is obscenely wasteful to knock down an existing home unless its beyond repair – even if you really like the lot and neighbourhood – because of the energy that was required to make the materials used in the construction of the home. Even an old energy leaking building is better off for the environment than throwing all of those resources away. You should not be rewarded for this wasteful act with retrofit incentive money.

There are plenty of empty lots in the city if you want to build a new home, no need to go and tear down a perfectly good one just to suit your desires. How very selfish.

This is “greenwashing” at its worst – no wonder people are so pissed off about people touting LEED and the rest of it just for show – its people like you who give it a bad name.

Shame on you.

I have to disagree with your belief that what you are doing is a renovation and qualifies for some rebate. The moment you completely demolish your home, you no longer owned a home. You own a lot with a big hole. You can’t ‘retrofit’ a new home.

I don’t disagree that there should be a program for people like you who go beyond current regulations/standards, but the current rebate program was never meant for new construction. You knew that when you were originally sceptical about being eligible.

Good luck with the project – and never ever trust a third-party about anything related to the government. Call the government directly and try to get something in writing be it paper or email.

I definitely love the idea of these… but unfortunately we won’t be able to use them

Are you, Jeremy, including on the south wall a planned area
for solar space heating? I am looking at this from Your Solar
Home out of Vaughan. It looks very intersting. For us, we
would need to install on the outside of our existing south
facing brick wall but if your walls are not yet built you
could I would think arrange the brickwork such that these could
be installed so the outside is flush with the outside of the
brick.

Dan

Yea, was meant for you. Sorry

It does bit, however.

Dan

I’d fight it. It’s $10k that you clearly ought to get – it’s clear you’re meeting the spirit of the rebates, and as you say, going above and beyond. I imagine this is one of those cases where someone in the civil service just needs to be “enabled” to give you the rebates, ‘cause I’m sure they want to; tell them the dirt below the house is shared between both the old version and the renovated version, and that it is structurally important, and my guess is you’ll be on your way.