The garden city as a sustainable community

1. The garden city as asustainable community Stephen V. Ward Department of Planning Oxford Brookes University svward@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 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

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 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

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

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

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

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 Howard’s vision

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

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

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?