News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Millennials Don't Drive--And Here's Why They Aren't Likely To Start Anytime Soon

Started by ZLoth, October 25, 2014, 08:31:44 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ZLoth

From Fast Company:

Millennials Don't Drive--And Here's Why They Aren't Likely To Start Anytime Soon
It's not because they're broke. They just don't need cars.
QuoteAn auto industry exec might argue that millennials are driving less, and are less likely to buy cars, because they're broke. But a new report explains in detail why anyone who makes that argument is missing the point--and why millennials, the largest generation in the U.S., are likely to keep shunning cars no matter how the economy changes.

"The general trajectory we've been on, this 60 year driving boom, really does appear to be over," says Phineas Baxandall, a senior policy analyst at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the organization that co-authored the report with the Frontier Group. An update on a previous 2012 report, the study pulls in new census data through last year, along with multiple state-specific studies and opinion polls.
FULL ARTICLE HERE

Quite frankly, I don't buy it. It may work in high-urbanized areas like San Francisco, Los Angeles, or New York City, but not in Sacramento.
I'm an Engineer. That means I solve problems. Not problems like "What is beauty?", because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems and call them "paychecks".


Zeffy

Quote from: ZLoth on October 25, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
They just don't need cars.

Try saying that to anyone who lives in a highly suburbanized area (Hillsborough, Hamilton, any of the Brunswicks besides New Brunswick...etc) in New Jersey.
Life would be boring if we didn't take an offramp every once in a while

A weird combination of a weather geek, roadgeek, car enthusiast and furry mixed with many anxiety related disorders

freebrickproductions

Quote from: Zeffy on October 25, 2014, 08:50:52 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on October 25, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
They just don't need cars.

Try saying that to anyone who lives in a highly suburbanized area (Hillsborough, Hamilton, any of the Brunswicks besides New Brunswick...etc) in New Jersey.
Or anyone here in Madison County, AL.
It's all fun & games until someone summons Cthulhu and brings about the end of the world.

I also collect traffic lights, road signs, fans, and railroad crossing equipment.

(They/Them)

SSOWorld

Quote from: ZLoth on October 25, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
From Fast Company:

Millennials Don't Drive--And Here's Why They Aren't Likely To Start Anytime Soon
It's not because they're broke. They just don't need cars.
QuoteAn auto industry exec might argue that millennials are driving less, and are less likely to buy cars, because they're broke. But a new report explains in detail why anyone who makes that argument is missing the point--and why millennials, the largest generation in the U.S., are likely to keep shunning cars no matter how the economy changes.

"The general trajectory we've been on, this 60 year driving boom, really does appear to be over," says Phineas Baxandall, a senior policy analyst at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the organization that co-authored the report with the Frontier Group. An update on a previous 2012 report, the study pulls in new census data through last year, along with multiple state-specific studies and opinion polls.
FULL ARTICLE HERE

Quite frankly, I don't buy it. It may work in high-urbanized areas like San Francisco, Los Angeles, or New York City, but not in Sacramento.

FTFY - LA and SF (for SF outside the city itself) depend on cars to get around due to the sheer size of the areas.  LA's transit system is not as extensive as SF's or NY's
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

Thing 342

I think that this is based off of the flawed thought that there is a net inward migration to cities. In reality, young adults move into the city to start their careers, but move out to the suburbs when they are older and have a family.

Brandon

It's bullshit, and has been proven bullshit in other articles before.  They're broke, and have access to other vehicles not their own.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

corco

Right, cars last longer and millenials have massive phone bills that used to be money that could go towards car payments.

The relative value of used cars to reliability is a big part of the problem in my mind. At least in my family, we pass cars down and around the chain. If my parents get a new car, their used car is likely worth more than it's worth on the open market (it's a well maintained, perfectly reliable car)- it's better just to sell that car to the kid for the trade-in value than to have them buy a brand new car and make payments.

I have two cars right now- one is my grandma's 2001 Honda Accord and one was my uncle's 2002 Jeep Liberty. I paid for both of them, but I did so knowing their history and knowing that they are perfectly good, reliable cars despite their age. It would be silly for me to assume car payments on a new car in that situation, especially since I'm still just getting started and trying to build up a good base of savings.

