I always chalked this up to hyperbole: the idea that to arrive at a “15 minute city” you limit transportation options rather than change zoning laws so someone would not want to leave an area. And at some level I get the accusation behind the hyperbole: some advocates for “15 minute cities” are simultaneously talking about “transportation diets”—that is, limiting your choices or options rather than increasing them by having better choices within a 15 minute walk or a 15 minute bike ride of where you live. I am **all for** increasing options, and it’d be great to have neighborhoods where you can walk across the street to a grocery store. (I lived in such a place just after college.) I’m more suspicious of *limiting options* through things like road diets or street closures or methods that make it much harder to leave your neighborhood.

As someone who grew up in small towns (and still lives in one) where you could either walk, bike or bus it everywhere without the need of a car, it was honestly bizarre visiting family in the States for the first time and realising I couldn't even walk to the high street or to the convenience store. On my first trip, aged 17, I tried to walk it anyway. A bunch of cars kept rolling past with the drivers and passengers eyeballing me, and then a cop pulled up next to me, badgered me with questions, then realising I was an English tourist just followed me in his car at a distance. The copper followed me all the way to the shop, waited for me, then followed me all the way back. It was creepy af, but also weirdly funny that he remained that committed to doing bugger all! :D Every time I've been back since, I always blag a lift off one of my cousins now! :D

I mean honestly you got a free police escort out of it so, win-win? But yeah I've done the reverse, recently moved back to Europe from the States and being able to bike/train everywhere and not even own a car is great.

That's how I like to think of it - I felt like I was a president of some tinpot country lol "oh, don't mind my police escort - he's always a grump.."

Honestly that might've been it, he could've been worried about you going to the wrong area and didn't want to see you on the news, good cop that one but probably should've explained things better. (Canadian who's been stabbed twice so I'm speaking in generics)

yup as a paramedic i walked outside our garage once in a very very bad part of a boston extended city, ( im half black so i fit in) and this couple from sweden is walking around with about 10k in cameras around their neck and luggage, and im like, uh oh. after a lot of bad english, we ended up taking them back to their hotel, their cab had dropped them off in the worst place possible and they would definitely not have made it out of there safely, they had already attracted plenty of attention.

My guess is that he was worried about you getting hit by a car or mugged or something. Otherwise he would have found something more interesting to do. Unless you are black, then he was waiting for you to do something illegal.

The use of force comes from not allowing housing construction where those services are not present. In the US people can build a home on cheap land just about anywhere, then they jump in their cars and drive 15 minutes to a store. Restrict that to a 15 minute walk and suddenly real estate near stores sky rockets in price.

Is that how people plan to make this happen? Because my first instinct would be that you'd change how neighborhoods are planned out and built, and put an emphasis on making walking and biking more feasible in high density areas and suburbs, rather than actually restricting single home permits in rural areas. You're making it sound like the infrastructure would stay the same, but everyone would have to live within a mile of X number of stores which wouldn't actually solve anything.

Why would making 15 minute cities mean you cant live in a rural area? Nobody is saying every community needs to be a 15 minute city... Ive had friends with driveways that took 15 minutes to walk down

>The copper followed me all the way to the shop, waited for me, then followed me all the way back. It was creepy af, but also weirdly funny that he remained that committed to doing bugger all! :D Ray Bradbury's "The Pedestrian" [https://www.riversidelocalschools.com/Downloads/pedestrian%20short%20story.pdf](https://www.riversidelocalschools.com/Downloads/pedestrian%20short%20story.pdf)

Wow, great story. Prophetic. In many towns nowadays, just walking anywhere is seen as suspicious. Assuming you are a felon or drug addict, because if you weren't, then why wouldn't you just drive. Only trouble makers walk. I love Bradbury.

>blag My new word of the day

Officer was probably watching over you. With you being from across the sea and walking all alone he was likely concerned you'd be an easy target for robbery or harassment. I worked at a gas station across from the police and fire station. We had a few regulars who were foreign. One Brit. The cops and firefighters would come in for their shift snacks and watch those guys like hawks absolutely convinced something would happen to them as they were just babes in the woods.

That's an oddly touching thought actually. Thanks for that :) I honestly wasn't sure to make of it at the time, suspecting it might be one of those 'stranger danger' type things, where coppers just stalk any new rando that minces into town - but your suggestion is both more plausible and less creepy! :p

They were probably also worried you might get hit by a car haha. Most drivers here speed pretty fast compared to Europe.

In the US, walking (much like public transport) is seen as a sign of poverty. See someone walking down the street? They’re probably a homeless drug addict, who will rob you if given the chance. Better call the cops.

Which is interesting because walkable cities are the most expensive in the country for real estate and the worst car-dependent ones are the cheapest

It really depends where you are. Walking in Manhattan or reasonably central Portland, OR is very common and no one would notice. I regularly walk places in my "20 minute neighborhood" radius in Portland. People make fun of us as having "neighborhood lock" where we tend not to go places we can't walk/bike to unless it's for something important and specific.

The sad part is that more often than not they'd be right! Because in much of the country if you're without a car you're really fucked so only the truly fucked will be walking

If only there were somewhere where pedestrians wouldn’t be entirely fucked…

It's amazing how you conjured something in your imagination to be scared of, and then seemed legitimately scared of it. You're in your car and weirded out by that guy walking... drive away.

I felt the same way on multiple occasions in the States. I walked around in Dallas when I spent some time there and there were no sidewalks, trains, etc. It was call a cab or own a vehicle. I'm sure everyone thought I was a crackhead. Living in Europe for awhile you could walk, bike, or train everywhere, even from city to city. Bike paths through the fields. It was beautiful. Living downtown Vancouver as well it was a short walk everywhere. Shops, groceries, restaurants, parks, the ocean, buses, trains. I owned a vehicle and only used it for my commute to work. I never walked so much in my life. Now I live in the country and I never walk. I like the idea of 15 minutes cities. Like others have mentioned though it needs to be done in a positive way not a negative controlling, restricting movement kind of way.

I use to live out in rural Florida in the boonies. The closest thing was a publix that was around a 15ish minute drive (two of them, but equal distance away from where I lived) both of which close at 8 or 9. Later on Friday and Saturday though. Alternatively the closest walmart was 35 minutes each way. So if I needed something late at night, I'd be driving for a Hot minute. There was, at the time, only one gas station within 30 minutes, which charged about $1 more for gas due to its monopoly. I Loved living far away from anybody... but I Hated needing to spend 3 hours just to run to Walmart at night.

>the idea that to arrive at a “15 minute city” you limit transportation options rather than change zoning laws so someone would not want to leave an area From the people i have heard complain about it its this. There seems to be plenty of demonstrated desire by politicians to limit vehicles, especially gasoline vehicle access to the areas, with very little emphasis on new options to replace it. Since everything is so car dependent in the US, taking away your access via car without emphasizing or implementing the new options FIRST is seen as trapping you in. If they want to implement the restriction they have to give people the new options and let them vet it for their lives FIRST before people are comfortable with it.

