Garden city movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ebenezer Howard's 3 magnets diagram which addressed the question 'Where will the people go?', the choices being 'Town', 'Country' or 'Town-Country'
 The garden city philosophy is a method of urban planning that was initiated during 1898 by Sir Ebenezer Howard in the United Kingdom.
Garden cities were intended to be planned, self-contained, communities surrounded by "greenbelts" (parks), containing proportionate areas
of residences, industry, and agriculture.

Inspired by the Utopian novel Looking Backward, Howard published his book To-morrow: a Peaceful Path to Real Reform during 1898 (which
was reissued during 1902 as Garden Cities of To-morrow). His idealised garden city would house 32,000 people on a site of 6000 acres
(2400 ha), planned on a concentric pattern with open spaces, public parks and six radial boulevards, 120 ft (37 m) wide, extending from the
centre. The garden city would be self-sufficient and when it had full population, another garden city would be developed nearby. Howard
envisaged a cluster of several garden cities as satellites of a central city of 50,000 people, linked by road and rail. [1]
Contents
[hide]

 1 Early development

 2 Garden cities
 3 Garden suburbs

 4 Legacy

 5 See also

 6 References

[edit]Early development
Howard’s To-morrow: a peaceful path to real reform sold enough copies to result in a second edition, Garden Cities of To-morrow. This
success provided him the support necessary to pursue the chance to bring his vision into reality. Howard believed that all people agreed the
overcrowding and deterioration of cities was one of the troubling issues of their time. He quotes a number of respected thinkers and their
disdain of cities. Howard’s garden city concept combined the town and country in order to provide the working class an alternative to working
on farms or ‘crowded, unhealthy cities’.[2]

To build a garden city, Howard needed money to buy land. He decided to get funding from “gentlemen of responsible position and undoubted
probity and honor”.[3] He founded the Garden Cities Association (later known as the Town and Country Planning Association or TCPA), which
created First Garden City, Ltd. in 1899 to create the garden city of Letchworth.[4] However, these donors would collect interest on their
investment if the garden city generated profits through rents or as Fishman calls the process, ‘philanthropic land speculation’. [5] Howard tried
to include working-class cooperative organizations, which included over two million members, but could not win their financial
support.[6] Because he had to rely only on the wealthy investors of First Garden City, Howard had to make concessions to his plan, such as
eliminating the cooperative ownership scheme with no landlords, short-term rent increases, and hiring architects who did not agree with his
rigid design plans.[7]

In 1904, Raymond Unwin, a noted architect and town planner, along with his partner Barry Parker, won the competition run by the First
Garden City, Limited to plan Letchworth, an area 34 miles outside London. [8] Unwin and Parker planned the town in the centre of the
Letchworth estate with Howard’s large agricultural greenbelt surrounding the town, and they shared Howard’s notion that the working class
deserved better and more affordable housing. However, the architects ignored Howard’s symmetric design, instead replacing it with a more
‘organic’ design.[9]

Letchworth slowly attracted more residents because it was able to attract manufacturers through low taxes, low rents and more
space.[10] Despite Howard’s best efforts, the home prices in this garden city could not remain affordable for blue-collar workers to live in. The
populations composed mostly of skilled middle-class workers. After a decade, the First Garden City became profitable and started paying
dividends to its investors.[11] Although many viewed Letchworth as a success, it did not immediately inspire government investment into the
next line of garden cities.

In reference to the lack of government support for garden cities, Frederic James Osborn, a colleague of Howard and his eventual successor
at the Garden City Association, recalled him saying, “The only way to get anything done is to do it yourself.”[12] Likely in frustration, Howard
bought land at Welwyn to house the second garden city in 1919.[13]The purchase was at auction, with money Howard desperately and
successfully borrowed from friends. The Welwyn Garden City Corporation was formed to oversee the construction. But Welwyn did not
become self-sustaining because it was only 20 miles from London.[14]

Even until the end of the 1930s, Letchworth and Welwyn remained as the only existing garden cities. However, the movement did succeed in
emphasizing the need for urban planning policies that eventually led to the New Town movement.[15]

[edit]Garden cities
Howard organized the Garden City Association during 1899. Two garden cities were built using Howard's ideas: Letchworth Garden
City and Welwyn Garden City, both inHertfordshire, England. Howard's successor as chairman of the Garden City Association was Sir
Frederic Osborn, who extended the movement to regional planning.[16]

The concept was adopted again in England after World War II, when the New Towns Act caused the development of many new communities
based on Howard's egalitarian ideas.

The idea of the garden city was influential in the United States. Examples are: the Woodbourne neighborhood of Boston; Newport News,
Virginia's Hilton Village; Pittsburgh'sChatham Village; Garden City, New York; Sunnyside, Queens; Jackson Heights, Queens; Forest Hills
Gardens, also in the borough of Queens, New York; Radburn, New Jersey;Greenbelt, Maryland; Buckingham in Arlington County, Virginia;
the Lake Vista neighborhood in New Orleans; Norris, Tennessee; Baldwin Hills Village in Los Angeles; and theCleveland suburb of Shaker
Heights. In Canada, the Ontario towns of Kapuskasing and Walkerville are, in part, garden cities.

In Argentina, an example is Ciudad Jardín Lomas del Palomar, declared by the influential Argentinian professor of engineering, Carlos María
della Paolera, initiator of "Día Mundial del Urbanismo" (World Urbanism Day), as the first Garden City in South America.

In Australia, the suburb of Colonel Light Gardens in Adelaide, South Australia, was designed according to garden city principles.[17] So too the
town of Sunshine, which is now a suburb of Melbourne in Victoria.[18][19]

Garden city principles greatly influenced the design of colonial and post-colonial capitals during the early part of the 20th century. This is the
case for New Delhi (designed as the new capital of British-ruled India after World War 1), of Canberra (capital of Australia established during
1913) and of Quezon City (established during 1939, capital of thePhilippines 1948-76). The garden city model was also applied to many
colonial hill stations, such as Da Lat in Vietnam (est. 1907) and Ifrane in Morocco (est. 1929).

