Greening the Rural Landscape, Pilot Thesis by Benjamin Nourse

GREENING THE RURAL LANDSCAPE Ecological

Intensification

of the Essex Hinterland

Benjamin Nourse Pilot Thesis 2018

Benjamin Nourse Homerton College

Pilot Thesis Greening the Rural Landscape: Ecological Intensification of the Essex Hinterland 3rd April 2018

4,976 words

Including abstract, citations, and footnotes [Image captions 347 words]

Submitted in partial fulfilment of MPhil Architecture and Urban Design at the University of Cambridge I would like the thank Professor Koen Steemers, Ingrid Schrรถder, and Aram Mooradian for their invaluable guidance and support.

This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text.

Abstract

The rural landscape is progressively homogenising, fragmenting, and shrinking, due to intensive farming methods and urbanisation. The increasing population of the United Kingdom, raises the demand for food and homes, thus agriculture and housing are in perpetual competition with the natural habitats of the countryside. While landscape urbanism is concerned with the importance of landscape in cities, what does this mean for the countryside? Rather than considering the countryside as the hinterland beyond the city, land is a connected plane on to which there are varying densities and types of inhabitation.

This pilot thesis proposes the ecological intensification and celebration of the rural landscape.

The consideration of nature and humanity in one large ecosystem, enables designers to formulate a stable framework, onto which one can create a co-inhabited landscape. Given that the native ecology of the UK is deciduous woodland, yet agriculture prevails as the dominant use of land, there is a disciplinary need to re-evaluate the quality of the rural landscape. Moreover, this research will formulate as a speculative design for rural Essex, that ecologically intensifies the countryside, which will be tested for environmental and cultural resilience.

Figure 1. Location of Essex

Contents

1

Glossary of terms

3

What does ‘greening’ the countryside mean?

8

Is the countryside not already ‘green’?

18

Why do we need to ‘green’ the countryside?

34

Implementing a ‘green’ countryside

38

List of figures

40

Bibliography

Figure 2. Aerial view of Marks Tey in Essex, illustrating the dominance of agriculture, Ordnance Survey.

Glossary of terms Chain

Unit of distance, equivalent to 22 yards (length of cricket pitch).

Enclosure

The legal encasement of land, restricting the use to the owner.

Ecotone

Transitionary region between two or more biomes.

Exurb

A community beyond the suburbs that have ties to a city. A term coined by Auguste Spectorsky in 1955.

Furlong

Unit of distance, equivalent to 220 yards, also equivalent to 10 chains.

Greenbelt

A concentric area of political protection around the periphery of large cities that prevents the construction of new developments.

Greenfield site

A greenspace that is under consideration for development that has not previously been built on.

Greening

The ecological enhancement of land.

Habitat components

The measurable environmental elements that are compulsory for a given species to exist, including, presence of water, altitude, geological conditions, other species etc.

Landscape Urbanism

An approach that believes that the arrangement of landscape is the key to successful urban design.

Matrix

Connected ecological system of landscape.

Open field system

A rotational system of farming used in ancient Europe, that divided rural landscapes into farmable plots and common land.

Patch

A basic unit of landscape that differs from its surroundings and can be measured using the presence of habitat components.

Selion

A portion of farmland one furlong by one chain in length, associated with the open field system.

1

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the Manningtree transmitter, by Terry Jones, 2014.

2

WHAT DOES ‘GREENING’ THE COUNTRYSIDE MEAN? Definition ‘Green’ and ‘greening’ are particularly ambiguous terms which aside from the colour, tend to imply an unspecified environmental concern. The Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘greening’ as ‘The modification or adaption of something in accordance with ecological principles.’ 1 In the context of the built environment, that ‘something’ is space.

This pilot thesis proposes the ecological enhancement of the landscape of Essex, which will formalise as a speculative design.

Approach

Figure 4. Speculative bricolage of habitats, land uses, and vernacular buildings.

Rather than categorising space as human or natural, and attempting to provide spatial solutions based on separate disciplines, namely urbanism or landscape architecture, this thesis intends to study the countryside from a post-modern perspective,2 through a branch of landscape urbanism that views ecology as the basis of successful city and country planning.3 Ecology is not merely the study of nature, but the relationship between organisms and their physical surroundings as well as with each other.4 We often forget that humans are also natural, and due to globalisation and the residence of people on every continent, we are integrated into almost every ecosystem.5

“Greening: def. 5”, Oxford English Dictionary, 2018, http://www.oed.com/view/ Entry/81206?.

2 Charles Waldheim, “Planning, Ecology, And The Emergence Of Landscape”, 2008.

3 Ian McHarg, “An Ecological Method”, in Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 38.

4 “Ecology”, Oxford English Dictionary, 2018, https://en.oxforddictionaries. com/definition/ecology.

5 Marina Alberti et al., “Integrating Humans Into Ecology: Opportunities And Challenges For Studying Urban Ecosystems”, Bioscience 53, no. 12 (2003): 1169.

1

3

When lecturing about the process of discovery, Richard Feynman said, “if it disagrees with (nature), it is wrong”.6 This notion can be applied to more than science but also the way we inhabit and share space. Ann Whiston Spirn said that ‘The city, the suburbs, and countryside must be viewed as a single, evolving system within nature’.7 As more people now reside in urban environments than the countryside, we are living increasingly detached lives from other ecosystems. From house plants, to the effects of waste plastics on undiscovered ocean species, the imprint of humanity is prevalent. As the dominant species on Earth, it is the responsibility of humans to sustainably co-inhabit the planet alongside millions of other lifeforms.