Had my grandmother or my uncle sold these vehicles on the open market, they would have gotten a few thousand bucks each for them, which really isn't a fair price for vehicles that could be driven to Alaska and back without hesitation. Better to keep those cars in the family and pass them around until the wheels fall off- that's where the value is maximized. I might actually buy a new car to replace the Honda next year, and at that point I will probably sell the Honda to my younger sister, and it will still be reliable.

Millenials are really the first folks to be in that bubble- cars now can comfortably stay reliable for 20 years and hundreds of thousands of miles. Previous generations didn't have the luxury of a massive pool of reliable used cars to choose from, so young people had to bear the expense of buying a new car if they wanted something reliable.

It's not that they're less likely to have cars, it's that they're less likely to buy new cars since they are broke and as rational actors there are plenty of perfectly reliable used cars around. That's what's hurting the auto industry. The Japanese coming in and forcing Ford and GM to build better cars over the last 30 years to the point that every car sold today is pretty damn reliable, breaking the old "trade in your car every three years or you will be stranded on the side of the road" thing is the "problem."

wxfree

I've noticed a trend of younger people shunning driving, not completely, but partly.  Almost everyone I know of driving age has a car (or pickup) here in suburban and rural Texas, but my younger friends aren't eager to drive and often look to avoid it.  I've always enjoyed driving, and just going places before I could drive.  To me, the trip there is part of the reason to go, an added benefit.  To the younger people I know, the drive is more often thought of as a reason not to go.  Even my friend who enjoys driving fast and crazy prefers only short distances; he has no affinity for long distance travel.  In my small part of the world, this article seems to be overstating the case, but just about everyone I know from high school age up to late 20s or early 30s seems to want to avoid driving as much as they can.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

Scott5114

See, I am perfectly happy driving to some place hours away, it's commuting and doing tasks around town I'd prefer not to drive to. I would love to be able to walk or bike to work but my job isn't in the same county I live in, and the town my job is in isn't a place I'd really like to live.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

froggie

QuoteIt's bullshit, and has been proven bullshit in other articles before.  They're broke, and have access to other vehicles not their own.

We've sparred about this before, but in my experience, it hasn't been fully dis-proven yet, especially in urban areas as others have mentioned.  You are right in that they tend to be broke (especially in rural areas such as where I am), but even when they have "access to other vehicles", they often don't use it.

Scott's comment is also dead-on to the mentality and the notion that they just aren't as interested in daily driving (occasional trips, yes....every day, no).

cjk374

My 16-year-old wants his drivers license NOW so he can start driving where ever he wants to NOW!!  He says he loves to drive and wants to drive long distance trips.  My child bucks the article big time.
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

Laura

QuotePart of the trend is also driven by external forces, like the fact that some states are making it more difficult to get a drivers license, so the number of high school seniors with a license keeps dropping. Universities are making it more difficult to keep cars on campus, and adding new programs, like bike sharing, that students might give students new habits they want to keep after graduating.

Yep. In Maryland, you can't get a license now until you are 16 and a half and can't have non-family passengers for the first 151 days (5 months). At my alma mater (Lynchburg College), you can't have a car as a resident freshman unless you have extenuating circumstances (like a job off campus or something), and even then you still have to pay $500 for a freshman permit. I was able to get my license in 2003 at age 16 and one month and have a car on campus in 2005 for a $50 permit fee.

I was born in a generation gap, so a lot of my cousins are getting to driving age and aren't driving. Their reasons include not the cost of the car itself, but in the car insurance. Simply, they are using the money that they would have used for car insurance on a smartphone. With all of the restrictions stated above, there's no reason to get a car if they can't drive friends around and are going to college in an urban area where they won't need a car anyway.

Another huge contributing factor is that these kids are helicopter kids with helicopter parents. Their parents are more than happy to drive them around because it's safer and less scary, and the kids are more than happy to get rides because they're free and the rides give them extra time that they can sit and use their phones. Also, their parents can pick up their friends and their friends' parents can pick them up - if they or their friends drive, they can't ride together anyway.

Everyone is so busy these days, too, that parents see giving rides as another opportunity for quality time with their kids. If they have to do it until the kid is 16.5, why not do it for the extra year and a half before they go to college?

adventurernumber1

Being a Roadgeek, I am ashamed to possibly be thought of as a smartphone-addicted teen who shuns driving (not by you guys, but possibly by the rest of society). I actually use my smartphone a good bit, but I'm going to be honest, I only use it when away from home or "in bed," and I only mostly use it for:

* Accessing this forum on Safari
* Going on Google Maps
* Taking road videos/pictures if on the road
* communicating with some roadgeeks & friends on both Instagram & Skype
* and texting/calling

Yep, that's it, haha. And honestly, I actually don't know how addicted these teens are to their phones (when I'm at my friends', we just play video games and play outside). But if they're honestly addicted to the point where they sped every available moment on it? Do they have lives? Do they have hobbies? And if they get caught in this habit, theyre going to be much too lazy when they get a job! And also, if kids wait until after college to start driving, they're gonna suck. People need experience. I'm getting my permit at age 15 and license at age 16, but I've been practicing driving since I turned 14 (shh, it's only been in neighborhoods and parking lots  :sombrero: ). You have to have experience driving or else you'll wreck your first day on the road!!

I do not like this trend at all.
Now alternating between different highway shields for my avatar - my previous highway shield avatar for the last few years was US 76.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127322363@N08/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-vJ3qa8R-cc44Cv6ohio1g

corco

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 26, 2014, 04:38:03 AM
See, I am perfectly happy driving to some place hours away, it's commuting and doing tasks around town I'd prefer not to drive to. I would love to be able to walk or bike to work but my job isn't in the same county I live in, and the town my job is in isn't a place I'd really like to live.

This is my thought as well on driving. I absolutely love driving for pleasure, but driving to work or to the store is something I dislike doing immensely. Here in Helena, I don't want to rent a place within walking distance of the downtown area where I also work because the markup over property value to rent down there is absurd, but as soon as I can afford to buy down there that's my plan so I can stop driving to work.

I also wonder if beefed up DUI enforcement hasn't led to the movement of young people downtown. Part of the reason I'd like to live downtown is that I can go out and not even get wasted but have a couple and not have to worry about the risks of getting home. A generation ago, DUI was a bit easier to get away with, not a total societal faux pas, and the penalties weren't as severe.

J N Winkler

Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2014, 09:22:06 PMFTFY - LA and SF (for SF outside the city itself) depend on cars to get around due to the sheer size of the areas.  LA's transit system is not as extensive as SF's or NY's

This is true.  However, the Metro in Los Angeles is a good bit more extensive than it was when I first visited in 1998, and is very heavily used, while Metrolink offers reasonably good regional connectivity.  Both systems have good timekeeping because they are rail-based.  This is an important advantage over the freeways, which now offer very poor travel time reliability since their capacity has lagged regional population growth for at least 50 years now.  In Los Angeles at least, there is also good connectivity with a dense bus route network.  When I visited LA for a couple of days last month, I was struck by the heavy load factors on the Blue Line running between South LA (I-105 corridor) and downtown.

Even in much less densely populated towns elsewhere on the same 6750-mile roadtrip, I saw many more people walking and riding bicycles than was the case when I took a 10,000-mile roadtrip back in 2003 that traversed many of the same states.  It seemed to me like many have absorbed all the "America is an obese country" messaging of the past five years or so and decided  purposefully to do something about it.

Quote from: corco on October 26, 2014, 12:03:14 AMRight, cars last longer and millenials have massive phone bills that used to be money that could go towards car payments.

The relative value of used cars to reliability is a big part of the problem in my mind. At least in my family, we pass cars down and around the chain. If my parents get a new car, their used car is likely worth more than it's worth on the open market (it's a well maintained, perfectly reliable car)- it's better just to sell that car to the kid for the trade-in value than to have them buy a brand new car and make payments.

These factors, as well as crippling student debt and high youth unemployment, would help explain why millennials are far less likely to buy new cars, but the problem is broader than that since car ownership (whether new or used) and driving in general are down among that age group.  Also, any family that can afford to pass on a car owned from new to a kid that starts driving is in a quite privileged position.  A family car has added value only to the extent that its service history is fully documented and the manufacturer's recommended severe-service maintenance schedule has been rigorously followed.  Since the income squeeze is multigenerational, many people I know from high school that have children starting to drive have simply bought used cars for them (whether from a dealer or through private sale) because their own cars are secondhand with unknown or poorly documented service histories.

