Aesthetics and Hermeneutics: Complementary?

I recently gave a paper on how aesthetics might be a useful dialogue partner for environmental hermeneutics. My point was this: the philosophical discipline of aesthetics--broadly conceived as related to perception and sensibility, not simply a philosophy of art or of beauty--offers tools for understanding interpretation of place as text. To explain: environments are unique objects of interpretation, for at least a few reasons. Foremost, we are within environments in a way that we are not within a novel or painting. To interpret environments means to interpret something that includes us on several levels: physical, emotional, intellectual. Yet environments are somehow also different than us. Second, there is an explicitly sensual, embodied side of environments that is missing from our interpretation of a book or work of art. We might read any copy of Crime and Punishment and come to the same interpretation, but we cannot gather the same interpretation from each and every landscape or place as if they all represented the same thing called "environment."

Given these--and other--unique features of environments, it seems that aesthetics might give a needed complement to the work of hermeneutics. Aesthetics presents ways of understanding how we sense and perceive. It identifies values and qualities unique to such aesthetic experience. And finally it begins to reflect on how perception and interpretation are interrelated using a different vantage point than the hermeneutical approach to this question. In other words, I would argue that an area of inquiry that will significantly advance environmental hermeneutics is the interrelationship between hermeneutics and aesthetics as environmentally-focused disciplines.

Is this kind of interconnection between environmental aesthetics and environmental hermeneutics needed? Or does philosophical hermeneutics already offer a persuasive way to engage in our perceptual encounter with built and natural environments?