Method In order to measure the success of existing sites and the design proposal, this pilot thesis postulates an alternative to the current land valuation model, centred around the theory of ecology rather than economy. Economics assesses the quantitative value that land has to humans, in comparison to other commodities. Moreover, monetary value fluctuates and is dependent on national economic systems, rather than changes in the landscape itself. Land does not have one value as it is composed of many layers and complex systems [fig. 5].8 This pilot thesis employs a comparative matrix, individually assessing the importance of landscape systems to its inhabitants. The first axis maps both the value of land to humans and nature. The second axis is composed of elements that define a healthy ecosystem, namely: complexity,

Richard Feynman, “Cargo Cult Science”, 1974.

Ann Whiston Spirn, “The Granite Garden”, in Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 175.

8 Ian L McHarg, Design With Nature (Garden City, N.Y.: Published for the American Museum of Natural History [by] the Natural History Press, 1969), 34.

6 7

4

Figure 5. A post-modern view of Essex. Land does not merely have one value nor usage, but is a connected plane on to which there are varying networks, components, and degrees of inhabitation.

diversity, symbiosis, stability, and entropy, as defined by Ian McHarg in 1969 [fig. 6].9 These ecological variables can be employed to re-consider the organisation of people and their habitats, namely cities and buildings.

Colchester: Park and Roman Town

Simple

Complex

Uniform

Diverse

Independent

Interdependent

Unstable

Stable

High-entropy

Low-entropy

Mersea: Salt Marsh

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Audley End: Country Park

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Chelmsford: Agriculture

Simple Uniform

Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Diverse

Independent

Interdependent

Unstable

Stable

High-entropy

M25 at Brentwood: Divided landscape

Complex

Complex

Low-entropy

Finchingfield: Village

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Figure 6. An arbitrary matrix study, that begins to rank the human and natural ecological qualities in comparison to other landscapes.

Natural Human

9

McHarg, Design With Nature, 120.

5

Figure 7. County Land Use Map

7

IS THE COUNTRYSIDE NOT ALREADY GREEN? ‘Greenspace’ is an equivocal term that indicates any planted land. It encompasses many land uses with varying degrees of ecological value, from fragments of rich ancient woodland to vast oil seed fields. To define whether the countryside is ‘green’, one must establish the land use and its ecological components.

Faux-natural landscapes and Agroecology The dominant use of land in the United Kingdom and Essex is agricultural, in particular arable farmland. Agricultural land is not a natural landscape. Although farmland is ‘green’, in that it is vegetated, it has a low ecological value compared to many other uses of greenspace, such as parks and forests.10 Farmland is composed of a singular crop with few other species migrating through, generating immensely homogenised habitats. There are approximately 400,000 species of plants, 300,000 of which are edible, yet globally we merely consume 200 of those species.11 Furthermore, the transient state of annually re-sowing and harvesting crops reduces the opportunity for naturally occurring life to permanently thrive. Additionally, pesticides and herbicides prevent the existence of any biodiversity which risks the success of a crop. The greenspaces of London have a higher diversity of wildlife than the majority of the Essex countryside due to the variety of urban pockets, creating a multiplicity of micro-climates and habitats. Among many, the urban foxes, pelicans of St James’ Park, and 125 species of fish in the tidal River Thames, illustrate that despite the

10 G. Philip Robertson et al., “Farming For Ecosystem Services: An Ecological Approach To Production Agriculture”, Bioscience 64, no. 5 (2014): 404-415.

11 Adrian Barnett, “The Nature Of Crops: Why Do We Eat So Few Of The Edible Plants?”, New Scientist, 2015, https://www.newscientist.com/article/ mg22730301-400-the-nature-of-crops-why-do-we-eat-so-few-of-the-edibleplants/.

8

Figure 8. The dominance of a faux-natural landscape: arable and horticultural land in Essex [green]

preconception, artificial landscapes do not always correlate to lack of biodiversity.12 The low ecological value of Essex farmland strengthens the political argument in favour of greenfield development. As the UK’s population increases, so does the demand for both food and homes, meaning there is an increasing contention with natural habitats.

Urbanisation In 2017, the UK’s Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond, states we need to build 300,000 new homes per year to alleviate the UK’s ‘Housing Crisis’.13 Currently the primary issue with greenspace in Essex is the perpetual development of greenfield sites into residential estates, particularly around the fringes of existing settlements, as well as the creation of entirely new towns.

Presently, the largest scheme in Essex is the development of the ‘North Essex Garden Communities’ (NEGCs), a plan to create three entirely new towns on greenfield sites, totalling approximately 43,000 new homes located along major transport routes to London.14 Although the intention is to build to ‘Garden City Principles’,15 the Town and Country Planning Association have converted Ebenezer Howard’s principles ‘for a 21st century context’,16 and unlike Howard’s

12 “Main Biodiversity Resources In The Tidal Thames”, Port Of London Authority, accessed 1 April 2018, https://www.pla.co.uk/Environment/MainBiodiversity-Resources-in-the-Tidal-Thames-Species.

13 Philip Hammond, Oral Statement To Parliament: Autumn Budget 2017 (London: UK Government, 2017).

14 “North Essex Garden Communities”, NE-GC, 2017, http://www.ne-gc.co.uk/ about/.

15 Quote referring to the concept by Ebenezer Howard in the late 19th Century, and adapted by local councils, including Essex County Council.

16 “Garden City Principles”, Town And Country Planning Association, 2018, https://www.tcpa.org.uk/garden-city-principles.

