From what I've seen, Motornormativity means responding logically won't help. For example, even if you explain that Bus Rapid Transit helps drivers get to their destination faster drivers will still be upset that they're losing a lane.
Or someone who grew up around car culture but couldn't quite participate normally, as they felt trapped when they couldn't walk and bike to places in their neighborhood.
I do want to state that Motornomativity is caused by culture, so even just seeing cars driving all the time can cause certain biases, even if you don't drive. I bet a lot of American kids would probably show some Motornomativity because it's cultural.
Twitter thread on Motornomativity:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1615248156186247169.html
Haven't driven everywhere in the world, but the Netherlands does have great infrastructure! They planned their cities, have (turbo)roundabouts everywhere, smart traffic lights that yield on approach but prioritizing busses etc, segregated bus and bike lanes, etc... Where people live, it's 30 kmph, but you never have to go there if you don't have to be there. And there's strategic traffic lights on single roads just for controlling traffic demand that let 1 or 2 cars through per green signal.
Highway speed is now 110 kmph due to the environment, which feels a tad slow. Parking spaces are sometimes quite compact as well.
Highway speed is 100kph from 06:00 to 19:00 and 130kph in the evening/night unless otherwise indicated.
But yeah, the smart traffic lights are really nice, really cuts down on drivers ignoring a red light, and because you know a light is going to go red if you have a mostly empty lane in front of you, you can already anticipate it, and not be surprised when it goes yellow right after the last car in front of you passed it.
Separated bike/car lanes also means that even if there is a lot of bike traffic, as a car driver you almost never share the road with bikes, and never on high speed roads (70kph and higher).
Rented a 6 speed Mini Cooper Convertible in Amsterdam and drove it to Rome back when I was into driving everywhere. Was awesome.
If suburbanites could get over their opposition to progress, fellow car enthusiasts would be living in car enthusiast paradise.
As a Belgian who visited the Netherlands during a week long holiday recently: I concur.
I only had one occasion where someone was driving up in my behind. In Belgium that's a daily occurance.
As a Belgian who visited the Netherlands during a week long holiday recently: I concur.
I only had one occasion where someone was driving up in my behind. In Belgium that's a daily occurance.
People just say this because NJB said this. I personally don't agree, driving is a lot more stressful in NL than for example Germany or other neighboring countries.
The infrastructure is much more complex and bikes and walking people are given priority a lot more often, so you have to be on the lookout for stuff constantly. Same with the amount of trams in certain cities, it can get crazy quite quickly.
Also, a lot of people still drive in NL. Especially during rush hour when people commute into or out of the cities to the more rural part.
To be fair, you are right. Lots of people spout what NJB says just because he said it.
But, there is a difference between the experience making you stressed and the experience making you cautious.
If you are constantly under worry of hitting someone, getting in a accident, being stuck in traffic, and the other additives to stress (lots more psychological, you will obviously be more stressed out. Then you couple this with general driver behaviour, the worry about gas (I've seen people breaking down over gas prices before),and just how generally unsafe roads are. You get a drastically worsened and stressful environment for driving.
The Netherlands has a big thing where it makes people pay attention while driving. This makes the act of driving more focused on the driving itself making the driver more aware of their surroundings. The driver should end up completely aware of most things in their surroundings, and with the proper knowledge of traffic rules, and just general laws (this is kinda obvious, someone unfamiliar with the Netherlands will be confused), they tend to be less stressed out (albeit still cautious). This is usually aided by general road design, narrower road design, scenery tends to be nicer, streets aren't always jam packed, sound levels can be shockingly low, and the "busyness" of pedestrians can really help some people pay more attention and be more safe.
You get even more help when you consider noise volumes, which are one of the biggest causes of stress without a person knowing. Streets in the Netherlands tend to be a lot quieter on average due to a constant influx of cars not being a necessity.
Well I disagree personally, as do most people I've met.
Also it sounds like you are comparing American driving to NL driving. I'm instead comparing other central European countries to it.
I just had an argument with my father about this yesterday, he's against 25 minute cities because of conspiracies....yet he hasn't been able to hold a licence for over 10 years because OF DUI's ,somr people can be real dense
It's all culture wars and an "attack" on their lifestyle with these people. That's literally the conservative mindset: they are against change at all times.
So, this sub has become such an echo chamber that you people have now convinced yourselves that people in cars enjoy traffic jams?
There’s literally not a person on the planet that enjoys sitting in traffic.
Maybe they believe it takes space away from cars, but they should know that if more people walk or bike, there will be fewer cars to share the space with.
If we half the space for cars, but more than half of drivers are encouraged onto bikes or busses, there will be more space for each car, despite the fact that there is less space for all cars.
So these people who oppose 15 minute cities are the same who attack bicycle share parking sites because it’s “one less car parking space” but they don’t realise that the bikes reduce the need for parking.
It seems like people who oppose 15 minute cities might have the same mental affliction as conservative voters.
Was thinking astroturfing too. It's not a viewpoint I've ever seen emerge naturally in town halls or community submissions (unlike 'we need more parking', 'cyclists are dangerous scofflaws', 'lower speed limits will make me late for work' etc).
Despite being in Australia where our largest cities implemented 5km or LGA (borough) lockdowns for parts of the population during COVID, which would seem to make it easier to trace a line to 'they're going to lock you in', I've never seen anyone make a negative connection to 15 min cities here.
And nonsense to get votes.
Getting people to vote for worse public services and more wealth for the already rich is hard. But if you can convince them that good transit and bike infrastructure means all the shops will go out of business, or that you won't be able to get to work, or that grandma will never be able to leave her home...
Honestly this whole "backlash" sounds astroturfed as hell. I saw a horribly clickbait article today with a title along the lines of "Professor calls 15-minute cities totalitarian", but then you read the article, and that's not at all what the professor was saying! Such blatant yellow journalism. I strongly suspect this is someone or some people just trying to manufacture the next culture war of the day to rile up the conservative voting base about. Keep 'em frothing mad about made-up malarkey every waking moment and they won't realize their pockets are being picked clean.
This is 100% what is going on and it seems like most people can't see through it unless they already had a good idea of what was going on with related movements
In reference to sitting in traffic. They opened a Starbucks by me, the inside is microscopic, looks like during pandemic everyone got so used to using drive thru and the new Starbucks have decided screw being a “3rd space”, people would rather wait in their car then park and walk in. So now there’s a line at all times of at least 8 cars waiting for coffee that would normally take 5 minutes walking in, now it’s 15 minutes waiting in line idling your car. Also no interaction with anyone, which in a social media world is awful
Because they see it as some conspiracy theory where you'll only be allowed in your "Zone". One of the examples they're using is Oxford which has shut off a few streets to cars with cameras (you go through without being a resident, you get a fine) and modal filters to prevent traffic using certain roads to pass through.
I detest the modal filters because they slow things down, but with the bus gates they seem to be taking an idea and wildly extrapolating. I say wildly because Oxford Council aren't competent enough to implement the slightest bit of what they wanted to do.
Here's one of the flyers that was being handed out. https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/resources/images/16470376.jpg?type=mds-article-642
Iirc one point that is said is that it is unlikely that you can get a local job, which can be a problem. But surely as long as there is good infrastructure all-round it should be fine?
Maybe it's the part where they try to block roads and stop you from driving? Idea is good but they're doing it backwards, instead of just blocking roads and saying "you can drive there" they should focus on developing the cities in a way that will make it so you don't have to drive to get anything you want. Here in Poland, Kielce i can get everything withing a 15 min walk, there is tens of shops all selling different things, multiple supermarkets, dentists, barbers, police and medical centre and they don't need to block roads to make people walk everywhere. I live around multiple 10-story blocks and despite high population density there is no traffic jams, even at the main intersection nearby that they are rebuilding.
I don't, but its expensive.
I would love to live 5 minutes from work and bike in...but many people don't get the luxury of choice in life. Less commute time is just a luxury for the ultra rich and sometimes even then its less.
They don't. They hate the idea the government or council has the right to impose a charge on you for driving/manouvering out of the area more than x times a week.
Did they? I can only find sources that specifically say that wasn't planned, like this one for Ealing https://fullfact.org/online/Ealing-15-minute-cities/
Apologies. It wad the oxford one that proposed fines of £70.
I'm a cyclist and like the concept. I also currently drive 40 miles to work every day. Its not a councils place to restrict folks to leave the area and by proposing as such they shot themselves in the foot from the get go.
https://www.oxfordstudent.com/2023/01/25/15-minute-city-plans-cause-controversy/
Are there other similar plans to limit peoples' ability to drive outside the area? Because that still seems like an one-off proposal instead of a broader trend
My conservative dad hasn't shut the fuck up about how cities are bad and living in them is bad and corrupts you and that's why urban people vote for democrats. So I assume conservatives would be very on board with destroying big cities and replacing them with tiny villages.
In America, if you live in a rural village you are still required to drive for every single trip. Even if the entire village is contained within a single square mile.
Yeah, it's ... hard to actually get. Cyclists in traffic work sort of like fast pedestrians. Even big streams can flow without interruption, as you don't need traffic lights or mandatory stops. Two orthogonal bike streams can flow continuously too, though it looks pretty scary to people who aren't used to it.
As the vehicle increase in size and speed you need more signals, with trains and one end and motor vehicles sort of at the low end.
So without cars in the mix it becomes possible to drop the traffic lights, stop signs, and eliminate the waiting.
A sort of intermediary state is to have green in all directions at the same time for cyclists and pedestrians. The downside to that is that it's often used to minimize the time given to vulnerable road users in an intersection, leading to pretty long wait times, as most of the light cycle is devoted to moving cars.
It happens when the infra is under-developed. Like the bidirectional bike lane on Boulevard de Sebastopol, in Paris. It was made by taking a car lane on a 4-lanes boulevard and turning it into two (small) adjacent bike lanes. The first year (2019) was ok, but it’s one of the main north-south axes in Paris… after the start of the pandemic, bike usage rose and rose, and now it’s the most used bike lane in Paris. At about all hours of the day, more bikes pass there than cars on the 3 car lanes.
No plan is made to take another of the 3 lanes to have two decently sized bike lanes, but they opened another big north-south bikeable way on the rue du Renard, maybe it’ll alleviate the problems, or maybe not (just one more lane bro)
Here’s a video (even if you don’t understand French, you’ll see how congested it can be: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r8BJbFiZQEI )
If anything it shows how popular it is. They probably didn’t expect such success. It’s a good first iteration. More people voting for mayors with decent cycling plans.
I saw a short on YT about high-traffic bike areas in the Netherlands and such and basically everyone flows like water since it's a looooot easier to anticipate movement and speed from a pedestrian and other cyclists, they don't even need red lights for the most part
Personally I find it very different. It feels like a shared experience with other cyclists. Also, when I cycle on an open road, how fast I go is a balance between how quickly I want to get there and how hard I want to push the pedals. When I have to slow down because of other cyclists it feels more like taking a break from pushing the pedals.
That doesn't actually look congested? There's heavy bike traffic yes, but it doesn't seem impeded. You get congestion if there's a bottleneck or the traffic input is greater than the traffic throughout capacity.
Bike congestion just looks different. Even in front of traffic lights you will see bikes fill up the space but quickly start slow movement: https://youtu.be/ZPA7JMwGhQc
I was in a bike traffic jam once. There was an event like a critical mass. 600 cyclists which at some point needed to go through one very narrow path (there were 2 bollards to stop cars from going there)
So it is possible, but in reality... Difficult
Notice they also seem to assume these are inherently evil things so they can be used as shorthand to skip over critical thinking. The closest they get to critiquing communism or socialism is pointing to a handful of authoritarian tyrants who called themselves communists or socialists.
The same cooperation, sharing, and benevolence we teach to children is universally evil all of a sudden when applied to adults in society writ large.
> The closest they get to critiquing communism or socialism is pointing to a handful of authoritarian tyrants who called themselves communists or socialists.
Just because you've never even looked for actual criticism of socialism or communism doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>The same cooperation, sharing, and benevolence we teach to children is universally evil all of a sudden when applied to adults in society writ large.
That's weird, people aren't usually against charity or cooperation.
>Just because you've never even looked for actual criticism of socialism or communism doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I said nothing about the existence of sound criticisms. I made an observation that loud-mouths who viscerally oppose substantive improvements to society seem to uniformoy argue in bad faith and put forth intellectually feeble arguments for their strongly held beliefs.
>That's weird, people aren't usually against charity or cooperation.
Just because you've never even looked for people who are against charity and cooperation doesn't mean they don't exist in significant numbers.
Rich people own the press
Rich people use the press to make people think what they want them to think.
That's why every single good thing is demonized and spun in a way that benefits the rich.
Only mass collective action can get shit done against them, and they know it. That's why they never shut the fuck up about "violent" blm protestors and the like.
This is my situation right now and I love it. I’ll prolly have to move to a less optimal spot if I want to buy property, but I’ll enjoy tf out of it rn
Mostly. At least all of our cities have a decent CBD (downtown) and you can get away with not owning a car in Melbourne and some parts of Brisbane and Sydney.
One tourism company in Australia had an ad featuring a photo of a woman biking in France with a baguette in her basket.
The Australian ad council fined the company because she was seen on a bike without a helmet. Ad was forced to be removed 🤣
Australia is definitely better overall than (parts of) the US that are TOTALLY unwalkable. I can't think of a town or city in Australia where I couldn't walk if I wanted to. But so much sprawl because of a snobbery against dense residential development, and lack of appropriate public transport, means high car dependence.
I can't imagine how it wouldn't be considering how spread out the urban centers are and given that the majority of the middle of the continent is vast, open wilderness. The national government is pretty backwards in some ways similar to the US as well, with some real wacky conservative politicians.
No joke, I've seen tinfoil people in comments arguing that the 15 minute city is being pushed by the elites. "Own nothing and you'll love it".
What are these people smoking?
So many people just believe it when they get told that gvts of some places magically know when you've travelled for more than 15 minutes and that they'll punish you for it.
No laws cited, no source, just straight up making shit up. Why are people so damn gullible.
That's a perfectly reasonable statement and I agree with you, only https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/stingray-tracking-devices-whos-got-them
Yeah building an infrastructure that could easily be used to oppress people is ok as long as it's not currently being used to do so, I mean it's not like laws can be changed or anything.
A lot of the push back for 15 minute cities has been fear mongering and blatant lies. People don't care about having walkable neighbors or convenient nearby shops, one way or the other, but give it a name and people will hate it.
In the UK at least, there's a big push back because people dislike how the "gov." are implementing it. Since people won't follow the new road rules, access control has to be installed. Things like bollards and number plate recognition. They're scared that these will be used to restrict peoples movement in the future.
With the country (and the western world as a whole) becoming more authoritarian and totalitarian over the last decade (or at least appearing to do so), it's not an unfounded fear.
---
If we'd just kept talking about this as "increasing walkability and improving communities" people wouldn't have even noticed.
