T h e C a s e f o r a n e w H e r t f o r d s h i r e V i l l a g eW E LW Y N H AT F I E L D B O R O U G H C O U N C I L

L O C A L P L A N C O N S U LTAT I O N

2 3 J A N U A RY- 1 9 M A R C H 2 0 1 5

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION: THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

SECTION 1: THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

SECTION 2: THE IDEALISATION OF THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

SECTION 3: PLANNING POLICY AND THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

APPENDIX 1: HERTFORDSHIRE VILLAGES TODAY

APPENDIX 2: ENGLISH MODEL VILLAGES

APPENDIX 3: SCOTTISH MODEL VILLAGE

4

6

13

17

28

35

54

4 5

Although close to London, Hertfordshire still enjoys significant

areas of predominantly rural landscape character. The landscape

of Hertfordshire is naturally friendly, green and gently rolling.

These rural areas are not just characterised by the natural

landscape but also a whole series of villages. In many cases

these are typical of archetypal English villages.

The British village occupies a special place in the heart of the

nation and is a key characteristic of the countryside. A recent

survey conducted by Country Life magazine reported that 80

per cent of respondents still wanted to live in a rural village or

countryside dwelling, whilst only 20 per cent of the population

actually managed to do so. Beauty, fresh air, tranquillity,

cleanliness and friendliness were all cited by Country Life

readers as major draws to the countryside. Popular perception

continue to support the views that rural life offers more space,

less crime and better produce. Within Hertfordshire, one only

has to look at the popularity of such well-loved villages as

Ashwell, Aldbury, Essendon, Kimpton or Much Hadham (to

name but a few).

This rich tradition of English village architecture has often

been created out of a desire to house workers, improve living

conditions and provide development which sits comfortably

within the landscape. This document considers the evolution

INTRODUCTION

and types of village and how they have provided a variety of

different responses to these fundamental aims and objectives.

The 21st Century has brought new pressures on housing

numbers, a fresh debate about green belt and how best to

accommodate new development. In rural areas the housing

crisis can be particularly acute – in 2005 the Office of

National Statistics predicted the rural population to increase

by 16 per cent by 2028, compared to 9 per cent in urban

areas. Due to planning regulation and changing patterns of

commercial development, however, no settlements which are

recognisable as true villages have been built for many years.

Planning policy in England, rather than continuing the rich

tradition of village development, has for nearly 70 years placed

increasing pressure on the village. Many settlements have been

steadily compromised by a lack of structural support, and by

the accretion of poorly considered developments that have

undermined the qualities that make villages special –community,

local identity, human scale, and space.

Is the time therefore right to consider a new village as one of a

number of measured responses to providing adequate housing

supply?

Whitwell

Hertfordshire has a rich tradition of creative town and country

planning including two of the most important garden cities.

Hertfordshire also can also draw upon its experiences of the

New Towns – Stevenage, Hatfield and Hemel Hempstead are

now all mature settlements. In all cases there were lessons to

be learnt but throughout the twentieth century Hertfordshire

consistently led the way with new creative thinking.

The 2008 document entitled ‘ Hertfordshire Guide to Growth

– how should the County Grow?’ published by the University

of Hertfordshire sought to re-ignite this creative spirit and

proposed a variety of alternative scenarios which could deliver

additional growth for the County.

Well planned urban extensions can of course deliver additional

housing and employment for our major settlements. Should,

however we not explore other alternatives? There is a popular

call for a new Garden City within Hertfordshire to remove

pressure from many of our existing towns. Whilst such a

development may, in time, provide an exciting way forward,

should we not consider other alternatives as well? A well

planned satellite village could deliver valuable new housing

whilst satisfying demand for the rural idyll.The reduced scale of

a village compared to that of a new town offers lesser impact

upon the landscape and perhaps critically, allows areas to be

potentially assembled from single ownerships as opposed to

complicated (and speculative) exercises in land assembly from

multiple parties.

In making the case for consideration of new villages this paper

seeks to understand the development of the village in England,

and in doing so to come to terms with the qualities that make

it such a successful, tenacious and attractive settlement type.

Firstly, a brief history of the English village is laid out,

exploring the different types of village in England and how

they have developed. A village will typically fall into one of the

following three categories: the organic village characterised

by incremental growth; the estate village laid out by private

landowners and; the industrial village planned and executed

for a new elite, the wealthy entrepreneur. Current planning

policy in Britain is evaluated with reference to the village. The

reader will observe that the terms ‘English’ and ‘British’ are

used interchangeably in this document. This is because although

the history of villages began in England, and the rural villages

of middle England evoke the most redolent examples of the

village type in this country, examples of village development

in Scotland also played an important role in the history of the

development of the village type.

Finally, one cannot fail to note the variety in terms of in shape

and size of villages. Small villages tend to be less than 750

dwellings and have limited facilities. Villages of 1,000- 3,000

dwellings tend to have greater facilities and oftenare able to

support a primary school.

Whilst the village is held up as the epitome of Englishness and

a timeless retreat from the relentless pressures of modern life,

it must also be recognised as occupying an important position

as an essential part of the character of this country and its

provision of housing.

Gascoyne Cecil Estates makes the case that it is time for policy

makers to reconsider the village model as one of a number of

delivery models which offer answers to the present housing

crisis.

6 7

ESTaTE VillagES: plaNNEd SETTlEmENTS iN ThE 18Th aNd 19Th CENTuriES

The outbreak of the English Civil War (1642-1651), and the

political and socio-economic turmoil that followed, led to

a hiatus in the development of villages across the country.

However, the following century saw prosperity in England (now

unified with Scotland), which in turn led to one of the most

significant series of new, planned settlements across Great

Britain.

The Georgian Period (1714-1830) witnessed a total

reorganisation of the housing system in both England and

Scotland, which saw the disappearance of old farms and

hamlets, the enclosure of land, the emergence of capitalist

farmers and the resettlement of the population in villages, both

organic and planned. Farming across Britain was revolutionised,

which meant that although fewer people lived and worked on

farms, their productivity increased. This would have a significant

knock-on effect on the English village, as landowners created

settlements to house the population no longer required to

work the land.

Landowners were motivated to create planned villages on

their estates for a number of reasons, which were at once

commercial, philanthropic and private in purpose. The stimuli

for the production of planned villages included:

Social responsibility

Planned estate villages such as those at Selworthy in Somerset

(1828) and Englefield in Berkshire (late 19th century) and

were constructed as a means for local landowners to

provide philanthropic support to the working class. During

the nineteenth century charity and philanthropy became

increasingly popular, particularly to alleviate the unpleasant

conditions in which many of the poor lived. Lacking basic

sanitation and crippled by overcrowding, existing housing for

the poor decreased life expectancy, lowered productivity, and

caused widespread misery. Furthermore, without the safety

net of a universal welfare state, retirees and the sick enjoyed

no housing security – a major incentive for the production

of planned estate villages was to cater to this demographic.

The construction of estate villages was not driven solely by

generosity, as the landlord stood to make some return on his

social investment.

Wharram Percy, North Yorkshire (9th century)

SECTION 1:THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

OrigiNS

Although it was once widely believed that England’s first villages

were established by successive waves of Angles and Saxons

in the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries, most historians and

archaeologists now agree that true villages (as opposed to

hamlets or temporary homesteads) were created through a

process of gradual evolution over many centuries following the

Anglo-Saxon arrival, and that true villages did not become a

common feature of the rural landscape until the eleventh and

twelfth centuries.

Throughout the Middle Ages rural settlement patterns were

unstable, which tended to prevent widespread investment in

large, permanent settlements. Events such as flooding, famine,

pestilence or military destruction, such as the catastrophic

bubonic plague epidemic between 1348-50, caused villages to

move, or even disappear. A fresh wave of village depopulation

and desertion followed between c.1450-1550, when large-scale

enclosures for commercial sheep and cattle farming and the

land-grab that followed the Dissolution of the Monasteries saw

the destruction of between 500-1,000 villages and hamlets.

The deserted village of Wharram Percy, which survives only

through a ruined church and marks in surrounding fields,

is typical of the medieval village in England. First settled in

prehistoric times, Wharram Percy flourished between the 12th

and the 14th centuries, before final abandonment in about

1500 following the introduction of sheep farming by the local

landowner. The outlines of 30 medieval houses are preserved, as

are marks that indicate two water mills and a pair of Norman

manor houses.

The modern town of Stony Stratford in Buckinghamshire, today

a busy, picturesque market town, is a medieval success story.

Although absent from the Domesday Book (1085/87), the site

of Stony Stratford had been occupied under Roman Britain.

The village clearly grew in the twelfth century, for in 1194

Stony Stratford was granted a market charter and had become

a market town, boasting two churches, a market square and a

village green.

ThE rural rEVOluTiON: OrgaNiC VillagE dEVElOpmENT

At around the middle of the sixteenth century an era of rural

population growth and extensive rebuilding of villages began,

lasting until the military and political turmoil brought by the

English Civil War (1642-1651). Tudor and Elizabethan villages

were larger and more complex than ever before, and for the

first time, they were built to last. Featuring a rich variety of

regional and local building styles, the entire physical structure of

villages – no longer just the church, the manor house and the

tithe barn – became permanent features of the rural landscape.

