markwill2112

Is it possible to get by without a car in the States? If so, what are the cities that have the best public transport networks?

fatbrit

First inane question of 2009. Congratulations!

markwill2112

Look FF I just wanted to make sure I hadn't missed any. After having to temporarily leave the US and no longer having a car or a place to stay, I am trying to make the best decision for my return. I know what cities have public transport, but people on this board may actually use it on a day to day basis, whereas I used a car in Atlanta, so actual daily experiences might help me make the best decision.

penguinsix

Yes, you need a car.

I mean it's a pretty general question so sure there are exceptions and people who get by without one. But unless you are living in the core of a major urban area (i.e. NY, DC, Boston, etc) you need a car, and even in some of those places it is nice to have one. Most of America is not designed to be walkable.

http://britishexpats.com/wiki/Travel...ars_in_America

In a large number of posts on the USA site about 'being lonely' and 'having no friends' a lack of a car is frequently noted.

nettlebed

I lived for a year in Manhattan. No car. Would have been a terrible liability. When I needed to drive, I rented one.

I currently have a colleague in Seattle. He doesn't own a car. He is a member of http://www.zipcar.com/

If I lived in any of the following cities, I would probably NOT own a car:

1. Boston (The T)
2. NYC (NY subway, etc)
3. Chicago (The El)
4. SF metro area (BART, etc)
5. Seattle (Metro KC, Sound Transit - I live in the Seattle metro area, and drive my car maybe once or twice a week)
6. Portland (MAX, TriMet, etc)

All the above assume you live in reach of public transport )above in parens). Anywhere else, you almost certainly NEED a car.

Apologies if I missed any metro area with good public transport...

Rete

A very generalized question, Mark. In the 'burbs of any major city throughout the US you more than likely will need your own transportation. As Nettlebed noted in Manhattan and from experience here the immediate 'burbs you don't.

NC Penguin

I assume you wish to utilize public transport in order to get from work and home. If that's the case, you may have to live downtown or in the inner city to survive living without your own vehicle.

The bigger cities tend to have the more developed public transport networks but many also have a very high cost of living (for the US at least). e.g. Los Angeles, New York, San Diego, Boston, etc.

So, the question to you is whether you can afford to live downtown or in the inner city in order to solely use public transport?

Bob

You'd own a car...it's minging, it closes around midnight and it's not really that cheap and you've got to hump your groceries around sometime and doing that on feet, during the winter is a munters game....plus you'd have to live in downtown to really have it as a practical means of getting around, which means stupidly expensive rent, as soon as you leave the central zone it becomes a bit shit, once your outside of zone 2-3, it's commuter rail and really, pretty shit. The buses are minging and crap too...plus there's not much public transport that goes between the towns apart from the commuter rail and that generally dumps you in the middle of nowhere.

It could possibly be doable though, just pretty miserable, though zipcar is pretty decent in beantown.

penguinsix

What Bob said applies, with the exception of NY, to pretty much most US cities with mass transit, even the good ones. For example Washington DC has the second most used subway system, but it is still a royal pain in the ass to get groceries using nothing but public transit. The SF BART system is really more of a rail than a subway (last I checked the trains actually had schedules rather than 'every few minutes') and the MUNI bus and trams are ok if you live on a line and if they are working on time.

You can get to work and home and even some play if you live and work atop of a station, but those prices tend to be pretty higher vs. the already high prices in those urban areas, and for other things, a car is really something you'd like to have around.

note: I lived 7 years in Washington DC without a car. It can be done, but now that I have one I see how much easier is to live with a car.

chartreuse

Surely the question is whether the OP is big enough, scary enough and heavily armed enough to live in the inner city in order to solely use public transport?

Patrick Hasler

If you don't have a car around here you will never get out of the village

Taxi's cost a fortune, there is no bus service untill you get about 35 miles away, then there's Twailways/Greyhound. We have a train service of sorts ... one each way NYC to Montreal per day.

YOU NEED A CAR

Giantaxe

I live in San Francisco, about 25 mins walk from downtown. I own a car, but I rarely drive it to a destination within the city. I walk to work, use stores (including Whle Foods) that are within walking distance, and utilize public transport to go elsewhere. This is simply a lot easier - and cheaper - than driving and parking. My car use is almost exclusively out of town trips, and these would be difficult or impossible without a car.

fatbrit

But OP is doing without car to save money. On all other counts, Frisco is a great destination. But on $$$....I think not!

starky

Work wise Boston is spread out a lot. Most of the tech companies are not in the city and you really need a car to get to many jobs that are based out of the city. If you work down town in Boston then you probably don't need a car. Life is way better with one though. Other then that I reckon NYC is the only place I would live in the US without a car. The whole country is designed around cars.

meauxna

I guess I have to say it.

Portland Oregon. No car required.