best US cities without a car

[mmr]

can anyone comment on baltimore without a car?

[Kathiza]

I'm an international student and I don't plan on buying a car. How are the following cities without a car:

* Bloomington, IN (one user already said that it's manageable - someone has another opinion?)

* Chapel Hill, NC

* Columbia, MO

Thank you so much!

[communications13]

I live in Florida and it would be very difficult in Fl, Alabama, Georgia, Missississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, without a car. I also lived in Los Angeles for a while and it would be incredibly difficult to live there without a car.

I did my undergrad in Chicago w/o a car and LOVED it. UChicago and UIC both have train stops close to campus. NYC obviously has great transportation but cost of living probably cancels out that advantage. Portland Oregon has good public transit that goes straight to most of thier universities. I've also heard very good things about Boston, Washington DC, Philidelphia, and St. Louis.

As for the south, Charlotte NC and maybe Atlanta, GA are the only places I can think of that has reliable public transit but it is limited.

To respond for other places in the mid west....it depends on what you are looking for. There is something called mega bus where you can get from city to city cheaply. Say you went to UIllinois in Champange/Urbana which has transit on campus but not as much around town, you would be able to visit Chicago for cheap, so if you're able to live close to campus in Madison, or Milwalkee or Indianapolis etc, there are ways to get to more excitement easily.

The economy has also caused massive cuts across the country in transit. Buses and trains are more expensive, more crowded with less service.

As a Grad student, not having a car is probably going to limit you to schools that are in larger cities, however, most major universities in 'college towns' do have solid transportation on and immediately around campus, the problem really arises when you need to get away from campus, particularly away from the undergrad crowd.

[kotov]

You can get around Auburn just fine without a car. If you live on campus you can walk everywhere except the grocery stores, but you can take a bus to one or close to one. If you live off campus, you can easily walk or bike to campus and you can walk to a grocery store in all likelihood.

[qbtacoma]

Santa Barbara doesn't have the greatest public transportation. If you're at UCSB there is a bus loop on campus that can take you downtown or into Goleta, but it can take a long time and can be kind of a pain. I wouldn't say it's absolutely necessary to have a car (the campus is extremely bike friendly and if you live in Isla Vista, campus and little markets are within biking distance), but if you plan on going shopping a lot or wanting to go to bigger grocery stores like Albertson's or Trader Joe's, I would recommend having a car.

I disagree with this; Santa Barbara is very doable without a car and is particularly bike-friendly. For one thing, there are prominent bike lanes on State/Hollister, the main thoroughfare through town, and bike lanes on pretty much all the streets. For another, drivers are used to bikes here and give them lots of space. True, grocery stores can be spread out of walking distance, but a bike with a basket plus a backpack should solve that problem if you are shopping for one or two people, once or twice a week. There is also a farmshare service which delivers local food to your door once a week, and I've found that easily provides all the fresh food needs for three people (http://plowtoporch.com/). The buses are frequent but often 5 or 10 minutes late as well. There are a few express buses which use the freeway and make it easy to get between downtown and the university.

[singlecell]

You don't need a car in Chicago.

I never had one there, but I imagine they're relatively easy to keep (if you don't mind piling your furniture on the street and parking-regulation-by-mercenary-piracy!) and it would be an asset, unlike NY where it's a liability. Really really don't need one though.

I have to disagree with the 'easy to keep' part. I have lived with and without a car in Chicago and life is far simpler and cheaper without one. They don't call the ticketing vans the "Department of Revenue" for nothing! City stickers, different parking permits needed for each residential street parking zone, not to mention the parking meters were sold to a private company.

Biking is generally good here, but pales in comparison to Seattle.

[mandarin.orange]

As for the south, Charlotte NC and maybe Atlanta, GA are the only places I can think of that has reliable public transit but it is limited.

I wholeheartedly disagree re. Charlotte, having lived here since 2004. From day 1, it has struck me as THE least biker/pedestrian-friendly place I have ever lived. I moved from Cincinnati, where I lived close to the University, was an avid cyclist on their many rails-to-trails paths, and had gone for bouts of several months at a time without a car. Once in NC, my bike gathered dust, I eventually donated it, and have moved on to other sports and activities.

