After living in D.C. for about two years, I’ve grown accustomed to the good life: walkable cities. Cities that prioritize their people, promising accessibility, affordability and convenience. Almost everywhere in the District is within walking distance. Buying groceries or depositing money isn’t a challenge. I can just walk there, take the Metro or hop on a bus, on GW’s coin.
But today, only 6.8 percent of the U.S. population is located in a walkable city, and about 80 percent of drivers feel that they highly depend on their cars. People from my hometown of Calexico, California, certainly fall into that 80 percent. The town had a population density — the total population divided by total land area — of nearly 5,000 people per square mile in 2023, while D.C.’s is more than 11,000.
California residents are notorious for complaining about how unwalkable most of the state is, critiquing the many highways and distance between buildings. Calexico has similar problems: vast desert wastelands dividing buildings and stores and farmlands dotted by highways. So, a working car is essential.
Without one, my brother and I faced significant challenges completing basic tasks like buying groceries or paying bills. The closest store was a couple of miles away and public transportation was scarce. No buses pass through my neighborhood — in fact, the closest bus stop was located in the store we tried to get to. It was the same story for paying certain bills. Since we didn’t have checks, we would have to complete payments in person, or certain bills had to be paid in the neighboring city of El Centro, California, which meant longer distances to travel and more highways.
I still try to forget the embarrassing memory of when I got my period a week early and had to ask one of my friends if they could buy pads for me. It took more than an hour to meet my friend and retrieve them. If I was in D.C., I could’ve just walked to CVS. There are taxis or Ubers, but they aren’t always affordable, especially for lower-income families. There’s no reason to spend up to $20 just to get to Walmart.
When my brother was taken to the hospital during the summer after an accident and fell ill, it was incredibly stressful and infuriating to have to pick him up from the hospital in another city — especially when no one else in my family could help. When he woke up vomiting after his first hospital visit, we had to wait for my aunt to pick us up because the lack of a car and other transportation meant I couldn’t immediately address the situation or quickly help him access health care.
The U.S. has become heavily “car-centric,” where owning a car is not just a preference, but a need — especially when about 90 percent of households own at least one car. For most of my life, my family has had no choice but to rely on cars, and when we haven’t had one, we’ve felt the effects almost instantly. There’s nothing wrong with driving, but it shouldn’t be the main — or only — form of transportation. A walkable city provides free or more affordable transportation and more opportunities for exercise. In some cases, public transit is even safer than cars.
Some cities are already trying to become less “car-centric” and make cities more pedestrian friendly, whether by creating crosswalks or closing down streets for a couple of hours. Developments like these are always positive and show that we can always do more to make our cities accessible for all. It’s not just about getting rid of cars but having more options available that will benefit families like mine and many others. The heart of a city is its people, not its vehicles.
Andrea Mendoza-Melchor, a junior majoring in journalism and mass communication, is the opinions editor.
