ro-monster

I live in the Bay Area. San Francisco is a decent candidate, but I don't think it's because of the tech companies. Most of the larger ones are located in the suburbs about 40 miles south of the actual city. In fact, some of the suburban towns have little other than tech companies in them. So many of their employees live in SF and commute to work in the South Bay that each of the big companies has a fleet of private buses for employees.

But bicycles and transit are both used pretty heavily in the more densely populated parts of the entire Bay Area, and many people who live in SF don't own cars, because the cost and hassle are simply prohibitive. You must either pay for a private parking space (usually $300/month or more) or get a resident sticker to park on the street and move your car frequently, as parking is prohibited on one side of every street for street cleaning twice a week. Most people who park on the streets get a lot of expensive parking tickets. Car sharing is very popular and the vehicles are everywhere.

I think it would not be that great a leap for SF to have no privately owned cars inside the eastern half of the city. The western half is more like a suburb and not as well served by transit, so that would be harder. I do think that car sharing would stay, though, unless something catastrophic happens.