Defining and Designing Executive Discretion in Urban Planning Law: 'Aesthetic value' as a Material Consideration.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that 'beauty is in the eyes of the beholder'. If this is true, can governments legitimately regulate the aesthetics of the built environment? Research in psychology has revealed that the way in which we perceive the beauty of our environment has important effects on our well-being as individuals and as a society. If an aesthetically pleasing environment indeed serves the public interest, it seems legitimate for governments to control the beauty of buildings and neighbourhoods. Planning authorities typically enjoy considerable room for appreciation (discretionary power) in matters of 'aesthetic regulation'. But precisely because aesthetic taste is often regarded as highly subjective, not everybody agrees that this is desirable. This raises the question of who is to (co)decide on what constitutes 'beauty' in this context. Architects, as experts? The public? This is also important because 'aesthetic regulation' affects fundamental rights. Whereas owners point to their right to protection of property, architects argue that they should be free from censorship, relying on their right to freedom of expression. The public, on the other hand, may well argue that it has a right to enjoy an agreeable neighbourhood, which could be subsumed under the right to an effective enjoyment of private life. The project studies the way in which Flemish urban planning law deals with these questions and seeks inspiration the US, the UK and the Netherlands.

Keywords:AESTHETICS, URBAN PLANNING

Disciplines:Urban and regional design, development and planning, Law, Other law and legal studies