In Bhutan's capitol city Thimphu the new plan, with the Principles of Intelligent Urbanism, is an organic response to the fragile ecology. Using
sustainable concepts, it is a contemporary response to the Garden City concept.

The Garden City philosophy also influenced the Scottish urbanist, Sir Patrick Geddes, for the planning of Tel-Aviv, Israel during the 1920s,
during the British Mandate for Palestine. Geddes started his Tel Aviv plan in 1925 and submitted the final version in 1927, so all growth of this
garden city during the 1930s was merely "based" on the Geddes Plan. Changes were inevitable.[20]

[edit]Garden suburbs
The concept of garden cities is to produce relatively economically independent cities with short commute times and the preservation of the
countryside. Garden suburbs arguably do the opposite. Garden suburbs are built on the outskirts of large cities with no sections of industry
and dependent on trains to London[21].

Following Unwin’s participation in the Letchworth garden city project in 1907, he moved on to work one of the first garden suburbs,
Hampstead[22]. Years later, Unwin became very influential in government policy supporting garden suburbs as opposed to creating new
independent cities[23]. Many now view Unwin as turning his back on the garden city movement.

Garden suburbs were not part of Howard's plan[24] and were actually a hindrance to garden city planning—- they were in fact almost the
antithesis of Howard's plan, what he was trying to prevent. The suburbanization of London was an increasing problem which Howard
attempted to solve with his garden city model, which attempted to end urban sprawl by the sheer inhibition of land development due to the
land being maintained in trust, and the inclusion of agricultural areas on the city outskirts.[25]

Smaller developments were also inspired by the garden city philosophy and were modified to allow for residential "garden suburbs" without
the commercial and industrial components of the garden city. They were built on the outskirts of cities, in rural settings. Some notable
examples being, in London, Hampstead Garden Suburb and the 'Exhibition Estate' in Gidea Park and, in Liverpool, Wavertree Garden
Suburb. The Gidea Park estate in particular was built during two main periods of activity, 1911, and 1934. Both resulted in some good
examples of domestic architecture, by such architects as Wells Coates and Berthold Lubetkin. Thanks to such strongly conservative local
residents associations as the Civic Society, both Hampstead and Gidea Park retain much of their original character.

One unique example of a garden suburb is the Humberstone Garden Suburb in the United Kingdom by the Humberstone Anchor Tenants
association in Leicestershire and it is the only garden suburb ever to be built by the members of a workers co-operative; it remains intact to
the present.[26] During 1887 the workers of the Anchor shoe company in Humberstone formed a workers cooperative and built 97 houses.
American architect Walter Burley Griffin was a proponent of the fashion and after arrival in Australia to design the national capital Canberra,
produced a number of Garden Suburb estates, most notably at Eaglemont with the Glenard and Mount Eagle Estates and the Ranelagh and
Milleara Estates in Victoria.

[edit]

a) The Early Influences on The Garden City

The now well discussed event that initiated practical town-

planning in Great Britain and in many parts of the world
was the publication in 1898 of the book, "To-morrow: A
peaceful path to Real Reform," by Sir Ebenezer Howard.
Ironically, concerning the book, The Times wrote "an
ingenious and rather entertaining attempt - the only
difficulty is to create it." (October 19th. 1898.)
The influences on the book were mostly personal to
Howard, although a few previous parallels can be drawn.
At this stage the majority are with utopians, despite the
very realistic approach found in the book. In the early part
of the nineteenth century, several Village Associations
were set up to build around the London metropolis, e.g..
around Ilford for 5-6000 people in 1848. The ideals were
as follows; very similar in fact to the later design
constraints of the Garden City Prospectuses.

"Air and space, wood and water, schools and churches,

shrubberies and gardens, around pretty self contained
cottages in a group neither too large to deprive it of
country character, nor too small to diminish the
probabilities of social intercourse." (Edinburgh Magazine.
Dec. 1848.)

Indeed, this quote should be compared with "Tomorrow:"

inwhich Howard states

"... by so laying. out a Garden City that, as it grows, the

free gifts of Nature- fresh air, sunlight, breathing room and
playing room- shall be still retained in all needed
abundance" (Garden Cities of To-morrow. 1902 edition.
page 113)

Due to the expense of travel for the working and lower

classes of the time, the country offered a very romantic
retreat from town life, despite its worse deprivation.
Around the early 1800's the more well off classes were
becoming more aware of the deprived, as it began to affect
them. Diagrams from "Garden Cities of To-morrow" 1902

“We want all the beauty that is here... and more also. And
none of these distresses.... I believe- out of me and the
Good Will in me and my kind there comes a regenerate
world-cleansed of suffering and sorrow.” ("New Worlds
for Old". H.G.Wells 1908.)
The misery of the towns came to the fore in such writings
as the "Communist Manifesto" by Marx & Engels (1848)
and the works of Booth.

It is interesting to note that in all these early ventures,

private enterprise was very important, e.g. James Silk
Buckingham's plan for "Victoria" in l849; from which
Howard obviously derived the radial diagrams for Garden
City. Buckingham states that his scheme was designed to
"avoid the evils of communism". At this time the technical
and the political aspects of town planning thought were
very closely related. Howard in his own book thought that
his Garden City should be a private enterprise, though he
did think that parliamentary powers would be necessary
for a larger project.

