[briandon]

In the most-detailed example of such initiatives described in the article, the steps taken in Oxford include ALPR-camera-triggered automated fines for driving on certain roadways at certain times of certain days to those "without a permit" (who is eligible for the special permits, how eligibility is determined, etc. is not discussed) and actual blocking of other streets using bollards (and heavy planters and other obstacles).

Pointing out that the authorities implementing such schemes are attempting to reduce individual freedom of movement and action is factual, not a conspiracy theory.

[supertrope]

This is not that different from neighborhoods that ban through through truck traffic, or only allow residents to park curbside.

There is a fundamental trade-off between favoring people transiting through an area and residents. As someone traveling through you want wide straight roads with high speed limits. As a resident through traffic burdens you with pedestrian danger, air pollution, noise, and more crashes. So you lobby your council member to lower speed limits, add stop signs, and add traffic calming.

[mistrial9]

it becomes different when there is automated, remote enforcement associated with fines

[pjc50]

Let me introduce you to the "speed camera".

(Invented by Maurice Gatsonides many years ago as a rally training tool, of all things)

[supertrope]

I think we'd be better off with 100% toll roads. Instead of feeling like you got singled out with a fine, just pay for what you use.

[dolorian]

This is the real answer, but we're too used to the game of wealth redistribution, where we're all secretly hoping someone else will pay for what we want. It's very antisocial, it externalizes the costs of your actions onto everyone else.

Trucking causes 99% of damage to roads, but pays only 30% of the bill.

[zamnos]

That's not a very difficult technology. Thankfully, depending on your jurisdiction, that's seen as a violation of civil rights, and is illegal (unless manually operated by a police officer, in the case of Nevada, for instance).

[pjc50]

Oxford is not in Nevada.

This is where the culture war comes in: there's no reason why people in Nevada should care about traffic planning in Oxford!

[dsfyu404ed]

>This is where the culture war comes in: there's no reason why people in Nevada should care about traffic planning in Oxford!

The bulk of the commentary on this website consists of people who are not directly affected by a thing opining about that thing.

Why the double standard? What makes your interest legitimate while others is illegitimate?

[pjc50]

The massive headache for anyone trying to engage with this is the difference between what the actual proposals are and what has been "read into" them by people with paranoid worldviews who are drunk on culture war.

> ALPR-camera-triggered automated fines for driving on certain roadways at certain times of certain days to those "without a permit"

This is basically the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge system which has been in operation for twenty years.

> and actual blocking of other streets using bollards

Yes, this is a standard anti-"rat run" technique to prevent through traffic in residential areas to improve safety.

Yes, there are people against driving! No, it's not a globalist conspiracy, it's people who want to be able to cycle or walk safely or take their kids to school.

A road increases freedom of movement for people in cars and decreases freedom of movement for people on foot. A busy enough road is an impassable barrier.

[908B64B197]

> include ALPR-camera-triggered automated fines for driving on certain roadways at certain times of certain days to those "without a permit" (who is eligible for the special permits, how eligibility is determined, etc. is not discussed)

The issue with these scheme, is that they are pushed and implemented by bureaucrats rather than innovators. What a bureaucrat knows how to do (and what's beneficial to him) is to create new regulations, bureaucratic processes and levy taxes, fines, fees and so on. Where the money's actually going? Some opaque budget where it's redistributed to fund, among other things, salaries and generous pensions for the bureaucrats that have to be hired to manage this extra regulation!

The real solution to incentivize using the ring roads is to make them more efficient and a faster, better alternative to going through the center of the city. That requires understanding why people are still driving through.

The other issue is that anti-car activists are often idealists rather than pragmatic. Their approach to selling the 15 minute city should be to make it so that it's cheaper than driving everywhere, faster and more convenient, while leaving the option for people to still own a car and use it. Naturally, if not taking the car is the better option, people will leave them in a parking garage most of the time.

[fatnoah]

I didn't get the controversy in the article until I saw the camera-based enforcement, restricted access, etc. I lived in a "15 minute city" in downtown Boston, MA (USA) for quite some time and it worked very well, even without restriction.

[LatteLazy]

It's not really. There is no conspiracy about closing roads to make them into pedestrian areas. No one claims fining someone for driving through a park would be a "conspiracy"...

[briandon]

Driving through a park is already prohibited. The initiative is describing paved roadways.

In Oxford, the ability to drive on particular existing streets (streets, not parkland) is to be turned into a privilege, allegedly at certain times on certain days, and those who use those existing roadways without having new, specific permits will be automatically fined.

From the article:

Officials in Oxford approved a plan last year to install “traffic filters,” which would limit access on six roads in the city during certain times of day. The filters are cameras, not physical barriers, that take photos of vehicles’ license plates. Fines are then issued to those without a permit.

[LatteLazy]

You're still not actually describing a conspiracy though are you?

And it is standard for roads to stop being roads, to become limited or no access to vehicles etc.

Suddenly we're meant to think the illuminate are behind the fact only the park staff can drive through the park or only local residents can park in some places. But it's not true.

Just say "I like driving and want to drive a lot". There is no need to pretend that the UN and GoldmanSachs are plotting against you!?

[dsfyu404ed]

>There is no need to pretend that the UN and GoldmanSachs are plotting against you!?

Plotting against me? Nonsense. At best I'm just a number to them. In reality I'm probably not even that, I'm part of a statistic. They don't give two shits about me, about what god I worship, about what drugs I do, about how I spend my day, about any of it, so long as the dollars flow.

I am far, far more concerned about some jerk in some high class neighborhood who lives 15mi from me who has delusions of thinking they know what's best for the world and the money to take a good crack at implementing their fantasy to the detriment of everyone outside their bubble.

(The above is in general and is not specific to urban planning or any other social or economic issue)