15 minute cities and the conspirators

[ivykaty44]

15 minute cities being organised to mean that you don't have to rely on a car to get to everything and can easily walk to many places therefore only have to use the car for longer journeys

the conspiracy theories im seeing on social media are suggesting its a world wide control formula and we will be fined for moving from one district to another.

www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/02/08/15-minute-city-conspiracy-theories-insane-says-15-minute-city-creator/?sh=121378916156

I'm wondering if the car manufactures are behind the conspiracy, as they would have a lot to lose if people live in places where they don't need a car and can just ave one family car or hire a car. Billions of sales could be lost if this takes off.

Some cities have gone car free - theculturetrip.com/europe/spain/articles/the-car-free-spanish-city/ and found after much objection, that it works well - especially for the elderly

"will ban private vehicles from six areas of the city at certain times"

And they're issuing passes to mitigate the impacts on business by the sounds of things. Can you explain how that equates to an "end to rural communities"?

I'm not in favour of how Oxford have done this and they're rightly facing significant legal challenges, which is how things should be. We shouldn't see what Oxford are doing and just witlessly assume that it'll soon be applied to the whole country. Of course it won't. We're a democracy and people, and businesses, are powerful.

We shouldn't see what Oxford are doing and just witlessly assume that it'll soon be applied to the whole country. Of course it won't.

If you read said thread, there's mention of plans in other UK places too. It's possible they will also be challenged, I don't know

We're a democracy and people, and businesses, are powerful.

I hope so, but people need to be informed, we can't all live in la-la land while changes that may harm us go ahead

And I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I'm shocked by some of the things I read (not on FB)

Not read the whole thread, but I can’t understand why, when the issue is too much traffic in the centre of Oxford, the solution isn’t improving public transport and incentivising its use - eg free for locals, or cheaper than travelling and parking.

Creating zones with fines for travelling outside them too often is bound to stir up conspiracy theories because it’s such a heavy handed way to deal with things. It smacks of typical political decisions by people who have everything they want and will be unaffected, and have no idea of the real world.

You have to pay to drive in to central London during certain times - this is to limit pollution and congestion. Last time I looked this hasn't resulted in the forced relocation of rural Kent dwellers to South london tower blocks.

But perhaps a reverse Year Zero has been happening under my nose and I have not noticed.

Central London and even lots of outer London has way better public transport than elsewhere. It is not comparable.
When I lived in London I did not have a car, I did not need one.

Me too but plenty of Londoners objecting to the ULEZ and LTNs have a very different view

Up to 100 day passes per year will be offered to residents and businesses affected by the changes, enabling them to travel through the filters without penalty

or they can find another way to travel between zones, if not they can travel by car from A to C to get to B no one will stop them. If though it’s a 15 minute walk from A to B then driving from A to C to get to B might become a bit daft if it takes 30 minutes

I think there is a interesting wider issue going on here about the sustainability of our dominant mode of rural living eg dormitary villages where work, social life and services are only acccesible by car, in the face of climate change, congestion and finite fuel.

In centuries gone by rural dwellers have accepted very geogrpahically limited lives and people moved to towns and cities for more opportunity. This was obviously a hard limitation imposed by the absence of motorised transport. Now people can live rural lives but access the convenience of town and city living using a car. However cars have significant and growing negative externalities, how to deal with this is an challenging policy question.

Congestion and how to deal with it an age old problem. 1st century Romans were moaning about the day time ban on wheeled traffic in Rome which was introduced as a congestion limiting measure.

In centuries gone by rural dwellers have accepted very geogrpahically limited lives and people moved to towns and cities for more opportunity. This was obviously a hard limitation imposed by the absence of motorised transport.

things changed in the mud 1800s as trains operated and people could move, sadly beeching put paid to that in the 1960s with all the train cuts

@Ginmonkeyagain The people who lived rurally and were happy with less services have largely had to move out as house prices and rents have soared with commuters and retirees. My family are from a rural area and they can not afford to live there any more.
To turn the clock back you need all those commuters and retirees to move out who want more than is in their local village. And house prices and rents to fall. It wont happen though.