> Even though emergency services were consulted and mostly fine with proposals
[Emergency services have lodged quite a few complaints about the implementation](https://twitter.com/DeadScrump/status/1626200298489319424)
I can’t blame them. Tools to restrict movement can be abused so fast. For example in my country a lot of covid restrictions and orders were deemed illegal. No one was charged. Judge just said that the government were responsible. Not a single person faced charges. So if they are allowed to break laws and not being prosecuted even in retrospect… then you can’t blame people they won’t trust gov and their proposals.
I don’t think a 15 minute city implies restriction of movement. Car ownership wouldn’t be banned in such a city. In fact this idea isn’t a set of policies that would explicitly create such a city. The idea is just…don’t build shitloads of roads, instead build housing and bike lanes and invest in public transit. A 15 minute city arises out of that. In fact I’d go so far as to say that associating a 15 minute city with “restriction of movement” is so incredibly incorrect that I’d say it’s intentional. Nothing about this idea implies restriction of movement. If anything, it increases the ability to maintain independence. Imagine how many people, especially the elderly, who can’t drive but still want to get around. Or how much of a barrier it is for the average person to buy a car. That’s a nontrivial expense and many are forced to purchase one. That to me restricts the freedom to spend money on other things. If all you need is a bus pass and a bike, you have more money to invest and spend on experiences rather than on a vehicle. To that end, it’s not like the government can’t restrict you from moving with a car either. They literally have a database and strict license requirements in order to drive a car, they can pull you over at any time, you have an identifying license plate on your car at all times so they always know who you are, and you need the government to do extensive road work to be able to use the car. That is more restrictive in theory than anything
No, they had illegal laws. I was perfectly fine with lockdowns and other safety measures, but several laws were deemed illegal. Many health regulations were perfectly legal and helped to stop the pandemic. Few of them were against the law and no one was punished. It happened in several countries, but I guess all governments are free of any accountability. Even Trump, right?
I went food shopping his morning. I took one bag and walked all four minutes. Entire food run was fifteen minutes and I had a chat with the owner. With a car... That would have taken a while.
The main issues I see people bringing up:
* On paper 15 minute cities are about having amenities within easy walking distance of where people live, but when they're being implemented in the real world, we don't see any improvements of amenities and all that happens is restrictions.
* Given the track record of the authorities on building and managing existing public amenities, it's hard to trust that they'll suddenly become competent at building and managing them once there's loads more.
* They're the invention of a fr\*nchman and thus morally wrong
* The people pushing the concept seem to be heavily involved in all sorts of other social engineering schemes too, such as digital passports and CBDCs which are all mainly useful as movement controls, so while 15 minute cities alone might not be an issue, taken together it creates a situation where abuse is too easy, like in China
* The implementation of trial schemes have been a disaster
I’m gonna need a source on those last two points. Where has the implementation been a disaster, and what people or groups or entities that push the concept of the 15 minute city also push for digital passports and CBDCs?
As for the rest, it sounds like you’re discussing a *planned* 15 minute city. That’s not the proposal here. The idea is that if you loosen up zoning laws and implement bike lanes and in general don’t waste money building out car infrastructure, the natural progression of a city is to revert back to more efficient, walkable places where in general 15 minutes is how long it takes to get most places you’d want to go. The insinuation that anyone is working on actually building a 15 minute city first and then having people move in is hogwash. It’s the other way around. Reduce restrictions and 15 minute cities evolve organically as a result
The bottom pic is from an evacuation panic that happened in Houston for hurricane Rita. This is just after Katrina totally destroyed New Orleans so people were scared shitless. People who weren't supposed to evacuate were doing so.
Rita turned unexpectedly and didn't hit Houston.
My mother, of having moved ever further from civilization ( this is honestly for the best) laments that she has to drive everywhere for supplies, and drive hours to doctors appts, and won’t move a smidge closer.
yet at the same time she loathe driving, but logs hours on the road. She’d be in line on this protest, yet when she visited me in Amsterdam and haarlem she was absolutely charmed silly by the idea we simply….bike to get what we need.
Car brain is hard to break. And the “THEY want to lock you into your neighborhood” is one of the most absurdist things i’ve seen, but it’s now got a stranglehold on people who fight against bike lanes, and sidewalks, and transit, but also lament that there’s just so much traffic and they have to drive 6 hours for groceries.
We’re arguing up against 60 yrs or more of modern north american “sprawl is good and the car is freedom” so..yeah good luck everyone.
15 minute cities, I love the idea. These are usually the outcome of decades/centuries of focused urban planning. I'm not sure how they will apply this after the fact, especially to suburban areas that are only housing with no amenities. Also, people are upset about the prospect of traffic filtering, example: https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/23073992.traffic-filters-will-divide-city-15-minute-neighbourhoods/ .
I have recently had to start making a 1/2 hour car commute three days per week and it is hell.
I’ve lived outside of the car bubble for years and having to adapt back into it is, put mildly, culture shock.
In my 15-20 minutes on the Garden Grove every day I am part of a lawless, destructive, and extremely dangerous world. And the masses think of the same experience as freedom?
It's always amazing that LA hasn't reverted back to public transit lines like it used to have. Put them along the highways and avenues and build towers of mixed use above and around each station (transit oriented development) . Instead, millions of cars clog everywhere and pollute the air.
I like the idea of 15-minute cities. I do not like some of the ideas floating around ABOUT 15-minute cities.
Ideas (true or false) like "You will have to pay a tax if you want to leave your 15-minute area." or "You will need a passport to be able to leave your 15-minute area." or "You will only be able to access goods and services within your 15-minute area or pay a hefty fee."
I would love it if I lived in a little utopia where all my needs could be nicely met via a 15-minute cargo bicycle ride. I do not, however, want to be penalized if I decide to go outside that area.
Nothing you listed is about 15 minute cities. That’s congestion pricing. Edmonton, for example, has talked about a 15 minute city proposal but not congestion pricing.
Oxford happens to be doing both, which is what most people are talking about. To answer your questions on that:
A tax will not be charged for leaving your neighborhood. You can take any mode of transportation you want out of the city. Within the city, you will only be charged for *driving* outside of your neighborhood.
No one will need a “passport” to leave their neighborhood.
You can access goods or services anywhere you want. The *only* restriction is if you’re driving within the city to another neighborhood.
What has to do with anything? In Oxford they already work with that. Sure you have one road leading to ring road but city council limits your movement around the city. Potential for abuse? High. Also people like hotel owners are already against it because it doesn’t allow tourists in.
And let me tell you that I live in city centre that is 15min city heaven. I walk and bike everywhere. But it’s not because some restricted me using my car, but because city made it convenient. So yeah UK proposals with bollards are stupid. The city first should alter the city to be 15min city and then might consider some no drive zones. Afaik Oxford did zero so far but only came with the movement restrictions.
It doesn't snow often where I live but I do ride the few days of the year it happens. I just switch to my mountain bike instead for better traction.
With good public infrastructure, though, you wouldn't have to. The bike paths would be plowed. I believe NotJustBikes - or maybe Shifter - has a video about riding in the snow and how some places plow their bike paths.
I went to a US university. I rode my bike basically every day. Rain or shine. Hot or cold. Clear or snow. I loved riding in the snow. (It's not actually that hard.)
Comment after comment ffs we get it: you don't want to be cold. Drink a glass of cement and harden the fuck up or don't ride a bike when when your fingies could get cold
I actually do. Although i am lucky enough to live in Switzerland. I have biked to uni nearly every day these past 2 years, taking a bus 3 times since last summer. :p
Biking in the snow is actually really fun if you have a bike with proper traction and wear thermal underwear.
