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

[NE2]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating.

It's called a bike. I'm depressed with social anxiety and I've tried various things all over the Orlando area using the combination of bike+bus.

[kkt]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

I have a car now, and I wouldn't choose to do without one.  But I chose to live without a car as a working adult for about 15 years.  Yes, being carless closes the door to exploring most rural areas pretty thoroughly.  But one can still explore interesting nooks and crannies within the city.  You get to know a city much better by bus and walking than you do driving -- in the car, you have to be watching the road more than interesting things alongside, and even if you do see something interesting there may not be a handy place to pull over for a better look.  I also rented cars for weekend trips a couple of times a year.

Man, if I were in DC I could spend a year's free time just visiting all the museums.  But that's just me.

[The Nature Boy]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

I have a car now, and I wouldn't choose to do without one.  But I chose to live without a car as a working adult for about 15 years.  Yes, being carless closes the door to exploring most rural areas pretty thoroughly.  But one can still explore interesting nooks and crannies within the city.  You get to know a city much better by bus and walking than you do driving -- in the car, you have to be watching the road more than interesting things alongside, and even if you do see something interesting there may not be a handy place to pull over for a better look.  I also rented cars for weekend trips a couple of times a year.

Man, if I were in DC I could spend a year's free time just visiting all the museums.  But that's just me.

That is a fair point, but you'd be amazed at how quickly you can visit the museums and then go "what now?" There are certain parts of nearby Appalachia that I want to explore and some Civil War stuff in Virginia that I can't get to. Bikes only really get you as far as public transit will, especially in an area with extensive public transit. I'm not saying that I don't like exploring the city, I do and I often take at least an hour each day to walk somewhere new. I find that walking is an exceptional way to explore a city and get some exercise. I'm not complaining about being in DC, I'm just complaining about not having the freedom to leave and explore the non-metro surrounding area.

I would never drive my car IN the city, I'd still use public transit and love that I have the opportunity to do so. I just miss having a car and by extension the option to leave and explore new things. I just hate the idea of thinking "I want to visit here!" and then looking into the logistics of getting there and realizing that it's impossible.

Just my two cents, but I also have an extreme case of wanderlust.

[Pete from Boston]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

Wait, the people that are not traveling around in a glass booth, isolated from sound, weather, and direct personal interaction are the ones in a bubble?

It has been explained here often, but just as a refresher, in cities like Boston or New York, not only can you live life and cover lots of needs with walking, biking, and public transit, but you can also rent a car for an hour, an afternoon, a day, or longer without much hassle.  It's a pretty manageable lifestyle, and I know a lot of well-adjusted people that do it.

[The Nature Boy]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

Wait, the people that are not traveling around in a glass booth, isolated from sound, weather, and direct personal interaction are the ones in a bubble?

It has been explained here often, but just as a refresher, in cities like Boston or New York, not only can you live life and cover lots of needs with walking, biking, and public transit, but you can also rent a car for an hour, an afternoon, a day, or longer without much hassle.  It's a pretty manageable lifestyle, and I know a lot of well-adjusted people that do it.

You can, yes. But I just hate not having the freedom to just leave for a few hours without having to go through the hassle of renting a car to do so. It's a lifestyle that I'm trying right now and that I find I don't particularly like.

I'm also not much of a city person so maybe I'm the opposite of much of my generation.

[kkt]

Are there zipcars or some equivalent there -- a service that has short-term rental cars available at many places in the city, where you can sign up for the service in advance and when the need comes rent them for an hour or two?  They got expensive if you wanted them all day, but they're handy for short-term things.

[NE2]

There are certain parts of nearby Appalachia that I want to explore and some Civil War stuff in Virginia that I can't get to. Bikes only really get you as far as public transit will, especially in an area with extensive public transit.

Manassas at least is an easy 5-mile ride from the Fairfax Connector at Centreville. Beyond that, I guess you could find someone else in the area with a car who's into that stuff and go fantasize about upholding slavery together.

[Pete from Boston]

There are certain parts of nearby Appalachia that I want to explore and some Civil War stuff in Virginia that I can't get to. Bikes only really get you as far as public transit will, especially in an area with extensive public transit.

Manassas at least is an easy 5-mile ride from the Fairfax Connector at Centreville. Beyond that, I guess you could find someone else in the area with a car who's into that stuff and go fantasize about upholding slavery together.

How do you know they won't be fantasizing about sawing off limbs without anaesthesia?

[The Nature Boy]

There are certain parts of nearby Appalachia that I want to explore and some Civil War stuff in Virginia that I can't get to. Bikes only really get you as far as public transit will, especially in an area with extensive public transit.

Manassas at least is an easy 5-mile ride from the Fairfax Connector at Centreville. Beyond that, I guess you could find someone else in the area with a car who's into that stuff and go fantasize about upholding slavery together.

I'm on the Union side here, it just so happens that most of the war was fought in this area of the country. Same with the War of 1812 actually. Some of us appreciate history and want to see where it happened, warts and all. I'm a history buff, not a damn racist.

[ET21]

I can say this article is bullshit cause I'm a millennial, I might be broke, but I love driving 

Which article: the OP's or the one that Brandon recently posted?

Of course, the latter article seems to focused on new car purchases.  Typically, used car purchases encompasses a much greater percentage of the overall vehicle purchasing pie; regardless of age demographic.

Original OP

[SignGeek101]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

To be honest, I HATE driving. If I can get everything done with the bus, bike or walking, I'll do it. Taking pictures of signs though is troublesome, but because I'm not a roadgeek (wanting to clinch routes) it isn't that bad.

[J N Winkler]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore. I'm restricted to as far as public transit can take me and that's infuriating. I've been to Tyson's Corner, Virginia more times than I care to admit just because the Metro goes there and it's about as far as I can get without using Amtrak or one of the intracity bus lines. I like exploring rural areas so neither option works particularly well for me anyway.

I'm a road geek though so maybe I derive more pleasure from driving than the average person.

I love to drive, but I did without a car for a decade, using a bicycle for most trips and either walking or taking transit for the rest.  With a bicycle, it is not too hard to get out of a reasonably compact city, so rural exploration was pretty easy.  It is not a lot of fun to own a car or attempt to use it in an area where parking is heavily rationed.

[GCrites]

Some things are better at 80mph, others are better at 1mph.

[Henry]

The way I see it, it's just not practical to live in the city and have a car, especially if one can use public transportation to get from Point A to Point B. It's another thing to have a car if there are longer trips involved.

[The Nature Boy]

That's why I've decided that I'm not a city person. I like making long trips and having a car in a city is expensive and impractical.

Thanks to those who answered my questions though. Different strokes for different strokes.

[Pete from Boston]

That's why I've decided that I'm not a city person. I like making long trips and having a car in a city is expensive and impractical.

Thanks to those who answered my questions though. Different strokes for different strokes.

There's a balance to be had if you want it.  It's not like "city person" necessarily equates with "carless."  I have both a driveway and good access to public transit.  Probably the biggest added cost for me is city insurance prices and parking tickets, both of which can be kept to a minimum if you're careful.

[wphiii]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble? I haven't had a car in 4 months and I've nearly gone crazy from not being able to leave and explore.

Long-distance driving is the only reason I own a car; I never had one until I was almost 26 and I only finally caved and bought one because it looked for a while like I was going to have to move to Nashville for my job. I'm glad I have it, especially since my s/o moved from Texas to D.C. a couple of years ago so I can do a sort of weekend commuter thing now, not to mention owning a car has been largely responsible for tapping a previously-unrealized thirst for wandering. As far as day-to-day living goes, though, I almost never drive anywhere and I'm much happier (and probably healthier) for it.

[vdeane]

Personally, I never understood how people can live their lives according to the transit schedule.  I like being able to just go somewhere wherever I want.  Plus I wouldn't want to be limited to wherever transit goes (especially since I never learned how to ride a bike; too scared of falling).

So that means I'd need a car.  And parking is NOT fun in a city; it's typically all on-street, even for residential areas, and parking in commercial areas often isn't free (and I refuse to use meters or their more modern equivalents because of the need to guess how long you'll be parked).  And on-street parking is a HUGE hassle in winter when you have to play musical parking spaces with the legality of where one can park constantly changing due to snow removal.  And traffic isn't fun either; it takes forever to drive anywhere until you get to the freeway (at least suburbs have SOME areas where you can avoid slow moving strip mall corridors; in cities, EVERYTHING moves at that pace!).

Plus I like to have services nearby rather than having to drive to the next town, so rural areas/small towns are out too, at least for anywhere I'd be living permanently (for now; maybe when I retire and no longer need to commute the equation will be different).