The village developed organically in response to location, site

conditions, aspect, slope, and perhaps most importantly of

all, vernacular materials, such as the honey-colour limestone

buildings of Cotswold villages like Stow-on-the-Wold and

Lower Slaughter, or the granite and slate of the traditional

Cornish dwellings found in Mevagissey

and Polperro. It was during this long golden age of vernacular

craftsmanship, or ‘rural revolution’,

with its widespread rebuilding of cottages and yeomen’s

farmsteads, growth of squatter settlements and restyling of

manor houses, that a definite starting point in the history of

village England (in terms of what can be seen in the landscape

today) can be found. It was at this point that the concept of the

English village – a rural idyll laden with nostalgia and tradition –

truly emerged.

The organic village type is the most prevalent across the UK.

As one might expect, this type demonstrates the steady growth

of a settlement over the centuries, not governed by masterplan

or estate manager. This is not to say that organic villages lack

organisation of any kind. Indeed, many of the most beautiful

and highly regarded villages in England are built around the

village green, or the length of a high street (See Case Study 1:

Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire).

8 9

These model villages were often built in vernacular styles, using

traditional materials, just as the older, ‘organic’, cottages had

been. In many cases, a Georgian admiration for the picturesque

saw the construction of idealised, landscaped cottages.

Selworthy, built near Minehead in Somerset in 1823 by local

landowner Sir Thomas Acland, is a famous example of this

tendency towards the picturesque.

iNduSTry: plaNNEd VillagES ON aN iNduSTrial SCalE

By the mid-nineteenth century the concept of planned new

settlements was firmly established and well practiced. To keep

up with the country’s industrial growth new model villages

were conceived on a larger scale and with a new purpose, the

housing of factory workers. The villages were to be catalysts for

improving both the economy and the wellbeing of the people.

These motives remained strong in the late nineteenth century.

There are three classic examples of philanthropic, planned

towns that date from the later nineteenth century in the UK:

Saltaire, Bournville and Port Sunlight.

This was the epoch of rich enlightened industrialists,

proprietors and philanthropists who, inspired by social doctrine,

wished to satisfy their workers’ needs, taking care of their lives

inside and outside the factory. The purpose was to provide all

the workers with a home, complete with a vegetable garden,

and to furnish all the services necessary to their life: a church,

a school, a hospital, a community centre, a theatre, public baths

and others. And with better living conditions it was hoped

that factory efficiency would also increase. Today the villages

are considered highly pleasant and popular places to live,

demonstrating their enduring success (even if the residents are

no longer solely factory workers).

Saltaire, near Bradford

This principle of philanthropic intention with capitalist return

came to be known as ‘five per cent philanthropy’. In addition,

many landowners also adopted a paternalistic attitude to the

development of model villages, and could impose their own

values, such as teetotalism, upon their tenants.

Commercial gain

With the reorganisation of farming in England into a much

more efficient industry, landowners recognised that the people

who formerly worked the land would need new occupation.

Thus, when they considered building a new village, landowners

were aware that certain advantages could accrue – a village

could provide a market for selling surplus produce, and it could

generate employment for the tenants who might otherwise

have found themselves thrown out of a district due to

enclosure and the abandonment of joint tenancies. It was also

widely recognised that happier, healthier workers were likely to

be more productive. Given that local landowner would employ

the majority of those housed in estate villages, such villages

provided a mutually beneficent situation for both tenant and

landlord.

Reputation and aesthetic concern

The development of an estate was symbolic of the power

of a wealthy landowner to influence the landscape they

owned, shaping the growth of rural settlement through their

involvement in the development of agricultural England. These

newly constructed villages were often built to uniform designs,

and made from locally sourced materials. They were often

arranged in symmetrical patterns with distinctive planned

landscaping, in contrast to the majority of rural settlements

being the product of organic development.

In some cases the development of planned villages was caused

by the popularity of landscaped parkland, of the sort designed

by Capability Brown. The planned village of Milton Abbas, for

example, was laid out by Brown for the 1st Earl of Dorchester

in 1780 to rehouse those whose homes had been demolished

to make way for new sweeping hills, lakes and groves.

SCOTTiSh ESTaTE VillagES

The eighteenth-century Scottish estate villages were developed

in response to and to assist a revolution in the economy of the

estate and of the nation – they were expected to provide a

completely new framework for human life in the countryside.

Each village was planned with social, economic and architectural

concerns firmly in mind, with the aesthetic appearance of the

village considered street-by-street and house-to-house. In

Scotland, houses were built from vernacular materials (free-

stone, with mostly tiled or slated roofs) and to two or three

storeys.

Many of the villages had notable architects, such as William

Adams at Inveraray (1772-1800) and Thomas Telford at Ullapool

(1788). In the simplest case, the basic plan was of two rows

of houses facing each other across a wide road or a green,

or in a cross formation with a green or marketplace where

they met (much like many ‘organic’ villages had developed).

Smaller parallel streets branched off the principal streets to

form a grid. The houses frequently opened directly onto the

pavement to avoid the occupants leaving their rubbish in front

of the house, though gardens were provided at the rear. The

aesthetic appearance of the new village would be complimented

by the delivery of social and community amenities, such as the

market place or green. A common provision was that of an

inn. Landowners might also provide a church, a courthouse or

a school (See Case Studies 2 and 3: Inveraray, Argyll and Port

Ellen, Islay).

ENgliSh ESTaTE VillagES

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries many English

landowners completely rebuilt many villages on their estates,

driven by social responsibility and commercial awareness, as

well as their own needs. Some wanted to re-site villages outside

a newly landscaped park (a notable example being Milton

Abbas, created by the 1st Earl of Dorchester in 1780), and in

other cases villages were created with a desire to improve the

local setting and conditions for tenants (such as at Englefield,

Berkshire, Selworthy, Somerset, Snelston, Derbyshire and Old

Warden, Bedfordshire).

10 11

Early 20Th-CENTury plaNNEd VillagES

The construction of new towns and villages continued into the

20th century, with garden villages or suburbs being built alongside

the large communities at Letchworth and Welwyn Garden Cities.

Inspired by the precedent set by model villages such as Port

Sunlight (the first effective large-scale integration of 19th-century

social reform with picturesque town design), and the much-

vaunted precedent of Hampstead Garden Suburb (1907), estates

such as Whiteley Village, Surrey, or Garden Village, Kingston-Upon-

Hull, were laid out along thorough principles of both physical and

social planning.

Hampstead unleashed what might be described as a golden

age for English garden village design, inspiring developers,

including property owners, enlightened capitalists, aristocratic

landowners and public agencies such as the London County

Council to propose villages and suburbs intended to cater to

the needs of both the middle and working classes.

These settlements were characterised by low development

densities, high-quality materials and good design, intended to

counter the perceived haphazard and unplanned development

that was becoming increasingly common across the country.

Whiteley Village, for example, offered a highly formalised

solution, providing accommodation for over 300 residents in a

23-acre, octagonal village.

The construction of new planned settlements in the early 20th

century was widespread and successful. In Paradise Planned – The

garden suburb and the modern city (2013), Robert Stern, David

Fishman and Jacob Tilove document 55 garden suburbs, villages

and estates built in Great Britain and Ireland between 1900 and

1940. Few have been built since. Thus during this period the

concept of a viable stand-alone village was reliably confirmed.

William Ratcliffe, Hampstead Garden Suburb from Willifield Way, c. 1914Bournville promotional poster

Port Sunlight, the Wirral

12 13

The village has been an essential part of rural life in England

for roughly 500 years. In addition to its functional qualities,

village life has become engendered with an almost mythic

status within the cultural imagination of Great Britain. This

has happened through a centuries-long ideological process,

through which an image of the English village has become

ingrained with national identity as an antidote or escape from

the realities of the industrial, and post-industrial, environment.

The idealisation of the English village is part and parcel of

a general affection amongst the population for all things

rural, encouraged by a nostalgic longing for an Arcadian

past, in which countryside communities were at one with

the landscape and its people. This tendency to idealise the

countryside has its roots in the European pastoral tradition,

stretching back over many centuries and expressed in poems,

literature and art. The pastoral became extremely popular

with the blossoming of the English Romantic movement in the

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which formed many of

the current popular ideas about landscape.

Since the Industrial Revolution, in particular, the working

countryside has had a picturesque filter imposed upon it.

The immensely popular landscape paintings of artists such as

John Constable and Humphry Repton powerfully influenced

their viewers, who often shaped the landscape in imitation of

the artists’ visions. Rejecting the realities of industrialisation

and the unfavourable conditions of urban life, landscape

painters nurtured an aesthetic taste for nature, just as William

Wordsworth was writing his lyrical ballads, the Brontës were

setting their novels on the moors of West Yorkshire, and Jane

Austen was describing the country parklands and houses of

southern England. Come George Eliot’s Silas Marner (1861) or

Middlemarch (1874), the rural village community was deeply

instilled in the nation’s cultural consciousness at a time when

the Industrial Revolution was transforming Britain at a greater

and more invasive rate. These authors’ works have sold in

their millions, reflecting the nation’s preferred view of history

– they are usually set in the countryside, in stately homes or

quaint villages. The rural ideal is intimately tied to a feeling for

history, to an antipathy towards the urban, and to the idea of

English nationhood.

