DC vs Boston area public transit systems (living, best, better)
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.
I'm a current DC resident and am planning a move to the Boston area pretty soon. I would welcome any insight that you have on the area, but I am particularly interested in how the Boston metro area's public transit system compares to the DMV area. Living in DC I currently get around very easily not owning a car -- I can walk almost everywhere I go, take buses extremely rarely, and take maybe 3-5 metro trips a week. Farthest trip (to a Dr that is out in VA) is about half an hour. How does the Boston system compare? Does it stretch far enough into the suburbs around the city? (I expect to be living in or around Cambridge)
I have a trip planned to visit Boston at the end of March, but am not sure whether it will be conducive to widely exploring the transit system.
they are fairly comparable in number of lines and coverage.
probably the most comparable in the country in that they cover their hub cities and surrounding communities very adequately.
they are fairly comparable in number of lines and coverage.
probably the most comparable in the country in that they cover their hub cities and surrounding communities very adequately.
You can survive very easily without a car in Boston. If you have certain needs (or job) that exist only out in the far suburbs then certainly the feasibility of going carless decreases, but for general, normal, day-to-day requirements, Boston's transit is more than adequate to go without a car. It's fairly equal to DC in this way.
Is Cambridge specifically very suburban or pretty close? It looked from the metro map like it was close-ish, similar to some of the father VA suburbs on the DC metro.
I'm deciding between Harvard law and some NYC law schools and this is one of my criteria.
cambridge has 6 subway stops on two different rail lines.
harvard square is 5 stops away from downtown crossing on the red line (no need to transfer).
not to make harvard sound elitist but i'm curious what other school would you be considering ?
also, bostons subway is the oldest in the country and it feels that way. when i was in dc in the 90's it felt like minority report (all the stations and trains are uniform -- honeycomb wall pattern; everything was clean -- not allowed to chew gum or listen to radios on the train; you didnt have to leave the platform while transferring trains -- trains are designed to ride on multiple lines).
last i was in boston, years ago, some of the old orange line stations still had chinese escalators (motorized wooden planks on a slant); trains would black out intermittently; since the t is patched together from multiple systems, some of the older style green line trolleys wont fit on the red line rails, blue lines door ways are lower than the orange lines platforms...
during the winter storms several stations/lines were closed for repairs because the older equipment is more susceptible to failure.
Last edited by stanley-88888888; 02-25-2016 at 07:15 AM..
Having lived in the DC area (Kensington and Silver Spring) and now living in Boston, I feel like I can weigh in pretty well.
DC's rapid transit is better. No getting around it. The MBTA in Boston is very good for a major American city (really better than all but DC, NYC, and Chicago), but I think METRO in DC is a much better system for getting around the core of the city (with the glaring exception of Georgetown- but that was intentional) and closer suburbs. It's more extensive, cleaner, and more reliable than the MBTA's Red/Orange/Blue/Green Lines (the Green Line is really a light rail network with central subway tunnel).
That's not to say that Boston doesn't have its advantages. I think Boston's flat fares ($2.10 whether you're going one stop or from one end of the line to the other) are more user friendly. It's cheaper to ride rapid transit in Boston. I think Boston's a more walkable city. Both are great, but Boston, especially close to the core, is (in my opinion), the best city for walking in the U.S. San Francisco is close (and may get the nod due to better year-round weather) and New York is excellent. But Boston is compact and easy to navigate on foot. Boston's commuter rail network is more extensive than DC's and reaches to great spots for day trips without a car. It goes to neat secondary cities like Lowell and Providence. It connects to awesome seaside towns like Salem, Rockport, Gloucester, Plymouth, Newburyport, Hingham, etc. It also connects to beaches, ski areas, hiking, etc. That's recreational, but it's an aspect of life I'd put heavily in Boston's favor.
Cambridge is urban. It's more urban than most Boston neighborhoods. Same for Somerville. Cambridge is very much a part of Boston's urban core. More so than even places like Rosslyn or Alexandria. It's an easy walk, bike ride or transit ride from downtown Boston. It's better to think of Cambridge (and other places like Brookline and Somerville) as neighborhoods within Boston than "surburbs."
I think you'll do fine without a car in Boston. While DC's Metro is better than Boston's MBTA, I'd actually choose Boston without a car over DC. I think that between the coverage in the urban core and the pedestrian scale, Boston's better in that regard. I think you'll find that Boston feels smaller (a tad) and more compact.
DC's rapid transit is better. No getting around it. The MBTA in Boston is very good for a major American city (really better than all but DC, NYC, and Chicago), but I think METRO in DC is a much better system for getting around the core of the city (with the glaring exception of Georgetown- but that was intentional) and closer suburbs. It's more extensive, cleaner, and more reliable than the MBTA's Red/Orange/Blue/Green Lines (the Green Line is really a light rail network with central subway tunnel).
I disagree. More extensive, maybe. MBTA takes you anywhere you'd likely need to go. Cleaner? Yes, sure. More reliable? Definitely not. MBTA is not great, but WMATA is definitely worse outside of rush hour.
I agree with the rest of what Irfox has to say though. You'll be fine in Cambridge without a car as long as you're within walking distance (or have a good bus route) to the closest T station.
EDIT: I'd like to add that DC Metro has gotten worse in recent years. That might account for some disconnect between your previous experiences and the current situation, if you haven't ridden it in awhile.
Is Cambridge specifically very suburban or pretty close? It looked from the metro map like it was close-ish, similar to some of the father VA suburbs on the DC metro.
I'm deciding between Harvard law and some NYC law schools and this is one of my criteria.
There's a stop on the red line called "Harvard" and if I recall correctly walking out of that station points you basically onto the front step of campus just a minute or two from the law school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley-88888888
not to make harvard sound elitist but i'm curious what other school would you be considering ?
Who cares about law school rankings? It's all about the walkscore/transitscore!!
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.
