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.
It's quite possible in northeast corridor cities. Many households that own a car do so as either a luxury or a backup. I own a car because I can afford it, and having kids it is good for emergency purposes or trips out of the city. But I don't need a car, and can easily go days and days without using it.
Yes, of course it's quite possible in many cities - even outside of the Northeast. But the post you responded to said it's still not practical. There's a big difference in possible and practical.
Yes, of course it's quite possible in many cities - even outside of the Northeast. But the post you responded to said it's still not practical. There's a big difference in possible and practical.
Practical is too subjective. People have very different thresholds for what they are willing to do. Some can't conceive of walking a few blocks to pick up a gallon of milk. Car free living is not for them, and they wouldn't consider it practical. A lot of people might be willing to go car free but admit it is more practical to have one.
But then there are also counter examples. If I walk to a nearby restaurant to pick up some take out, it's faster than driving because driving requires a series of one way streets, finding parking, etc. Likewise, if I drive to work, it takes longer than riding the subway due to traffic. So driving in those situations is impractical to me. But somebody who won't walk no matter what, would disagree.
Sometimes, especially if you live in New York, cars can be a hassle. Having to pay for things that stop running, nowhere to park etc. things like that. It's nice to be able to just leave your home and walk, take a bus, train, taxi etc. to where you need to go.
Well, being a car guy, I am glad that Los Angeles is near the bottom of the list.
With all the car shows out here, including the year-'round weekly ones, it wouldn't be much fun if most people didn't own cars!
It's surprising to see that, even in New York, 44.3 percent of households own a vehicle. I would guess that some of the other cities on the list (Newark, New Orleans, Miami, Cleveland, Detroit, and Oakland) have low vehicle ownership rates because of economics, rather than because transit is particularly accessible or that the particular city is walkable.
I would otherwise agree w/ the others, but in the case of Newark, it's a big city crammed into a tiny area that many residents can get along w/o a car.
Most train lines in NJ go through one of Newark's major train stations
How isn't transit accessible in those cities? Especially Miami, Oakland, and Cleveland, maybe even Detroit..?
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.
