The ideas put forward by Ebenezer Howard were challenging for many to accept. They came at a time where poor health, overcrowding and poverty consumed most living in cities and required social change before their benefits could be truly realised. The legacy that he hoped to leave behind was all that he envisioned his Garden City would offer. It required the adoption of all his ideas although acknowledged that this would need to be perfected. Both work from his successors and influences on legislation keep Howard’s ideas alive however not in their entirety. Ideas which have been harder to accept have been left aside, changing Howard’s legacy over the course of time.
Ebenezer Howard shocked many with his ideas presented in his self-published 1898 book "To-Morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform” (Parsons and Schuyler, 2002). This was because he had never before displayed such intelligence or leadership qualities required to produce a revolutionary piece of work (Fishman, 1982). His years before publishing play an important role in understanding his key ideas and why they deviate to his legacy today. Born in 1850, Howard finished schooling at age 14 where he began working as a clerk for a stock broker’s office in London. He then tried farming in Nebraska in 1871, only to fail and move to Chicago one year later. Six years’ time brought Howard back to London where he worked as a stenographer (Parsons and Schuyler, 2002). Here he had the opportunity to learn about city problems and schemes developed to fix them (Buder, 1969). Coupled with his failure and temporary poverty experienced when farming, his work as a stenographer awakened him to social issues, in particular poverty and housing (Fishman, 1982).
Howard became transfixed with these problems, attending readings and discussions to educate himself from both political and social standpoints (Parsons and Schuyler, 2002). A book titled ‘Looking Backward’ by Edward Bellamy then captivated Howard and minds alike (Hall & Ward, 1998). In his book, Bellamy spoke of the communities of the year 2000. He depicted a nation who worked for each other, the land publicly owned and all operations highly centralised (Mullin, 2000). Enthused by Bellamy’s ideas, Howard began developing models to test his work. In this time it became apparent that not all his ideas may be practical. This sparked innovation for Howard as his own ideas developed and the utopian known as the Garden City was born (Fishman, 1982).
In Howard’s book, republished in 1902 under the name “Garden Cities of To-Morrow”, he illustrates his ideas in the form of a new community, named the Garden City (Buder 1969). The principle behind the Garden City is best explained by Howard’s renowned picture, the three magnets Figure 1, as shown in the appendices. The diagram depicts the city and country as two individual magnets, both of which attracting people with their benefits and detracting with their detriments. Howard’s work aimed to create a community that incorporated the benefits of both city and country while neglecting these negatives. This was described as the ‘Town-Country magnet’; attracting those living in poverty with cheaper rents and job prospects as well as industries with lower operating expenses and markets at their doorstep (Howard, 1965).
In creating this third magnet, Howard believed he had the answer to social problems. Those living in poverty would be able to move into the new affordable city with job prospects and a higher standard of living. This would then aid decentralisation, reducing the overcrowding issues London was currently experiencing. It therefore improved the standard of living for all people concerned (Filler, 1986). The Garden City was however more than an answer to social issues; it was an economic and social step towards a higher stage of establishment (Fishman, 1982). This was built upon Howard’s two fundamental ideas; the community ownership of land and a connection with nature. While these ideas were in no way original, Howard never claimed they were. His innovation came from identifying what each idea or proposal offered and combining them in a way to create a successful system (Fishman, 1982).
The community ownership of land was one of the most important and most troubling ideas that Howard strived to achieve (Buder, 1969). The removal of profit motivated developers enabled the community to receive the full benefit from increasing land values. The result is satisfying for the community rent remains stable with increasing land value and more funds are available to spend on public spaces. It also indirectly benefits as Howard believed cooperation or brotherhood would form, creating a stronger, more satisfied community (Buder, 1969). As the benefit remains in the community’s hands, a sense of responsibility is developed for their city which leads onto Howard’s next idea of connection with land. Like the name suggests, large gardens and ‘green belts’ would also be significant features in the Garden City. Howard saw a connection with nature as an important factor affecting people's satisfaction and future prosperity (1902). The current situation in London was a very clear example of what happens when this connection is lost with poverty, poor health and pollution evident to all.
