Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
^Sure it is. See page 40 of the Commission's rules:
a. The new structure exhibits the general size, shape, and scale of the features associated with the property or district. |
OK take the bias goggles off.
Do you notice how the language is very open there and doesn't use words like
REQUIRED. Instead they intentionally use words that are open for interpretation like CONSIDERED and GENERAL.
If you read the design guidelines for the Historic Michigan Avenue Boulevard you will notice the rules prefaced with this
Quote:
Designers of new buildings in the district should look to the historic buildings in the district for design context. No set of guidelines can take the place of a design professional's judgement and expertise in developing a building design which will meet a functional program as well as being compatible and appropriate to the district. The following criteria, as
identified in the Commission's rules and regulations should be considered...
|
Again open language and obvious intent to rely on the designer over a set of rules. As for materials
Quote:
|
As noted in both the Chicago Landmarks designation report and these guidelines, the predominant building material of this district is masonry. There is a wide variety of masonry, including terra cotta, stone and brick, all in various colors. These materials are used in a variety of sizes, with a range from simplistic to elaborate detailing. Materials for new construction are encouraged to be compatible with the existing range of materials. Compatibility may be achieved through a combination of color, texture, unit size or detailing, depending on the materials chosen.
|
Again open language... materials are "encouraged to be compatible" not "required to be compatible" and even goes on to say that compatibility may be achieved through several other means.