20th century new towns conference proceedings

(1)

Internacional Conference

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

ARCHETYPES AND UNCERTAINTIES

3RUWR(6$3$XGLWRULXP0D\

&HQWURGH(VWXGRV $UQDOGR $UD~MR ĚĞƉĂƌƚĂŵĞŶƚŽ

(2)

(3)

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

Archetypes and Uncertainties

Conference proceedings

Edited by

Paolo Marcolin and Joaquim Flores

DARQ| Departamento de Arquitectura

(4)

Title:

20th Century New Towns. Archetypes and Uncertainties. Conference Proceedings.

Editors:

Paolo Marcolin & Joaquim Flores

Grafic design: Joana Couto

Design of the cover: Paolo Marcolin

Edition:

CEAA | Centro de Estudos Arnaldo Araújo DARQ | Departamento de Arquitectura Escola Superior Artística do Porto

Property:

CESAP | Cooperativa de Ensino Superior Artístico do Porto

Impressão e acabamento:

CEAA | Centro de Estudos Arnaldo Araújo Porto, Portugal

1st_{edition, Porto, May 2014} Print: 200 CD Rom copies ISBN: 978-972-8784-57-7

CEAA | Centro de Estudos Arnaldo Araújo DARQ | Departamento de Arquitectura Escola Superior Artística do Porto Largo de S. Domingos, 80 4050-545 PORTO – PORTUGAL Telef: 223392130 / Fax: 223392135

e-mail: [email protected] ; [email protected]

(5)

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

Archetypes and Uncertainties

The planning and settlement of new towns were originated by different reasons. In twentieth century cities perhaps the largest reason was to determine new territorial and urban planning structures that would allow a better organization of the territory, ensuring the development of more efficient and balanced socio-economic models.

In some cases the construction of these cities was inspired by the principles of the nineteenth century English utopias, reflecting a strong concern in integrating the urban and natural components and highlighting the role of the natural landscape, understood as a city matrix on which articulates the urban structures.

In other cases the inspiration come from the rationalist ideals of the modern movement, seeking to personify the idealistic and democratic spirit of a new world order, producing rational and functional solutions and even if sometimes they do not fully overcome certain obstacles, an important contribution to the urban and architectural theory and practice advance was made.

Furthermore, other cases relate to the post-modernism and the emergence of critical views of the modern movement. These towns were born to give an answer to the problem posed by the large settlements deindustrialization and de-urbanization, assuming the role of organized urban extensions needed for controlling the sprawl of existing cities which was made through a process of unordered and peripheral urbanization.

Some focused mainly on a completely physical, economic and administrative independency in relation to major urban centres. Others, even if based partially on these principles of independence and geographical isolation, were planned as secondary structure networks dependent from a main urban conurbation. Many of these experiments have already been object of diversified studies addressing more or less specific thematic areas, seeking to define and apply critical and analytical methodologies to better understand and decode the processes and design criteria that were the basis of their urban and architectural morphologies.

Opting for an analytical prospective directed to re-contextualizing the urban and architectural contributions of these experiences, the conference 20th century new towns – archetypes and uncertainties aims to discuss their real effects in the present being especially welcome papers focusing on the following two aspects:

I. Archetypes | Spatiality, materiality and identities which persisted over

(6)

recognize them as meaningful and timeless, distant from temporal gestures which respond only to contemporary needs.

II. Uncertainties | Parts or components of the urban system that

remained incomplete, leading to realities that persisted “open” or that were

completed through different intentions, appropriation processes or intervention criteria from those planned in their original design. The nature of these uncertainties could be a further indicator of the effects produced by these archetypes in the city development.

(7)

New towns projects aren’t just delimited ass spatial entities devised to take up a territory which has lacked of any kind of urban existence until that moment. That is, they go beyond its colonial meaning and aim at emphasizing a territory, whether in economic or representative-politic terms. A new town, conceived as a unitary project, can also express itself as a theoretical and far-reaching proposal. Thus, town is considered as a whole, even though the degree of spatialization only affects an urban fragment limits. It is with this conception that nineteenth-century Ensanches at Mediterranean towns and Madrid’s Linear City, for example, were planned. These proposals are intended to be incorporated to an existing town, continuing with a more classical tradition linked with “New Towns” project. Both of them combine its nature of fragments, contribute to existing towns’ urban development, and establish themselves as alternatives to that one at the same time. That’s why they are understood as “New Towns”. It is not necessary to start from the beginning to think that we are designing a new town project. The really important thing is not so much the suggestion of a new urban entity, but the theoretical-disciplinary approaches accompanying and giving sense to the specific urban project, even if their parameters are limited to a new fragment which should be included in the existing town. This was the sense of nineteenth-century Ensanches, devised as town projects which are alternative to the existing one, complementing its native spatial elements and expressing “New Towns”. The same applies to Madrid’s Linear City designed by Arturo Soria. We are going to analyse both urban alternatives, focusing on their effects and influence on “New Towns” projects, including those which mention concrete urban fragments during the twentieth century.

Keywords: Barcelona Ensanche, Madrid Linear City, New Towns

The analysis and comprehension of proposals of new towns performed during

Twentieth century means to relate its parameters, as designed entities, to Howard’s premises when he devised its “model” of Garden-city over a century ago. We consider that this “model” is the one which more firmly defines the

programmatic points of Twentieth-century New Town project. This “model’s”

original form and content advocates the town as it will exist many years later.

Even, it plans ahead for the concept of “metropolitan-city”, such as it was being

(12)

20th Century New Towns. Archetypes and Uncertainties Conference Proceedings. Oporto, May 22-24, 2014

10

Hypothetically, the Garden-city proposed paves the way for new urban

conceptions from two different perspectives: as New Towns, and also as

Fragments incorporated to the existing town. In this way, we can perceive that both alternatives share the same principles. Nevertheless, the second option’s ones will cause a larger impact. This way, we understand the interpretation of

Garden-city as Garden-suburb, that is, like a fragment of the city in its all, conceived in America in the 20s, for example. This interpretation was linked with Clarence Stein’s work1_.

Which programmatic bases do appear in Howard’s model of Garden-city?

