How do you make a nice city to live in? It’s a simple question that has been central to Monocle since day one – it’s why we run an annual quality-of-life survey and why I get to host a weekly podcast called The Urbanist. Over the years we have looked at the value of green space, of creating neighbourhoods that are walkable and transport networks that move you around a metropolis with ease. But something strange is happening; a shift that threatens to get ugly if civic leaders are not careful: good urbanism is getting a reputation as something a bit too left-wing and middle class for some people’s liking.
This week, on Monocle 24’s The Briefing, I joined host Markus Hippi to talk about a story here in the UK involving a Conservative member of parliament, Nick Fletcher, who had said that the seemingly innocuous notion of the “15-minute city” would deprive people of their liberties and that it was an “international socialist concept”. There was much guffawing from his fellow MPs as he spoke but his view – one that has increasing traction – is that city planners are trying to curtail our personal freedoms by locking us into our neighbourhoods. Now, while some of this thinking borders on the bonkers, the way that these low-traffic, 15-minute zones are being created will diminish your “right” to drive a car. If all of the services that you need are a short walk or cycle from your front door then you might find that some people move around the city less and metropolises become more segregated. The big city lights dim.
The 15-minute city concept was honed by Carlos Moreno, a Colombian-French urbanist and professor at the Sorbonne, whose vision gained airtime during the pandemic. Anne Hidalgo, the mayor of Paris and a member of the centre-left Socialist Party, adopted the idea in her re-election campaign in 2020. Does this make the 15-minute city an international socialist plot? Hardly but it’s not apolitical either. Why? The ideological meaning that is being attached to the car.
On the right, the car is being used as an emblem of freedom; a tool that allows you to move around your city, your nation, when you want. On the left, the car is now demonised as the ultimate example of planet-damaging individualism while the bicycle is revered as almost holy. And, at a city government level, this divide is shaping policies and the pace of change to a more sustainable future. And, yes, to be fair, politicians on the left will be more likely to support the notion of the 15-minute city – and with fewer caveats.
This week, I spent a fascinating afternoon cycling around Brussels with Pascal Smet, the region’s secretary of state for urbanism and heritage, and his spokesman, Damiaan de Jonge, for a story that I am plotting for Monocle. We cycled down highways transformed into pedestrian and bike boulevards; saw parks that were once car parks. I quizzed Smet about how this transformation had been delivered at some pace and how he had persuaded people to lose some of their car freedoms. He said that you must focus on the outcomes and prove to people that these changes are about quality of life for the majority. And riding around Brussels, it was clear to see that people were making the most of these changes.
So why could things get ugly? For starters, not everyone has Smet’s diplomacy; the skill to nudge people along. We live in a world of neighbourhood consultations that somehow always go the council’s way and preachy mayors whose methods alienate many citizens from the urban debate. There are people who feel ignored. In cities where the public transport is creaky (or a network’s staff regularly on strike), for example, a car can be vital. For many extended families or people working night shifts, a car is needed. Add on top of that punishing charges for driving a petrol-fuelled car (London) or imminent city centre bans for all but those wealthy enough to own an electric vehicle (Amsterdam) and you soon create the perfect environment for populist local politics and daft conspiracy theories.
If we want to get everyone on the low-emissions bus, it’s going to need a civic political class that can work with people’s concerns, avoid weaponising the arguments and understand that delivery will be shaky at times. Otherwise, urbanism will become seen as a pursuit that favours a left-leaning political elite – and much good work will unravel.
If you don’t subscribe to Monocle already, join the club today for ideas, inspiration and analysis.