9

model, exact figures and requirements are not stated.17 This model is over 100 years old and is arguably outdated, as it pre-dates the popularisation of the motorcar and the mass suburbanisation of East London and Essex. Although urbanisation threatens the biodiversity of the countryside, development is inevitable. However, one of the ten 2018 Essex Design Guide principles of a ‘garden community’ is ecologically positive, stating it is ‘Development that enhances the natural environment, providing a comprehensive green infrastructure network and net biodiversity gains, and which uses zero-carbon and energy-positive technology to ensure climate resilience’.18 This pilot thesis intends to focus on landscapes cited for development by the North Essex Garden Communities, to enhance the current viability of this project. This is an opportunity to create a landscape that aids the UK’s housing crisis as well as create an ecological framework that amalgamates both people and nature.

Arguably, the countryside of Essex is in greater need of ‘greening’ than the other home counties, such as Kent, Surrey, and Buckinghamshire which all have large areas of outstanding natural beauty in addition to the protection from the greenbelt. Furthermore, the cultural and geographical link to what were the poorer parts of London, namely the East End docklands, as well as the heavy bombing of the East End during World War II, led to the suburbanisation of much of the countryside.19 Throughout the 20th century, the landscape of Essex has been a testing ground for residential utopias, predominantly realised as working-class

17 Andrzej Olechnowicz, Working-Class Housing In England Between The Wars (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2011), 17.

18 Essex County Council, “Garden Communities”, Essex Design Guide, 2018, https://www.essexdesignguide.co.uk/overarching-themes/garden-communities/.

19 “Johnathan Meades: The Joy Of Essex”, TV programme (BBC, 2013).

10

Figure 9. Interplay of other political protection areas. National Park [turqouise], Areas of Natural Beauty [lime], 2011 Greenbelts [dotted].

Figure 10. There is no distinct border, nor physical difference in the landscape, merely a political dotted line.

11

radical estates, or what Ian Nairn refers to as ‘subtopia’.20 Tom Turner argues that ‘Each solution to the housing problem has, in turn, been discarded and replaced by a new solution.’21

London Greenbelt in Essex Although the county town of Essex is Chelmsford, the gravity of London dominates the county’s landscape.

The 2011 London greenbelt is a political area, governing approximately 27 percent of the Essex landscape [97,764 Although the greenbelt is a well-intended hectares].22 concept, it is deceptive in its appellation; ‘green’ implies an environmental aspect to the policy or a vegetated landscape, whereas in reality it is an invisible area with the primary purpose of preventing urban sprawl and conserving the countryside. The greenbelt has a variety of other issues, including the ambiguous loophole phrase: ‘exceptional circumstances’, in which development can still occur.23 Furthermore, although the earlier greenbelts were intended for recreational use,24 the vast distance of the current greenbelt from the city centre is walkable, thus due to inaccessibility Londoners are less likely to interact with greenbelt biodiversity.

The rationality of abutting the greenbelt against London is logical, but the outer limits have no rationale and are not defined by a change in character nor topography. The Ian Nairn, Outrage (London: Architectural Press, 1955).

Tom Turner. Landscape Planning (London: UCL Press), 1996. 162.

22 This data was extracted from Ordnance survey maps processed using GIS by the author.

23 Fiona Cullen, National Planning Policy Framework. Gateway Methodology / Stages of Heritage-Led Regeneration. Vol. 1, 2006. 19. https://doi.org/ https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/6077/2116950.pdf.

24 Many greenbelt proposals have been made over time, including John Claudius Loudon’s 1829 concentric ‘breathing zones’, Raymond Unwin’s 1929 ‘green girdle’, Patrick Abercrombie’s 1944 ‘green belt’, to the current 2011 greenbelt.

20 21

14

Previous Figure 11. Many greenbelt proposals have been made over time, including John Claudius Loudon’s 1829 concentric ‘breathing zones’, Raymond Unwin’s 1929 ‘green girdle’, Patrick Abercrombie’s 1944 ‘green belt’, to the current 2011 greenbelt.

outer boundary of the greenbelt politically implies a false hierarchy over identical landscapes. If the primary intention is to prevent the sprawl of London, the greenbelt is arguably failing, as London overspill development is occurring outside the periphery. In Essex, this is predominantly formalising as suburban estates on the fringes of existing towns, with the commuting residents having stronger cultural, social, and economic ties to London, than the town in which they reside.25 The government still requires new residential schemes to alleviate the housing crisis and therefore development is encouraged in the North of Essex but given that the ecological value and use of land is so similar, the North Essex landscape should not have to suffer residential development over the South. The London overspill in North Essex, illustrates that the greenbelt does not prevent greenfield development; if homes are in demand, they will merely be built elsewhere. By enforcing a political boundary between the natural and human, i.e. by restricting development, advocates a false dichotomy that nature and humans cannot coexist. This project poses an exploration of spatial solutions to co-inhabit landscape rather than continue to out-compete natural ecosystems. The rural landscape should be celebrated rather than perceived as a restriction.

25

Robert Bruegmann, Sprawl (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 2.

15

Figure 12. Key routes and greenspaces in Essex.

17

WHY DO WE NEED TO ‘GREEN’ THE COUNTRYSIDE? Life has been on Earth for over four billion years and has since evolved into millions of complex species. However, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature ‘Living Planet Index 2016’, vertebrae species have ‘decreased in abundance by 58% between 1970 and 2012.’26 The largest factor of this decline is loss and degradation of habitats. As a spatial issue referring to the removal, fragmentation, and diminution of essential habitat characteristics, it is the responsibility of those who design and control land to reverse this decline of biodiversity. In Design for Nature, McHarg states ‘Man is that uniquely conscious creature who can perceive and express. He must become the steward of biosphere. To do this he must design with nature.’27 By breaking down this global ecological issue into manageable sites, one can analyse local issues and suggest spatial solutions. This section will explore rural ecological issues in the UK and Essex and offer a series of design devices in response, which will be tested on a landscape within the proposed NEGCs site. It will test the spatial effects of habitat enlargement, diversification, enclosure, and two strands of defragmentation, firstly in terms of habitats and secondly the natural/human divide.

