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