Howard’s work was first published towards 1898, “Tomorrow: A peaceful path to real reform”. Its second edition appeared in 1902 with a new title, “Garden Cities of Tomorrow”2. His pretensions were not to define the spatial bases of a new “urban model”, but to identify its implementation possibilities. Garden-city principles have been excessively synthesised as the meeting point bringing

together the best of town and countryside, which is explained by the well known theory of “The three magnets: country, city, city-country”. Regardless of these

abuses, three aspects summarise the really important thing of this “territorial model”: limits of growth, decentralization as a spatial commitment and its

private-cooperative management, which paves the way to devise the town as a business.

For all that, Howard collects and rationalises previous ideas and experiences. For

instance, he gathers from Company Towns, their decentralised systems nature,

their self-sufficiency and their internal correlation between housing-services-industry. A new diagram considering a town “…designed for healthy home and industry; having a size which enables high levels of social living standards;

1_{Stein, C.S. “Toward New Towns for America”.}

Cambridge, Mass. MIT. 1973.

(13)

Alfonso Alvarez Mora, New Towns As Fragmentary Urban Projects…

11

surrounded by an agricultural belt; and a town where which land is public property or community’s joint ownership”3.

The second proposal regarding New Town projects, even if it is previous in time,

is the Ensanches de Población one. These ones were designed for Mediterranean

towns during the second half of Nineteenth century, highlighting the Barcelona’s

Ensanche designed by the engineer Ildefonso Cerdá in 1859.

Historically speaking, there is no evidence of the role played by the Ensanches

as a precedent of Garden-city “model”, nor, consequently, of the fact that Howard could know Ildefonso Cerdá’s “Teoría General de La Urbanización”4. Nevertheless, it takes up our attention that both proposals share several

similarities when dealing with the designed object. We are mainly referring to

the idea of decentralization –a global idea in Garden-city, a residential one in Ensanches - and to land management. In this latter procedure, both try to avoid

the generation of added values which are not controlled by the owners involved

in the construction of the new town.

This approach of concepts allows us to think about the cultural context in which

one and the other proposals were developed, as well as about its role as

ideological support redirecting the construction of the capitalist city in the

Europe of the late nineteenth century. These connections were possible because

of “planners’” ideology. Indeed, all of them were proposing the City of Capital,

but incorporating, in each case, the appropriated improvements to avoid the

imbalances that industrialization had originated. Both insisted on preventing

excessive speculation, at the same time as a new spatial distribution was being

emphasized. This new distribution, whether that is called “decentralization” or “extension”, was paving the way for the segregated, zoned, decentralized town. In short, the city built by capital.

3 _{See Sica, Paolo. “Il Regno Unito. Howard e il movimento per la Città Giardino”. In “Storia} dell’Urbanistica. Il Novecento”. Roma-Bari, Laterza, 1978, page 7 and followings.

4 _{Cerdá, I. “Teoría General de la Urbanización”, Facsimil edition, Madrid, Instit}_{uto Estudios}

(14)

12

In this way, we could repeat Sica’s arguments when he states that Howard

“…takes a social system based on free initiative and benefit for granted…,

making an effort to correct the imperfections which capitalist development has introduced in spatial organization”5. Therefore, since then, the term “garden city”, or “garden suburb”, would extend to planned developments projects in

general. The term, used indiscriminately, will not necessarily relate to Howard’s

model of decentralization, neither to a specific type, nor to the initiative

dimension, nor to the cooperative training. Apart from Howard’s failures, his

achievement has been to state that town consists of a set of zones requiring a

number of services. If these ones consist on individual or collective housing

quarters has little relevance. Until that moment, city had been devised as a

compact and inarticulate area. The growth of industrial city had removed any

intermediate item. Howard would try to eliminate this gap depending on a

hierarchy of urban units. In this way, he considers modern neighbourhood

bases, breaking down traditional city into independent and separate fragments.

And this is exactly what approaches the idea of Garden-city to the original

concept of Ensanche. With the exception that it is in the Ensanche projects

where, hypothetically, first appeared these questions; where the general

principles that would promote the project of capitalist city, either as a “new town” or like fragments incorporated to the existing, were established.

In fact, Cerdá stands up for “urban expansion” in front of “concentration” in the

“Teoría General de la Urbanización”. To some extent, this connects and anticipates the concept of “decentralization” that Howard would defend later. As

Soria y Puig indicates, “… Cerdá’s research aims at verifying the hypothesis that

an excessive concentration was the main cause of social ills. “Excentrization” and to decrease of population from that anthill where humanity is living crowded, had to be done: to “ruralise” town.”6. “Elsewhere the town is invading

the country: here the country must invade the town”, says Howard. The “Three

Magnets” theory in which Howard based his proposal for a Garden-city, a

5

Sica, Paola. Op. cit.

6 _{See Soria y Puig, A. “Ildefonso Cerdá, hacia una Teoría General de la Urbanización”. Madrid,}

(15)

13 decentralized, spread on countryside town, is not very different from Cerdá’s

support to the immersion of city in countryside.

Anyway, what these proposals have in common is, perhaps, that idea of “neighbourhood”, urban fragment, as the reference for the project. Howard considers the “neighbourhood” a consequence rather than a starting point, while this “neighbourhood” defines the original logic of the Ensanche’s creative

process. We are talking about the most obvious spatial reality that has defined,

since then up to nowadays, the main “urban creation”, that is, the urban unit.

This one brings together a concrete sociological structure, whether “neighbourhood” or “neighbourhood unit”.

We are not treating the “neighbourhood” in its modern meaning, that is, a “neighbourhood unit” that directly relates “social space” and “urban form”, as proposed by Clarence Stein7; but as a result which provides the designed town with a concrete “sociological structure”. This structure is expressed through the spatial spread of a sort of “urban services” organized in a hierarchy depending

on the number of inhabitants they address. It is this link between “amount of services” and “number of inhabitants” what inspires us to consider a first hierarchy which initially does not imply a closed structure or a strict zoning. “Absence of zoning in Cerdá’s Plan”, Bordoy Alcántara says; and he continues

“Although Cerdá did not think of the neighbourhood as an urban unit, we notice a sociological structure in the Ensanche. Under the presidency of a parish, he grouped units not exceeding 25 ha with a population approaching 10000

inhabitants. Markets cover circular areas within a radius of 900 metres. Parks are distributed in such a way that the distance from anywhere to some of them does not exceed 1500 metres. He moves hospitals outside the Ensanche”8. In this way, Cerdá organized the Ensanche not so much as the sum of

neighbourhoods but as a served urban structure. Anticipating plans that are

similar to the ones observed in the model of Garden-city.

