The garden city as a sustainable community

1
The garden city as asustainable community

• Stephen V. Ward
• Department of Planning
• Oxford Brookes University
• svward_at_brookes.ac.uk

2
Introduction

• The concept of sustainable development occupies a
  central position in planning of human settlements
• But not used when Ebenezer Howard invented garden
  city idea in 1890s
• Also Howards garden city vision not central to
  most UK and European thinking about what a
  sustainable urban community is
• Perceived negatively as inspiration for rigid
  single use zoning and soulless suburbs

3

• Favoured European model is a medium-high density
  mixed-use pattern (eg EC Green Paper on Urban
  Environment, 1990 UK Rogers Report, 1999)
• Barcelona rather than Letchworth or Welwyn Garden
  City
• Garden City more favourably regarded in USA and
  some other countries
• Also may be set to become more significant in UK
  thinking within new Sustainable Communities
  programme (2003-)
• It is therefore particularly appropriate to
  evaluate the garden city in light of current
  thinking about what makes a sustainable community

4
Key characteristics of asustainable community

• UK government now says these are
• A flourishing local economy to provide jobs and
  wealth
• Strong leadership to respond positively to change
  
• Effective engagement and participation by local
  people, groups and businesses, especially in the
  planning, design and long term stewardship of
  their community, and an active voluntary and
  community sector
• A safe and healthy local environment with
  well-designed public and green space

5

• Sufficient size, scale and density, and the right
  layout to support basic amenities in the
  neighbourhood and minimise use of resources
  (including land)
• Good public transport and other transport
  infrastructure both within the community and
  linking it to urban, rural and regional centres
• Buildings - both individually and collectively -
  that can meet different needs over time, and that
  minimise the use of resources
• A well-integrated mix of decent homes of
  different types and tenures to support a range of
  household sizes, ages and incomes

6

• Good quality local public services, including
  education and training opportunities, health care
  and community facilities, especially for leisure
• A diverse, vibrant and creative local culture,
  encouraging pride in the community and cohesion
  within it
• A sense of place
• The right links with the wider regional, national
  and international community

7
How far then does the garden cityhave these
characteristics?

• Must be examined at several stages in the garden
  citys evolution
• First Howards original concept, as developed in
  his 1898 book,
• To-Morrow A Peaceful Path to Real Reform
• Second at the realities of the two garden
  cities, Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City, as
  they took shape from 1903 and 1920
• Third at the way they function as settlements
  today

8
The vision

• The garden city based on co-operation
• Land bought at agricultural value
• Owned and managed collectively
• Business development both collectively and
  privately funded
• But citizens, not land speculators, would benefit
• Development carefully planned
• Limited to 30,000 population

9

• Combined best features of town and country
• Nature preserved
• Private and public open spaces
• Agricultural belt protected around garden city
• Clean air, fresh water
• Public transport, walking, cycling
• Good quality affordable houses for everyone at
  moderately low densities
• Good social facilities

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City during
development

• Many aspects broadly followed the vision
• All land was bought at agricultural values
• Garden city companies gave strong leadership,
  generally in public interest
• Operated on limited profit basis
• Beyond that financial benefit to go to community
  (but long delayed)
• Local employment (eventually) allowed high degree
  of self-containment

13

• Walking, cycling and public transport, especially
  rail
• Development in both was very carefully planned
• Size of the garden cities was limited to roughly
  30,000
• Development combined best of town and country
• Nature was preserved in open spaces and
  agricultural belt
• Healthy, smoke-free, clean air
• Slightly lower densities than in original vision

14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16

• Mixture of hosing types and wide social mix
• Housing quality high by contemporary standards
• Good collective facilities were provided from an
  early stage
• Strong and active sense of local community,
  especially in Letchworth

17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20

• But there were some difficulties and weaknesses
• Shortage of capital meant slow development
• Not easy to attract employers to the garden
  cities initially
• Eventually enough firms decentralising from
  London and new light manufacturing industries set
  up in Letchworth and Welwyn GC
• Both, especially Welwyn GC, adopted industrial
  marketing
• Some employers deterred by experimental nature of
  Howards vision

21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23

• Slow growth of housing also severely limited the
  size of local workforce
• Shortage of working class housing also a factor
  in early days
• Significant commuting in early years - in and out
  - but using rail or cycle
• Some tensions between companies and local
  communities
• Companies sometimes too overpowering, especially
  in Welwyn GC
• No local community financial benefit until much
  later
• Segregation between richer and poorer areas in
  Welwyn GC

24
Letchworth and Welwyn Garden Cityin the long term

• Public corporations created (for Welwyn GC 1948
  Letchworth 1963)
• Not-for-profit heritage foundation formed in
  Letchworth (1995)
• Only in Letchworth were funds ever transferred to
  local community
• Welwyn GC only gave a return to central funds
• In the long term both adapted well to economic
  changes
• In a very buoyant region of Britain
• Some original industries have provided basis for
  subsequent growth

25

• New sources of employment eg office development
  in Letchworth
• More car-based commuting (in and out)
• Most housing popular and adaptable little
  redevelopment needed
• Some cuts in local schools as population ages
  and densities decline
• Other services have survived well, especially in
  centres
• Remain popular places to live with strong though
  not very diverse communities
• Conservation policies help protect special
  qualities

26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
Are the garden citiessustainable communities?

• Measured against the criteria indicated at the
  outset, they
• have succeeded in delivering
• Flourishing local economies
• Strong leadership (especially Letchworth)
• Active communities with strong local
  participation (especially Letchworth)
• Safe and healthy local environments with many
  green spaces
• Sizes and layouts which support good range of
  local services in centres (in walkable distance
  for many residents)

29

• Good rail links to London and neighbouring towns
• Buildings that have been adaptable
• A range of housing types and tenures
• Generally good public services
• Strong local culture (especially Letchworth)
• Strong sense of place
• Good links with the wider world

30
(No Transcript)
31

• They have been less successful in
• Maintaining non-central services, especially as
  population ages and household sizes decline
• Providing a high standard of local bus services
• Preventing a general shift to car-based travel
• Avoiding significant social class segregation in
  residential areas (especially Welwyn GC)
• Avoiding decline in some local public services
• Having a narrower local culture than in core city
  areas
• Sense of place may not appeal to everyone

32

• Overall though,
• The successful outweigh the less successful
  aspects
• Both garden cities have a strong claim to be
  considered as sustainable communities
• But can the model be widely applied?