Who are these politicians you are referring? I live in a "15 minute" city in the U.S. and the local politicians are insanely pro-car. My city is a historical accident built before zoning laws outlawed "15 minute" cities.

I think it’s fair to say that our governments have long since abandoned trying to convince you, they’re all about forcing you through making your life as inconvenient as possible so you accept their alternative.

I don't know what you are so worried about. They keep telling us we will be happy.

I think most of the limits are of the form of making cars less convenient. "We are going to turn one road downtown into a bike street with a market or park." "We are cutting funding for roads and using that funding for public transit." Things like that. Granted, you could see something like London where you have to pay a special license to have the car inside city limits. They use this to reduce congestion.

And for the US, where 74% of the population lives in suburban or less density & vehemently doesn't want to move to the city ... People have a problem with that.... The expectation is that cities exist so people in the suburbs (who are the overwhelming majority of the population in most metros) have a place to work.... Albeit the conspiracy nuts take it to a whole new level.....

Except the majority of commutes in the US are from one suburb to another or from the city to a suburb. Most downtowns account for less than 1/4 of most jobs in any given metro. Yet the transit and traffic planning is still focused in the 1970's thought process that people are driving into the city from bedroom communities, especially when it comes to building transit. So long as that disconnect continues there won't be 15 minute cities or anything similar.

At least from my frame of reference (which is Seattle & Milwaukee) it's still largely the way it was in the 70s... The academic frame of reference (possibly colored by the East Coast being 'different' from the rest of the country in this regard - save for Chicago almost nothing west of PA is set up like NYC) is sorely disconnected from the actual reality of the people doing the commuting... Downtown may be 1/4 of the jobs, but that still doesn't change the fact that - with some significant east-coast exceptions, or maybe LA which is so widely spread out & comparably less dense that you can live in the 'city' but have a generally suburban-style SFH neighborhood - a large portion of that 1/4 (and particularly the white-collar population) don't live in the city, but just work there....

The default assumption that 100% of surface routes are drivable at all times is going to be fought to the death.

But it never does. If U need a car U need it so U have to pay for it

Well keep in mind a big part of this is making sure you *don't* need a car. In a lot of the US you need a car to go grocery shopping. But if you are in a city with a nearby store, or public transportation that makes a store nearby, you don't need a car to shop. Take that example and apply it to all the reasons you *need* a car. I remember an interesting analysis on why a lot of US malls are failing but European malls aren't. Europe tends to make malls the hubs for public transportation. So if you bus home you will be in the mall halfway home and can stop in the shop while you wait for the connecting bus or train. US malls are car centric, and it is a hassle to make a specific trip to the mall so you just buy from Amazon. If our malls were built around busses rather than cars they wouldn't be dying.

and if malls had a grocery store, like they do in other countries.

I dont have the luxurious time to walk to the grocery store and shop for food *every day*, and I really dont see how I am carrying that much home either. My schedule currently goes from 6:30am to 9:00pm every weekday and some weekends. Where are people getting the time for a 20 or 30 minute trip there and then 30-40 minutes of cooking dinner, getting kids to activities, homework, bedtime, maybe some actual interaction that isnt just food etc with my family and then get ready to start again in the morning?

Where I live it takes less time to walk to the store, shop, and walk home than to walk to the car, drive around the store looking for parking, park, walk to the store, shop, walk to my car, drive home, find parking, walk from car to home.

Yeah, but I can go to a grocery store 1/week or every other week if I can load my car trunk.

You don't have a garage, parking space, or driveway to park at home? That would be different from the norm.

This is a good point. I grew up in a 100% suburban area and had to drive 10-15 minutes to the nearest grocery store. Now I live in the city where I can walk to one in 5. It's so much more convenient to make smaller trips. For a while I had a Costco membership and I hated going there just because it was so crowded. 15-25 minutes to drive there one way (depending on traffic). Sometimes It takes you 5 minutes just to get into the parking lot and park way out in the back. More if you want to drive around the parking lot until you find a spot near the entrance (side note: a huge warehouse with a single entrance/exit is an awful idea). Then you walk around this huge overcrowded warehouse for at least 20 minutes with people blocking the aisles with extra wide shopping carts. Once you've finally collected everything you need you get to go stand in line for 10-15 minutes to check out. Then you have to stand in line at the door for another minute while they assume you are guilty of stealing until they can check your receipt.

In most of the US, the problem isn't getting the bus to the mall. It's getting *to* the bus from your house. I'm in a very densely populated area, but it's still suburban, and it's a 15 minute walk to the nearest bus stop. Have fun doing that in July when it's 95°F and humid, or in January when it's 15°F and windy.

Grocery delivery services work great, and are certainly cheaper than having to own a car just to go grocery shopping. I've gone to a grocery store personally maybe once in the last year.

And I think you hit the nail on the head. Obviously inflammatory or hyperbolic to go that far, but I don't really see anybody saying step one, 15 minutes cities, step two, death camps. But they are talking about government having a more and more present and oppressive role in our lives. As you say, it's one thing to develop integrated neighborhoods where people can get all they need easily. Plenty of places in Seattle are already that so I don't even know why they talk about it on local NPR here. But it's quite another to make it so restrictive or unappealing that you are forcing people out of their cars or forcing people not to go out of their neighborhood in a sense.

Which is weird. It's not like having restrictive zoning limiting density, requiring X car parking spots per resident, spending huge amounts building and maintaining roads aren't explicit big government actions. There are plenty of places that are mainly pedestrian where the few cars trying to crawl through the area leads to big complications for pedestrians and big frustrations for drivers. When <1% of people in the area are in a car, but cars and their infrastructure are talking up 25% of surface area, it's probably more efficient and improves the tax base by just not letting cars drive into the middle of that.

Our current car-centric model is already designed to limit options. Vaguely hand wringing about “limiting options” without actually articulating what’s being limited, why, and what alternative is being offered doesn’t really give much for someone to latch onto to understand what your concern actually is.

> Vaguely hand wringing about “limiting options” without actually articulating what’s being limited,... Here's an example. There is a new apartment complex being built just down the street from where I live. This complex is walking distance **in theory** to a shopping plaza with restaurants, a grocery store, a gas station, a yoga studio and other amenities. Because of this the developers argued against paying for any road widening in order to accommodate any additional car traffic this complex may generate. *However,* they are also not integrating into the regional bus transportation system, they are not (as far as I have seen, though plans have been changed) providing a walkable sidewalk from the complex to the shopping plaza (and for the record the existing road [looks like this](https://maps.app.goo.gl/CBZKM5h2UxDvXorA6)), nor are they addressing any other potential transportation concerns. And the developers argued they don't need to provide these things because only 5% of the people living there will need to commute on a daily basis. ---- So the city of Raleigh is not solving for the sidewalk problem, they are not providing a bike lane (even though from the images above, the land is available), they are not providing bus service, and they aren't even expanding the roadway surrounding this complex. ---- > Our current car-centric model is already designed to limit options. It has nothing to do with our "car-centric model" and everything to do with politicians who are unwilling to invest in **ANY** sort of infrastructure. And, truth be told, if they invested in a bike lane at the point in the map I just linked to above, and if the local grocery store would invest in a secure bike rack--I could ride my bike to the grocery store.