The cultural and social criticism of the great Victorian

polymaths, such as Matthew Arnold, John Ruskin and William

Morris, further inculcated the ideal of the English village in the

British cultural imagination. They ascribed to the Industrial

Revolution the responsibility for the social and cultural woes

of contemporary life, and directly or indirectly lauded the

rural village as a natural and unspoilt antidote to the cultural

malaise they perceived. Arnold’s poetry, for example, prefers

the peace and permanence of natural scenery in contrast with

the ceaseless change of human things. His descriptions are

often picturesque, and marked by striking natural similes.

In 1871, Ruskin founded the Guild of St George, a

communitarian venture with the aim to acquire land and

through labour, wind and water power, to bring it into useful

production – Ruskin wished to show that contemporary

life could still be enjoyed in the countryside, with land being

farmed traditionally. Six years previously, in Sesame and Lilies

(1865), Ruskin had even called for what amounted to the

Garden City, where new houses, in groups of limited extent

within walls, would combine elements of the town and

country.

William Morris, the most ardently political of the three, was a

key figure (alongside Ruskin) in the development of the Arts

and Crafts Movement. The Movement stood for traditional

craftsmanship, and advocated economic and social reform in

reaction to industrialisation and the deleterious influence they

perceived in urban living.

Contemporary historians tend to agree that rapid

modernisation and myths about that national past go hand

in hand. They tend to assume that both elites and the public

tend to turn to stories about an essential national character

enduring through the ages in order to warrant the rapid

political, social and economic changes of the nineteenth century.

SECTION 2:THE IDEALISATION OF THE ENGLISH VILLAGE

laTE 20Th-CENTury plaNNEd VillagES

In the last 20 years the UK has witnessed new approached to

town expansion, inspired by the New Urbanism movement,

which has reflected careful planning, large-scale public

consultation and sensitivity to environmental and community

issues. However, there has been no parallel resurgence in

the development of planned villages, arguably as a result of

restrictive planning policy and an atmosphere of cultural

resistance inspired by the legacy of Greenfield development in

the previous decades.

Today, the motivation for the construction of planned villages

is not unsanitary conditions, massive overcrowding or the

lack of a welfare state. Rather, planned villages are now put

forward as an alternative to the undersupply of housing across

the country, which for decades has steadily worsened before

reaching its current crisis point. A problem just acute as those

that motivated the creation of planned villages in years passed,

the lack of housing in England has dramatically altered the

social and economic landscape of the country and created an

imbalance in the housing market of comparable proportions

to those that drove the construction of planned villages in the

past.

It is not within the capability of the open market to deliver

well-made villages comparable to the high quality of the estate

settlements of generations gone. Private landowners and

leaders of industry have historically created planned villages

of calibre, such as those described in the case studies laid out

in this report, and this private patronage will be looked upon

to provide the next generation of model villages. Examples

of failed settlements, such as New Ash Green, demonstrate

the underperformance of public/private partnerships in the

creation of new planned settlements (See Case Studies 14–15).

Masterplan drawing for Seaside, Florida (1981)

14 15

GWR Poster - Totnes (c.1930)

‘out of the way corner’, as he described Kelmscott, where

‘people built Gothic till the beginning or middle of last century’.

Although the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement, or the

works of Ruskin and Arnold, only truly penetrated the educated

classes, it was during World War One that the romanticised

virtues of rural England and its villages were truly confirmed

as a metaphor for national identity. Not only did these virtues

continue to provide a perfect antidote for the ugliness and

dehumanisation of urban industrialism, they also served as a

psychological comfort against class struggle and military threat.

During the first half of the twentieth century, the idealised

image of the countryside was further democratised through

the growing, and cheapening, output of the publishing business.

Travel books about England were extremely popular, and they

rose in parallel with a number of new organisations, including

As a result of the agricultural depression and a renewed burst

of endogenous growth in the towns, Britain as a whole had by

1900 reached its present-day level of around 80 per cent of

the population living in urban areas, a level that even Germany

reached only in the 1960s. By this point, the urban condition

was accepted as permanent and normal.

Among the romantic socialist followers of Morris and the Arts

and Crafts Movement, the countryside acquired a talismanic

significance as everything that contemporary England was

not, but yet might be. This was, of course, a false dichotomy,

as the real countryside of the present – depopulated, subject

to speculative development and increasingly standardised into

large, homogenous tracts – was not in fact as idyllic as might be

supposed. Morris’s ideal was of the old English countryside of

the fifteenth century, and it is significant that he had to retreat

to what was then a remote part of Oxfordshire to find it – an

John Constable, Dedham Mill, 1820

Sir Humphry Repton’s plan for Stoneleigh Abbey

16 17

The under-provision of housing has been a problem endemic in

England for decades. Over the next 20 years, to keep pace with

increasing housing need, 240,000 new homes will need to be

built in England each year, plus another 60,000 a year to address

the backlog that has steadily accrued. In reality, only a third of

this is being delivered. Between 1997 and 2007, an average of

just 148,000 new homes were provided each year – in no year

did it come close to 200,000 – and in 2014 only 118,000 were

built. To meet demand, upwards of a million more homes will

need to be delivered over the next decade beyond what recent

delivery rates have achieved in order to meet the needs of the

next generation.

But planning policy and its application has failed to provide the

circumstances in which the housing industry can thrive. The

results have been dramatic, with an inflated housing market

bound by under provision. Between 1999/00 and 2007/08 there

was an explosion in house prices (173 per cent) and mortgage

credit (182 per cent) – yet housing completions in the private

sector increased by less than 17 per cent (124,470 to 145,450).

Not only that, but the overall floor space in new builds shrank

to the third lowest in the 28 EU countries, better only than

Romania and Italy. Given this, the concept of the village is never

contemplated.

SECTION 3:PLANNING POLICY AND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

Urban extensions, Garden Cities and New Towns have propagated. Never the village.

the Council for the Protection of Rural England (1926), the

Ramblers’ Association (1935) and the Youth Hotel Association,

which, along with older groups such as the National Trust

(1895), stimulated the public’s interest in preserving rural

villages and the surrounding countryside.

An article published in The Spectator on 20 July 1912 perfectly

illustrates the Arcadian qualities the English village was ascribed.

Entitled ‘In Quest of an English Village’, the article advocated a

scheme ‘for acquiring an unspoilt English village, which should

be preserved in its original state as a standing record of the

rapidly passing beauty of the countryside’. It was proposed that

the National Trust acquire ‘some beautiful old English village’,

‘not yet spoiled by the addition of the typical modern jerry-

built cottage… and its entire lack of artistic design’. The article,

abundant with elegiac and nostalgic language, stated:

‘Our English Villages, with their supreme sense of peace

and homeliness, with their gardens glowing from crocuses

of March to the cluster-roses and the lilies midsummer,

with their roofs set among apple-blossom and

immemorial elms, are part of our best national heritage.

It is our duty to keep such a heritage for those that come

after us, and to hand it on untouched and unspoilt.’

The vast, predominantly middle-class appetite for ‘discovering’

and learning about this ‘real’ England was fed by a plethora of

rural literature, landscape painting, radio broadcasts and films

on countryside life, such as the The Spectator article quoted

at length above. In all of this, the economic and social realities

– long-term agricultural depression, the persistent decline

of centuries-old village crafts and the seemingly unstoppable

depopulation of countless villages – was given scant attention.

This idealisation of the countryside went largely unchallenged

in the later twentieth century. A major and early proponent

was Thomas Sharp, a key individual in town planning in the

mid-twentieth century. He was a key figure in defining thinking

about the forms that town and countryside should take, in

reconciling existing and valued character with modernity,

and in making these arguments accessible through a series of

polemical books. ‘The English village’, he wrote in The Anatomy

of a Village (1946), ‘has long occupied a central place in the

affections and pride of our own people, countrymen and

townsmen alike. It has been accepted too… as a characteristic

and attractive product of the English way of life’. Sharp

respected the historic way of life encapsulated by the ideal of

the English village, but believed that the village should be open

to change and development:

‘A study of the principles of design, whether they were

conscious or unconscious, which have given our English

villages their beauty, their charm and their character,

may elucidate principles that will be useful in our new

building’.

Presaging the advent of design codes and planning principles

defined by vernacular architecture, Sharp firmly believed that

the rural English village could provide a model for solving the

problems faced by housing and development in mid-twentieth-

century England.

18 19

hOw haS plaNNiNg pOliCy aNd praCTiCE halTEd ThE dEVElOpmENT Of ThE ENgliSh VillagE?Many of the current housing and planning problems in

rural England are rooted in the planning policy introduced

incrementally throughout the twentieth century, which failed

to address problems specific to villages and rural settlements

in favour of the treatment of planning in the town or the city.

The former were seen to be part of the agricultural landscape,

which was both protected from development to prevent

further intrusion into the countryside, and heavily supported

economically by agricultural subsidies. The result was the

beginning of a rural policy of urban containment, with growth

restricted mainly to small council housing estates on the edge of

the village. New Towns were tasked with housing the bulk of the

new population.

Pre-New Towns programme - how was development restricted?