The plan for Victoria consisted of an outer square

containing 1000 houses and gardens, a second square
slightly smaller within containing a covered arcade with
workshops; similar to Howard's Crystal Palace containing
shops and a winter garden, though possibly both were
influenced by a similar plan to surround London with such
a concourse. In Victoria a central square contained the
more expensive houses and public buildings and the three
were all connected with radiating avenues, tree-lined and
extending from the centre. Howard states; "I had got far on
with my project.." before he read Buckingham's book. (See
"Garden Cities of To-morrow" 2nd ed.p112) The acreage
of Victoria was to be 10,000 in total, although only 1,000
acres were to be built on, with a surrounding agricultural
estate. Howard's original draft for his book also had a total
of nearly this; 9,000 acres, with 1,000 built on. This was
later reduced to 6,000 but with 1,000 acres for 30,000
inhabitants, (intensity 30 persons/acre.) and an additional
2,000 people in the surrounding 5,000 acre agricultural
estate. The town also had l20ft. wide radiating boulevards,
planted with trees, dividing the town into six sectors.
The reason for the town was "to raise the standard of
health and comfort of all true workers of whatever grade,"
this being similar to the utopian city "Hygeia" in 1875 of
Dr. Benjamin Ward Richardson which had a population of
100,000 in 20,000 houses on 4,000 acres. (25persons/acre)

In this city the boulevards were to be "....planted on each

side of the pathways with trees, and in many places with
shrubs and evergreens." The important variation between
Howard's ideas and all previous utopian thought was the
realistic way in which he had gone into explaining how the
design could be carried out. His illustrations are only
diagrams, dependent on the site, and this gave a new
dimension to the town plan; a versatile freedom during its
creation. The financial method of supporting the settlement
on the increase in land value, "the unearned increment"
due to its construction on virgin land, was entirely new.
The basis though came from his own personal experiences,
especially the reading of Bellamy’s "Looking; Backward"
which gave Howard his co-operative approach. His
alternative living in the city and country during his
younger days obviously had a prime effect together with
the period he spent in the United States, especially the four
years in Chicago after 1871. At this time a third of its
population was homeless and Chicago was "The Garden
City," due to the designing, before the fire, of the city's
most ambitious park system in 1869.

One reason why Sir Ebenezer Howard's book failed to

engage the attention of political and sociological experts at
the time of its publication was because of his limited
knowledge in the field in which he was to make such a
distinguished contribution.

(b) The Early Garden City Movement

"My proposal is that there should be an earnest attempt

made to organise a migratory movement of population
from our overcrowded centres to sparsely-settled rural
districts; that the mind of the public should not be
confused, or the efforts of organisers wasted in a
premature attempt to accomplish this work on a national
scale, but that great thought and attention shall be first
concentrated on a single movement yet one sufficiently
large to be at once attractive and resourceful;..." ("Garden
Cities of To-morrow” E. Howard. 1902 edition. Page 112.)

The movement was accomplished, but only in the New

Town programme over half a century later. Less than eight
months after the publication of "To-morrow" ,the Garden
City Association was formed by Howard and in May 1900
it resolved "to form a limited company called The Garden
City Limited", and in 1901 Ralph Neville K.C. became its Rushby Mead, Letchworth (1908)

chairman. Two conferences were held, the first at

Bournville in 1901, established by George Cadbury twelve
years earlier on 612 acres, there being at that time 925
houses on 138 acres, in which 300 delegates attended. And
a second in July 1902 at Port Sunlight near Birkenhead
when 1000 attended. The later was established by William
H. Lever in 1887 on 56 acres. These were decisive
propaganda steps leading eventually to the creation of
Letchworth. To an appreciable extent it can be seen, on
drawing comparisons between these early examples and
Letchworth, that town planning attitude was rooted in
artistic rather than social considerations. The similarities
between The Causeway at Port Sunlight, Broadway at
Letchworth and Parkway at Welwyn Garden City are
obvious, although this is only a single example. Several
important factors gave credibility to the Garden City
proposals. Namely the existence of such material examples
as those above and also that by Sir Titus Salt (Saitaire near
Bradford) which was opened in 1853 with 3000
inhabitants housed in 800 houses. Also effective was its
remarkably simple economic base, put forward as a
legitimate undertaking for private enterprise.
On the 16th. July 1902, The Garden City Pioneer
Company Limited was registered with a capital of
£20,000, with the idea of setting up and constructing a
Garden City around London. The original company was
wound-up after some lengthy negotiations concerning the
contract for the Letchworth estate and its signing in July
1903, and The First Garden City Ltd. was registered at
Somerset House on September 1st.

(c) The Garden City Style

"The idea of the promoters of the Garden City was not to

build an artistic town. We must first see that our citizens
are decently housed." This was the attitude of Raymond
Unwin, architect at Letchworth, and whereas this may be
so, there still remains a strong resemblance aesthetically
between all the Garden Cities and Suburbs. A resemblance
of planning and architectural style mainly initiated by
Unwin and his partner Barry Parker and carried on by such
people as Louis de Soissons and Kenyon at Welwyn.
Indeed the style has also had a vast influence on the New
Towns, and it is this more than anything that has affected
living conditions within them. The "style" is medieval,
with strong associations with the imminent "arts and crafts
cottage style". A large use is made of dormer windows,
steep gabled roofs with low eves, sometimes mansard, and
well categorised in Unwin's book, "Town Planning in
Practice".

In the book, strong use is made of the "inward-looking"

cul-de-sac and of cottages collected around "natural"
greens . Narrow, informally winding gravel roads, between
avenues of trees; the Garden City aesthetic at its best.
The plan by Messrs. Barry Parker and Raymond Unwin of
Letchworth in 1903, was based on an area of 1250 acres
for 30,000 inhabitants, (24 persons/acre) with 2500 acres
reserved as rural belt. This plan was of course subject to
modification as Howard states, ".... this abscence of plan
avoids the dangers of stagnation..." as development
proceeded. Another plan was prepared by W.R.Lethaby
and Halsey Ricardo in 1903, which was not used, and both
plans surprisingly resemble each other, and Wren's plan
for rebuilding London after the Great Fire of 1666. They
are similar, even down to the radiating tree lined avenues
and their positions on entering the town square.

According to Unwin the axis for the town at Letchworth

was established because of the positions of three old oak
trees on the site; an important step for future planning.

"the most beautiful gardens of all I believe to be those in

which some of the aims of the landscape gardener have
been carried out on a simple and orderly plan." (Town
Planning in Practice. R. Unwin 2nd. ed.)