Well yes that is an issue - along with why local shops and sercices in these areas are dying. I grew up in a village of 150 people, there are now 0 children living there, it is literally dying.

if not they can travel by car from A to C to get to B no one will stop them

It's likely that these journeys would take longer, hence more pollution. All of a sudden it's not clear whether it's about climate change or not

The other thing that worries me is that these measures (not only in Oxford, but in other places, even outside of the UK) seem to be implemented by stealth.

Citizens and businesses shouldn't have be put in a position of having to resort to expensive law suits to prevent damage. Authorities have a duty of care and are accountable to everyone under their remit (not just those who voted for them) At the moment it feels like they are pushing irrational, harmful rules to see how far they can get without people noticing or complaining. It's madness

Harmful rules? Not harmful for everyone and quite the opposite of 'madness'

I find some of the debate of 15min cities baffling
For background earlier in my career (about 15yrs ago) I used to master plan developments that would be classed as 15minute cities.
Our larger bodies of work were not in this country as developers and funders here were generally not interested in the nature of these projects as there primary drivers were profit not sustainable communities.
We did do a plan for a part of Edinburgh but it never got funded so was shelved.
We did produce workable schemes for India and a few places in South America.
It frustrates me that often these very solid principles of building good supported vibrant communities are either badly translated, interpreted or value engineered out in the name of profits so we have new developments that are cut off from the things that are needed to actually make them work well and give them longevity.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/16/15-minute-city-planning-theory-conspiracists

A good article skewering the ridiculousness of some of these conspiracies.

"There’s an international socialist conspiracy afoot, and it wants to make it easier to walk to the shops. Fringe forces of the far left are plotting to take away our freedom to be stuck in traffic jams, to crawl along clogged ring roads and trawl the streets in search of a parking spot. The liberty of the rush-hour commute, the sanctity of the out-of-town shopping centre and the righteousness of the suburban food desert is under threat as never before. The name of this chilling global movement? The “15-minute city”."

@DappledThings It is a good article. The article also acknowledges real concerns about how this could increase social segregation and negatively affect poor communities.

So will poor areas get an Aldi and richer areas get a Waitrose with Tesco somewhere in the middle, I live in a town but wouldn't want to be stuck with Asda which is nearest but I never use

@RedRiverShore3

The key point is we will all need to make sacrifices . Yes, I’d love to be able to go to Waitrose or Fortnum and Mason on demand, it is not essential and it’s simply not sustainable with the climate crisis. We all need to be making use of what’s available locally on foot, rather than gallivanting about.

Previous generations spent the vast majority of time either at home or in their local communities. We will need to do likewise- the days of driving across town for coffee or a specific shop are over.

So it sounds really good if you are well off, especially as you now don't have to mix with the plebs. What sacrifices are they making?

The majority of planning for this kind is for new development and if planned well (which currently it generally isn't) should be a mix of social and tenure types - so not a rich area or a poor area or old /young persons area - it should a mix of everything which makes the best 'communities'
It's much harder to enact in existing development and there needs to be tailored to circumstances more but should try to encourage a diverse mix not segregated areas.
If you want to think about supermarkets - an existing area which is already very successful that I know well in this regards has an Asda and a Sainsbury's as well as lots of independents (both posh and convenience store types)

It also has good public transport options to further afield.

Previous generations spent the vast majority of time either at home or in their local communities

Rubbish. People have always been on the move - work, pilgrimages, crusades, being a mercenary, being in the army or navy, being married to someone who was in the army or navy, being an imperial administrator, being a missionary, being an ambassador, being a merchant, simple curiosity about what another place was like.

But you're on a windup anyway so have nothing useful to say.

Have you heard about how 'misinformation' will be actively tackled by social media (and MSM are at it as well apparently)?

apnews.com/article/technology-science-politics-germany-business-a10273eea5a0227c38187cc4f84d8788

Good to see people in Leeds and other places speaking up

All looks very sensible too. Explaining to people how misinformation spreads and how to be robust against it.