Design by Competition and the Potential for Public Participation: Assessing an Urban Design Competition on Toronto’s Waterfront

References

• Alexander, E. R., and L. P.Witzling. 1990. “Planning and Urban Design Competitions: Introduction and Overview.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research7 (2): 91–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, E. R., L. P.Witzling, and D. J.Casper. 1987. “Planning and Urban Design Competitions: Organization, Implementation and Impacts.” The Journal of Architectural and Planning Research4 (1): 31–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Institute of Architects. 2011. The Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions. Washington, DC: American Institute of Architects.
   Google Scholar
• Arnell, P., and T.Bickford, eds. 1984. Mississauga City Hall: A Canadian Competition. New York: Rizzoli.
   Google Scholar
• Arnell, P., and T.Bickford, eds. 1984a. Southwest Center: The Houston Competition. New York: Rizzoli.
   Google Scholar
• Banerjee, T., and A.Loukaitou-Sideris. 1990. “Competitions as a Design Method: An Inquiry.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research7 (2): 114–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabanieu, J.1994. “Competitions and Architectural Excellence.” Places9 (2): 40–41.
   Google Scholar
• City of Toronto. 2001. Making Waves: Central Waterfront Part II Plan. Toronto: City of Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• De Haan, H., and I.Haagsma. 1988. Architects in Competition: International Architectural Competitions of the Last 200 Years. London: Thames and Hudson.
   Google Scholar
• Desfor, G., M.Goldrick, and R.Merrens. 1989. “A Political Economy of the Waterfrontier: Planning and Development in Toronto.” Geoforum20 (4): 487–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eidelman, G.2011. “Who’s in Charge? Jurisdictional Gridlock and the Genesis of Waterfront Toronto.” In Reshaping Toronto’s Waterfront, edited by G.Desfor, and J.Laidley, 263–286. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eley, J.1990. “Urban Design Competitions: A British Perspective.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research7 (2): 131–141.
   Google Scholar
• Filion, P., and C.Sanderson. 2011. “The Impact of Organizational Crafting on Planning.” Planning Theory and Practice12 (1): 77–94.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B.2001. Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Enquiry Fails and How it can Succeed Again. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, D.1996. “Planning, Design and Managing Change in Urban Waterfront Redevelopment.” Town Planning Review67 (3): 261–290.
   Google Scholar
• Hume, C.2006. “Finally, Waterfront Waves. We Won’t Learn the Winner Till Friday. Meanwhile, People are Starting to Talk.” Toronto Star, 27th May 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Hume, C.2006a. “Hallelujah, We’re Capable of Change.” Toronto Star, 21st August 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiner, K., P. H.Jacobsen, and D. T.Jensen. 2011. “Dialogues and the Problems of Knowing: Reinventing the Architectural Competition.” Scandinavian Journal of Management27 (1): 160–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laidley, J.2007. “The Ecosystem Approach and the Global Imperative on Toronto’s Central Waterfront.” Cities24 (4): 259–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson, M. S.1994. “Architectural Competitions as Discursive Events.” Theory and Society23 (4): 469–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehrer, U.2011. “Urban Design Competitions.” In Companion to Urban Design, edited by T.Banerjee, and A.Loukaitou-Sideris, 304–316. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lehrer, U., and J.Laidley. 2008. “Old Mega-projects Newly Packaged? Waterfront Redevelopment in Toronto.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32 (4): 786–803.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipstadt, H.1989. “The Experimental Tradition.” In The Experimental Tradition: Essays on Competitions in Architecture, edited by H.Lipstadt, 9–19. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lipstadt, H.2003. “Can ‘Art Professions’ be Bourdieuean Fields of Cultural Production? The Case of the Architecture Competition.” Cultural Studies17 (3-4): 390–419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipstadt, H.2006. “The Competition in the Region’s Past, the Region in the Competition’s Future.” In The Politics of Design: Competitions for Public Projects, edited by C.Malmberg, 7–28. Princeton, NJ: The Policy Research Institute for the Region, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• Loew, S.1994. “Design Control in France.” Built Environment20 (2): 88–103.
