I am in my early twenties, I can’t drive, and I’m embarrassed about it. I’ve had informal lessons for the past year and a bit, but I have yet to obtain to legally drive, plus I don’t have a car. I’m lucky to live in a city that doesn’t require me to drive to function, but having my girlfriend pick me up and drop me off is getting old. I want to wear the pants sometimes and end my term as a passenger princess. Here’s the thing, though: why are we so car-dependent in North American society?
Suburbia
Before auto-industrialization was introduced into North America’s cities, one could travel to work, home, and engage in public life virtually all on foot. As urban populations grew and travel became auto-dependent, cityscapes changed to adapt to the working population sprawling from the city center to settle and raise families. Because this sprawl became a naturalized growth pattern, urban developers and government actors became one-dimensional when accommodating population growth — more sprawl. Today, people are starting to notice the detriments of this residential model. I believe suburban sprawl antagonizes the natural flow of cities — both from an environmental and a social engineering standpoint. I understand the appeal of the suburbs, though. As a place to settle down and raise a family, spacious and low-density areas of residence seem like the perfect fit. However, it is not practical. Suburban sprawl requires city developers to continually build outwards keeping people farther and farther away from their places of work — isolating them from the vibrancy of the urban core while at home and isolating them from their families while at work. Outward expansion of residences has its limits. Squires claimed that “outward expansion has been driven by several political, economic, and social forces and has been closely associated with emerging inequalities in the distribution of wealth produced in those communities and nationwide” (2002: 5). He also mentions that metropolitan areas in the United States saw their populations increase by 128% between 1950 and 1990 (Squire 2002). However, land use increased by 181%. This displays the inequity in city development. This inequity was due to the influx of suburbanites. With this influx comes many detrimental socioeconomic trends. Income disparity in the suburbs is influenced by the central city. When the central city is flourishing economically, the suburbs experienced the same trend but at a higher rate. However, when the central city is on an economic downtrend, the suburbs do not experience as much a pitfall. Not only that but poverty concentrates in the city center. Racialized people in urban areas are predominately isolated from the suburbs for numerous reasons. Redlining, persuasion from real estate agents, and the so-called preservation of local culture all contribute to the segregation of racialized people trying to move to the suburbs. On top of that, freeways are damaging to the social nucleus of cities & towns by design: plenty of racialized communities have been demolished for the sake of automobiles.
Smart and Green Cities
This article comes from a city-planning blog. The author critiques National Geographic’s most recent cover story featuring a so-called electric revolution. National Geographic was claiming that with the introduction of electric vehicles, our daily commutes will become greener. Pattison went against that claim stating that the climate crisis is too extreme to wait a couple of years for car companies to become completely electric. Transforming cities to be walkable and bikeable is the key to greener commutes. This article makes a good point that auto-dependence is the actual hindrance to overcoming the climate crisis. Even electric vehicles make us vulnerable to lithium shortages. Transforming residential areas to be easier to travel via foot or bike encourages business activity, according to Pattinson. Through this format, neighbourhoods will become places people can “work, play, gather, worship, and do much of their shopping close to home.” (Pattinson 2021). This is a unique approach for me. One of my favourite cities in the world is Lisbon, so I understand Pattinson’s perspective entirely. It’s a city that is not constructed primarily for cars. People in the streets are biking, skating, and even rollerblading from place to place! Roads have two lanes at most, and pedestrians get priority in most streets. If more North American cities adopt this layout, I can see citizens becoming more integrated.
Biking Infrastructure
In this article published in U of T News, there is a calling for Scarborough to improve its biking and pedestrian infrastructure. Unfortunately, Scarborough has the highest amount of traffic deaths out of every sub-city in Toronto. The article claims that this has to do with its uninviting and confusing urban planning. Scarborough’s streets favour cars way more than they should. “Today, close to 40 per cent of households in Scarborough don’t have access to a single automobile.” (Campbell 2021). Yet, this city is built as if everyone travels via private vehicle. Scarborough’s streets are extensive — building biking infrastructure would not cost much. In the midst of a climate crisis, discouraging auto dependence is of the utmost importance. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Creating bike lanes will not be enough, though. This requires a drastic change in the urban landscape. Suburbia has to adapt to make bikeable and walkable destinations. High-density housing with immediate commercial and medical services should be at the forefront of this structural change. The benefits that come with landscape include a physically active society, a collectivist community, and general safety.
Luckily, Scarborough is not a prototypical suburb. The localcommunity is tight-knit. Ridesharing (public transport/Uber) is used frequently. It is not as low-density as its neighbours in Pickering. The only thing that is its current model will not suffice in the future. As housing becomes more expensive in downtown Toronto, young people begin to look at their options outside. To accommodate the inevitable wave, it is time for urban planners in Scarborough to consider residents on foot.
Conclusion
Cars have imposed their will on the meaning of outside mobility. I argue that cities should be for people, not people with cars. Traffic-related deaths are so easy to reverse if we as a communal body understand how perilous personal vehicles are. This is not to say that cars should be removed as an option of transportation, this is to say that is should not be the primary option — especially since the number of people will always outnumber the number of cars in the world.
Sources:
Campbell, D. (2021, October 12). ‘Dangerous and unpleasant’: New report shows why Scarborough needs a proper walking and cycling network. University of Toronto Scarborough — News and Events. https://utsc.utoronto.ca/news-events/our-community/dangerous-and-unpleasant-new-report-shows-why-scarborough-needs-proper-walking-and
Pattison, John. (2021, October 7). “Greening” Our Commutes. Strong Towns. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2021/10/7/how-green-was-my-commute
Squires, Gregory D. (2002). Urban sprawl and the uneven development of metropolitan America. Urban sprawl: causes, consequences, & policy responses. Pp. 1–21. Urban Institute Press.