Motorists here are not used to sharing the road and tend to buzz or run off cyclists with nary a care; some are outright aggressive. A couple close friends have witnessed horrible accidents to one of their group during triathelon training rides.

There is ONE light rail, and it doesn't even service the university area. It's primary use seems to be to shuttle Panthers fans uptown for game day. To get anywhere by bus, you must inevitably go to the transit station uptown first (a high crime area...a friend of mine was mugged at gunpoint two years ago). There is no direct line from the southeast-southwest part of town; you must go through uptown. A bus services the airport, but this is generally not used except by food court employees. I tried it once and was the only person with luggage on board. Everybody drives. This is the proud home of NASCAR, after all!

[kdilks]

As mentioned a few times in this thread, Minneapolis is GREAT without a car. In fact, it is absolutely awful to live here with a car. You have to move it at 8am whenever there's a heavy snow. Not fun.

As long as you have off-street parking, there's no problems with having a car. My life would be absolutely awful here if I didn't have a car.

[woolfie]

RE: Bloomington Indiana: It's a small town so it depends on what you're used to. I did not have a car there and I loved it. I lived in the Prospect Hill neighborhood, near west side, and I walked to work/classes everyday. You can walk anywhere downtown and on campus from these neighborhoods. If you need to live near the mall, east side, or the strip mall and movie theater area near Ivy Tech, you'll have to take the bus which is fine for my use, but if you're used to NYC-level transportation you will hate it. I'd suggest not living there so that you don't have that problem. But honestly, there is no reason to go to the east side or west side, unless you just HAVE to go to a White Castle or Fazoli's or Staples. It's just that kind of stuff. And the buses do go there. My advice is to live near west/near south/near east side and walk everywhere. I miss that life now that I live in a city where I have to constantly drive.

That city is Columbus, Ohio. Which I will tell you is the WORST city without a car. As is Indianapolis and Vienna, VA. Those are all cities where you sit in the car your whole life and everyone is enraged. It's a stressful life and I miss living in Bloomington where I actually loved winter, because walking in snow is fun, driving in snow is hell. BLOOMINGTON FOR LIFE

Edited January 30, 2011 by woolfie

[philosophy chic]

Boulder, CO is a great place to live without a car. The city has amazing bike trails and, as was mentioned earlier, a good public transportation system. Big cities like DC and NY have good transits as well. I've lived in both Knoxville, TN and Lexington, VA. I would strongly recommend a car for Knoxville, but you could get by without one in Lexington if you lived in town. Lexington is a really small town though, so if you plan on going to a bigger city, airport, or train station, you will have to find a ride or pay a taxi.

[starlite]

You must have a car in Houston unless you live on campus. But getting around to places like the grocery store and restaurants would be difficult. With the weather, you'd want to have a car.

Bikers are not treated well there. There aren't even bike lanes and it's very unusual to see a bike on the road at all. I visited my family last fall and tried to bike about 2 miles to a smoothie place and about died from the drivers and the heat. Austin is home of Lance, so it's definitely a more bike friendly city.

I hope someone could comment further on Houston, as I'm seriously considering BCM (I'm still waiting on other schools, but the info would still be very helpful). So I've read that cars are a must, but what about the bus + bike combo? Are bikers treated well there, maybe as good as in Austin?

[starlite]

Portland!

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/02/08/10-best-cities-for-public-transportation

[TransnationalHistory]

I live in Florida and it would be very difficult in Fl, Alabama, Georgia, Missississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, without a car. I also lived in Los Angeles for a while and it would be incredibly difficult to live there without a car.

I did my undergrad in Chicago w/o a car and LOVED it. UChicago and UIC both have train stops close to campus. NYC obviously has great transportation but cost of living probably cancels out that advantage. Portland Oregon has good public transit that goes straight to most of thier universities. I've also heard very good things about Boston, Washington DC, Philidelphia, and St. Louis.