   Google Scholar
• Malmberg, C.2006. “Introduction.” In The Politics of Design: Competitions for Public Projects, edited by C.Malmberg, 3–5. Princeton, NJ: The Policy Research Institute for the Region, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• Mansour, Y., ed. 2003. The Grand Museum of Egypt: International Architecture Competition. Cairo: The Egyptian Ministry of Culture.
   Google Scholar
• Nasar, J.1999. Design by Competition: Making Design Competition Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ollswang, J. E.1990. “Successful Competitions: Planning for Quality, Equity and Useful Results.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research7 (2): 105–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pantel, G.1994. “Design Control in German Planning.” Built Environment20 (2): 104–112.
   Google Scholar
• Punter, J.2005. “Urban Design in Central Sydney 1945–2002: Laissez-Faire and Discretionary Traditions in the Accidental City.” Progress in Planning63 (1): 11–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Institute of British Architects. 2013. Design Competitions: Guidance for Clients. Leeds: Royal Institute of British Architects.
   Google Scholar
• Sagalyn, L. B.2006. “The Political Fabric of Design Competitions.” In Politics of Design: Competitions for Public Projects, edited by C.Malmberg, 29–52. Princeton, NJ: The Policy Research Institute for the Region, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• Solomonson, K.2001. The Chicago Tribune Tower Competition: Skyscraper and Culture Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spreiregen, P. D.1979. Design Competitions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R. E.1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Strong, J.1976. Participating in Architectural Competitions: A Guide for Competitors, Promoters and Assessors. London: Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sudjic, D.2006. “Competitions: The Pitfalls and the Potential.” In The Politics of Design: Competitions for Public Projects, edited by C.Malmberg, 53–66. Princeton, NJ: The Policy Research Insitute for the Region, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2002. Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Public Consultation and Participation Strategy. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2003. Central Waterfront: Public Space Framework. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2003a. East Bayfront Precinct Planning: Summary of Public Forum #1. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2006. Toronto Central Waterfront Innovative Design Competition: Competition Brief, Version 2. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2006a. Innovative Design Competition for Toronto’s Central Waterfront: Background Information Document, Request for Qualifications. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2006b. City-at-Large Public Input Summary Report. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2006c. Jury Report for Toronto Central Waterfront Design Competition. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2006d. Waterfront Design Review Panel: Minutes of Meeting 8, Wednesday June 21st, 2006. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• TWRC. 2007. Waterfront Design Review Panel: Minutes of Meeting 16, Wednesday May 9th, 2007. Toronto: TWRC.
   Google Scholar
• Van Wezemael, J.2011. “Research on Architectural Competitions: Towards a Theory of Jury-based Decision-making.” Scandinavian Journal of Management27 (1): 157–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volker, L.2010. Deciding about Design Quality. Leiden, NL: Sidestone Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waterfront Toronto. 2008. Waterfront Design Review Panel: Minutes of Meeting 24 Wednesday February 13th 2008. Toronto: Waterfront Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Waterfront Toronto. 2009. Queens Quay Revilalization Environmental Assessment: Municipal Class Environmental Study Report. Toronto: Waterfront Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Waterfront Toronto. 2012. “Queens Quay Environmental Assessment.” Waterfront Toronto, Accessed March 28. http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/queens_quay_blvd/queens_quay_ea.
   Google Scholar
• Waterfront Toronto. 2013. “Constructing Queens Quay.” Waterfront Toronto, Accessed May 20. http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/explore_projects2/central_waterfront/queens_quay/constructing_the_community___queens_quay.
   Google Scholar
• West Don Lands Committee. 1999. Obstacles and Opportunities: Realizing the Potential of the West Don Lands: Workshop Final Report. Toronto: West Don Lands Committee.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K.2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar