Looking out from the descending airplane window at night, I follow the spiderwebs of lights growing bigger and brighter. The delicate spindles turn into busy highways, the small pearls of light grow into crossroads and squares, and all the darker spaces in between take the shape of parks and residences. What one sees outside of the window of a plane at night is the true soul of a city: a network of light and life.

Cities are complicated systems of human interaction and concrete infrastructure, which are somehow supposed to exist in symbiosis. Just like the spiderwebs they often resemble when looked at from a bird's eye view, their resilience is in their flexibility. However, with urban growth that flexibility – of human mobility, of construction, of redefining routes and systems – lessens, thus also exposing the inherent fragility of cities. Air pollution, noise pollution, stress, relentless pace of economic development: it takes more and more out of the environment and of the people living in cities to keep them stable.

A solution that has been growing in popularity is the 15-minute model. It is at its core an attempt to reconnect people with each other and with the city by reinforcing the sub-networks within the cities. It is imagined that by providing all essential elements of urban life into an 800 meter walkshed from a (central) residential area – from grocery stores and parks to schools and kindergartens to workplaces and recreational facilities. The city would then become more of a conglomeration of hubs rather than the singular giant unit we are used to. It definitely comes with its perks: it would reduce car use by promoting walkability, thus also driving CO2 emissions down; it would offer more opportunities for people to interact with each other regularly and form stronger bonds; it would incentivize a better work-life balance by saving on commute time. Conspiracy theorists claim that the 15-minute city model is part of a larger plan to confine people to certain areas of town. That is – though – not the aim of the project, as the 15-minute plan will not restrict the movement of people rather it would take away the necessity of a long commute.

While conspiracies about nefarious grand schemes concealed by promises of a better lifestyle have been debunked, there are certain aspects of the 15-minute model that have often been largely neglected at sustainability conferences where the plan has become a buzzword. To illustrate them, all we need to do is consider what we, NYU Abu Dhabi students, dislike about life on campus. In a way, NYUAD is a 15-minute city: we have all that is essential to us, the residents, facilities within walking distance, including a convenience store, a gym, a library, several different restaurants and cafes, an art gallery, and a concert space (or even three halls, actually). Life here is comfortable. Yet it feels isolating. For now, we have the incentive of going into the city for experiences such as shopping centers or cinemas with blockbuster movies, among many others. But if those were also within campus, there would be no reason for us to leave at all, considering that they are now building a mall next to campus that is soon going to become a reality In fact, we already are so busy that we can spend weeks on end without going out into the city. Now scale it all up.

Centering our lives around our offices also does not really seem to offer that promised work-life balance. People need physical degrees of separation from their jobs in order to be able to switch off their work mentality (again, think back to weekends or even breaks you spent on campus). If your residence’s location is based on where your office is, does your life not then revolve around your work entirely?

Yet those are petty considerations coming from a position of privilege. The real problem with the isolation of the 15-minute model is its impact on marginalized communities. The plan would work well in an affluent neighborhood, but it will limit the economic mobility opportunities for people of lower income. In a study of residents’ behavioral patterns in an attempt to inform policymakers of the best ways to implement a 15-minute city plan, the MIT Senseable City Lab found a strongly positive correlation of experienced segregation in poorer neighborhoods and a negative correlation on the same factor in rich neighborhoods. What this statistical analysis tells us is that it is highly likely that developing 15-minute areas in the city centers would have a positive impact, but it will marginalize further communities that have already been experiencing economic, racial, or other types of segregation.

The 15-minute city is also a model developed in regions where walkability is possible in terms of the climate of the place. But it would be irrational to expect greater walkability as a result of such a plan in an arid climate, for instance, like the one in the UAE. There are other steps to be taken first to ensure the safety of the residents in extreme weather conditions before policymakers should consider adopting this urban development plan.

Then what would a perfect solution for urban sustainability look like? Perfection is not something cities are capable of, but perhaps we should just follow the heartlines of the city: the brightest lines and spots on the city’s network at night tell us a lot about where people want to go and be and do so together. Maybe we can just learn from each other and connect on a safe all-encompassing public transport system, meet in small public spaces in our neighborhoods, and grow together communal gardens in the parks. Integration, involvement, and imagination can take us further than the 15-minute sustainable city.