Reconciling history with modernity: 1940s plans for Durham and Warwick

Abstract

IntroductionProbably at no time in British history can there have been so much widespread enthusiasm for the concept of radically rebuilding and replanning familiar towns and cities than in the 1940s, though in practice far less planned change was effected than in other decades such as the 1960s. Stemming from the impetus for comprehensive planning, developing but frustrated during the 1930s, the case for planning was given great impetus by the devastation wrought on a number of towns and cities by German bombing and by an apparent willingness by the government to legislate for and to resource comprehensive planning (see, for example, Cullingworth, 1975). It was perhaps in these early war years that planning was a truly popular cause, when a book on town planning could be a best seller (Sharp, 1940). The mood of the time led many towns and cities of different sorts to want plans for their future development. These plans were often focused on the redevelopment of central areas. This in itself was a radical shift: the preoccupation of planners and planning system in the 1930s had been primarily with controlling the form of urban expansion.Plans were produced internally or were commissioned from consultants. In addition to officially sanctioned plans, private bodies developed their own proposals. In the case of London this included such diverse bodies as the MARS (Modern Architectural Research) Group and the Royal Academy. Urban areas across the country, including major commercial centres, small mill towns, and cathedral cities undertook plans. Not surprisingly, badly war-damaged cities usually commissioned plans; but many were produced for settlements untouched by bombing. These ranged from modestly produced working documents to lavish plans produced by a number of key national consultants and published by such bodies as the Architectural Press.Collectively, the plans are known for their uncompromising vision and self-belief in creating better, more functional, places. Existing British cities were held not to be working efficiently. The key priorities were seen to be the need to improve access and circulation (both for people and for traffic), to separate incompatible land uses, and to provide better quality housing for the urban poor (Abercrombie, 1943; Tiratsoo, 2000b). Though there was often a detailed and sophisticated analysis of the development of a Abstract. During the 1940s a series of remarkable and radical planning documents, generally now collectively referred to as`reconstruction plans', were produced for many British cities. Universally, these sought to introduce a highly interventionist, comprehensive planning, often with strong elements of`clean sweep' reconstruction. The author considers two such plans, for the historic cities of Durham and Warwick. He examines how the authors of these plans sought to reconcile the desire to achieve functional modern places with historic character, in a period of growing consciousness of the historic qualities of place. The author concludes by briefly considering th...

The Modern Historic City: Evolving Ideas in Mid-20th-century Britain

“…The emphasis on character that was used has proved to be extremely enduring and indeed forms an important element of the later plans and the cornerstone of the national designation of protection of historic areas, conservation areas, introduced by the Civic Amenities Act 1967 (Larkham, 2003). Character was considered using approaches of townscape analysis still extensively used today, albeit this was more evident in some of the other 1940s plans, especially those of Thomas Sharp, than those considered here (Pendlebury, 2004b). Nor was their legacy of thinking about the nature of historic towns limited to visual appearance: there was, for example, at least some recognition of the positive value of mixing together different land uses.…”

The ‘spirit of living continuity’? Revisiting the urban vision, methodologies and influence of the Studies in Conservation

“…Signs of changing attitudes, however, gradually appeared. For instance, while mainly inspired by thoughts of modernisation, the wave of 'advisory' city plans produced in the 1940s often displayed sensitivity to conservation of historic or special areas as well as buildings (Larkham, 2003;Pendlebury, 2003Pendlebury, , 2004Pendlebury, , 2009. In legislative terms, the 1944 and 1947 Town and Country Planning Acts imposed statutory responsibility for listing buildings.…”

Ontology and the Conservation of Built Heritage

“…In part, this is because of difficulties in reconciling the somewhat muted and heterogeneous architectural and design ideas of reconstruction in the 1950s öthe architecture of`good manners' (Gould and Gould, 1999) öwith the notion of an iconic conservation object. However, the reconstruction legacy is often about an integrated approach to urban design, town planning, and architecture, in which it is difficult to separate individual objects from the wider schemes of which they are part (Pendlebury, 2004). This would require an ontological approach in which the everyday infrastructure of ordinary buildings, roads, pavements, and spaces in between is brought into the conservation perspective.…”