7_{Stein, C., op. cit.}

8

(16)

14

Hypothetically, both assumptions –the one referring to the Ensache and the

Garden-city one- would appear as trials and references which pave the way to

new urban conceptions, foreseeing the Twentieth-century “New Town” projects.

In theory, New Towns are set out from the project that pretends to be

innovative, like the drafts of Le Corbusier, or from the reality planned. In this

later case, we would meet several cases: twentieth-century new political and

administrative capitals, urban decentralized alternatives with regards to existing

urban agglomerations; new towns in the context of a revolutionary,

social-productive alternative; or just current territorial colonization aiming to underline

new territories in which most conflictive social groups are being segregated, or

to create exclusive class settlements.

Our hypothesis is that both proposals would allow the development of other

theories regarding the creation of new towns. Among these theories, which have emerged from the extension of the proposals’ original principles and also by dialectical confrontation, the project of Linear City9 designed by the engineer Arturo Soria y Mata stands out. It consists on a new urban design, although, as

it is intensely connected with the city of Madrid, it oscillates between its status

as a new kind of urban settlement and its final expression as a peripheral area

with certain autonomy. This project was issued some years earlier than the first

text of Howard, what turns Soria y Mata into a pioneer in its field. It should be

noted that, as Howard’s idea was expressed in the context of a proposal-project

which was totally issued –the Garden-city-, Linear City appeared fragmented,

diversified in time. Indeed, although Linear City is previous to Garden-city, Arturo Soria’s theories prove that he perfectly knew Howard’s thinking. In fact, following Arturo Soria’s disciplinary path, we could argue that it was its head-on opposition to Garden-city what paved the way to the definition of Linear City

basis. Thus, it is well-known his statement regarding his vision of the

Garden-city: “The monkey is to man as the Garden-city is to Linear City”.

(17)

15 A lot of facets of Ensanches and Garden-city come together in the Linear City

project. Nevertheless in the case of Garden-city, which is contemporary to Linear

City, the matters which do not achieve the objectives established by Arturo Soria

are dismissed. It is the case, for example, of the effects of both “models” on

land prices, above all on those with “centrality” values. According to Arturo

Soria, Garden-city keeps its plan as a centralized urban model, what does not

miss high values of central property, decreasing when we approach to periphery.

As a consequence, this hierarchy of values promotes and determines social

segregation. The reasoning exposed is to some extent unappealable, as land

value depends not only on its location but also on its use, and we all remember

that Howard dedicated the centre of the Garden-city to a Great Central Park. “In

the Linear City, on the contrary –Arturo Soria explains- the highest price of land will not be just in one point, but in a line of indefinite extension, which decreases as far as it separates from the lanes alongside crossing streets. Prices are distributed along roads parallels to railway, and not by concentric circles. As land prices decrease quickly, we can locate various social contents in a same block”10.

Nevertheless, land value should not be interpreted depending on its location,

without taking into account the property interests, without appealing the social

added value of those interests. Apart from those anecdotes, the really

interesting thing regarding this question is the fixed attitude present in all the

proposals exposed. Neither of them questions about the land role as “product”.

That is, its “rent’s land” status to the detriment of that other which would

consider land like “area for social development” one. Therefore, the Capitalist

City born under industrialization is not put into question. Only the defects

derived from the process of urban development are disputed, in order to correct

them. Land speculation stands out among these faults, forgetting that this one is the consequence of the “urban model” which is not put into question or abandoned.

10 _{See Soria y Mata, Arturo, “Tratados de Urbanismo y Sociedad”.}

(18)

16

What does Linear City collects from previous experiences, accepting or refusing

them, that lead us to consider it a New Town proposal that could be referenced as a “model” to imitate, or interpreted critically? Does it include the overall casuistry or does it represent a concrete case? In a different way, does it allow

to think about an assumption of the principles of capital, as any other urban

expression, either projected or spatially redirected? Could we really take the

Linear City as an exemplar town which, although devised as a spatial alternative

in opposition to the existing, it is not identified as an alternative to the town of

capital, like in previous models?

Linear City was devised as a New Town project, regarding, as a methodological

proposal, some questions which, in those days, were being reconsidered as a

new way of thinking about “urban corpus” elaboration. Its status of New Town

project precisely lied in this aspect. That is, this status lied in its new urban

proposal, devised as a spatial alternative, which project basis defined, in turn, a

conceptual corpus on urbanism. On the other hand, talking methodologically, that “corpus” was being built in a strong connection with economic, social and political demands which correspond to the reproduction of capital. Indeed, the

city of capital, from which Linear City was another outline, was being thought,

projected and built.

Linear City’s conception started towards 1882. Since that year Arturo Soria closely collaborated with the newspaper “El Progreso”. It is by the press that his

ideas would be issued. Among that ideas, the one about which Arturo Soria was

most concerned was traffic. Thus, he devised new urban entities as

agglomerations whose future scenery and final form were determined by the

requirements of urban mobility: “… a town’s form, he said, is, or should be, a

form derived from the needs of locomotion…the first thing we should do is to

draw a railway”11.

11_{See Terán Troyano, F.}_{“La Ciudad Lineal. Antecedente de un Urbanismo actual”. Madrid, Ciencia}

(19)

17 In this way, Linear City was organized as a “rail corridor”, with a large central

street, about 500 metres wide, traversed in both directions by a tramway.

Services-equipments were situated in this axis’ edges, making this one into the

central model par excellence, beyond which a diverse residential area was

extended.

He gathered from Ensanches its Residential-Bourgeois City condition,

differentiating it from that one which welcomed the proletariat. He also took up a

new approach to the project, in which the Plan-Design represented the first

phase, getting autonomy in front of its real process of construction. That

implied, therefore, the end of the discipline’s route that had subordinated the

city to its architectonic side until that moment. The Plan-Design identified the

new urban project in the context of a new Theory of City. This theory bet on the

Hygienic City and turned the means of transportation into the tools that enabled

mobility and land production.

