+
From: Architexturez-IN <admin-in@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:32:17 +0530
It's easy to understand why jurisdictions avoid aesthetic evaluation of
new buildings. Public officials, as well as many developers and
architects, are uncomfortable with the subjectivity.
What should a community's aesthetic standards be, they would ask? How
can beauty be measured? Who is to say -- and why -- that brick is better
than stucco, that one window pattern looks better than another, that a
facade is poorly composed or that proportions are visually awkward?
How can you tell architects and their clients that a project, while
meeting all legal requirements, would be detrimental to its site and
neighborhood?
Zoning and building codes have long been accepted as legitimate uses of
government's power to protect public health, safety and welfare, even if
they infringe on private property rights. But is there any legal
justification for regulating aesthetics? What health, safety and welfare
issues arise when a property owner is deciding between red or blue
paint, or between flat and curved walls?
cont'd....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/04/AR2008010402008.html