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.
NYC, SF, and Chicago. But those should be the only factors in moving somewhere. From there you have to choose what else you want from a city. What type of weather? People? etc. If I were you, my first choice would be SF.
The rock group Chicago was originally called Chicago Transit Authority (CTA). That tidbit is of no help at all, I know. Just that my ridiculous memory was awakened.
There are quite a few cities in which it is easy and common to go car free. Frequent examples like NYC, Portland, San Francisco, and Boston have that reputation for plenty of reason. But here's the thing. It is possible almost anywhere, if you make the commitment. You can do pretty well combining cycling and bus based transit, for example. The hardest part is making the choice, then once you have, you may start to feel a bit righteous about it.
There are quite a few cities in which it is easy and common to go car free. Frequent examples like NYC, Portland, San Francisco, and Boston have that reputation for plenty of reason. But here's the thing. It is possible almost anywhere, if you make the commitment. You can do pretty well combining cycling and bus based transit, for example. The hardest part is making the choice, then once you have, you may start to feel a bit righteous about it.
the thing is...nyc/chicago ... don't know enough about boston/sf ... but in nyc and chicago, many parts it is a down right HASSLE and expense to have a car, you often have to pay about 200 a month for a spot, plus city parking pass, plus higher city insurance, plus neighborhood zone stickers and the inevitable parking tickets you will get for doing nothing. You can just get around on foot and subway better. If you don't need to get to the burbs, it is kind of pointless. You can even get i-go or zip cars for abouty 7-8 bucks an hour if you need to pick up something large.
the thing is...nyc/chicago ... don't know enough about boston/sf ... but in nyc and chicago, many parts it is a down right HASSLE and expense to have a car, you often have to pay about 200 a month for a spot, plus city parking pass, plus higher city insurance, plus neighborhood zone stickers and the inevitable parking tickets you will get for doing nothing. You can just get around on foot and subway better. If you don't need to get to the burbs, it is kind of pointless. You can even get i-go or zip cars for abouty 7-8 bucks an hour if you need to pick up something large.
Basically everything you just talked about is how it is in Boston too. Anytime I try to go into the city to visit friends, it's the biggest pain in the ass if I try to drive.
Boston's definitely a city that you can get along just fine without a car. In fact, if I were going to live in any of the central neighborhoods like the North End, South End, Back Bay, Beacon Hill, or Fenway, I wouldn't even consider having a car. The same goes for much of Brookline, Allston, and Brighton.
Some parts of Boston you definitely don't want a car. Parking spots downtown sell for as much as $300,000. Even in the more outlying areas, you are dealing with a fight for street parking much of the time. I have a car but it is only because I have kids and it is useful for transporting them and their gear. Before kids, I had and then gave up a car because it was wasting money (insurance, excise tax, etc.) for something that I didn't use.
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.