I S S U E N O. 4 7 3
replanning of the central part of the city. It also led the discussion about implementation of the Green Belt, first proposing it in its 1919 report as a means of curbing urban sprawl, then championing the idea in public debate. Another seminal London Society publication, published in 1921 and edited by Sir Aston Webb, studied the problems the capital faced at that time and came up with solutions; it was entitled London of the Future. When Patrick Abercrombie was approached to deliver a new plan for London he made clear that he would only take it on if he was able to follow the course taken by the London Society and work on the Greater London region as a whole. So, in his Greater London Plan 1944, Abercrombie criticised the ‘lamentable failure to realise a need for coordination in planning all around London' and praised the London Society’s Development Plan as ‘full of guidance for the future'. The Society’s history is very similar to that of the Municipal Arts Society (MAS) of New York, whose advocacy has helped to shape the city since its inception in 1893. Some of MAS’s early accomplishments include passing the city’s first zoning laws, contributing to the planning of the city’s subway line, and, like the London Society, promoting the idea of regional planning. So, whilst respecting the past, the London Society has never been a conservation society. It has always taken a balanced view of past, present and future. Both the London Society and MAS are believers in the idea of cities. Both reacted against the lack of planning and the unhealthy environments of 19th century cities, but believed in the benefits of agglomeration when properly designed. Unlike the Town and Country Planning Association, founded just over a decade before
us, the London Society did not reject the idea of the dense metropolis. Indeed our support for the Green Belt as a contained area for the development of the city, not only ended sprawl but spurred densification. Looking to the future So how do we respect the founding beliefs of the Society and mould them to suit today’s capital? We hold on to the concept that London’s future must be shaped by contemporary culture as well as by its rich and layered history. For centuries one of London’s great strengths has been its ability to adapt to change and to integrate the new with the old, an approach that has been enshrined in the London Plan where response to character and local context is highlighted. So after much deliberation, we redefined the purpose of the Society as ‘Valuing the past, looking to the future’ with a strapline that reads: ‘Engaging all Londoners in the debate about design, architecture and planning in the capital.’ This we felt respected the original aims of our founding fathers, while making them clearer and more comprehensible to a modern audience. Our new motto provides a simple way of describing what we are about and reflects the sentiments set out in the closing words of London of the Future: ‘In the reorganisation of London we cannot stand still, and we ought not to stand still; but we can advance with reverence and see to it that the immemorial spirit of London does not suffer amid the rush and stress of our modern life.’
7
LS Layout issue 473 SS 2019 final JCT edit 1.indd 7
26/02/2019 15:50:24