In his second article on transport-related issues, Paul Collins looks at the meaning of districts, low-traffic neighbourhoods and 15-minute cities.
The idea of a neighbourhood or district in the make-up of towns and cities is a generally well-understood concept and reality, both whether they have developed naturally over time or been planned by public authorities or private landowners. Villages too are, in effect, neighbourhoods.
The idea of a good neighbourhood has been much explored in literature and is often based around the idea of “liveability”, in terms of safeness and proximity to schools, shops and services, as well as open space and some employment opportunities. In addition, such areas often include heavily trafficked roads, either on their boundaries or running across them while their internal or connecting streets are not intended for through traffic.
But, for whatever reason, the subject of low-traffic neighbourhoods and 15-minute cities has become controversial.
Good or bad or somewhere in between, these concepts and their implementation have both ardent supporters and unhappy dissenters.
ULEZ update
In the April article of Mainly for Students, on controversial transport-related matters, some of the issues around ultra-low emission zones – especially in London and their extension across the outer boroughs – were discussed. ULEZ were very much an issue in the recent mayoral elections. The Conservative party pledged to reverse their expansion to cover all of London had it won. However, the Labour mayor was re-elected and the extended coverage has remained in place.
But what of recent evidence on ULEZ being a good or bad thing? As ever, there are winners and losers. Those with non-compliant vehicles have to pay a daily charge to use them in the outer London boroughs. Against that, a report published by the mayor of London’s office on 25 July 2024 has indicated a drop in non-compliant vehicles and an increase in overall air quality in the six months since the policy was introduced. Those losing out are most likely to be less well-off residents who might not be able to afford a newer, compliant vehicle and whose jobs depend on using their existing vehicles.
The major property players appear silent to date on the report and its impact on the real estate market, but maybe it is too early to form those reactions, so watch this space. Let us, however, now move to LTNs and 15-minute Cities.
Low-traffic neighbourhoods
Related in part to ULEZ and neighbourhood areas is the concept of the low-traffic neighbourhood. These were first introduced in the 1970s but many more were created during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Their function is to restrict cars from using roads in certain parts of a neighbourhood, especially those using the neighbourhood streets as a shortcut (sometimes referred to as a “rat run”) instead of using the more appropriately designated main roads. In the April article, I described the difference between roads and streets as follows: “Use of the word street versus road is somewhat semantic. Streets are, of course, like roads on which people and vehicles travel but they have a different function. Streets are the places along which we live, shop or work and almost always have houses or buildings fronting them.”
In restricting motorised traffic using planters or permanent bollards, streets become quieter, safer and pleasant to walk or cycle along. More recently, traffic warning signs and car number plate identification cameras have been installed at the entrance to these areas. Not having an access permit for such areas will normally result in a fine.
This has resulted in a number of protests. Even so, following LTNs in London and elsewhere, Oxford City Council proposed to confirm existing LTNs (and introduce new ones).
Laurence Fox, the actor and political activist, turned out alongside some 2,000 protesters more than a year ago in Oxford city centre to campaign against their introduction. Katie Hopkins, the controversial media personality and columnist, has said she believes these local government policies are about overly controlling individual rights to move in and around a city by whatever means, in particular by cars.
Their introduction is, however, broadly supported by the government – especially where full and proper consultation with residents and businesses has taken place (see the March 2024 guidance by the Department of Transport: www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementing-low-traffic-neighbourhoods).
The low-traffic plan has gone ahead in Oxford but it interesting to note that the council has since removed reference to 15-minute cities from its draft new local plan for 2040 and replaced it with “20-minute neighbourhoods”.
The revised wording of the plan nevertheless upholds much of the 15-minute concept, explored below, with its claimed benefits, stating that 20-minute neighbourhoods should plan to provide “essential facilities within 20 minutes’ walk from home” and that “the idea behind this concept is that all essential everyday facilities should be within that distance so it is easy for people to base their lives on walking rather than using a car”.
Facilities should include shops, recreational opportunities, parks, community facilities and access to public transport (mostly bus stops), and the plan adds that the “concept fits in with the goals of low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) which minimise traffic within the neighbourhood”.