However, even if Linear City is conceived as “new town”, it can’t ignore the City

of Madrid, what would pave the way to its final conception as a peripheral area

dependent on its coexistence with the existing city. “Workers and pensioners, workshop foremen and other people, Arturo Soria explained, could come to Madrid centre -to the offices, workshops and studios- in the morning, and they

would be back to their homes in the evening…This project, from which I am

licensed, consists on planning Linear City along the ring railway-tramway. I pretend to set up a neighbourhood similar to the Paseo de la Castellana’s one,

affordable for everyone because of cheap land, simplicity of payment in

instalments and because each plot’s buyer would have the land once the first

instalment has been paid”12.

In effect, Linear City, conceived like town, is carried out as periphery. We find a

more direct relationship between “new town” and “peripheral areas” in the

Linear City project than in the Garden-city one. Thus, we can consider that like

an urban proposal consisting on the construction of a “peripheral area” as an

(20)

18

alternative, as a “new town”, and also as a “fragment”. Meanwhile, Garden-city

is shown as a total alternative, even if the following interpretation of this one

would result into its own perversion, considering the initial “decentralization” a simple “residential decentralization”.

Nevertheless, Arturo Soria’s project has gone further. We think that there are obvious similarities between this proposal and Le Corbusier’s one in relation to “The Three Human Establishments”13_{. Indeed, both of them devise the New}

Town project as a diverse structure of “linear routes” which rely on existing cities, considering these ones the heads, central reference nodes, of the

suggested “territorial structure”. For both Le Corbusier and Arturo Soria, town expands like an “urbanized territory”. In this territory’s frame existing cities act as the “centres” in which big ideas are originated, while in “linear space”, strictly speaking, is where the principles of modern urbanism, the industrial age’s new

towns, are executed. They both talk about the need to “urbanise country-to “ruralise” town”, idea inherited from Cerdà’s and Howard’s thinking.

In effect, Le Corbusier lays out, in the context of “The Three Human Establishments”, the “total urbanization of territory”. To do that, Industrial

Linear City, suggested as one establishment more, between others, together

with Radio-Concentric Cities, existing cities and units of agricultural

development, which take up the centre of the triangulation formed by those

establishments, all of those define a structure which gets the value of a

City-Territory. This is the New Town, directly inherited from Arturo Soria’s thinking.

The only difference in favour of Le Corbusier is that Linear Industrial City is

provided with the three classical modes of mobility of goods and people, that is, motorway, railway and water. “The exam of working conditions on industrial societies, said Le Corbusier, leads to recognise the utility and need of the three basic human establishments for the activity. That is, unit of agricultural

(21)

19

development, Industrial Linear City and Radio Concentric and exchange’s (government, art, ideas, commerce) City”14.

In the same way as Arturo Soria, Le Corbusier does not ignore the existing town,

the Radio-Concentric City. He considers it to be essential for the New Town

project, taking that city as a territorial presence unavoidable to sign on new

urban adventures. Although he is usually so critic to history that he refuses to

recognise it as a reality to get back, on this occasion he considers that it is

indispensable. Thus, he gives that existing city none other than the role of space

for creation and thought, the art city. Is this the first step to define the new

town in which the existing-constructed, the historical town, has a privileged

place? In this case, the modern urbanism basis would spread out beyond the city

itself, where there is enough “void-space” and the “country urbanization” makes

into reality.

All the urban projects designed by Le Corbusier are paradigm of the new city,

which is being thought as an alternative to its first industrial expression,

inherited from Nineteenth-century town. After reviewing these projects, we

observe a theorist position in which the existing city occupies a prominent place

on the new town project. Far from its anti-historical stance, Le Corbusier does

not disregard historical city. Indeed, he assigns to this one a prominent role as the new city “centre”, although indiscriminate renewal is needed. Like this, we could understand that reproduction of “centrality” on new towns is not possible, in such a way that we should necessarily add “historical centrality”, or existing city, to the new town project. This means the recreation of the projected beyond

the constructed, that is, in peripheral areas.

In effect, we notice this permanent feature in Le Corbusier’s urban projects: The use of the existing city as a spatial category which assumes “centrality”

conditions is appreciated in most of them, with the exception of Chandigarh

project. This latter is more like a theorist recreation, an attempt that history is

redirecting to its town condition. With this reservation, we state that, as argued

(22)

20

by Le Corbusier, “Urbanizing is to value. Urbanizing is not to spend money, but to earn money, to make money … The centre of towns represents a great property value which can double, multiply, as modern techniques allow to build

sixty floors and any more six…The centre of Paris, currently threatened to death,

threatened to abandon, is actually a diamonds mine…it must rebuild on itself…”.

Therefore, in Modern City project there is a close link between what to do with

the existing city and how to reproduce the newest –what spreads the most

refined essences of modernity- in peripheral areas. Modern City is a creation

which has its raison d’être beyond the existing constructed, where the new can

be recreated, where new theories have creative freedom. We identify again the

model assumptions made for Ensanches, Linear City or Garden-city in the New

Town project. In this one, we notice that it is beyond the existing constructed

were the ideals rooted on its own thought can be accomplished; that is, the

construction of a new land intended to be a projected reality in all its scope.

Now then, and to conclude, experimenting new forms of Modern Towns apart

from existing city, is not the New Town condition being reduced to a simple

peripheral setting? Conceived as a complete town, does it abandon this condition

to take the form of a neighborhood of the existing town? This is, at least, Hans

Blumenfeld argument, appearing in its work on new towns of the U.S.A., like

Chatham Village, in Pittsburgh, Baldwin Hills, in Los Ángeles, Green Belt Towns

and Reston, Columbia and Irvin New Towns. In relation to that, he states that “…they are not self-sufficient towns, but parts of a larger metropolis on which they completely depend. Actually, they are considered honest suburbs for medium and upper classes. Their inhabitants usually work outside this area and many times they mix together with industrial properties which draw workforce from outside”15.

Therefore, the project of Modern Town is presented more as a fragment than as

a complete urban fact, helping, in its new town condition, to renew the existing

15 _{Blumenfeld, H. “El Papel del Diseño”, published in the book “El crecimiento de las ciudades”,}

(23)

21 town. To achieve that, it is indispensable to think, to project, to program and to

build a peripheral area which welcomes, by the decentralization process, the concrete functions of traditional urban centres. These “new fragments” are refined as the other side for the renewal process of that “centres”. This is, at

least, Morton Hoppenfeld’s opinion, a planner who participated in the project of

Columbia’s New Town, located between Baltimore and Washington. “Columbia,

he states, was never devised as self-sufficient. In all ways, it is integrated into the socio-economic life of Howard`s County and large metropolis of Washington D.C and Baltimore. It is expected to become the third urban centre, between the

two big cities.” Seeing this experience, on the other hand he argues that “… we

will not be able to raise our central towns again unless we form, at the same

time, new communities going with urban renewal…Any reasonable politic

intended for reconstructing our cities should necessarily contain a politic for the develop of new towns as a complement”16.