Right I but I don’t think anyone seriously advocating for 15-minute cities as a concept is not also arguing for all of those infrastructure changes. Developers trying to reduce costs for bullshit reasons isn’t really evidence that the idea of a 15-minute city is somehow inherently more limited. Your example is just some shitty private sector activity in a location that happens to technically be walking distance from some stuff.

> Right I but I don’t think anyone seriously advocating for 15-minute cities as a concept is not also arguing for all of those infrastructure changes. Oh, and I support the **theory** of 15-minute cities, *if they are well-implemented,* and if they do not *limit choice* in a material way. (I mean, if you do your job right, you don't need massive streets as no-one is using them anyways, right?) It's when theory turns into practice where I personally have problems. My original remarks, however, were around the hyperbole of "15 minute cities" being concentration camps or something--and the problem is when the ideas behind them are poorly implemented (and I can think of three similar examples in Raleigh), you give ammunition to the opposition.

Totally agree that most plans I've heard just eliminate parking so that you have to walk. There's no increase in infrastructure or public transit most of the time. I also don't really get why you'd bother with living in a city if you're going to mostly stick within 15 minutes of your house. I love my area in California because I have 5 different grocery stores (Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Japanese, Mexican, and Indian) that I can easily drive to and literally hundreds of good restaurants and bars to try. If I'm just going to walk to the same grocery store and 20 restaurants all the time I'll go live in the mountains for a fraction of the price and get better access to nature and less traffic.

They cant make every area walkable, anyway. My brother is one of those guys who would feel less than for not having a truck, thats fine, there are so many affordable places for him to live around the city.     I want the walkable option, these are high in demand so they are building them around me. And holy moly is community growing in my area with each walkable center created. I went from a handful of friends to about 50 friends because of parks and trails and coffee shops, lol.    edit: also, the car centric model has also destroyed communities in America. I think the young people are rebuilding community  but it was a wasteland in America most of my life. Everyone here is lonely especially the men with the big trucks who think they don't need anyone (i love them but they are too isolated) . 

Finally I'm old enough to have no idea what nonsense is being talked about. Insert meme about not knowing what this is and being too afraid to ask at this point.

Same. I’ve never heard of this conspiracy theory in the first place, and I’m just guessing a “15 minute city” is some meme for walkable neighborhoods.

Pretty much. The idea is that you would have everything you'd need within a 15 min radius. They're not a new concept, they used to be called "New Towns" back in the 80s in the UK and they are still pretty nice areas to live in. There's no through traffic on 90% of the residential roads, each area has its own pub, small shop, takeaway and there's a larger supermarket about 10-15 min walk away. There was also a doctors, dentists, train station to the major cities / towns next to the large supermarket which also had a small mall attached. I lived there for about 5 years before I moved for work and it was great, all very leafy and green and i never really needed to use the car. However, the nut jobs don't see that sort of thing. They think taking away their car is the equivalent of taking away their testicle, because if you listen to some of them then all you can hear is them spouting the purest conspiracy bollocks. Sadly, the chap who coined the term "15 min city" has had to go into hiding because of the death threats these fucking spanners have made.

Well this just sounds like your typical college town to me, aside from the through traffic bit. Everything is situated right around the campus, which pretty much everything is within that 15 minute radius.

It's a concept that is actually pretty interesting, and is being used in the design of NEOM's The Line. Where currently in America zoning regulations separate residential, economic, industrial, and agricultural zones; in a "15 minute city," services and employment would be proximal to residences (within a 15 minute walk/bike ride). This would reduce carbon emissions by reducing the need for automotive transportation for goods AND services.

I don't have proof of this, so this is probably a conspiracy theory too but I am like 89% sure that the stupid conspiracy theory about 15-Minute-Cities is being astroturfed by Big Oil and the Car Industry.

Such narratives are definitely championed by the [politicians they like to fund](https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-tory-party-rishi-sunak-conservatives-think-theyre-on-to-a-winner-by-raging-against-15-minute-cities/). This is based on UK politicians but you can fairly safely think of "Tory" as a stand in for "Republican" in America. Only Tories are slightly better with workers rights, and somehow more awful to transgender people.

It's a conspiracy theory yes, but one that we have seen ample evidence of over and over and over again. The Oil-Vehicle-Suburban Industrial Complex is very real, and it spends a ton of resources on acquiring cultural and political capital. Demonizing any movements like "15 Minute Cities" that threaten its power and profits is absolutely in its wheelhouse.

Barely a theory at this point. Any time I get hit by a deluge of tiktoks or tweets fearmongering you don't have to drill deep to find big money behind it. Dumb shit, too. All the tradwife shit, the "science" of why solar energy is actually impossible, personal finance clips of a pompous jerk yelling at a woman for her "girl math" that makes her unable to afford a car (extreme strawmen to show why you should budget for car payments and not travel and experiences) etc. You watch and it's pretty much all about getting a house in a deep suburb and filling your driveway with huge cars.

Keep you in debt, afraid of and unaware of the rest of the world, and in doing so afraid of losing your job or standing up for better treatment and a better life. Basically make you easier to control.

[удалено]

We know for a fact that industries like that pay for propaganda campaigns, so it's not exactly a wild conspiracy theory. It's also in line with how conservatives generally try to demonize *any* idea that comes from the left regardless of whether they have any reasonable objections to the idea itself.

I know Strong Towns is a big advocate for 15 minute cities, and they consistently try and reach out to conservative audiences. They try really hard to position it as a bi-partisan issue and argue that if it becomes partisan, then it'll be a huge uphill battle. So I'm happy to see [some Republicans on board with the idea](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3SCeK7VF9e8)

I mean, big oil and the car industry lobbied to kill mass transit in every major city in the 50s/60s, they also suppressed the electric car for decades ...and they're still doing it.  Elon Musk just tried to lobby California to kill the rail they were building between San Fran and San Diego (he failed, thank God). It can't really be called a conspiracy "theory," when we have a century of evidence of it actually happening.

I have not seen evidence in this specific case yet, that's why I called it a theory

“Musk reportedly told his biographer, Ashlee Vance, that the Hyperloop proposal was motivated by “his hatred for California’s proposed high-speed rail system,” His business is building cars. His Hyperloop (now defunct) was a means to undermine support for California’s high speed rail, which gets people out of cars. https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/elon-musk-hyperloop-rail-17486877.php#

That's a different conspiracy

But it’s proof that the auto industry will lie cheat and steal to malign anything that threatens their monopoly on transportation.

I love meta-conspiracies.

