"Ever since the publication of Trystan Edwards' Good and Bad Manners in Architecture in 1924 it has been recognized that an important part of the urban experience is the design of buildings which fit into the existing visual context. Clearly contextual compatibility impacts many aspects of the urban experience, including urban quality, urban landscapes, urban planning, urban conflicts, urban policies, urban design, urban housing and urban neighborhoods. Many authors and designers (Cullen, 1961; Brolin, 1980; Bently et al., 1985; Tugnutt & Robertson, 1987) have commented on the need to fit new buildings into existing visual contexts, not to mention architectural critics ranging from the Prince of Wales down to the rest of us. What has not been so widely recognized is the virtual absence of scientific validation for the basic principles of contextual design. For example, most cities in the United States have implemented aesthetic controls on architecture (over 80% of all U.S. cities and 93% of the cities with populations of 100,000 or more have "design review" requirements for new projects) and over 75% of those cities sometimes or always used contextual principles to evaluate new buildings (Lightner, 1993). Yet, in a recent international conference on design review, 49 papers were presented, but only three papers were grounded with scientific data (Preiser & Lightner, 1992). The importance of scientific validation in design review can be ascertained by inspecting the connections between public policy, the judicial system, and the scientific establishment."