Sie sind auf Seite 1von 29

Sir Ebenezer Howard was the

founder of garden cities.



His garden city embodies all the
ideas championed by the current
generation. It combines work and
residence, provides housing for a
wide range of incomes, and
includes a town center with a well-
defined civic space, all at a
walking scale with easy access to
parkland. Bob Fisher APA panel

Strong community
Ordered development
Environmental quality
These were to be achieved by:
Unified ownership of land to prevent individual land
speculation and maximize community benefit
Careful planning to provide generous living and
working space while maintaining natural qualities
Social mix and good community facilities
Limits to growth of each garden city
Local participation in decisions about development
Garden cities allowed a genuine celebration and
renewal of nature, even within an essentially urban
industrial economy.
Garden cities have been the richest source of
planning over the last century. Within the principles of
garden cities many key principles of planning practice in
the 20
th
century can be found.


* Land use segregation
* Master planning
* Residential site planning
* Neighborhood units
* Road hierarchies


Shopping malls
Industrial parks
Regional planning
Planned decentralization
Greenbelts
6000 acres
5000 for agriculture and 2000 people
1000 in the city for 30,000 people
Low rent on land - Agricultural
Dividends on the land would be paid out
Create a place that combines city life and
rural life
Eliminate slums
There are three garden cities designs that have influenced
other cities.

Letchworth, UK

Greenbelt, MD

Radburn, NJ

B. Parker and R. Unwin, the
Architects of Letchworth,
disliked the original
geometric symmetry of
Howards design and applied
their own organic unity to
the design. The industrial
sector was not as Howard
proposed and was separated
by a park from the
community. Although
Letchworth was not the ideal
garden city as Howard had
imagined, it did demonstrate
most of the ideals and
principles of a garden city.
Low population
1905 population was 1400
1907 population was 2800
1908 population was 5600

Slow growth until munitions factory was
built there in 1914

Means the housing increases in value



The city of Greenbelt was the first community in the U.S. built
as a federal venture for housing. It was designed as a
complete city, with businesses, schools, roads, and facilities
for recreation and town government.
Greenbelt was a planned community, noted for its interior
walkways, underpasses, inner courtyards, and Art Deco
Architecture.
Greenbelt is the only of the three garden cities to flourish only
because of the demonstration of the citizens residing in the
community.

As a result of the Great Depression, Radburn became
influenced by the post World War II suburban development.
Only a portion of the development was completed because
the developer went bankrupt during the Great Depression.
Radburn was designed to occupy one square mile of land
and house some 25,000 residents. However, the Great
Depression limited the development to only 149 acres.
Radburn created a unique alternative to the conventional
suburban development through the use of cul-de-sacs,
interior parklands, and cluster housing. Although Radburn
is smaller than planned, it still plays a very important role in
the history of urban planning.
The Regional Planning Association of America (RPAA) used
Radburn as a garden city experiment. Members of the RPAA
were often referred to as the think tank.
The main design intent for Radburn was to separate
vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
The Radburn planners achieved this separation through the
use of the superblocks, cul-de-sacs, and pedestrian-only
pathways.

Through the use of the superblock, houses in Radburn were
uniquely designed to have two fronts. The back side of the
house, what we would normally consider the front side, faced
the culs-de-sac and parking. The kitchen was normally placed
in the back to provide visitors a place to enter the house. The
front side of the house faced towards the green spaces or
parks encouraging pedestrian traffic. Since automobiles were
given limited access to the backs of the houses, the fronts of
the house were relatively quiet, therefore, the bedrooms were
always placed on this side of the house.

Construction of interior parks were heavily dependant on the
development of Radburns road infrastructure . In a typical
city plan, roads occupy about 35% of the total land area,
however, in Radburn they occupy about 21% of the land
area. These parks played a large role as a spatial component
by tying together structures and circulation.
Radburn contains a very noticeable landmark that is
constantly used as a form of reference and identity. The Plaza
Building is Radburns only neighborhood shopping center,
and its tall clock tower has been a neighborhood landmark
since 1927.
The 2900 residents of Radburn share 23 acres of interior parks,
which yield 345 square feet / person.
These parks provide small districts for the city.


Radburn has very distinct edges. Bordered by a river to the
south and east and a traditional gridiron system to the north-
east which indirectly affected the later developments of
Radburn.
Radburn works as a garden
city and a wonderful example
of a well designed community
because every piece is
integrated perfectly into one
body.
Were bigger and met bigger housing needs
Relied much more on state intervention
Were built at higher densities (but important
exceptions eg most UK new towns)
Also included more apartments instead of
individual houses, and increasingly high rise
Often poorer community facilities (in Europe
especially)
Have proved less sustainable in long term (in
Europe at least) than garden cities
To be developed within a 12 mile radius of
London

Helped with decentralization

Socially and economically self contained
towns

Influenced by Howards theories
Low density housing
Cheaper due to lower road costs and sewer
system costs

Block planning instead of street planning

Combining urban and rural housing

Reported by:
Del Rosario, David
Mendoza, Christian David B.
Putungan, Francis M.