(24)

22

Alfonso Álvarez Mora, Architect, 1972, by the School of Architecture of Madrid. Ph.D.

(25)

23

TRAN SFERABLE LESSON S FROM TH E BRI TI SH N EW TOW N S

Ge or gia Bu t in a W a t son

Oxford Br ookes Univer sit y , Oxford, Unit ed Kingdom

Abst r a ct

Gr eat Brit ain has a long t radit ion of building New Tow ns. Som e of t he early developm ent s, such as Let chw ort h and Welw yn Garden cit y w er e a direct out com e of Eben ezer How ard’s ideas present ed in his sem inal w ork Tom orr ow : a peaceful Pat h t o Real r efor m ( 1898) lat er published as Garden Cit ies of Tom or row ( 1902) . These early developm ent s w er e init iat ed t o r em edy som e of t he w or st slum condit ions of London and t hey becam e m odels for t he next generat ion of new set t lem ent s.

The post - w ar r econst ruct ion w as underpinned by t he 1946 Act on building New Tow ns in order t o accom m odat e t he overspill from London and t o generat e urban grow t h. Thirt y t w o New Tow n s w er e designat ed in t w o phases: Phase On e, from 1946- 1950 and Phase Tw o, bet w een 1961- 1970. Phase Three t ook place bet w een 1970 and 1996.

I n 2004 t he Office of t he Deput y Prim e Minist er com m ission ed a r esear ch proj ect on t he t ransferable lessons fr om t he New Tow ns, t o est ablish guidance for t he building of new or expanded com m unit ies in four grow t h ar eas: London- St anst ed- Cam bridge- Pet erbor ough corridor; Ashford in Kent ; t he Tham es Gat ew ay; and t he expansion of Milt on Keyn es. This paper present s t he key findings of t he r esear ch, by focussing on t he cont ext of building New Tow ns in t h e UK; by ident ifying key t ransferable lessons grouped under eight t hem es of delivery, finance, creat ing com m unit ies, gov er nance, econom ic achiev em ent and com pet it iveness, physical environm ent and design, long- t erm sust ain abilit y and end user experience. The last part of t h e paper m akes final recom m en dat ions for building new com m unit ies in t he 21st cent ury.

Ke y w or d s: Brit ish New Tow n s; t ransferable lessons.

Ba ck gr ou n d

I n order t o solve som e of t he problem s of t he 19t h C Great Brit ain a

num ber of ideas w ere put forw ard by t he philant hropist t hinkers such as

Ebenezer How ard and lat er on by Raym ond Unw in, Barry Par ker and a

w hole host of ot her key players. The m ost radical and influent ial ear ly

ideas cam e from Ebenezer How ard and his sem inal book Gar den Cit ies of

(26)

20t h Cent ur y New Tow ns. Ar chet y pes and Uncer t aint ies Confer ence Pr oceedings. Oport o, May 22- 24, 2014

24

How ard’s idea w as t hat large cit y conurbat ions, part icular ly London,

should be relieved of it s congest ed areas by building sat ellit e new

com m unit ies ( Ward, 2004) .

The idea of building new com m unit ies w as not a new concept t o m anaging

urban grow t h and som e of t he early ideas w ere put forw ard by King

Edw ard I , in 1296, w ho ordered 24 new t ow ns t o be built . Lat er on it w as

Leonardo da Vinci w ho had sim ilar ideas for t he cit y of Milan. I n 1515

Thom as Moore proposed a Ut opia, based on sim ilar ideas as proposed by

his predecessors.

How ard’s concept of ‘Tow n’ and ‘Count ry’ w as specifically designed t o cope

w it h London’s sit uat ion, but lat er on it w as also applied in ot her new t ow n

building program m es. Each new t ow n w as designat ed t o be m oderat e in

size, bet w een 32,000 and 58,000 people, w as t o be self- cont ained,

defined by a green belt t o separat e t he ‘t ow n’ from t he ‘count ry’ and w as

t o cont ain serv ices and em ploym ent t hat any t ow n should have.

I n addit ion t o t heoret ical and social concerns, t he polit ical underpinning

for building New Tow ns w as also st rong and in order t o im plem ent

How ard’s concept s t he Garden Cit y Associat ion w as form ed in 1889, led

by How ard, w hich lat er on becam e Tow n and Count ry Associat ion ( Ward,

2004) .

I n order t o im plem ent t he ideas proposed by How ard a program m e for

building Let chw ort h Garden Cit y w as put forw ard in 1901, w it h Raym ond

Unw in and Barry Park er as it s key players. This init iat ive w as follow ed by

t he developm ent of Welw yn Garden Cit y in 1919. These t w o new t ow ns

becam e prot ot ypes for t he new generat ion of planned set t lem ent s,

designat ed t o decent ralize urban grow t h aw ay from t he m aj or London

conurbat ion.

Aft er t he Second World War t he UK governm ent st art ed one of t he m ost

(27)

Geor gia But ina Wat son, Tr ansfer able Lessons from t he Br it ish New Tow ns

25

t he lost housing st ock dest royed during t he w ar as well as t o replace slum

areas of m aj or cit ies.

(28)

26

Figu r e 2 . Designat ed UK grow t h areas ( DCLG, 2006) .

The 32 New Tow ns creat ed in t he UK from 1946 represent one of t he

(29)

27

sout h east or in neighbouring regions. Of t he rem ainder, six w ere in

cent ral Scot land, four in t he nort h w est , t hree in t he nort h east , t hree in

Nort hern I reland, t w o in Wales, t w o in t he w est Midlands and one in t he

east Midlands ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) . I n t ot al, t he overall t arget s

w ere in t he region of t w o m illion people. By 1991 act ual grow t h am ount ed

t o only 1.4 m illion. New Tow ns planned for t he capit al region had achieved

90 per cent of t heir planned grow t h. Gr ow t h of som e New Tow ns has

cont inued since 1991 and som e are undergoing furt her expansion

program m es ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) .

