British new towns: Some administrative aspects

The degree of continuity in this essay is far from being all that it should, but a common thread is discernible, namely the administrative arrangements devised to handle new town development, both in theory and in practice, and in particular, the means devised (or not devised) to ensure that new town developments (of all sorts) were integrated with wider strategic planning policies.As study progressed, it emerged that new towns in Britain were at something of a cross-roads.The function of new towns in planning as a whole was being discussed between Government and interested parties.Accordingly, much of the essay is devoted to examining the case for new town and development corporation-type institutions and considering how the experience of the past suggests that they might be adapted for use in the future.If any dedication is required, then it must be two-fold.First, to Ebenezer Howard, a man more grievously misrepresented by his friends than by his opponents.And Secondly, to the Harley Committee whose study (given great prominence in this essay because it appears to me to have been so unjustly neglected elsewhere) is a model of incisive understanding and sound common sense, which^had it been found in so-called "planners*1, would have prevented much wasted time and effort, and many misguided initiatives.countryside •.•What Howard said about the relation of town and country within the garden city area is equally applicable to the entire business of city and regional planning: the administrative unit that is created must be capable of embracing both the urban and rural aspects of the regions• " Mumford (1945) p* 55* This quote at once confirms the intellectual scope of Howard's work.He wrote at a time when thirty years of continuous depression in agri culture had left rural society debilitated and impoverished.He saw the problems of urban and rural squalor as two aspects of malaise in the organisation of communities and the economy.This understanding was sadly not reflected in the 1947 Act, a situation which PAG attempted to remedy only in 1968.Howard has suffered from consistent superficial interpretation, but it is disappointing that in "Garden Cities of Tomorrow" his understanding is not formalised into an analysis of the administrative framework which might achieve the town and country planning which he advocated.By contrast, very precise suggestions about the finance and administration of the built up area are given, encouraging practical men to think in terms of building closely-bounded towns quite insulated from the surrounding country.Howard's ideal of a country-wide spread of Social Cities called for far more than the addition of a few new "municipalities": it would have called for a complete reform of local government boundaries, along the lines of city-regions disposed around town clusters, of some level or other.One can look upon the Radcliffe-M and proposals for England, ^ and the new regional divisions in Scotland as attempting this form in the same conviction which Howard had, that town and country must be planned in a way that recognised the interdependence of their functions in a healthy system (in this case grouping around town clusters of a very high level in the hierarchy)• Instead of tackling this, the model developed starts by assuming the existence of a"municipality", and concentrates on demonstrating the financial realism of the approach.The provision of intrastructures and services is discussed in some detail, but in a chapter entitled "Expenditures": who will provide the services is not an issue, the question is whether the rate-rent revenues in prospect will meet the costs -and the answer is of course "yes".Items discussed are:-Roads -city Roads -country Circular railway Schools