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.
Well Uber and the other ride services make it really easy if the exspense is affordable. Now there is even a rental share program where people rent their cars. Unfortunately most cities you're going to need a car. I needed and kept a car in San Fransisco when I stayed there many years ago.
I drove all over the city of Denver many times, I feel you must have a car there unless and only unless you intend to stay in one concentated area for a time like downtown, which I did except it was so easy to park at my hotel. It is very manageble to drive there once you are used to it, and you can avoid the freeways very easily. I'm an exspert at Denver now and know all the traffic flows, I zip accross Colfax back and forth sometimes twice a day right through downtown. You just avoid the rush and don't go on the freeway if you can help it.
I can brag I lived in NYC and kept a Geo Storm in Aqua blue on the street for 10 years! It was so awesome, in the old days, you had to move it once or twice a week for a couple of hours. Not once in ten years was it ever broken into. I went all over the place and there was alwsy parking. That was all over by 2004, when they finally built condos on the parking lot accross the street. After that I would leave my car in Westchester county at a friends house and got out of the NY area. After 911, everybody and their mutt wanted to live in NYC, it was CRAZY. Leaving was the best thing I ever did, thank goodness I didn't have a great apartment or I would still be there.
When I did Seattle about 5 years ago, I drove everywhere including downtown and stayed in a place with steet parking right out front no problem. I didn't see the big deal, maybe after 25 years in NYC I was used to it. I parked everywhere I needed to. I do think having a smaller car or coupe helps in big cities. One of those huge SUVs is going to be much more difficult to park.
Last edited by travelhound; 03-01-2019 at 12:41 AM..
Chicago, Philadelphia, Jersey City, Baltimore,
Seattle, Oakland, Minneapolis, Miami...
Check this annual ranking of walkable and transit friendly US cities: https://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/
Only parts of any of those places is going to be livable without a car. Considering you can rent easily if you don't need to own one. You have to take the Hood into consideration, and the fact these cities are HUGE. You do not want to take public transport through certain areas at certain times, not good. Baltimore? Really? I don't think so, only the high end areas. Ditto all the rest. Seattle didn't have a hood that I saw, just a really run down southern part of town that was ugly houses for 300k. Yes, if you are willing to live in funkyville, you can still afford Seattle for 300k. For that you can own a Palatial mansion in most of the south and midwest. Buses looked awful and took forever except, again immediate downtown. Now, they use a lot of FERRIES there, people live on these amazing remote islands! Talk about a pain of a commute. The islands have the cheap housing down these remote roads. Definitely need a car.
As long as buses exist you don't need a car to get around. Don't understand why people think trains are the only means of transport.
buses (excepting b.r.t.) contribute to traffic and pollution. subways are rapid-transit, grade-separated, rite-of-way, have more frequeant headways, have more expedient fare collection, ...
buses (excepting b.r.t.) contribute to traffic and pollution. subways are rapid-transit, grade-separated, rite-of-way, have more frequeant headways, have more expedient fare collection, ...
Except when BRT isn't BRT.
Silver Line in Boston was billed as BRT, but 66% of the stops are at grade with on-bus ticketing.
OP:
People live car free everywhere, but not by choice. I lived car free in Tucson for a year as a freshman at UofA, decent buses if your 19 and want to shop at a mall and have no issue walking 12 blocks...
In the US, by choice, I'd rank- (note, maps missing almost all bus routes)
1 - NY
buses (excepting b.r.t.) contribute to traffic and pollution. subways are rapid-transit, grade-separated, rite-of-way, have more frequeant headways, have more expedient fare collection, ...
And even when you get off at a station, there's a good chance you're not walking to your final destination. You'll need a bus connection or pay for a rideshare. And you talk about traffic/pollution; one full bus(which is powered by clean fuel or even electricity nowadays)>> 10-20 cars on the road.
Ten years ago, I never would have believed that I would say this, but Phoenix metro has made HUGE strides in transportation with its new light rail system. And it's still being extended.
You'd be limited to areas of Phoenix, Glendale, Tempe and Mesa. It does not (and likely never will go to Scottsdale). But there are also buses and Uber/Lyft.
The downsides include that it's SLOW. And waiting for a train in the summer heat is a real drag.
I can't believe that Philadelphia has barely been mentioned in this thread. I grew up and currently live in West Philly (albeit south of Market, near Baltimore Ave now), and I've never needed a car to get around. We are one of the few cities that offers 24/7 service on certain bus routes, and certainly one of the few that has 24 hour subway service on Friday and Saturday nights!
This is discussed frequently in the general US forums. I will assume the OP is asking about the US since his four cities mentioned are all US cities. Clearly there are hundreds of cities around the world that are quite conducive to carless living.
For me, the US cities where you can live quite comfortably, have convenient access to many employment opportunities and most city amenities, while relying on transit would be NYC, Chicago, SF, Boston, Philly, DC.
Right below that is cities where you would be a bit more constrained geographically but offer enough coverage to enough areas that it would still be a fairly comfortable and fulfilling experience: LA, Seattle, Portland
Then there is a group I think that is borderline as it is fairly limiting but depending on your lifestyle could be fine: Denver, MSP, Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, Houston, Sacramento, Pitt, Baltimore, Cleveland, New Orleans...this is a long list as I'm grouping several tiers together at this point. San Diego, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, and St Louis are some wild cards that you could look into, I just have little or no experience with them to confidently rank.
As someone mentioned earlier, you could probably do perfectly well in all of the above and others if you can budget for frequent ridesharing.
The obvious choices---NYC, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Wash DC, SF
Cities like St. Louis, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Baltimore have at least one line, if not two, and are expanding. Even LA has some light rail..
Regardless of where you are---if you position yourself correctly,as far as a home is concerned, you can get around pretty well no matter where you live...
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.