The New Tow ns were designat ed m ainly in t w o phases: from 1946- 50,

w hen m ost of t he London overspill New Tow ns were begun, and from

1961- 70, w hen m ost of t he provincial New Tow ns w ere designat ed. They

w ere governed by t he st at ut ory m echanism involv ing t he creat ion of an

appoint ed public corporat ion serv ing each New Tow n t hat had st rong

pow ers as a delivery vehicle. There w ere t w o m aj or st rat egies em ployed:

new t ow ns designat ed on new land, aw ay from t he m aj or conurbat ions,

and t hrough t he expansion of t he ex ist ing set t lem ent s.

Wit hin t he New Towns program m e it self, t here w ere som e im port ant

var iat ions over t im e. The m ost obvious change w as in t he role t hat t he

privat e sect or played in t he delivery of various aspect s of developm ent ,

part icular ly aft er t he elect ion of t he That cher Conservat ive governm ent in

1979. There w ere also m aj or changes in t he housing t enure pat t erns of

t he New Tow ns. I nit ially m ost New Tow n resident s w ere developm ent

corporat ion t enant s, alt hough ow ner occupat ion began t o grow from t he

lat e 1960s as pr iv at e house builders w ere given a bigger role t o play . This

w as also enabled by t he changes in r ight t o buy m echanism s, support ed

by legislat ion t hat w as int roduced in t he early 1970s and, especially, from

1980.

Whilst t here w as m uch sim ilar it y in t he planning and delivery of early New

Tow ns, t here w as m uch great er diversit y in t he planning of t he lat er

(30)

28

professional support for t hem and t hey at t ract ed high calibre appoint ees

t o run t hem , st aff t o w ork for t hem and consult ant s t o undert ake

com m issions for t hem . They also at t ract ed a great deal of professional

and academ ic at t ent ion, inspir ing an im m ense am ount of published

m at erial, of vary ing ut ilit y ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) .

N e w Tow n s a n d Gr ow t h a r e a s: Tr a n sfe r a ble Le sson s

The next sect ion of t he paper present s findings from t he research carried

out on behalf of t he Depart m ent for Com m unit ies and Local Governm ent

( DCLG, 2004- 2006) w it h a v iew t o analy se research and ot her lit erat ure

on t he exist ing New Tow ns. Part icular focus is on t he t ransferable lessons

from t he New Tow ns under t he 1946 and subsequent New Tow ns Act s

( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) . The m ain purpose of t he research w as t o

ident ify lessons from t he New Tow ns program m e t hat m ight be

t ransferable t o t he Gr ow t h Areas init iat ives. Key grow t h areas include:

London- St anst ed- Cam br idge- Pet erborough corridor;

Ashford in Kent ;

The Tham es Gat ew ay;

Milt on Keynes and Sout h Middlands.

The research w as lar gely desk based, support ed by t he researchers’ ow n

prim ary invest igat ions and w ork, and it ut ilised som e 2000 books, art icles,

and ot her published m at erial ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) . The m ost

im port ant source w as t he New Tow ns Record, prepared on behalf of t he

Com m ission for t he New Tow ns and t he relevant Scot t ish and Nort hern

I reland Depart m ent s. First issued in 1997 and revised in 2004, it collect s

a lar ge am ount of research m at erial. The t ransferable lessons are

st ruct ured under eight m ain t hem es:

1. Delivery 2. Finance

(31)

29

4. Governance

5. Econom ic Achievem ent and Com pet it iveness 6. Physical Environm ent and Design

7. End user experience 8. Long- t erm Sust ainabilit y

As t he House of Com m ons Select Com m it t ee on Transport , Local

Governm ent and t he Regions observed in 2002, t he New Tow ns

program m e const it ut es t he m ost im port ant source of previous lessons

regarding large scale planned urban grow t h. I t w as obv ious from t he

out set of t he research t hat cert ain lessons w ill sim ply not be t r ansferable,

or can only be par t ially t ransferred, as t he cont ext is now quit e different

w it h far great er reliance on privat e developers t o deliver grow t h.

One of t he key findings is t hat alt hough t here is a need t o be flexible w hen

preparing m ast er plans for t he grow t h areas, it is acknow ledged t hat t hey

undoubt edly played a key part in creat ing New Tow ns ident it ies and

prom ot ing t heir im ages. This qualit y rem ains im port ant and can usefully

be ret ained w it hin t he Grow t h Areas program m e t oday.

This sense of part ial t ransferabilit y applies also t o ot her t opics. Like any

large scale areas of grow t h, t he New Tow ns obviously faced m aj or

problem s of infrast ruct ure provision and, in som e cases, land r eclam at ion

before developm ent could proceed on t he ground. The key differ ence t hen

w as t hat t hese w ere resolved by public finance ( even t hough only a sm all

part of t his act ually cam e from t he New Tow n Developm ent Corporat ions

t hem selves) . The privat e sect or role in infrast ruct ure provision, by now

privat ely- ow ned public ut ilit ies or ot her bodies, is obv iously m uch great er

in t he Grow t h Areas t oday. Yet t he great er reliance on public ex pendit ure

in t he New Tow ns posed it s ow n problem s and som et im es clearly needed

great resilience and persist ence on t he part of t hose responsible for

securing it from cent r al governm ent or ot her public bodies. Alt hough t heir

(32)

30

Grow t h Areas need t o display sim ilar qualit ies in cham pioning t he

infrast ruct ure needs of t heir ow n areas.

The scale of grow t h in designat ed four grow t h areas is com parable t o

earlier built New Towns but t here is, t o dat e, a lim it ed at t em pt t o creat e

ent irely freest anding new set t lem ent s in t he Grow t h Areas, except , in line

w it h local planning policies est ablished ar ound Cam br idge and a new ly

proposed Garden Cit y of Ebbsfleet in t he Tham es Gat ew ay.

I n several cases ( Basildon, Milt on Keynes, Nort ham pt on, Corby, Harlow ,

Pet erborough) form er New Tow ns are act ually affect ed as t hey are

designat ed for fur t her grow t h. There is a recognit ion t hat ordinary local

planning agencies are in m ost cases inadequat e t o deliver m aj or grow t h

on t heir ow n, and t herefore som e form of a Developm ent Corporat ion

w ould be desirable.