During his lifetime, Howard’s efforts were translated into the development of two cities, Letchworth and Welwyn. Letchworth’s construction began in 1903 and was the first achievement for Howard and his Garden City Association (Hall and Ward, 1998). Despite attracting significant public support, it was very difficult attracting large industries and financial backers. As a result, instead of a trust or non-profit company looking after the city’s funds, a dividend company was formed to protect investor’s interests (Buder, 1969). This security encouraged investors and then industries however it did not follow Howard’s idea of community receiving all benefits from increasing land value which was central to the developing cooperation in the community. Letchworth still however satisfied Howard’s idea of reconnecting people with the land and presented an example of planned development. Along with his Garden City Association’s pressure, this forced government authorities to review the living conditions many were being forced to live in. This sparked the birth of town planning legislation with the introduction of the 1909 Town's Planning Act (UK Parliament, )
Welwyn then began being constructed in 1920 as a result of Howard’s frustration with the Letchworth community not owning their land (Filler, 1986). To fund the development Howard used his personal assets, donations and bank loans. He then formed a non-profit company called Welwyn Garden City Limited and began arranging the planning, publicising and construction of the new Garden City (Filler, 1986). Howard’s passing in 1928 left his partner, Frederic Osborn as the forefront of the Garden City movement (Osborn, 1950). Osborn shared Howard’s belief that new cities needed to be built however did not see the importance of community owned land. Because of this, instead of trying to raise interest on his own, he continued to pressure council and government officials to convert the Garden City’s approach into legislation (Fishman, 1969).
Osborn therefore kept the Garden City alive and with his continual pressure had a large role in the development of the 1946 New Towns Act (Hall & Ward, 1998). The act authorised the construction of multiple new towns based on the hard work of Howard. The continual development and health of those living in Letchworth and Welwyn made them worthy models to apply to the future towns. The New Towns Act (1946) also followed Howard’s idea of leasing land to repay loans and incorporated his lower density development (Fishman, 1982).
It is here that the legacy of Ebenezer Howard begins to deviate from his ideas. His two garden cities of Letchworth and Welwyn are physical examples of his ideas he worked towards and therefor serve as his legacy. Both cities have since had their land sold so his principle of the community owning the land has been removed. His name is then firmly etched into the term Garden City which greatly influenced the birth of town planning and the 1946 New Towns Act. Both pieces of legislation identify that the marriage of town and country is a good way forward however once again do not acknowledge Howard’s idea of community owning the land. And now today, a garden city may simply refer to the low density city.
Although individually his ideas were not original pieces of work, the innovation required to combine them and develop a conceptual city is worthy of praise. To then be the key figure in founding two cities based upon these ideas is what makes Ebenezer Howard a truly influential planner. His main ideas of community ownership of land and re connecting people with nature are key motivators behind these cities. They give an insight into what Howard worked so tirelessly to achieve. His successors and legislation have not captured this fist idea and as his two cities have also deviated from this idea; its impact has diminished over time. Howard’s Legacy today aligns closely with what has been captured in legislation. That is the marriage of country and town, or re connection of people with the land.
References
- Buder, S. (1969). Ebenezer howard: The genesis of a town planning movement. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(6), 390-398.
- Filler, R. (1986). A history of welwyn garden city Phillimore & Co Ltd.
- Fishman, R. (1982). Urban utopias in the twentieth century: Ebenezer howard, frank lloyd wright, and le corbusier MIT Press.
- Hall, P., & Ward, C. (1998). Sociable cities: The legacy of ebenezer howard J. Wiley.
- Howard, E. (1965). Garden cities of to-morrow Mit Press.
- Mullin, J. R. (2000). Edward bellamy's ambivalence: Can utopia be urban? Utopian Studies, , 51-65.
- Osborn, F. J. (1950). Sir ebenezer howard-the evolution of his ideas. Town Planning
No comments:
Post a Comment