15 minute city presentation

PARIS

NEW YORK

MILAN

SINGAPORE

PORTLAND

MELBOURNE

DUBLIN

BOGOTA

A New Time-based Urban Agenda Exploring the 15-minute city in concepts and practices

Student

Ahsaas Tarwani (913281) Thesis Supervisor

Prof. Maria Antonella Bruzzese Msc in Urban Planning and Policy Design | December 2021 Scuola di Architettura, Urbanistica, Ingegneria delle Costruzioni Politecnico di Milano

Why this study Discursive debates in urban planning field and general media alike If ‘15-minute city’ is everything, then maybe it’s nothing!

Need for defining and situating ‘FMC’ in the wider scientific scholarship Discuss its utility as an ‘utopian idea’ ‘new urban planning model’, or a mere’ political campaign’

Through this study, I have tried to clarify the significance of rhetoric of ‘FMC’ from urban planning perspective Investigate & analyse the rhetoric, first, planning theory perspective

FMC in concepts

then, its emperical application

FMC in practices

Outline of presentation

01

Introduction

02

FMC in Concepts

03

FMC in Practices

04

Conclusion

1.1

The ‘x’-minute city

2.1

Moreno’s 15 minute city and its components

3.1

Casestudy critierias & methods

4.1

Discussing the relevance of FMC

1.2

Method of documentation

2.2

Arguments in favor

3.2

Portland, Melbourne & Paris at a glance

4.2

Conclusionary remarks

2.3

Critical issues

3.3

Casestudy findings and synthesis

4.3

Way forward

01 Introduction

1.1. ‘x’-minute city 1.2. Method of documentation

1.1. ‘x’-minute city 15/20-minute city (FMC)

30-minute city

Based on principles of tactical urbanism

Based on principles of spatial proximity & active transport

Based on reducing average travel time within region

Concerns installing modular street furnitures

Concerns decentralization of urban functions close to people

Concerns installing public transit infrastructure

Application: Stockholm city

Application: International

Application: Sydney Metropolitan Region

1-minute city

1.2. Method of Documentation Literature review

Focus of the study

Documentating the ‘new’ urban planning concept & its debate

Research parameters

15-minute city

Time period November 2020 - May 2021

Proposed by Carlos Moreno (2020) & promoted by C40 organization, as a

Languages

Grey Literature Seminars/ Webinars

‘New Urban Planning Concept’

Conference proceedings

of webinars engaged in and transcribed

English, Italian, French

Place of origin of material OECD member countries

Media articles & blogs Reports, white papers and presentations

102 hours

Keywords with boolean operators 15-minute city, 20-minute city, proximity city, 15-minute neighbourhoods, 20-minute negihbourhoods, post-covid cities

Online portals for search Google search, google scholarly, Linkedin, Facebook

Total 91 reviewed media & blog articles

Total 56

peer reviewed articles, white papers, reports & conference proceedings

02 FMC in Concepts

2.1. Moreno’s 15 minute city 2.2. Arguments in favor 2.3. Critical issues

2.1. Moreno’s 15 minute city

The argument Components

2.2. Arguments in favor 2.3. Critical issues

2.1. Moreno’s 15-minute city

The argument

Components

The Argument The City as it is

Enter 15-minute city 6 Urban social functions that constitute urban life Working Living Learning

15-minute

Enjoying Caring Supplying

Scattered city that entails commute Urban citizen

=

Time poverty Carbon emissions

Normality

Pandemic

Accessiblity by mobility

Paradigm shift

+ + + +

Safe & Inclusive communities

Creative/cultural production from the time thus saved Low carbon emissions

Health and cost benefits

New Normality

Accessiblity by proximity

2.1. Moreno’s 15-minute city

“

The argument

Components

We need a big bang of proximity and decentralization of city to fit a different pace of urban life, i.e. ‘the 15 minute pace’ Moreno (2020)

” source: Moreno (2020)

2.1. Moreno’s 15-minute city

The argument

Components

The Components of FMC 4 Principles Ecology

Designing a green and sustainable city.

