From Concept To Completion A Critical Analysis of The Urban Village

From Concept to Completion: A Critical Analysis of the Urban Village
Author(s): Michael Biddulph, Bridget Franklin and Malcolm Tait

Source: The Town Planning Review, Vol. 74, No. 2 (Apr., 2003), pp. 165-193
Published by: Liverpool University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40112551
Accessed: 30-04-2015 16:37 UTC
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 support@jstor.org.
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 2.87.13.64 on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 16:37:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TPR, 74 (2) 2003
MICHAEL BIDDULPH, BRIDGET FRANKLIN AND

MALCOLM TAIT
From
to
concept
completion
A critical analysis of the urban village
This paperprovidesa criticalreviewof the 'life' of a planningconcept- the
urbanvillage.Initiallyit considersthe processwherebythe concepthas become
discursivelyfixedinto somethingseeminglyhomogeneous,and locatedcarefully
in relationto both establishedand emergingdebatesabout, for example,
community,designand sustainability.The paperthen moveson to considerthe
value and utility of the conceptas it has been implementedand then
subsequentlyas it becamea lived experience.This processof implementingthe
concepthas resultedin it becomingunfixed.This resultedfrom- an
intensificationin debatesrelatingto urbanpolicy;changesin the institutionthat
owns the concept;tensionsfrom the competingprofessionalagendas;tensions
betweenurbanvillage design and developmentprinciplesand the local
circumstances;and contradictionsbetweenthe conceptas a productof
professionaldiscourseand the experiencesand aspirationsof residents.
A number of developmentconcepts have emerged recently in Britain whose

proponentsclaim that, if achieved,they would deliver more sustainableurban
environments.Specificallythese concepts seek to transcendtypical patternsof
developmentand insteadcaptureand promotea differentvision. Such concepts
apply to a rangeof scales, but include the compactcity (Jenkset al., 1996), the
polycentric city (Frey, 1999), the urban quarter(Krier, 1998), the sustainable
urbanneighbourhood(Rudlinand Falk, 1999),the urbanvillage(Aldous, 1997),
the eco-village(Barton,1999),and the millenniumvillage(DETR, 2000). These
concepts have become importantin legitimising and coordinatingmore finite
MichaelBiddulphand BridgetFranklinare lecturersat the Departmentof City and Regional
Planning,Universityof Cardiff,GlamorganBuilding,King EdwardVII Avenue, CardiffCF10
MalcolmTait is a lecturerin
3WA; email:biddulphmj@cardiff.ac.uk,
franklinbj@cardiff.ac.uk.
the Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, Geopraphy and
PlanningBuilding,Winter Street, SheffieldS3 7ND; m.tait@sheff.ac.uk
PapersubmittedMay 2002;revisedpaperreceivedOctober2002 and acceptedNovember2002.
165
166 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

elementsof an underlyingdevelopmentstrategyand in some cases providinga
perceiveddeeperlegitimacyto the act of planning.Gainingacceptancefor these
conceptsand translatingthem into practicehas, however,provedmore difficult,
and the only one that might claim to have resultedin any significantnumberof
plannedor built examplesis the urbanvillage.
Using the urbanvillageas an example,this paperaims to considerwhatmight
be called the 'life' of such a concept in planning. In particularit considers a
numberof transformationswhich togetherconstitutethe processesinvolved in
conceptualising,developing and finally living in the urban village concept.
Centralto this approachis an understandingof how variousactors have taken
multifariousstrandsof thinkingand 'fixed'them into a seeminglyhomogeneous
concept,and then how and why this concepthas been progressively'unfixed'as
it has been transformedinto 'paper'planningschemes, transformedagain into
built products,and finallyrealisedas a lived experience.
Despite the proliferationof developmentsunderthe urbanvillagerubric,little
academicresearchhas been conducted into the phenomenon.Biddulph (2000)
arguedthat the urbanvillage concept is largelyderivedfrom traditionalnotions
of neighbourhoodplanningupdatedwith referenceto more recenturbandesign
concepts. Thompson-Fawcett (1996; 1998a; 1998b; 2000) investigated the
backgroundand philosophyof the urbanvillage and comparedit to the similar
New Urbanist or TraditionalNeighbourhoodDevelopment (TND) movement
in the USA. Her empiricalworkof the British experienceis limited to two case
studies, the locationof one of which is also the subjectof a less criticalpaperby
MeArthur (2000). Both Thompson-Fawcettand commentatorson the TND
arguethat the thinkingbehind the respectiveconceptsis Utopian,nostalgicand
deterministic, as well as based on a flawed premise about contemporary
constructions of community (Audirac and Shermyen, 1994; ThompsonFawcett, 1996; Southworth, 1997). Built examples too do not always match
the vision, since in addition to giving substance to a 'cloudy paradigm'
(Thompson-Fawcett, 2000, 278), they are also subject to the whims of
developers,the proclivitiesof residents,and the realityof economic and social
forces (Leung, 1995; Southworth and Parthasarathy,1997).
Initiallythis paperprovidesan understandingof the processesand forcesthat
have led to the articulation of the urban village concept. In particular it
elucidatesthe influenceof both structuraland humanagencyfactorswhich have
influencedits constituentattributes,as well as how the urbanvillageconcepthas
evolved and been justified. Interviews with 22 key players and a review of
relevant literature showed how the urban village concept was formed and
articulated, and how it relates to other discourses in planning, policy and
development.
After this the papermoves on to appraisethe processesand forces that have
impactedon the adoption,interpretation,applicationand implementationof the
urbanvillageconceptin specificlocations,and in particularto analysethe extent
to which urbanvillage design principleshave been adoptedand the reasonsfor
any departurefromthem. A questionnairesurveyof all UK localauthorities(not
County Councils) produced informationabout 55 schemes and showed the
FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION
167
variety of forms that urban villages assume in different localities. Following this,
research into three specific case studies revealed some of the detailed processes
by which the urban village concept has been implemented in greatly differing
locations. The case studies selected were Bordesley Urban Village, Birmingham,
Garston-under-the-Bridge Urban Village, Liverpool and West Silvertown
Urban Village, Royal Victoria Docks, London. These are three contrasting
schemes in contrasting locations, affected by differing local development
conditions. This part of the work involved interviews with key professionals
(11 in Bordesley, 13 in Garston-under-the-Bridge and 17 in West Silvertown)
regarding the adoption of the concept, the development process and the
resultant outcomes.
Finally the paper investigates both the patterns of life within urban villages
and the variety of values and meanings ascribed to developments informed by
the urban village concept, on the part of all those individuals involved. In
particular the paper assesses the extent to which the urban village, as a lived
experience, accords with the intentions and perceptions of those who promote
and use it and whether the principles of development accord with user
aspirations. The results of surveys of residents (131 returns), and in-depth
interviews or focus groups with 38 residents in the three case study locations
revealed how residents experience, use and attach meaning to so-called urban
villages and have allowed conclusions to be drawn about the extent to which
there is a correspondence with the intentions of urban village promoters.
Fixing the urban village:

the derivation and definition of the concept
The urban village concept was first developed and promoted by the Urban
Villages Group (UVG) in the late 1980s, following a challengefrom the Prince
of Wales. The concept was guided by a philosophyand a set of principlesthat
calledfor well designed,mixed use and sustainableurbanareas,with a sense of
place and community commitment (Aldous, 1992). The credibility of the
conceptappearsto derivenot only from the legitimacyestablishedby the Prince
of Wales and the UVG (laterthe Urban Villages Forum (UVF)), but also from
its initialendorsementby the Government(DOE, 1997;Urban VillagesForum/
EnglishPartnerships,undated).More recently,however,it has been superseded
in governmentdiscourse by different concepts, notably the notion of a more
generalurban'renaissance'and more specifically'millenniumvillages' (DETR,
2000; Urban Task Force, 1999).
The contextfor the conceptwas one of increasingconcernwith the qualityof
modern development,especially when comparedwith older, more traditional
areas. In addition, the property recession of the late 1980s/early 1990s also
meant that development professionals were willing to reconsider their
approachesto development. The promotion of the concept was undertaken
specificallyby a small group of developers, investors, architectsand planners
broughttogetherby the Prince of Wales to form the UVG. The Prince, driven
by his widely publicisedthinkingon architecture,humanvaluesand community

