That the topic ofdesign review is somehow trou My biases are clearfrom the start: I am among blesome is probably one thing all readers can those who believe that, despite all signals to the contrary, the physical structure of our environ agree on. Beyond this, however, I suspect pros pects of consensus are dim. Differing opinions ment can be managed, and that controlling it is on the subject likely range from those desiring the key to the ameliorationofnumerous problems control tothosedesiringfreedom. Saysonecamp: confronting society today. I believe that design our physical and natural environments are going can solve a host ofproblems, and that the design to hell in a hand basket. Says the other: design of the physical environment does influence be review boards are only as good as their members; havior. more often than not their interventions produce Clearly, this is a perspective that encompasses mediocre architecture. more than one building at a time and demands As a town planner and architect, I am sympa that each building understand its place in a larger thetic to the full range of sentiment. Perhaps a context-the city. Indeed, anyone proposing discussion of these two concepts-control and physical solutions to urban problems is designing freedom-and their differences would now be or, as may seem more often the case, destroying useful. But let me instead suggest that both posi the city.

Klappentext

That the topic ofdesign review is somehow trou­ My biases are clearfrom the start: I am among blesome is probably one thing all readers can those who believe that, despite all signals to the contrary, the physical structure of our environ­ agree on. Beyond this, however, I suspect pros­ pects of consensus are dim. Differing opinions ment can be managed, and that controlling it is on the subject likely range from those desiring the key to the ameliorationofnumerous problems control tothosedesiringfreedom. Saysonecamp: confronting society today. I believe that design our physical and natural environments are going can solve a host ofproblems, and that the design to hell in a hand basket. Says the other: design of the physical environment does influence be­ review boards are only as good as their members; havior. more often than not their interventions produce Clearly, this is a perspective that encompasses mediocre architecture. more than one building at a time and demands As a town planner and architect, I am sympa­ that each building understand its place in a larger thetic to the full range of sentiment. Perhaps a context-the city. Indeed, anyone proposing discussion of these two concepts-control and physical solutions to urban problems is designing freedom-and their differences would now be or, as may seem more often the case, destroying useful. But let me instead suggest that both posi­ the city.

Inhalt
Introduction: The Debate on Design Review Brenda Case Scheer University of Cincinnati.- 1 Democracy and Design.- 2 Reviewing New Design in Historic Districts.- 3 Can the Process of Architectural Design Review Withstand Legal Scrutiny?.- 4 The Abuse of Discretionary Power.- 5 Design Review and Conservation in England: Historical Development and Contemporary Relationships.- 6 Design Review from the Inside.- 7 Discovering Suburban Values through Design Review.- 8 Design Review Comes to Phoenix.- 9 Santa Fe Styles and Townscapes: The Search for Authenticity.- 10 Transforming Suburbia: The Case Study of Bellevue, Washington.- 11 Discretionary Design Review: Shaping Downtown Cincinnati.- 12 The New England Life: Design Review in Boston.- 13 Place-Making and Design Review.- 14 Carbuncles, Columns, and Pyramids: Lay and Expert Evaluations of Contextual Design Strategies.- 15 Local Architectural Language and Contextualism.- 16 Disciplinary Society and the Myth of Aesthetic Justice.- 17 Private Design Review in Edge City.- 18 Battery Park City: An American Dream of Urbanism.- Epilogue.