Though t oday’s language differs, t he em phasis on creat ing sust ainable

com m unit ies and accom m odat ing social m ix has st rong echoes of t he New

Tow n ideals of self- cont ainm ent and social balance. There are lik ely t o be

com parable problem s of m aj or infrast ruct ure provision w hich w ill be

crit ical before lar ge scale developm ent can proceed.

I t seem s likely t hat som e degree of m ast er planning w ill be required,

w hich in t he New Tow ns played a key role in est ablishing im age and place

ident it y. Place m arket ing is also likely t o be an im port ant considerat ion in

Grow t h Areas as it w as in t he New Towns. This is already used in t he

Tham es Gat ew ay area.

There are t hough som e im port ant cont rast s w hich w ill lim it t he

possibilit ies of lesson t ransferabilit y.

The New Tow ns Developm ent Corporat ions ( NTDCs) w ere unelect ed

(33)

31

direct ly appoint ed and had st rong land acquisit ion pow ers. The Urban

Developm ent Corporat ions ( UDCs) generally share som e of t hese

charact erist ics but w ill not be operat ing in areas ot herw ise m ost

com parable t o t he New Tow ns.

The NTDCs largely operat ed in a clim at e of high st at e spending at a t im e

w hen t here w as a st ronger belief in public sect or ent erpr ise and

invest m ent . They w ere t hem selves m aj or developers. Today, t here is

great er em phasis on public/ pr ivat e part nerships, and a m uch great er

involvem ent of t he pr ivat e sect or.

I n part icular t he NTDCs w ere landlords of large am ount s of housing. This

had m aj or advant ages in ensur ing housing affordabilit y and t his obviously

played a role in get t ing m aj or developm ent underw ay relat ively quick ly .

Today, social and affordable housing is delivered t hrough Social

Regist ered Landlords or t he privat e sect or.

I t seem s likely t hat t he Grow t h Areas w ill involve a higher rat io of

brow nfield: greenfield developm ent , com pared t o t he New Tow n

developm ent s. Generally NTDCs, at least before t he elect ion of t he

That cher governm ent in 1979, had a very different relat ionship t o privat e

developers and especially house builders t o t hat w hich prevail in t he

Grow t h Areas t oday. Lengt hy negot iat ions of planning agreem ent s w ere

virt ually unknow n but t oday t hey can be key issues in t he Grow t h Areas.

The New Tow ns, especially in t he sout h, w ere very successful in at t ract ing

em ploym ent t hat closely m at ched t he sk ills of t heir local w orkforces.

Alt hough t he w ider regional econom ies clearly have great grow t h

pot ent ial, it is less clear how far t he Grow t h Areas w ill be able t o m at ch

(34)

(35)

33

Ke y t h e m a t ic fin din gs

D e liv e r y

I n order t o deliver New Tow ns program m es, New Tow ns Developm ent

Corporat ions ( NTDC) w ere set up t o deliver a com plex set of planning and

ot her developm ent procedures. NTDCs w ere pow erful delivery bodies t hat

could acquire land, quit e oft en at very fav ourable pr ices, and also had all

ot her pow ers t o build new com m unit ies. They act ed as ‘lead’ developers

as w ell as landlords. They could also borr ow funds from t he governm ent

at very favourable prices for periods of up t o 60 years ( Cullingw ort h,

1968; Osborne & Whit ick , 1977) .

Transferable lessons t o t he new grow t h areas are t hat NTDCs are st ill

being set up t o deal w it h large- scale urban developm ent s; London

Docklands Developm ent Corporat ion is a good exam ple, and m ore

recent ly sim ilar st ruct ures w ere set up for t he developm ent of London

Tham es Gat ew ay ( But ina Wat son, et al, 2006) . I n t oday’s clim at e, t here

could be m ore public/ privat e part nerships charged w it h t he responsibilit y

t o deliver grow t h, and also pull t he financial resources t oget her. I nvolv ing

privat e house builder s t o deliver bot h pr iv at e and affordable housing, is

also desirable t o delivery diversit y of t enure and housing prov ision. Such

part nerships can also deliver fast er, but co- ordinat ion is needed via

m ast er planning. This also applies t o Local Aut horit y part ners w here j oint

effort s are desirable part icular ly w hen it com es t o building infr ast ruct ure

or t he provision of schools and ot her social facilit ies.

Part nerships w it h volunt ary agencies t o deliver com m unit y clubs and ot her

social facilit ies are also desirable ear ly on in t he planning of large new

set t lem ent s. Delivery Part nerships should also engage w it h t he exist ing

local resident s as w ell as t he new com ers, t o est ablish social cohesion early

(36)

34

Alt hough t here is an elem ent of com pet it ion building in different grow t h

areas, part nership w ork ing should be encouraged t o overcom e delays and

com plex negot iat ions, part icular ly in building roads and ot her

infrast ruct ure proj ect s. The research also est ablished t hat an or ganizat ion

could be form ed at t he nat ional level t o facilit at e m ut ual learning. Som e of

t his exchange of know ledge is current ly being prov ided t hrough t he Tow n

and Count ry Planning Associat ion ( TCPA) .

Fin a n ce

Bot h t he Cent ral Governm ent and privat e finance need t o be co- ordinat ed

and clear responsibilit ies est ablished. Early acquisit ion of land is

part icular ly cr it ical, in order t o avoid com plex purchase negot iat ions at t he

last m inut e and also t o avoid high cost s. Addit ional value creat ed t hrough

developm ent should be used t o provide social am enit ies and facilit ies, and

t he current m echanism of Sect ion 106 agreem ent can facilit at e t his

benefit .

I t is also im port ant t o prepare long- t erm financial scenar ios as any fast

ret urn on invest m ent m ay not be v iable. Det ailed im plem ent at ion

st rat egies ought t o be in place in order t o avoid unnecessary delays.

Careful at t ent ion should also be given t o m arket ing new grow t h and new

com m unit y developm ent s t o at t ract com panies as w ell as resident s int o

t he new grow t h areas. Grow t h area t eam s should also consider

sust ainabilit y issues, encouraging m odern t echnology and renew ables t o

be em ployed in t he const ruct ion of houses as w ell as ot her facilit ies.