(Jencks, 1988), led the call for a return to more human scale and aesthetic
development,based on an analysisof how 'good' places were designed:
there were many places that we'd all visited and we had all seen and had all
admired which shone out as examples of mixed-use places where
communities could flourish. And since there were such good examples,
why was our generationstubbornlyresisting or ignoringthem and instead
creatingplaces that didn't achieve those high ideals?(propertydeveloper/
Urban Villages Forum member)
In addition, legitimacy for the concept was derived through adoption of a
varietyof discourseswhich resonatedwith both old and new orthodoxies:
Neighbourhood
PlanningConceptsof proximityand localitycentralto the
urban village reflect neighbourhoodplanning ideals originatingin the
1920s (Biddulph,2000; Madanipour,2001).
UrbanGeographyand SociologyVillage-likecharacteristicsin cities have
been identified for decades (Gans, 1962; Taylor, 1974). Particularly
importantto many proponentsof the urbanvillage has been the workof
Jane Jacobs (1961) with her concerns for diversity and mixing uses
('everythingshe said about urban areaswas true' [representativeof the
business community/Urban Villages Forum member]).
CommunityInvolvementWork to involve communitiesand give them a
stake in their neighbourhoodswas alreadypopularin the field of urban
design, and promotersof the urbanvillagefound a receptiveaudiencefor
this approach.
UrbanDesignPromotionof urbandesign by the BritishGovernmentwas
apparentthrough the Quality in Town and Country Initiative and the
Urban Design Campaign(Biddulph, 1997). The urban village concept
reflects this, emphasising design quality as defined, for example, by
Jacobs (1961), Cullen (1961), Lynch (1981), Bentley et al. (1985) and
Gehl (1996). Similar development concepts were also endorsed internationally, for example, Transit Orientated Development, Pedestrian
Pockets (Kelbaugh, 1989; Calthorpe,1993) and TraditionalNeighbourhood Development (Kriegerand Lennertz, 1991).
SustainabilityThe late 1980s/early 1990s saw an increasedinterest in
sustainability,and the urban village concept also drew, albeit rather
vaguely on this- 'the twin objectives must therefore be to ensure a
sustainableglobal environment;and to provide local environmentsthat
are . . . more sustainable'(Aldous, 1992, 25).
Workto identify key principlesand to 'fix' the concept in the early 1990swas
basedon the modelof new-buildschemes.To fix or agreethe natureof the concept
the variousprofessionalsproduceda book which set out the group'saspirations,
definedwhat an urbanvillagewould be (Box 1), and provideda rationalefor the
developmentform (Aldous, 1992; 1995). Much of the interest by the privatesector housebuildersat the time was premisedon the belief that they could be
involvedin the wholesaledevelopmentof urbanvillageson greenfieldsites.
169
3,000-5,000 people
'[I]nclude such adjoining land as is needed for its maximum protection
. . . maximum possible self sufficiency' (p. 24)
Focal village square
Small enough for everything to be in walking distance
Mix of housing tenures, ages and social groups
Retail mixed with other uses throughout the scheme
Primary school within the scheme
Pattern of open spaces should be considered
Connected street network
Traffic calming
Locality will set the prevailing architectural style
Architectural focal points, street corners, building lines, visual incidents,
enclosure
Mix of uses within neighbourhoods, street blocks, streets, and within
individual buildings
Permeable, pedestrian friendly, cul-de-sacs to be avoided
Social mix and consultation
Legible, focal points, strong street corners
Variety of buildings and spaces that change and adapt over time
Bring life to the buildings and the spaces in front of them
Box 1 Urban village design and development principles (from Aldous 1992; 1995)
To widen awareness and interest in the concept the UVF sought the
endorsementof two of the most powerfulforcesin developmentin Britain.First,
the UVF, throughcontactsin Government,lobbied for the urbanvillage to be
acknowledgedas a preferred development form in national planning policy
guidance which local planning authorities use to guide the content of their
planningpolicy. They were so successfulin this that the urbanvillage concept
was explicitly referredto as a preferredform of developmentin the opening
pages of its advice on general policy and principles. More specifically the
governmentguidancestates:
The planning system can be used to deliver high quality, mixed-use
developments,such as 'urbanvillages'. Built on large sites, usually within
urbanareas,they are characterisedby- compactness,a mixtureof uses and
dwellingtypes, includingaffordablehousing, a rangeof employment,leisure
and community facilities, appropriateinfrastructureand services, high
standardsof urbandesign, accessto public open spaceand green spaces;and
readyaccess to public transport.(DOE, 1997, 3-4)
The UVF's success in getting the urbanvillage referredto in such an explicit
and high profile mannermeant that where large-scaleresidentialdevelopment
was being considered every local planning authority in the UK should be
rejectingdevelopmentsin the form of housing estates, and instead pursing the

pattern of development suggested in the urban village book. In addition,
however, the guidance also suggested that 'this approachmight also help to
improve an existing residential area of poor quality through the gradual
introductionof some or all of the urbanvillage characteristicsmentionedabove'
(DOE, 1997, 4). The urbanvillage idea was also, therefore,regardedas relevant
in an urbanrenewalcontext.
In response to such endorsementthe UVF, via personal and professional
networks, also sought the involvement and endorsement of the concept by
English Partnerships (EP), the government's renewal agency which funds
appropriateforms of development.This step was successfuland was publicised
via a joint UVF and EP publicationpromotingmixed-use development(UVF/
EP, no date) and by the fact that UVF memberswere subsequentlyretainedby
EP to act as adviserson a wide rangeof projectsseekingrenewalfunds from the
agency.EP, for its part, subsequentlypreferredto fund neighbourhoodrenewal
schemes which provided some evidence of conformitywith the urban village
concept or its attributes.
During the mid- to late 1990sthe focus shiftedfromonly promotingthe urban
villageas a suitableformof developmentfor greenfieldsites to it also becominga
morepublic conceptthat could be used within a regenerationcontext.The UVF
thereforemoved the emphasisof its activitiesfrom searchingfor greenfieldsites
where a prototype urban village could be built to advising on and endorsing
urbanrenewaldevelopmentsthat adequatelyreflectedurbanvillage design and
developmentprinciples.
This period demonstrateshow disparate'good' planning ideas and themes
were brought together and characterisedas a particulardevelopmentconcept
which then became fixed in meaning, initially in a book that was seen to
representthe views of the UVG and subsequentUVF, and which then were
disseminated into wider practice via two most powerful means: national
governmentplanning guidance and the agency set up by that governmentto
fund urban renewalin England.
Unfixing the concept I: examining the contested meanings
Despite an impressionof consensus in planning discourse about the meaning
and relevanceof the urbanvillage concept, an analysisof the languageused in
professional interviews by those most closely involved with defining and
subsequentlypromotingthe concept demonstratesthat the consensus was not
actuallyreal. Insteadthe concepthas been continuallyconfrontedby competing
professionalagendas,perspectivesand motivations.As such we can see how this
planning and development concept was discursively constructed and reconstructedby agents with a vested interest in its future.
A series of 22 interviewswas completedwith individualsassociatedwith the
urbanvillage concept and who representedthe housing developmentindustry,
local authorityplanners,urbandesign consultancies,agenciesof urbanrenewal,
social housing providers and also planning and developmentinterest groups.
The discourseand languageof the transcriptionswere scrutinisedto assessways
FROMCONCEPTTO COMPLETION
171
in which the concept was socially constructed. The interviews sought to

