Re-Enclosure of the Urban Picturesque: Green-Space Transformations in Postmodern Urbanism Author(S): Michael Hebbert Source: the Town Planning Review, Vol

Home , Arthur Lewis Building, Urbanism

Re-Enclosure of the Urban Picturesque: Green-Space Transformations in Postmodern Urbanism Author(s): Michael Hebbert Source: The Town Planning Review, Vol. 79, No. 1 (2008), pp. 31-59 Published by: Liverpool University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40112746 . Accessed: 26/09/2014 11:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Liverpool University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Town Planning Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TPR,79 (1)2008 Michael Hebbert

Re-enclosureof the urban picturesque

Green-space transformationsin postmodern urbanism

The paper seeks to compare and contrast the roles of green space within modern and postmodern urbanism.Modernism rejected enclosure in favourof an open space vision inspiredby eighteenth-century picturesque landscape design. Its paradigm of an unbounded public realm was diffusedand regular- ised during the second half of the twentiethcentury through housing and highways development, open space policies and regulatorypractices. As the stock of green space increased, so did concerns about itsenvironmental and social utility.Towards the end of the centurythere appeared an alternativevision of urban open space. Instead of openness itsought enclosure, and instead of a passive pictorialquality itaimed at the active provisionof ecosystem services to the builtenvironment. This article describes this rethinkingof town greenery,looks forits underlyingsocial and environmentalrationale, and assesses its place withina wider planning theoryof postmodern urbanism.

The treeshown in Figure i wasone of thousands recently uprooted by Manchester City Council,having been planted some thirty years ago. Then thecouncil's vision was to replacethe building frontage along the main roads into the city with a green,flowing, openlandscape. Now itsvision is to grubup thebuffer greenery so frontagecan be rebuilt,framing streets and squaresin whichnew trees will be planted.A dispersed, pervasivelandscape in whichbuildings stood is beingreplaced by a landscapethat standsbetween and is framedby buildings.The alterationcan be describedas a processof matrixreversal, a shiftfrom 'out' to 'in' landscape,extensive to intensive form,modernist to postmodern space. However described, it involves a fundamental turnin purpose and method,a paradigmshift. Whatfollows is a descriptionof thisshift of visionthrough the medium of a wide- rangingreview article. It takesthe long twentieth century as itstime-frame and draws on Europeanand US as wellas Britishplanning literature. It is one of a sequenceof essayson thetheme of reconsolidationin recenturban design; others have looked at publichealth, collective memory, highway design and streetarchitecture as well as theunderlying concepts of urbanism(Hebbert, 1999; 2003; 2005a; 2005b;2006; forthcoming). The articlebegins with the pulling down of parkrailings and theopening up of townsto a free-flowingnatural landscape evocative of theeighteenth-century picturesque.The firsthalf describes the ideal and thesocial and environmentaldisappoint- mentsof itsrealisation. The secondhalf turns to contemporary orpostmodern green

Michael Hebbert teaches at the School of Environmentand Development, ArthurLewis Building, Universityof Manchester,M13 9PL; email: [email protected].

Paper submittedOctober 2006; revisedpaper received November 2007 and accepted December 2007.

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 32 Michael Hebbert

Figure1 Grubbedtree on pileof spoil in Beswick, East Manchester, where a thirty-year-oldlandscape bufferalong theradial Ashton Old Road is being replacedby buildingswith active frontage Source:author's photograph

space.It describesthe shift from extensive to intensiveprovision and considershow lessmay prove to be more.We concludewith a discussionof socialand ecosystemroles - whichallow the re-enclosure phenomenon to be understood likeother aspects of postmodernurbanism - in termsof designfor multi-functionality.

The modernist urban landscape The twentiethcentury's landscape vision was to bring nature to town. The US parkway movementexperimented from the 1860sonwards with systems of interconnected greenspace to oxygenatethe city and dispelits miasmas (Lubove, 1967; Szczygiel and Hewitt,2000). The 'emeraldnecklaces' of Olmstedand his followerswere radical green-spacesystems that broke down conventionalcategories of park,urban and rural(Hirsch and O'Hanlon, 1995).English garden-city builders responded weakly to theseideas, using green space in a conventionalfashion within curve-plan suburbs and axiallygeometric civic centres. The authentictwentieth-century landscape vision

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 33

Figure2 Schemefor Claremont, Surrey Source:Tunnard, 1938; reproducedby kindpermission of ArchitecturalPress Archive/RIBA Library PhotographsCollection

wasborn between the wars from the marriage of modernhighway engineering layout withModern Movement design. Open greenlandscape plus new white architecture becamethe universal icon of socialdemocracy (Worpole, 2000). A seminalstatement of thisideal was ChristopherTunnard's book, Gardens in the ModernLandscape (Tunnard, 1938; Neckar, 1990). The authorwas theteam member responsiblefor green space within MARS (theModern Architectural Research Group), theBritish arm of theinternational modern movement. An activemember of thenew Instituteof LandscapeArchitects (previously the British Association of GardenArchi- tects),his book was themanifesto for the profession that gave the architectural avant- gardeits settings of sunlight,openness, and freedom.No morerockeries, streams and contouredlawns, no moreregimented lines of trees;nature should not be contained butshould flow into the city, connecting playgrounds, recreation areas, home, factory and countrysidein a continuousstream of health-givinggreenery, a 'garden without limitation'(Tunnard, 1938, 166). The imageof thecountry calling in on thetown was a directhomage to eighteenth- centurypicturesque landscape theory. Tunnard ingeniously transformed a proprietary - - aesthetic openvistas from a countrylandowner's seat to a distanthorizon intoa templatefor landscapes of urbancollectivism. He tookinspiration from the Clare-

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 34 MichaelHebbert

montestate in Surrey, a great eighteenth-century estate by Sir John Vanburgh, Charles Bridgeman,William Kent and Lancelot'Capability' Brown, which was dividedby fivefirms of buildersinto luxury homes. He caricaturedthis enclosure process with a sketchof a cow markedup forits carcass joints, entitled the 'ButcherMethod'. By contrast(see Figure2), he showedhow itspicturesque setting could have been preservedintact without the loss of a singlegreat tree as an openbackground for flats and terracedhouses, with shared gardens flowing uninterruptedly into a communal landscape(op. cit, 158). The idealisedpre-industrial pastoral imagery of thepicturesque movement fitted wellwith the technologicaloptimism of the machineage. Naturefree of toilwas laid out forcontemplation and physicalenjoyment (Worpole, 2000; Jacques, 2000). In mid-twentieth-centuryplanning theory, it was axiomaticthat the introduction of vegetationon a largescale to the interior of citieswould 'bring life, change and vigour directto thetownsman' (Gutkind, 1962, 52). Lewis Mumford saw modernism's urban landscapesas transformativespaces, 'giving collective form to theI-Thou relation', whereold-fashioned parks had merelyprovided places of refugefrom the urban crowd.Throughout his influential career, Mumford urged planners to conceivethe greenpublic realm on an ambitiousscale: Perhapsthe first step towards regaining possession of our soulswill be to re-possess and plan thewhole landscape... In thecities of thefuture, ribbons of greenmust run throughevery quarter, forming a continuous web of gardenand mall,widening at the edgeof thecity into protective green belts, so thatlandscape and gardenwill become an integralpart of urbanno lessthan rural life. (1964, 173-75) This visionwas international,though its nuances varied fromculture to culture.The landscape of US parkwayswas a settingfor the American Dream, givingthe suburban commutera daily tasteof the greatoutdoors (Gandy,2002). The post-warstadtland- schqftconcept offereda way of repairingGermany's broken historic nexus between folkand homeland (Diefendorf,1993; Mantziaras, 2003). Hans Berhard Reichow's OrganischeStadtbaukunst of 1948, a key text,saw the change fromintensive to extensive green space, park to landscape, as a move 'away fromthe satisfactionof merely aestheticneeds to the fulfilmentof general elementalneeds, to the establishmentof the biologicallynecessary' (Sohn, 2003, 125).In Frenchlandscape theory,an appeal to ruralvitality and traditioncombined with the promise of machine-age mobility for'horizontal spirits' (Bardet, 1949, 121;Cohen, 1995; Rabinow, 1989). The gigantic public realmof Sovietcities embodied the all-encompassingCommunist state (Engel, 2006). In theirnests of greenery,the neighbourhoodunits in Britishreconstruction plans evokedthe nationalnostalgia for the face-to-faceworld of thevillage green (see Figure3). All were variationson a shared theme.It was an idea of progressfrom enclosure

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 35

Figure3 City neighbourhood,deliberately reduced to quasi-ruralisolation by a combinationof highwayseverance and landscape bufferplanting. Source: Nicholas, 1945 to openness,from the in space of a conventionalpark to an outlandscape of flowing edgelessgreenery (Fairbrother, 1974, 142); from the confinement and muddleof the streetto thegeometrical purity of thefreeway (Merriman, 2004); from the profane confusionsof thetown to thepurity of a newGarden of Eden (Tuan,1974, 104). ChristopherTunnard left Britain in 1939for a careerat Harvardand Yale.But his fellowpioneers - GeoffreyJellicoe, Brenda Colvin, Sylvia Crowe and Nan Fairbrother - continuedto take Capability Brown as a referencepoint for the public landscapes of thewelfare state (Jacques, 2000; Crowe,i960; Matless,1998). The visionwas collec- tivistand its implementation ran alongside the progress of welfarism. Some progressive Britishmunicipalities began to pulldown their park railings even before the Second WorldWar made it a patrioticduty (Conway, 2000; Rasmussen, 1982, 416; Fox, 1995). In post-warreconstruction, open-plan was thenorm. In reactionagainst the brutal mineralenvironment of the industrialcity, green-space seemed an unquestionable benefit;the most gentle and universalform of socialengineering (Abrams, 2003, 119)

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 36 MichaelHebbert

and thesurest basis of publichealth (Forshaw, 1943). The essentialbuilding block - - of thewelfare state theneighbourhood unit came wrappedin it (see Figure3). Nationalpolicy statements such as theDudley Report (CHAC, 1944)made generous allowancesmandatory within planned estates. Planners and landscapearchitects took it as a basic tenet'that people inherently like the picturesque, and giventhe choice woulddecide to live in a settingnot dissimilar to eighteenth-century parkland' (Gilbert, 1989,11). As an internationalphenomenon, state involvement in housingsupply was linkedto extensiveamenity landscapes (Beer et al., 2003).Jane Jacobs wrote Death and lifeof GreatAmerican Cities (1962) from her observations of the newly-formedopen grasssettings of US socialhousing projects. As US jobs and householdsmigrated to thesuburbs and beyond,the same picturesque treatment was extendedto thevoids leftbehind, if theywere not used for parking lots (Ford, 2000). An equallyimportant factor of changewas road transport.The centralidea of twentieth-centuryhighway design was thatroads, like railways, should have their own permanentway for uninterrupted driving. Landscape ideals featured prominently in roadconstruction propaganda. In theUS, theAmerican Association of Nurserymen wasan activelobbyist for the 1944 Federal- Aid Highway Act and the eventual creation of the$100 billion, 41,000-mile interstate system. It offeredlandscape planting as a wayto winover objectors, reducing 'misunderstandings, oppositions and bad public reactions'(White, 1959, 190). Urban roads would become 'elongated parks bringing to theinner city a welcomeaddition of beauty,grace and greenopen space' (Snow, 1959, xii).The greenstuff simultaneously enhanced the driver's pleasure and protectedthe non-driver'shealth and safety(Giedion, 1941; Crowe, i960; Halprin,1966). From the mid-twentiethcentury onwards, the principle of a vegetatedsleeve or buffer came to be appliedby city authorities to roads of everysize and grade(Figure 4). As theautobahn conceptof a roadwaywithout built frontage or side-turnswas extendedfrom arterial roadsto distributor and local roads, so didthe realm of roadsideplanting. At the most detailedlevel of sitelayout, engineering standards specified wide road verges for the convenienceof theutilities, and generousvisibility splays so thattraffic need not slow downon theapproach to junctions (Woodford et al., 1976).Road landscapesdid more thanany other factor to breakopen thebuilt fabric of cities,reduce densities and increasethe area of plantedvoids. In plannednew towns and housingestates, they providedthe matrix for complete schemes of landscapedesign (Higson, 1997). Several milliontons of spoilwere moved to create an inventedtopography of traffic-screening bermsalong the highway grid of MiltonKeynes, the UK's largestnew town (Turner, 1998).25 million trees were planted: the chief planner said his aim was 'tolose the city in a re-createdforest' (Walker, 2007, 75). Programmedinto the pattern language of thetwentieth-century city,the matrix of greenspace continued to growwith the passage of time.Whereas the size of private gardenswas shrinking(Ravetz, 1995, 193-94) and the stockof privateallotments

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 37

Figure4 East Kilbride,near Glasgow: theWestwood neighbourhood,green but still largely treeless 28 yearsafter the designation of thenew town Source:by kindpermission of BRE diminishing(Meller, 2005), new development,public and private,steadily added to the stockof public amenityspace. Edge plantingand amenitystrips of grasswere often requiredby planners as a condition or developer contribution(UGSTF, 2002, 53). The dominanttypology of a buildingset likea poached egg in itsown car-parkon an access road multipliedthe off-cuts of space leftover after (or in) planning(SLOAP and SLOIP) (Casson, 1956;AR, 1973;Fairbrother, 1974). It was rarefor a new buildingnot to be equipped witha vanitypatch of evergreenshrubbery to thefront or side (Figure 5). In Tunnard's originalvision, the landscaper (his term)stood equal witharchitect and engineeras the expertwho would open up the cityto the flowof nature(1938, 166),but in dispiritingreality the profession seemed littlemore thana serviceindustry forproperty developers and highwayengineers (Gandy, 2002, 147). The modernist picturesquehad declined into a routineapplication of designstandards (Manthorpe, 1956). We can hear a thin echo of Gardensin theModern Landscape in the clumps of

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 38 Michael Hebbert

Figure5 Bufferplanting along a flankwall anywherein theUK. A commonrequirement of planning permissions,this miserable vestigial vegetation is the directdescendant of the landscape buffers shownin Figure3 Source:author's photograph

shrubberyand stripsof grassof anysuburban business or retail park, and the'indeterminateland oozes' alongroadsides and aroundhousing projects (Jacobs, 1962, 102). The entirepractice of green-spacedesign and managementwas on thedefensive and underfire from two directions.

Social and environmental critiques of the urban picturesque The greenspace favouredby modernist urbanism was regardedmore for its mastic- likeability to join togetherthe functional zones of thecity than for its own functional attributes.As thequantum of urbanvegetation grew, so didquestions about functionality.Unlike conventional types of street/square/park/garden,itspieces were usually unnamedand weaklyidentifiable. The earliestcriticisms of thepost-war picturesque had to do withits amorphousness and lackof urbanity;they were part and parcelof Iain Nairn'sinfamous 'subtopia' (AR, 1956,355). Amenity spaces were often of the wrongscale for human use. They often appeared alongside roads; as PeterBlake put

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 39

Figure6 Uninvitingsign on a Warringtondistributor road. Pedestriansprefer the hazards of the road vergeto thethickets and subways.Source: authors photograph

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 40 MichaelHebbert

it,where people wouldn't want to use themor couldn'tget at themeven if theydid (1964,30). Theirvery freedom posed newissues of socialcontrol (Carr and Lynch, 1981). Whereas traditional enclosed parks had been designed for control and managed bykeepers, open-plan landscape was intrinsicallyharder to supervise,whether in its all-too-openpatches of grasslandor itsall-too-closed belts of shrubberywith their undercroftsand detritusof litter.Close planting,for initial impact, often produced - densethickets (Figure 6) that- withthe exuberanceof nature wouldovergrow footpathsand outrunthe efforts of maintenanceteams (Comedia and Demos,2002; HoC, 1999and 2002-3;DTLR, 2002,10). As cities'landscape estates expanded, older parks and newerplanted areas were in competitionfor a diminishingresource base (UGSTF, 2002,53). In a contextof continuousdownwards pressure on unitcosts of maintenance,governments sought economiesin batch contracts, replacing site-based groundsmen and specialistkeepers withall-purpose maintenance teams who used the same trimmers and gang-mowers inparks as on highwayverges. As thequantum of plantedspace grew, so theancient artof urbanhorticulture became coarsened into mechanical crudity (Spirn, 1984). Toomany parks have been reduced to grass, trees and tarmac in the quest for cheaper maintenance.The damagethus inflicted is quickly and clearlyvisible, but what is nowalso clear is theprofoundly demoralising effect that it has on parkusers and the surroundingcommunity and its economic and social life. (HoC, 1999) Parliamentariansexamining the state of UK parksin 1999were shocked at thelevels of declineand abandonment; they found that the keeperless park had become, like the unstaffedrailway station, 'one of the ghost zones of modern Britain'. David Nicholson- - Lord contrastedthe great historical tradition of thepicturesque whatAlexander - Pope had called'calling in thecountry' withthe reality of publicopen spacesrife withvandalism (1987, 32). Whateverthe actual levels of danger,the landscapes of theurban picturesque often had thephysical attributes of riskyplaces: concealment, exposure,short lines of sightand non-supervision(Coaffee, 2003). MaartenHajer definesthe urban public realm as a landscapeunder continual scrutiny by its occupants forsigns of reassuranceor threat(Hajer and Reijndorp,2001, 73). Perceptionsof dangerdominate green-space user surveys (DoE, 1996;DTLR, 2002; WDS, 2004; MKP,2005, 35). When city leaders meet to talk about green-space, as theUS Mayors' Forumdid at itsLos Angelesmeeting in thesummer of 2004,issues of personalfear topthe agenda (Hudnut, 2004). Urban landscapes of fearoffer an ironicinversion of thehistorical idea of townsas placesof sanctuaryfrom the dangerous thickets and lurkingpredators of thecountryside (see Figure 7; Tuan, 1980,146). Meanwhile,a similarprocess of disenchantmentwas occurringwithin the natural enviroment.The urbanpicturesque had aimedto bringnature into the city, yet that was not whathappened. The Dutch gardendesigner Mien Ruysobserved of Le

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof the urban picturesque 41

Corbusierthat he worshippednature but fundamentally misunderstood it(Woudstra, 2000,136). Twentieth-century modernism's image of naturewas controlled, improved and gardenesque,and assumedintensive maintenance (Gilbert, 1989). It encouraged a perceptionof greenspace as an inertconstruction-industry material, like the greeri spongeused in architecturalmodels, a staticexterior decoration based on nursery- cataloguedistinctions: grass, flowers, shrubs, trees (Taylor, 1981, 85). As Ian McHarg (1969)showed, this was reallyan anti-natureattitude. There was a systematicfailure to see plantedground as 'a livingcomposition with its own inherentpatterns of survivalwhich nature constantly reinstates' (Fairbrother, 1974, 25). As thosesucces- sionalprocesses in a temperateclimate would normally tend towards a forestclimax, thepre-forest combinations used in theurban picturesque were intrinsically unstable, and so requireda continuousinput of labour,chemicals and machinery.The conven- tionalmowed, weed-controlled grass of urbanamenity space became'a symbolfor everythingthat is wrongwith our relationship to theland' (Hough,1994, 129). The contrastwas shown up as deindustrialisationbegan to grip the urban economy. Nicholson-Lord(1987) contrasted the environmentalsterility and placelessnessof publicgreen space withthe ecological richness of brownfieldland. It was extraor- dinaryhow rapidlyhard-surfaced factories, marshalling yards, docks and gasworks coulddevelop a soilstructure and a successionalvegetation of understorey,overstorey and canopy.The ecologicallandscape movement around Ian McHarg,Ian Laurie and MichaelHough argued for parks and othercategories of urbangreen-space to be allowedthe same ecological freedom, reverting to semi-wildurban commons with vegetationleft to seed,grow and decayin naturalsuccession (Laurie, 1979). Some Dutchcities successfully applied this successional approach, though it was generally resistedby open-space managers (Spirn, 1984). The mostfamous case in the UK, and one of the largestin Europe,was the adventitiouslandscape that colonised an abandonedwar munitionsfactory to the northof Warrington.When the land was developedfor housing, much of itssemi- wild landscapewas retainedand incorporatedinto the systemof highwayand housinggreenery. However, the physical layout of theestates was entirelyconven- tional,with clusters of cul-de-sacssurrounded by bufferplanting. It was innovative onlyin the ecologicaldimension. Unsurprisingly, residents of Warrington'surban wildwoodshave proved uneasy about the naturalistic thickets which press too closely aroundtheir homes, and fearfulof thepaths and roadwaysthat run through them (Jorgensenet al, 2007).We needto balancebiophilia with human liveability. Abrams (2003)found overgrown vegetation projecting 'an imageof desolationand despair'in overgrowncourtyards of Ralph Erskine'scelebrated ecological landscapes at Byker inNewcastle. For the second edition of hisbook City Form and Natural Process, Michael Houghrevisited some of thenatural landscapes around Dutch housing estates and foundthat their low-maintenance naturalised vegetation had been radicallythinned

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 42 Michael Hebbert

Figure7 The Women'sDesign Service undertakes a safetyaudit in the buffer landscaping by Bristol's BaptistMills/Millpond underpass. Few womenuse theamenity. Source: by kindpermission of theWDS

and simplifiedin responseto muggingand drug-dealing(1994, 123). Nicholson-Lord (2004)notes the viciouscircle by whichCCTV surveillanceforces the removalof shrubsand undercroftvegetation, forcing a reversionto thelowest denominator of sterilemonoculture. Developmentsin theurban environmental agenda have widened the functionality gap stillfurther. The urbanpicturesque was a landscapeof mobility,designed to make drivingenjoyable. Global warming has put it in a newlight. As MatthewGandy (2002) observes,highway landscapes along arterialroads used to symbolisethe marriage of natureand humanartifice; today they have becomea symbolof estrangement betweenthe two (Figure 8). The uprootedtree in Figure1 symbolisesthe arrival of a freshparadigm: postmodern urbanism. As Nan Fairbrotherput it,'new lives, new landscapes'.

The re-enclosure movement The Germanlandscape architect Peter Latz (2000)looks back on thelatter half of thetwentieth century as a periodof lostopportunity; an era of buffergreenery in

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 43

Figure8 A landscaped road junctionwith a screen of maturingtrees obliterated by a 96-sheet billboard.Clear Channelwastes no painton thegimcrack carpentry seen fromadjacent homes. Source:authors photograph whichopen space was definedby anti-urbanvalues. 'What we need moreof', Peter Blakeonce said,'is lessurban open space.We need closedspace' (1981,11-12). Today thatshift is happening.After half a centuryof indeterminateland oozes,cities are reinventingand retrofittingmorphologies not practised since the early years of the twentiethcentury: the urban square, the avenue of streettrees, the multi-way boule- vard,building along frontage lines, the grid-bounded square and park,the corridor (Turner,1996). Urbanism, in the phrase of Trancik's influential study Finding Lost Space (1986),has becomethe task of 'makingfigurative space out of thelost landscape'. MichaelHough (1990) speaks of a strategyof 'matrixreversal', which turns the green matrixof modernism into a matrixof built form, open into closed space, out to in. The re-enclosuretendency reflects new confidence about cities as placesto work, play and live.Its design discourse spans all stylesof urbanismfrom late modern Rotterdam to retro-romanticBerlin (Hajer and Reijndorp,2001). The varietyof approachescan be exploredat the Centre de CulturaContemporana de Barcelona'sweb-based European Archiveof ContemporaryUrban Space, a collectionof hundredsof projectsentered forthe centre's biennial prize (http://urban.cccb.org). For PeterLatz, thisarchive

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 44 MichaelHebbert

marksthe end of twentieth-centuryspace and thebeginning of a twenty-first-century urbanlandscape (2000, 5). The re-enclosurephenomenon goes beyond local circumstances and cultures;like earlierphases of green-spaceconversion, its reach is global(Clark, 2006, 6). Tjallingii (2003)speaks of a fundamentalshift from 'green' to 'red'dominance in the struggle for urbanland. In theformer Communist bloc, the process of infillingand partitioning openspace is drivenby a sometimeschaotic process of privatisation(Beer et al, 2003; Engel,2006). Re-enclosure in market economies is also often linked to neoliberal shifts of ownershipand managementof a previouslyundifferentiated public realm. The politicaleconomy of theseprocesses was discussedin a recentissue of thisjournal by Webster(2007). Here we focuson thephysical outcome. In Francethe process is called 'residentialisation',and itinvolves a mixof demolition,low-rise infill, internal fencing and privatisation.Phillipe Panerai's reworking of theTeisseire district of Grenoble (Figure9) is a characteristicexample (Panerai, 1999; Desfontaines, 2004). In Holland, theonce-iconic modernist landscape of Amsterdam'sBijlmermeer has becomean equallyiconic example of an architectureof addition(Figure 10) to formstreets in thegreen void (Docter, 2000, 203-13; Bruijne et al., 2003).In Germany,Berlin's city authoritieshave pursuedan ambitiousand controversialstrategy to replacefree- flowingurban landscape (Stadtlandschafl) withbounded urban space (stadtischerRaurri) (Burg,1997, .75; Hajer and Reijndorp,2001). In Ireland,Dublin's high-rise satellite estateof Ballymunhas been transformedby a processof architecturalenclosure, whichreclaimed 170 acres of housingland frombleak amenity grassland to createa townscapeof gardens,parks, pocket-parks and tree-linedboulevards (Figure 11; BRL, 1998).In England,the open amenity spaces of theHulme estate in Manchesterwere recolonisedafter only 20 yearsto makea gridreminiscent of thenineteenth-century streetlines (Rudlin and Falk,1999). At the timeof writing,the UK's largestand greenestnew town, Milton Keynes, is pursuing controversial intensification proposals thatinvolve grubbing up treesand levellinglandscape bunds so thatsome sections of thebusy grid roads can be madeviable for pedestrians and publictransport, by being frontedin the urban fashion with buildings instead of vegetation.The city'sCampbell Park,originally designed to blendseamlessly into the greenmatrix, is acquiringa hardframe of high-densityflats (MKP, 2005). Everywhere, the once 'sturdy,versatile, recognisableand timelessconcept' of modernism'surban picturesque is undergoing matrixreversal. Indeed the urban picturesque suddenly begins to seem like an endan- geredhabitat (Docter, 2000; Beer et al., 2003).

Enclosure and functionality Weopened with a disconcertingimage of nature uprooted. The siteof thattree in East Manchesterwas partof an aerialphotograph included in RichardRogers's Urban

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 45

Figure9 New owner-occupiedhousing with detached garages insertedaround the edge of the Teisseireestate in Grenoblewith the aim of desenclovement(breaking social and physicalisolation). The prospectsfor the tree seem poor Source:authors photograph

Task Forcereport over the caption 'land goingto waste'. Some of Manchester'swaste- land was derelictindustrial property (brownfields), but mostwas public open space. Some urbanareas have too muchpublic space, much of whichis poorlydesigned, managedand maintained.Many twentieth-centuryresidential developments have a - publicrealm that is simplySLOAP (spaceleft over after planning) soulless,undefined places,poorly landscaped, with no relationto surroundingbuildings. (UTF, 1999,57) Excess open space exacerbated the problemsof abandonment in neighbourhoods where almost half the shops and a quarterof dwellingswere empty.The remedyis compaction (Echenique and Saint, 2001). East Manchester'samorphous landscapes are being reduced and re-enclosedinto public spaces framed and overlookedby building,as the Urban Task Forceprescribed: 'from the frontdoor to the street,to the square, the park and on out to the countryside... a hierarchyof public spaces that

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 46 Michael Hebbert

Figure1 0 New terracesbuilt over the arcadian landscape of the Bijlmermeerestate in south-east Amesterdam,to forma connectivestreet fabric. Source: authors photograph

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 47

Figure1 1 Streettrees receive attention in the new centralhigh street of Ballymun,Ireland Source:authors photograph relateto buildingsand theirentrances' (UTF, 1999,71). If thedefining feature of the - twentiethcentury urban landscape was itsfreedom of definitioneverything flowed intoeverything else - theemergent paradigm is based on spaceswith definition and purpose,and notone singlepurpose but multi-functionality, serving both human use and enjoymentand as an infrastructureforecosystem services (Beer et al., 2003). This multi-functionalinfrastructure is composed of varioustypologies at several scales,from the gardens,balconies and roofsof individualbuidlings to the green beltsthat structure metropolitan regions (Turner, 1998; TCPA, 2004;Woolley, 2003; Swanwicket al, 2003).To beginat thescale of theindividual dwelling, gardens (and evenbalconies) are themost familar category of multi-functionalgreen space. Their ecologicalpotential has longbeen recognised(Gilbert, 1989), and theircontribution to sustainabledrainage and run-offis belatelybecoming appreciated in responseto lossesthrough paving, decking and infill.Many rebuildsof mass housingprojects turnamenity lawns into enclosed gardens to maketheir open space morepersonal, usefuland enjoyablefor residents (Desfontaines, 2004). The sanctuaryquality of back

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Michael Hebbert

Figure 1 2 The cityof Zurich allows the free growthof adventitiousweeds around the base of street trees and along parkingverges. Source: authors photograph

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof the urban picturesque 49

gardensis reinforced inpostmodern urbanism by the typology of theperimeter block, inwhich buildings line the edge of a developmentsite with their fronts facing outward to thepublic realm of thestreet while the backs define the green space. Urbanists admire perimeterblocks because the outer walls make urban space and reconstitutestreets as placeswith identity and purpose,but an equallysignificant benefit lies within. These spaceshave particular and fascinatingproperties. Their micro-climate is sheltered by theheat-retaining walls of buildings.The wallsthemselves can cascadevegetation. Sunlightcan penetratemost parts of a courtproviding that outer building heights are properlymanaged. The inward-facingwindows enjoy a communalview whatever the ownershipand managementarrangements at groundlevel. The interiorenclosures can formindividual gardens or sharedlandscapes, depending on residentialdensity, and theyoften absorb parking. Their plant and animallife is botha biodiversityvalue and an enhancementto liveabilityand wellbeing(Rohde and Kendle,1994). The gardenedcourts of perimeterblocks are one of themost ancient types of greenspace in Europeancities. Camillo Sitte (1900) mourned their disappearance at theturn of thetwentieth century. A hundredyears later this type of greenspace has been widely revived.Barcelona's Villa Olimpica and Amsterdam'sEastern Harbour District have led theway in reinventingthe typology with innovative mixtures of communalspaces andprivate gardens, as wellas ingeniousways of fittingin car-parking, interior blocks and throughpathways without losing the sense of an enclosedwhole. Outsidethe perimeter block lies the public realm of streetsand squares,mineral pavingsframed by themineral walls of buildings.Streets have been socialenviron- mentsthrough human history and theirgreen-space potential is onceagain becoming appreciatedas theyare prised from the grasp of thehighway engineer and redefined as multi-functionalspaces (DfT, 2007). Urban arboriculture is still convalescent; trees are oftenput in pavementswithout adequate preparation or aftercare(Spirn, 1984; Pauleit,2003). As universitiesrevive the scientific and skillsbasis, more is being discov- eredabout the benefits that street landscapes can bring(Randrup et al., 2002;Nowak etal., 2004; Konijnendijk et al., 2005). Trees reduce vehicle speeds, dampen noise, form a psychologicalsafety barrier between lanes of movement, moderate the microclimate and reducethe traffic-induced pollution of ozone,sulphur dioxide and particulates (Beckettet al., i998;Jacobset al., 2002). They have equally important functions within thelarger web of a town'sgreen infrastructure: they provide a significantshare of the urbanforest; their continuous canopy acts as an ecologicalcorridor; and each treepit (as Zurichdemonstrates, Figure 12) has thepotential to be a mini-wildflowerpatch (Bonamoni,1990, 60). Sustainabledrainage requirements are also beginning to trans- formthat old cliche,the tree-planted amenity grass-strip, into a new typeof linear green-space,a vegetatedopen swale(Figure 13) whose wetland planting adds fresh strandsof ecologicalinterest to thestreet environment (Konijnendijk et al., 2005). Movingupwards in scale,the nextcategory of postmoderngreen space is the

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 50 Michael Hebbert

Figure1 3 Sustainabledrainage integratedwith compact urbandesign in the landscape plan for TaftenhoePark, Milton Keynes Source: by kindpermission of EnglishPartnerships

localpark, now seen not as a diffusedbackground but as a preciousenclosure within a predominatelymineral urban matrix. Again, the postmodern approach combines humanand ecosystemfunctions. For humans, the emphasis is on safeaccessible spaces forrelaxation, physical exercise and play. As Jane Jacobs realised fifty years ago, people willshun spaces that are just landscape oozes; a parkneeds to be a complexenclosure (Jacobs,1962). A generationused to thelifestyle of an urbanflat needs outdoor spaces thatfunction as publicor sharedrealms. Hajer and Reijndorp(2001, 9) arguethat unlesssuch spaces are fenced,defined and identifiablethey cannot give structure to socialencounters amid the cosmopolitanism and socialdiversity of themodern city. From an ecosystemperspective, neighbourhood green space has important functionsto do withclimate change mitigation and adaptation,such as sustainable drainagesystems to reduceflood risk and waterpollution, and micro-climatedesign to reducethe effect of urbanoverheating. The use of greenspace to managesurface wateris revolutionaryfor urban design. At theoutset it implies much closer attention to topographyand thelie of theland in thelayout of new development(Gordon

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof the urban picturesque 51

and Tamminga,2002). Green spaces engineered for water retention will tend to be locatedcentrally in relationto thebuildings and spacesthey drain. While much of theinitial work on sustainableurban drainage systems (SUDS) wassuburban in spirit, withwide swales and filterstrips that pushed buildings apart and reducedsite density (CIRIA,2000), surface-water management can enhancestreetscapes and reinforce the urbanistconcept of neighbourhoodparks as enclosedspaces framed by the buildings theyserve, as themasterplan for the new Milton Keynes neighbourhood of Tattenhoe Parkillustrates (Figure 13). All that needs to be devisedis a regimefor managing such a multi-functionalresource (White and Howe,2005). Nexton thescale of urbangreen spaces are thebigger parks, commons, valleys and landscapecorridors that shape a town'soverall structure. The crucialdiscovery of postmodernurbanism is theneed forconnections and corridors,and again the concepthas been reachedfrom more than one direction.For human liveability and transportsustainability, greenways are systems for mobility and recreation, making the built-upmass permeable by modes other than the private car. Climate change science emphasisesthe contribution of structuralgreen space to mitigating heat-island effects throughair movement.Landscape ecology reveals the biodiversityyield of green spaceslinked by rivervalleys, transport infrastructures and thefiligree of gardens, parksand streets.The ecologicalpatch/corridor/mosaic model is directlyapplicable to built-upareas (Dramstad et al., 1996),though always with an extradimension of humanpresence and memory.As Kowarikand Korner(2005, 215) put it,Bambi- stylenature protection is out of place in a town.The builtfabric encloses this green spacenot as undifferentiated,free-flowing nature, but as an infrastructureof patches and corridorspurposively planned and managedfor connectivity and heteroge- neity(Forman, 1995, 448). Its biodiversitydepends on an effectivespatial zoning of patchesin which vegetation is allowedto growfreely: annually as a summermeadow or throughthe years as a successionalplant community (CABE, 2006). Successful urbanwildernesses may not have railings and keepersin uniforms,but need to be as carefullydesigned as traditionalparks for multi-functional use, so thatundisturbed areasare zonedwith margins, and clearrouteways are offeredthat connect up, have good visibilityand look cared-for(Kowarik and Korner,2005; Konijnendijket al., 2005;Gilbert, 1989). As CABE putsit (2006,17), 'litter picking is as importantin a wildlifearea as in a formalrose bed'. At thescale of theoverall pattern of a townin itssetting, postmodern urbanism hasgiven new life to one of theoldest multi-functional concepts, the green belt. Pictur- esque landscapeinterpenetrated nature and builtform as a deliberatecounterpoint to thefreedoms of individualmotorised mobility. Climate change has setthe context fora radicallydifferent agenda of ecologicalmodernisation, inwhich the city resumes itshistoric role as a place of compactness,convenience and diversity,and cars are an occasionaloption, not an everydaynecessity (Beatley and Manning,1997). This

