Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover What Do Design Reviewers Really Do? Understanding Roles Played by Design Reviewers in Daily Practice

  • 138 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides a general description of the rationale for conducting the study and for organizing the book. How did the study come about? What is the overall approach to the study? What research question is asked? What is the hypothesis? Why is the study timely? Why is design review important? What is the purpose of the study? What is the rationale for data collection? What chapters are included and why? These questions will be addressed more generally here, but details will be provided in relevant chapters later.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, J. L., Brees, A. E., & Reninger, E. C. (2008). A study of American zoning board composition and public attitudes toward zoning issues. The Urban Lawyer, 40(4), 689–745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, C. (2014). The contingent public value of ‘good design’: Regulating the aesthetics of the Australian urban built environment. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 73(2), 282–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. J., Dixon, D., & Gillham, O. (2013). Urban design for an urban century: Shaping more livable, equitable, and resilient cities. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M. (2017). The formal and informal tools of design governance. Journal of Urban Design, 22(1), 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., De Magalhaes, C., & Natarajan, L. (2017). Design governance: The CABE experiment. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., de Magalhães, C., & Natarajan, L. (2018). Design governance the CABE way, its effectiveness and legitimacy. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 11(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, E., & Higgins, M. (2009). How planning authorities can improve quality through the design review process: Lessons from Edinburgh. Journal of Urban Design, 14(1), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eia, U. (2011). Annual energy outlook 2011 with projections to 2035. Washington, D.C: Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. & Sirianni, C., D (1993). Critical studies in organization and bureaucracy. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, K., & Thomas, J. M. (Eds.). (1989). Making regulatory policy. University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imrie, R. (2007). The interrelationships between building regulations and architects’ practices. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 34(5), 925–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imrie, R., & Street, E. (2011). Architectural design and regulation. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemar, A. S. (2015). Zoning as taxidermy: Neighborhood conservation districts and the regulation of aesthetics. Indiana Law Journal, 90, 1525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service (30th anniversary expanded edition). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, F., & Visscher, H. (2006). Deregulation and privatisation of European building-control systems? Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33(4), 491–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer, B. C. (1994). Introduction: The debate on design review. In B. C. Scheer & W. F. E. Preiser (Eds.), Design review: Challenging urban aesthetic controls (pp. 1–10). New York: Chapman and Hall.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer, B., & Preiser, W. (2012). Design review: Challenging urban aesthetic control. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamps, A. (2013). Psychology and the aesthetics of the built environment. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2009). Design by the rules: The historical underpinnings of form-based codes. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(2), 144–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2012). City rules: How regulations affect urban form. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Architecture and Design, Lawrence Technological University, Southfield, MI, USA

    Joongsub Kim

Authors
  1. Joongsub Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joongsub Kim .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kim, J. (2019). Introduction. In: What Do Design Reviewers Really Do? Understanding Roles Played by Design Reviewers in Daily Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05642-1_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation