From design advice to peer review: The role of the Urban Design panel in Vancouver

Journal of Urban Design

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 113-135

  Punter, John ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN; PLANNING SYSTEM; URBAN DESIGN; URBAN PLANNING;

CANADA;

EID: 0041662139     PISSN: 13574809     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13574800306483     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. BDA (Bund Deutscher Architekten) (2001) Unterstutzende Massnahmen zur Qualitatssicherung (Cologne, BDA).
2. Blaesser, B. W. (1994) The abuse of discretionary power, in: B. C. Scheer & W. F. E. Preiser (Eds) Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control, pp. 42-50 (New York, Chapman & Hall).
3. Blore, S. & Sutherland, J. (1999) Building Smileyville, Vancouver Magazine, 32(9), pp. 48-58.
4. Brine, J. (1997) Urban design advisory panels: South Australia looks to Canadian experience, Australian planner, 34(2), pp. 206-211.
5. City of Vancouver Planning Department (1974) Shaping the Future: The City Planning Department's Goals and Objectives for 1974 (Vancouver, City of Vancouver Planning Department).
6. City of Vancouver Planning Department (1994) Discretionary Zoning Backgrounder (Vancouver, City of Vancouver Planning Department).
7. City of Vancouver Planning Department (1996) Urban Design Panel (Vancouver, City of Vancouver Planning Department).
8. City of Vancouver Planning Department (1999a) Vancouver's Urban Design: A Decade of Achievement (Vancouver, City of Vancouver Planning Department).
9. City of Vancouver Planning Department (1999b) Monitoring Rs-5/5S and RS-6 in Areas Rezoned as Part of the RS- Interim Zoning Program, Administrative Report August 19 (Vancouver, City of Vancouver Planning Department).
10. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (2002) Design Review (London, Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment).
11. Costonis, J. J. (1989) Icons and Aliens: Law, Aesthetics and Environmental Change (Urbana, IL, University of Illinois Press).
12. Groat, L. (1994) Carbuncles, columns and pyramids: lay and expert evaluations of contextual design strategies, in: B. C. Scheer & W. F. E. Preiser (Eds) Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control, pp. 156-164 (New York, Chapman & Hall).
13. Habe, R. (1989) Public design control in American communities, Town Planning Review, 60(3), pp. 195-219.
14. Hinshaw, M. L. (1995) Design Review, Planning Advisory Service Report 454 (Chicago, IL, American Planning Association).
15. Laan, J. (1999) Welcome by the Federatie Welstand, Urban Design International, 4(1/2), pp. 5-10.
16. Lai, R. T-Y. (1988) The Invisible Web; Law in Urban Design and Planning (New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold).
17. Lai, R. T-Y. (1994) Can the process of architectural design review withstand legal scrutiny?, in: B. C. Scheer & W. F. E. Preiser (Eds) Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control, pp. 31-40 (New York, Chapman & Hall).
18. Lightner, B. C. (1992) Design review: a critical evaluation, Cities: The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, 9, pp. 280-287.
19. Mandelker, D. (1993) Land Use Law (3rd edn) (Charlottesville, VA, The Michie Co.).
20. Nasar, J. L.& Grannis, P. (1999) Design review reviewed: administrative versus discretionary methods, Journal of the American Planning Association, 65(4), pp. 424-433.
21. Poole, S. E. (1987) Architectural appearance, review regulations and the first amendment: the good, the bad and the consensus ugly, The Urban Lawyer, 18, pp. 287-344.
22. Punter, J. V. (1999) Improving the instruments, processes and products of aesthetic control in Europe, Urban Design International, 4(1/2), pp. 79-100.
23. Punter, J. V. (2002) Urban design as public policy: evaluating the design dimension of Vancouver's planning system, International Planning Studies, 7(4), pp. 265-282.
24. Punter, J. V. (2003) The Vancouver Achievement: Planning and Urban Design (Vancouver, UBC Press).
25. Rombouts, J. (1999) Aesthetic control management in the Flanders region of Belgium, Urban Design International, 4(1/2), pp. 25-29.
26. Royal Institute of British Architects (1993) Architectural Advisory Panels (London, Royal Institute of British Architects).
27. Scheer, B. C. (1994) Introduction, in: B. C. Scheer & W. F. E. Preiser (Eds) Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control, pp. 1-10 (New York, Chapman & Hall).
28. Scheer, B. C. & Preiser, W. F. E. (1994) Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control (New York, Chapman & Hall).
29. Shirvani, H. (1985) The Urban Design Process (New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold).
30. Stamps, A. E. (1997) Meta-analysis in environmemtal research, in: M. S. Amiel & J. C. Vischer (Eds) Place Design and Management for Place Making, pp. 114-124 (Edmond, OK, Environmental Design Research Association).
31. Stamps, A. E. & Nasar, J. L. (1997) Design review and public preferences: effects of geographical location, public consensus, sensation seeking and architectural styles, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, pp. 11-32.
32. van Weert, C. (1999) Aesthetic control management in the Netherlands, Urban Design International, 4(1/2), pp. 15-20.
33. Varkki George, R. & Campbell, M. C. (2000) Balancing different interests in aesthetic control, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20, pp. 163-175.
34. Vaughan, M. (1984) Eyes on urban design, Vancouver's Urban Design Panel, Quarterly Review, 11(4), pp. 7-8.
35. Ziegler, E. H. (1986) Aesthetic controls and derivative human values: the emerging rational basis for regulation, in: J. B. Gailey (Ed.) 1986 Zoning and Planning Law Handbook, pp. 239-252 (New York, Clark Boardman).