And while smartphones are expensive, on a monthly basis they are still much smaller than the monthly payments for a new car, which are now quite high since prices have risen almost commensurately with mechanical longevity.  It is now hard to leave a dealer's lot without paying $15,000 for a small car in base trim.  Add 30% or so for a five-year finance period and the buyer has to commit to a $334 monthly payment, which is quite large compared to a monthly smartphone bill of about $60.  I think the real story is that the comparative advantage of Internet-enabled devices to cars has ballooned lopsidedly in favor of the former since the mid-1990's.  This trend has only been accentuated by the involuntary deleveraging many households have had to go through since 2008 when consumer credit became very, very tight.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

english si

I live in suburbia, and while 'suburbia' here is probably more dense than American suburbia, I don't think you need to drive to live here, unless your job requires you to.

You may catch lifts off others or need to borrow a vehicle every now and then, sure, but you can walk/cycle to many useful places, get groceries and shopping delivered, use public transport, etc, etc. A car is more of a convenience out here than in a city (where it might even be an inconvenience), but its still not an essential for the able-bodied 20-something.

J N Winkler

Quote from: corco on October 26, 2014, 11:32:46 AMI also wonder if beefed up DUI enforcement hasn't led to the movement of young people downtown. Part of the reason I'd like to live downtown is that I can go out and not even get wasted but have a couple and not have to worry about the risks of getting home. A generation ago, DUI was a bit easier to get away with, not a total societal faux pas, and the penalties weren't as severe.

DUI is a consideration for some.  The other side of the coin is that almost two-thirds of Americans simply don't drink.  As an example, my alcohol consumption averages out to about two drinks a week and that puts me in the 70th percentile.  (Even if you are not in charge of a motor vehicle, you still have to be careful not to walk around falling-down drunk because that hugely raises your risk of dying in a vehicle/pedestrian accident and also, if you are a woman, being sexually assaulted.  Pedestrians can be charged with being drunk and disorderly, and in some jurisdictions it is an offense to be drunk in charge of a cycle.)

Downtowns have significant pull factors as well.  For young people they are the best places to experiment with different social identities--can you imagine a hipster in the suburbs?  Also, they tend to serve as clusters for cultural facilities such as art museums and public libraries.  Even in Wichita, which has struggled for more than 20 years to create a livable downtown, the public library, the art museum, a quite good branch of the local YMCA, and an arts-and-restaurants district are all within easy cycling distance of each other and of several high-rise apartment buildings and condo developments.  As I see it, the main disadvantage of downtown living in the US (though not in western Europe) is that they tend to be food deserts.  In Wichita you have to go to the suburbs to find a store that sells fresh vegetables.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

algorerhythms

Quote from: Laura on October 26, 2014, 10:04:50 AM
QuotePart of the trend is also driven by external forces, like the fact that some states are making it more difficult to get a drivers license, so the number of high school seniors with a license keeps dropping. Universities are making it more difficult to keep cars on campus, and adding new programs, like bike sharing, that students might give students new habits they want to keep after graduating.

Yep. In Maryland, you can't get a license now until you are 16 and a half and can't have non-family passengers for the first 151 days (5 months). At my alma mater (Lynchburg College), you can't have a car as a resident freshman unless you have extenuating circumstances (like a job off campus or something), and even then you still have to pay $500 for a freshman permit. I was able to get my license in 2003 at age 16 and one month and have a car on campus in 2005 for a $50 permit fee.

When I was a senior in college (2006), there was practically a riot at my college when they raised the parking permit fee from $25 to $35. Now, the university I'm doing my Ph.D. at has a parking permit fee of $200 and it's cheap relative to other universities. So I walk to campus instead of driving.

SSOWorld

Quote from: J N Winkler on October 26, 2014, 11:56:34 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2014, 09:22:06 PMFTFY - LA and SF (for SF outside the city itself) depend on cars to get around due to the sheer size of the areas.  LA's transit system is not as extensive as SF's or NY's

This is true.  However, the Metro in Los Angeles is a good bit more extensive than it was when I first visited in 1998, and is very heavily used, while Metrolink offers reasonably good regional connectivity.  Both systems have good timekeeping because they are rail-based.  This is an important advantage over the freeways, which now offer very poor travel time reliability since their capacity has lagged regional population growth for at least 50 years now.  In Los Angeles at least, there is also good connectivity with a dense bus route network.  When I visited LA for a couple of days last month, I was struck by the heavy load factors on the Blue Line running between South LA (I-105 corridor) and downtown.

Even in much less densely populated towns elsewhere on the same 6750-mile roadtrip, I saw many more people walking and riding bicycles than was the case when I took a 10,000-mile roadtrip back in 2003 that traversed many of the same states.  It seemed to me like many have absorbed all the "America is an obese country" messaging of the past five years or so and decided  purposefully to do something about it.
Yea I can imagine about that.  When I first visted LA - briefly - in 1997, I had not heard of the Metro Rail.  In fact, I was a little scare of the city as it was. (only the Red, Blue and Green lines existed then - as you pointed out briefly).  When I went back there last year (2013), I took advantage of it, MetroLink and Amtrak to get around a bit (I was out there for half the year) when I went sightseeing.  I had parked either at the Soledad Canyon station in the SCV near where I "lived", or at the North Hollywood station park-and-ride.  I had taken both the Red and Blue line end-to-end.  Sure beats attempting to find parking spots in the tourist areas like Hollywood or Long Beach (the two points I went to).  However, the only way I could have commuted to the job by transit was Metrolink and via buses - which would have taken way longer compared to just getting on the 5 and driving down (Route: Magic Mtn. Pkwy in Santa Clarita to Balboa Blvd in Sylmar - 20 min drive in free-flow traffic) SF's BART and the commuter rails/transits on the east coast are WAY more extensive and offer more routes - giving commuters a chance to use them more often.  I've used NJTransit from MetroPark to NY Penn, the former station's large parking areas get full, FAST!!!!
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

Thing 342

Quote from: algorerhythms on October 26, 2014, 01:24:46 PM
Quote from: Laura on October 26, 2014, 10:04:50 AM
QuotePart of the trend is also driven by external forces, like the fact that some states are making it more difficult to get a drivers license, so the number of high school seniors with a license keeps dropping. Universities are making it more difficult to keep cars on campus, and adding new programs, like bike sharing, that students might give students new habits they want to keep after graduating.

Yep. In Maryland, you can't get a license now until you are 16 and a half and can't have non-family passengers for the first 151 days (5 months). At my alma mater (Lynchburg College), you can't have a car as a resident freshman unless you have extenuating circumstances (like a job off campus or something), and even then you still have to pay $500 for a freshman permit. I was able to get my license in 2003 at age 16 and one month and have a car on campus in 2005 for a $50 permit fee.

When I was a senior in college (2006), there was practically a riot at my college when they raised the parking permit fee from $25 to $35. Now, the university I'm doing my Ph.D. at has a parking permit fee of $200 and it's cheap relative to other universities. So I walk to campus instead of driving.
At the college my sister attends (Georgia Tech) I've heard that it's cheaper to pay parking tickets than it is to pay the $500 parking fee.

algorerhythms

It's similar here as long as you get caught fewer than 10 times per semester. The parking permit is $200 and a parking ticket is $20.

cjk374

Quote from: adventurernumber1 on October 26, 2014, 10:24:35 AM

Yep, that's it, haha. And honestly, I actually don't know how addicted these teens are to their phones (when I'm at my friends', we just play video games and play outside).

WOW!! Teens that still play outside??  :wow: My son only goes outside to go to school & walk his flea-bitten dog.  His main focus is his x-box, his x-box & his x-box.  He wants a job to make his own money, but I don't know if he fully understands the responsibility that goes with all of that....despite my trying to explain it to him.


Quote from: adventurernumber1 on October 26, 2014, 10:24:35 AM

But if they're honestly addicted to the point where they sped every available moment on it? Do they have lives? Do they have hobbies? And if they get caught in this habit, theyre going to be much too lazy when they get a job!

You are wise beyond your years.   :nod:
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

vdeane

I think it's interesting that these articles only survey Millenials in NYC or Silicon Valley.  I was also surprised by the article posted upthread that most Americans don't drink.  When I was in college, you were a social outcast if you weren't nursing a hangover a least a few times per semester.  Maybe it's generational.  Oddly enough, Clarkson didn't charge for parking permits while I was there, and as far as I know, they still don't (I honestly don't see how they can still do that while simultaneously increasing enrollment and reducing the number of parking spaces).

