The thing is you'd only be "trapped" with no access to the natural beauty because everyone opts for cars instead of public transport.
Norway has a population density about 1/10th of the US (to get away from the "but the US is so big" argument that inevitably comes up), yet when I lived in Oslo, I could stroll along the main central city streets, and catch light rail to pretty much the middle of the woods in 20 minutes, regular rail to the central mountain massifs in a few hours, or a bus to the beach in 15 minutes.
That only works because of heavy investment in public transport over decades, probably in part because car ownership became common much later - Norway wasn't particularly wealthy until the oil revenues started pouring in in the 70's. Culturally the car has never gotten the same position as in the US. Even households that have 2-3 cars will often rely on public transport for commutes.
There'll always be areas where not having a car is impractical because of density - not everyone can sanely get away with not having a car in Norway either; and there's always be places that will be tricky to get to without a car - whether rented for the trip or your own. But the US is in the current situation because you've favoured the car for so long that everything is geared for it.
Of course it's self-perpetuating. I've spent quite a lot of time in the Bay Area, without a drivers license (never bothered to learn to drive as I've never had any use for a car in Oslo and now London), and if I'd lived there I'd have gotten a license as quick as - I'm generally quite flexible about walking long distances just for the walk, and happy to take things easy and wait for a bus or a train , but even somewhere like the Bay Area with a population density well over the places I grew up had so horrible public transit coverage it'd drive me crazy.