elucidateinformationand perceptionson- the interviewee'sinvolvementwith
the urban villages movement;the UVG/UVF; the history of the urban village
concept;the characteristicsof the urbanvillage;developmentprinciplesfor an
urban village;the applicationof the concept to specific developments;and the
relationshipbetween this and other concepts.
The impressionconveyed in the interviews was one of uncertainty- about
past, presentand futurerepresentationsof the urbanvillage, and in regardto its
validity as either a concept or reality. This was equally the case whether the
intervieweewas supportiveor scepticalof the meritsof the concept.When asked
to define an urban village, most intervieweesfell back, whether consciouslyor
not, on the list of attributesfrom the Urban Villages Report, although some
went on to extendthe applicabilityof the urbanvillage idea into the more recent
agendasof urbanrenaissanceand sustainability:
It's a flagshipexampleof the kind of projectswhich can . . . bring areasback
to life or retrofit tiredareasin a way which not only worksfor them but has a
sort of presentationalvalue and communicatesthe positive sense of urban
developmentin cities. (Council for the Protectionof Rural England/Urban
Villages Forum member)
A main tension emergedbetween people who felt that the concept was only
relevantto new-build situationsand those who also thought that it could find
relevance in regenerationscenarios. The former felt that house builders in
particularcould not deliver the concept without special circumstancesand, in
particular,strict controlof land and its value over about 20 years:
Here we come to the fundamentalproblem. There is no way the private
sector is capable of undertakingurban development on the true Urban
Villagebasis and that realisationcameover the developersalthoughit hadn't
come over all sorts of other people ... So the little group of developers
disappearedbecausethey acceptedthat they couldn't deliver- that it was a
charade,(planningconsultant/UrbanVillages Forum member)
The latter, in contrast, sought to bring the concept to the attention of
regenerationagencies, and both developers and planners working within a
regenerationcontext, thus seekingto apply the concept within this new context
despite the housing developers'doubts:
Our role has been to assemble and advise project partnerships in
regenerationareas on the approachthat can hopefully deliver some of the
outcomesthat not just the Urban VillagesForum think are viable, [. . .] now
it seems to be prettymainstreamreally,to try and persuadeothersto pursue
these sorts of approaches. (Princes Foundation/Urban Villages Forum
member)
The majoritybelieved that places called urban villages could be identified,
although it was accepted that few would be endorsed as such by the Urban
VillagesForum, since most so calledurbanvillageswere in fact ordinaryestates

adoptingthe urbanvillage label for marketingpurposesor existing areascalled
urbanvillages by local authoritieskeen to raise the profileof their areas:
The great dangeris that you get [house builders]sort of re-brandingwhat
are essentially housing estates with a couple of shops under the name of
Urban Villages and then all it becomes is a brand identity rather than
anything meaningful in terms of design ... I mean you've still got the
Councilswho almostall preferto use the Urban Villageconceptto re-badge
pretty dire housing estates and out of town retail development, (senior
memberof the Commissionfor Architectureand the Built Environment)
Such badging was considered a particularfeature of the house building
industry'sapproachto gaininglocalplanningauthorityfavourfor largerhousing
developments, especially since the concept had been so heavily endorsed in
Governmentguidance.
There was also an acknowledgedtension betweenthe extent to which such an
ambitious concept can or should be fixed in stone, and the need to make it
flexibleenoughto be applicablein differentdevelopmentsituations- whilst also
not lapsing into meaninglessness.To some extent the semanticswere seen to
capturethis:
It puts two wordstogetherthat don't reallyfit together,the word urbanand
the word village, and the meaning of the word village counteracts the
meaning of the word urban, and thereforein one sense it doesn't mean a
greatdeal. On the otherhand it's a very attractivephrasefor people to use to
describe something that might otherwise be unattractive,(planning and
urbandesign consultant,URBED)
To many the very contradictionand fuzziness of the concept were seen as
carryingan implicit value, not least because they ensure a resonancewith a
varied audience,from policy makersto the ordinarypublic. At the same time,
the inherentcontradictionsof the conceptand its perceiveddilution in practice,
together with perceptions of the personalities involved in promoting the
concept, resultedin a certainamountof doubt about the utility of the concept.
Its impactand momentumwere seen by some to have waned('the idea is past its
sell by date'), while others believed that it might need to be 'reinvented'.
Overallthe interviewsrevealedthat differentinterestsconstructedthe urban
village concept differently, with little shared or immutable meaning, and to
different degrees of refinement. Thus, both meaning and application were
contested, resultingin a fluidity of interpretation.
Unfixing the concept II: planning the concept in localities
A second stage of unfixing the concept was observed as its applicationwas
undertakenin specific local places, in the policy contexts of local development
agendasand as it was interpretedby local actors. The questionnairesurvey of
UK local authoritiesidentified55 developmentstermed 'urbanvillages' which
demonstratedhow the concept has been loosely applied. The questionnaire
173
resulted in an exceptionally high return rate of 60 per cent, suggesting that even
though this list of schemes is not exhaustive it would be representative. The
locations of the urban villages referred to here are presented in Figure 1. The
results of the questionnaire allowed comparison of schemes both with one
another and with the principles of urban village development endorsed by the
UVF. Analysis of planning briefs, masterplans and development frameworks
sent by local authorities also facilitated a more detailed understanding of how
development principles were being interpreted.
Fig. 1 The locationof UK urbanvillagesidentifiedas a resultof the questionnairesurvey

JUSTIFYING THE URBAN VILLAGE FOCUS
For the most part the local planningdocumentationused languagedrawingon

discoursesthat alreadyhad salience to their anticipatedaudiences,with urban
village claims legitimised by reference to institutionalised structures and
practices- such as Government agendas, the orthodoxy of the UVF, the
culturalimageof the mythologisedEnglishVillage,or the post-industrialicon of
the heritage rich historic quarter. A few elaborated in some detail on the
concept,often accompaniedby prescriptiveurbandesign language,while others
focused more on generic 'village' qualities, seeking to capture an essence of
'villageness'by reference,for example,to provisionof a 'villagegreen'. For the
most part, attemptsto formalisean urban village ideology were tentative, and
frequentlythe words 'village'and 'urbanvillage' were used interchangeably,or
in a state of ambiguity(' "village"and "urban"are ratherloosely defined and
not mutually exclusive' (Lincoln City Council, Long Leys Urban Village
PlanningBrief, 1999, 2).
LOCATION
Urban villages are mostly located in urban areas and generallyin inner urban
areas.They have been built (or are planned)on a rangeof previousland usesmost commonly on mixed-use inner-urban sites, for example old railway
sidings, ex-industrial sites and older residential areas. Other previous uses
include former large industrial and Ministry of Defence sites and hospitals,
while a number (notably in the South East of England) are proposed for
greenfieldsites.
SIZE
Urban villages are ideally portrayedas distinctiveneighbourhoodunits with a
populationof between3,000 and 5,000 built with a rangeof densitieson sites of
approximately100 hectares. However, the research suggested that planned
developmentsvary greatly in size from just over one hectare (Attercliffein
Sheffield) to nearly 300 hectares (Swanpool in Lincoln), and with projected
populationsrangingfrom 160 to 15,000 (see Table 1). A largeproportionwere
roughly aiming for the desired size, but it must also be noted that an equally
Table 1 The population, size and density characteristicsof planned urban villages
The population of
planned urban villages
0-2,499
2,500-4,999
5,000-9,999
10,000-14,999
15,000-19,999
20,000-25,000
15
12
9
1
1
1
The size of planned

urban villages (hectares)
0-49
50-99
100-149
150-199
200-249
250-299
300-350
26
6
5
2
2
1
2
The average density of