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Shrinking ecologies: strategic habitat enlargement Rural greenspaces are gradually diminishing in size and habitat suitability. According to the UK Countryside Survey, between 1978 and 2007 there was a long-term decrease of open countryside by 9.2 percent [fields, heaths, moors, and

Arbitary ecological value matrix of existing site in Marks Tey, Essex.

Left Figure 13. Marks Tey, Essex landscape located within the NEGCs development scope

Louise McRae, Robin Freeman and Valentina Marconi, Living Planet Report 2016: Risk And Resilience In A New Era (Gland, Switzerland: WWF International, 2016).

27 McHarg, Design With Nature, 1969, 5

26

19

woods], although many habitats remained stagnant and plant richness in streams improved.28

Figure 15. Newhall green corridor, Harlow, Essex

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable

In the UK, there are currently a variety of political provisions in place to prevent the attenuation of key habitats, in particular national parks, sites of special scientific interest, nature reserves, areas of outstanding natural beauty, listed parks, and ancient woodlands. The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 states that, ‘planning permission should be refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats’.29 Due to the proximity of Essex to London, although highly valuable habitats are protected, greenspaces that are not considered of national value are at risk of urbanisation, including allotments, farmland, parkland, golf courses, cemeteries, campsites, school grounds, and playing fields. Rather than replacing rural habitats with housing, the changes that will inevitably occur in response to the housing crisis are an opportunity to ecologically intensify weak rural habitats.

The ‘Newhall Urban Extension’ by Studio Real in Harlow, Essex, is an example of a suburban masterplan on a greenfield site which considerably improved the local ecology, yet also successfully delivered new public amenities and 6,000 new homes, including architecture by Alison Brooks and Richard Murphy [fig. 15].30 Before development, the site was predominantly arable land ‘of low ecological value’, yet it’s success is attributed to the introduction of a central

Low-entropy

Arbitary ecological value matrix of speculative site in Marks Tey, Essex.

Left Figure 14. Speculative strategic habitat enlargement proposal

28 P.D Carey et al., Countryside Survey: UK Headline Messages From 2007, ebook (NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, 30pp. (CEH Project Number: C03259), 2008), 18.

29 Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, National Planning Policy Framework (London: UK Government, 2012), 118.

30 “Newhall Urban Extension, Harlow, Essex”, Studio Real, accessed 31 March 2018, http://www.studioreal.co.uk/projects/NEW-NEIGHBOURHOODS/ NEWHALL-URBAN-EXTENSION,-HARLOW,-ESSEX/5/5.

21

green corridor with pockets of semi-improved grassland, woodland, hedgerows, scattered trees, streams, ponds and reed beds.31 This scheme utilised architecture as a catalyst to improve the quality of landscape and enlarge the habitable area.

Homogenous landscapes: diversification of form, use, components, and enclosure The Essex countryside is becoming progressively homogenised, due to intensive farming and the rising demand for new suburban and exurban homes. The simplification of crop rotations means there is less fallow land, as farmland is in production for longer periods and advances in agricultural technology mean more rapid harvesting and sowing, thus more fields are under the same conditions at one time.32 At the regional scale, many studies have shown that spatial heterogeneity increases the quantity of biodiversity.33 As a spatial response to homogeneous rural landscapes, the diversification of form, land use, habitat components, and enclosure, will increase ecological value [fig. 18].

Diversification is required at a range of scales, from the region to the portioning of fields, to allow for variability in species requirements.34 Moreover, design should prioritise unique and endemic phenomena over those that are commonplace.35

31 Essex Biodiversity Project, “Integrating Biodiversity Into Development, Greenfield Site”, ebook, 2010.

32 Tim G. Benton, Juliet A. Vickery and Jeremy D. Wilson, “Farmland Biodiversity: Is Habitat Heterogeneity The Key?”, Trends In Ecology & Evolution 18, no. 4 (2003): 182-188, doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00011-9. 185.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid, 186.

35 McHarg, “An Ecological Method”, in Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 40.

22

Figure 16. Speculative landscape, adding value with diversified topography.

Figure 17. The topographically thus ecologically diverse landscape at Beeleigh, Essex.

The majority of the English countryside is divided into privately owned parcels of farmland based on the system of enclosure. The agricultural shift from the medieval open field system to enclosure, redefined the arrangement of the countryside,36 from selions (thin strips of shared farmland by rural communities, usually one furlong by one chain in length, and one acre in area), to large enclosed farms, which now in the UK have an average land holding of 77 hectares.37 The perpetual cultivation of selions created ridge and furrow topographic divisions in the landscape. Given that Essex is a moderately flat county, topography is a design device for diversity. Arguably, one could go as far to propose an artificial mountain range. Variety in land formation diversifies environmental conditions. Geographically raised habitat patches are more likely to be exposed to the sun and wind, whereas lower patches are more likely to collect water.

A local example is Beeleigh Falls, in Essex, a landscape in which the River Chelmer and River Blackwater meet at a series of man-made flood defences, which drop to form a tidal brackish estuary [fig. 17]. The combination of topography and salinity change creates a series of microclimates and habitat types.

