@jcboy,
If you don't behave, I'm going to send you to design school so you can spend other people's money. (Not that you are spending money unwisely, I've no idea. But I see you as always ready to go.)
When I first studied design, I was all over redoing our house. Luv a duck, such super ideas. No way we could afford that, which was a good thing, as I was at least partly nuts. Today, or over this last weekend, long past that first design play, I saw yet another architectural team turning a local to me california bungalow into sleek modern inside a cab envelope. I'm not opposed to new wiring - but I've become resistant to change of the nature of the house. Not always, but in those particular conditions.
The starter architects in our neighborhood who later became extremely famous did that, which made the rest of us interested. A lot has been lost, with all that play that I was originally all for. Much now on the obnoxious side - tastes change, arch modes change.
I and a pal have photo'd where loss happened, before it did, at an in between time. The assumption was, for all of us playing in the beginning, that places are now better. When we photo'd that neighborhood, it was clear the change was both part of life and decimating of a culture. I suppose she and I should still write about that.
Husband and I did eventually remodel but mainly circulation changes, and kept the architectural mode. It became my baby house, to speak sentimentally. It about killed me when new owners, young architects, sleeked it up, and the next people bungalowed it again - between them making it no longer a small cottage. Sort of house torture. I admit I started it. But I think of the house as a battered animal at this point.
My cottage garden, that people used to walk by on purpose - appropriate, it was a beach cottage - became a place with a circle in front and banana plants (in a semi arid desert).
JC, I'm not trying to stop you, which sounds impossible anyway. But - you have an interest in design, I hope you explore it.