Proximity

Minimising the distance to other activities.

Solidarity Participation

Establishing links between people

The FMC framework and its prescriptions Urban services

Density

Diversity

Engaging citizens in planning.

Proximity

Digitalization

Urban data source: Moreno et al. (2021)

Existing cities can be transformed into 15 minute cities by redefining the public commons

Design of buildings and urban spaces through form based codes rather than land uses.

Temporal measure to urban planning rather than just spatial focus

Cities should be focussing on accessibility to amenities and services rather than only accounting accessiblity to opportunities (jobs)

Every square meter area in the cities (like streets, parking areas, buildings) should be put to multi-functional use as per the requirements of the residents.

Promote sharing economy & digitalization of services to reduce the commute.

2.1. Moreno’s 15 minute city

Provision for ‘work from home’

2.2. Arguments in favor 2.3. Critical issues

Connecting residents to amenities Making cities more resilient

2.2. Arguments in favor

Provision for ‘work from home’

By Richard Florida, Ezio Manzini and others

A. Provisions for post covid ‘Work from home’

‘zoom shock’

Shrinking headquarters as an opportunity for more mixed uses Co-working spaces in neighbourhoods Capture spillover impacts on local production & consumption Socio-economic policies at ‘local’ scale ‘Cosmopolitan localization’ by Manzini (2020)

Connecting residents to amenities

Making Resilient city

By Saskia Sassen and others

B. Reconnecting residents to proximity amenities

Objective vs Percieved accessibility

Removing Border vacuums (Jacobs,1961) Removing accessiblity shadows by localization of global spaces eg. overtouristified city centres Planning accessiblity ‘with’ and ‘for’ people

2.2. Arguments in favor

Provision for ‘work from home’

Connecting residents to amenities

Making Resilient city

By Pisano (2020)

C. Making cities more resilient

A fairer distribution of services

Flexible buildings and urban spaces

+ Decentralization of services

Primary transport connections and secondary bike/walk connections

+ Increasing Redundancy

Hierarchy of transport

source: Pisano (2020)

2.1. Moreno’s 15 minute city

2.2. Arguments in favor 2.3. Critical issues

Monodimensional perspective Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’ Feasiblity & consequences

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

By Edward Glaeser, Ricky Burdett and others

A. Monodimensional ‘resident’ oriented perspective to cities Proximity of people vs proximity of firms

The City as it is

15-minute city

Agglomeration benefits of urban centres that lead to economic innovation among firms These innovations lead to reducing cost of living to benefit all residents

Issue of localization of Jobs to Local scale (of neighbourhoods) Cities (through its urban ‘job’ centres) offer upward socio-economic mobility to lower strata Localising jobs from urban centres to ‘local scale’ will reduce the function of cities as place of ‘opportunities’ for all, specially with reduced role of public transit as mere ‘peripheral connection’

Work centers

Residential areas

15-minute clusters

Daily commute source: downtoearth.in

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

By New Urbanists like Andreas Duany, Richard Rogers

B. Contradictory to the time and space metric of ‘neighbourhood’ concept Average threshold of comfortable walk

15-minute time frame & Individual abilities 15 minute time frame & slow modes of transportation & their respective sheds 15 minute neighbourhood vs. 5 minute ‘New Urbanist’ neighbourhoods

Children

Elderly people

Average person

Average 5-7 minute walk

Average 8-10 minute walk

15 minute walk

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

By New Urbanists like Andreas Duany, Richard Rogers

15-minute time frame & Individual abilities 15 minute time frame & slow modes of transportation & their respective sheds 15 minute neighbourhood vs. 5 minute ‘New Urbanist’ neighbourhoods