In NY, you can't get any kind of licence until 16 1/2.  From 16 1/2 to 17, the only licence you can have is a "limited junior license" that allows driving to work and school ONLY.  From 17 to 18, you can get a "junior licence" that allows driving only during the day unless driving to/from work or with a parent in the car and has a limitation on the number of non-family passengers, though you can get a full licence if you've taken driver's end from a public school (doesn't work with getting driver's ed from a driving school; the state considers such courses to be worthless even though they're probably better than most of the public schools).  NYC is even more restrictive, with it being illegal to even learn outside of driver's ed (de facto - the language is technically that they need to be in a car with passenger side brakes; it's also illegal to drive on the expressways until age 18).  It is also illegal to drive in a DMV roadtest area with a learner's permit across the entire state, so if you happen to live in one, you're just screwed.

I think it's funny that with all this hype about how teens are such unsafe drivers and making it much harder to get a full license that the written and road tests are still trivially easy.  Seriously, you'd have to TRY to fail those things.  I suck at parallel parking and still got a perfect score on both.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Laura

Quote from: Thing 342 on October 26, 2014, 02:21:50 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on October 26, 2014, 01:24:46 PM
Quote from: Laura on October 26, 2014, 10:04:50 AM
QuotePart of the trend is also driven by external forces, like the fact that some states are making it more difficult to get a drivers license, so the number of high school seniors with a license keeps dropping. Universities are making it more difficult to keep cars on campus, and adding new programs, like bike sharing, that students might give students new habits they want to keep after graduating.

Yep. In Maryland, you can't get a license now until you are 16 and a half and can't have non-family passengers for the first 151 days (5 months). At my alma mater (Lynchburg College), you can't have a car as a resident freshman unless you have extenuating circumstances (like a job off campus or something), and even then you still have to pay $500 for a freshman permit. I was able to get my license in 2003 at age 16 and one month and have a car on campus in 2005 for a $50 permit fee.

When I was a senior in college (2006), there was practically a riot at my college when they raised the parking permit fee from $25 to $35. Now, the university I'm doing my Ph.D. at has a parking permit fee of $200 and it's cheap relative to other universities. So I walk to campus instead of driving.
At the college my sister attends (Georgia Tech) I've heard that it's cheaper to pay parking tickets than it is to pay the $500 parking fee.

Yep. I should have emphasized that the Lynchburg College $500 fee is only for freshman in an attempt to encourage biking and ridesharing. The upperclassmen fee is still $50. They now have a deal where you can get free bus passes and the like, and there's a bike shop on campus where you can volunteer to work on bikes and earn your own.

http://www.lynchburg.edu/content/bike-shack

From what I've heard, the program is working really well. (I think the free transit passes also help!)

As a point of reference, at my current university (Morgan State) parking permits for residents are $125 per semester. It's free for commuters.

gilpdawg

Quote from: algorerhythms on October 26, 2014, 01:24:46 PM
Quote from: Laura on October 26, 2014, 10:04:50 AM
QuotePart of the trend is also driven by external forces, like the fact that some states are making it more difficult to get a drivers license, so the number of high school seniors with a license keeps dropping. Universities are making it more difficult to keep cars on campus, and adding new programs, like bike sharing, that students might give students new habits they want to keep after graduating.

Yep. In Maryland, you can't get a license now until you are 16 and a half and can't have non-family passengers for the first 151 days (5 months). At my alma mater (Lynchburg College), you can't have a car as a resident freshman unless you have extenuating circumstances (like a job off campus or something), and even then you still have to pay $500 for a freshman permit. I was able to get my license in 2003 at age 16 and one month and have a car on campus in 2005 for a $50 permit fee.

When I was a senior in college (2006), there was practically a riot at my college when they raised the parking permit fee from $25 to $35. Now, the university I'm doing my Ph.D. at has a parking permit fee of $200 and it's cheap relative to other universities. So I walk to campus instead of driving.
When I was a college freshman in '96, my college said freshmen must park at the football stadium about a 20 or 25 minute walk from the dorms. No problem until it rains. So I found a friend who had a slightly off campus apartment and parked there. The other people on my floor were quite pissed I thought of that and they didn't.





Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.