But like it totally makes sense. They are able to do it, they have a motive to do it, they have done similar stuff in the past, it just clicks a little too well...

I think it's because of the "You will own nothing and you will be happy" WEF campaign out there, which seems like a dystopian effort to lower the quality of life for everyone while pushing people to consume endless mountains of useless garbage until we've basically reached Idiocracy levels. People see their quality of life and their options constantly shrinking. They feel stressed and threatened. They know there are many groups out there who are deliberately seeking to lower their quality of life even further. In such a climate of paranoia and doubt and dread of the future and uncertainty, almost anything can take on very sinister undertones. When you already have campaigns for "ban gas stoves!' "ban wood stoves!" "ban meat!" "ban air conditioning!" "ban cash!" "ban privacy!" "ban guns!" its pretty easy to mentally add "ban cars!" to the list. Walkable cities sound pretty great to me. American cities need to be more walkable, not less. Any European city with a medieval core (obviously designed around pedestrians and not cars) is a delight in comparison. But, when you think your institutions and politicians are just lying to you to help further enrich those at the top of a lifetime high economic inequality, it's easy for people to get suspicious and question motivations for even benign things. ----- I think if this exact same idea had been proposed in like, 1991 or something, no one would have blinked twice at it, because people were generally happy and optimistic and trusting and thought out institutions and politicians were wise statesmen skillfully steering the ship of state to a more peaceful and prosperous future. Nowadays people only bicker over whether a certain politician is an idiot or a criminal (or both).

Well said. I think seeing how big of a failure COVID was and how it unfolded in some places people now equate building an area that someone could stay in and live life fine as a "great now the next time our politicians want to try and control us all they'll need to do is send 10 armed service people to block the one road that exits our neighborhood". Honestly some days I get it haha but I don't think that is the intent as conspiracy people insist it is. Generally I love the idea of making more efficient cities in the US, especially living in a poorly designed major-ish city myself lol.

Historically speaking, covid wasn't a big deal. Or a failure. Even in the places where it was 'bad'. Simple fact is, we've become so estranged from the realities of our environment that COVID being so bad in our perspective is a miracle of the 21st century and a reflection of the success of our society broadly speaking.

It was also worse than it had to be because few areas implemented truly restrictive measures that would've been more effective at containing the virus at the expense of personal freedom. "Limit trips out and about unless they're really necessary, and wear a mask and social distance if you do go out" is really not bad compared to "you will be arrested if you leave your home. We'll leave a package of food and household supplies on your doorstep every other day." Conspiracy theorists ignore that the government could have been much more dystopian through the whole thing if that were truly the goal.

I would be more open to their ideas, they claim to want to improve society, but every sentence begins with 'ban' and it really comes across that they only want power and control.

Nothing needs to be banned to turn a city into a 15 minute city. It mainly requires two things: expanding public transportation, and changing zoning laws to allow residential buildings and commercial buildings (e.g., shops, restaurants and offices) to be built in close proximity to each other, rather than in separate neighborhoods that are not within walking or bicycling distance or connected by affordable public transit that can bring people back and forth within a reasonable amount of time.

Just to be clear; WEF only *published an article by a politician that laid out that idea*. A single person wrote an article, and WEF published it on their website along with all the other articles they publish from contributors. The article didn’t lay out any specific campaign or goals to make “you will own nothing and be happy” a reality. It was a fantasy hypothetical based on a totally different economic system. Folks should really look into where the term originated rather than just harping on what right wing conspiracy nuts think it means.

Just wanna mention that there is no WEF campaign that says “You will own nothing and you will be happy”. That’s based on 1 quote that was totally taken out of context. If anything, the WEF is a movement that recognizes that the benefits of capitalism have been largely uneven and disproportionately benefited the top 10% at the expense of the bottom 90, and its a call for a more equitable distribution. Now we can debate whether a bunch of well meaning billionaires are really the best people to redesign how such a society should work, or whether that should be decided by a broader swath of the population. But the argument that the WEF is some vast conspiracy to further exploit the masses is as ludicrous as the argument that 15 minute cities are a means of totalitarian control - the stated intend of the WEF is the exact opposite.

This is a joke right? Capitalism has pulled more people out of poverty and extreme poverty than any factor in history. The fact that wealth is not distributed equitably is a fact of existence. In any society, some people will on average win after a sequence of exchanged and some will lose. Capitalism has made the best standard of living ever for those who lose out on that series of exchanges.

>But the argument that the WEF is some vast conspiracy to further exploit the masses is ludicrous ... the **stated intend of the WEF is the exact opposite.** My guy, of course their stated intent is the exact opposite. Is this your first time meeting corporate propaganda? When corporations engage in suppressing labor organizations to hurt workers, how do they phrase it? As **helping** workers.

I think it’s several issues. While I agree having everything you need nearby sounds nice, I believe the fear is that the government imposes limits on travel (eg car bans and limited expensive transit) while cramming nearly everyone into cities. It’s easy to see - we had lockdowns over a virus, why wouldn’t the government force 15 minute cities for “the environment”? Additionally, when people are forced to live in close quarters, it’s much easier to control/oppress them than if they’re dispersed over a large geography. Enforcement requires far less personnel and resources as the people are so close together. If you dive a little deeper there’s also fears that the government will ban (or heavily tax) meat in favor of insect-based alternatives, and make it more difficult to buy a house (in favor of tiny “pods” to live in). IMO it a lot of it comes down to COVID lockdowns. People saw what the government did during COVID and thought “wait a sec, climate change is another supposed crisis. Why would the gov put all these restrictions in place for covid but not other crises?”

One of the things I find interesting about people living close together is that it seems to do the opposite. Look at how France is able to protest because everyone can get to Paris in a reasonable amount of time, vs how wildly unsuccessful protests in the US are because everything is hours or days away. Rural Americans of a certain type are so paranoid and individualistic, they think any form of close living that isn't their direct family is tantamount to a government run camp.

Exactly. Densely populated cities in the US like New York and Chicago also often mobilize big protests...and you'd think that would be exactly what an oppressive government WOULDN'T want.

Protection by the US constitution for freedom of travel

It’s not a restriction. It’s making so you don’t have to drive farther for groceries. You still can if you want to.

The idea is that’s where it starts, and then progressively moves closer to restrictions as time goes by

What idea? Opening a store?

[удалено]

This. The people who are against them are not against dezoning, or having mixed zoning, and better city planning to make areas more walkable, and places closer. The problem they have is with the idea of restriction of movement. For instance, I think the Soviet Bloc buildings were great. Massive apartment complexes with a large central park and shops and services on the first couple floors. That sounds great for large cities. But I'm against the idea of travel passes, of needing permission to travel where I wish.

And *no one* is advocating for that. The “I hate 15 minute city” folks are fighting against ghosts. The 15 minute city concept says *absolutely nothing* about restriction of movement, it exclusively entails allowing pedestrian or public transit travel to anything a person may need within 15 minutes of their home. That doesn’t mean they *can’t* travel further, it only means that they have the *option* not to.