3/4

1/2

1/4

00

1/4

5 minu te wal k

B. Contradictory to the time and space metric of ‘neighbourhood’ concept

1 MILE

1/2

3/4

1 MILE

1&1/4

1&1/2

1&3/4

2 MILE

2&1/4

2&1/2

2&3/4

3 MILE

lk a w te u in m 15

e bike t u n i 5m

5 minute

e-bike

15 min ute

bik e

source: cnu.org

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

By New Urbanists like Andreas Duany, Richard Rogers

B. Contradictory to the time and space metric of ‘neighbourhood’ concept

1 MILE

3/4

1/2

1/4

00

1/4

1/2

15-minute time frame & Individual abilities

3/4

1 MILE

1 MILE

3/4

1/2

5 minute walk

5 minute walk

15 minute walk

15 minute neighbourhood vs. 5 minute ‘New Urbanist’ neighbourhoods

5 minute walk

5 minute walk

1/4

1 MILE

1 1/4

1 MILE

1 MILE

3/4

5 minute walk 5 minute walk

5 minute walk

1/4

00

5 minute bike

5 minute walk

5 minute walk

5 minute walk 1/2

5 minute walk

5 minute walk

1 MILE

1 1/2

00

1/4

1/2

1 1/4

1/2

1/4

1/4

3/4

15 minute walk shed 7 neighbourhoods Population: 23,500

3/4

1 1/4

5 minute walk 5 minute walk

1/2

1 1/2

1/2

5 minute walk

00

1 1/2

3/4

15 minute time frame & slow modes of transportation & their respective sheds

1/4

3/4

1 MILE

5 minute bike shed 13 neighbourhoods Population: 41,600

1 1/4

1 1/2

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

4800m 1600m 1200m

By Jan Gehl and New Urbanist, Randal Ghent

800m 400m

B. Contradictory to the time and space metric of ‘neighbourhood’ concept

Urban park

A proposal to break 15 minutes into 5 / 10 / 15 minutes No differentiation between 6 urban functions/ amenties, neither definite density values provided

Density and agglomeration benefits need to be balanced in a free market economy Social equity based on individual abilities should be addressed

Departmental store Access to all modes of public transport

5 minute walk

Local bar Kids play area

Specialised sports facilities

Bank

10 minute walk

15 minute walk

Local park 5 minute bike District hospital University/ higher school 15 minute bike Cinema theatre

(Author’s interpretation of iterations of Gehl architects & CNU)

2.3. Critical Issues

Monodimensional perspective

Challenge to ‘Neighbourhood unit’

Feasiblity & consequences

By Richard Dunning, Peverini & Chiaro, and others

C. Feasibility of application to existing cities and its consequences FMC’s narrow view of accessiblity Distinction of Neighbourhoods based on by putting value on time and amenities in the backdrop of (unequally distributed) telework patterns

+

Reduced function of public transport

Trigger Real Estate Actors Flow of capital among neighbourhoods leading to sequential gentrification and displacement of poor and vunerable communities

Exacerbate social divide in cities source: downtoearth.org

Way forward to emperical application of the concept

Arguments in favor

Critical Issues

Provisions for post covid ‘Work from home’

Only ‘resident’ oriented perspective to cities; No differentiation between various urban functions

Reconnecting residents to proximity amenities

Contradiction to the time and space metric of ‘neighbourhood’ concept

Making cities more resilient

Feasibility of application to existing cities and consequences

Way forward to case-studies

03 FMC in Practices

3.1. Casestudy criterias & methods 3.2 Portland, Melbourne & Paris at a glance 3.3. Findings and Synthesis

3.1. Casestudy criterias & methods 3.2 Portland, Melbourne & Paris at a glance 3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Research questions Selection criteria Method

3.1. Casestudy Criterias & Methods

RQ 1

Research questions

Selection criteria

Method

From critical issue ‘A’ Mono-dimensional perspective to cities How do cities define the FMC concept & how do they treat different urban activities

From critical issue ‘B’ ‘Neighbourhood’ time-space metric

RQ 2

Research Question How do cities adopt the time based concept of 15-20 minute city? Can a common planning framework be derived?

Does the spatial metric of proximity in FMC module differ from the ‘Neighbourhood concept’ as defined in New Urbanist principles?

If yes, what are its prescriptive components and how is it different?

RQ 3

From critical issue ‘C’ Feasiblity of application & consequences How do cities treat the socio-economic differential across the territory to achieve proximity for all?