The retirement of farmland and the introduction of a variety of greenspaces into new settlements, are perhaps the most feasible means of changing usage. In terms of the portioning of fields, variably articulated thin strips of land, similar to selions, would diversify monotonous landscapes and prevent

36 Bruce Winterhalder, “Open Field, Common Pot: Harvest Variability And Risk Avoidance In Agricultural And Foraging Societies. Risk And Uncertainty In Tribal And Peasant Economies.�, 1990, 67-68.

37 Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, Agriculture In The United Kingdom 2012 (London: UK Government, 2013), 7.

23

Figure 19+20. The reconfigured Orongo Sheep Station, New Zealand.

Figure 21. The ‘celebrity species’ of England, the Red Squirrel, was reintroduced to Mersea Island.

Simple

Complex

Uniform Independent

Diverse Interdependent

Unstable High-entropy

Stable Low-entropy

Arbitary ecological value matrix of speculative site in Marks Tey, Essex.

Left Figure 18. Speculative landscape diversification proposal

the loss of area in vehicular turning circles which would occur in squared portions. However, portioning should also occur at a variety of scales and be determined by the requirements of the local biodiversity. In order to maintain a heterogenous landscape, fields can recollect the benefits of enclosure by introducing new hedgerows and ditches, to prevent invasive species. The Orongo Station masterplan, by Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, is a diversification scheme for a 3,000-acre sheep station on the North Island, New Zealand [fig. 19, 20]. Prior to colonisation, the native habitat of this area was tropical rainforest, yet unregulated sheep farming has changed the landscape beyond recognition. By strategically retiring portions of farmland, based on the flow of the topography, the scheme re-introduced 500,000 trees, 75 acres of salt and freshwater wetlands, cultural gardens, and retained managed pastoral farmland as well as restored the endemic Tuatara from near extinction, back into the wild.38 The homogenocene is a proposed epoch in which humans are the cause of ecological homogenisation, part of which is due to disrupting the balance of many ecosystems by intentionally or inadvertently introducing invasive species.39 In Essex, Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam are particularly damaging species.40 Enclosed spatial boundaries aid the sustainability of diversity. Mersea Island in Essex reintroduced red squirrels into the wild in 2012,41 which was possible due to spatial detachment from the grey squirrels on 38 “Orongo Station Conservation Master Plan”, Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, accessed 31 March 2018, http://www.nbwla.com/projects/farm/ orongo-station-conservation-master-plan.

39 M.J Samways, “Translocating Fauna To Foreign Lands: Here Comes The Homogenocene”, Journal Of Insect Conservation, no. 3 (1999): 65-66.

40 “Invasive Species”, Essex Biodiversity Project, 2012, http://www. essexbiodiversity.org.uk/invasive-species.

41 “Essex Island Home To England’s Rarest Mammal”, Wild Essex, 2016, http:// www.wildessex.com/wildlife/an-essex-island-has-become-home-to-one-ofengland-rarest-mammals/.

25

the mainland. The physical separation of habitats reduces the potential for invasive species to prevail. Although this is a distinct geographic example, the level of spatial separation required to prevent invasive species is dependent on the fragility of the species in question.

Fragmented ecologies: defragmentation Habitat fragmentation is the division of a large continuous habitat into a series of smaller patches with a net habitat loss.

It is often caused by the human removal of native wildlife for infrastructure, buildings, and farmland. The spatial response to fragmented landscapes is the regularisation of edge conditions and defragmentation of isolated patches.

Simple Uniform Independent Unstable High-entropy

Complex Diverse Interdependent Stable Low-entropy

Arbitary ecological value matrix of speculative site in Marks Tey, Essex.

Figure 23. Ecoduct in the Netherlands, re-establishing a corridor for wildlife.

Left Figure 22. Speculative defragmentation proposal

Fragmentation creates larger and more complex edge conditions, which require individual analysis at the landscape scale. Larger peripheries mean increased contact with other land uses, which can create ecological richness or decline. Successful habitat edge conditions are not disconnected boundaries but ‘fuzzy’ buffer zones, that may asymmetrically vary around the habitat.42 The extent of the central ‘core’ habitat is determined by the complexity of the peripheral shape, i.e. the more regular the boundary is, the more effective the core habitat [fig. 22].

The distance and permeability of an ecotone, combined with the spatial capabilities of the species determines the patch dynamics [interaction between the isolated habitats].43 Transport infrastructure that divides the forests of the Netherlands, incorporates ‘ecoducts’ which can bridge fragmented habitats due to the small distances.44 However,

Raphael K Didham, “Ecological Consequences Of Habitat Fragmentation”, Encyclopedia Of Life Sciences, 2010, doi:10.1002/9780470015902.a0021904.

43 Ibid.

42

27

with larger distances in Essex, a fine-grain ‘greenway network’ based on a ‘patch and corridor’ format, will increase feasibly due to the little area required to create corridors, which could formalise as hedgerows, ditches, pathways, bridleways, and waterways.45 In certain instances, there is a disparity between defragmentation and the diversified portioning of greenspace, yet these design devices should be deployed depending on local conditions, preventing the spread of invasive species, yet enabling habitat symbiosis.

The natural-human divide: defragmentation In a world subjugated by the human species, our knowledge and usage of land can determine the existence of other species. Urbanisation and advances in digital technology have reduced spatial interactions between people and natural environments, thus general knowledge and understanding of biodiversity is declining. Children now only spend an average of 68 minutes outdoors each day,46 which is reflective of the general knowledge of nature. According to a study by the Department of Zoology in Cambridge, British children between ages eight and eleven identified 80% of the fictional species ‘Pokémon’ yet only 50% of real wildlife species.47 This study indicates the instinctive human desire and capability to learn about biodiversity, yet the source of education is now technological as well as physical. When people interact with others physically, they also interact

44 U.S. Department of Transportation, Wildlife crossing structure handbook Design And Evaluation In North America (Lakewood: Federal Highway Administration, 2011), 60.