The interwar period witnessed the highest ever rate of

construction of homes in Britain, the majority of which was

uncontrolled and under-regulated development on green field

sites within striking distance of major towns and cities across

the country. With the rise of the motorcar transport was cheap,

and decades of agricultural depression had resulted in a surplus

of inexpensive farmland ripe for development. These conditions

made for ready and rapid expansion around established villages,

towns and cities.

The majority of this glut in development took place outside

of any robust control by planning legislation, as weak planning

policies were unable to prevent unstructured growth. For

example, the first town and country planning policy, the 1909

House and Town Planning Act, permitted (but did not require)

local authorities to prepare plans for new suburban areas;

built-up areas and open country were both excluded. Later, the

1919 Housing, Town Planning, etc Act compelled towns with a

population over 20,000 to prepare suburban planning schemes

before 1st January 1926, although few of these schemes actually

became operative. Subsequent Acts slowly granted more powers

to planning authorities, but it was 1932 before the Town and

Country Planning Act 1932 extended planning powers to almost

all built-up and undeveloped urban and rural land (although rural

interests protested that ‘the Act regarded the countryside as a

mere appendage of the town’).

The last major pre-war planning measure was the Restriction

of Ribbon Development Act 1935. Designed to prevent the

further sprawl of towns and cities across the countryside, the

Act legislated against linear, incremental development alongside

classified roads at the edges of settlements. Such attenuated

building had been one of the most pronounced, and in many ways

undesirable, features of construction in Britain after 1918. By

spreading development out along road frontages, not having to

build new roads or drains, the scale of impact per new dwelling

on local services was maximised. The provision of public services

to this linear form was inefficient, and markedly more expensive

than providing services, including schools and public health, to

more concentrated forms of development.

However, the Act was difficult to enforce, and local authorities

had not been stringent in their application of its controls. Such

feeble policy meant that any efforts by central government to

control planning and development across Great Britain ultimately

ended in failure. At the end of 1941, only a fraction of the land

in Great Britain was covered by planning schemes, and it was

possible for the Minister of Town and Country Planning to

state, in 1947, that ‘more damage has been done, both to our

towns and to the countryside, through sporadic and ribbon

development since 1909, the date of the first Town and Country

Planning Act, than in any period preceding it’.

New Towns Act 1946

Inspired in part by the failures of planning policy and the negative

impact it had had across England, and also stimulated by the ever-

growing housing requirements in England (accentuated by the

widespread destruction felt throughout the Second World War),

the New Towns Act 1946 allowed the government to designate,

acquire and develop sites for the construction of new towns.

On 19th October 1945, fresh from Labour’s convincing election

victory, Town and Country Planning Minister Lewis Silkin

appointed a New Towns Committee. Its purpose was to:

‘…consider the general questions of the establishment,

development, organisation and administration that will arise

in the promotion of New Towns in furtherance of a policy of

planned decentralisation from congested urban areas; and in

accordance therewith to suggest guiding principles on which

such Towns should be established and developed as self-

contained and balanced communities for working and living’.

hOw did ThiS happEN?

Why is it that an apparently free market economy has

constrained housing supply? Why are homes not being built

to meet demand and quality, and why is price not improved

through competition?

In essence, the current UK planning system is based on the

1947 Town and Country Planning Act. The 1947 Act was

created in response to the numerous challenges faced in

England post-World War Two – inequality, a failing welfare

state, unemployment, environmental concern, agricultural

demands and the need for social improvement.

One of the most tangible results of this policy was the

introduction of greenbelts into local town plans. The

purpose of the greenbelt was to curtail urban development

and to maintain open space around cities and towns in

which agriculture, forestry and outdoor leisure could

prevail. However, while preserving open space, the current

greenbelt policy has drawn some criticism in recent years.

The policy has been attacked as too rigid in the face of new

urban and environmental challenges. In particular, it has been

claimed that areas of green belt can be of unremarkable

environmental quality, and may not be well managed nor

provide the recreational opportunities originally envisaged.

However, the Green Belt has contained unrestricted sprawl

and led to the regulation of many urban areas.

In 1947, the Minister of Town and Country Planning Lewis Silkin

stated that the purpose of town and country planning was

‘to secure a proper balance between the competing demands

for land, so that all the land of the country is used in the best

interests of the whole people’. Arguably, this noble goal requires

a balance, and this balance has had a dramatic impact on the

nature, and sustainability, of the English village.

An example of ribbon development, the antithesis of good rural planning.

20 21

cooperation (which failed) and the very best intentions failed

to provide an exemplary new village in the second half of the

twentieth century; although New Ash Green grew to become

an affluent and successful community, it did so as a commuter

town, not as a vibrant and sustainable village.

Although no new towns have been formally designated since

1970, several new towns (in the literal sense) have been built

on green field sites. Most notably perhaps at Cambourne in

southwest Cambridgeshire gained planning approval in the

context of widespread rejection similar schemes and a system

which preferred to direct private development towards the

peripheral expansion of existing towns and settlements. This

was achieved through lengthy negotiation and careful planning,

as well as a realistic attitude by the planning authorities to

the need to provide additional housing in Cambridgeshire,

and a slight thaw in the institutional opposition to green field

development that had thwarted previous similar proposals.

In the 1980s, despite an increase in political and cultural

opposition to allocations of undeveloped land for housing,

Britain’s biggest house builders formed a coalition with the

hope of launching a privately initiated programme of ‘new

country towns’. Named Consortium Developments Ltd (CDL),

the group was established in 1983, intending to develop up

to 15 new towns in the prosperous region around London,

where housing demand was high but local planning was very

restrictive of developers. Each town would comprise around

5,000 dwellings, with social and physical infrastructure largely

provided by CDL. The concept was novel in twentieth century

Britain, where new settlements had usually been developed

by philanthropic companies or by government agencies. CDL

set about making ambitious planning applications across the

country with the intention of changing planning policy and

opening up the opportunity for the construction of new

settlements. Although the applications were unsuccessful,

CDL did create a policy opening for private sector new town

building. In 1988, the Department for the Environment issued a

policy statement declaring that

‘in a few cases it may be practicable to consider making

provision for new housing in the form of new settlements.

These might range in scale from moderate sized townships to

small villages…’

The principle of private new settlements was seized most

energetically in Cambridgeshire, where rapid population and

employment growth coupled with rigid planning prohibition

around Cambridge had resulted in a severe housing shortage.

So much so that in 1988, a County Structure Plan proposed

Shopping precinct, New Ash Green

In order to create New Towns, industry and population

from congested areas would be systematically decamped to

sites at least 25 miles from the centre of London, or ten or

fifteen miles from the centre of other cities. This distance was

intended to ensure that the towns would be self-contained,

yet near enough to existing population centres to encourage

people to move. Maximum population was set between

30,000 and 60,000, and a protective greenbelt of agricultural

land would surround each town. The goal was for a balanced

community enjoying the latest architectural and engineering

standards of layout, landscaping, communications, industry,

shops and social housing. The first New Town Designation

Order, for Stevenage, was issued on 11th November 1946; by

December 1949 eight New Towns had been designated.

However, the planned post-war new towns were unable to

contain the population growth of the 1950s and 1960s, and as

a result many baby-boomers moved to live in smaller towns

and villages beyond London’s greenbelt (and elsewhere), often

commuting back to their urban employment by car or by train.

Because of the strength and popularity of the greenbelt policy

and the protection it afforded, and until 1970 (when the last

New Town, Central Lancashire, was designated) New Towns

remained the primary solution to the country’s housing needs

and the English village was overlooked as a result. After 1970,

with demand for housing continuing and green belts continuing

to confine development around existing settlements, urban

infill and the reuse of brownfield sites became the development

methods of choice. At around this point the British village

became a battleground between planning policy and market

pressures. House prices surged as demand outstripped supply

and growth was suppressed by planning authorities keen to

prevent urban sprawl.

Returning to Silkin, their point was to protect areas in attempt

to maintain a balance. Green Belts restricted development

around towns and cities, requiring regeneration and New Towns

increase the supply through designation, which maintained

the supply of housing.Despite the government’s emphasis

on the construction of New Towns between 1945 and 1970,

some attempts were undertaken to create new communities

at smaller settlements, to varied success. At Ash, for example,

on the North Downs in Kent, it was proposed to build a new

village on land that had been designated for the Green Belt.

There was considerable opposition to the scheme, called New

Ash Green, and planning permission was only granted following

a public enquiry in 1964.

New Ash Green was to consist of just 2,000 new houses built

on 190 acres of green field land by a partnership between

private developers and the Greater London Council (GLC).

The intent was to build a range of houses, a quarter of which

would be occupied by GLC tenants. All houses were to back

onto common land and pedestrian pathways and roads, in

keeping with New Town practice, were to be kept apart. Offices,

studios, shops and light industry were to generate employment,

and a community centre, library, church and school were to be

created to encourage community spirit.

In the event, the GLC withdrew and the scheme was not

completed in its original form – the size and density of the

development was increased, and less attention was given to

design or the provision of public space. The development

of New Ash Green demonstrates how even extraordinary

circumstances (a public enquiry), plans for public/private

C. Willams-Ellis, England and the Octopus, 1928. A savage manifesto against market-forced building and

architecture.