dwellings (per hectare)
in planned urban villages
20-39
40-59
60-79
80-99
100-119
120-140
19
5
3
1
1
1
175
large number were significantly smaller, suggesting that even though suitably
sized sites were not available the concept was still considered appropriate.
RANGE OF FACILITIES
One of the defining characteristicsof urban villages is said to be their mixed

uses. Most schemesreportedon in the surveyincludedfood and groceryshops,
play facilitiesand often a communityhall. Fewer developments(especiallythe
smallerexamples)have post offices and a pharmacy.Most have some form of
employmentprovision,althoughoften minimal.Only two (Ancoats,Manchester
and BuckshawVillage, Lancashire)statedthat they plannedto provideas many
jobs as there were residents.However,many developmentsare close to existing
or proposedlarge employmentsites and thereforeaim to provideonly housing.
VARIETY AND DENSITY OF HOUSING
A wide varietyof housingmixes areproposedin urbanvillages.The provisionof

affordablehousingrangesfrom 10 per cent (in inner-urbanareas)to virtuallynil
(in suburban and free-standing development). Housing density also varies
considerably(see Table 1). The majorityof developmentsfall in the planned
range of 25-40 units per hectare. Some inner-city locations attain densities of
100 units per hectare,while suburbanand free-standingdevelopmentsare often
20-30 units per hectare- roughly the same as the average density for new
developmentin England.Interestingly,many plans could not indicateintended
densities, suggestingthat such matterswere being left to housing developersto
determineas a resultof marketconditions,ratherthanbeing regardedas a policy
objectiveof public interest.
TRANSPORT
Reducingcar dependenceand allowingpeople to choose more environmentally

sustainablemodes of transportare consideredto be a primarygoal of urban
villagedevelopments.To this end bus servicesareeitherprovidedor plannedfor
most urban villages, although little detail of the level of service was provided.
Eleven developmentsalso take advantageof existing train links, while eight
referredto the plannedprovisionof light rail systems.
FUNDING
The developmentsare largelyprivatelyfunded, with only four having a greater

input of public money.
DESIGN GUIDES
Of the 55 schemes received only 13 included design guidelines, development

frameworksor masterplanswhich attemptedto convey somethingof how urban
village principlesmight be encouraged.These documentsalso variedconsiderably in extent and degreeof prescription.The fact that 42 schemescould make
no clear reference to any such site-specific guidance beyond statements of
general aspirationshows how local authorities in particularhave not always

wanted to influencethe typical pattern of developmentthat the private sector
might deliver.
The survey information confirms that developments defined as 'urban
villages' vary markedlythroughout the UK. This variety highlights how the
discursively constructed urban village concept also becomes 'unfixed' when
appliedto a specificdevelopmentcontext. This reflectsthe amorphousnatureof
the urban village concept itself, the difficulty of applying such a concept
uniformlyin differentlocalities, and the variety of motivationsfor adoptionof
the urbanvillage rubric.
Unfixing the concept III: implementing the concept in localities

The analysisof three case studies allowed us to examinehow the urbanvillage
concept had informedthe implementationof particularschemes. A case study
approachwas chosen in order to analyse the detailed processes of decision
making and explore 'urban village' outcomes in contrasting localities. The
developments also had to have established populations who could be
Fig. 2 Features of the Bordesley urban village (not to scale)
177
subsequently surveyed about the relevance of the concept to their localities and
their patterns of life (see below).
Bordesley is an inner-city area of Birmingham, which by the mid-1980s
exhibited serious decline with high unemployment, vacant land and poor
housing- much of it council housing (81 per cent). Within the area measures of
poverty and deprivation were high with 20 per cent of eligible people on income
support, only 36 per cent of those aged between 16-59 were economically active
and one out of five households owned a car (data derived from the 1991 UK
Census). The area was included in a plan to regenerate East Birmingham
through an Urban Development Agency, which in 1987 became the Birmingham Heartlands Development Company. The public/private partnership
included the private house builders Wimpey and Bryant as the developers for
Bordesley. The regeneration work was virtually complete at the time of the
Fig. 3 Features of the Garston urban village (not to scale)

research, with much already well established. See Figure 2 for a map
summarisingthe Bordesleyinitiative.
Garston-under-the-Bridgeis a deprived, run-down community located six
miles south-east of Liverpool city centre consisting largely of nineteenthcentury terraced housing, with some post-war council and private-sector
development.Within Garston 23 per cent of households are single parent, 21
per cent of the eligible population claim income support and 77 per cent of
residents have an annual income below 10,000 (the UK average is
approximately23,000) (GUVP, 1999). In 1994 a successful Single Regeneration Budget bid led to the establishmentof the Speke Garston Partnership
(SGP) to devise and implement a renewal strategy for the area. In 1996 the
SpekeGarstonDevelopmentCompanywas formed,which also had an influence
on developmentsin Garston. Work began in the late 1990s and a number of
communityfacilitieshave been provided,but a comprehensivehousing renewal
programmeremainsto be completed. See Figure 3 for a map summarisingthe
Garston-under-the-Bridgeinitiative.
West Silvertownlies on the edge of Royal VictoriaDock, East London, and
consistedmostly of derelictland with a smallresidentialpopulationin two tower
blocks. No specific social data could be found for the existing small residential
Fig. 4 Features of the West Silvertown urban village (not to scale)
179
population.The areawas developedas an urbanvillage followinga competition

organised by the London Docklands Development Corporation(LDDC) in
1994,which was won by WimpeyHomes in associationwith the PeabodyTrust.
Workbeganin the mid-1990s, with the first phase of 1,000 houses completedat
the time of the research. See Figure 4 for a map summarisingthe West
Silvertowninitiative.
ADOPTION OF THE URBAN VILLAGE NAME AND CONCEPT
In each location adoption of the urban village idea stemmed from different
considerations,and therewas not alwaysa unity of opinion amonginterviewees.
In Bordesleyadoptionof the urbanvillage name was felt to conferwhat the key
membersof the regenerationpartnershipsaw as an appropriateimage for what
they wantedto achieve,at a time when the concept itself had not yet been fully
workedup by the UVG. However, preciselywho coined the term and why was
'lost in the mists of time' (development officer BirminghamCity Council).
Subsequentlysome principles from the urban village repertoirewere appropriated as the concept gained currency, thus illustrating the inherent
adaptabilityof the concept. However, to the UVF, Bordesley was never a
'real' urban village. In West Silvertown the precise origin of the idea is
contested. Regenerationplans were alreadyafoot before the Secretaryof State
for the Environment used the expression 'urban village' in relation to the
developmentin 1992/93. This followed discussionswith the UVF (which was
activelylookingfor placesthat could be so designated),and was pickedup by the
LDDC as encapsulatingbut also legitimisingits developmentambitions.At the
same time, and independently,the Director of Development for the Peabody
Trust also suggestedthat the isolatednatureof the site made it an ideal location
the urbanvillage designation
for an urbanvillage. In Garston-under-the-Bridge
of the close relationship
as
the
result
about
It
came
cut.
clear
more
seems
the
EP
and
in
the
individuals
between
UVF,
Speke Garston Development
initiative
The
(led by the SGP) was seen to have
existingregeneration
Company.
urban village potential and thereforecould be conveniently'badged'with the
title to gain profileand in the hope of attractingresourcesfrom EP. However,
when EP did not respondas anticipateddue to a regionaloverspendthe urban
village aspect was diluted.
KEY AGENTS IN THE CASE STUDY URBAN VILLAGES
In each case study the involvementof regenerationagencieswas the catalystfor

developmentactivities,especiallyin regardto attractingthe confidenceof private
house builders. Individualswithin those agencies then actively negotiatedthe
urbanvillageideafor reasonsof imageor pragmatismor both. In Garston-underthe-BridgeandWest Silvertownthis processwas assistedby the UVF, whichwas
followingan agendaof its own in its effortsto ensurethe realityof urbanvillages.
Also of fundamentalimportancein terms of mediatingideas into development
outcomeswerethe planninganddesignprofessionals(includingTibbaldsMunro
in West Silvertown, Roger Tym and Partners in Bordesley, and Liverpool
Architectureand Design Trust in Garston-under-the-Bridge),local planning