3.1. Casestudy Criterias & Methods

Casestudy Selection Criteria

Research questions

Selection criteria

Method

3.1. Casestudy Criterias & Methods

Research questions

Selection criteria

Method

Portland

Melbourne

Paris

20 minute city

20 minute neighbourhood

15 minute city

Area: 375 km2 Population Density: 1895 ppkm2 (2018)

Area: 2453 km2 Population Density: 453 ppkm2 (2021)

Method

Data

Scope and Limitations

Casestudy method with exploratory approach

Primary data: City vision documents, comprehesive plans, interviews with city officials

Spatial perspective to issues of accessibility

(Yin, 2009)

Qualitative Content Analysis

Secondary data: Official reports & research documents, newspaper & online media articles

(Creswell, 2018)

Unit of Analysis

Strategies to create accessiblity by spatial proximity

Area: 709 km2 Population Density: 6812 ppkm2 (2016)

Concern of generalization of local socio-economic and governance context Causal relationships (questions of ‘Why’) not explored Assymetrical data for Paris casestudy, some assumptions created based on local media articles in order to populate the datasets Interviews with city officials of Paris could not take place

3.1. Casestudy criterias & methods 3.2. Portland, Melbourne & Paris at a glance 3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Portland Melbourne Paris

3.2. Portland, Melbourne and Paris at a glance Portland

Portland

Melbourne

Paris

Status: Well articulated & in ‘implementation’ phase Conception

Analytical studies

Strategic framework

Feedback loops

3.2. Portland, Melbourne and Paris at a glance Melbourne

Portland

Melbourne

Paris

Status: Developing policy, in ‘pilot’ phase Conception

Analysis

Pilot projects

Pilot project 1: Strathmore precinct

Pilot project 2: Craydon precinct

Pilot project 3: Sunshine precinct

3.2. Portland, Melbourne and Paris at a glance Paris

Status: Political proposal only Ideation phase

Portland

Melbourne

Paris

3.1. Casestudy criterias & methods 3.2 Portland, Melbourne & Paris at a glance 3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles of proximity

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

How casestudies treat the ‘critical issues’

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

4800m 1600m

20 minute neighbourhood

1200m

800m

800m

10 minute walk

400m

RQ1 How do cities define the FMC concept & how do they treat different urban activities?

Urban park

Departmental store

10 minute walk as mode of transport + public transport Minimum basic amenities defined & localised

Access to all modes of public transport

Provision for ‘work from home’ but ‘jobs’ not a part of FMC modules

Kids play area

Specialised sports facilities

RQ2 Does the spatial metric in FMC module differ from the ‘Neighbourhood concept’ as defined in New Urbanist principles?

5 minute walk

Local bar

Basic amenities only

Public transit for higher order services

10 minute walk

Bank

15 minute walk

Local park 5 minute bike District hospital University/ higher school

Module centered on public transit node

15 minute bike Cinema theatre

High density mixed use around the node Intra and inter neighbourhood connectors Derivation of 15-20 minute city cluster from casestudies

An iterative proposition of ‘15 minute city’ (Illustrative)

(Author’s interpretation of iterations of Gehl architects & CNU)

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

How casestudies treat the ‘critical issues’

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

800m radius 10 minute Networked walk 5 minute Euclidian Distance 20 minute neighbourhood 800m

10 minute walk

RQ1 How do cities define the FMC concept & how do they treat different urban activities?

10 minute walk as mode of transport + public transport Minimum basic amenities defined & localised Provision for ‘work from home’ but ‘jobs’ not a part of FMC modules

RQ2 Does the spatial metric in FMC module differ from the ‘Neighbourhood concept’ as defined in New Urbanist principles?

Basic amenities only

Public transit for higher order services

Module centered on public transit node High density mixed use around the node Intra and inter neighbourhood connectors Derivation of 15-20 minute city cluster from casestudies

Neighbourhood center (Transit node with local amenities)

Public transit route with active ground floor retail

Predominantly residential blocks

Streets connecting neighbourhood to districts (with car, bike and pedestrain paths & active ground floor retail)

High-density mixed use buildings

Inter-neighbourhood streets (primarily pedestrain oriented)

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Finding 1

“

FMC is a reiteration of ‘Neighbourhood unit’, first put forward by Clarence Perry and further developed by New Urbanists

”

Synthesis: 3 Principles

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

The rhetoric of ‘FMC’ as a communicative tool

negotiation within cities

mobilization across cities

Portland

Melbourne

Paris

20 minute city

20 minute city

15 minute city

20 minute neighbourhood

20 minute neighbourhood

Complete neighbourhoods

Proximity city

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Finding 2

“

FMC is used as ‘communicative tool’ rather than as a ‘new spatial planning concept’, in contrast to what its proponents claim.

”

Synthesis: 3 Principles

3.3. Findings and Synthesis

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

Synthesis 3 Principles for creating proximity at neighbourhood and city level

Method Tabulation

Filter

Casestudies

Literature review Synthesis

Portland

strategies of the three cities

accessibility based strategies

Melbourne Paris

Principle 1 Principle 2 Principle 3

Method

Rapid scoping (Gilgun,2016) Keywords

‘urban form’; ‘accessibility’ ; ‘proximity’ Portal

Google scholarly articles

3.3. Findings and Synthesis Principles

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Compact city

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

Multi-modal sustainabe transport

Distributed & networked system

Transport planning

Landuse planning

Socio-economic policies

Features Inward growth and densification from core to outwards

Work

t an grou h bounda b r ry U

Live

su Outer burbs

Relatively high density Landuse mix and intensification

le Midd ring

Leisure

Quality of urban design

I Work

ty

er c nn i

Live

Leisure

From

Co-location of compatible mixed uses

Urban growth boundary & infill development of Density

‘car-based and long commute’ cities towards

‘walkable and short commute’ cities

Proximate environments & time efficiency

3.3. Findings and Synthesis Principles

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Compact city

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Multi-modal sustainabe transport

Landuse planning

Transport planning

Synthesis: 3 Principles

Distributed & networked system Socio-economic policies

Features Quality provision & variety of public transport modes Promoting soft mobility Discouraging car-commute Mobility as a service (MaaS)

From

‘car-based and long commute’ cities towards

‘walkable and short commute’ cities

Car based commute

Mobility as a Service (MaaS)

3.3. Findings and Synthesis Principles

Finding 1: The Neighbourhood unit

Compact city

Finding 2: Communicative tool

Synthesis: 3 Principles

Multi-modal sustainabe transport

Landuse planning

Transport planning

Distributed & networked system Socio-economic policies

Features Economic structures distributed across the territory Demographic distribution System of nodes and connectors Polycentric city with connected satellite clusters

From

‘car-based and long commute’ cities towards

‘walkable and short commute’ cities

Networked Urban System

Urban growth boundary (compact city)

Neighbourhood links

Principle urban centers

City links

District centers Neighbourhood centers

District links

04 Conclusion

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC 4.2 Conclusionary remarks 4.3. Way Forward

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC 4.2 Conclusionary remarks 4.3. Way Forward

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

Why the title ‘FMC’

FMC stands for..

From Finding 1 & synthesis

A. The Rhetoric of FMC stands for:

Spatial dimension Neighbourhoods

Compact city

Creating,

Governance dimension

Compact and Networked cities based on sustainable transport starting from neighbourhood up

Place based approach

Building up

Aligning landuse, transport and socio-economic policies to the neighbourhood scale Socio-economic dimension

Brings to focus the issue of, Reducing commute for citizens by providing amenities they need in the neighbourhoods

People

Amenities

Provide

Define

Greater co-ordination between micro and macro scale

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

B. Why the title ‘Fifteen Minute City’

A communicative planning perspective

City branding & inter ‘global cities’ competition Compact city also called as,

The near city

City of short distances Walkable city Close knit cities

Attract tech-firms, knowledge workers and investors By providing attraction of cultural offerings and lifestyle values