22 23

and recommendations for future best practice), development

in the countryside has for the most part been highly managed,

with emphasis placed on protecting valued landscape and

environmental features. This has not prevented all development

(as the 1980s relaxation of planning rules, which allowed for

a great deal of modest development in many communities,

demonstrated), but it has significantly limited it, especially in

smaller rural villages and hamlets. Although there is strong

policy to prevent development in rural communities, there has

been very little produced to offer structured guidance to good

development in the countryside.

A pertinent example is the current preference for new

development to Brownfield land has had an adverse effect

on rural areas. In 1999 Urban Task Force, a group founded

by Richard Rogers Partnership to provide guidance for development in England, published a report promoting quality

design, brownfield development and higher densities. This

led to a new target being set requiring 60 per cent of new

development to be on Brownfield sites, meaning that local

authorities had to focus on opportunities for redevelopment

that entailed regenerating areas that had formerly been settled.

It also meant that the green belt and open space were more

protected, helping to restrict urban sprawl. The nature of UK

planning policy is that is is centralised and Brownfield policy

must apply to all areas.

Although it is logical to seek to develop Brownfield sites in

large towns and cities, there are fewer Brownfield sites available

for construction in rural areas, which automatically prejudices

against their development.

Narrow approach to sustainability

In March 2012, the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition

government introduced some of the latest reforms to the

UK planning system. Then-Minister for Planning Greg Clark

reiterated reform priorities from 2004 when he stated that ‘the

purpose of planning [was] the help achieve

sustainable development’. He also reflected Lewis Silkin’s ideals

when he stated that ‘it is about positive growth – making

economic, environmental and social progress for this and

future generations’. Such environmental concerns are laudable

and should remain central to new development. However, the

current methods have implications for the English village.

As the 2008 Taylor Review of Rural Economy and Affordable Housing

noted, many small rural settlements that lack certain services

are written off as unsustainable. This is usually attributed to

Sequential development at Basildon, Essex

that the local demand for 18,000 houses could best be met

by a pair of new towns located somewhere to the north of

the city. Although this did not occur, the county’s receptive

attitude to the creation of new settlements in Cambridgeshire

eventually led, after five years of wrangling, to the construction

of Cambourne.

In September 1992, a much-revised application for Monkfield

Park Village (later to be renamed Cambourne) was submitted.

On 8 December 1993, outline planning consent was granted.

A Master Plan and Design Guide by Terry Farrell and Partners

was approved in 1996, and work started on site in June 1998,

led by a developer consortium comprising Bovis, Bryant and

George Wimpey.

The 1994 planning permission allowed for the creation of a

‘new settlement comprising up to 3,000 dwellings and 10

per cent reserve; local centre comprising shops, community

facilities, public houses, two primary schools, business park,

public open space, landscaping and recreational uses; drainage

infrastructure; highways infrastructure including dualling of the

A45 on the site frontage, the Caxton By-pass and formation

of site access; associated and ancillary development’, on the

requisite that a Master Plan was submitted and approved by the

Local Planning Authority.

Central to the Cambourne appeal was its promise to be an

idyllic modern village, where families could get the best of both

worlds – a place in the country with urban amenities. This

claim recycled the promise of the Garden City movement, and

was a persuasive component of the planning application. The

consensus is that much of the masterplan has been achieved.

Cambourne is not, however, either in terms of size or character,

a village. Nor is it a small town. It is in fact a hybrid, an ‘exurb’,

a large housing estate with some of the character of a village

and some of the amenities of a town. At Cambourne, the built

environment is not representative of a village’s architecture

or density and some would argue that the settlement feels

disconnected from other local villages and towns. However,

it can be argued that Cambourne, offers some lessons and

perhaps the position adopted by the Department of the

Environment in 1988 should be re-considered in the context of

the current Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan process.

hOw iS plaNNiNg pOliCy failiNg ThE VillagE, aNd whaT CaN bE dONE TO addrESS iT?Lack of specific, detailed policy for rural development

Since the 1942 Scott Report (a lengthy review of the complex

changes felt by agricultural society in rural England, and plans

Cambourne, Cambridgeshire

24 25

solve the housing crisis. The report argued that the local planning

system, which bases most new development on building around

existing communities, is failing. In response, Policy Exchange

proposed that each of the 353 councils in England should build

one garden village of 3,000 homes. This would provide more

than 1 million new homes, and offer an alternative to edge-of-

town development, which ‘ramps up local opposition to new

development and makes it ever more politically toxic for local

authorities and politicians’.

The report proposed the revision of the New Towns Act (1946)

to give local authorities the Act’s powers to designate new

garden villages, typically consisting of up to 3,000 homes, as part

of their local plans. The villages would be managed by locally led

delivery agents, which would be charged with masterplanning

and the setting of design quality standards, and would ensure a

mix of housing provision in the new settlement.

Long term planning, with awareness that growth and change

is inevitable, is an essential requisite for good practice in the

development of villages. Lessons from history have shown that

many of the most-loved English villages are the product of

planned settlements in open countryside, and yet policy makers

and popular opinion is almost universally opposed to such

development today. Those seeking to valiantly protect the ‘green

and pleasant land’ of England’s rural history fail to realise that

this image of the English village is nothing more than a false idol.

A new, mature and reasoned approach to English village planning

must become mainstream, rather than radical. The current

system is failing, and as a country we stand to lose both the

ideal, and the reality, of rural village life.

As seen in Appendix 1 Hertfordshire has some excellent

examples of the English village. It is also acknowledged that

due to the presence of the Green Belt a solution to meet the

housing target in Wewlyn Hatfield is more challenging. For this

reason it is proposed that alternative solutions for development

are explored including the provision of new satellite villages as

envisaged at the Hertfordshire charrette.

concerns that distributed rural communities will require the use

of more resources than larger developments, for the provision

of infrastructure and services, and for the increased car-use that

results from rural living. There is a widespread assumption that

because smaller rural communities may have little or no services,

shops, or public transport of their own they are fundamentally

unstable – and therefore not suitable for development on the

grounds of an implied greater need to commute and travel by

car to access services and employment. However, the Taylor

Review argued persuasively that planning policy should consider

issues of sustainability in a balanced and long-term way. The

impact planning could make in creating a sustainable village

should be central to the planning process, rather than the

current circumstances in many of the villages in England.

Since the post-war period, although recent government

has claimed they are acting in the interests of sustainable

development (influenced by the 1947 Town and Country

Planning Act), the purpose of planning has moved in favour

of facilitating economic growth, often to the detriment of

environmental and social considerations.

OpTiONS fOr bETTEr VillagE dEVElOpmENT

It can be argued that the future of the English village is under

threat. Planning policy presently fails to adequately support the

sympathetic development of existing villages and it has similarly

prevented the growth of truly new independent settlements

in rural England, halting a trend that has been prevalent across

the United Kingdom for centuries. Much of current policy and

opposition to development is predicated on the assumption

that the quality of many modern developments fails to meet

people’s expectations. New development, does not however

have to be bad and The English village could continue to

flourish if rural policies are developed sensitively to address

local circumstances.

In 2008, the University of Hertfordshire hosted a ‘

Hertfordshire Charrette’. The Charrette provided a chance for

a diverse group of residents and professionals to convene and

discuss the challenges faced by the County. Participants were

offered the opportunity to work directly with a design team in

developing sustainable growth strategies for Hertfordshire. This

exercise produced six growth scenarios by which the County

might accommodate growth, critiqued existing settlements and

offered opportunities for typical village and hamlet extensions.

One such scenario studied during the charrette process was

the opportunity to create new satellite villages. These villages,

it was proposed, should be separated from existing urban

settlements by enforceable ‘green wedges’ of a size small

enough to be willingly walked or cycled. These ‘wedges’ would

serve to preserve nearby houses views, prevent sprawl and

allow access to open spaces by allowing for a green corridor

between new settlements and the old.

As ever, public transport was identified as playing an important

role. The satellite villages must be appropriately served and

should feature the amenities ordinarily required by residents on

a daily basis; shops, offices and community gathering spaces be

that a pub or sports facility. The most effective satellite villages

would be those designed to connect to the thoroughfare

networks of existing towns with direct routes between the

new and old centres for pedestrians, cyclists and buses.

Gascoyne Cecil Estates strongly concurs with many of the

outcomes from the Hertfordshire Charrette and have offered

a variety of solutions to the question of new housing and

development within their formal representations to the

Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan. Rather than favouring any one

scenario however, Gascoyne Cecil Estates believe that a

balanced response will be required in order to address present

development pressures. Put simply it is not believed that there

is a single panacea to future growth. Development should

thus be carefully planned and achieved through a variety of

appropriate delivery models.

Stimulated by the country’s housing crisis, some options for

better village development are now being explored, and indeed

are gaining traction. In February 2015, the think tank Policy

Exchange published Garden Villages - empowering localism to

Symondshyde proposed indicative Masterplan

26 27

Gascoyne Cecil Estates are actively promoting the development of a new model village north west of Hatfield.

