Quote:
Originally Posted by Denverite
Indeed, I am well aware that this already exists to varying degrees in most, if not all, municipalities. I have been through the review process before. Not sure they're doing a good job at times. It's been my experience that they tend to be either extremely militant about design changes or extremely lax. Little in-between.
|
I think that's because the ideal that you suggest,
"Ideally, this would be a required step in the process with input from a group of architctural professionals who are open minded and diverse, and who can, at a minimum, suggest and advise reasonable recommendations of the external appearance with respect to the project location, budget, and purpose." is extremely hard to achieve. It's a design by committee setup with no codified rules to fall back on. Instead, everyone is going to argue about what a building should look like which would slow the development process and increase the cost of building and this negative will be magnified because there's nothing on the books to fall back on.
But what currently exists with the current regulatory environment results in the two extremes that you mention between a laissez faire and total control approach. Is a happy medium even possible?
Threaded Mode