1. More relevant during Pandemic, with the Fifteen minute city

‘The fear of end of cities’ (Florida et al., 2021)

2. C40, a Mayor’s organization, as promoter 3. Mayoral elections in NYC, Paris & Milan,

the three c40 members that embraced the concept ‘’Political campaign’’

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

B. Why the title ‘Fifteen Minute City’

A communicative planning perspective

City branding & inter ‘global cities’ competition Compact city also called as,

The near city

City of short distances Walkable city Close knit cities

Attract tech-firms, knowledge workers and investors By providing attraction of cultural offerings and lifestyle values

1. More relevant during Pandemic, with the Fifteen minute city

‘The fear of end of cities’ (Florida et al., 2021)

2. C40, a Mayor’s organization, as promoter 3. Mayoral elections in NYC, Paris & Milan,

the three c40 members that embraced the concept ‘’Political campaign’’

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

B. Why the title ‘Fifteen Minute City’

A communicative planning perspective

Therefore, From Finding 2 and Interviews,

Interview extracts

“

FMC is more than a Branding Strategy.

It makes easy to understand what they can get in (15 or) 20 minutes’ - Art Pearce, Portland Bureau of Transport

“

The simple language makes easy to communicate the importance of density & diversity to communities - James Mant, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Melbourne

”

Helps align not only external actors but also internal actors

By putting value on ‘personal’ time, makes urban planning ‘personal’

”

Provides a common social vision to all territorial actors

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

B. Why the title ‘Fifteen Minute City’

A communicative planning perspective

Therefore, From Finding 2 and Interviews,

Interview extracts

“

FMC is more than a Branding Strategy.

It makes easy to understand what they can get in (15 or) 20 minutes’ - Art Pearce, Portland Bureau of Transport

“

The simple language makes easy to communicate the importance of density & diversity to communities - James Mant, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Melbourne

”

Helps align not only external actors but also internal actors

By putting value on ‘personal’ time, makes urban planning ‘personal’

”

Provides a common social vision to all territorial actors

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC

FMC stands for..

Why the title ‘FMC’

A narrative for all territorial actors

A narrative for

urban citizens Retrospect their lifestyles and change their consumption patterns: To buy local and stay local Change from ‘car’ commute to faster means of public transport

Create intrigue for questioning the planning processes of their cities and thus participate in city-making.

A narrative for

private investors + firms By creating ‘demand’ for proximity, may nudge private developers to ‘supply’ real estate offerings accordingly.

Influence private investors to provide ‘specialised high order’ facilties close to people and not in hinterlands of the city.

A narrative for

political decision makers Through emphasis on ‘subjective time’, FMC may give incentives and motivation to balance investments between increasing economic vitality of cities and liveability of its citizens.

Motivate firms to offer ‘work from home’ to employees for full time/ partly, thus creating hybrid proximity for employees who can afford.

Potential buy-in from all territoral actors to reduce ‘artificial’ temporal poverties due to organizational leakages

A narrative for

urban planners Go beyond binary approach to service provision Break inter-deparmental silos Critically think impact of policies on density, distance and destinations Provide alternate means of services in critical areas

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC 4.2. Conclusionary remarks 4.3. Way Forward

4.2. Conclusionary remarks

A narrative ‘of’ planning rather than being a narrative ‘for’ planning

From looking at the, three principles of creating proximity & their respective strategies adopted in case-studies,

Rather spatially decentralizing the city as percieved from its linguistic interpretation, FMC signifies,

Decentralization of investments from city centre to suburbs.

Decentralization of planning procedures at the tune of neighbourhoods, close to people.

Decentralization of demographic polarities between centre and peripheries.

4.1. Discussing the relevance of FMC 4.2. Conclusionary remarks 4.3. Way Forward

4.3. Way Forward

Future trajectory for research

Role and impact of ‘narratives’ in planning, starting from the rhetoric of ‘15-minute city’ and its quantification.

PARIS

NEW YORK

MILAN

SINGAPORE

PORTLAND

MELBOURNE

DUBLIN

BOGOTA

Thank you