45 Tom Turner, City as Landscape: A Post Post-Modern View of Design and Planning (London: E&FN Spon, 1996): 202.

46 ‘Children aged 8 to 15 years in the UK spent just over an hour (68 minutes)’, ‘on average per day taking part in an outdoor activity, sports-related activity or travelling on foot or by bicycle’, Claire Shenton and Eleanor Rees, Children’s Engagement With The Outdoors And Sports Activities, UK: 2014 To 2015 (London: Office for National Statistics, 2018), 1–11.

47 Andrew Balmford, “Why Conservationists Should Heed Pokemon”, Science 295, no. 5564 (2002): 2367b-2367, doi:10.1126/science.295.5564.2367b.

28

Figure 24.

Public understanding of wildlife is in decline due to technological and cultural shifts.

with an environment. Social interactions through digital technology have reduced the need to physically interact with each other, thus physical space has lost cultural and social value. However, by not interacting with the natural environment, one is deprived of the well-being and education gained through experience. If we are not aware nor care about nature, it may cease to exist.

Interactions between nature and humans can be considered at two scales. Firstly, occasional excursions, such as a visit to a nature reserve or the beach, which are spatially determined by country planning and a personal desire to travel. Whereas the second, are the banal daily experiences, such as travelling to work, walking the dog, meetings in public spaces, and sitting in the garden, which are formed by architecture and town planning. To create an ecologically symbiotic landscape, at the country scale this project advocates a fine grain rural network that defragments biodiversity rich landscapes and settlements, and at the architectural scale, the removal of the hard rural-urban edge conditions by amalgamating biodiversity with the built environment.

The spatial divide between humans and nature in Essex is a product of a national culture of prioritising economic and intellectual development over all else. The dominant residential typology in North Essex is the nuclear family suburban house. A Design Guide for Residential Areas, or the 1973 Essex Design Guide, is a document created by the County Council, to provide developers with a

29

Figure 25. The divided landscape of Great Notley, Essex. The design guide town is defined by transport infrastructure, and is fragmented from the ecologically successful country park.

30

Figure 26. Speculative sketch, that defragments people and nature at the everyday scale, by blending public and private greenspace.

baseline design quality to adhere to.48 The exemplary Essex Design Guide town, Great Notley, completed in 2000, is a prime example of an arcadian suburb that meets the suggestions made by the document. However, it highlights a series of issues, namely that the preconception of design, incapacitates the landscape to form as a process.49 The fundamental planning flaw overlooked by the guide, is the prioritisation of access to elsewhere over access to nature.

The curve of a highway fragments the masterplan, defining both the form of the town and isolating it from the adjacent country park. Although the park is an ecological success, to access it from the town requires crossing a four-lane national speed road. However, new settlements should reconsider the prioritisation of highway infrastructure over the connectivity between communities and nature.

The divide between humans and nature in the UK is cultural as well as spatial. The historic western European view of the natural environment was that it was uninhabitable and undeveloped. The 17th century French royal palaces carved away native forests to make space for ordered gardens.50 Although the 18th century picturesque serpentine lakes and sweeping paths of Capability Brown and Humphery Repton depicted the English appreciation for natural form,51 landscape remained hierarchically dominated by the human habitat, namely architecture. In rural Essex, the lack of objections and petitions against new estates on greenfield sites, illustrates the diminishing of bucolic agrarian cultures. By assimilating a digital age cultural stimulus and

48 Essex Planning Department, A Design Guide For Residential Areas (Chelmsford: Essex County Council, 1973).

49 Alan Ruff, “An Ecological Approach”, in Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 177.

50 “The Estate Of Marly”, Palace Of Versailles, 2018, http://en.chateauversailles.fr/ discover/estate/estate-marly.

51 David Watkin, The English Vision (London: J. Murray, 1982), 67.

31

Figure 27. Speculative landscape with shared county manor and inhabited follies. To what extent can an entire community be integrated or hidden in a landscape?

biodiversity, with architecture, will create a sustainable rural ecosystem.

At the architectural scale, this pilot thesis advocates residential settlements that are integrated into landscapes, rather than those that merely occupy land. Emilio Ambasz is an example of an architect who attempts to ‘green over the gray’.52 His projects including the Fukuoka Prefectural International Hall in Japan and Casa de Retiro Espiritua in Spain, redefine the human/natural edge condition. It is not merely a moment where a housing estate meets a field but a space for an interdependent ecology to thrive, created by spatially and materially blending architecture and landscape.

In Essex, the extent of the proposed natural and human ecological integration is yet undefined, but the intention is to culturally embed homes into a landscape by combining contemporary and traditional vernacular components, with the existing landforms and local biodiversity.

“Firm History”, Emilio Ambasz And Associates, accessed 31 March 2018, http://emilioambaszandassociates.com/information/.

52

32

Figure 28+29. Emilo Ambasz, seamless blend between landscape and architecture.

