U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-02-2013, 04:27 PM
 
485 posts, read 1,171,367 times
Reputation: 230

Advertisements

I want to move to a city where I definitely don't need a car and can live comfortably without one. So what are my options?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-02-2013, 04:49 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
1,221 posts, read 2,274,376 times
Reputation: 770
Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco. DC, probably Portland, and even the downtown/urban cores of automobile cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 05:16 PM
 
Location: The Magnolia City
8,931 posts, read 11,799,993 times
Reputation: 4853
No one needs a car, and "comfortable" is relative, so the answer would be everywhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 05:42 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,416 posts, read 11,920,328 times
Reputation: 10536
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon22 View Post
I want to move to a city where I definitely don't need a car and can live comfortably without one. So what are my options?
IMHO next to New York, DC is the easiest city in the U.S. to not have a car. Boston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco come close, but it's really only certain sections of each city that it's preferable not to have a car. Sadly (but predictably) the highest-cost areas (which are not ghetto) are the ones it's easiest to live car free. Chicago I'd rate a little more autocentric, but you can do without a car in some parts of North Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 05:45 PM
 
2,426 posts, read 3,620,728 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
IMHO next to New York, DC is the easiest city in the U.S. to not have a car. Boston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco come close, but it's really only certain sections of each city that it's preferable not to have a car. Sadly (but predictably) the highest-cost areas (which are not ghetto) are the ones it's easiest to live car free. Chicago I'd rate a little more autocentric, but you can do without a car in some parts of North Chicago.
You can do without a car on the entire northside very easily, and the northside is about the same size of SF so in Chicago you are perfectly fine living without a car. Only half the people I know that are close to my age own a car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Maryland
4,265 posts, read 5,477,295 times
Reputation: 4594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
You can do without a car on the entire northside very easily, and the northside is about the same size of SF so in Chicago you are perfectly fine living without a car. Only half the people I know that are close to my age own a car.
Yeah, you can do just fine in a large chunk of Chicago without a car. In fact, Chicago also has a few really nice suburbs that you can do just fine without a car, too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 06:14 PM
 
Location: Miami-Jax
6,312 posts, read 6,967,264 times
Reputation: 3503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maintainschaos View Post
Yeah, you can do just fine in a large chunk of Chicago without a car. In fact, Chicago also has a few really nice suburbs that you can do just fine without a car, too.
Yeah, I lived in Evanston for two years with no car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,416 posts, read 11,920,328 times
Reputation: 10536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
You can do without a car on the entire northside very easily, and the northside is about the same size of SF so in Chicago you are perfectly fine living without a car. Only half the people I know that are close to my age own a car.
I dunno. When I visited Chicago, I thought the rail stations seemed really far apart, and it was often a long walk to get to places. Some neighborhoods I wanted to go to didn't even seem to be on a rail line at all. I'm sure if you utilized the buses it wouldn't be that bad though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 06:58 PM
 
2,426 posts, read 3,620,728 times
Reputation: 1453
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
I dunno. When I visited Chicago, I thought the rail stations seemed really far apart, and it was often a long walk to get to places. Some neighborhoods I wanted to go to didn't even seem to be on a rail line at all. I'm sure if you utilized the buses it wouldn't be that bad though.
What neighborhoods where you trying to get to?

Well I don't know were you were but the stops are not that far apart, on the southside they can be, on the northside no. Then again you can't expect there to be an El stop on every other block. Boston, SF and NYC don't have that either. Sometimes you have to walk a little more, but for the most part the trains are very convenient in the city.

For example for the Blue Line in regards to walking time, I live literally 5 minutes from one stop, then 12 minutes from another one and then 15 from another one. Then the Belmont bus which runs 24/7 and comes about every 5 minutes, is literally a 2 minute walk from my apartment. And I actually live in Avondale, where in areas like Lincoln Park, Lakeview, Wicker Park, Bucktown, the Loop, Near North Side, etc, the public transportation is even MORE convenient compared to my current neighborhood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,522 posts, read 12,285,896 times
Reputation: 3827
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
I dunno. When I visited Chicago, I thought the rail stations seemed really far apart, and it was often a long walk to get to places. Some neighborhoods I wanted to go to didn't even seem to be on a rail line at all. I'm sure if you utilized the buses it wouldn't be that bad though.
People take buses in Chicago. Historically, streetcars carried more passengers than the el in Chicago, and today the buses still have higher ridership than the trains. Compared to other cities, especially NYC, the bus network in Chicago is extensive, and relatively efficient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top