Public Transport vs Car

[Ricky]

Do you prefer to go car-free and live near things and have access to good public transit or would you prefer to live in a smaller city where traffic isn't bad and driving wasn't a hassle?

I know there are many in-betweens, like being in a smaller city with decent public transit or being in a larger city with a car, but I wanted to keep it simple and ask what the "ideal" scenario would be.

I prefer having a car in a low-traffic city but still being close to everything I need. That way, I'm not spending much time in the car, my errands are more convenient and faster, and I don't have to deal with weirdos on the train/bus. I've found that even when you're only a mile from a grocery store - it's still a pain to get those groceries home on a regular basis, unless you're biking of course. I don't know - I'd still rather just use my car very sparingly and get my exercise in a safer, more enjoyable way. I just got to thinking about this because I used to think I would want to live in a high-density area where everything is convenient to get to. Then I started to see all the downsides to that - noise, more influence/control from the city, hassle to get groceries, etc.

The only city in the U.S. with world class public transport is NYC in my opinion - and I seriously don't understand how people get their groceries - or really anything. I mean you could have them delivered - but that adds up fast. Or you could go to the store and get an Uber back, but same story really, and still not as convenient as just driving in a less hectic place.

[Jeremy E.]

I think ideally you live near everything and walk everywhere, followed by living near everything and biking everywhere. However I chose the carless option with public transport as it was the closest thing to those choices(Personally I'm carless even though I have a 17 mile each way commute to work).
I recently visited Seattle and it has amazing public transport. I don't know what you consider world class public transport, but I don't see anyone needing more than what Seattle offers. I'm pretty sure most big cities have good enough public transport. I thought it was really badass how you can put your bike on the front of the buses in Seattle.

[Zikoris]

I love the carless, close-to-everything lifestyle so much that I've never even bothered to get a driving licence. It's great! I walk almost everywhere, and bike/transit to a few places.

Grocery delivery? Uber? It's really interesting that those are the two things that you think of when imagining how carless people grocery shop. The first two things I think of are a backpack and bike bags. Third would be something with wheels, like my cat stroller or those little carts people pull behind them. Fourth would be a pull-behind bike trailer. Fifth would be just carrying the bags on the bus.

[NYCWife]

As a carless New Yorker . . . We walk to our local grocery store and bring along our "granny cart" to carry home our groceries. When we are feeling like a splurge, we take the subway to a fancier grocery store about 2 stops away and then use the cart to bring home our groceries. Some grocery stores in fancier parts of town offer free delivery, I've heard.

For everything else we purchase in the city, we either carry it home by hand (in a backpack or in a grocery bag) or we use our cart to carry it home.

Our biggest "bring things home" adventure is actually Amazon packages. We live in an apartment building where there is no doorman, so no one to collect/keep our packages. We have discovered Amazon lockers, which are lockers throughout the city. You can have your Amazon purchases shipped there, same as any street address. When they arrive, you get a secret code that you use to unlock just your locker and pick up your packages. Genius!

I agree with Zikoris--we have fallen in love with being carless. It's so much less of a headache (no gas, no insurance, no washing/upkeep). You experience the city so much differently by bike or by foot than you do in a car. We have stumbled across so many jewels, just by walking randomly throughout the city.

We used to be a 2-car family before we moved to NYC and I wouldn't trade back for anything. I love being car-less. To each his own, right? That's why it's so nice to have such variety in our US cities!

[Vilgan]

We have a car in Seattle but use it very sparingly. I think the last tank of gas was 2-3 months ago. I use it 1-2 times a month for business meetings at awkward locations when traffic is trivial and then we'll use it to get out to the mountains to hike occasionally.

Almost everything we need is either within walking distance or within easy transit distance. We occasionally flirt with the idea of getting rid of the car completely and I think inertia is the main reason we haven't gotten rid of it.

[alsoknownasDean]

I prefer to live in an area where I'm not dependent on the car for everything, and I live near decent public transport (the walk score here is 79%, not too bad). Realistically I could manage without a car here (and I did for most of last year).

The idea of total car dependency sounds awful to me.

However, I still own one. My parents live out of town with fairly poor public transport (and their house has a walk score of 11%), and I've recently started playing cricket and the grounds can be out of comfortable bike/transit distance.

I do about 10,000km a year, probably nearly half of that's in trips to visit family and friends. I've got a cheap, small 13 year old car that should keep on going for a long time yet.