authorities,and philanthropichousing trusts (BournevilleVillage Trust and
Peabody) without whose involvementthe social and communityobjectives in
Bordesleyand West Silvertownwould not have been achieved.In both Garstonunder-the-Bridgeand Bordesleyprivatehouse builderswere uninterestedin the
urban village status, beyond the subsidised development opportunitiesthey
brought, and their powerfulposition in the process meant that they were able
effectivelyto disregardurban village design ideas. This is despite the fact that
nationally some of the companies had formally endorsed the concept, or
elsewherewere planningto develop schemesmore in line with the principles.
ADOPTION OF URBAN VILLAGE
Applicationof any 'fixed'notion of an urbanvillagewithin the differentcontexts

has been partial. In particularthe rhetoric (for example mixed use, mixed
tenure, sustainable)has been adopted by particularactors, at particulartimes
and in relationto particulartasks, althoughoften more to support an existing
position than as a solution to specific developmentissues.
The following highlights some main points in regardto the extent to which
urbanvillage principleswere applied in the three case studies.
Urban design
The urbanvillage concept was stronglypremisedon the view that good urban
design would create more interesting and stimulating forms of development
suitableto the context, that adoptionof neo-traditionaldesign principleswould
allow residentsto choose more sustainablelifestyles, and that a well-designed
scheme would create a communityfocus and allow social integration.In West
Silvertown a master plan was produced which guided the urban design
characteristicsof the area. This responded well to the waterfront context,
created a coherent pattern of accessibility and townscape, allowed for
integrationof mixed uses, and allowed some control over the integrationof
tenures through the scheme while also reducingthe distinctionbetween social
and privatehousing. In Garston-under-the-Bridge
a design guide was produced
for the renewalagencies, but it became clear that the guide contradictedboth
local authorityand residentexpectationsfor the areaand little effortwas made
by professionalsto arguefor the project.As a resultthe urbandesign featuresof
the urban village were shelved and a number of separateand very standard
housing schemes have, to date, resulted (Fig. 5). In Bordesleya strategyand
subsequent development frameworkwere produced which identified broad
features of the planned area, including elements such as the location of the
village centre, sites for housing and the location of a park. Individual
developments were, however, subject to minimum intervention, leading to
little coherencyin the townscape.
High-density development
In an urban village higher-densitydevelopment should provide more people

locallyto sustainshops and otherfacilitiesand serviceswithinwalkingdistances.
New developments in Bordesley and Garston-under-the-Bridgehave typical
181
Fig. 5 Standardhousingdevelopmentcontradictingurbanvillagedesign ideas in Garston-under-the-Bridge
UK densities which are lower than those thought necessary to achieve this
potentiality. This is essentially because private-sector house builders were
building their standard houses without any regard to the impact of this on the
viability of community services such as the provision of shops. Prior to the
development both locations were also unattractive to private-sector developers,
and so any introduction of new housing was regarded as a significant success
whatever its form, while in Garston-under-the-Bridge the new housing was seen
to be supporting existing services. In West Silvertown, just a few miles from the
city of London, the development context was totally different. Despite the fact
that the established community was relatively deprived, and the dockside
context was initially unattractive, there would always be considerable scope for
higher-density development in apartments, made attractive to city workers (Fig.
6). In addition, residents of London typically have to consider living at higher
densities when compared with other regional cities due to historic precedent. As
a result there is a greater depth of experience of living in such a way and a greater
tolerance of the form. As a result higher-density forms of housing were
considered both more acceptable and viable.
Identity and place making
Urban villages would typically have a distinct architectural character which it is
thought should contribute to residents' sense of attachment to the place. In West
Silvertown the location, isolation and new urban form give a clear identity to the
182 MICHAEL BIDDULPH, BRIDGET FRANKLIN AND MALCOLM TAIT
Fig. 6 Higher-densityhousingdevelopmentin West Silvertown
183
Fig. 7 The village entrance sign in Bordesley
area. Bordesley makes some attempts at place making, giving some sense of
identity for 'Bordesley Village' residents. This is typically a little contrived and
achieved through the use of 'village' entrance signs (Fig. 7) and distinct street
furniture. Garston-under-the-Bridge retains the strong sense of identity it
already possessed because of its distinct history, physical isolation and resulting
from the life-long friendships and relationships that have formed between
people in the area.
Communityinvolvement
The UVF has always endorsed community involvement as an appropriate means
of ensuring that any urban village plan matches residents' aspirations. A
planning weekend was held at West Silvertown, but unfortunately had little
influence on development outcomes. In Bordesley the public have been involved
in minor decisions such as traffic calming, the community hall, and road naming,
while in Garston-under-the-Bridge extensive efforts have been made to involve
the community, principally because there is a large, established population.
Environmentallyfriendly design
Although an interest in environmentally benign forms of development has
emerged in parallel to attempts to promote urban villages, the UVF has also
made claims that its form of development is environmentally sustainable. In all

of the case studies, however,any argumentfor the sustainabilityof the schemes
has tended to focus on the extent to which economic and social sustainability
goals have been achieved as a result of initiatives to reuse brownfieldland,
introduceprivatehousing and hopefullythereforesustainboth pre-existingand
new community facilities and services. Issues of environmentalsustainability
have received less attention, with only one developmentfor PeabodyHousing
Associationcontainingany specificfeaturesto reducethe environmentalimpacts
of the particularhousing scheme.
Pattern of open space
The UVF's emphasison urbandesign encompassesthe view that well-designed

places should accommodateopen spaces into a plan, be they focal spaces of an
urbancharacter,or green spaces for recreation.Bordesleygave high priorityto
the provision and improvement of green space and landscaping. This was
regardedas a mechanismfor attractingprivate-sectorhouse builders, but the
outcome has also been the creation of a valued open space in the resulting
scheme.The scheme also establisheda new village centre, althoughthe existing
patternof streets means that the space is not a focal space in the area (Fig. 8).
West Silvertown focused on hard landscaping and creating access to the
waterfront,althoughit also produceda focal spacein front of the smallarcadeof
shops. In Garston-under-the-Bridgean open green space is planned,while the
Fig. 8 The Bordesley village centre
185
neighbouring retailing centre has seen a 'face lift' creating a new focus. In
general such initiatives have been successful, although the more urban focal
spaces typically fall short of the 'market square' image encouraged in urban
village literature.
Mixed use
Achieving both horizontal and vertical mixing of uses is regarded as a

mechanismfor creatingvitality for longer periods of the day, while it is also
thought that it might reduce the need to travel and subsequentlyfoster greater
attachmentto a place. In particularthe urban village concept suggests that
people should have the opportunityboth to live and to work in a locality. In
relationto employmentin particularthere are minimalopportunitiesin all the
schemes. Bordesley has most employment use, through retained small
industries. West Silvertown has some live/work units, although the majority
of the development is residential. Both Garston-under-the-Bridgeand
Bordesley are also close to major employment sites, which encouragedthe
plannersto focus more exclusivelyon housing developmentand the provisionof
a wider range of neighbourhoodfacilities. The achievementof verticalmixing
has also been ratherlow key, with only small areasin both Bordesleyand West
Silvertownseeingthe provisionof residentialuses aboveshops. This is generally
attributableto a lack of interestin this form of developmentby house building
companies,which have dominateddevelopmentin all three areas, and also a
concern about the viability of smaller retail units in areas served by larger
supermarkets.
Mixed tenure
Mixing tenuresis associatedwith the provisionof a more balancedcommunity,