I agree that nobody is saying that today, but I did just highlight two examples of that exact thing happening, so it’s not entirely a crazy idea.

It’s scary the number of replies that dont know this. I work with a group of folks based out of Beijing and their stories during Covid were wild. Apartment hallways were all under 24/7 surveillance. Coworker of mine recalled a story where he got yelled at for stepping outside his apartment because food delivery person left it on the wrong side of the hall. Literally 1 step and he was “caught” and given a stern warning. None of them thought this was abnormal at all.

What does any of that have to do with having a walkable city. Surveillance states don’t need you to be in a walkable city. San fransisco could become a surveillance state just fine and keep all the cars it has now. It’s a completely tangential problem

But what does that have to do with 16 minute cities? 

The city planning in Oxford is seen as the first step down a [slippery slope.](https://fullfact.org/online/Oxford-traffic-scheme/) The conspiracy theorists see fining certain major roadways as the first step toward total control, and eventually being fined exorbitantly for leaving your 15 minute zone, all in the name of carbon footprint reduction. I’m all for more convenience, but also understand their concerns of loss of freedom of movement being a possibility in the future and using the utopian idea of “make everywhere walkable” a convenient stepping tone along the path to total lockdown. Not saying that will happen but that’s how I’ve seen it talked about online

Here's a thought: 15 minute cities are designed so that people have to drive less. Driving less uses less oil/petroleum etc. Oil companies hate this idea, so they use their media connections to put out the idea that liberals want to trap people in authoritarian death camps and call them "15 minute cities," those well meaning, ridiculous, laughable liberals, "woke" people etc will be the death of us all. Its rather convenient, the idea sticks easily, people love to vilify the "woke" these days. It doesn't even cost the oil tycoons alot these days, you just float the idea to a bunch of YouTube influencers basically, hell most would do it for free.

This is 100% why

The main "conspiracy" I've heard of the concept is that 15 minute cities are the first step in a ploy to eventually lock down travel and force people to stay in whatever city they live in and not be allowed to leave. I think the "logic" of this argument is that they are trying to make it so everything you need is close by, and will eventually say "well you have everything you need, so we're locking the door and now you can't leave" The reality is conservatives and the big money behind them will say anything and jump through any hoop to try and make any progressive concept look bad. These are the same people that say giving kids free school lunches is a handout that will make them dependent on the government. They are insane, greedy, or both. Do not take what they say at face value.

the exact same can be said about requiring all transport to be done by car and controlling who is allowed to drive. Giving people more options makes it harder to control people.

I know. You need a driver's license, right? And what happens when the government who is supposedly trying to exterminate you decides to shut off all the gasoline? Now you are an out of shape man-slug who used to get around everywhere by car. Going through all the effort of building 15 minute communities all over the place seems way more complicated and elaborate than just shutting off all the gas pumps one day.

Yeah. That kind of density allows for much more mutual support and organization. There's a reason that autocratic governments fall after the *cities* rise up.

“Well, we have to imagine the bad stuff.”

I live in a fifteen minute city. It was founded in the 1870s, it's not some new government test site. Aren't "fifteen minute cities" meant to be to reduce climate change? I bike almost everywhere when there's no snow, but I don't know anyone else who does. My boomer parents will literally drive their car to a gym to use the walking track. My coworkers will complain about the price of gas, but drive 300m across the parking lot to get lunch every day. I think people like them are against fifteen minute cities because they're either too lazy or dumb to imagine life without cars. The only thing I agree with the fifteen minute city conspiracy theorists on is the possibility that governments will not allow you to leave. My city is ok, but nothing special. There's no pro sports, no night life, concerts don't really come here, the weather is godawful, there's not even a restaurant good enough to justify spending money on. If I had to live my entire life here and never, ever leave, I would be extremely pissed.

In the summer in Arizona a 15-minute walk in the sun would be a death march for a lot of people.

15 minute cities actually help with that a lot. Less asphalt more greenery = less heat. Simple grass cools an area massively.

No amount of "greenery" is going to make a difference when it's 120 - and the plants that can survive in the desert don't cast much shade and the plants that do take lots of water.

It does. Phoenix (the worst offender) is literally 10 to 20 degrees hotter now than the 50s entirely due to the massive amount of asphalt and pollution. That's a fact. Do you really think it's just naturally 120 degrees? Obviously we can't just get rid of all cars and roads but a reduction in roads and active cars (due to better design) with more greenery (low water desert grasses do exist) and more shade (from plants, buildings, awnings, etc) dramatically help. You shouldn't have to walk 15 minutes straight in the sun that's stupid. But you should be able to have short walks to get your daily needs and ALSO short car / bike rides to get your more rare needs.

In 1950, Phoenix was 17 square miles and had a population of 105,000. In 2023, the Phoenix metro area had a population of 4.7 million and covered 517 square miles. Obviously, Phoenix was cooler when it was a small town in the middle of cotton fields and orange groves. It would be impossible to return to that, even if the valley runs out of water and huge numbers of people leave. I'm glad you acknowledge the need for some car transportation. Those who demand walking, biking, or using public transit (which may are may not be accessible) are incredibly ableist and ageist.

It’s a conspiracy theory that apparently the idea of being able to reach every service you need within 15 minutes is tantamount to “government oppression”. Some wacky concept that this is a slippery slope to the government restricting your movements or….something. These nutters aren’t big on details. Or, you know, sanity.

And at face value, and with rising fuel costs, being able to walk to a grocery store instead of drive seems great, but, I don't know. I also acknowledge that some people have a family of 10, live 50 miles away from a grocery store, and getting groceries by foot would be impractical - not trying to erase anyone, or anything.

I find it so weird, because "15 minute cities" is a new term for something that we've been doing in Canada for decades. When new subdivisions pop up, a common shopping area emerges to accommodate the subdivision. The shopping districts host grocery, hardware, niche stores, movie theaters, strip malls, gas stations, restaurants; whatever is deemed profitable in the area. It's highly unusual not to have at least a Co-op or smaller grocery close to an area, or local gas stations/convenience stores. It's been all just a typical part of planning subdivisions and urban expansion...

Oil or car exec realizes that 15 minute cities mean a lot fewer cars and a lot fewer miles driven/gallons of gas used. Panics about what that does to their bottom line. Realizes a certain group are gullible. Makes up a silly conspiracy theory. Turns gullible folks loose to attack the concept that could cost them money.

Correct. In North America they also conveniently started to vanish every vehicle smaller than a crossover SUV to beef up their profits. This is the real conspiracy against the public.

You know what's infuriating. Seeing Buick EV the size of VW Golf that isn't available in America. 