Figure 30. North Essex Garden Communities and site location

33

IMPLEMENTING

A

‘GREEN’

In reaction to the shrinkage of greenspace, homogenisation of landscape, and the physical and cultural fragmentation of habitats and people, this project proposes the reconfiguration of the North Essex rural landscape. Continuing the spirit of radical settlements in Essex and the context of the UK housing crisis, this project will manifest as a co-inhabited landscape based on the symbiosis between people and nature, with the intention of improving ecology, public wellbeing, and general knowledge of biodiversity. It proposes the redefinition of the political outer boundary, of the London greenbelt with the introduction of a physical landscape in North Essex. At the county scale, this could materialise as a county national park, including fine grain trails and greenways connecting strategically located habitat nodes and urban centres. The feasibility of this scheme depends on how ecologically enlightened a client is. In the case of the North Essex Garden Communities, the client is the culmination of three local authorities and a county council, thus if one can implement this project efficiently, it may be achievable.

34

COUNTRYSIDE

Moving forward to a period of fieldwork, this pilot thesis draws on a series of design considerations. Firstly, the diversification of uses, physical components, and topography, creates ‘enrichment through complexity’.53 Rather than having predisposed ideas about what design should be, design should formulate and augment as a process, beginning with the physical flow of the landscape as provided by nature. On site, the involvement of both the designer and the future users of the landscape, will embed a shared sense of local identity in the project and facilitate spontaneous chance events.54 Lastly, design that considers nature and humanity in a single ecosystem, will ecologically intensify the rural landscape.

53 Ruff, “An Ecological Approach”, in Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 177.

54 Ibid.

35

Figure 31. A speculative coinhabited landscape created from a bricolage of existing Essex locations.

List of Figures Figure 1. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 2. Aerial photograph, Ordnance Survey, 2018.

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the Manningtree transmitter, by Terry Jones, 2014, https://www. flickr.com/photos/boxster986/14762480398.

Figure 4. Collage, Author, 2017.

Figure 5. Diagram, Author, 2018.

Figure 6. Tables, Author, with Google Earth Imagery, 2018.

Figure 7. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 8. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 9. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 10. Map, Author, with Google Earth Imagery, 2018.

Figure 11. Map, Author, 2017.

Figure 12. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 13. Marks Tey, Aerial photograph, Ordnance Survey, 2018.

Figure 14. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 15. Studio REAL, ‘NEWHALL URBAN EXTENSION, HARLOW, ESSEX’, http://www. studioreal.co.uk/projects/NEW-NEIGHBOURHOODS/NEWHALL-URBAN-EXTENSION,HARLOW,-ESSEX/5/5 Figure 16. Sketch, Author, 2018.

Figure 17. Photograph, Author, 2018.

38

Figure 18. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 19. Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, ‘Orongo Station Conservation Master Plan’, http://www.nbwla.com/projects/farm/orongo-station-conservation-master-plan.

Figure 20. Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, ‘Orongo Station Conservation Master Plan’, http://www.nbwla.com/projects/farm/orongo-station-conservation-master-plan.

Figure 21. Photograph, Dougal Urquhart, http://merseawildlife.blogspot.co.uk/ Figure 22. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 23. Ecoduct, Netherlands, http://ecodemica.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/wildlife-bridge-orecoduct.html.

Figure 24. Collage, Author, 2018.

Figure 25. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 26. Sketch, Author, 2018.

Figure 27. Sketch, Author, 2018.

Figure 28. Fukuoka Prefectural International Hall, Japan, Emilo Ambasz, https://www.archdaily. com/803830/emilio-ambasz-i-detest-writing-theories-i-prefer-writing-fables Figure 29. Casa de Retiro Espiritua, Spain, Emilo Ambasz, https://www.archdaily.com/224879/ classic-cordoba-house-emilio-ambasz Figure 30. Map, Author, 2018.

Figure 31. Collaged Map, Author, 2018.

39

Bibliography Alberti, Marina, John M. Marzluff, Eric Shulenberger, Gordon Bradley, Clare Ryan, And Craig Zumbrunnen. “Integrating Humans Into Ecology: Opportunities And Challenges For Studying Urban Ecosystems”. Bioscience 53, no. 12 (2003): 1169.

Balmford, Andrew. “Why Conservationists Should Heed Pokemon”. Science 295, no. 5564 (2002): 2367b-2367. doi:10.1126/science.295.5564.2367b.

Barnett, Adrian. “The Nature Of Crops: Why Do We Eat So Few Of The Edible Plants?”. New Scientist, 2015. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730301-400-thenature-of-crops-why-do-we-eat-so-few-of-the-edible-plants/.

Benton, Tim G., Juliet A. Vickery, and Jeremy D. Wilson. “Farmland Biodiversity: Is Habitat Heterogeneity The Key?”. Trends In Ecology & Evolution18, no. 4 (2003): 182188. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00011-9.

Bruegmann, Robert. Sprawl. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008.

Carey, P.D, S Wallis, B.A Emmet, L.C Maskell, J Murphy, L.R Norton, I.C Simpson, and S.M Smart. Countryside Survey: UK Headline Messages From 2007. Ebook. NERC/ Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, 30pp. (CEH Project Number: C03259), 2008.

Coles, Jeremy. “How A City Can Save Its Wildlife”. BBC, 2018. http://www.bbc. co.uk/earth/story/20150731-how-a-city-can-save-wildlife.

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. Agriculture In The United Kingdom 2012. London: UK Government, 2013.

Didham, Raphael K. “Ecological Consequences Of Habitat Fragmentation”. Encyclopedia Of Life Sciences, 2010. doi:10.1002/9780470015902.a0021904.

Essex Biodiversity Project. “Integrating Biodiversity Into Development, Greenfield Site”. Ebook, 2010.

Essex County Council. “Garden Communities”. Essex Design Guide, 2018. https:// www.essexdesignguide.co.uk/overarching-themes/garden-communities/.

Essex Planning Department. A Design Guide For Residential Areas. Chelmsford: Essex County Council, 1973.