Disagree on two points: The only southern city I lived in was New Orleans, and I found it very easy to have a car. It was small enough that I could bike most anywhere in a short amount of time, and since the weather rarely got too cold, it was also pleasant/enjoyable. While I'm sure this might not be true for all southern cities, I imagine many are small enough that's not too hard to pull off.

Secondly, NYC only has a high COL in Manhattan proper. Brooklyn and Queens can be just as cheap as anywhere else.

I grew up in Baltimore, which isn't the easiest for biking, but the areas around the two main academic institutions (JHU and MICA) have all a student needs within biking/walking distance. There are many cities that might require a car for the average resident, but around the campus are easy for walking/biking.

[jennesy]

Secondly, NYC only has a high COL in Manhattan proper. Brooklyn and Queens can be just as cheap as anywhere else.

I have to disagree. The COL in NYC - even in Bk and Queens - is still extremely high. A bedroom in a shared apartment is going to run you AT LEAST $600/mo. A 30-day MetroCard is $105. EVERYTHING is just a little more expensive in NYC than in most parts of the country. Go walk around a Target in Bk or Queens and compare prices - everything is a tiny bit more expensive. It all adds up.

[TransnationalHistory]

On 2/24/2011 at 12:23 PM, jennesy said:

I have to disagree. The COL in NYC - even in Bk and Queens - is still extremely high. A bedroom in a shared apartment is going to run you AT LEAST $600/mo. A 30-day MetroCard is $105. EVERYTHING is just a little more expensive in NYC than in most parts of the country. Go walk around a Target in Bk or Queens and compare prices - everything is a tiny bit more expensive. It all adds up.

sorry, but I've never spent more than $500 a month in rent, currently spend $440, including all utilities. And I personally find the city to be pretty bike friendly, so I don't bother with the subway. And I find the food cheaper than anywhere else, both in terms of supermarkets like Food Baazar and the various cheap restaurants to be found. Brooklyn is only expensive if you live in a trendy (williamsburg, greenpoint, etc.) or professional (park slope, dumbo, etc.) area. Plenty of cheap rent elsewhere.

[Gunner24]

This is a tough question to answer, because you have "big cities with colleges", midsize cities, and the straight-up "college towns". If your going to school in a city that you don't want to be able to explore and hang out in (and many bigger cities suck), then most campuses you can get by with a bike, shuttles, buses, etc. If your going to school in a great city (San Fran, NY, Austin for example) then check some online reviews about public trans and/or biking. Also can check League of American Bicyclists for info on bike-friendliness, if you're a bike-type person like me If you're going to school in a college town, generally you'll be fine without a car. I have siblings at CU-Boulder and CSU (Fort Collins), both college towns, and neither has ever wished they had a car. Most college towns are used to having lots of students without cars, so generally it's relatively easy/cheap to get by without one. Hope this helps.

Edited February 24, 2011 by Gunner24

[firefly28]

One bit of advice: consider the weather if you're thinking about relying on public transportation. Waiting outside in sub-freezing temperatures with freezing rain batting you in the face while waiting for the bus is not fun. Pittsburgh has a fairly extensive public transportation system. Unlike a few other cities, they don't have an electronic tracking system to tell you where the buses actually are, and the buses are usually late in the winter time. Sometimes they just break down. Every winter when I was an undergrad, I vowed to never stay in Pittsburgh for graduate school, and when it came time to apply, I applied to almost all warm-weather schools. If you've never had your face go numb (as in literally numb, unable to clearly speak numb) while waiting for the bus, trust me you don't want to find out what it's like.

[jennesy]

On 2/24/2011 at 1:09 PM, TransnationalHistory said:

sorry, but I've never spent more than $500 a month in rent, currently spend $440, including all utilities. And I personally find the city to be pretty bike friendly, so I don't bother with the subway. And I find the food cheaper than anywhere else, both in terms of supermarkets like Food Baazar and the various cheap restaurants to be found. Brooklyn is only expensive if you live in a trendy (williamsburg, greenpoint, etc.) or professional (park slope, dumbo, etc.) area. Plenty of cheap rent elsewhere.