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 52 MichaelHebbert

designconcept is inconceivablewithout a physicalboundary and effectiveregulatory measures to preventsprawl (Register,2002). In the postmodernfigure-ground, the finalenclosure is the green space separatingtown from country. Two themesrun throughall thesetypologies. The firstis thatless can be more.The qualityand functionalityof planted space count formore than itsextent in hectares. One of Europe's most environmentallyaware municipalities,the Dutch town of Breda, has downsized itspublic open space, sellingland fordevelopment and giving the proceeds to itsparks department(Tjallingii, 2003, 112-13). The Commissionfor Architectureand theBuilt Environment (CABE) has encouragedEnglish local councils to do the same, releasingthe parts of theirestate thatfail to provide 'local identity, characterand delight'(CABE, 2004, 87). In the opinion of the parliamentarianwho chaired two Commons selectcommittees on the topic,excess open space remainsan issue (Bennett,2004). But Andrew Bennett MP also noted, and this is the final point, an alarming absence of informationand policy.Towns withno green-spaceinventory can hardly oversee the patternand functioningof these assets (Campbell, 2001). Britishurban areas have gone down a dangerousroute of intensifyingand infillinggardens, allot- ments,playing fields and amenitylandscapes withoutany strategyfor the green space thatwill remain. This policylacuna extendsthrough all levelsof governmentand was a centralpoint of criticismin the Royal Commission on EnvironmentalPollution's recentreport on the urban environment(RCEP, 2007, 82). The Scottishpolicy guide- line on open space and physicalactivity (SG, 2007) requiresauthorities north of the borderto take a thoroughaudit and make a strategythat sets out the visionfor new and improvedopen spaces, but no such requirementapplies elsewherein the UK. The pace of enclosureis runningfaster than the practice of multi-functionalspace management(Barber, 2005.)

Conclusion

This paper has told a before-and-afterstory. It startedwith the twentieth-century visionof an unbounded naturalrealm within towns and cities,and followedthe vision throughimplementation and disillusionwith its environmentaland social outcomes. Then it followedthe alternativevision of enclosed green spaces, differentiatedby functionand conceived as much forecological infrastructureas forhuman use and enjoyment;in the words of the post-unificationplan for inner Berlin (Burg, 1997), stadtischerRaum nichtfliefiendoffene Freirdume (urban-type space, not open-flowing free space). Of course, neithertype has been universal.The rise of the modern landscape concepthardly affected the cities of MediterraneanEurope, where the late-twentieth- centuryexperience was of a prolongedassault on the landscape by speculativedevel-

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 53

Figure1 4 Today,the strains of maintainingan 'out'landscape show even inthe iconic settings of the Britishand Swedishnew towns,as seen herein Vallingby. Source:author's photograph opmentand self-builthousing, much of it unauthorised;see, for example, Gabriella Corona'sterrifying account of thedisappearance of naturein modernNaples (2005). The postmoderndecline of the picturesquelandscape should not be overstated. Despitethe privatisation of theirassets, most of theUK's newtowns maintain their extensivelandscape areas to a good standard,thanks to the settingup of special trustswith significant revenue-generating endowments of offices,shops and pubsto coverupkeep costs (Higson, 1997). In thebest of Scandinavianpost-war settlements, suchas Vallingbyoutside Stockholm, Christopher Tunnard's vision of a democratic landscapeof open layoutand interweavinggreenery can stillbe seen and enjoyed. Buteven these famous settings are showingthe strain (see Figure14), while the best newScandinavian development - suchas Stockholm'sHammarby Sjostad - follows a radicallydifferent strategy of enclosure. Ken Worpole'sbook HereComes the Sun (2000) celebratedthe passingof the

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 54 MichaelHebbert

modernistlandscape in an optimisticspirit. He wrotehopefully about the new greenspace agenda: Increasingly,the issueof the provisionof high-qualitypublic amenities and public spaces,together with a muchgreater attention to issuesof environmentalquality, rangingfrom air qualityto thereduction of trafficand greaterwalkability of urban settingsand amenities,is bringingback togetherfor the firsttime since the 'heroic' periodof earlymodernism, issues of urbanplanning, social equity and publichealth policyin thename of 'ecologicalmodernisation5. (2000, 131) In otherwords, the new enclosuremovement is doing todaywhat the modernistsdid seventyyears ago: crystallisinga conception of social and environmentalprogress into a tangiblelandscape form.This is anotherheroic momentfor urban landscape design.

References

abrams,r. (2003), 'Bykerrevisited', Built Environment, 29, 117-31. ar {architecturalreview) (1956), Subtopia (December special Issue). - ar (architecturalreview) (1973), 'SLOAP space leftover afterplanning , ArchitecturalReview, 920, 201-66. barber, a. (2005), GreenFuture: A Studyof theManagement of Multi-functionalUrban GreenSpaces in England,Reading, Green-space Forum. bardet, G. (1949),Mission de VUrbanisme,Paris, Les Edition Ouvrieres. beatley, t. and manning, k. (1997), The Ecology of Place: Planningfor Environment,Economy and Community,Washington, DC, Island Press. beckett, k. P., freer-smith,P. H. and taylor, G. (1998), 'Urban woodlands: their role in reducingthe effectsof paniculate pollution',Environmental Pollution, 99, 347-60. beer, a., delshammar,t. and schildwacht, p. (2003), A changingunderstanding ol the role of green-spacein highdensity housing', Built Environment, 29, 132-43. Bennett,a. (2004), 'Is theretoo much space?', GreenPlaces, 13 April. blake, p. (1964), God's Own Junkyard:The Planned Deteriorationof America'sLandscape, New York, Holt Rinehart& Winston. blake, p. (1981),'The Surgeon General has determinedthat urban open space is dangerousto yourhealth', in Taylor (ed.), 11-12. bonamoni, l. (1990), Le Temps des Rues: vers un nouvel amenagementde Vespace rue, Lausanne, IREC. brl (ballymunregeneration ltd) (1998), MasterPlan for the New Ballymun,Dublin, Ballymun RegenerationLtd. bruijne,d., von hoogstraten, d., kwekkeboom,w. and LUijTEN,a. (2003),Amsterdam Southeast: CentralArea Southeastand Urban Renewal in theBijlmermeer igg2-2Oio, Bossom, Thoth. burg, a. (ed.) (1997), PlanwerkInnenstadt Berlin: ein ersterEntwurf, Berlin, Kulturbuch-Verlag. CABE (COMMISSION FOR ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT) (2OO4), Creating Successful