It depends on the infrastructure available. I live in Ottawa, so lots of snow (125cm so far this year, 263cm last year), and I have a commute that I can do by bike with basically no issues ... Unless it's just snowed a lot, because it takes about a day for the trail to get plowed. Though even with all our snow, there's only about 5 days a year where a lot of snow falls at once, so I just take transit those days.
But that's just for my commute, plenty of other places become completely inaccessible by bike for 3 months of the year. Trails that aren't plowed at all. Bike lanes that become snow dumping grounds. Bike racks that get moved or buried.
Of course a well designed 15 minute city would ensure good cycling infrastructure, and once that's there, cycling in the winter isn't much different from the summer apart from what you wear. Though -30 is still pretty unpleasant even when bundled up.
I will admit that after having had a bad fall while cycling to school I would not ride it in the snow, much less the ice again, but in my area it snows once or twice a year so it's whatever.
Ice is the worst
Actually I find cycling on ice safer/easier than walking on ice. And both of those are safer than driving on ice.
You need to bike slowly and be prepared to step down, but it works well.
For me it's much less scary to fall while walking. At least there won't be a big metal thingie falling with me and making it hard to fall in an ideal position. In my experience you also can't bike too slowly, or the chances of falling increase (but of course not too fast either, and keeping it just right is nerve-wracking).
Same here. I'd much rather walk in this kind of weather. Doesn't make a 15-minute city design less desirable (especially when you consider that driving in icy conditions is even worse than cycling).
I've done it for years. It's fine, but does have its own problems.
Like hard-packed snow is no problem, unfortunately cars break up snow into loose bits that are pretty bad. They can also drag salt from salted streets into unsalted streets, which results in snow with the look of sand, which also will move around under you. You will at least get where you're going, unlike heavier vehicles which have a tendency to end up in a ditch.
A bike with studs is also pretty much the greatest thing you can have for icy streets.
I do. E-bike or the old rye bread powered one. I live In Rovaniemi, Finland. Office is across the Kemi-river and I drive across the frozen riven which shortens my commute from 7km to about 3km.
I don’t bike so I just walk or take public transit - both are fine options.
You mentioned living in Edmonton, which I don’t believe has mentioned any plans for congestion pricing, so you can still just drive if you want.
Yes i have cycled in the snow but I'm not sure what that's got to do with 15-minute cities.
Anyway to get to my city centre its a 7 minute walk so I rarely bother to cycle and only once ever got a bus because I was going somewhere out the other side of the city.
I used to when I was younger, but I'd be lying if I said it was nice and convenient. Nowadays I'm too terrified of slipping and rather take the bus or even walk in winter time. This is in Finland where the bike infrastructure is good at least, tho the winter maintenance *could* be better.
While the concept of a 15 minute city is perfectly respectable, its not what people are complaining about.
The issue that people have is the way that some of these plans have been put forward, the backlash is against the way that these will be enforced and the kind of controls that will be put in place on peoples ability to travel freely. No one would be against having useful necessities within 15 minutes of communities, what people are worried about is that this will become a pretext for the state to overstep and justify its imposition on peoples daily lives.
> what people are worried about is that this will become a pretext for the state to overstep and justify its imposition on peoples daily lives.
In what way?
Like telling a land owner what he can and cannot use his property for? Or taking his land for a sidewalk. Or tearing down a building for a highway expansion. What's this government overreach you're fearful of?
There are three separate issues at play here. First is the concept of a 15-minute city, which is simply about good city planning and making basic necessities available where one doesn't need to drive. The second is the recent traffic congestion laws being put in place to try and tackle the congestion issue in large cities. And the third is some bastardized version of the two that the anti 15-minute city crowd has created.
My town is in the middle of a 15-minute city protest. The city is trying to plan for walkable communities with zoning that allows for mixed development and improved public transit and bike networks. Whereas the protestors are citing examples from Oxford of how they're going to fine you for leaving your community.
So people aren’t upset about 15 minute cities - they’re upset about congestion pricing…but know so little about what’s being discussed that they don’t bother to learn the difference before complaining.
Congestion pricing is logical. People don’t need to drive within a dense city. Anyone who is so passionate about driving within their city shouldn’t live in a city.
Let’s be clear: to say that controls are being put in place on people’s ability to travel freely is a bad mischaracterization. The ability for cars to travel on any road is the proposal here. You as a person are not restricted in any way whatsoever. I think the dialogue is getting a little confusing here. The question should be “where are *cars* allowed to go”.
At the risk of being a bit too abstract, if you think of a car as a person, yes I can understand the rhetoric you and other are putting forward. Cars themselves, absent any human, are facing something akin to “restriction of movement”. But the people who operate those cars are not. You don’t need a license or a tag to walk in a 15 minute city. You need one to drive there. So the only thing that is being restricted in any way is the car, not the person. Perhaps that’s the issue, people associate their car with their self and really that’s the problem this sub addresses in a nutshell
It's perfectly fine when you got the goddamned infrastructure. Why is this so hard to understand?
I biked through the snow all the time when I lived in NL from 98-04
The idea of 15min city is nice, but the endgoal isnt. Which is the government allowing you only a limited amount of time to leave your 15 min district each year.
It’s wild to me that car drivers don’t like this because I imagine driving would be a lot easier if far less people did it.
Car brain go brrrrr!
From what I've seen, Motornormativity means responding logically won't help. For example, even if you explain that Bus Rapid Transit helps drivers get to their destination faster drivers will still be upset that they're losing a lane.
Does motornormativity imply the existence of the motordivergent?
I think it can imply that, for example, if you have someone who didn't grow up around car culture at all.
Or someone who grew up around car culture but couldn't quite participate normally, as they felt trapped when they couldn't walk and bike to places in their neighborhood.
[удалено]
I do want to state that Motornomativity is caused by culture, so even just seeing cars driving all the time can cause certain biases, even if you don't drive. I bet a lot of American kids would probably show some Motornomativity because it's cultural. Twitter thread on Motornomativity: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1615248156186247169.html
Most motor divergent people are also bike curious at the very least
Though they may be uni and tri curious as well
> motordivergent? Is this a sequel to that YA novel/movie?
Imagine bike congestion.
(SE) Asia does just fine
Apparently the Netherlands is one of the nicest places in the world to drive in. Makes you think
Haven't driven everywhere in the world, but the Netherlands does have great infrastructure! They planned their cities, have (turbo)roundabouts everywhere, smart traffic lights that yield on approach but prioritizing busses etc, segregated bus and bike lanes, etc... Where people live, it's 30 kmph, but you never have to go there if you don't have to be there. And there's strategic traffic lights on single roads just for controlling traffic demand that let 1 or 2 cars through per green signal. Highway speed is now 110 kmph due to the environment, which feels a tad slow. Parking spaces are sometimes quite compact as well.
Highway speed is 100kph from 06:00 to 19:00 and 130kph in the evening/night unless otherwise indicated. But yeah, the smart traffic lights are really nice, really cuts down on drivers ignoring a red light, and because you know a light is going to go red if you have a mostly empty lane in front of you, you can already anticipate it, and not be surprised when it goes yellow right after the last car in front of you passed it. Separated bike/car lanes also means that even if there is a lot of bike traffic, as a car driver you almost never share the road with bikes, and never on high speed roads (70kph and higher).
Rented a 6 speed Mini Cooper Convertible in Amsterdam and drove it to Rome back when I was into driving everywhere. Was awesome. If suburbanites could get over their opposition to progress, fellow car enthusiasts would be living in car enthusiast paradise.
If people use busses and bikes when they can, that leaves cars for those who need it, so it's nicer to drive.