Letchworth was planned basically by the constraints of the

site. Welwyn Garden City Site Plan (1927)

"That every house should have its garden and should be so

placed and planned that all its rooms should be flooded
with light and sunshine, unblocked by other houses or by
its own projections, were the main ideals. It was necessary
to break away from the customary type of street with its
endless rows of houses, cramped in frontage, hideous in
appearance from the street, and squalid in the congestion
of its back projections and its yards." (Raymond Unwin
FRIBA)

These were the reasons for the style that was evolved and
had a strong influence on all town planning since. The
creation of a medium between social reform of the squalid
cities and the integration of nature. Indeed in the 1930's,
Unwin's book was the bible for most planners, although its
power has since wained.

(d) Letchworth and Hampstead

Strong parallels and changes can be noted between

Letchworth and Hampstead Garden Suburb; (construction
began May 1907) the later being much more formal and
overall perfect. Concerning Letchworth, C.B.Purdom
states;

“the actual Garden City is less perfect than the ideal, but,
we may hope, more human..... So far as aesthetics were
concerned the directors had no policy whatever." (The
Garden City. 1913) Letchworth: Straight curbed roads with uniform planting

This conflict had definite results. Unwin, whereas he did

have to approve all submitted designs in the town, rejected
little. No means were available to carry through what the
Letchworth prospectus spoke of “the high standard of
beauty which they desire to attain in the Garden City.” The
pamphlet that The Garden City Company issued in 1904 to
intending builders should illustrate this lack of planning
standard concerning aesthetics.

"It should be remembered that a sunny aspect for the main Hampstead: Curving unmade lanes and max. use of site
rooms is almost as important as ample air space.... (there
should be) no outbuildings at all; the w.c. or e.c. being
under the main roof and entered from the porch or from a
lobby outside. The promoters believe that by encouraging
quite simple buildings, well built and suitably designed
and grouped together they will be helping to secure far the
Garden City a special charm and attractiveness by methods
which experience shows are better calculated to ensure
them than the lavish use of pointless ornament."

It should be noted that these are only "suggestions" and

that the whole pamphlet, on further reading, is in very
general terms. The very feeble attempt to set an aesthetic
standard for the town failed. One uniformity in the town
did occur, and that was of the roof colour. This; "as the
only aesthetic constraint that was felt important" and to
which the directors were sympathetic. The causes of the
indifferent building at Letchworth, are many, but probably
the most important were the problems concerned with
getting speculative builders to build in the town, and hence
get industry to settle. The Garden City as a new concept
was obviously viewed with scepticism, and the directors
could not be too limiting. This was the main initial
problem concerning a private undertaking of this kind, as
opposed to a government project. Although this was not
seen at the time as a failure of the company; "this
control.... broke down because it attempted the
impossible," it was proven to be so at Welwyn, and later at
Letchworth in the planning of Broadway, when uniformity
was obtained. Of course this was taken to extremes for
other reasons in the first New Towns.

"There is, however, (at Letchworth) none of the fearful

exactness, the almost painful sense of tidiness, and the
self-conscious aestheticism that are experiences in the new
suburb at Hampstead. A town is not made by one man, nor
by one man's ideas.... There are for instance, many
unquestionably ugly houses at Letchworth." (The Garden
City. Purdom.)

The work of the Parker and Unwin partnership produced a

much more static nature and greater uniformity in the
smaller unit at Hampstead. Personally I think that because
of this it is much more pleasing and as a whole, more
united. The main reason for the change is it seems, the
influence of the medieval ideas of Camillo Sitte and his
principles concerning devotion to deliberate informality
and irregularity. Straight streets become curved and
corners, which were previously open of buildings become
built up. A picturesque atmosphere was important, and
thus a static whole, contrary to Howard's versatile
principle of plan. This is basically why Hampstead
succeeded; its small size was essential. It is the collection
of conflicting architects at Letchworth that introduced its
disconnected nature.

(e) Welwyn Garden City

I am now going to cover Welwyn in more detail as an

important bridge between the original Garden City ideals
and those of The New Town Movement. Welwyn
underwent these changes in planning over time, due to
subsequent changes in management and thus is a good
illustrative example.

"My ideals have as yet been realised only to a small

degree, but I plainly see time and its evolutionary
processes fighting ever on my side." ( Ebenezer Howard in
Purdom's "The Garden City", writing on Letchworth.)

Welwyn Garden City was started immediately after the

First World War in the period when Lloyd George
invented his slogan, "A fit country for heroes to live in"
and the max. residential density was raised to 12
houses/acre, to cover the increased demand. After
Letchworth the term "Garden City" came into common
usage, and for a long time, Howard's carefully defined
concept was lost. It seems that also at this stage, several of
his previous disciples began to doubt his initiative. They
include Sir Frederick Osborn, who was concerned with
Letchworth and became chairman of the We1wyn
Company until 1935. He thought of him as "a fine old
spirit but no longer capable of initiating a great enterprise."
He was to be proved wrong when on 30th. May 1919, at an
auction sale, Howard put down a deposit for part of Lord
Desborough's Panshanger estate near Welwyn consisting
of 1,458 acres at £51,000. Indeed the Second Garden City
Ltd. was formed on 29th. April 1920, with a capital of
£250,000.

In a pamphlet for private circulation, issued on 25th.

September 1919, it was stated;

"The Board have invited Mr. C.M.Crickmer F.R.I.B.A. (an

architect already partially engaged at Letchworth) to
prepare the preliminary Town Plan on Garden City
principles.... The preservation of the beauty of the district
and the securing of architectural harmony in the new
buildings, will be among the first considerations of the Welwyn Garden City: Campus & Parkway
company..... The maximum density will be twelve houses
to the acre."

The average was to be no more than 5, with when the final

property was totally purchased ( in 1949 ) a population of
40-50,000 on 4536 acres. The first houses were designed
by Crickmer and built in 1920 on Handside Lane. Bernard
Shaw is said to have denounced these as a "slum" although
indeed, they are of the Letchworth tradition and very
simple in construction. Then came one of the first of many
progressions towards a new improved type of planning,
when on 26th. April 1920, Louis de Soissons F.R.I.B.A.
was appointed to make out new plans for the town, which
were presented to the board on 11th. June.

De Soissons' original plans, again did not hold any

mandatory power, although those drawn up are still in
form, very similar to Unwin's planning style. A similar
relation between formal and informal, winding' roads
exists. A large use is made of cul do sacs, and interesting
copies between de Soisson's plans and "Town Planning in
Practice" can be noted.

The Welwyn directors were much firmer than those

concerned at Letchworth in supporting their
architect/planner, and under the companies lease system
the external design of all buildings was subject to
approval. The company was not in such a weak position,
compared with before, and this I feel produced a much
nicer overall composition aesthetically. De Soissons chose
for the town's main style the red-brick Georgian
architecture of surrounding Hertfordshire rather than the
Letchworth tradition.

Welwyn Garden City was the first development to benefit

from the 1919 Housing Act, and in 1921, Welwyn Rural
District Council, later to be an U.D.C. started building
schemes under the jurisdiction of De Soissons. This period
of design is still though very similar to that of Unwin,
while certain aspects did give it an individual rural
character. One important feature was the lack of metalled
roads suitable for road traffic. The two original Garden
Cities had rolled gravel roads on flint hardcore, of varying
standard widths dependent on their use. This was mainly
due to limited company resources, although maintenance
costs were high; it gave a certain “rural” atmosphere. Most
of the roads had no visible curb stones, or pavements and
so the grass verges moulded into the roads in a very
country manner. This has, with the advent of motor traffic,
long since gone, and a great amount of the character has
been lost. The actual houses in the residential districts had
purpose built outbuildings, built by the company, so that
tenants did not erect unsightly sheds. Rented houses were
mainly built, although the company did start building for
owner-occupation eventually. Higher rents were charged
for better premises than those of the council. Similar
elements between Unwin and de Soissons, and for that
matter New Town planning are many. In the residential
area, "the natural contour of the land had to be taken
advantage of and the architectural effect that was aimed at
had to be secured by strictly utilitarian means."
The reason given for cul de sacs was to make maximum
use of the land with minimum service expenditure. The
"Prairie Planning" outcry concerning the phase one New
Towns was based on the assumption that they used Garden
City ideals, whereas the urbanity of the early Welwyn cul
de sacs is very real. The requirements of company
expenditure and Unwin's " nothing was gained by
overcrowding" produced very intimate enclosures with
relatively high density planning around.

At Welwyn, “there was no money for embellishments.”

The roads therefore follow the contours of the land
wherever possible so that the greatest amount of land
could be developed at the lowest cost. “An examination of
the plan will show certain roads on the curve and others
made straight. This was not done on the drawing board to
get a road scheme that looked good on paper; it is the
result of following the natural conditions of the site”. This
is important because on comparing the Welwyn plan with
that of Letchworth and then Hampstead it will be seen that
a progression is nearing completion. The radiating
boulevards of Howard's diagrams have, perhaps non-
intentionally, produced a similar symmetrical/limiting
town plan. Welwyn nearly avoided the formal avenue.
Only the town centre has them, although this, because of
its position makes it the most visually attractive part of the
town. A progression away from the formal to the informal
is present, even down to extreme informality in the first
new towns. The Unwin mixture of the two, comes to a
climax at Welwyn.

All trees already established were wherever possible left in

the plan, all the roads were planted with trees and many
more were planted at the back of building plots. At focal
points, large trees were planted in groups to make features
in the roads and cul de sacs. A large use was made of a
flexible building line although the cornice line on
building's is maintained along the length of roads, despite
in some cases a gradient. According to Purdom, "Welwyn
has shown that the best results are to be secured by
building schemes being carried out as consistent units."
The close is recommended by him as an important
aesthetic, functional and social improvisation. De Soissons
states that thirty is the max. number of houses to be put in
one of them, although at Welwyn few have more than 12.
Due to the companies important stress on residential
development, this is where most of the trends exist.
Welwyn for a long time, because of the commercial
policy, lacked adequate means of socialising. No public
houses were built; the council built a single community
centre on the periphery of the town, and a single theatre
held a monopoly together with the department store. Only
now, and it is still in course of construction, has a possibly
satisfactory amenities centre come into being.
The Effect of Sir Ebenezer Howard
and the
Garden City Movement
on
Twentieth Century Town Planning

An evaluation of the changes in British town planning, by comparing the completed

aesthetic design.

Using Welwyn Garden City as the basis and taking into consideration the early
influences and present constraints.
Sir Ebenezer Howard

Contents

SECTION ONE:- THE GENERAL PLANNING

a. The Early Influences on the Garden City.

b. The Early Garden City Movement.
c. The Garden City Style.
d. Letchworth and Hampstead.
e. Welwyn Garden City.

SECTION TWO:- THE RESIDENTIAL PLANNING

a. Analysis of Garden City Housing.

b. New Town Housing.

SECTION THREE:- THE DENSITY PROGRESSION

a. The New Town Legislation.

b. Land Allocation Variations.
c. State and Commercial Planning.
d. "Prairie Planning" and The New Town Phases.
e. Conclusion.

SECTION 0NE:- THE GENERAL PLANNING

(a) The Early Influences on The Garden City

The now well discussed event that initiated practical town-planning in Great Britain and in many parts of the world was the publication in
1898 of the book, "To-morrow: A peaceful path to Real Reform," by Sir Ebenezer Howard. Ironically, concerning the book, The Times
wrote "an ingenious and rather entertaining attempt - the only difficulty is to create it." (October 19th. 1898.)

The influences on the book were mostly personal to Howard, although a few previous parallels can be drawn. At this stage the majority
are with utopians, despite the very realistic approach found in the book. In the early part of the nineteenth century, several Village
Associations were set up to build around the London metropolis, e.g.. around Ilford for 5-6000 people in 1848. The ideals were as follows;
very similar in fact to the later design constraints of the Garden City Prospectuses.

"Air and space, wood and water, schools and churches, shrubberies and gardens, around pretty self contained cottages in a group neither
too large to deprive it of country character, nor too small to diminish the probabilities of social intercourse." (Edinburgh Magazine. Dec.
1848.)