Feynman, Richard. “Cargo Cult Science”. Lecture, California, 1974.

Hammond, Philip. Oral Statement To Parliament: Autumn Budget 2017. London: UK Government, 2017.

40

Lyle, John. “Design for human Ecosystems”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 178-188. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

McHarg, Ian L. Design With Nature. Garden City, N.Y.: Published for the American Museum of Natural History [by] the Natural History Press, 1969.

McHarg, Ian. “An Ecological Method”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 38-43. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

McRae, Louise, Robin Freeman, and Valentina Marconi. Living Planet Report 2016: Risk And Resilience In A New Era. Gland, Switzerland: WWF International, 2016.

Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, National Planning Policy Framework(London: UK Government, 2012).

Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. National Planning Policy Framework. London: UK Government, 2012.

Nairn, Ian. Outrage. London: Architectural Press, 1955.

Olechnowicz, Andrzej. Working-Class Housing In England Between The Wars. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2011.

Philip Robertson, G., Katherine L. Gross, Stephen K. Hamilton, Douglas A. Landis, Thomas M. Schmidt, Sieglinde S. Snapp, and Scott M. Swinton. “Farming For Ecosystem Services: An Ecological Approach To Production Agriculture”. Bioscience 64, no. 5 (2014): 404-415.

Radical Essex, 2018, https://www.radicalessex.uk/.

Ruff, Alan. “An Ecological Approach”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 175-177. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

Ruff, Alan. “An Ecological Approach”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 175-177. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

Samways, M.J. “Translocating Fauna To Foreign Lands: Here Comes The Homogenocene”. Journal Of Insect Conservation, no. 3 (1999): 65-66.

Shenton, Claire, and Eleanor Rees. Children’S Engagement With The Outdoors And Sports Activities, UK: 2014 To 2015. London: Office for National Statistics, 2018.

Spinrad, William. “: The Exurbanites . A. C. Spectorsky.”. Social Problems 4, no. 1 (1956): 95-95. doi:10.1525/sp.1956.4.1.03a00180.

State Of Nature. Ebook. RSPB, 2016. https://www.rspb.org.uk/globalassets/downloads/documents/conservation-projects/state-of-nature/state-of-nature-uk-report-2016.pdf.

41

Steenbergen, Clemens M, and Wouter Reh. Architecture And Landscape. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2003.

Turner, Tom. City As Landscape. London: E&FN Spon, 1996.

Turner, Tom. Garden History. London: Taylor & Francis, 2006.

Turner, Tom. Landscape Planning. London: UCL Press, 1996.

U.S. Department of Transportation. Wildlife crossing structure handbook design and evaluation In North America. Lakewood: Federal Highway Administration, 2011.

Waldheim, Charles. “Planning, Ecology, And The Emergence Of Landscape”. Lecture, Harvard Graduate School of Design, 2008.

Watkin, David. The English Vision. London: J. Murray, 1982.

Whiston Spirn, Ann. “The Granite Garden”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 173-174. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

Whiston Sprin, An. “The Granite Garden”. In Theory In Landscape Architecture: A Reader, 173-175. Simon Swaffield. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.

Winterhalder, Bruce. “Open Field, Common Pot: Harvest Variability And Risk Avoidance In Agricultural And Foraging Societies. Risk And Uncertainty In Tribal And Peasant Economies.”, 1990, 67-87. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239731218_ Open_field_common_pot_Harvest_variability_and_risk_avoidance_in_agricultural_and_ foraging_societies.

“Essex Island Home To England’s Rarest Mammal”. Wild Essex, 2016. http://www. wildessex.com/wildlife/an-essex-island-has-become-home-to-one-of-england-rarest-mammals/.

“Firm History”. Emilio Ambasz And Associates. Accessed 31 March 2018. http:// emilioambaszandassociates.com/information/.

“Garden City Principles”. Town And Country Planning Association, 2018. https:// www.tcpa.org.uk/garden-city-principles.

“Greening”. Oxford English Dictionary, 2018. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/81206?.

“Invasive Species”. Essex Biodiversity Project, 2012. http://www.essexbiodiversity. org.uk/invasive-species.

“Johnathan Meades: The Joy Of Essex”. Documentary. BBC, 2013.

“LE 02 Ecological Value Of Site And Protection Of Ecological Features”. BREEAM,

42

2018. http://www.breeam.com/BREEAMInt2013SchemeDocument/content/11_landuse/ le_02.htm#BREEAM_checklist_for_defining_land_low_eco_value.

“Main Biodiversity Resources In The Tidal Thames”. Port Of London Authority.

Accessed 1 April 2018. https://www.pla.co.uk/Environment/Main-Biodiversity-Resources-in-the-Tidal-Thames-Species.

“Major Infrastructure And Projects”. Essex County Council, 2018. https://www. essex.gov.uk/Environment%20Planning/Development-in-Essex/Pages/Major-Infrastructure-and-Projects.aspx.

“Newhall Urban Extension, Harlow, Essex”. Studio Real. Accessed 31 March 2018. http://www.studioreal.co.uk/projects/NEW-NEIGHBOURHOODS/NEWHALL-URBAN-EXTENSION,-HARLOW,-ESSEX/5/5. about/.

“North Essex Garden Communities”. NE-GC, 2017. http://www.ne-gc.co.uk/

“Orongo Station Conservation Master Plan”. Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects. Accessed 31 March 2018. http://www.nbwla.com/projects/farm/orongo-station-conservation-master-plan.

“The Estate Of Marly”. Palace Of Versailles, 2018. http://en.chateauversailles.fr/discover/estate/estate-marly.

43