• @Rozz
    link
    587 months ago

    Maybe to not be misleading about what is original and what is new

      • @SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        397 months ago

        I work in stone conservation and for the body that dictates these regulations, even if it was built out of stone it would be required to be visually distinct. The only exception is if it were reinstatement of an original feature that had been demolished or decayed to the point that it had to be removed and fully rebuilt. In that case every effort should be made to source the stone from the same quarry, and the same mortar mix should be used.

        • @BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          127 months ago

          An easy way to do that is make the addition not flush, or use a different kind if masonry. The linked documentary includes an interview with the local planning council who recommended finding a local architect with expirience to do it.

          Instead the chrap English bastard just used the cheapest options he could find in Essex and wore the council down to approve this monstrosity.

            • BarqsHasBite
              link
              fedilink
              9
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Even if it went from grey stone to grey plastic siding, you could tell when it goes from stone to plastic. That should be enough to meet their “different” criteria, but not be such an outrageous eyesore.

      • @Successful_Try543@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        24
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Maybe, in case the next renovation is due, you know for sure which parts are to be preserved and which can be removed. However, some craftsman or architect doing that should be able to tell the difference between modern boards and windows and ancient ones without relying on the help of white plastics or baby blue paint.