It was inspiring to join Kathryn Firth, John Nordon, Jessica Arczynski and Biljana Savic for the 70th #NegroniTalks on #NewTowns earlier this week. Lots of lively debate and inspired perspectives.
As one comment reinforced - it's common to assume all New Towns are very similar and aesthetically depressing - and it's true that by the turn of the century, the idea of New Towns had become somewhat maligned.
However, as I noted in the debate, the first generation of New Towns experimented to very different degrees. Some were more heavily influenced by the Modern Movement, others by the Garden City movement. Crawley falls into the latter category, and initially followed more traditional housing patterns: terraces, back-to-back gardens, clear delineation of public and private space, with privet hedge frontages. They also prioritised landscape and heritage retention, which supported a distinctive neighbourhood identity, even if the housing was fairly standardised.
Parts of those early Crawley neighbourhoods and local parades have become Conservation Areas, and some buildings are now Grade 2 Listed. Yes, modern parking density challenges the original streetscape in places, but the homes are loved, and have proven to be easily adaptable.
I know I might be biased as a lifelong 'Crawleyite', but I'd argue those first eight neighbourhoods, planned between 1950-1970, have proven reasonably successful – some bits are not too bad aesthetically, either. The town has even enjoyed zero unemployment for long periods, owing to its location.
So - if New Towns are to form a small component of the 1.5m desperately needed, I think it should be possible to learn from the early successes and deliver places that are truly socially, economically and environmentally sustainable - and aesthetically pleasing!