Indeed, this quote should be compared with "Tomorrow:" inwhich Howard states
"... by so laying. out a Garden City that, as it grows, the free gifts of Nature- fresh air, sunlight, breathing room and playing room- shall be
still retained in all needed abundance" (Garden Cities of To-morrow. 1902 edition. page 113)

Due to the expense of travel for the working and lower classes of the time, the country offered a very romantic retreat from town life,
despite its worse deprivation. Around the early 1800's the more well off classes were becoming more aware of the deprived, as it began
to affect them.

“We want all the beauty that is here... and more also. And none of these distresses.... I believe- out of me and the Good Will in me and
my kind there comes a regenerate world-cleansed of suffering and sorrow.” ("New Worlds for Old". H.G.Wells 1908.)

The misery of the towns came to the fore in such writings as the "Communist Manifesto" by Marx & Engels (1848) and the works of
Booth.

Diagrams from "Garden Cities of

It is interesting to note that in all these early ventures, private enterprise was very important, e.g. James Silk Buckingham's plan for To-morrow" 1902
"Victoria" in l849; from which Howard obviously derived the radial diagrams for Garden City. Buckingham states that his scheme was
designed to "avoid the evils of communism". At this time the technical and the political aspects of town planning thought were very
closely related. Howard in his own book thought that his Garden City should be a private enterprise, though he did think that
parliamentary powers would be necessary for a larger project.

The plan for Victoria consisted of an outer square containing 1000 houses and gardens, a second square slightly smaller within containing
a covered arcade with workshops; similar to Howard's Crystal Palace containing shops and a winter garden, though possibly both were
influenced by a similar plan to surround London with such a concourse. In Victoria a central square contained the more expensive houses
and public buildings and the three were all connected with radiating avenues, tree-lined and extending from the centre. Howard states; "I
had got far on with my project.." before he read Buckingham's book. (See "Garden Cities of To-morrow" 2nd ed.p112) The acreage of
Victoria was to be 10,000 in total, although only 1,000 acres were to be built on, with a surrounding agricultural estate. Howard's original
draft for his book also had a total of nearly this; 9,000 acres, with 1,000 built on. This was later reduced to 6,000 but with 1,000 acres for
30,000 inhabitants, (intensity 30 persons/acre.) and an additional 2,000 people in the surrounding 5,000 acre agricultural estate. The
town also had l20ft. wide radiating boulevards, planted with trees, dividing the town into six sectors.

The reason for the town was "to raise the standard of health and comfort of all true workers of whatever grade," this being similar to the
utopian city "Hygeia" in 1875 of Dr. Benjamin Ward Richardson which had a population of 100,000 in 20,000 houses on 4,000 acres.
(25persons/acre)
In this city the boulevards were to be "....planted on each side of the pathways with trees, and in many places with shrubs and
evergreens." The important variation between Howard's ideas and all previous utopian thought was the realistic way in which he had
gone into explaining how the design could be carried out. His illustrations are only diagrams, dependent on the site, and this gave a new
dimension to the town plan; a versatile freedom during its creation. The financial method of supporting the settlement on the increase in
land value, "the unearned increment" due to its construction on virgin land, was entirely new. The basis though came from his own
personal experiences, especially the reading of Bellamy’s "Looking; Backward" which gave Howard his co-operative approach. His
alternative living in the city and country during his younger days obviously had a prime effect together with the period he spent in the
United States, especially the four years in Chicago after 1871. At this time a third of its population was homeless and Chicago was "The
Garden City," due to the designing, before the fire, of the city's most ambitious park system in 1869.

One reason why Sir Ebenezer Howard's book failed to engage the attention of political and sociological experts at the time of its
publication was because of his limited knowledge in the field in which he was to make such a distinguished contribution.

(b) The Early Garden City Movement

"My proposal is that there should be an earnest attempt made to organise a migratory movement of population from our overcrowded
centres to sparsely-settled rural districts; that the mind of the public should not be confused, or the efforts of organisers wasted in a
premature attempt to accomplish this work on a national scale, but that great thought and attention shall be first concentrated on a
single movement yet one sufficiently large to be at once attractive and resourceful;..." ("Garden Cities of To-morrow” E. Howard. 1902
edition. Page 112.)

The movement was accomplished, but only in the New Town programme over half a century later. Less than eight months after the
publication of "To-morrow" ,the Garden City Association was formed by Howard and in May 1900 it resolved "to form a limited company
called The Garden City Limited", and in 1901 Ralph Neville K.C. became its chairman. Two conferences were held, the first at Bournville in
1901, established by George Cadbury twelve years earlier on 612 acres, there being at that time 925 houses on 138 acres, in which 300
delegates attended. And a second in July 1902 at Port Sunlight near Birkenhead when 1000 attended. The later was established by
William H. Lever in 1887 on 56 acres. These were decisive propaganda steps leading eventually to the creation of Letchworth. To an
appreciable extent it can be seen, on drawing comparisons between these early examples and Letchworth, that town planning attitude
was rooted in artistic rather than social considerations. The similarities between The Causeway at Port Sunlight, Broadway at Letchworth
Rushby Mead, Letchworth
and Parkway at Welwyn Garden City are obvious, although this is only a single example. Several important factors gave credibility to the (1908)
Garden City proposals. Namely the existence of such material examples as those above and also that by Sir Titus Salt (Saitaire near
Bradford) which was opened in 1853 with 3000 inhabitants housed in 800 houses. Also effective was its remarkably simple economic
base, put forward as a legitimate undertaking for private enterprise.
On the 16th. July 1902, The Garden City Pioneer Company Limited was registered with a capital of £20,000, with the idea of setting up
and constructing a Garden City around London. The original company was wound-up after some lengthy negotiations concerning the
contract for the Letchworth estate and its signing in July 1903, and The First Garden City Ltd. was registered at Somerset House on
September 1st.