and the urban village concept seeks to encouragea fine mixing within streets,
ratherthan a coarsemixing of social and privatehousing in differentareas.A
mixture of tenures was achieved in all three areas although not the fine mix
endorsedby the concept. In both Bordesleyand Garstonnew privateand social
housing schemes have been createdquite separatelyfrom either the traditional
community or social housing, and there is virtually no reason for either the
private and social housing or new and old residents to mix. In both areas,
however,the provisionof privatehomes has been regardedas a mechanismfor
achievinga more 'balanced'community,althoughthis is a functionalratherthan
a social goal, as the supposedlymore affluentprivateresidentsmight be able to
assist the viability of the communityfacilities. In West Silvertownthere is no
design distinctionbetween social and private,but true 'pepperpotting'has also
not been achieved. The interviews with residents also determined that new
privateand social tenants do not mix in any of the locations.
Facilities
Many of the urban village planning and design concepts are premisedon the
view that their achievementwill assist in providing and maintaininga wider
rangeof facilitieswithin the neighbourhoods.This was a reasonwhy the concept
Fig. 9 WindowLane in Garston,formerlythe centreof the communitycontaininga rich mix of shops, pubs
and otherfacilities.Realisticallythe level of provisionin this areawill be rationalisedto matchcontemporary
patternsof shoppingand serviceuse.
was regarded as useful for Garston-under-the-Bridgewhere existing local

services have been suffering from long-term decline, and it was hoped that
adoptionof urbanvillage design and developmentprincipleswould reversethis
trend.To date thereis little evidencethat this has been successful,and it is more
likely that the existing provision will be further rationalised to a more
sustainablelevel (Fig. 9). Bordesley has provided the limited 'village centre'
with convenienceshops and a health centre and West Silvertownhas a small
paradeof shops. All schemeshave providedcommunityhalls, with the assistance
of philanthropicsupport or gap funding, although the hall in Garstonalready
has an uncertainfuturedue to low levels of use and an unwillingnessof residents
to pay for activities.In generalthe urbanvillage vision of a vibrantmix of small
shops and facilitiesalongan attractive'high street'seems to be quite farfromthe
developmentrealitywhere those smallershops are typicallyin a state of decline
as a result of contemporaryshoppinghabits.
Public transport
In additionto sustaininga rangeof communityfacilitiesan urbanvillage would

also be able to sustainan effectivepublic transportsystemto neighbouringareas.
Public transportin both Garston-under-the-Bridgeand Bordesleywas already
deemedto be relativelygood (but Bordesleyresidentsregretthat it has not been
improved).In West Silvertownconsiderableeffort has been put into transport
187
links, from a low base. Unfortunately, however, between the areas and many
neighbouring facilities car travel remains the most attractive option in all cases
for people with access to a car.
Self-sufficiency
Some have suggested(Biddulph,2000) that one of the definingcharacteristicsof

an urban village is the view that developmentshould lead to a degree of selfsufficiencyand a localisationof life to within the village's boundaries.Such a
and
plan was not seen as particularlyrelevantin both Garston-under-the-Bridge
in
Bordesleywhere the communitiesrely on accessibilityto facilities adjacent
areas. Garston in particularactually suffers from its isolation and resulting
stigma. Intervieweessuggested that residents'poverty has actuallylimited the
extentto which some peoplefeel confidentabouttravellingbeyondthe boundary
of the community,while some residentsfromneighbouringareasdon't chooseto
drinkin the Garston-under-the-Bridge
pubs or use the limited shops becauseof
the area'sreputationor its isolation. In West Silvertownself-sufficiencywould
have been more achievablegiven the isolated position of the development,but
the populationis currentlynot large enough to sustain a diverse range of uses
and residentsare forced to use facilitiesat a distance,with many of the private
residentsfindingit convenientto use facilitiesclose to their employment.All in
all, the goal of achieving greater self-sufficiencyseems profoundly misplaced
when such areas are embedded within wider urban networks and when
confronted by contemporaryaspirations and the specific circumstancesof
communities.
Social sustainability
Enhancing social relationships between members of the community and

developing community capacity is also a goal of urban village development,
with residents working with professionals in the planning of the scheme,
managing aspects of the resulting development and, through community
associations, forming types of interest groups commonly associated with
village life. The aim in Garston-under-the-Bridgeand Bordesleyhas been to
stem the loss of people from the areas, and it is certainlyfelt that retentionof
existingpopulationshas been achievedwhile some newcomershave also arrived.
In Bordesleythese newcomersalreadyshow commitmentto stayingin Bordesley
but, despitethe reinvigoratedcommunity,therehas been only limitedsuccessin
effortsto engagethe communityand a CommunityForum initiativehas failed.
Garston-under-the-Bridgealready had a range of active and established
community groups, but the pre-existing urban-village-likecharacteristicsof
close social ties and local serviceuse are becomingdiluted. In West Silvertown
the majorityarenew residentswho do not expectto stay long term.Here a Trust
has been formed to assist in communitydevelopment,but social integrationis
weak. In Bordesleythe retentionand expansionof the school, and in Garstonunder-the-Bridgeand West Silvertownthe provisionof new schools, have had
importantcommunityimpacts.
Unfixing the concept IV: life in an urban village

PATTERNS OF LIFE IN THE URBAN VILLAGES
The so-calledlocalisationof life is regardedby promotersof the conceptas one

of the potentialpositiveconsequencesof the creationof urbanvillages,as people
can realise most of their daily needs within the direct vicinity of their homes.
Our analysisof the use of facilities and services in the case studies found that
where possible people would use local shops for items such as bread and milk,
and that they would also tend to use a local newsagent,chemist or post office.
However,generalshoppingfor food would occur beyond the developmentsand
where people owned cars they would exercise greater choice about which
supermarketsto use. In development terms these trends seem to have been
accepted with little attempt to create anything other than very limited local
shopping opportunitieswithin schemes. In all cases the community facilities
were used little by responding residents, while in Garston-under-the-Bridge
people were also not attendingthe local churches.As statedpreviouslythe local
schools were well used by residentswith children,and the schools were seen as
having a cohesive effect on communityrelations.
In West Silvertownmany of the more affluentpeople would tend to be more
mobile and take advantageof the opportunitiesthat London offers. In sharp
contrast Garston-under-the-Bridgehad a very localised life, but for many
people engaged in social renewal of the community this was regardedas an
economic imperative created by poverty, rather than being a desirable
preferenceor a lifestyle choice.
RESIDENT SATISFACTION AND AWARENESS OF THE URBAN VILLAGE
CONCEPT
Residents were not greatly concernedby the urban village status of the places
where they lived, nor particularlyawarethat such concepts were being either
seriouslyor loosely applied. In both Garston-under-the-Bridgeand Bordesley
people were generallysatisfiedwith what had been achieved,althoughthey had
concernsor reservationsaboutcertainfacilities.In Garston-under-the-Bridge
in
some
urban
attributes
would
not
be
particular
village
acceptedlocally (higher
nor Bordesley
densityand mixed use), and in neitherGarston-under-the-Bridge
would urbandesign be regardedas significant.In West Silvertownresidentsfelt
that the scheme had few physical or social village attributes, although they
commentedpositively on the design.
OTHER REFLECTIONS ON THE CASE STUDIES
In all three locations,the workof the regenerationagencieswas fundamentalto

