Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cities that you can live happily without a car in, in America, are few and far between. Because of that they have really managed to set themselves apart and make themselves that much more favored by recent generations that view traits aligned with the car free lifestyle as highly desirable. Would you be disappointed if you had to settle for second best group of cities that are still ridiculously cool but not quite as car free? Thinking Denver, Austin, Portland, heck Nashville and Charlotte, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, etc.
I completely get what you are saying. That is why I am still in brainstorming phase and am in no means ready to do this yet. In fact, I am pretty much chained where I am until 2020.
I've lived in Charlotte before and while the city offers more to do than OKC and a more progressive general populace, it's still very car oriented and my day to day life wouldn't be that much different than it is now and it wouldn't make moving back there worth it for me unless my job took me there. I feel the same way about most cities in the South. Dallas is pretty much a larger Charlotte. Atlanta might be doable but I have a hard time seeing myself there. Honestly if I was going to stay in the South, I would prefer somewhere like Charleston or Savannah.
Portland is out because of the job market but Denver, Austin, and Seattle might be worth a look. While those places aren't quite a classically urban as my ideal, they have other perks that would make up for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist
Your monthly car payments may seem like a lot to you now, especially if you amortize car maintenance and gas costs into it. But you're still probably talking about only ~$500-600/mo at most including insurance, for your average car. Less if it's old/used. Maybe $700-800 if you're fancy. What are you paying in OKC for rent? <$1000? Probably easily (and for really nice stuff). You mentioned money and selling your car. You will sacrifice low rent and those car payments for at least the same monthly rate for a cramped studio apartment in a rougher or less transit-served/further-out part of town. You'll also need ~$100/mo for a transit card, so that eats into what you saved with getting rid of the car. And don't pretend you won't ever be tempted to take a cab or Uber/Lyft. Talk to many people living in these dense car-free cities and many pay hundreds a month for those super tempting services (rather than waiting around for trains and buses, transferring, etc etc...which as was mentioned further up, is more daunting in the cold/ice and brutally uncomfortable in the summer if you wear nice clothes to work).
I am paying $800/month for rent and about $700 total for my car. That puts me up to $1500 that I could spend on rent in a place where I didn't have a car. By 2020, hopefully I'll be making a little more than I am making now so that figure will go up.
It's definitely something to consider though, and this is why if I am going to live without a car I want to be in a completely transit oriented city. Trying to live without a car somewhere with barely adequate public transportation will just be a hassle and I'll end up spending a lot on services like Uber. If I ended up somewhere like Denver, Dallas, Austin, heck any of the major Southern cities, I probably eventually would end up buying a car because I would be tired of being at the mercy of a transportation system that isn't up to par.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist
Honestly, you might just be packing some bags and moving to an up and coming city in Eastern Europe to get the real deal. Not to sound negative, but by 2020, the 5 or so cities in the US that are classically urban the way you are desiring, will be for the 1% that can afford them and the third world immigrants who literally don't care if they live on the streets because it would be better than where they're coming from and they just want the American opportunity (for them or their kids) and to be near those who speak their language. Are you 1%er or 3rd world fob? One thing you could look into is getting into a rent-controlled unit in NYC or SF. In SF it might be easier (you must know someone who will "deed" you their lease so to say)...it's a very tenant friendly city, and rent control is arguably both what has pushed SF's housing prices to where they are today and what has managed to keep much of the city's culture and funky people still in the city. What a dynamic regulation.
Interesting idea and not something I have ever really considered. I have always wondered how San Francisco remains what it is despite the cost of living.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist
Not to be fairly grim about it...but I'm a city snob like hell and even I'm considering exploring options in like a Denver or Nashville or something. Like seriously, it's gotten absolutely out of hand and these cities are bordering on not worth the cost (as many are finding out, companies too). Car free is fun. So is having a car. Pros and cons to each.
I hear you. Car free is only fun in a city that has adequate alternate transportation which is why I am being very selective. I may end up having to drop the car-free requirement, save a little longer, and move to a second-tier city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist
To make all the fans of me from Philly happy, that might be the saving grace city that is still affordable in 2020 (barring economic collapse that halts home price appreciation in one or more of the other cities) and can offer that car free lifestyle. Maybe Baltimore cleans up its act. Who knows? Just don't get your hopes up too much...or go finance yourself an Ivy league education because those are the only new non-3rd-world-immigrant people moving to NYC, SF, DC, and Boston.