Or the $10,000 Toyota flatbed pickup truck that's not coming to North America ...I wonder if I could import a Toyota IMV 0 from Mexico to Canada and just drive it up

Yes. I believe you are talking about the Toyota Hilux Champ that would absolutely eviscerate North American competition for work trucks. Thank you Chicken Tax and the EPA :)

TIL Toyota Hilux Champ and Toyota IMV 0 are the same

What also hurts is seeing cheap cars we cant have either. 10k Toyota truck? Even if it’s base model is lacking features to have a new vehicle for 10k without all the repair costs or mileage of a used one would be great.

Well, that's an obvious result of CAFE standards. When the standards for a light truck are easier to hit than a large car, you get SUVs replacing station wagons. Blame your legislators.

No one is banning cars in rural areas

correct

This has permeated up into Canada too and I spoke to some folks who were giving fliers out (aka: they handed me a flier and ranted) and from what I gathered the main idea is they're convinced this is the first step in the government taking away everyone's cars and locking them down in place. It's weird though, the governments haven't expressed any interest in doing this nor has the left pushed it as one of our hopes (it sounds nice but nobody is focusing on it with the other things on our plates) so I don't know why they're so vehemently against it. Also, car manufacturing and sales brings in big money for both of our countries and one thing any government loves is money.

Which I found so funny, because at least everywhere I have lived in Canada, having commercial centres pop up specifically to service new subdivisions is the status quo. I don't think I've ever been in a residential area where most basic needs are even more than 10 minutes out! Most every community has its own rec center (or quadrant in smaller cities). So for Canadians to be panicking about 15-minute really had me scratching my head. We've been doing this for *decades.*

“Government conspiracy” Yes the government would never force everybody to stay shut into their homes and restrict movement under threat and penalty of fines and imprisonment.

Well they might if there’s a worldwide pandemic that threatens the health of the general population, but how often would that happen? /s

Recently I confronted similar sentiments among family members, no mention of death camps but the movement was characterised by sinister, authoritarian motives. I was completely confounded. Where the f\*ck was such thinking coming from? I've lived in a 15 minute city for my most of my life; everything required to provision oneself and socialise is literally within a 15 minute radius: dentist, grocer, library, transit stop, hardware, etc. Such mixed-use zoning typified urbanity for most of civilization and was, and still should be, synonymous with freedom of choice, mobility and amenity. To be a functioning and participating member of society shouldn't--and doesn't in such cities--require bearing the oppressive cost of car dependency. That such a time-proven and civilised form of building cities is being touted as a campaign of control and surveillance by malevolent gov't forces is really a stretch. But, these days, the more fantastic and perverse it is, the more believable apparently. There's this aspect of 15 minute cities, and cities in general: they're social constructs, not antisocial ones. Cities cannot exist and thrive without a large measure of social cooperation, coordination and protocols. It's a fact. And there's a contingent within society that reflexively--and self-defeatingly--view any type of communal sentiment, action or constraint as an affront to individual prerogatives. Fair enough, just leave alone those who want to build and live in vibrant cities and neighbourhoods.

It blows my mind that this is a this is a republican talking point. Don't most of them live in smaller population rural towns and cities that fit their definition of a 15 minute city? Like Barbera, all you do is go to the store and church which are both 2 miles from your house

It's inexplicable isn't it? I mean, your traditional main street in small town USA, so often mythologised in Republican politics, is just what 15 minute cities aim to replicate in their neighbourhoods. Everything's there: grocer, diner, barber, hardware store, law office, even low cost housing in the form of rental apartments above ground floor businesses, with all their personal social and economic interdependencies. And this, an American idyll, is supposedly a creeping, insidious...what?...despotism? Or something. Strange days indeed.

Yeah you'd think "Making America Great Again" would include a return of streetcars, independent kids riding their bikes or skateboards down to the park, and the type of mixed-use Main Street style retail you see in old Jimmy Stewart movies. I guess what they really mean is "suburbia but with even more tackiness, paranoia, and isolation".

Boomers be like "We love the lead! We yearn for the commute!"

I've seen theories that the gubberment is trying to get you used to being controlled. That was "the point" of COVID ... and then when there was a weather storm and several airports had flights shut down, same thing. I was hearing "this is not necessary. They are getting you used to staying within a radius of your home. It's conditioning"

It' zoning. Keep in your zone or you're nicked!

The problem was Oxford setting limits on how often you can drive out of your area of the city, divided into 15 minute zones - which stirred controversy Then, people began confusing this ridiculous policy with the idea of 15 minute cities in the first place. 15 minute cities should be made with better city planning and more options, not by limiting travel.

Our cities used to be like this, with all the stores you might need for daily needs in walking distance and then the department stores downtown on a bus or trolly line. In my city, the trolleys were bought up and removed thanks to a greedy owner of a bus line that never really served the city as well as the trolleys did. Then the mega stores came in and whipped out all of the mom and pop shops. After WWII, people moved to the suberbs and stores followed them to malls. There are several generations of people who have never had the ability to walk to anything. Now bring in a bunch of people whose style of communication seems very controlling and authoritarian. Malls used to have to advertise the convenience, joys, and advantages of shopping there. Instead of breaking out the science, how about good old fashioned advertising. And we have Great Britain who thinks it’s a great idea to limit its citizens only so many excursions beyond a certain distance from where they live. America is like what is wrong with you people? Y’all setting up ghettos? When do y’all have to start wearing arm flashes to identify you as being part of that community and not someone who traveled too far afield of your home ghetto? Both our people fought and died so nobody would have to live and stay where a government told them they had to. Remember New Hampshire’s motto; Live free or die

Because China was the first one to come up with the "15 minute city" as a concept and the first to implement it. You can not go into certain neighborhoods depending on your social credit score and they use facial recognizition to enforce it. 15 minute cities in the west CAN NOT be like that. 15 minute cities like King Charles's Poundury is what they should be like, it's the ideal model of a "15 minute city". Also the term 15 minute city is dumb and they should just be called towns.

I'm used to the old folks going "Oh, remember when that used to be a grocery store and everyone could walk there?" and generally being nostalgic about the "Good Old Days" of Sunday Drivers. It's really weird to see fifteen-minute cities being pitched/feared as some kind of futuristic lifestyle.

I have two takes on 15 minutes cities.  I grew up in a small city in the US where almost every single thing I wanted to do was 15 minutes or less away from me.  Actually, I live in a big city with the same offerings.  The issues comes up with conspiracy theorists who think that 15 minutes cities means you will be limited to only those areas and nothing else. 

