By Emanuel Mendoza

The first true automobile was created during the 19th century. They became widely popular throughout the United States during the 20th century, and by 1929, there was almost one car for every household. 

Before vehicles, cities were built with people in mind. The cities were compact, streets shared both commercial and residential areas together, and transport to schools and stores was within a reasonable walking distance. 

After cars, however, new land was constructed with vehicles as the main focus because of the popularity of the automobile as described before. This rapid expansion outside the cities and into new towns and villages during the 20th century makes up the majority of modern America today. 

 In the modern age, aside from a couple of historical major metropolitan areas, almost all regions are largely reliant on vehicles, especially suburbs. Suburbs, areas outside the city made up of mostly residential areas also became very popular throughout the country. Raleigh and Wake Forest are premier examples of these car-reliant areas. 

Car-dependent areas, which are mainly medium-sized cities, suburbs, and towns built with cars in mind are the result of suburban sprawl and suburban-style: spread out communities, filled with separated zoning for commercial and residential, as well as an abundance of roads that lack public transportation and supportive infrastructure for pedestrians,  such as sidewalks. 

Whether cities with walking infrastructure or suburbs with heavy car dependency are superior to each other is a never-ending argument with various understandable pros and cons. 

Some may argue that suburban towns and villages are better because it is less crowded, there is less pollution and trash, and there is less crime than heavily populated areas. 

Others, in favor of large cities, may argue that their areas are more culturally diverse, are safer, have much better public transportation, and have much more available commercial and cultural spaces close to residential areas. They also argue that suburbs have a lack of identity caused by how separated the communities are, leading to a lack of neighborhood authenticity. 

However, I believe that the perspective and viewpoint of the youth, specifically adolescents and children, are overlooked and are not taken into consideration as much as they should. 

The youth will soon run the world and will shape our nation. The environment and context that they live in shape their mental health, emotions, thoughts, and ultimately, who they will be as citizens. Therefore, it is important to pay attention to how un-walkable cities, which are mainly suburban and rural areas, impact our youth. 

Unwalkable cities heavily restrict the access that our youth have to their friends and other social venues, such as parks and churches. In order to get to these venues, such as a friend’s house, they usually need someone to drive them, and this may be very challenging depending on the parent’s schedule or who is even willing to drive them in the first place. 

Lack of sociability and infrequent social interactions has a variance of consequences, including but not limited to, increased suicide rate, sleeplessness, anxiety, depression, obesity, and other health risks. 

A study conducted by a professor from Columbia University found that suburban youth, who are characterized by their walkability, have higher rates of personal anxiety and substance abuse and are more prone to unconventional and disruptive behavior. Suburban girls are also at higher risk of experiencing significant depressive issues–two to three times their urban counterparts. 

Not being able to walk or travel to places without public transportation leaves our youth trapped in their homes and with restricted access to the outside world. The dependence and freedom that they usually cultivate in their older teenage years is hindered because of the lack of walkability unless they purchase their own vehicle. 

Inflation and rising costs have led to decreased access to vehicles for families that are of lower income than their other counterparts. Furthermore, insurance costs average around 1-2 thousand dollars per year depending on the company. Teenagers should be able to have other options besides driving to get around, which can be a risky activity due to their young age and higher risk of crashes and death. 

These areas also lack entertainment and social venues that allow for leisure activities for our youth, with many teenagers describing the rural and suburban landscape as “boring” and isolated. This is amplified due to the lack of public transportation and walkability in these landscapes. 

Our youth as a result has to  rely heavily on technological devices to take up their time, playing video games using social media for hours on end. Teenagers have a lot of energy to burn off, and the way our cities are constructed should encourage and promote the lifestyle of our youth who do not have as much access to vehicles as adults do, instead of discouraging their movement. 

Those who criticize our youth for spending excess time on screens or for not going outside should blame the car-dependent infrastructure and urban sprawl instead of the teens themselves, as we would engage less with our screens and more with the real world if our cities had the appropriate infrastructure for walking. 

I am aware that it will take a significant amount of funding and planning to be able to change the composition of the suburbs themselves. We’d have to revamp all of our towns, cities, and suburbs to replicate the same exact infrastructure of the major metropolitan or historic cities themselves, and this may not be realistic. 

However, it is true that directing funding and city planning to support venues of transportation other than vehicles, rather than changing the composition of the suburbs themselves, is a realistic goal that can be achieved if our policymakers and government officials use their resources to support said venues. 

For starters, solutions would include adding sidewalks where it is needed, a reliable and abundant transportation system that covers all neighborhoods that can be arrived at a reasonable walkable distance, and lowering vehicular speeds so that they do not pose a hazard to pedestrians walking or biking, and creating newer infrastructure around our cities that does not encourage vehicle use. A premier example is mixed land use, where the neighborhoods in our towns contain both residential and commercial areas that can be accessed by its residents. Shaping government policy to discourage people from using their cars and instead other venues such as biking is the most plausible solution to this problem plaguing all of America. 

Imagine a world where a teenager can easily walk out of their apartment or house and easily walk to the park to hang out with their friends. Imagine a world where teenagers can easily go to each other’s houses within walking distance and socialize daily. 

This scenario that is scarcely seen throughout the nation can become abundant throughout our nation if enough awareness is raised and if our citizens put their effort in and reach out to their government officials and city planners to persuade them to support pedestrian infrastructure. 

Image Sources (In order) 

1st: https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/who-invented-the-first-car-and-when-was-it-made-76976

2nd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_Row_%28Boston%29

3rd: https://www.wideopenspaces.com/10-reasons-urban-sprawl-is-the-outdoorsmans-worst-enemy/