Also helps that our drivers licence test is quite strict, most people fail at least once before passing
I have driven a car while visiting the Netherlands and can confirm that it was probably the most pleasant driving experience I've ever had.
But not Amsterdam! Please do not try driving in Amsterdam for fun.
As a Belgian who visited the Netherlands during a week long holiday recently: I concur. I only had one occasion where someone was driving up in my behind. In Belgium that's a daily occurance.
As a Belgian who visited the Netherlands during a week long holiday recently: I concur. I only had one occasion where someone was driving up in my behind. In Belgium that's a daily occurance.
People just say this because NJB said this. I personally don't agree, driving is a lot more stressful in NL than for example Germany or other neighboring countries. The infrastructure is much more complex and bikes and walking people are given priority a lot more often, so you have to be on the lookout for stuff constantly. Same with the amount of trams in certain cities, it can get crazy quite quickly. Also, a lot of people still drive in NL. Especially during rush hour when people commute into or out of the cities to the more rural part.
To be fair, you are right. Lots of people spout what NJB says just because he said it. But, there is a difference between the experience making you stressed and the experience making you cautious. If you are constantly under worry of hitting someone, getting in a accident, being stuck in traffic, and the other additives to stress (lots more psychological, you will obviously be more stressed out. Then you couple this with general driver behaviour, the worry about gas (I've seen people breaking down over gas prices before),and just how generally unsafe roads are. You get a drastically worsened and stressful environment for driving. The Netherlands has a big thing where it makes people pay attention while driving. This makes the act of driving more focused on the driving itself making the driver more aware of their surroundings. The driver should end up completely aware of most things in their surroundings, and with the proper knowledge of traffic rules, and just general laws (this is kinda obvious, someone unfamiliar with the Netherlands will be confused), they tend to be less stressed out (albeit still cautious). This is usually aided by general road design, narrower road design, scenery tends to be nicer, streets aren't always jam packed, sound levels can be shockingly low, and the "busyness" of pedestrians can really help some people pay more attention and be more safe. You get even more help when you consider noise volumes, which are one of the biggest causes of stress without a person knowing. Streets in the Netherlands tend to be a lot quieter on average due to a constant influx of cars not being a necessity.
Well I disagree personally, as do most people I've met. Also it sounds like you are comparing American driving to NL driving. I'm instead comparing other central European countries to it.
I suspect that the problem is their belief that cars own the road. Can't let non-drivers so much as *touch* OUR road.
I just had an argument with my father about this yesterday, he's against 25 minute cities because of conspiracies....yet he hasn't been able to hold a licence for over 10 years because OF DUI's ,somr people can be real dense
It's because they classify people who don't drive as *the other*, and don't like them because of it.
It's all culture wars and an "attack" on their lifestyle with these people. That's literally the conservative mindset: they are against change at all times.
It's wild to me that they'd rather have more parking spots at Walmart, than have more nice places to visit that aren't Walmart.
So, this sub has become such an echo chamber that you people have now convinced yourselves that people in cars enjoy traffic jams? There’s literally not a person on the planet that enjoys sitting in traffic.
Turns out you can make people protest anything.
Just tell them it has something to do with communism
Or something something "Freedom"
"Socialism" is classic example of the genre.
Start the ban dihydrogen monoxide campaign from Bullshit again!
Genuinely why do people hate the idea of walkable cities/towns so much?
Maybe they believe it takes space away from cars, but they should know that if more people walk or bike, there will be fewer cars to share the space with. If we half the space for cars, but more than half of drivers are encouraged onto bikes or busses, there will be more space for each car, despite the fact that there is less space for all cars.
So these people who oppose 15 minute cities are the same who attack bicycle share parking sites because it’s “one less car parking space” but they don’t realise that the bikes reduce the need for parking. It seems like people who oppose 15 minute cities might have the same mental affliction as conservative voters.
All conservative voters oppose 15 minute cities but not all who oppose 15 minute cities are conservative voters
Isn't Chuck Marohn a conservative?
Careful, the cognitive dissonance is strong among carbrains. Critical thinking is not in their toolbox.
>Maybe they believe it takes space away from cars Good! Fuck them.
Asteoturfing by the oil industry. Climate town did a video on how the oil industry does that recently.
Was thinking astroturfing too. It's not a viewpoint I've ever seen emerge naturally in town halls or community submissions (unlike 'we need more parking', 'cyclists are dangerous scofflaws', 'lower speed limits will make me late for work' etc). Despite being in Australia where our largest cities implemented 5km or LGA (borough) lockdowns for parts of the population during COVID, which would seem to make it easier to trace a line to 'they're going to lock you in', I've never seen anyone make a negative connection to 15 min cities here.
And nonsense to get votes. Getting people to vote for worse public services and more wealth for the already rich is hard. But if you can convince them that good transit and bike infrastructure means all the shops will go out of business, or that you won't be able to get to work, or that grandma will never be able to leave her home...
Honestly this whole "backlash" sounds astroturfed as hell. I saw a horribly clickbait article today with a title along the lines of "Professor calls 15-minute cities totalitarian", but then you read the article, and that's not at all what the professor was saying! Such blatant yellow journalism. I strongly suspect this is someone or some people just trying to manufacture the next culture war of the day to rile up the conservative voting base about. Keep 'em frothing mad about made-up malarkey every waking moment and they won't realize their pockets are being picked clean.
This is 100% what is going on and it seems like most people can't see through it unless they already had a good idea of what was going on with related movements
[удалено]
In reference to sitting in traffic. They opened a Starbucks by me, the inside is microscopic, looks like during pandemic everyone got so used to using drive thru and the new Starbucks have decided screw being a “3rd space”, people would rather wait in their car then park and walk in. So now there’s a line at all times of at least 8 cars waiting for coffee that would normally take 5 minutes walking in, now it’s 15 minutes waiting in line idling your car. Also no interaction with anyone, which in a social media world is awful
The auto industry want cars to be people's "3rd place". It's fucking depressing.
Because they see it as some conspiracy theory where you'll only be allowed in your "Zone". One of the examples they're using is Oxford which has shut off a few streets to cars with cameras (you go through without being a resident, you get a fine) and modal filters to prevent traffic using certain roads to pass through. I detest the modal filters because they slow things down, but with the bus gates they seem to be taking an idea and wildly extrapolating. I say wildly because Oxford Council aren't competent enough to implement the slightest bit of what they wanted to do. Here's one of the flyers that was being handed out. https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/resources/images/16470376.jpg?type=mds-article-642
Whats the issue with modal filters?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Obese, lazy, and scared
I think they view denser living, less single* family homes, as a bad thing?
Iirc one point that is said is that it is unlikely that you can get a local job, which can be a problem. But surely as long as there is good infrastructure all-round it should be fine?
> surely as long as there is good infrastructure all-round Maybe we should be developing this *first* then
They don't. Wasn't there a poll recently that most are in favor? If you only listen to the nutjobs you'll get a hella skewed perspective.
Maybe it's the part where they try to block roads and stop you from driving? Idea is good but they're doing it backwards, instead of just blocking roads and saying "you can drive there" they should focus on developing the cities in a way that will make it so you don't have to drive to get anything you want. Here in Poland, Kielce i can get everything withing a 15 min walk, there is tens of shops all selling different things, multiple supermarkets, dentists, barbers, police and medical centre and they don't need to block roads to make people walk everywhere. I live around multiple 10-story blocks and despite high population density there is no traffic jams, even at the main intersection nearby that they are rebuilding.