A new village provides a unique opportunity to comprehensively plan new housing, necessary supporting infrastructure, and

to create a sustainable form of development for enjoyment by future generations. Furthermore, Symondshyde’s location, with

good potential for connections to the urban area of Hatfield, and also close to Welwyn Garden City, makes this one of the most

sustainable locations for new development in the Borough. The preservation of a green corridor between the proposed village and

the urban area also ensures that views and open space can be retained and enjoyed by residents of both settlements. The function of

the Green Belt is thus preserved.

The wider benefits accruing from the creation of a Green Corridor offer an exciting opportunity to provide sustainable linkages

between the existing village settlements of Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield.

Gascoyne Cecil Estates commend this vision and would welcome the opportunity to engage with Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council and the local community in the preparation of the new Local Plan.

Hertfordshire countryside

Symondshyde proposed indicative Masterplan

28 29

In 1999, the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) produced a report of their inquiry into the future of planning in the UK. Although the report was published over 15 years ago, it remains relevant to the debate surrounding the future of planning in this country. A significant message was the importance of foregrounding an awareness of the interconnected, multi-tiered and constantly shifting environment in which planning in England takes place. Historically, the report argued, there has been a tendency to conceptualise places – be they villages, towns, cities or counties – as closed systems, disregarding the interdependency between locations and the implications this might have on planning practice. Instead, planning in the future should enable locate needs and top-down priorities to be reconciled – it is no longer appropriate to assume that a single national policy is able to meet the different needs of the various regions and localities across the country.

This devolved, subsidiary approach should inform planning on all scales across the UK, with stronger regional identities and regional agencies developing new policies and strategies to provide development plans that are appropriate to local needs. In Hertfordshire, this approach has particular merit, because much of the county is restricted by planning policy in a manner unlike anywhere else in the UK; when much of the undeveloped land in Hertfordshire was designated green belt in 1971, future development in the country was immediately bound together, and curtailed.

Before 1971 however, Hertfordshire had enjoyed over seven decades as the site of some of the most innovative instances of town and village planning ever attempted. A set of conditions made this possible, and in their combination Hertfordshire was able to function as an incubator for novel planned settlements in the UK. Firstly, the county benefited from its location. Within striking distance of London, Hertfordshire was well placed to offer capacity to house the burgeoning populations of existing

urban centres. Given that the Garden City movement sought to balance urban living with an appreciation of urban life, Hertfordshire was well situated. Similarly, when New Towns sought to draw people from the city, they also needed to remain close enough to establish economic relationships with London. Spanning an area of 634 square miles, Hertfordshire also offered the space to accommodate these new settlements. Sitting above London, Hertfordshire contains many key routes between the capital and the major cities of the Midlands and the North. Major road and rail networks cross the county, and the importance of this infrastructure in the establishment of new villages, towns and cities should not be underestimated.

Many sources concur that the requirement for the construction of new housing in England has mounted to critical levels, and forced the debate on the future of such restrictions in their current forms. In this context is it instructive to look at current villages in the county for the contribution they make to the networked settlement infrastructure across the county.

The following six – Ashwell, Aldbury, Essendon, Much Hadham, Welwyn and Codicote - have been considered to this end.

APPENDIX 1: HERTFORDSHIRE VILLAGES CASE STUDY 1: ASHWELL

724 Units1667 Residents

30 31

CASE STUDY 2: ALDBURY CASE STUDY 3: ESSENDON

32 33

CASE STUDY 4: MUCH HADHAM CASE STUDY 5: WELWYN

MUCH HADHAM

3534

CASE STUDY: CODICOTE APPENDIX 2: ENGLISH MODEL VILLAGES

36 37

Bourton-on-the-Water is a village and civil parish in

Gloucestershire, England, within the Cotswolds Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty. The village is one of the most

popular tourist attractions in the Cotswolds. Its centre is

picturesque, with ornamental low stone bridges spanning

the clear waters of the River Windrush, and a broad village

green flanked by many fine Cotswold-stone building. Bourton

is a large village centred on the historic core, a straight high

street descending from the church to the north alongside

the Windrush, from which residential roads branch. Several

twentieth-century medium-to-high density housing estates

and some light-industry extend to its north and west.

Despite its modern additions, the village is the epitome of

Cotswolds charm; the historic core has been protected as a

UK Conservation Area and English Heritage designates 117

buildings within Bourton as having Grade II or higher listed

status.

There have been settled populations at Bourton-on-the-

Water since Neolithic times. By the 11th century the church

was established at its site at the northwest end of the village,

and by the 12th century Bourton had begun to assume its

orientation along the course of the Windrush. The village grew

in size and prosperity from the mid-17th century (towards

the end of the ‘rural renaissance’), and by 1700 the village had

grown to stretch along both sides of the Windrush, connected

by low arched bridges and fords and focused around a

central village green. This growth was perhaps stimulated by

agricultural changes in the parish, and is reflected in the size

and architectural richness of the houses. By the end of the 18th

century the village had further expanded, structured around the

organising principle of the river Windrush and the High Street,

and had become renowned for its attractive appearance. Since,

the growth of the village has been organic and incremental,

influenced by such factors as the arrival of the railway or the

construction of larger, better roads. In the 1930s a group of

houses was built by the Rural District Council (RDC) north-

west of the village, and another estate was later built beside the

station. After World War Two many more houses were built,

by the RDC and by private developers, along the road leading

southeast from the village.

As elsewhere in England, the late-19th century saw a decline in

the agricultural trades at Bourton. This decline was balanced

and perhaps outweighed by an expansion of the building trades;

even more important was the growth of the tourist trade,

accompanied by an increase in road traffic. The attractions

to the tourist have also drawn numbers of people seeking

retirement and seclusion, and Bourton has overtaken other

local centres (such as Stow-on-the-Wold and Northleach, both

towns) in both population and amenities. Sadly, however, some

of the architectural charm of the village has been lost with

the proliferation of garish shop fronts and signage designed to

appeal to the tourist trade.

The buildings of Bourton-on-the-Water are of the 17th century

and later, except for part of the church and two or three

houses that incorporate 16th-century work. Modern additions

aside, Bourton remains a highly beautiful example of the English

village, replete with a wealth of vernacular architecture and

local character that enjoys a deserved reputation as one of the

most attractive villages in the Cotswolds. The historic centre

of Bourton is the archetypical village that exists in the English

cultural imagination, the idealised subject of panegyric for the

rural idyll, and its peripheral housing estates represent the

harsher reality of 21st-century villages in England.

bOurTON-ON-ThE-waTEr, glOuCESTErShirELocation The Cotswolds, Gloucestershire

Village type Organic

Population (2011) 3,676

Households unknown

Density 2,414.7 inhabitants/km2

Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire

Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire

38 39

Joseph Damer, 1st Earl of Dorchester, purchased Milton Abbey

in Dorset in 1752. Having set about the construction of a large

country house at the Abbey, Damer commissioned Capability

Brown to remodel and landscape his estate. As part of this

process, Damer set about the systematic removal of the small

town of Middleton from land near to his new manor house.

This was a result of the fashion among English landowners to

convert farmland around their homes into open parkland. To

rehouse the evicted tenants, the model village of Milton Abbas

was built.

The village, which embodies the vision of the rural idyll, is

characterised by its surrounding wooded slopes, which provide

a strong sense of enclosure and security. Based around a single

road, The Street, the historic centre of Milton Abbas follows a

simple linear pattern along a gentle curving road, comprising

of a wide street with houses on both sides set back behind

wide grass verges, with each of the houses being similar in size

and proportion. The town has a post office, a primary school,

several pubs and a church. To the north of the historic centre,

the village was extended in the mid-twentieth century with

more modern housing, and other facilities including a doctor’s

surgery.

Milton Abbas has a typical ‘English’ character, its uniformity

combined with the texture and limited pallet of local vernacular

materials (whitewashed walls, steep thatched roofs and small,

black-framed windows) creating an extremely attractive village

that is both cohesive and ordered. The uniformity of design is

pleasing, rather than overpowering or oppressive. This is due

to the relative width of the street. Each cottage is placed in a

comfortably sized plot with equal spaces either side between

neighbours. These spaces and views through to the gardens

beyond contribute greatly to the street scene, providing

uniform breaks between the façades of the cottages and a

landscaped, naturalistic setting; they are an important part of

the original design and contribute to both the character and

appearance of the village.

milTON abbaS, dOrSETLocation Dorchester, Dorset

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 730

Households 232

Density uNkNOwN

Milton Abbas

Milton Abbas, Dorset

40 41

Situated near to the town of Biggleswade in Bedfordshire, Old

Warden is a small, well-preserved estate village in the heart of

rural Bedfordshire. The village is situated in a hollow between

high ground, and consists of a single road lined with houses on

both sides.

The main and northern parts of the village settlement were

almost all created by the Third Lord Ongley in the later part

of the eighteenth and early part of the nineteenth centuries as

a model village to replace the old village at Warden Street. In

the last quarter of the nineteenth century, Joseph Shuttleworth,

who acquired the Old Warden estate from the Onley family in

1872, also carried out some improvements some of the housing

on the estate.

The present village is a carefully created composition reflecting

an appreciation for picturesque architecture through its various

elaborate designs for cottages arranged irregularly in loosely

spaced groups, surrounded by a setting of trees, hedgerows

and slopes. Designs for the houses at Old Warden range from

whitewashed, thatched cottages with eyebrow dormers and tall

chimneys, to Arts-and-Crafts style, half-timbered buildings, and

redbrick houses with latticed windows and steep-sloped roofs.

