15min cities

I don’t really know if this has much stamina for its own thread, but 15min cities are being discussed everywhere at the moment. As far as I understand, it’s a simple idea that one can leave their front door and walk/cycle 15mins to shops, restaurants and amenities.

I.e. how most European cities work, give or take 5mins.

Do I have that right?

If I do have that right - beyond people misunderstand everything - why do a lot of people view this idea as an infringement of their freedom, privacy and rights? I saw a video of a bloke being interviewed who thought it meant he wouldn’t be able to leave the city or at least would be restricted in doing so.

Am I missing something or are these just the same people who believed what was written on the big red bus?

Conspiracy theorist types are latching on to it so there’s a lot to ignore

who thought it meant he wouldn’t be able to leave the city or at least would be restricted in doing so.

LOLZ

I have heard it called 20 mins neighbourhood which is less exclusive (i.e just cities) and more focussed on communities (cities, towns, villages etc) that has all the amenities within 20 mins walk of their home.

A great idea if it could be realised but as someone who lives in a village 30 mins (drive) from Glasgow where the majority of people work in Glasgow or Edinburgh I'm not sure it would ever work in my scenario. All amenities are already in the place you go to work so you actually don't use the amenities in the place you live apart from weekends/WFH days. I still like the idea though.

It’s loony antivaxxers and anti 5G types turning up to the protests who now have a new confusing enemy to add to the list.

There’s also a load of Clarkson types who can’t understand the difference between minor restrictions on driving and draconian restrictions on movement.

Both groups have made up a whole load of imaginary new rules about the 15 minute city idea - e.g. restrictions on how often you’re allowed to leave your assigned 15 minute zone. None of which have been floated by anyone serious.

Wow, just had a quick look on tinternet. How has something fairly basic been so wildly misunderstood? So glad I don't look at the news often.

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYBk3twX/

I quite enjoy this guys' tiktoks

Zackly.

The big error is that the posh yoghurt knitting retired / never worked local politicians who can afford to live within walking distance of good sushi don’t know how to present ideas to people who are busy and stressed and running late and increasingly financially squeezed.

What you do is, you don’t.

You certainly don’t brand your ideas up as ‘15 minute middle class liberal elite tofu cities’ and create one big enemy for the gutter press to pick on.

You just tell a single street you’re going to shut one end to improve traffic flow and make it quieter, then you do it. It’s been done for decades without such substantial opposition.

All that said, I do feel for the people who live on busy roads who are going to experience even worse traffic and pollution while the (richer) people who live in side streets get nicer lives for free.

Plus I endorse any form of public unrest at the moment, it’s perhaps mis-targeted anger, but like the strikes it’s a tipping point because of all the other shit working folk have had to put up with for the last decade that’s made their lives worse.

Stick it to the man.

Yeh you need to mix in Covid lockdown's, LTN's, ULEZ and low emission zones, China social credit score, WEF and then extrapolate from it would be good to have essential services in walking distance to I will live in a ghetto and my every movement tracked and controlled

All that said, I do feel for the people who live on busy roads who are going to experience even worse traffic and pollution while the (richer) people who live in side streets get nicer lives for free.

Its not always the case tbh. This is more "fAcTs" bandied about by anti LTN protestors and not whats been observed by long term analysis of well planned and executed road closures.

https://thecityfix.com/blog/traffic-evaporation-what-really-happens-when-road-space-is-reallocated-from-cars/
https://www.rapidtransition.org/stories/reducing-roads-can-cause-traffic-to-evaporate/
https://www.hammersmithbridge.org.uk/p/179/traffic-evaporation

Bringing tofu into it is very Braverman / Hopkins of you ;-)

Am I missing something

Ignoring the proper loons for obvious reasons, the main objection I've heard from normal people is: actual things are being removed, to be replaced with some feels about introducing improvements.

What’s being removed?

I used to get annoyed by these types, but now I just let them make their own bed to lay in. I’m over trying to help and educate.

All that said, I do feel for the people who live on busy roads who are going to experience even worse traffic and pollution

Nope. Rat running occurs because main roads are at capacity. If you remove the rat runs no magical new capacity appears on the main roads. It simply results in less driving.

I live on a main road and I would love the back streets round here to be properly LTNed. It would make zero noticeable difference to the amount of traffic going past my window but would make a huge difference to walking and cycling the back streets.

while the (richer) people who live in side streets get nicer lives for free.

There's little evidence for this either. People of all income levels live adjacent to both types of road, and most council estates were built as LTNs from day one.

Depends where is it I guess. I'm not that well versed on it, because it seems like such a basically obvious thing to do I'm still a bit in shock by the debate.

My understanding is that Cambridge is proposing a congestion charge - so money is being removed from your pocket at a time when things are tight.

Other places drivers are required to drive alternate routes - so their current route to work is being removed resulting in increasing your commute time and fuel cost.

In an ideal world you'd start a load of good stuff/quick wins you can do some PR on, then start on the restrictions, then build out the longer term infrastructure and start to introduce the more punitive/restrictive parts.

They would argue freedom of movement and personal choice

Cambridge is proposing a congestion charge - so money is being removed from your pocket at a time when things are tight.

Other places drivers are required to drive alternate routes - so their current route to work is being removed resulting in increasing your commute time and fuel cost

Its like, either people are banned from using certain roads and routes in their cars, or they pay to do so. Both cause contention with drivers. What other choices are there to ease congestion?

Based on...

What other choices are there to ease congestion?

Right, but that wasn't the question.

I think it's obtuse to act like there are no disadvantages.

Even if you reasonably think euthanasing the bat shit opponents would be a net benefit to society. Which I think we can all agree on.

Examples like ULEZ and LTN

I agree it's wrong to say there are no disadvantages, but people really need forge new ways of doing things; take some personal responsibility.

Or stand on the street complaining to anyone who'll listen, putting their fate in the hands of others.

No patience for it, especially when it spills over into the ridiculous conspiracies that caused me to start this thread.

I'd argue that knackered, 15yr old Sprinter van idling outside my house is imposing on my freedom of choice, if we're going that route.

But I don't; I just shut the window.

Yes please. Places people want to be in that don't "require" driving.

my own conspiracy theory is that LTNs and 15 min cities, ULEZ, and the rest have been identified as a substantial threat to the business model of vehicle manufacturers and fossil fuel companies, so it's a safe bet that a lot of this confused opposition has been fomented by some PR companies on their payroll.

Of course I have zero evidence for this but for me the more outrageous scenario would be to imagine that the abovenamed companies are relaxed and complacent about policies which are explicitly seeking to reduce car dependency and haven't taken any action to protect their profits.

take some responsibility

These types of people are totally incapable of taking responsibility. For anything. Ever.

You see it throughout DM comments and shit that comes out of those readers mouths. "We need to remove red tape and cut things I don't care about for people I don't care about, but simultaneously bring in legislation to protect me against x, refund me for y, and provide me with the following services.... ".

Things like Dieselgate and ULEZ are peak eg.

Depressingly I wish that were the case. I think it's now just a toxic circle jerk of alt-right grifters needing to keep up the repayments on their audi X a Conservative party that has lost any meaning POST-2007 X the parasitic nature of big tech's social media business model.