The garden city as asustainable community

Stephen V. Ward

Department of Planning

Oxford Brookes University

svward@brookes.ac.uk

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 Howard’s 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

• 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

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

• 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

• 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

How far then does the garden city

have these characteristics? • Must be examined at several stages in the garden city’s evolution

• First: Howard’s 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

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

• 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

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

• 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

• 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

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 Howard’s vision

• 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

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

• 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

Are the garden citiessustainable communities?

Measured against the criteria indicated at the outset, theyhave 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)

• 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

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

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?