Old wardEN, bEdfOrdShirELocation near Biggleswade, Bedfordshire

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 328

Households 119

Density (parish) unknown

Snelston is a small village located three miles south-west of

Ashbourne in Derbyshire. The village is located in a valley

bounded on its eastern side by Darley Moor, and on its western

side by the river Dove. A small brook, which joins the Dover,

flows through the centre of the village.

Snelston Hall, once the seat of the Stanton family, was built in

1828 to designs by architect Lewis Nockalls Cottingham. It

was occupied until around 1945, and demolished in 1951. Two

decades later, the local squire John Harrison also commissioned

Cottingham to remodel Snelston village, which remains today.

The village is structured around a ‘T-junction’, around which

clusters of houses are built to an unstructured, organic lay out.

Many of the houses were occupied by estate workers, which

continues to be the case today.

Many of the village houses feature Flemish brickwork with

Tudor chimney stacks, and lacy-style windows set deep in

stone mullions. There are some timber-framed houses, the

best examples being the former inn and the old post office.

The school, built in 1847 to educate 40 pupils, was erected and

maintained entirely at the expense of John Harrison.

Location near Ashbourne, Derbyshire

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 202

Households 78

Density (parish) unknown

SNElSTON, dErbyShirE

Snelston, Derbyshire

Old Warden, Bedfordshire

42 43

The small village of Selworthy lies at the heart of the Holnicote

estate, located three miles from Minehead. The village lies

within an estate of 12,443 acres.

The village of Selworthy is located on the south-facing wooded

slopes of Selworthy Combe, one of the hills between the Vale

of Porlock and the Bristol Channel. The focal point of the village

is the whitewashed, 15th-century church, set on a terrace above

the town. Several dwellings are situated beside the church, with

six more located around the village green, which is located

between the old road and a stream. Three more houses are

located beneath the green, on the west bank of the river.

The history of Selworthy dates back to the Domesday Book,

although the village as it stands today was rebuilt in 1823 by Sir

Thomas Acland of Killerton. Sir Thomas was a philanthropist

and designed the model village himself to provide housing for

the aged and infirm of the Holnicote estate.

The houses are built from cream-washed stone, with thatched

roofs, and were deliberately designed to evoke the appearance

of an old-fashioned, ideal village. It is likely that Sir Thomas was

influenced by his friend John Harford, who commissioned John

Nash to build Blaise Hamlet at Hembury between 1810-11

for his aged retainers. Both Blaise Hamlet and Selworthy are

examples of the picturesque style of architecture, but whereas

the cottages of Blaise Hamlet are deliberately asymmetrical and

varied, the buildings at Selworthy are pleasingly homogenous

with deep thatched roofs, eyebrow dormers, Tudor-lattice

windows and tall chimneys.

SElwOrThy, SOmErSETLocation near Minehead, Somerset

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 477

Households 217

Density (parish) unknown

Englefield is a small village on the Englefield Estate in West

Berkshire, close to Reading. The village’s name of derives

from the battle fought there between Saxons and Danes in

AD870, Englefield meaning ‘Englishmen’s Field’, or ‘Warning

Beacon Field’. The Estate passed between various families until

eventually passing to the Benyon family. In the late 19th century,

Richard Fellowes Benyon rebuilt the villagers’ houses as a

model estate village. Richard Benyon was philanthropic on a

grand scale and fascinated by agricultural economics. Causes

close to his heart in 1862 included the Mendicity Society, the

National Society for School Furniture, the building of the Albert

Memorial and the Society for the Augmentation of Small Livings.

Towards the end of the nineteenth century, Benyon restored

and embellished the Elizabethan manor house, and at this time

set about modernising the Englefield Village, whose community

thrived under his influence. He created the model estate village

as it stands today, modernising cottages and farm buildings and

providing a bathing pool for boys, a penny soup kitchen, a new

school and a renovated church (designed by Gilbert Scott).

Many cottages at Englefield are similar in style, featuring

distinctive brickwork. The village is laid out along a single street,

and consists of large detached and semi-detached cottages.

Location near Reading, Berkshire

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 286

Households 124

Density (parish) unknown

ENglEfiEld, bErkShirE

Englefield, Berkshire

Cottage at Selworthy, Somerset

44 45

Titus Salt, a wool producer, found in the late 1840s that

Bradford city was no longer able to support his business in

the manner he wished, due to its pollution and overcrowding.

So, between 1851 and 1853 he relocated his factory to the

countryside, together with a few workers’ cottages and plans

for a much larger new settlement, Saltaire. By 1868 over 800

homes had been laid out at Saltaire, on wide streets arranged

in a gridiron pattern south of the river and Salt’s mill. Each

house provided for the best in contemporary living, with its

own water and gas supply and an outside lavatory. Sizes varied

from the two-up-two-down scale to much larger houses to

reflect the hierarchy of the workers within the wool mill. A true

community was founded with amenities such as dining blocks,

bathing pools, washhouses, an alms-house for retired workers,

a dispensary, a hospital, a school and a church. Although the mill

fell out of use in 1986, the village continues to flourish and was

designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2001. UNESCO

describes the integrity of Saltaire as a model industrial village

as almost total, with only 1 per cent of the original buildings

destroyed since its foundation. Beyond the site’s boundaries

twentieth-century development has surrounded Saltaire to the

east, south and west.

SalTairE, NEar bradfOrdLocation near Bradford, West Yorkshire

Village type Industrial

Population (2011) unknown

Households unknown

Density unknown

Port Sunlight is located on the banks of the Mersey, near

Bebington in the Wirral. Like Salt, William Hesketh Lever had

become wealthy from the profits of industry, and he too was

appalled by the squalor of his workers’ housing and by the high

price of city rents for factory space. Thus, in 1888 he moved his

factory and workers to a new site out of town; the new factory

and village was named Port Sunlight. In exchange for improved

standards of living, the workers were expected to follow a life

of sobriety, thrift and a desire for self-improvement. The village

came equipped with schools, a library and public buildings,

providing lessons in cookery and dressmaking. By 1909, there

were over 700 residences on a 130-acre site. The village was

laid out with a large green at its centre, which was occupied by

the settlements principal buildings – the school, hospital, church

and inn. Residential accommodation was arranged in courtyard-

style blocks, with allotments at their centre. Further important

buildings, such as a town hall, public baths and art gallery, were

interspersed throughout the village, connected by axial roads

and sight lines.

Although no longer leased to factory workers, the village

is controlled by a village trust, which aims to enhance and

preserve its character. Over 900 houses are Grade-II listed,

demonstrating the historical legacy of this planned village.

Location The Wirral, Merseyside

Village type Industrial

Population (2011) unknown

Households unknown

Density unknown

pOrT SuNlighT, ThE wirral

Port Sunlight, the Wirral

Saltaire, near Bradford

46 47

In 1879, George and Richard Cadbury moved their chocolate

factory from central Birmingham to a rural location, at what

is now Bournville. From the outset, the Cadbury’s offered

hard-workers good salaries and working conditions, including

the pioneering development of pensions. In addition, a 120-

acre site was purchased in 1894 with the intention of building

a model village to ‘alleviate the evils of modern more cramped

living conditions’ for the Cadbury’s factory workers. Designed

by architect William Alexander Harvey, Bournville was laid out

with a variety of housing types (detached, semi-detached and

terraced) arranged along long streets, with large gardens and

modern interiors. A large recreation ground was situated next

to the Cadbury factory, as well as a park and alms-houses.

The community’s social life was also catered for; although

the Quaker Cadbury family ensured no public houses were

built, other amenities were provided such as infant and junior

schools, a day school for adults, meeting houses and a host of

events such fetes.

However, after several years it became apparent that the

Bournville Building Estate was becoming threatened by

encroaching urbanisation and the sale of houses by factory

worker lessees for personal profit. To retain control of the

Village, George Cadbury decided to turn it into a Charitable

Trust; the Bournville Village Trust (BVT) was created on 14

December 1900. The BVT is bound by a Deed, which specified

how the Village could develop in the future, and as a result the

original village has remained largely untouched by the passage

of time. Bournville Village soon became highly regarded and

renowned. Early visitors included the Krupp’s architect from

Germany, Dame Henrietta Barnet who founded Hampstead

Garden Suburb, William Hesketh Lever who founded Port

Sunlight, and the Rowntrees who founded New Earswick. The

town has been a continuous success. Now a Conservation Area

containing some 7,800 homes on 1,000 acres of land, it remains

a popular residential area of Birmingham.

bOurNVillE, NEar birmiNghamLocation near Birmingham, West Midlands

Village type Industrial

Population (2011) 25,938

Households 7,800

Density 3,990/km2

Bournville Village Trust housing, c.1905

Bournville

48 49

Garden Village is a planned early-20th-century model village

built for the employees of Reckitts, a manufacturing firm. The

existence and character of Garden Village stemmed from

the desires of James Reckitt (1833-1924) to provide a good

quality living environment for his firm’s employees. Lever’s Port

Sunlight and Cadbury’s Bournville were important examples to

follow, as was the nascent Letchworth Garden City, based on

the principles of the Garden City movement as advocated by

Ebenezer Howard.