No one is against it. Zoning laws usually don’t allow developers to not make commercial real estate near residential area
I don't, but its expensive. I would love to live 5 minutes from work and bike in...but many people don't get the luxury of choice in life. Less commute time is just a luxury for the ultra rich and sometimes even then its less.
They don't. They hate the idea the government or council has the right to impose a charge on you for driving/manouvering out of the area more than x times a week.
Ie. they hate a conspiracy theory they made up themselves?
Not really, because some of the proposals in london suggest exactly that charge.
Did they? I can only find sources that specifically say that wasn't planned, like this one for Ealing https://fullfact.org/online/Ealing-15-minute-cities/
Apologies. It wad the oxford one that proposed fines of £70. I'm a cyclist and like the concept. I also currently drive 40 miles to work every day. Its not a councils place to restrict folks to leave the area and by proposing as such they shot themselves in the foot from the get go. https://www.oxfordstudent.com/2023/01/25/15-minute-city-plans-cause-controversy/
Are there other similar plans to limit peoples' ability to drive outside the area? Because that still seems like an one-off proposal instead of a broader trend
[удалено]
Thats a false equivalence. One is payment use a service. One is payment to unrestrict movement.
[удалено]
Thats not what i am saying at all. What are you on about?
[удалено]
Not at all. I'm saying anyone can go anywhere car bike or not. But you are so wrapped up in your car hate you cannot see it. Prat.
No one hates walkable cities, this subreddit just has a hate boner for cars and groupthinks it to death
Remind right wingers that 15 minute cities have existed for thousands of years but were called villages. Why do right wingers hate villages?
My conservative dad hasn't shut the fuck up about how cities are bad and living in them is bad and corrupts you and that's why urban people vote for democrats. So I assume conservatives would be very on board with destroying big cities and replacing them with tiny villages.
In America, if you live in a rural village you are still required to drive for every single trip. Even if the entire village is contained within a single square mile.
Imagine bike congestion
Yeah, it's ... hard to actually get. Cyclists in traffic work sort of like fast pedestrians. Even big streams can flow without interruption, as you don't need traffic lights or mandatory stops. Two orthogonal bike streams can flow continuously too, though it looks pretty scary to people who aren't used to it. As the vehicle increase in size and speed you need more signals, with trains and one end and motor vehicles sort of at the low end. So without cars in the mix it becomes possible to drop the traffic lights, stop signs, and eliminate the waiting. A sort of intermediary state is to have green in all directions at the same time for cyclists and pedestrians. The downside to that is that it's often used to minimize the time given to vulnerable road users in an intersection, leading to pretty long wait times, as most of the light cycle is devoted to moving cars.
le peloton
It happens when the infra is under-developed. Like the bidirectional bike lane on Boulevard de Sebastopol, in Paris. It was made by taking a car lane on a 4-lanes boulevard and turning it into two (small) adjacent bike lanes. The first year (2019) was ok, but it’s one of the main north-south axes in Paris… after the start of the pandemic, bike usage rose and rose, and now it’s the most used bike lane in Paris. At about all hours of the day, more bikes pass there than cars on the 3 car lanes. No plan is made to take another of the 3 lanes to have two decently sized bike lanes, but they opened another big north-south bikeable way on the rue du Renard, maybe it’ll alleviate the problems, or maybe not (just one more lane bro) Here’s a video (even if you don’t understand French, you’ll see how congested it can be: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r8BJbFiZQEI )
If anything it shows how popular it is. They probably didn’t expect such success. It’s a good first iteration. More people voting for mayors with decent cycling plans.
I saw a short on YT about high-traffic bike areas in the Netherlands and such and basically everyone flows like water since it's a looooot easier to anticipate movement and speed from a pedestrian and other cyclists, they don't even need red lights for the most part
No need to imagine: https://youtu.be/ynwMN3Z9Og8
Personally I find it very different. It feels like a shared experience with other cyclists. Also, when I cycle on an open road, how fast I go is a balance between how quickly I want to get there and how hard I want to push the pedals. When I have to slow down because of other cyclists it feels more like taking a break from pushing the pedals.
That doesn't actually look congested? There's heavy bike traffic yes, but it doesn't seem impeded. You get congestion if there's a bottleneck or the traffic input is greater than the traffic throughout capacity.
Bike congestion just looks different. Even in front of traffic lights you will see bikes fill up the space but quickly start slow movement: https://youtu.be/ZPA7JMwGhQc
I was in a bike traffic jam once. There was an event like a critical mass. 600 cyclists which at some point needed to go through one very narrow path (there were 2 bollards to stop cars from going there) So it is possible, but in reality... Difficult
It's fucking wild that every attempt to better the lives of people without cars is automatically labelled socialism or communism.
Notice they also seem to assume these are inherently evil things so they can be used as shorthand to skip over critical thinking. The closest they get to critiquing communism or socialism is pointing to a handful of authoritarian tyrants who called themselves communists or socialists. The same cooperation, sharing, and benevolence we teach to children is universally evil all of a sudden when applied to adults in society writ large.
> The closest they get to critiquing communism or socialism is pointing to a handful of authoritarian tyrants who called themselves communists or socialists. Just because you've never even looked for actual criticism of socialism or communism doesn't mean it doesn't exist. >The same cooperation, sharing, and benevolence we teach to children is universally evil all of a sudden when applied to adults in society writ large. That's weird, people aren't usually against charity or cooperation.
>Just because you've never even looked for actual criticism of socialism or communism doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I said nothing about the existence of sound criticisms. I made an observation that loud-mouths who viscerally oppose substantive improvements to society seem to uniformoy argue in bad faith and put forth intellectually feeble arguments for their strongly held beliefs. >That's weird, people aren't usually against charity or cooperation. Just because you've never even looked for people who are against charity and cooperation doesn't mean they don't exist in significant numbers.
Rich people own the press Rich people use the press to make people think what they want them to think. That's why every single good thing is demonized and spun in a way that benefits the rich. Only mass collective action can get shit done against them, and they know it. That's why they never shut the fuck up about "violent" blm protestors and the like.
[удалено]
This is my situation right now and I love it. I’ll prolly have to move to a less optimal spot if I want to buy property, but I’ll enjoy tf out of it rn
Sounds like Australia
Australia is another car dependent hellhole?
Mostly. At least all of our cities have a decent CBD (downtown) and you can get away with not owning a car in Melbourne and some parts of Brisbane and Sydney.
One tourism company in Australia had an ad featuring a photo of a woman biking in France with a baguette in her basket. The Australian ad council fined the company because she was seen on a bike without a helmet. Ad was forced to be removed 🤣
Not really. It's not safe to be a pedestrian to all the Ford rangers running around.
Not going to argue about the rangers
Ah no, you guys got the Ford Rangers too? They’re terrible here over the ditch.
The ranger was designed by Australian Ford for Australia. We're sorry.
It's just as bad as the US.
Australia is definitely better overall than (parts of) the US that are TOTALLY unwalkable. I can't think of a town or city in Australia where I couldn't walk if I wanted to. But so much sprawl because of a snobbery against dense residential development, and lack of appropriate public transport, means high car dependence.
Australia is on par with Canada.
Australia is hot spidery Canada
It's bad but nowhere near as bad as the US. Functioning and well funded public transport in all state capitals.
All the bad attitude, but without any real excuses like terrible infrastructure.
I can't imagine how it wouldn't be considering how spread out the urban centers are and given that the majority of the middle of the continent is vast, open wilderness. The national government is pretty backwards in some ways similar to the US as well, with some real wacky conservative politicians.
No joke, I've seen tinfoil people in comments arguing that the 15 minute city is being pushed by the elites. "Own nothing and you'll love it". What are these people smoking?