- environmentally,socially and economically.Those
achieving improvements
involved in the agenciesin West Silvertownand Bordesleywere unanimousin
feeling that such achievementswere substantialand had assuredthe future for
the areas. Residents who lived with the end results were less wholeheartedon
these points. To both the agencies and the residents, however, it was these
broader achievements that were important, rather than those specifically
189
according with urban village principles. In each location regeneration plans

existed prior to, and independently of, urban village associations, and
subsequently elements of the urban village concept were explicitly or implicitly
abstracted and reinterpreted to fit
(a) the strategy or vision for the area;
(b) the agendas of the organisations and individuals involved; and
(c) the local context of the site characteristics, populations and facilities.
West Silvertown, with almost a tabula rasa, strong design leadership, and
general commitment to the urban village concept, comes closest to the
idealised urban village- although it is still some way short. However, it does
meet the aims of its development brief. In Bordesley, urban village claims were
less institutionalised, there was less to lose, and the activation of principles was
more by accident than by design, driven by a development brief that was
firmly rooted in the needs of the locality. Here the nature of the process and
the commitment of key actors, rather than idealised principles, were seen as
the key to success. In Garston-under-the-Bridge, attempts to adhere to urban
village principles were minimised when they no longer seemed to bring
strategic benefit. Indeed, the effort to seek classification as an urban village
part way through the process of renewal when an accepted strategy had been
established seemed to confuse the issue as some actors sought to repackage and
re-present plans with a greater emphasis on urban village qualities, rather than
emphasising matters previously considered a priority. In none of the locations
was the title urban village used much in practice. Bordesley was 'Bordesley
Village', West Silvertown was referred to either as such or as 'Britannia
Village'- the name given by Wimpey, and Garston (with the exception of a
few urban village brochures specifically produced for EP) continued to be
referred to as 'Garston-under-the-Bridge', to distinguish it from the adjacent
and established Garston Village.
Conclusions
The purposeof this paperhas been to considerthe life of a concept in planning
such as the urbanvillage. In particularit has been concernedwith highlighting
a number of transformations that constitute the processes involved in
conceptualising,developing and finally living in the urban village concept.
Centralto this task has been an understandingof how multifariousstrandsof
thinking have become fixed into a seemingly homogeneousconcept, how and
why this thinking has then been progressivelyunfixed as actors have tried to
transformthe concept into both paper planning schemes and built products
and finally how the concept has been confronted by contradictory lived
experiences.
THECONCEPT
'FIXING'
Attemptsto fix the urbanvillage concept were driven by a varietyof interests,
and may be viewed as a process of mediationbetween individuals(such as the

Prince of Wales) and wider (reproduced)social structures. This process of
mediationwas largely discursive,in that definingand agreeingon the concept
meant drawingon differentdiscourses,albeit with an elitist and traditionalist
emphasis,which servedfirst to definethe urbanvillageand second to positionit
within wider,and increasinglyurgent,debateson contemporarycities and urban
form. Such work,led by the UVG and exemplifiedby its report(Aldous, 1992),
establishednot only a set of genericdevelopmentprinciples,but combinedthese
to set out a particularvision of a locality- 'the urban village'. However, a
prescriptive version of the urban village remains elusive and the concept
representsa loose, fuzzy and ambiguous set of ideas and associations.This
allows for a wide degree of flexibility among those who claim to support, or
indeed refute, the concept, while notions of what the concept might mean
remaincontested.
'UNFIXING' THE CONCEPT
The urbanvillageconceptis one that encapsulatesa tensionbetweenthe need to

defineand stabiliseitself as a set of ideasand the redefinition,destabilisationand
unfixingof the conceptas it gets implemented(and thereforecollideswith other
discourses,local structuresand actors).This is exemplifiedby the fact that the
concept has undergonechanges over time, first as the surroundingdiscourses
aboutcities have intensified,and second as the institutionthat owns the concept
(the UVF) has changed, both in personnel and organisationalstructure. In
addition, and crucial to this research, is what occurs in the process of
implementingthe urban village concept in localities. This has more obviously
led to an unfixingof the concept, and the questionnairesurveyhighlightedthe
varied characteristicsof urban villages. The results of the survey also showed
how the process of naming a developmentan urban village lends it apparent
coherenceand thereforea deeper legitimacywithin the discourseof planning,
regardlessof its characteristics.The three case studies reinforcedthese findings,
providingdetailsof the processesby which urbanvillageswere mediatedon the
ground and how these processeswere informedby aspectsof the urbanvillage
ideal. The extent to which the urban village concept was drawn upon and
modified in each case study location varied according to the historical and
topographicalcontext, the local structures (development industry, planning
regimes, community/social structures) and the commitment of the agents
(developers,architectsand so forth). In this way, the urbanvillageconceptas an
idealised notion is transformedthrough the process of alignment by agents
workingwithin local areas,structuresand regimes.
REALISING THE DESIGN IDEAL
Much of the urbanvillageideal is expressedwith referenceto urbandesign ideas

that would need to be realised through the British planning and land
developmentsystems. The interviewsundertakenin the study highlightedthe
contrastingviews of the UVF membersabout whetherthese design ideas could
be achieved, with the group divided between members convinced that an
organisationpromotingthe conceptwould need to controlthe land and its value
FROMCONCEPTTO COMPLETION
191
over a long periodof time and, on the otherhand, those holding to the view that
incentivesvia fundingfor urbanregenerationworkwould be enough to provide
an adequateframework.The former group, in particular,never realised their
ideal as the requisite circumstanceswere never in place. Answers to the
questionnaireexposed how misplacedwas the confidenceof the second group,
with many so-called urban village schemes only able to provide referenceto
some generalurbanvillage aspirations.Few have adoptedspecificmasterplans
or guidanceto influencethe developmentform, while sites were sometimestoo
small,the plannedpopulationsweretoo variedor issues such as densityor mixed
use wereonly expressedin quite vagueterms. Such a lackof conformitywith the
conceptis explainedby the limitedrelevanceof the conceptto many localitiesor
their circumstances.In particularthe case studies highlighted how councils
sometimeshad contraryviews about what would work in their locality, while
house builders tended to be given a high degree of freedom to determinefor
themselvesthe formof developmentthat would be appropriate,especiallywhere
the marketfor developmentwas weak.In such a case, house builderswould tend
to have less interest in the complicateddevelopment scenario that an urban
villagerepresents,while some of the objectivessuch as finelymixing tenuresand
providing connected street networks through deprived areas would not be
entertained.
THE URBAN VILLAGE IN USE
The urbanvillage encapsulatesnot only a vision of a particularoutcome of the

developmentprocess, but also a vision of a particularform of social activity
(largelybased aroundlocalism).Through interviewsand questionnairesurveys
with residentsof 'urbanvillages'it was possible to ascertainthe extent to which
the use of localities was influenced by urban village developments.Research
found that patternsof use of space and facilitieswere not merely influencedby
the largely physical interventionof the urban village, but also by numerous
social and economicstructures.In addition,while residentsappreciatedcertain
attributesof the schemes,they did not generallyidentify with the urbanvillage
conceptas one that was importantin shapingtheir area,indicatingthe extent to
which the concept is an artefactof professionaldiscourses.
In particularthe value of localisation was often contradictorywhen real
communitieswere considered.Certainprofessionalswere preparedto regardthe
choice of a localisationof life within a defined urban village communityas an
unquestionablypositive idea, characterisedby wide ranging social relations
forming within a small geographic area. However, members of deprived
communitieswithin the case studies had such relationships,and often renewal
effortsof any type were tryingto broadentheir horizonsand (re)introducethem
into the opportunitiesprovided by the wider urban milieu, even if this only
extendedto using facilitieswithin neighbouringareas.This definingcharacteristic of life in an urban village expressedas a patternof physical development
and then transposedonto an ideal of social relations therefore appearsto be
particularlymisplaced.
192 MICHAEL BIDDULPH, BRIDGET FRANKLIN AND MALCOLM TAIT