My point is that at prices that low (around $500/mo) you are likely to have a bedroom in a shared apartment. That setup doesn't work for lots of people. Also, in many other cities $500 goes a lot farther. For example, I paid $550 for a one bedroom plus office in downtown Madison. A comparable apartment in NYC would be at least $1000 even if you go farther out into Bk or Queens.

While biking is great for some, it doesn't work for everyone. Anyone going to CUNY will likely have to commute between at least 2 campuses for teaching, classes, and research obligations. If you live way out in the middle of Brooklyn and teach at City College that would be a LONG bike ride and pretty difficult if you're stuck teaching a night class.

Your point is well taken - living in NYC on $1000 a month CAN be done and I know people who do it - but it's only possible if a LOT of concessions are made and circumstances beyond your control (e.g., teaching assignments) work out to make that a possibility.

[vtstevie]

I've lived in Burlington, VT for about 6 years now and have never owned a car in my life. I use the Vermont Carshare network whenever I need to leave town for archival visits and the like, otherwise the city is extremely walkable.

However, if you plan on living in South Burlington/Winooski/Colchester for the exponentially cheaper rent, a car would be desirable.

[saffron]

Lived in Madison WI for five years without a car. Lots of bike paths and bus system is free for students!

[Henry Hudson]

On 2/24/2011 at 5:41 PM, Gunner24 said:

...

If you're going to school in a college town, generally you'll be fine without a car. I have siblings at CU-Boulder and CSU (Fort Collins), both college towns, and neither has ever wished they had a car. Most college towns are used to having lots of students without cars, so generally it's relatively easy/cheap to get by without one. Hope this helps.

While generally true, it should be noted there are college towns where the campus is quite distant from town proper, and public transit can be spotty. Summer can be awkward as well; grad students may still need to use campus facilities but Sept-May student-oriented bus runs may not operate in summer. Newer campuses can be out in remote rural or suburban areas with roadways unfriendly to anything but cars.

College town does not automatically equate to being easy to live without a car.

that said, Ithaca, despite its hills, seems pretty good to me as an occasional visitor.

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I know major cities like NY, Chicago, DC, Philly, Boston are very easy to live without a car. But how about smaller cities like Minneapolis, Seattle, Madison WI, St. Louis, and other places?

[asleepawake]

Try Wikitravel.com articles on the cities to check out information about the public transport in the areas. Check the weather to see if it would be reasonable to ride a bike regularly.

[Usmivka]

I'd like to point out that Seattle and Boston are essentially the same size, and the extended Seattle urban area is larger than that of Boston in terms of population. Minneapolis is not much smaller, and DC is only a little larger than Boston or Seattle. So your city size list says more about your perceptions of the the cities than it does about what size they are and what resources they might host. The only truly small city on your list is Davis, and it is close to Sacramento and San Francisco.

If you don't mind biking and busing, every city on your list is livable without a car, based on either my experience or those of colleagues. Also, your list basically implies anywhere without multiple subway lines is unlivable without a car (is "small"), but in my experience busing is often much faster than the T in Boston, and buses in Seattle were very convenient when I lived there despite the light rail being limited. Not having a car might be a shame in a place like Seattle though, it will be a lot harder to get to the mountains, ocean, or rainforest if you are an outdoorsy sort.

All that said, I think what environment you'd like to be in and the other amenities may matter more than what public transit is like in each city, though it is important. Check out the city guide threads.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Usmivka

[OregonGal]

Yeah, I wouldn't count Seattle as "small".

I think that a transportation-friendly city that is actually small-medium is Portland, OR. I grew up there and the public transit system is well-developed and laid out, and actually goes all the way out to the suburbs because it's a regional system (I lived a half hour south of Portland by car and we had a bus come through twice an hour). Budget crunches mean that they're eliminating the free rail zone in the middle of Portland, but I think they have the best transfer deal between bus and rail--your ticket buys you a 2-hour or all-day pass to any part of the transit system, so there's no surcharge for transfers bus-bus or bus-rail. All the light rail cars have hanging bike racks and all the buses have front racks for 2-3 bikes, so it's very bike-friendly as well.