I n cost ing and preparing financial plans care should be t aken t o secure

adequat e funding early on in t he process in order t o avoid delays in t he

building and const ruct ion processes but also t o provide confidence, reduce

risk and give credibilit y t o t he developm ent . I f t he grow t h areas are t o be

part - financed by loans, t hese should be on flex ible t erm s, and if possible

at low int erest rat es. I t is also im port ant t o t ake int o considerat ion

(37)

35

Governm ent sources is needed in order t o launch such lar ge- scale building

init iat ives ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006; Lock, 1989) .

Cr e a t in g Com m u n it ie s

Key lessons relat ing t o “ creat ing com m unit ies” need t o be considered in

t he cont ext of 21stC com m unit y init iat ives. Som e of t he differences and

changes highlight t hat t he New Tow ns were planned before car ow nership

w as as ext ensive as it is t oday. As a result t he layout and parking

provisions w ere differ ent from t oday’s requirem ent s. I ndiv iduals are m ore

geographically m obile t oday t han ever before. Pot ent ially , people ident ify

less w it h t heir local com m unit y or neighbourhood as a result , and

t herefore t he challenge of creat ing int egrat ed com m unit ies is all t he

great er. Relat ed t o t his is t he com m ut er lifest yle t hat affect s m any people

t oday.

Housing in t he New Tow ns w as init ially largely rent ed from a social

landlord. This enabled m uch m ore cent ralised planning for com m unit ies t o

be put in place. Today’s housing provision is dom inat ed by t he privat e

sect or, but w it h a requirem ent for t he provision of social and affordable

housing. I t is im port ant t o have a m ix of housing t ypes, t enure and ot her

requirem ent s such as housing for elder ly and disabled t o encourage m ixed

com m unit y st ruct ur es as t his inev it ably influences t he t ype of

com m unit ies t hat com e t o live in t he new set t lem ent s.

I t is also w ort h not ing t hat t he New Tow ns built aft er t he w ar w ere very

different in charact er and cont ext . Nevert heless, som e of t he lessons t o

com e out of t he lit erat ure w ould appear t o have relevance t o t oday’s

cont ext .

I t is im port ant t o put in place part icipat ory st ruct ures w hereby bot h

exist ing and new com m unit ies can engage in ear ly decision m ak ing

(38)

36

ident ified in t he planning for grow t h of t he Tham es Gat eway ( But ina

Wat son et al, 2006) . A ‘Com m unit y Chest ’ or Com m unit y Trust Fund

could be set up early in t he process of planning new com m unit ies so t hat

social aspect s, volunt ary and com m unit y proj ect s could be support ed. I t

is also useful t o engage w it h Local Councils, t he church, neighbourhood

associat ions and yout h organizat ions.

I t is im port ant t o incorporat e ‘w alkable neighbourhood’ pr inciples, t o

encourage w alking and cycling. Locat ions of Schools and ot her facilit ies

are t herefore im port ant t o consider in t he design process as w ell as

support m ixed use developm ent s. I t is also desirable t o have social,

educat ional, healt h and ot her facilit ies est ablished in t he new set t lem ent s

areas, before t he populat ion m oves in.

Gov e r n a n ce

I t should also be recognised t hat t he New Tow ns were init iat ed and

subst ant ially developed in a per iod of m uch great er social defer ence t han

t oday, w hen m ost of t he populat ion did not readily quest ion t he

j udgem ent s of t hose in posit ions of aut hor it y.

Concerning t he pre- exist ing com m unit ies in designat ed areas, cent ral

governm ent and NTDCs learnt from t he public relat ions disast er t hat

m arked t he early day s of t he first New Town at St evenage ( Orlans, 1952) .

NTDCs soon recognised t he need t o m aint ain a regular flow of local public

inform at ion about t heir New Tow ns for bot h pre- exist ing and incom ing

populat ions.

This involved init iat ives such as specific NTDC newslet t ers and st rong

encouragem ent t o exist ing local new spapers. The social developm ent

depart m ent s of NTDCs w ere very im port ant in t hese effort s t o encourage

com m unit y developm ent and cohesion. Social developm ent and housing

depart m ent s oft en becam e channels of com m unicat ion bet w een

(39)

37

Am ongst t he ‘New Tow ners’ t hem selves, t enant s associat ions w ere oft en

t he first expression of aut onom ous com m unit y act ion. Ot her com m unit y

organisat ions w ere creat ed w it h t he encouragem ent of social dev elopm ent

officers and som et im es also t he act ive inv olvem ent of volunt ar y agencies

such as t he churches.

Effect ive arrangem ent s t o organise and involve com m unit ies in

governance oft en helped NTDCs in t heir negot iat ions w it h ot her agencies

t o secure bet t er facilit ies for t he New Tow ns. Local aut horit ies w ere

anot her vehicle for ar t iculat ing com m unit y concerns w it h t he adv ant age of

providing a form al elect ive elem ent t o allow represent at ion of t he new

com m unit ies. As not ed, how ever, relat ions w it h t he NTDCs w ere oft en

st rained.

Research ident ified ( But ina Wat son et al, 2006) t hat clar it y of

responsibilit y for delivery and relat ed gov ernance in t he Grow t h Areas is

essent ial and t hat t hey should be absorbed int o t he norm al governance

syst em s as quick ly as possible. Developm ent Corporat ions should also

encourage aut onom ous com m unit y act iv it y and leadership.

Econ om ic a ch ie v e m e n t a n d com pe t it ive n e ss

The init ial success of t he New Tow ns w as based on t he change of land

values from t hose of agricult ural values t o t hose associat ed w it h ur ban

uses. This is a key " hidden" t ool t hat has been used elsew here t o

encourage t he est ablishm ent of privat e sect or econom ic act iv it y.

Anot her elem ent in t heir success w as t he nat ional m acr o- econom ic

condit ions of t he period in w hich t he first generat ion of New Tow ns w ere

developed. Low int er est rat es and low inflat ion com bined w it h econom ic

grow t h and an urban- rural shift , especially in m anufact ur ing indust ry ,

m eant t hat t hey w ere essent ially w ork ing w it h t he gr ain of t heir

20th century new towns conference proceedings

Internacional Conference

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

ARCHETYPES AND UNCERTAINTIES

3RUWR(6$3$XGLWRULXP0D\

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

Archetypes and Uncertainties

Conference proceedings

Edited by

Paolo Marcolin and Joaquim Flores

20th CENTURY NEW TOWNS

Archetypes and Uncertainties

Contents