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 55

Masterplans:A Guide for Clients, London, Commissionfor Architecture and theBuilt Environ- ment. cabe (commissionfor architecture and the built environment)(2006), Making Contracts Work for Wildlife:How 75 EncourageBiodiversity in Urban Parks, London, Commissionfor Architec- tureand the Built Environment. chac (central housing advisory committee)(1944), TheDesign of Dwellings: Report of theCentral HousingAdvisory Committee, London, HMSO. CIRIA (CONSTRUCTIONINDUSTRY RESEARCH AND INFORMATIONASSOCIATION) (2OOO), Sustain- able UrbanDrainage Systems: Design Manual for Englandand Wales(CIRIA C522), London, ConstructionIndustry Research and InformationAssociation. Campbell, k. (2001), RethinkingOpen Space: Open Space Provision and Management, A WayForward, Edinburgh,Kit Campbell Associatesfor Scottish Executive Central Research Unit. carr, s. and lynch, k. (1981),'Open space: freedomand control',in Taylor (ed.), 17-18. casson, h. (1956),'Outrageous postscript', Journal of theTown Planning Institute, 42, 187-91. clark, p. (ed.) (2006), EuropeanCity and Green-space,Aldershot, Ashgate. coaffee, j. (2003), Terrorism,Risk and theCity: The Makingof a ContemporaryUrban Landscape, Aldershot,Ashgate. cohen, j.-l. (1995), Scenesof the Worldto Come:European Architecture and theAmerican Challenge i8oj-ig6o, Paris,Flammarion. comedia and demos (2002), ParkLife: Urban Parks and Social Renewal, Stroud, Comedia. conway, h. (2000), 'Everydaylandscapes: public parksfrom 1930 to 2000', GardenHistory, 28, 117-34- corona, G. (2005), 'Sustainable Naples: the disappearance ot natureas resource, in achott et al.(eds), 97-112. crowe, s. (i960), TheLandscape of Roads,London, ArchitecturalPress. daily, g. c. (ed.) (1997),Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems, Washington, DC, Island Press. DESFONTAiNES,m. (2004), 'Un nouveau concept, la residentialisationdes HLM', La Gazettedes Communes,1735, 40. Dfr (departmentfor transport) (2007), Manualfor Streets,London, Department forTrans- port. diefendorf,j. (1993), In theWake of War:The Reconstructionof German Cities after World War II, Oxford,Oxford University Press. docter, R. (2000), 'Postwartown planning in its midlifecrisis , in T. Dekker (ed.), TheModern CityRevisited, London, E & FN Spon, 197-213. doe (departmentof the environment)(1996), PeopleParks and Cities,London, Departmentof the Environment. dramstad,w. r., olson, j. and forman,r. (1996), LandscapeEcology Principles in LandscapeArchi- tectureand Land UsePlanning, Washington, DC, Island Press. AND THE DTLR (DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT REGIONS) (2OO2), Improving UrbanParks, Play Areas and OpenSpaces, London, Departmentfor Transport, Local Govern- mentand the Regions. echeniqjje, m.and saint, a. (eds) (2001), Citiesfor the New Millennium, London, L & UN bpon.

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 56 MichaelHebbert

elliott, b. (2000), 'Historicalrevivalisms in the twentiethcentury: a briefintroduction', Garden History,28, 17-31. engel, b. (2006), 'Public spaces in the blue citiesof Russia', Progressin Planning,66, 147-239. engels, f. (1952), The Conditionof theWorking-Class in England in 1844 (translatedby Florence Kelley Wischnewetzky),London, George Allen & Unwin. FAIRBROTHER,n. (1974), TheNature of LandscapeDesign, London, ArchitecturalPress. ford, l. (2000), TheSpaces Between Buildings, Baltimore, MD, JohnsHopkins UniversityPress. forman,r. (1995), Land Mosaics: The Ecologyof Landscapesand Regions,New York,Cambridge UniversityPress. forshaw,j. h. (1943), TownPlanning and Public Health (Chadwick Public Lecture), London, P. S. King and Staples. fox, c. (1995), The battleof the railings',Architectural Association Files, 29, 50-60. gandy,m. (2002), Concreteand Clay:Reworking Nature in New York,Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. giedion, s. (1941),Space Timeand Architecture: The Growthof a New Tradition,Cambridge, MA, Harvard UniversityPress. gilbert, o. l. (1989), TheEcology of UrbanHabitats, London, Chapman & Hall. Gordon, d. and tamminga,k. (2002), 'Large-scale traditionalneighbourhood development and pre-emptiveecosystem planning: the Markham experience 1989-2001', Journalof Urban Design,7, 321-40. gutkind,e. a. (1962), The Twilightof Cities,New York,Free Press of Glencoe. hajer, m.(1997), The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, Oxford,Oxford University Press. hajer, m. and reijndorp, a. (2001), In Searchof New Public Domain, Amsterdam, NAI Publishers. halprin, l. (1966), Freeways,New York,Reinhold Publishing. Harrison, s., pile, s. and thrift, n. (eds) (2004), PatternedGround, London, ReaktionBooks. hayden, D. (1995), The Powerof Place: UrbanLandscapes as PublicHistory, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. hebbert, m. (1999), A city in good shape: town planning and public health', TownPlanning Review,70, 433-54. hebbert, m.(2003), 'New urbanism:the movementin context',Built Environment, 29, 193-209. hebbert, m.(2005a), 'The streetas locus of collectivememory', Society & Space,23, 581-96. hebbert,m. (2005b), 'Engineering,urbanism and thestruggle for street design', Journal of Urban Design,10, 39-60. hebbert, m.(2006), 'Town planningversus Urbanismo\Planning Perspectives, 21, 233-52. hebbert, m. (forthcoming),An everydayunity: the art of streetarchitecture', in J.-F. Lejeune and C. Bohl (eds),Modern Civic Art: Sitte Hegemann and the Metropolis, London, Routledge. higson, n. (1997), 'Landscape', in New TownsRecord ig66-igg6 (CD-ROM), Glasgow, The PlanningExchange. hirsch, e. and o'hanlon, m. (1995), TheAnthropology of Landscape: Perspectives on Place and Space, Oxford,Clarendon Press. hog (house of commons)(1999), House of CommonsSelect Committee onthe Department ofEnvironment, Transportand the Regions: Town and CountryParks, London, HMSO.

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 57

hoc (house of commons) (2002-03), House of CommonsSelect Committee on the Officeof theDeputy PrimeMinister, Eleventh Report: Town and CountryParks, London, HMSO. hough, m. (1990), Out of Place: RestoringIdentity to theRegional Landscape, New Haven, CT, Yale UniversityPress. hough, m.(1994), Citiesand Natural Process, London, Routledge. hudnut,w. h. (2004), 'Mayors' Forum:the unifyinglens of green infrastructure',Urban Land Institute,available at experts.uli.org/Content/ResFellows/Hudnut/UL. Jacobs, a., macdonald, e. and ROFE, y. (2002), The BoulevardBook: History,Evolution, Design of MultiwqyBoulevards, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. jacobs, j. (1962), TheDeath and Life of GreatAmerican Cities, London, Jonathan Cape. Jacques, D. (2000), 'Modern needs, art and instincts:modernist landscape theory', Garden History,28, 88-101. jorgensen, a., hitchmough,j. and dunnett, n. (2007), 'Woodland as a settingfor housing in WarringtonNew Town UK', Landscapeand UrbanPlanning, 79, 273-87. keeble, l. (1956),Principles and Practice of Townand CountryPlanning, London, EstatesGazette. konijnendijk,c. c, nilsson, k., randrup,t. b. and schipperijn,j. (eds) (2005), UrbanForests and Trees,Berlin, Springer. kowarik, 1. and korner, s. (eds) (2005), Wild Urban Woodlands,New Perspectivesfor Urban Forestry, Heidelberg,Springer. latz, p. (2000), 'Structuringthe avant-gardelandscape', GardenHistory, 28, 4-5. laurie, 1. (1979), Nature in Cities: The Natural Environmentin theDesign and Developmentof Urban Green-space,Chichester, Wiley. lewis, p.,lowenthal, d. and tuan, y.-f.(1973), Visual Blight in America, Washington, DC, Associ- ation of AmericanGeographers. lubove, R. (1967), The Urban Community:Housing and Planningin theProgressive Era, Englewood Cliffs,Prentice-Hall. mcharg,1. (1969), Design with Nature, New York,Natural HistoryPress. manthorpe,w. (1956),'The machineryof sprawl',Architectural Review, 120, 409-19. mantziaras, p. (2003), 'Rudolf Schwarz and the concept of Stadtlandschaft',Planning Perspec- tives,18, 147-76. matless,d. (1998),Landscape and Englishness, London, ReaktionBooks. meller, H. (2005), 'Citizens in pursuitof nature: gardens, allotmentsand private space in European cities1850-2000', in Schottet al. (eds), 80-96. merriman,p. (2004), 'Freeways',in Harrison et al. (eds), 86-88 . mkp (milton keynes partnership) (2005), The New Plan for Milton Keynes:Environment and City Design,Milton Keynes,Milton Keynes Partnership. mumford,L. (1964), TheHighway and theCity, London, Seeker and Warburg. neckar, l. m. (1990), 'ChristopherTunnard's gardens in the modern landscape', journal of GardenHistory, 10, 237-46. Nicholas, R. (1945),City of ManchesterPlan, Norwich and London,Jarrold & Sons. Nicholson-lord, d. (1987), The Greeningof Cities,London, Routledge and Kegan Paul. Nicholson-lord, D. (2004), 'Crimes against nature', The Guardian,26 July. nowak, D. j. (2002), 'The effectsof urban forestson the physicalenvironment', in Randrup et al. (eds), 22-42.

