Pick only one: Austin, Philadelphia, Seattle

(or Portland)

Austin would meet all your needs except for the driving. I currently don't have a car so bus to work but 1. I work centrally and 2. I have access to my boyfriend's car for times of need.

I'm chicken about bikes but if you aren't and could find a place to live fairly close to the action here, you'd probably be good.

Phillyblog (www.phillyblog.com) is a good resource for figuring out where to live, among other things. I'd suggest somewhere in South Philly, east of Broad and south of South St. Fairmount might work too, or Powelton Village.

I was going to steer you away from Philadelphia, but it would definitely work with these two considerations. I've lived in Philadelphia without a car since 1989, and while not having a car certainly creates some limitations, it's a pretty easy city to get around in via public transportation and walking. Mostly I depend on walking and taking cabs. Some neighborhoods might be islands surrounded by places you wouldn't want to walk though, so its walkability will depend on where you live specifically. I mean, if you are in center city, parts of West Philadelphia/University city, Spring Garden/Fairmount/the Art Museum area, and maybe South Philly, there would be a pretty good sense of being able to get from where you are to any of the places I've just listed. (For example, I used to routinely walk home to 16th & Green, in Spring Garden/Art Museum area from, say, Drexel University, out around 30somethingth and Chestnut.)

On the other hand, I don't know Austin or Seattle, so what good is that? Mexican food: I don't think there's all that much of what people who know about Mexican food would consider good Mexican food, in Philadelphia. Lots of good restaurants though, covering a wide range of ethnic cuisine.

austin seems good too, maybe a little less user friendly, esp as non-driver

i also like philadelphia, but its not a city that would be top of my list for the east coast

Among the other two, Philly is the bigger, more comprehensive and more walkable city, all of which favor it imo. It also allows you relatively easy access by train to NY, DC and Baltimore, not to mention further North and South along the East Coast (but impresses me as a good east coast city to choose if you're from elsewhere, even if it's in some sense more insular than other east coast cities). However, I still think that Seattle, no slouch of a city, is worth serious consideration for its particular character, if you find it appealing, and especially if you're outdoors-oriented. Would its climate be marginally milder in summer/winter than Philly's?

Given that you've chosen (well?) one city each in three different regions, is that perhaps the ultimate choice you're trying to make?

i'm not really into bands anymore but there's all kinds of artsy stuff here and in general much more sophisticated and enlightened type culture abounds than the rest of our state.

I lived there v. happily, but people who're looking for that Tokyo-rush-hour urban buzz would go crazy in a hurry.

tho i am v tempted by texas bbq

I parsed this as "spring-fed librarians in the middle of town."

Yes please.