I will say if your #1 priority is to live the urban American life, don't worry about the climate. Choose based on affordability. If that leaves you with Chicago as your only option but you know you hate the cold, just go for it. You'll be happy you did, even if you're shivering. Don't place more emphasis on an SF or DC just because you're weighting the weather and they are more mild. You'll be more unhappy broke in a rat race oriented, relentlessly expensive, and hyper-competitive city with mild winters (you'll probably feel like you failed life and there is nothing worse) than you will shivering in a more affordable one that leaves you some $$ in the bank and a little bit more time to enjoy life.
Yeah right now I am really liking the look of Chicago and Philly. Seems like a great way to live a true urban life while still (relatively) affordable. Sounds like NYC, SF, DC, and Boston may be a little "out of my league" so to say.
NYC is the only city in the U.S. where it's the norm to not own a car. It's the only truly transit-oriented city. That's, in part, why I moved there.
That said, DC, Boston, Chicago, SF and Philly are all cities that have enough of a transit orientation where one could comfortably live without a car. But NYC is the only city where that is actually the default norm. It's the only city where the stores and the workplaces and the housing are built with the expectation that there's no car.
I moved to NYC without a job and without much money, and it was very easy. Got an apartment share and my costs actually went down. You can live in a prime neighborhood even today if willing to share. If not you will need to pay more, and live a bit further out.
It's great to hear this success story to counter the grim situation painted by anonelitist.
Awesome to hear you got a job in NYC so quickly. If you don't mind me asking, what is your career field?
As far as NNJ goes, imo unless you're living in Hudson County (Hoboken, Jersey City or Bayonne)..maybe even Newark to a lesser extent, you'll definitely want to have a car. The rents in said cities are rising as urban renewal takes it course, but still cheaper than NYC proper and you'd be adjacent to Manhattan (which is all that matters).
In NJ you can live car-free in Hudson County, southern Bergen County (which is basically an extension of Hudson County) and parts of Essex County.
Basically these three counties closest to NYC are dense, urban and transit-oriented enough to go car-free. Anywhere else in NJ I would probably get a car.
But I personally wouldn't live without a car in either place. I'm from Michigan and live in DC for now though. Being cold waiting on a bus or train isn't my thing. You slip and fall and freeze.
Next is COL a factor? Chicago is more affordable if that concerns you.
I don't know the actual numbers, but it's hard to believe all that many people have cars in Chicago. Or if they do they hardly use them.
The Census has the numbers for all U.S. cities. Around 70%-75% of Chicago households have at least one car. In fact there are more two car households in Chicago than no car households.
I don't know anyone in Chicago who doesn't own at least one car, and all the people I know are in the most urban, transit-rich North Side neighborhoods (Lincoln Park, Lakeview mostly). I assume that most households without cars are college-aged (or right out of college), elderly, or poor.
Granted, many people I know take transit to work, especially if they work in the Loop, but that doesn't mean they don't have a car.
I live in Jersey City without a car. It's easy. There are enough places to get your basic needs in walking distance, we have a bike share system in JC to help you get around other parts of town, and we have a lot of transit options (PATH, light rail, NJT, ferries). And when you really, really want to get in a car and drive somewhere away from the city, zipcar helps a lot!
$1500 could get you an OK studio in Journal Square or the Heights (kind of up-and-coming neighborhoods), but for the more desirable downtown areas, you can share a prewar apartment with someone.
Thanks for the reply. Yeah...this is the way I am leaning. Chicago then Philly then NYC. Cost of living is a factor and job market will also be a factor as I've said. I haven't really thought about Minneapolis, Baltimore, or Pittsburgh. Is public transportation extensive enough in those cities that I wouldn't miss my car if I didn't have it?
Portland is out unless the job market changes there. Everyone I know who has moved there (and I have a lot of friends who have) has ended up severely underemployed and has had to scrape by. Would Seattle be any better?
I just moved from Portland. Besides the job issue, the only places it's feasible to live car-free these days is the upscale expensive neighborhoods where the buses serve the areas much better than the poorer areas. It's a large contrast. I am talking about the need to use public transportation other than in the commuting hours for running errands, doctor's appointments etc. If you can't afford to live in the few areas with good bus service, you will need a car or a bike.
I lived in Portland for nearly 40 years car-free and found this to be the situation as service was cut back year after year.
I think Seattle has good public transportation but the COL is going to be high.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, you'll definitely want to have a car. The rents in said cities are rising as urban renewal takes it course, but still cheaper than NYC proper and you'd be adjacent to Manhattan (which is all that matters).