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 58 Michael Hebbert

nowak, d. j., kuroda, m. and crane, d. e. (2004), 'Tree mortalityrates and tree population projectionsin Baltimore,Maryland, USA', UrbanForestry and UrbanGreening, 2, 139-47. odpm(office of the deputy primeminister) (2002), PlanningPolicy Guidance iy: Planning/orOpen Space,Sport and Recreation, London, Officeof the Deputy Prime Minister. panerai, P. (1999), 'Convictionset references',Projet Urbain, 18, 19-21. pauleit, s. (ed.) (2003), 'Perspectiveson urban green space in Europe', BuiltEnvironment, 29, 89-93- prigge, w. (1996), 'Layerings:architecture and landscape in the urban area of Frankfurt/ Main', in K. Wachten (ed.), ChangeWithout Growth? Sustainable Urban Development for the 21st Century,Braunschweig/Weisbaden, Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, 98-105. rabinow, p. (1989), FrenchModern: Norms and Formsof theSocial Environment, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. randrup,t. b. et al. (eds) (2002), UrbanForests and Trees,Luxembourg, Office for Official Publica- tionsof the European Communities. rasmussen,s. e. (1982),London: The UniqueCity, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. ravetz, a. (1995), The Placeof Home:English Domestic Environments igi 4-2000, London, E & FN Spon. rcep (royal commissionon environmentalpollution) (2007), TheUrban Environment, Norwich, HMSO. register, R. (2002), Ecocities:Building Cities in Balancewith Nature, Berkeley, CA, BerkeleyHills Books. rohde, c. l. e. and kendle, a. D. (1994),Human Wellbeing, Natural Landscape and Wildlifein Urban Areas(English Nature Science Report No. 22), London, EnglishNature. rudlin, d. and falk, n. (1999), Buildingthe 21st Century Home: The SustainableUrban Neighbourhood, London, ArchitecturalPress. SCHOTT,d., luckin, b. and massard-guilbard,g. (eds) (2005), Resourcesof theCity: Contributions to an EnvironmentalHistory of ModernEurope, Aldershot, Ashgate. sg (Scottish government)(2007), OpenSpace and Physical Activity, Edinburgh, Scottish Govern- ment. sitte, c. (1900), 'Greeneryin the city'in G. R. Collins and C. C. Collins (trans,and intro.),City PlanningAccording toArtistic Principles, London, Phaidon Press,303-21. snow,w. b. (ed.) (1959), TheHighway and the Landscape, New Brunswick,NJ, Rutgers University Press. sohn, e. (2003), 'Hans Bernhard Reichow and the concept of Stadtlandschqftin German planning',Planning Perspectives, 18, 119-46. spirn,a. w. (1984), The GraniteGarden: Urban Nature and Human Design, New York,Basic Books. swanwick, c, dunnet, n. and woolley, h. (2003), 'Nature role and value of green space in townsand cities:an overview',Built Environment, 29, 94-106. szczygiel, b. and Hewitt, R. (2000), 'Nineteenthcentury medical landscapes:John H. Rauch, FrederickLaw Olmsted and the search forsalubrity', Bulletin of theHistory of Medicine,74, 708-34. taylor, e. (ed.) (1981), UrbanOpen Spaces, London, Academy Editions. tcpa (town & country planning association) (2004), BiodiversitybyDesign: A Guidefor Sustainable

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Re-enclosureof theurban picturesque 59

Communities,London, Town & CountryPlanning Association. tjallingii, s. (2003), 'Green and red, enemies or allies? The Utrechtexperience with green structureplanning', Built Environment, 29, 107-16. trancik, r. (1986), FindingLost Space, New York,Van NostrandReinhold. tuan, y.-f. (1974), Topophilia:A Studyof EnvironmentalPerception, Attitudes and Values,Englewood Cliffs,NJ, Prentice-Hall. tuan, y.-f.(1980), Landscapes of Fear,Oxford, Blackwell. tunnard, c. (1938), Gardensin theModern Landscape, London, ArchitecturalPress. turner, t. (1996), Cityas Landscape,London, E & FN Spon. turner, t. (1998), Landscape Planningand EnvironmentalImpact Design, London, UCL Press. ugstf (urban green spaces task force) (2002), GreenSpaces Better Places, London, DTLR. utf (urban task force) (1999), Towardsan Urban Renaissance:Final Reportof the Urban Task Force Chairedby Lord Rogers of Riverside,London, Departmentof Environment,Transport and the Regions. walker, d. (2007), 'Milton Keynes at 40', UrbanDesign, 104, 14-16. wds (women'sdesign service) (2004), MakingSafer Places: Interim Reports, available at www.wds. org.uk. webster, c. (2007), 'Propertyrights, public space and urban design', TownPlanning Review, 78, 81-102. white,1. and howe,j. (2005),'Unpacking the barriers to sustainableurban drainage use', Journalof EnvironmentalPolicy & Planning,7, 24-41. white, R. P. (1959), 'The functionaluses of plants on the complete highway',in Snow (ed.), 182-92. woodford, g., Williams, k. and hill, n. (1976), The Valueof Standardsfor theExternal Residential Environment,London, Departmentof the Environment. wooLLEY,h. (2003), UrbanOpen Spaces, London, E & FN Spon. worpole, k. (2000), Here Comes The Sun: Architectureand Public Space in TwentiethCentury European Culture,London, ReaktionBooks. woudstra, j. (2000), 'The Corbusian landscape: arcadia or no man's land?', GardenHistory, *8> I35-51-

Acknowledgements The authorgratefully acknowledges the support of theRoyal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851and (withthe usual disclaimers), the stimulus of colleaguesJohn Handley, Alan Barber and StephanPauleit.

This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:06:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions