4 ms·
And Boston and DC. I wouldn't live in SF without a car unless I was a biking enthusiast. Also I find that many people who proudly refuse to own a car in SF jus
by ng12 6y ago
And Boston and DC. I wouldn't live in SF without a car unless I was a biking enthusiast.
Also I find that many people who proudly refuse to own a car in SF just end up ubering everywhere.
- rpearl 6y agoTo be clear I (the original poster in this thread) have lived without a car in the bay area for almost a decade, and I don't Uber anywhere. NYC is definitely more walkable--and just as expensive. Boston is about as walkable, I think (I haven't spent much time there)--and also pretty expensive!
- fatnoah 6y ago>Boston is about as walkable Boston is definitely walkable. My wife and I shared a car when living there, and I'd literally go weeks without actually getting in the car (she worked in a suburb, so she needed it for daily driving). Everything was generally within 1/2 mile, including school for the kiddo, sports fields, parks, grocery, hardware, etc. Transit was also convenient and plentiful.
- diebeforei485 6y agoIdk. Pre-covid, I probably used Uber/Lyft two days a month. Some people do "Uber Everywhere", but I mostly biked/baywheels/muni.