Hence why I'm a suburban girl.  I don't really like the sprawl of modern suburbs (my preference is for the more compact 40s/50s era development, but there's not much of it in the Albany area), but I'll take them over all the issues in urban/rural areas.

Urban areas are great for someone who likes walking/biking, is in reasonable shape (enough that the idea of hauling groceries to/from the bus stop isn't a daunting prospect), willing to be flexible enough with their routine and scheduling to accommodate the transit schedule, and like to go out often within the area but don't need to go outside of it often.  I would wager that this set of traits is more likely to be found among students and recent grads than the population at large.

[NE2]

I never learned how to ride a bike; too scared of falling.

It's never too late. I didn't learn until my late teens and now I regularly ride 5-10 miles to get places.

[english si]

This is going to come across the wrong way to some, but I don't GET people who can live without cars. Do you never want to venture outside of your bubble?

You know those things at the bottom of your legs? If you put one in front of the other, then the other in front of it, you can travel quite some distance given time. If you want to go further, throw in a metro journey and then ramble somewhere, or invest in a machine that converts walking motion into wheel rotation allowing you to travel further and faster.

[english si]

Personally, I never understood how people can live their lives according to the transit schedule.

I live with half-hourly off-peak trains. I still barely notice the schedule.

Half-hourly is rather poor for mass transit, which typically runs at TUAG frequencies of 4tph (6tph in London as they are used to better) or higher. Certainly the Underground only has schedules on one line, because the others don't need it (some lines are running a train every 2.5 minutes off-peak now) and much of it is running at every 5 minutes or less.

[Pete from Boston]

Personally, I never understood how people can live their lives according to the transit schedule.  I like being able to just go somewhere wherever I want.  Plus I wouldn't want to be limited to wherever transit goes (especially since I never learned how to ride a bike; too scared of falling).

Living with transit schedules has become much easier with the advent of arrival-time apps.  And as for going off the network, use a car.  Not every mode serves every need. 

So that means I'd need a car.  And parking is NOT fun in a city; it's typically all on-street, even for residential areas, and parking in commercial areas often isn't free (and I refuse to use meters or their more modern equivalents because of the need to guess how long you'll be parked).

When you start saying things like "I refuse to use meters" you realize you're stacking the deck, right?  Tiny towns have parking meters.  Suburbs have parking meters.  At a certain point, requirements like this add up to "being difficult."

And on-street parking is a HUGE hassle in winter when you have to play musical parking spaces with the legality of where one can park constantly changing due to snow removal.  And traffic isn't fun either; it takes forever to drive anywhere until you get to the freeway (at least suburbs have SOME areas where you can avoid slow moving strip mall corridors; in cities, EVERYTHING moves at that pace!).

Huge hassle?  What would you call having no legs, then?  It's an inconvenience for most, little more.  Almost all of the time there is not a major snow emergency going on even here; in most cities it's not even that much.  And no, everything doesn't move at a crawl.  Your experience is limited or you're exaggerating.

Urban areas are great for someone who likes walking/biking, is in reasonable shape (enough that the idea of hauling groceries to/from the bus stop isn't a daunting prospect), willing to be flexible enough with their routine and scheduling to accommodate the transit schedule, and like to go out often within the area but don't need to go outside of it often.  I would wager that this set of traits is more likely to be found among students and recent grads than the population at large.

See, urban areas are good for people who like the amenities, culture and feel, and easy accessibility they provide.  They are not repositories for people who never go anywhere else and lug everything around in a cart (though there certainly are some of those people).  Most people I know in this one own cars, use a mix of modes, and handle the minor issues of things like parking and making room for other people with calm and perspective.

I couldn't really care less where you live nor what obstacles you choose to put in your way, but I think some of the assumptions you're presenting about how it works to live in a city do not accurately reflect most city-living experiences.  Most cities are not Manhattan nor like it. 

You are right on one thing, though–we do tend to be in reasonable shape.

[J N Winkler]

Personally, I never understood how people can live their lives according to the transit schedule.

I live with half-hourly off-peak trains. I still barely notice the schedule.

The problem is that in most smaller American cities, transit buses operate more like English village buses.  For example, in this city of 400,000, there is a bus stop about fifteen minutes' walk from where I live, right in front of a supermarket, but I have never been tempted to take the bus because it runs on once-an-hour frequency, only on weekdays and Saturdays, and in one direction only.  And because it is a bus and not a train that leaves each stop no earlier than quoted in the timetable, I can easily arrive at the bus stop on time only to discover that the bus I was aiming for came and went a minute ago and I have a wait of about an hour for the next one.

Here's the schedule for the bus that serves the stop near me:

http://www.wichitatransit.org/Routes/Documents/Meridian.pdf

My stop is #2 on the schedule (13th and West):

Shelter (northbound direction)

Suppose I want to board at #2 and unboard at #1 (Towne West Mall, still a significant traffic generator and employment center even in this age of decline for enclosed shopping malls):  because the bus runs in one direction only, I have no choice but to ride nearly all of the bus route, through downtown, past the machine shops and salvage yards in south Wichita, on I-235 for a brief hop, etc.  This takes 52 minutes by bus for a journey that takes barely 15 minutes by car, which is essentially door-to-door with far less walking on either end.  Being able to make the return journey in just 8 minutes is not compensation since this still averages out to 30 minutes per journey.

Meanwhile, in Oxford, a city of about 150,000, frequency of less than 6 buses an hour each direction for each of the two competing bus lines is considered unacceptable except on the very outskirts.

Also, observe at the bus stop that there is (1) no bus pull-out, (2) no concrete bus pad so the bus can stop and accelerate without destroying the pavement structure, and (3) no dedicated bus lane.  (1) and (2) are fairly extensively used in more bus-friendly metropolitan areas (e.g. San Francisco Bay Area) while (3) is a staple of local transport in Britain.

My stop in Oxford (southbound direction)

I wouldn't count on reasonably usable transit in any American metropolitan area outside the top 20 in population, and it tends to be rather better in cities that have hung on to fairly dense rail-based mass transit (e.g. Chicago and New York).  Even in Washington, DC, which has the Metro and an extensive bus system, I once roomed with a guy who took one of our colleagues to the mall in his van to spare her the inconvenience of a two-hour bus journey for a trip that ordinarily takes just 30 minutes by car.

In Wichita, the buses are less of a public facility and more of a necessary evil for epileptics and the extremely poor--in short, those who either cannot obtain a driver's license even by Kansas' rather relaxed standards, or cannot afford to own a car.  The city council is well aware of the shortcomings of the bus system, and one of the members (who, as it happens, represents my district) is a committed advocate of improvements, but a sales tax increment that would have funded them failed at last November's election because it was rolled up with a jobs slush fund.

I own a car, so I participate in autopia and am no greenhouse-gas angel, but at least it is a 1994 model--meaning no energy has had to be spent to produce a new car in the last 21 years solely on my account--and I keep it tuned up so it can sustain at least 30 MPG US (somewhat north of its original EPA highway mileage rating) for about three-quarters of the year in my current mix of urban and rural driving.

[1995hoo]

There's a bus stop half a mile from our house, but we seldom use it for two reasons: (1) Going to the subway on the bus takes forever because the bus gets stuck in the same traffic as everyone else and it can easily take half an hour. (2) Coming home, the bus runs once an hour and we can't rely on the subway being on time to make the connection. Also, lots of people in the DC area do not necessarily work a precise x:xx AM to y:yy PM work schedule and so cannot depend on leaving work in a timely enough fashion for a fixed bus schedule. That's a serious impediment for many people.

So we usually drive to the other subway station near our house (takes ten minutes to make the drive and park). I like having the bus as a backup option and have used it when, for example, I unexpectedly had to leave the car at the mechanic overnight and I had no way to get home. My wife was about to use the bus yesterday when her office closed early due to the parking garage collapse at the Watergate (next door to where she works), but a colleague gave her a ride home. Still, it's nice to have the option of a bus in a pinch.

(Why not ride the bus to the subway station where we park, given less traffic? Takes too long due to a convoluted route designed to serve as many neighborhoods as possible. While that's what the bus should be doing, it makes little sense to ride a bus for 40 minutes when it takes 10 minutes to drive.)

[02 Park Ave]

Quote

When you start saying things like "I refuse to use meters" you realize you're stacking the deck, right?  Tiny towns have parking meters.  Suburbs have parking meters.  At a certain point, requirements like this add up to "being difficult".

Everyone has the right to establish their personal ground rules without criticism.