(c) The Garden City Style

"The idea of the promoters of the Garden City was not to build an artistic town. We must first see that our citizens are decently housed."
This was the attitude of Raymond Unwin, architect at Letchworth, and whereas this may be so, there still remains a strong resemblance
aesthetically between all the Garden Cities and Suburbs. A resemblance of planning and architectural style mainly initiated by Unwin and
his partner Barry Parker and carried on by such people as Louis de Soissons and Kenyon at Welwyn. Indeed the style has also had a vast
influence on the New Towns, and it is this more than anything that has affected living conditions within them. The "style" is medieval,
with strong associations with the imminent "arts and crafts cottage style". A large use is made of dormer windows, steep gabled roofs
with low eves, sometimes mansard, and well categorised in Unwin's book, "Town Planning in Practice".

In the book, strong use is made of the "inward-looking" cul-de-sac and of cottages collected around "natural" greens . Narrow, informally
winding gravel roads, between avenues of trees; the Garden City aesthetic at its best.

The plan by Messrs. Barry Parker and Raymond Unwin of Letchworth in 1903, was based on an area of 1250 acres for 30,000 inhabitants,
(24 persons/acre) with 2500 acres reserved as rural belt. This plan was of course subject to modification as Howard states, ".... this
abscence of plan avoids the dangers of stagnation..." as development proceeded. Another plan was prepared by W.R.Lethaby and Halsey
Ricardo in 1903, which was not used, and both plans surprisingly resemble each other, and Wren's plan for rebuilding London after the
Great Fire of 1666. They are similar, even down to the radiating tree lined avenues and their positions on entering the town square.

According to Unwin the axis for the town at Letchworth was established because of the positions of three old oak trees on the site; an
important step for future planning.

"the most beautiful gardens of all I believe to be those in which some of the aims of the landscape gardener have been carried out on a
simple and orderly plan." (Town Planning in Practice. R. Unwin 2nd. ed.) Welwyn Garden City Site Plan
 (1927)

Letchworth was planned basically by the constraints of the site.

"That every house should have its garden and should be so placed and planned that all its rooms should be flooded with light and
sunshine, unblocked by other houses or by its own projections, were the main ideals. It was necessary to break away from the customary
type of street with its endless rows of houses, cramped in frontage, hideous in appearance from the street, and squalid in the congestion
of its back projections and its yards." (Raymond Unwin FRIBA)

These were the reasons for the style that was evolved and had a strong influence on all town planning since. The creation of a medium
between social reform of the squalid cities and the integration of nature. Indeed in the 1930's, Unwin's book was the bible for most
planners, although its power has since wained.

(d) Letchworth and Hampstead

Strong parallels and changes can be noted between Letchworth and Hampstead Garden Suburb; (construction began May 1907) the later
being much more formal and overall perfect. Concerning Letchworth, C.B.Purdom states;

“the actual Garden City is less perfect than the ideal, but, we may hope, more human..... So far as aesthetics were concerned the
directors had no policy whatever." (The Garden City. 1913)

This conflict had definite results. Unwin, whereas he did have to approve all submitted designs in the town, rejected little. No means
were available to carry through what the Letchworth prospectus spoke of “the high standard of beauty which they desire to attain in the
Garden City.” The pamphlet that The Garden City Company issued in 1904 to intending builders should illustrate this lack of planning Letchworth: Straight curbed
roads with uniform planting
standard concerning aesthetics.

"It should be remembered that a sunny aspect for the main rooms is almost as important as ample air space.... (there should be) no
outbuildings at all; the w.c. or e.c. being under the main roof and entered from the porch or from a lobby outside. The promoters believe
that by encouraging quite simple buildings, well built and suitably designed and grouped together they will be helping to secure far the
Garden City a special charm and attractiveness by methods which experience shows are better calculated to ensure them than the lavish
use of pointless ornament."

It should be noted that these are only "suggestions" and that the whole pamphlet, on further reading, is in very general terms. The very
feeble attempt to set an aesthetic standard for the town failed. One uniformity in the town did occur, and that was of the roof colour.
Hampstead: Curving unmade
This; "as the only aesthetic constraint that was felt important" and to which the directors were sympathetic. The causes of the indifferent lanes and max. use of site

building at Letchworth, are many, but probably the most important were the problems concerned with getting speculative builders to
build in the town, and hence get industry to settle. The Garden City as a new concept was obviously viewed with scepticism, and the
directors could not be too limiting. This was the main initial problem concerning a private undertaking of this kind, as opposed to a
government project. Although this was not seen at the time as a failure of the company; "this control.... broke down because it
attempted the impossible," it was proven to be so at Welwyn, and later at Letchworth in the planning of Broadway, when uniformity was
obtained. Of course this was taken to extremes for other reasons in the first New Towns.

"There is, however, (at Letchworth) none of the fearful exactness, the almost painful sense of tidiness, and the self-conscious
aestheticism that are experiences in the new suburb at Hampstead. A town is not made by one man, nor by one man's ideas.... There are
for instance, many unquestionably ugly houses at Letchworth." (The Garden City. Purdom.)

The work of the Parker and Unwin partnership produced a much more static nature and greater uniformity in the smaller unit at
Hampstead. Personally I think that because of this it is much more pleasing and as a whole, more united. The main reason for the change
is it seems, the influence of the medieval ideas of Camillo Sitte and his principles concerning devotion to deliberate informality and
irregularity. Straight streets become curved and corners, which were previously open of buildings become built up. A picturesque
atmosphere was important, and thus a static whole, contrary to Howard's versatile principle of plan. This is basically why Hampstead
succeeded; its small size was essential. It is the collection of conflicting architects at Letchworth that introduced its disconnected nature.

(e) Welwyn Garden City

I am now going to cover Welwyn in more detail as an important bridge between the original Garden City ideals and those of The New
Town Movement. Welwyn underwent these changes in planning over time, due to subsequent changes in management and thus is a
good illustrative example.

"My ideals have as yet been realised only to a small degree, but I plainly see time and its evolutionary processes fighting ever on my side."
( Ebenezer Howard in Purdom's "The Garden City", writing on Letchworth.)