REFERENCES
ALDOUS, T. (1992), Urban Villages: A
Conceptfor CreatingMixed-useUrbanDevelopmentson a SustainableScale, London,Urban
VillagesGroup.
ALDOUS, T. (1995), Economicsof Urban
Villages,London, Urban VillagesGroup.
ALDOUS, T. (1997), Urban Villages: A
Conceptfor CreatingMixed-useUrbanDevelopmentson a SustainableScale(secondedition),
London, Urban VillagesForum.
AUDIRAC, I. and SHERMYEN,A. (1994),
'An evaluationof neotraditionaldesign's social
prescription:postmodernplacebo or remedy
for socialmalaise?',Journalof PlanningEducationand Research,13, 171-3.
BARTON, H. (ed.) (1999), Sustainable
Communities:the Potential of Eco-villages,
London, Earthscan.
BENTLEY, I., ALCOCK,A., MURRAIN,
P. and McGLYNN, S. (1985), Responsive
A Guidefor Planners,Designers
Environments:
and Developers, Luton, Local Government
ManagementBoard.
BIDDULPH, M. (1997), 'Lessons from the
UrbanDesign Campaign',UrbanDesignInternational,2, 199-209.
BIDDULPH, M. (2000), 'Villages don't
makea city',Journalof UrbanDesign,5, 65-82.
CALTHORPE, P. (1993), The Next
AmericanMetropolis:Ecology,Communityand
the American Dream, Princeton, Princeton
UniversityPress.
CULLEN, G. (1961), The Concise Townscape,New York,Van NostrandReinhold.
DETR (DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND THE
REGIONS) (2000), MillenniumVillages and
SustainableCommunities,
London, DETR.
DOE (DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT) (1997), PPG1: GeneralPolicyand
Principles,London, DOE.
FREY, H. (1999), Designing the City:
Towards a More Sustainable Urban Form,
London, E & F N Spon.
GANS, H. (1962), The Urban Villagers:
Groupand Class in the Life of Italian-Americans,New York, Free Press.
GEHL, J. (1996), Life BetweenBuildings,
Copenhagen,ArkitektensForlag.
GUVP (GARSTON URBAN VILLAGE
PARTNERSHIP) (1999), GarstonNeighbourhoodStrategy,Liverpool,GUVP.
JACOBS, J. (1961), The Death and Life of

Great American Cities, Harmondsworth,
Penguin.
JENCKS, C. (1988), The Prince,the Architects and New Wave Monarchy, London,
AcademyEditions.
JENKS, M., BURTON, E. and
WILLIAMS, K. (1996), The CompactCity:
A SustainableUrbanForm?,London,E & F N
Spon.
KELBAUGH, D. (1989), The Pedestrian
Pocket Book: A New Suburban Design
Strategy, Princeton, Princeton University
Press.
KRIEGER, A. and LENNERTZ, W.
(1991), Andres Duany and Elizabeth PlaterZyberk: Townsand Town Making Principles,
Cambridge,MA, HarvardUniversityGraduate
School of Design.
KRIER, L. (1998), Architecture:Choiceor
Fate, Windsor,AndreasPapadakis.
LEUNG, H. (1995), 'A new kind of sprawl',
Plan Canada,September,4-5.
LYNCH, K. (1981), Theoryof Good City
Form,Cambridge,MA, MIT Press.
McARTHUR, A. (2000), 'RebuildingSustainable Communities: Assessing Glasgow's
Urban Village Experiment', Town Planning
Review,71, 51-69.
MADANIPOUR, A. (2001), 'How relevant
is "planning by neighbourhoods" today?',
TownPlanningReview,72, 171-91.
RUDLIN, D. and FALK, N. (1999),
Building the Twenty-first Century Home,
Oxford,ButterworthHeinemann.
SOUTHWORTH, M. (1997), 'Walkable
suburbs?An evaluationof neotraditionalcommunities at the urbanedge', Journalof Urban
Design,2, 9-34.
SOUTHWORTH, M. and PARTHASARATHAY, B. (1997), 'The suburban public
realm II: Eurourbanism,new urbanism and
the implication for urban design in the
Americanmetropolis',Journalof the American
PlanningAssociation,63, 28-44.
TAYLOR, N. (1974), The Village in the
City, London, MauriceTemple Smith.
THOMPSON-FAWCETT, M. (1996),
'The urbanist revision of development',
UrbanDesignInternational,1, 301-22.
THOMPSON-FAWCETT, M. (1998a),
'Leon Krier and the organic revival within

urban policy and practice',PlanningPerspectives. 13, 167-94.
THOMPSON-FAWCETT, M. (1998b)5
'Envisioning urban villages: a critique of a
movementandtwo urbantransformations'
(unpublishedPhD thesis),Universityof Oxford.
THOMPSON-FAWCETT, M. (2000),
'The contributionof urbanvillagesto sustainable development'in K. Williams, E. Burton
193
and M. Jenks (eds), Achieving Sustainable
UrbanForm,London, E & F N Soon, 275-87.
UVF/EP (URBAN VILLAGES FORUM/
ENGLISH PARTNERSHIPS) (undated),
Making Places: A Guide to Good Practice in
Undertaking Mixed Development Schemes,
London, UVF/EP.
URBAN TASK FORCE(1999), Towardsan
UrbanRenaissance,London, E & F N Spon.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researchfrom which this paper is derived was kindly
supported by the Economic and Social Research Council
grantno. R 000 22 3284.

From Concept To Completion A Critical Analysis of The Urban Village

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

From Concept To Completion A Critical Analysis of The Urban Village

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

From Concept to Completion: A Critical Analysis of the Urban Village

Author(s): Michael Biddulph, Bridget Franklin and Malcolm Tait

TPR, 74 (2) 2003

MICHAEL BIDDULPH, BRIDGET FRANKLIN AND

A number of developmentconcepts have emerged recently in Britain whose

166 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Fixing the urban village:

168 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

170 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

in which the concept was socially constructed. The interviews sought to

172 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Fig. 1 The locationof UK urbanvillagesidentifiedas a resultof the questionnairesurvey

174 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

For the most part the local planningdocumentationused languagedrawingon

The size of planned

The average density of

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

One of the defining characteristicsof urban villages is said to be their mixed

A wide varietyof housingmixes areproposedin urbanvillages.The provisionof

Reducingcar dependenceand allowingpeople to choose more environmentally

The developmentsare largelyprivatelyfunded, with only four having a greater

Of the 55 schemes received only 13 included design guidelines, development

176 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

Unfixing the concept III: implementing the concept in localities

Fig. 2 Features of the Bordesley urban village (not to scale)

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Fig. 3 Features of the Garston urban village (not to scale)

178 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

Fig. 4 Features of the West Silvertown urban village (not to scale)

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

population.The areawas developedas an urbanvillage followinga competition

In each case study the involvementof regenerationagencieswas the catalystfor

180 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

Applicationof any 'fixed'notion of an urbanvillagewithin the differentcontexts

In an urban village higher-densitydevelopment should provide more people

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Fig. 5 Standardhousingdevelopmentcontradictingurbanvillagedesign ideas in Garston-under-the-Bridge

182 MICHAEL BIDDULPH, BRIDGET FRANKLIN AND MALCOLM TAIT

Fig. 6 Higher-densityhousingdevelopmentin West Silvertown

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Fig. 7 The village entrance sign in Bordesley

184 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

The UVF's emphasison urbandesign encompassesthe view that well-designed

Fig. 8 The Bordesley village centre

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Achieving both horizontal and vertical mixing of uses is regarded as a

Mixing tenuresis associatedwith the provisionof a more balancedcommunity,

186 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

was regarded as useful for Garston-under-the-Bridgewhere existing local

In additionto sustaininga rangeof communityfacilitiesan urbanvillage would

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

Some have suggested(Biddulph,2000) that one of the definingcharacteristicsof

Enhancing social relationships between members of the community and

188 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT

Unfixing the concept IV: life in an urban village

The so-calledlocalisationof life is regardedby promotersof the conceptas one

In all three locations,the workof the regenerationagencieswas fundamentalto

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

according with urban village principles. In each location regeneration plans

190 MICHAELBIDDULPH,BRIDGETFRANKLINAND MALCOLMTAIT