Scott Reynolds wrote:
> 
> On 7/7/2003 9:21 PM, Declan Murphy wrote:
> 
> > Scott Reynolds wrote:
> 
> >> Well, if having a subway on the scale of Los Angeles is enough to
> >> qualify, Chicago has a "mass-transit subway system" because part of
> >> the el is actually chikatetsu. And Washington DC has a wonderful
> >> subway system -- clean, efficient, extensive. But the area where most
> >> fall short is the "comparable to those in Japan or with London, Paris
> >> etc." To put it in terms an American could understand: Is the
> >> mass-transit system good enough that someone who can afford a car
> >> would seriously consider doing without one? On this measure, very few
> >> American cities would score very high, I wager.
> >
> > Yeah thats pretty much what I meant by "comparable to those..." NYC? and ?
> 
> The subway in Washington DC is very nice indeed. And you can make do
> with the el and buses in a city like Chicago. I wonder what the
> situation is like in Boston....

I will be moving to Boston in August.  I also lived there for 10 weeks
in 1999. I cannot afford a car but I might've been able to had I decided
to move to the distant suburbs.

Anyway, the Boston T is well-connected and will take you within a 10
minute walk of most major urban universities (BU, BC, MIT, Northeastern,
Harvard, not sure about Brandeis, Tufts, or others).  It gets you to the
big museums and to within a short shuttle bus ride's reach of the
airport.  The outer suburbs are well serviced by commuter rail.

Access to the baseball stadium by train is a bit difficult, and some
neighborhoods, like the North End (where all the good Italian
restaurants are) is a bit difficult too.  If you count buses though, no
problem.

-- 
Curt Fischer