Reckitt proposed the idea of the ‘Village in the Town’, providing

not just homes for the workers but also shops, community

facilities and ‘Havens’ for pensioners. The main features of

Garden Village stem from the Reckitt’s aims of achieving a

good standard of housing and environment for his employees.

His object was to provide his employees with a house and

garden for the same rent as for existing inferior housing, which

in general consisted of long terraces with back yards, built at

a much greater density. Garden Village represented an early

example of Garden City planning and an enormous advance in

housing layout in Hull compared to that of nineteenth century

workers’ dwellings.

The 130-acre site on which Garden Village was to be built

was purchased in 1907, and its development took place in two

distinct phases, starting in 1908 and 1923. The majority of the

600 houses were completed in the earlier phase, to designs

by architects Percy Runton and William Barry. The low density

of the development, as well as the remarkable uniformity in

the overall design of the housing, are its most striking feature;

the 600 houses are constructed in 12 different styles and

five grades, averaging 12 houses to the acre. The structure of

Garden Village is formed by the tree-lined roads, some straight

and some sinuous, and the open spaces, such as The Oval,

which acts as a village green. This is where the largest and most

elaborate houses are situated, which create a sense of being at

the heart of the community.

In 1950 the Garden Village Company was disbanded; some

houses were sold to tenants, the Bradford Property Trust

bought the entire estate, and the open space known as The

Oval was transferred to the Hull City Council for a nominal fee.

The area became a designated conservation area in 1970.

gardEN VillagE, kiNgSTON-upON-hullLocation Kingston-upon-Hull, East Riding

Village type Industrial

Population (2011) unknown

Households unknown

Density unknown

Garden Village, Kingston-upon-Hull

Garden Village, Kingston-upon-Hull map c.1928

50 51

Whiteley Village was founded on the bequest of William

Whiteley, in 1907. He bequeathed £1 million (equivalent to

£92,301,980 in 2015) towards the foundation of the villages,

to be used for the purchase of land and the erection thereon

‘of buildings to be used and occupied by aged poor persons of

either sex as homes in their old age’.

Whiteley’s idea was a development of the long-established

almshouse tradition, but it is the scale – and architectural

and social ambition – of Whiteley’s vision which makes it

outstanding and still. The development provided not simply

cottages, but a village with churches, a shop, a village hall, a

library and other care and social facilities.

In 1911, a 225-estate was purchased to accommodate the

construction of the village. Walter Cave was appointed as

consulting architect, and together with the Trustees of the

estate selected R Frank Atkinson to design the village layout.

Although subsequently altered, the distinctive octagonal

design of the village remains. In 1913 Cave designed single-

storey ‘Model Cottages’ as a test for cottage design; they

were deemed too spacious, and the cottages built later were

somewhat smaller. Between 1914 and 1921 240 cottages

were built at Whiteley, designed by Cave and six other leading

architects. In order to avoid an institutional appearance by

encouraging variations in style, one block was entrusted to

each architect, except Sir Ernest George, who designed two.

Each of the eight sections comprised sixteen single-occupancy

cottages, four two-storey cottages, six double cottages and a

nurse’s cottage.

A wholesale modernisation programme was carried out on

the cottages between 1962 and 1970, and all 262 cottages are

Grade II listed. In her history of English villages, Gillian Darley

noted that Whiteley Village ‘continues successfully today… The

human scale of the buildings emphasized the individual’s place in

the life of the community whilst the overall planning reinforces

the visual unity of the village. It is an extremely attractive

example of architectural form and function happily integrated’.

whiTElEy VillagE, SurrEyLocation Hersham, Surrey

Village type Planned

Population (2011) c.320

Households 262

Density unknown

Whiteley Village, Surrey

52 53

Poundbury is an experimental new village on the outskirts

of Dorchester, Dorset. The village is built on land owned by

the Duchy of Cornwall, and has been led by the Prince of

Wales as a challenge to post-war trends in town planning.

European architect Leon Krier developed the masterplan in

the late 1980s, and construction began in 1993. The village is

built as a high-density urban setting, rather than a suburban

one. It attempts to create an integrated community of shops,

businesses and private and social housing, hence there is no

zoning, and the plan is centred around people rather than the

car. A high quality environment has been strived for through

the choice of materials, landscaping and other features such as

signage, and the houses are designed to be traditional. Despite

these measures, the town has been much criticised, particularly

for the use of non-local building materials that are out of

context alongside traditional Dorchester building stock. Many

people also perceive the development, with its collection of

neo-classical architectural buildings, to be kitsch. It is expected

that the plan’s four phases will be developed before 2020, with

a total of 2,500 dwellings and a population of about 6,000.

pOuNdbury, dOrSETLocation Dorchester, Dorset

Village type Modern planned

Population 6,000 (completed)

Households 2,500 (completed)

Density unknown

Cambourne, Cambridgeshire

Poundbury, Dorset

Cambourne is a stand-alone new town located roughly nine miles west of Cambridge on the site of a former airfield. The 1,030-acre site is still under development and will accommodate three distinct ‘villages’, called Great Cambourne, Lower Cambourne and Upper Cambourne. The project has been led by a consortium of builders including Bovis Homes, Bryant Homes, and George Wimpey Homes, with the masterplan developed by Terry Farrell and Partners. Construction began in 1998, the first residents moved in a year later, and the town became a civil parish on 1 April 2004. In 2006 1,000 homes were occupied with 2,300 further homes to be completed, and the final population is expected to be in the region of 8,000-10,000. The architectural styles aim at individualism, with terraced cottages, large detached homes, semis and town houses mixed together to imitate a village that has grown organically over many centuries. However,

the size of the settlement is much larger than a village, and the form and density of the housing and civic buildings is quite different.

The high street contains businesses for a local community, including a pharmacy, a fish and chip shop, a bookmaker, and a pub. Morrisons has opened a 5,575m2 supermarket with a petrol station. An ecumenical church, a library, a four-star hotel, a day nursery and two primary schools have opened, as well as a medical centre. Other community facilities include a community centre, a cricket field and pavilion, and a village green with a pond and play areas.

The economy of the new settlement is aided by the development of Camborne Business Park, which in 2003 employed 500 people, of whom 10 per cent were Cambourne residents. The relocation of South Cambridgeshire District Council to the Business Park was also beneficial to the economic viability of the town. Large areas of green open space, including a country park, an eco-park, a golf course, wetland and new woodland, separate the villages. The plan has tried to preserve existing landscape features as well as provide 11 miles of new hedgerow. The transport system has over 12 miles of footpaths, cycleways and bridleways.

Location Cambridge, Cambridgeshire

Village type Modern planned

Population (2011) 8186

Households 3300

Density

CambOurNE, CambridgEShirE

54 55

APPENDIX 3: SCOTTISH MODEL VILLAGES

The historian T C Smout has estimated that over 120 such

new villages were built in Scotland during the Georgian period.

Notable examples included Inveraray, which was created by

the 3rd Duke of Argyll. The Duke wished to have a new, more

habitable castle upon his accession in 1743, and with this he

also envisaged a new village. However, it was the 5th Duke who

built the majority of the settlement, between 1772 and 1800.

Front Street is aptly named, the urban façade of a straight-lined

plan, with the white houses symmetrically placed.

Running off Front Street are two parallel roads, the first is Main

Street along the waterfront and the other is called The Avenue.

The town was quickly equipped with a smithy, bake house, inn,

Town House and pier, with grander houses such as Ivy House

and Chamberlain’s House built for the middle classes. The 2011

census recorded a population of 596 at Inveraray, with a density

of 1,610.8 inhabitants per square kilometre.

iNVEraray, argyll & buTELocation Loch Fyne, Argyll & Bute

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 596

Households unknown

Density 1,610.8 inhabitants/km2

When Walter Frederick Campbell inherited estates in Islay

in 1816, he set about a process of radical improvements

to the island’s economy. He thus reorganised land holdings,

dispossessing many in the rural townships in order to reduce

the number of people dependent on the land, while at the same

time introducing better methods of husbandry to improve

agricultural production. Those displaced were re-housed and

re-employed in new planned villages such as Port Ellen, which

was founded on the south of the island in 1821, together with a

new distillery in 1825.

Port Ellen is a coastal settlement built around a small natural

harbour on Islay’s south coast, on the southernmost island

of the Inner Hebrides. The main street front the horseshoe-

shaped harbour, and several perpendicular streets extend

inland, lined with houses. A housing estate for fishermen,

weavers and workers at the distillery was added to the village

in the twentieth century. Islay’s other new planned villages

include Port Charlotte, Portnahaven and Bowmore, the latter

laid out in 1768 when the laird razed the old village of Kilarrow

as part of the improvements around Islay House.

Location Islay, the Inner Hebrides

Village type Estate

Population (2011) 846

Households unknown

Density 1,658.8 inhabitants/km2

pOrT EllEN, iNVEraray

Port Ellen, Islay

Inveraray, Argyll

Further Advice and Information can be obtained from;

Anthony Downs

Director - Planning and Development

Hatfield Park Estate Office, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL9 5NQ

Tel: 01707 287000