Welwyn Garden City was started immediately after the First World War in the period when Lloyd George invented his slogan, "A fit
country for heroes to live in" and the max. residential density was raised to 12 houses/acre, to cover the increased demand. After
Letchworth the term "Garden City" came into common usage, and for a long time, Howard's carefully defined concept was lost. It seems
that also at this stage, several of his previous disciples began to doubt his initiative. They include Sir Frederick Osborn, who was
concerned with Letchworth and became chairman of the We1wyn Company until 1935. He thought of him as "a fine old spirit but no
longer capable of initiating a great enterprise." He was to be proved wrong when on 30th. May 1919, at an auction sale, Howard put
down a deposit for part of Lord Desborough's Panshanger estate near Welwyn consisting of 1,458 acres at £51,000. Indeed the Second
Garden City Ltd. was formed on 29th. April 1920, with a capital of £250,000.

In a pamphlet for private circulation, issued on 25th. September 1919, it was stated;

"The Board have invited Mr. C.M.Crickmer F.R.I.B.A. (an architect already partially engaged at Letchworth) to prepare the preliminary
Town Plan on Garden City principles.... The preservation of the beauty of the district and the securing of architectural harmony in the new
buildings, will be among the first considerations of the company..... The maximum density will be twelve houses to the acre."

The average was to be no more than 5, with when the final property was totally purchased ( in 1949 ) a population of 40-50,000 on 4536
acres. The first houses were designed by Crickmer and built in 1920 on Handside Lane. Bernard Shaw is said to have denounced these as a
"slum" although indeed, they are of the Letchworth tradition and very simple in construction. Then came one of the first of many
progressions towards a new improved type of planning, when on 26th. April 1920, Louis de Soissons F.R.I.B.A. was appointed to make out
new plans for the town, which were presented to the board on 11th. June.

De Soissons' original plans, again did not hold any mandatory power, although those drawn up are still in form, very similar to Unwin's
planning style. A similar relation between formal and informal, winding' roads exists. A large use is made of cul do sacs, and interesting
copies between de Soisson's plans and "Town Planning in Practice" can be noted.

The Welwyn directors were much firmer than those concerned at Letchworth in supporting their architect/planner, and under the
companies lease system the external design of all buildings was subject to approval. The company was not in such a weak position,
compared with before, and this I feel produced a much nicer overall composition aesthetically. De Soissons chose for the town's main
style the red-brick Georgian architecture of surrounding Hertfordshire rather than the Letchworth tradition.

Welwyn Garden City was the first development to benefit from the 1919 Housing Act, and in 1921, Welwyn Rural District Council, later to
be an U.D.C. started building schemes under the jurisdiction of De Soissons. This period of design is still though very similar to that of
Unwin, while certain aspects did give it an individual rural character. One important feature was the lack of metalled roads suitable for
road traffic. The two original Garden Cities had rolled gravel roads on flint hardcore, of varying standard widths dependent on their use.
This was mainly due to limited company resources, although maintenance costs were high; it gave a certain “rural” atmosphere. Most of
the roads had no visible curb stones, or pavements and so the grass verges moulded into the roads in a very country manner. This has,
with the advent of motor traffic, long since gone, and a great amount of the character has been lost. The actual houses in the residential
districts had purpose built outbuildings, built by the company, so that tenants did not erect unsightly sheds. Rented houses were mainly
built, although the company did start building for owner-occupation eventually. Higher rents were charged for better premises than
those of the council. Similar elements between Unwin and de Soissons, and for that matter New Town planning are many. In the
residential area, "the natural contour of the land had to be taken advantage of and the architectural effect that was aimed at had to be
secured by strictly utilitarian means."

The reason given for cul de sacs was to make maximum use of the land with minimum service expenditure. The "Prairie Planning" outcry
concerning the phase one New Towns was based on the assumption that they used Garden City ideals, whereas the urbanity of the early
Welwyn cul de sacs is very real. The requirements of company expenditure and Unwin's " nothing was gained by overcrowding" produced
very intimate enclosures with relatively high density planning around.

At Welwyn, “there was no money for embellishments.” The roads therefore follow the contours of the land wherever possible so that the
Welwyn Garden City: Campus &
greatest amount of land could be developed at the lowest cost. “An examination of the plan will show certain roads on the curve and Parkway
others made straight. This was not done on the drawing board to get a road scheme that looked good on paper; it is the result of
following the natural conditions of the site”. This is important because on comparing the Welwyn plan with that of Letchworth and then
Hampstead it will be seen that a progression is nearing completion. The radiating boulevards of Howard's diagrams have, perhaps non-
intentionally, produced a similar symmetrical/limiting town plan. Welwyn nearly avoided the formal avenue. Only the town centre has
them, although this, because of its position makes it the most visually attractive part of the town. A progression away from the formal to
the informal is present, even down to extreme informality in the first new towns. The Unwin mixture of the two, comes to a climax at
Welwyn.

All trees already established were wherever possible left in the plan, all the roads were planted with trees and many more were planted
at the back of building plots. At focal points, large trees were planted in groups to make features in the roads and cul de sacs. A large use
was made of a flexible building line although the cornice line on building's is maintained along the length of roads, despite in some cases
a gradient. According to Purdom, "Welwyn has shown that the best results are to be secured by building schemes being carried out as
consistent units." The close is recommended by him as an important aesthetic, functional and social improvisation. De Soissons states
that thirty is the max. number of houses to be put in one of them, although at Welwyn few have more than 12. Due to the companies
important stress on residential development, this is where most of the trends exist. Welwyn for a long time, because of the commercial
policy, lacked adequate means of socialising. No public houses were built; the council built a single community centre on the periphery of
the town, and a single theatre held a monopoly together with the department store. Only now, and it is still in course of construction, has
a possibly satisfactory amenities centre come into being.
 Published by Norman
Lucey
Rickmansworth,
Hertfordshire, United
Kingdom
e-
mail: norman@lucey.net

© Copyright 1973,
Norman Lucey. All
rights reserved.