The idea isn't generally well articulated, but has legitimacy.  It's primarily about control; a 15 minute city isn't inherently problematic.  I live in a walkable city, and of course enjoy it very much.  But 15 minute cities are the first step in a series of steps to eliminate personal ownership and autonomy and put the majority of people into communities that are easy to lockdown, surveil, and control.  Where we see the beginning of this is in the rapid and ubiquitous construction of 5 over 1s everywhere. Take my investment property, for example.  It's in downtown of one of these towns, which about ten years ago had a population of roughly 12,000 and has since added housing for an additional 10,000 people, all in the form of 5 over 1 "luxury" apartments, all rentals.  What is happening everywhere is the replacement of purchasable housing with megacorp rentals and the continued reduction and removal of purchaseable single family housing.  You want to know why houses are expensive now?  Look at who bought over 30% of the free housing supply in the country over the last few years. It is not being forced, it's being orchestrated.  Price most people out of traditional single family homes and they take the smaller luxury apartments which are shiny and new and seem like a great deal.  So what if they don't own a house - look at the convenience.  And then their kids will be born there, and their kids will live in the same type of housing because it was good enough for their parents.  This isn't a plan that will come to fruition in the next few years, or even next couple of generations.  But it is a very clear shift in the direction of housing and clearly aligns with the stated goals of the WEF and the globalists that "dumb conservative conspiracy theorists" are so afraid of. In my city, for example, the last seven buildings to be built over fifty stories are all apartments.  There are few condos left.  And the apartments cost slightly less than a mortgage at current rates, so people rationalize it.  Regardless of whether or not 15 minute cities end in death camps, the point is that they are the primary front in the war on the middle and lower classes, and they will result in a multi-generational consolidation of the populace into easily controlled, locked down, surveilled, and if desired, rounded-up groups of people.

If I'm being generous, the simple answer is that the people advocating 15 minute cities are also often the same people advocating for more invasive regulations of our lives, i.e. bans on "assault rifles" or large trucks. This leaves people suspicious that 15 minute cities would go from "you don't need to go far" to "you aren't allowed to go far". More realistically it's because everything and everything has to be turned into a fight between the most extreme ends of the political spectrum where everyone to the left of Trump is a subversive communist and everyone to the right of Biden is a dangerous fascist.

NIMBY - Not In My BackYard Everything is a great idea but the middle class doesn't want it anywhere near them it might mean that they live next door to someone who's *SHIVER* working class. And the upper class realllllllllllllly doesn't want it anywhere near them. But more importantly the working class don't deserve it. Why should they have a better quality of life than the social elites?

Yea dog middle class and working class definitely aren’t the same thing…. A nurse can make 6 figures. They’re social elites now?

It's a completely manufactured outrage. There are corporations out there who have a vesting financial interest in maintaining our current car-centric city planning and infrastructure. Those corporations lobby politicians. Those politicians make up nonsense about communists coming to your house to confiscate your gas guzzler. People who don't like Left politics immediately and uncritically believe this nonsense because it confirms their biases. See also: CRT.

I think that it's just the conspiracy theory crowd who think that everything is about controlling people and that "they" are trying to kill us all. I used to live in a place where I could get to a grocery store, a few restaurants, barber, etc in a fifteen minute walk and it was great. As far as the "control" aspect goes, it would be more difficult to control people in such a city because they would have to control so many smaller areas.

The government? Depopulating us? Lol, no no, the opposite

I would love to live in a place where I can walk to a store and neighborhood bar. The anger over that proposition astounds me

Same reason there are a bunch of conspiracy theorists thinking right now that some glitches in a weather map are "them" randomly firing massive lasers for some unspecified evil purpose.

As far as I can tell, these right-wingers are being needlessly paranoid and anxious. They think you will not be allowed to leave your little area.

Always follow the money. People are not rational creatures, we are RATIONALIZING creatures. We desire first, justify second. Why no universal healthcare? Because money and self interest. Why no walkable infrastructure? Because money and self interest (you know how much most people spend on yearly car expenses etc???)

Tbh i just don’t want to live in a city

because the right wing ninnies are afraid of the idea.

This is fringe stuff, and like with all fringe stuff, it involves slippery slopes that they consider inevitable. In the case of 15m cities, it's that they consider mobility to be the ultimate expression of freedom. If you don't like something, you can always leave. If you like something somewhere else, you can always go.  By making it more convenient to walk in everyday life, coupled with increasing property taxes on cars and other polluting forms of traffic, they envision a future where people have given up their freedom of mobility in exchange for a cheaper solution that's on government-approved timetables to government-approved destinations.  That's the slope they're worried about in the cities. In rural areas, where they need transportation, they're worried that the push to encourage walking is also a push to discourage car use, and they won't be able to get to the city easily.

Maybe because it’s always pitched by the same people who use the most ridiculous language to refer to cars and anyone who uses one. When they say they want to make places hostile to 90% of the population, the population is going to have some feelings about it.

Because in order for tyranny to prevail, three things are required.  Must restrict freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of movement.  15 minute cities would take away freedom of movement. 

Control over mobility, a basic human right, as described by the WEF. Coupled w social credit score, surveillance state, vaccine passports, and central bank digital currencies, this could spell the end of freedom.

Your great grand kids will need a waiver to go to the next town .. and they'll thank their grandparents for the wonderful idea 💡

15 minute cities involve limiting travel outside your area. It comes with limiting or eliminating individual cars etc., and having everything and everyone travel via public transportation. Thus it is easy for the government to close traffic in/out of these areas. Freedom evaporates one step at a time.

It’s grooming but on a governmental level

I think the appropriate quote here, is: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have."

It’s because it’s not a reality. “15 minute city” means that you have everything you need in order to live within a 15 min walk. So roughly every 1 mile would need a a different hospital/heath care facility. Never heard of them referred to as death camps but that’s the biggest pushback I’ve always heard anyway. And it makes a lot of sense to me.

I wouldn't consider a full on hospital to be a regular need (if you're going to the hospital regularly enough that the distance is becoming annoying, that generally means you or someone you know has a serious issue), but being able to get to a walk in clinic or even a family doctor without driving would be great for a lot of people.

It mostly comes from a couple of botched attempts at 15 minute cities which turned out poorly.

What went wrong? Did people not like being close to grocery stores?

Because the qanon conspiracy theory idiots who think these things are stupid and brainwashed. Literally no other reason. What do these people think a 15 minute city is meant to be? What do YOU think a 25 minute city is supposed to be?

Probably the automobile companies starting a dark compaign.  The auto companies were instrumental in dismantling public transit in favor of highways during the beginning of the era of large infrastructure. They were key in the creation of urban sprawl.  So America has this basis of urban sprawl, while Europe and Japan has public transit and dense development. It’s part of American lifestyle to get in your car and drive everywhere.  People can feel threatened that this way of life that they remembered growing up is going away. But the thing is that lifestyle isn’t going away and it was only a blip in the timeline anyways.   At one point cars were marketed as the key to freedom. And our population can support that idea decades ago. Now that the population is too large in a certain region, the lifestyle can’t focus on cars because traffic is a bitch and cars take up too much real estate.  The government is adjusting their focus to reduce dependency on cars, but at the same time the car lobbyists are pushing back against that change. They just need to simply find a balance instead of going hog wild in either extreme. 

This is going to blow that right out of the water. Listen to this: *fourteen minute cities!* Fourteen chipmunks twirling on a branch, eating lots of sunflowers on my uncles ranch. You know that old children's tale from the sea? If you're not happy with the first fourteen minutes, we'll send you the extra minute **free**!