[seattlecyclone]

I picked the first option. I've lived in car-oriented areas in small cities where traffic is generally light. I currently live in a place where I don't need to drive most days. I much prefer the current state of affairs. Driving is dangerous, stressful, and bad for the environment. Why would I want to live in a place where that's my only reasonable way to get to places outside my home?

[Erica]

Since we love to cycle, and love nature, we couldn't go carless. We'd always need to be living somewhat away from the city.

[Vilgan]

Since we love to cycle, and love nature, we couldn't go carless. We'd always need to be living somewhat away from the city.

I used to think that, but doing the math - rentals can be more cost effective if you only drive on the weekends. Enterprise has a bunch of $10/day deals on the weekends when their business travelers don't need cars. There's also zipcar for shorter trips/needs.

[SeattleStache]

I live in central Seattle and am lucky enough that I can walk to work and pretty much everything else (hair salon, doctor, dentist, multiple grocery stores, Pike Place Market and everything else downtown). I own a 15 year old car that I park on the street with a zone permit which costs $65 every two years. I drive maybe 4 times a month but am keeping it until it dies just for the convenience. I secretly look forward to not having it anymore though. My condo has a 100% transit score and 98% walk score so I feel pretty set up for the car-free lifestyle.

[Erica]

Since we love to cycle, and love nature, we couldn't go carless. We'd always need to be living somewhat away from the city.

I used to think that, but doing the math - rentals can be more cost effective if you only drive on the weekends. Enterprise has a bunch of $10/day deals on the weekends when their business travelers don't need cars. There's also zipcar for shorter trips/needs.

Wow, we don't have those rates here.  I've heard of that though, you have it great then :)

It's a real bummer living in a very rich area. And zipcars aren't here either but I hear they are cheap in Southern Ca. My brother in law bikes everywhere in Oakland and rents a zipcar when he needs to drive somewhere. He has a good job in IT so it must be pretty convienent to do this.

[big_slacker]

We do option #2, kids being the main reason. I do bike to work 2-3 times a week and the wifey rides a singlespeed in the summer for errands a lot (yeah, we're hardcore like that). But even doing the math with my free bus pass and her buying a monthly it's a stretch to say public transpo would truly be a better value.

[Cranky]

Again, it really depends on where you are in your life...

I actually don't drive, but my husband does. We always have chosen to live someplace where I can get around without driving, but we do have a car and he drives to work every day, and we run errands in the car on Saturday.

It's not really about a big/small city thing, in my experience - it's no easier hauling a family's worth of laundry to the laundromat in Manhattan than in Podunk. The older I get, and I'm pretty old, the less enthusiastic I am about standing around waiting for the bus.

I never want to live somewhere again that it takes a long time to get around, and in a big urban area, that's what it takes whether you drive or take the bus.

I'm pretty happy in an area where there's little traffic, many things I can walk to, and spotty public transit.

[AZDude]

I think it would be nice to live somewhere with good public transportation. I took the bus to work when I worked downtown for a couple of years and found I liked it more than sitting in traffic. It was not even being mustachian, just a preference.

That being said, in this city, unless you work downtown, public transportation to work is difficult. For example, its 20 mins by car to my current job, but over an hour by bus. The city overall is gigantic, and not very walkable, even with the weather being great for 7-8 months of the year. We have talked about becoming a one car family, but never a zero car family.

[darkadams00]

Where I live, the difference between the best access to public transportation and greenways is about 1 mile. If a person chooses to buy a house in my city, an hour's research will make a significant different in access to bus stops and greenway intersections. The real estate market here doesn't reflect access to the alternative routes. They only reflect the age/quality of the neighborhood. Without spending an extra $100, I can buy a house the makes it either hard or easy to get around without a car. However, there is a definite uptick between in-town housing prices and just out-of-town. But to pay the "premium" and then not even buy in a location to access all available resources? That's just money left on the table.

[dodojojo]

I've been living scenario #1 for over a decade just outside of DC.  My neighborhood walk score is 94.  My family keeps harping on me to return to southern California, but it's really difficult to find a neighborhood in LA with a walk score of 94.  And if it existed, I probably couldn't afford to live in it (and continue with the 40% savings rate).

I miss many things about LA, but ditching the car-centric lifestyle was definitely the best thing about leaving that city.