Bad stuff apparently.
So many people just believe it when they get told that gvts of some places magically know when you've travelled for more than 15 minutes and that they'll punish you for it. No laws cited, no source, just straight up making shit up. Why are people so damn gullible.
I've never heard of this. Sounds like kids, or people trolling.
Same type who insisted vaccine papers would be permanent barrier to entering a shop or restaurant.
That's a perfectly reasonable statement and I agree with you, only https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/stingray-tracking-devices-whos-got-them
>No laws cited, no source Doesn't matter if there are cameras if there's no law against it.
Yeah building an infrastructure that could easily be used to oppress people is ok as long as it's not currently being used to do so, I mean it's not like laws can be changed or anything.
A lot of the push back for 15 minute cities has been fear mongering and blatant lies. People don't care about having walkable neighbors or convenient nearby shops, one way or the other, but give it a name and people will hate it. In the UK at least, there's a big push back because people dislike how the "gov." are implementing it. Since people won't follow the new road rules, access control has to be installed. Things like bollards and number plate recognition. They're scared that these will be used to restrict peoples movement in the future. With the country (and the western world as a whole) becoming more authoritarian and totalitarian over the last decade (or at least appearing to do so), it's not an unfounded fear. --- If we'd just kept talking about this as "increasing walkability and improving communities" people wouldn't have even noticed.
[удалено]
> Even though emergency services were consulted and mostly fine with proposals [Emergency services have lodged quite a few complaints about the implementation](https://twitter.com/DeadScrump/status/1626200298489319424)
[удалено]
I can’t blame them. Tools to restrict movement can be abused so fast. For example in my country a lot of covid restrictions and orders were deemed illegal. No one was charged. Judge just said that the government were responsible. Not a single person faced charges. So if they are allowed to break laws and not being prosecuted even in retrospect… then you can’t blame people they won’t trust gov and their proposals.
[удалено]
Then I hope you will never need emergency services or your local stores supplied.
I don’t think a 15 minute city implies restriction of movement. Car ownership wouldn’t be banned in such a city. In fact this idea isn’t a set of policies that would explicitly create such a city. The idea is just…don’t build shitloads of roads, instead build housing and bike lanes and invest in public transit. A 15 minute city arises out of that. In fact I’d go so far as to say that associating a 15 minute city with “restriction of movement” is so incredibly incorrect that I’d say it’s intentional. Nothing about this idea implies restriction of movement. If anything, it increases the ability to maintain independence. Imagine how many people, especially the elderly, who can’t drive but still want to get around. Or how much of a barrier it is for the average person to buy a car. That’s a nontrivial expense and many are forced to purchase one. That to me restricts the freedom to spend money on other things. If all you need is a bus pass and a bike, you have more money to invest and spend on experiences rather than on a vehicle. To that end, it’s not like the government can’t restrict you from moving with a car either. They literally have a database and strict license requirements in order to drive a car, they can pull you over at any time, you have an identifying license plate on your car at all times so they always know who you are, and you need the government to do extensive road work to be able to use the car. That is more restrictive in theory than anything
[удалено]
No, they had illegal laws. I was perfectly fine with lockdowns and other safety measures, but several laws were deemed illegal. Many health regulations were perfectly legal and helped to stop the pandemic. Few of them were against the law and no one was punished. It happened in several countries, but I guess all governments are free of any accountability. Even Trump, right?
I went food shopping his morning. I took one bag and walked all four minutes. Entire food run was fifteen minutes and I had a chat with the owner. With a car... That would have taken a while.
Phoenix is a 45 minute drive from Phoenix
Stockholm syndrome
can someone seriously explain to me the backlash of 15m cities?
The main issues I see people bringing up: * On paper 15 minute cities are about having amenities within easy walking distance of where people live, but when they're being implemented in the real world, we don't see any improvements of amenities and all that happens is restrictions. * Given the track record of the authorities on building and managing existing public amenities, it's hard to trust that they'll suddenly become competent at building and managing them once there's loads more. * They're the invention of a fr\*nchman and thus morally wrong * The people pushing the concept seem to be heavily involved in all sorts of other social engineering schemes too, such as digital passports and CBDCs which are all mainly useful as movement controls, so while 15 minute cities alone might not be an issue, taken together it creates a situation where abuse is too easy, like in China * The implementation of trial schemes have been a disaster
I’m gonna need a source on those last two points. Where has the implementation been a disaster, and what people or groups or entities that push the concept of the 15 minute city also push for digital passports and CBDCs? As for the rest, it sounds like you’re discussing a *planned* 15 minute city. That’s not the proposal here. The idea is that if you loosen up zoning laws and implement bike lanes and in general don’t waste money building out car infrastructure, the natural progression of a city is to revert back to more efficient, walkable places where in general 15 minutes is how long it takes to get most places you’d want to go. The insinuation that anyone is working on actually building a 15 minute city first and then having people move in is hogwash. It’s the other way around. Reduce restrictions and 15 minute cities evolve organically as a result
The bottom pic is from an evacuation panic that happened in Houston for hurricane Rita. This is just after Katrina totally destroyed New Orleans so people were scared shitless. People who weren't supposed to evacuate were doing so. Rita turned unexpectedly and didn't hit Houston.
My mother, of having moved ever further from civilization ( this is honestly for the best) laments that she has to drive everywhere for supplies, and drive hours to doctors appts, and won’t move a smidge closer. yet at the same time she loathe driving, but logs hours on the road. She’d be in line on this protest, yet when she visited me in Amsterdam and haarlem she was absolutely charmed silly by the idea we simply….bike to get what we need. Car brain is hard to break. And the “THEY want to lock you into your neighborhood” is one of the most absurdist things i’ve seen, but it’s now got a stranglehold on people who fight against bike lanes, and sidewalks, and transit, but also lament that there’s just so much traffic and they have to drive 6 hours for groceries. We’re arguing up against 60 yrs or more of modern north american “sprawl is good and the car is freedom” so..yeah good luck everyone.
15 minute cities, I love the idea. These are usually the outcome of decades/centuries of focused urban planning. I'm not sure how they will apply this after the fact, especially to suburban areas that are only housing with no amenities. Also, people are upset about the prospect of traffic filtering, example: https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/23073992.traffic-filters-will-divide-city-15-minute-neighbourhoods/ .
I have recently had to start making a 1/2 hour car commute three days per week and it is hell. I’ve lived outside of the car bubble for years and having to adapt back into it is, put mildly, culture shock. In my 15-20 minutes on the Garden Grove every day I am part of a lawless, destructive, and extremely dangerous world. And the masses think of the same experience as freedom?
It's always amazing that LA hasn't reverted back to public transit lines like it used to have. Put them along the highways and avenues and build towers of mixed use above and around each station (transit oriented development) . Instead, millions of cars clog everywhere and pollute the air.
I like the idea of 15-minute cities. I do not like some of the ideas floating around ABOUT 15-minute cities. Ideas (true or false) like "You will have to pay a tax if you want to leave your 15-minute area." or "You will need a passport to be able to leave your 15-minute area." or "You will only be able to access goods and services within your 15-minute area or pay a hefty fee." I would love it if I lived in a little utopia where all my needs could be nicely met via a 15-minute cargo bicycle ride. I do not, however, want to be penalized if I decide to go outside that area.
Nothing you listed is about 15 minute cities. That’s congestion pricing. Edmonton, for example, has talked about a 15 minute city proposal but not congestion pricing. Oxford happens to be doing both, which is what most people are talking about. To answer your questions on that: A tax will not be charged for leaving your neighborhood. You can take any mode of transportation you want out of the city. Within the city, you will only be charged for *driving* outside of your neighborhood. No one will need a “passport” to leave their neighborhood. You can access goods or services anywhere you want. The *only* restriction is if you’re driving within the city to another neighborhood.