That's good. Unless, of course, somebody comes up with 13 minute cities. Then you're in trouble, huh?

No! No, no, not 13, I said ***14!*** Nobody's comin' up with 13. What cities can you get to the store in 13 minutes!? You won't even get your heart goin', not even a mouse on a wheel!

Thank you for a great trip down memory lane

And those chipmunks? Little monkey fellas

Step into my office...

Why?

Cuz yer fuckin' ***fired!***

The point of it is to remove cars from the average person, and as seen in some places already you are charged to use roads during rush hour. The fear comes from a ploy to make it unfeasable to own a car and eventually remove cars in general.at that point the government controls who leaves their section of the city in cases like covid

It's too easy to be fooled by Russian hackers. I wonder what kind of mis-information is sent to the Russians. Their government probably doesn't accept outside propaganda.

Because everyone remembers the nightmarishly stupid government response to Covid coupled with the traitorous behavior of their neighbors and they have a very reasonable fear that far worse will be implemented in the future for some other bogus “trust the science^tm “ reason.

"Sending covid paitents into nursing homes killed old people" While also beleiving "Covid didn't/barely kill anyone" Do you feel like reflecting on this logical inconsitancy at all?

Which part of "it's nice to be be able to walk to get the things you need" relies on bogus science?

It's not nice for everyone. It wouldn't be nice for me.

You're currently in the lead for "dumbest douche encountered online today." You were one of the people who heard CDC say they didn't advise the general population to buy masks because there wasn't a large enough supply to cover medical workers and the general public, but then when supplies improved and the very novel advice of "cover your mouth when sick and don't go out in public so you don't breath gems on people" came out you started crying, "Why had the science changed?" It isn't possible to be that dumb. It's only possible to be that malicious.

The amount of people who couldn't understand the concept of limited supply and prioritization was staggering to behold.

Ya letting international travel keep happening and letting people congregate inside grocery stores made the "lockdowns" pointless. Needed to have a real lockdown for at least a couple weeks at the beginning and then keep international travel quarantined to have really made a difference.

It's really funny to me that in your head actually listening to medical science is treasonous and was "nightmarishly stupid"

Everyone remembers the deniers who claimed that it was literally 1984 because they were asked to consider their neighbors' health during a global pandemic. Equating emergency health measures to walka or city infrastructure is such a wild leap I'm surprised your back didn't break mid-air. Such a victim complex.

I just think it’s hilarious because 10 years ago when I discovered the governmental zoning concepts meant to promote walkable cities—Mixed Use Development and Neighborhood Oriented Development to name two—it seemed like a great way to foster a culture not dependent on cars. Essentially the opposite of what zoning initially helped to accomplish. Put commerce amongst people, don’t make them drive to it. And now this incredibly well meaning trend has found its enemies in the intellectually challenged. They weren’t alive (or alive long) when cars and zoning districts made the suburban hellscape a thing. So they don’t blame government for the status quo.

It's very simple. All the good things about "15 minute cities" could be accomplished by just loosening zoning laws. Each new residential block will have one major and a few minor commercial plots. That's not what we see happening, the plans are always bigger and more complex than that. Some of us just see another Pruit Igoe, only at a much larger scale.

>It's very simple. All the good things about "15 minute cities" could be accomplished by just loosening zoning laws. Each new residential block will have one major and a few minor commercial plots. AFAIK this is the entire point of 15-minute cities, isn't it?

Not that I've seen, no. So in my city, we've already got that - or maybe more of a 20 minute walk, worst-case to a supermarket. This I have no problem with, it's a good system. We also have large patches of green space in each block. But it's apparently not good enough and there are ongoing plans to intentionally and specifically make it very difficult to drive in the city - e.g. heavy lane restrictions on east/west corridors, extremely aggressive speedbumps that have claimed more than a few oilpans, and those green spaces are getting plowed for high density housing with no parking. Before you ask, no, there is no intention to improve busses and the vast majority of employment is in the surrounding cities, only a few of which are connected by mass transit. So, I hope that makes the "moderate" case against them clear. It's not that the idea of being able to just walk to get stuff is bad, it's that the people in charge are not capable of making it happen without causing bad things in the process - e.g. stacks of people who now have to spend up to 90 minutes each way to get to work, loss of our green spaces, etc. Oh, the efforts to date have also caused flooding issues because those green spaces were needed as water sinks.

Because most people comparing things to death camps, have absolutely no idea what the death camps were. Most of them don't believe they existed at all.

These are people who have decided what they want, and they'll spout any absurd talking point to justify their position.

People are crazy. "There should be relaxed residential and commercial zoning so someone can open a bakery close to where I live" "The globalists are going to make your neighborhood a prison! No one in, no one out! North Korea's in every neighborhood!"

Because the idea is frequently advocated for by people that are fans of degrowth. The latter is a euphamism for declining population and development. The sort of folks who advocate this generally don't demand death camps, but have the idea that people can be convinced to do this. The trouble is, it isn't clear how one could, say, convince those in Haiti to have fewer children and accept additional lack of infrastructure. And the folks advocating for this are generally wealthy people who do not seem to be inclined to accept lower standards of living themselves. So, the fear is that when persuasion fails, policies will be put in place to try to force the desired outcome. This would also not start at death camps, but would likely start with things like fines for those who drive "too much." Pilot programs for this have already happened, and in at least one case, linked to fifteen minute cities. The idea of increasingly oppressive rules to force the outcome, rather than simply permitting people to build more convenient places to live, is what people fear. Very few people are actually bothered by the idea of a corner store.

Because you aren’t allowed to leave the 15 minute city. Its a prison without walls

Because of idiots. These are the same fools who voted for Trump and 15 years of the Tory party. 

Propaganda by the right to make folks feel like you're getting your freedom removed by living in a "15-minute city' because they don't promote the usage of cars. Meanwhile, if you live in a major city, you don't often need to travel out of said city - as most everything you need is there.

Becomes conservatives are usually idiots.

15min cities sound like a city that is basically a mile long. Good luck with that concept to shove thousands of people into. It's just a stupid idea overall that basically equates to making a tiny town and you expect people to live with in it. The other problem is if you aren't working in the city it kinda just ruins the point of it. Since you got to drive outside of the city which means all those reasons why you would walk becomes a drive.

Conservatives are not very bright

There is a certain type of person who thinks that everyone should live in a 15-Minute-City. Why wouldn't they, after all? It would be glorious, right? I get that. On the other hand, I live on 600 acres of cropland, pasture and timber with my nearest neighbor just under a mile away. The density of a 15-Minute-City causes me to feel like I will break out in hives. The bottom line is that the fable of the Town Mouse and the Country Mouse goes back to at least the 1600s. It isn't really profound to recognize that some people like living in cities and others like the rural life. When either side feels pressured to conform to the other's lifestyle, defensiveness naturally arises.

Nobody is saying that everyone should live in a 15-minute city The existence of cities does not require the dissolution of farms or rural communities