This is the question posed on CityNerd video titled “Walkable Cities But They Keep Getting More Affordable”
If you ditched your car, could you afford to leave the suburbs for a great urban neighborhood?
Ray Delahanty answers the question in the 26 biggest US cities.
The analysis assumes the all-in cost of owning and operating a car is $1,000 per month, including purchase, insurance, fuel, and maintenance.
In the city, transportation costs might total about $250 per month for transit passes, biking, ride-hailing, and other small expenses.
This results in an effective $750 per month increase in the housing budget for city center residents who do not own a car.
The results of the video are quite interesting, as you can get more m² in walkable areas in most cities
Nope I would have to triple or quadruple my costs for housing to move to an urban environment. Also then I would be surrounded by other people in close proximity a lot of the time. Currently I pay less than 1k/mo for mortgage, and there’s only about 3 or less people per acre of land surrounding me. Costs for 1 car amount to roughly $800/mo including payment, insurance, and fuel.
If this is a con for you instead of a pro, you may be lost.
Everyone has their preferences. I can understand the desire for a more isolated lifestyle and I think there should be a place for that in our society.
Exactly. It’s just that that lifestyle shouldn’t be subsidized is all.
Most everybody has something subsidized. Lets not play the “why should i have to pay for it” game. Leads to dark places.
Fair enough.
Let’s just subsidize urban areas at the same rate as suburbs for the past century then.
I had a hard time understanding why this was even included until I got to the end and realized it’s on the con list
You may not need a car in the urban environment. Of course it would depend on the city. If it was Tokyo, a big yes for me. You’ll get less space but being able to walk to get everything I need is going to be good for my health in the long term.