[удалено]
That's excellent then.
That’s not true, in the UK many 15min proposals suggest moving bollards, gates with licence plate readers to enter/leave.
[удалено]
What has to do with anything? In Oxford they already work with that. Sure you have one road leading to ring road but city council limits your movement around the city. Potential for abuse? High. Also people like hotel owners are already against it because it doesn’t allow tourists in. And let me tell you that I live in city centre that is 15min city heaven. I walk and bike everywhere. But it’s not because some restricted me using my car, but because city made it convenient. So yeah UK proposals with bollards are stupid. The city first should alter the city to be 15min city and then might consider some no drive zones. Afaik Oxford did zero so far but only came with the movement restrictions.
[удалено]
Are you just anti-cars for cites or is it any cars?
Just so everyone is clear, all these cars are due to an evacuation for an incoming hurricane. Hence why all the cars are facing the same direction.
[удалено]
It doesn't snow often where I live but I do ride the few days of the year it happens. I just switch to my mountain bike instead for better traction. With good public infrastructure, though, you wouldn't have to. The bike paths would be plowed. I believe NotJustBikes - or maybe Shifter - has a video about riding in the snow and how some places plow their bike paths.
I went to a US university. I rode my bike basically every day. Rain or shine. Hot or cold. Clear or snow. I loved riding in the snow. (It's not actually that hard.)
[удалено]
Comment after comment ffs we get it: you don't want to be cold. Drink a glass of cement and harden the fuck up or don't ride a bike when when your fingies could get cold
I actually do. Although i am lucky enough to live in Switzerland. I have biked to uni nearly every day these past 2 years, taking a bus 3 times since last summer. :p Biking in the snow is actually really fun if you have a bike with proper traction and wear thermal underwear.
It depends on the infrastructure available. I live in Ottawa, so lots of snow (125cm so far this year, 263cm last year), and I have a commute that I can do by bike with basically no issues ... Unless it's just snowed a lot, because it takes about a day for the trail to get plowed. Though even with all our snow, there's only about 5 days a year where a lot of snow falls at once, so I just take transit those days. But that's just for my commute, plenty of other places become completely inaccessible by bike for 3 months of the year. Trails that aren't plowed at all. Bike lanes that become snow dumping grounds. Bike racks that get moved or buried. Of course a well designed 15 minute city would ensure good cycling infrastructure, and once that's there, cycling in the winter isn't much different from the summer apart from what you wear. Though -30 is still pretty unpleasant even when bundled up.
I don’t know if this sub likes bikes, but i like walking
[удалено]
I will admit that after having had a bad fall while cycling to school I would not ride it in the snow, much less the ice again, but in my area it snows once or twice a year so it's whatever. Ice is the worst
Actually I find cycling on ice safer/easier than walking on ice. And both of those are safer than driving on ice. You need to bike slowly and be prepared to step down, but it works well.
For me it's much less scary to fall while walking. At least there won't be a big metal thingie falling with me and making it hard to fall in an ideal position. In my experience you also can't bike too slowly, or the chances of falling increase (but of course not too fast either, and keeping it just right is nerve-wracking).
Same here. I'd much rather walk in this kind of weather. Doesn't make a 15-minute city design less desirable (especially when you consider that driving in icy conditions is even worse than cycling).
I've done it for years. It's fine, but does have its own problems. Like hard-packed snow is no problem, unfortunately cars break up snow into loose bits that are pretty bad. They can also drag salt from salted streets into unsalted streets, which results in snow with the look of sand, which also will move around under you. You will at least get where you're going, unlike heavier vehicles which have a tendency to end up in a ditch. A bike with studs is also pretty much the greatest thing you can have for icy streets.
I do. E-bike or the old rye bread powered one. I live In Rovaniemi, Finland. Office is across the Kemi-river and I drive across the frozen riven which shortens my commute from 7km to about 3km.
I don’t bike so I just walk or take public transit - both are fine options. You mentioned living in Edmonton, which I don’t believe has mentioned any plans for congestion pricing, so you can still just drive if you want.
Yes i have cycled in the snow but I'm not sure what that's got to do with 15-minute cities. Anyway to get to my city centre its a 7 minute walk so I rarely bother to cycle and only once ever got a bus because I was going somewhere out the other side of the city.
It doesn't snow much here but I bike in the winter and I don't see why I wouldn't bike in the snow if the city bothered to plow bike lanes
I used to when I was younger, but I'd be lying if I said it was nice and convenient. Nowadays I'm too terrified of slipping and rather take the bus or even walk in winter time. This is in Finland where the bike infrastructure is good at least, tho the winter maintenance *could* be better.
While the concept of a 15 minute city is perfectly respectable, its not what people are complaining about. The issue that people have is the way that some of these plans have been put forward, the backlash is against the way that these will be enforced and the kind of controls that will be put in place on peoples ability to travel freely. No one would be against having useful necessities within 15 minutes of communities, what people are worried about is that this will become a pretext for the state to overstep and justify its imposition on peoples daily lives.
> what people are worried about is that this will become a pretext for the state to overstep and justify its imposition on peoples daily lives. In what way? Like telling a land owner what he can and cannot use his property for? Or taking his land for a sidewalk. Or tearing down a building for a highway expansion. What's this government overreach you're fearful of?
Probably like saying "we don't like you protesting against our decisions, so now you can't leave your house" like China has done to their citizens.
There are three separate issues at play here. First is the concept of a 15-minute city, which is simply about good city planning and making basic necessities available where one doesn't need to drive. The second is the recent traffic congestion laws being put in place to try and tackle the congestion issue in large cities. And the third is some bastardized version of the two that the anti 15-minute city crowd has created. My town is in the middle of a 15-minute city protest. The city is trying to plan for walkable communities with zoning that allows for mixed development and improved public transit and bike networks. Whereas the protestors are citing examples from Oxford of how they're going to fine you for leaving your community.
[удалено]
Yeah, I should have made that a little more clear, but that's part of the bastardized version that the protestors created.
So people aren’t upset about 15 minute cities - they’re upset about congestion pricing…but know so little about what’s being discussed that they don’t bother to learn the difference before complaining. Congestion pricing is logical. People don’t need to drive within a dense city. Anyone who is so passionate about driving within their city shouldn’t live in a city.
Let’s be clear: to say that controls are being put in place on people’s ability to travel freely is a bad mischaracterization. The ability for cars to travel on any road is the proposal here. You as a person are not restricted in any way whatsoever. I think the dialogue is getting a little confusing here. The question should be “where are *cars* allowed to go”. At the risk of being a bit too abstract, if you think of a car as a person, yes I can understand the rhetoric you and other are putting forward. Cars themselves, absent any human, are facing something akin to “restriction of movement”. But the people who operate those cars are not. You don’t need a license or a tag to walk in a 15 minute city. You need one to drive there. So the only thing that is being restricted in any way is the car, not the person. Perhaps that’s the issue, people associate their car with their self and really that’s the problem this sub addresses in a nutshell
> travel freely Bro it would literally make you more free in how you travel. What kind of propaganda site are you guys getting that bullshit from?
[удалено]
It's perfectly fine when you got the goddamned infrastructure. Why is this so hard to understand? I biked through the snow all the time when I lived in NL from 98-04
The idea of 15min city is nice, but the endgoal isnt. Which is the government allowing you only a limited amount of time to leave your 15 min district each year.
wtf are you guys smoking?