The 15-minute city explained
In part, the concept of the 15-minute city can be traced back to American planner and architect Clarence Perry, who in 1929 defined the characteristics of a well-planned neighbourhood area or regenerated existing neighbourhood as having a reasonably well-defined boundaries and a centre with some public buildings and spaces, a mix of housing types and other land uses, and a network of walkable streets, taking something like five minutes to walk from its centre to its edge.
The current term and concept of a 15-minute city was coined by Carlos Moreno, professor at the Sorbonne University in Paris, in 2016 – and subsequently in the title and content of his newly published book The 15-minute City: A Solution to Saving our Time and Planet.
In it, he sets out – much like the policy intent of the 2040 local plan for Oxford – the ability of a city to provide short travel distances by walking and cycling between homes, leisure, health, schooling and food shopping.
Much influenced by Moreno’s arguments, Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo used the 15-minute city concept as the heart of her re-election pitch. On the back of some experimentation in several neighbourhoods, early initiatives included the weekend opening of school playgrounds, the pedestrianisation of nearby streets, supporting neighbourhood shops with rents, and the conversion of some buildings to mixed uses. It is also interesting that, as a result of her work as mayor and a commitment to 15-minute cities, she has been given the Urban Land Institute’s 2023 prize for Visionaries in Urban Development – its most prestigious award.
Working from home
One final dimension that might give some further possible legitimacy to the 15-minute concept is its relationship with the now (post-pandemic) accepted practice of working at (or close to) home.
While there have been moves back to in the office working, Forbes Advisor has reported that, in the UK between 22 May and 2 June 2024, 40% of UK workers spent some time working from home (with 14% only working from home). This compares with a total of 4.7% working remotely in 2019, prior to the pandemic.
These changes in working practices arguably mean a greater potential demand for local neighbourhood shopping, services, leisure provision and open space, but also new possible drop-in serviced office space (as well as greater patronised coffee shops with free wi-fi). Some recent research is giving witness to this – see, for example: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/remote-working-and-new-geography-local-service-spending
Form your own view
As students and future property professionals, it is not right to dismiss the arguments of opponents or supporters of LTNs, 15-minute cities or 20-minute neighbourhoods without proper reasoning and evidence.
Is it therefore about increasing control over people’s lives or is it about more sustainable forms of living – or some way in between, where a difficult political choice has to be made?
Some of the key upside arguments for LTNs and 15-minute cities centre around:
- Less extraneous traffic and thus less noise and better air quality
- Public transport less likely to be delayed
- A safer environment to walk and cycle
- Nicer access to shops, schools and local services
- The possibility of creating a better sense of place and social cohesion
- The opportunity to have a better work/life balance.
Arguments against might include:
- Making it difficult for businesses and services
- Some retailers and leisure facilities losing out in terms of accessibility by customers and passing trade
- The need for new capital spending and revenue support in improving and maintaining a less car-dominated public realm
- The restriction of freedom of movement by car travel and potential fines for not adhering to the new traffic-control regime.
It should also be noted that the idea of 15-minute cities shares a number of similarities with the concept of “compact cities”.
Compact cities are associated with higher densities, a mix of land uses and – very much like 15-minute cities – the promotion of shorter trips by walking, cycling and public transportation over car travel to get around. Places such as Copenhagen and Singapore are often cited as such models of urban planning and development.
Stop press
The new Labour government transport secretary, Louise Haigh, has just announced that LTNs and 20mph speed limits will be down to local councils to decide without having to consult central government. However, she made it clear that their introduction must be subject to community support.
Haigh thinks sitting in Whitehall making a decision about whether, say, a road in Chester should be 20mph or not is “completely ridiculous”, though the shadow transport secretary, Helen Whately, thinks Labour seems unable to take a “common sense approach to transport”.
The new government will also be reviewing funding for such measures in the new budget and spending review.
Paul Collins is Mainly for Students editor and a senior lecturer at Nottingham Trent University
Image © Peter MacDiarmid/Shutterstock
Follow Estates Gazette
