Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
8The data and literature demonstrate that most rural U.S. counties can be classified into three main community types stratified by their economic engine and rate of growth. In gen- eral, the growing counties tend to be either exurban (i.e., located near to and dependent on an adjacent urban center) or destination (i.e., natural amenities attract tourists, seasonal residents, and retirees). In addition to these two general cate- gories of growing communities, growth has come to other rural communities as a result of jobs created by casinos, jails or prisons, industrial agriculture, or through the development of niche economic markets. Declining counties are most typ- ically production (i.e., dependent on mining, manufacturing, or farming) and the rate of decline may be exaggerated by the communitiesâ isolation from their economic markets. Of the 2,436 rural counties, 600 (25%) can be classified as exurban, 558 (23%) can be classified as destination, and 1,279 (53%) can be classified as production communities.1 Table A-6 of Appendix A breaks down the statistical profile into the three community types of exurban, destination, and production. Additional detail on the three main community types follows. As noted earlier in the Profile of Rural America, the maps on the following pages do not portray conditions in large coun- ties as accurately as they do for smaller counties. Most rural communities can be classified into one of these three types with commonly shared issues. Of course there are always exceptions because of unique community qualities or characteristics. Some case studies illustrate these exceptions. Hutchinson, Minnesota (population 13,722), a predominantly production community is not in declineâprimarily because of a committed, successful em- C H A P T E R 3 Rural Community Types and Issues ployer and its proximity to more urban areas. Hayden, Col- orado (population 1,700), is another example of classifica- tion complexities. Hayden is a production community that is increasingly taking on exurban or bedroom community characteristics with increasing growth. Each rural commu- nity is unique, but most share the dominant characteristics and issues of these three rural community types. Exurban Communities Exurban communities are all over the country close to urban centers that provide jobs and serve retail, service, health, education, and entertainment needs; these are mapped in Figure 2. Convenient transportation access allows the exurban areas to function as bedroom communities that rely on jobs in the urban center, rather than within the local economy. Exurban communities may also serve employ- ment, shopping, and service needs, but on a smaller scale than the neighboring urban center. Table A-6 in Appendix A shows that exurban employment levels and median house- hold incomes are the highest of the three community types, largely fueled by the broader job market and higher wages and salaries available in the adjacent urban center. Communities that have shifted from a traditional reliance on a rural economic base to a level of dependence on jobs out- side of the community tend to experience significant changes in character and function. The increase in new commuting residents drives a demand for new housing and for basic goods and service needs to be met locally. Community and social welfare typically improve through increased access to jobs, educational opportunities, and health services. Increased land values due to growth can be a positive, although the increase also leads to higher property taxes, less affordable housing, and an overall increase in the cost of living. Rapid residential growth with insufficient planning or funding can lead to strain on public infrastructure (e.g., congested roadways, crowded 1A community may be classified in more than one category (i.e., a community may be in an exurban location with a production economy) or may not fall into any of the three categories. Therefore, the total number of communities classi- fied as exurban, destination, and production communities will not add up to 2,436.
schools, and inadequate water and sewer systems). Other issues related to growth include encroachment on agricultural land, scenic views, and cultural or historic resources, as well as pollution, sprawl, changing community character and values, loss of a sense of place, and competition for traditional, small businesses from large chain stores. Destination Communities These communities feature natural amenities (e.g., moun- tains, lakes, or beaches) that attract seasonal residents, retirees, and tourists. The economic base has shifted in these commu- nities from traditional rural industries (i.e., agriculture, manufacturing, or mining) to a service-based economy built around providing access to natural amenities and support of a recreational or leisure culture. These communities are focused in the West, Upper Great Lakes, New England, and to a lesser extent, scattered along the East Coast, Appalachian Mountains, the Midwest, and the Sunbelt; these are mapped in Figure 3. Table A-6 in Appendix A shows that destination communities grew by 1.5 percent annually between 2000 and 2004, slightly higher than exurban communities.4 The influx of new residents and visitors has breathed new life into many rural communities. The growth of local retail 9 Figure 2. Exurban counties in the United States.
and services leads to the creation of new and higher paying jobs and the ability to meet more daily needs locally, in- cluding health care and education. Similar to exurban com- munities, there is a demand for new housing construction and an increase in the cost of living. Higher crime rates have been identified in some destination communities. Destina- tion communities suffer from the same growth-related problems as exurban communities: encroachment on agri- cultural land, scenic views, and cultural or historic re- sources, as well as pollution, sprawl, changing community character and values, loss of a sense of place, and competi- tion for traditional, small businesses from large chain stores. Although these concerns should not be understated for ex- urban communities, the livelihood of destination commu- nities depends more directly on the preservation of local amenities and characterâthus preservation becomes an even more urgent need. Production Communities Production communities tend to be focused on a single industry that has experienced decline, such as agriculture, manufacturing, or mining. They have not diversified the job base and are isolated to the extent that they cannot depend on surrounding job centers. Evolving the economic base is often slow and difficult. For example, the conditions needed for qual- 10 Figure 3. Destination counties in the United States.
ity farmingâflat and open land, hot and humid summers, and wet winters, are not the conditions typically associated with high natural amenity areas that attract new residents and in turn a more diverse economy. Declining communities are concen- trated in the Great Plains, Corn Belt, Mississippi Delta, and Appalachia; these are mapped in Figure 4. Production communities are characterized by a loss of population and jobs. More specifically, these communities cannot retain the young and more highly educated segments of the population who leave to seek opportunities elsewhere. Household income is declining in these communities, and poverty levels are rising. Substandard housing is more com- mon in declining production communities and they tend to lack the capital necessary to improve existing housing or construct new housing. Some have developed large-scale industries that provide jobs, but these may attract more migrant workers than local residents. The key for declining communities is to sustain their vitality. This requires preserving public infrastructure and resources; developing new economic bases such as niche markets (e.g., handmade tapestries, high-end furniture, and technical equip- ment); creating collaborative business ventures and consoli- dated government services to leverage resources; improving physical and virtual connections to regional, national, and in- ternational markets; enhancing local education and skills; and maintaining community character. 11 Figure 4. Production counties in the United States.
Accessibility and Livability Challenges Faced by Rural Communities Rural communities face a number of challenges in provid- ing accessibility, the transportation connection between the community and its needs, and livability, the characteristics that make the community a desirable place to live. The challenges identified through the project survey, focus groups, and case studies are described in more detail below. Accessibility Rural communities depend on accessibility to economic drivers in order to support the community. Accessibility includes regional connections outside of the community (typically for passenger vehicles, freight, or public transit) and local connections within the community (for pedestrians, cyclists, passenger vehicles, or public transit). Challenges to providing access by road range from congestion in growing communities to isolation in declining communities. Rural isolation may be further exacerbated in the future by rising fuel prices, declining oil supplies, and emissions standards tightened to preserve air quality. Nearly every community struggles with insufficient fund- ing to build new roads, improve substandard or unpaved roads, maintain deteriorating roads, and upgrade or replace substandard and deteriorating bridges. The funding problem is exacerbated by the shift in freight transport from the rail system to trucks. This shift has led to the closures of many railroad lines and to increased truck traffic volumes along rural routes and through town centers, detracting from community livability and increasing road maintenance costs.5 An effect of limited funding and the rail-to-truck shift is that traffic fatality rates per vehicle mile of travel on rural roads are almost 3 times higher than on urban roads. Con- tributing factors include substandard road design, higher travel speeds, driver fatigue, and longer emergency vehicle response times. A high proportion of traffic fatalities involve freight vehicles.6 A second safety challenge is with road-rail crossings. Roughly 95 percent of all rail-related fatalities are caused by collisions at road-rail crossings due to inadequate crossing design, warning systems, education, enforcement, or by excessive and poorly located crossings.7 Serious challenges also exist to providing accessibility and minimizing isolation for people who cannot drive or do not have access to an automobile. Roughly 50 percent of rural intercity passenger rail service was lost when Amtrak began operating in 1971. The decrease in rural passenger rail services has increased the isolation and automobile dependence of rural communities. Amtrakâs funding has been continuously under threat in recent years, putting the remaining rail services at risk. Only 30 percent of online survey respondents reported that their community is served by passenger rail. More than half of those respondents described their rail service as âpoor.â The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) produces an annual report detailing the coverage of intercity transporta- tion services in rural areas across the country. The 2005 report indicated that 93 percent of the rural population is served by some level of year-round, intercity transportation service, which is defined as the percent of population living within 25 miles of a minor intercity transportation facility or within 75 miles of a major intercity transportation facility (such as a large hub airport). Intercity bus service covers 89 percent of the rural population, air service covers 71 per- cent, and intercity rail covers 42 percent. The report does not consider the frequency or the quality of the transportation service or the accessibility of the transportation facility to the rural population within the pre-defined radii.8 Transit service, within and between communities, is difficult to provide in rural areas due to the high cost of providing ser- vice to a dispersed, small population. Nearly 40 percent of rural residents live in communities with no local transit service.9 Online survey responses indicate that rural communities are almost twice as likely to be served by demand-responsive tran- sit as by fixed-route transit. The Burlington, Iowa, case study demonstrates an example of providing flexible transit service in a small town (25,000 population). The Burlington Urban Service (BUS) provides service on 40-minute intervals during the morning commute period and demand-responsive service during the rest of the business day. Internet use in rural areas is roughly 15 percent less than in urban or suburban areas. Contributing factors include the lack of internet service, lack of choice in service, low connec- tion speeds, and low education or income. Rural users are more likely to depend on internet use from a third place (i.e., somewhere other than home or work). This limits opportu- nities for rural residents to work out of their homes or at local telework centers, contributing to the continued need to drive long distances or move away from rural communities in order to work.10 Accessibility challenges differ from community to com- munity as discussed below. Exurban Communities The main economic driver of an exurban communityâs economy is a nearby urban center that provides most of its jobs, shops, and services. As such, the accessibility challenge for an exurban community is to maintain or improve auto- mobile and transit mobility between the community and the urban center. As an exurban community grows, the links connecting it to the urban center often become congested, reducing accessibility to economic engines. Meanwhile, 12
population growth is typically followed by an increase in local shops, services, and entertainment. The local accessibility challenge for exurban communities is to develop appropriate transportation networks to connect residents to these new commercial centers. Hayden, Colorado, is a case study of an emerging exurban community that took steps to ensure appropriate connectivity between new development and their existing road network. Destination Communities The economy of a destination community depends on bringing visitors or seasonal residents in from outside the community, thereby generating a need for high accessibility to the community from interstates and highways, airports, or other key links to regional and national population centers. Once in the community, providing accessibility from housing or lodging to the amenities that attract visitors, such as local shops, services, and entertainment, is vitally important. The amenity link is especially challenging for communities adja- cent to National Parks or other heavily visited destinations, because access roads can become heavily congested, and parking lots can be overwhelmed. The Sedona, Arizona, case study is an example of a destination community that struggled with this issue and addressed it by integrating multi-modal transit planning, street connectivity, and access management strategies. For amenities and destinations within the commu- nity, the challenge is to provide efficient pedestrian, cycling, transit, and automobile connections from hotels, condos, and other short-term or seasonal housing. Production Communities Production communities rely on mining, manufacturing, farming, forestry, or other resource-based economies. For these communities, economic vitality depends on the communityâs ability to access resources and deliver resources or value-added products to market. As a result, heavy truck traffic on main streets or through some production communities, is a common concern. This was a challenge faced in both the Cutler-Orosi, California, and Hutchinson, Minnesota, case studies. Many production communities are attempting to diversify the local economy and may require new types of access to reach new resources or markets. The local accessibility challenge for many production communities is to retain local shops and services and to provide multimodal transportation connections to these destinations. Securing funding for road improvements and transit service in production communities is a major challenge. Livability Land use and transportation decisions can influence factors of community livability such as the character of development, quality of the environment, and public health. It is important for a community to recognize the unique, desirable features that originally brought people to the community and/or cur- rently attract new residents. Effective planning of land use and transportation can be used to revitalize, maintain, or enhance those characteristics. For example, one challenge in many towns is that the traditional âMain Streetâ also serves as a state highway or other high-volume roadway. This can create a barrier to developing safe and accessible town centers that are pedestrian-friendly and serve as an attractive focal point for the community. Preserving historic and rural character is a major chal- lenge as communities change. More specifically, the chal- lenge is to design new buildings that fit the scale and aesthetics of the community while preserving historic build- ings that serve or served an important role in the commu- nity. Housing is a particular concern, because exurban and destination communities tend to struggle with maintaining the affordability of housing while production communities strain to maintain or improve the quality of housing. Growth tends to bring additional traffic, so another challenge is to minimize the effect of traffic on the community, especially cut-through traffic in residential areas and truck traffic along main streets. Rural character is often defined, not by the built environ- ment, but by pastoral, forested, or mountainous landscapes. A challenge in many rural communities is protecting these places from development in an effort to maintain the open and scenic character of the area. The planners and communities in the Northwest Vermont case study struggled to balance regional growth with maintaining their rural characteristics. Within the developed centers, communities must minimize the effects of land use development and transportation systems on air, water, and land quality. In communities with a current or past production economy, environmental challenges may also include the redevelopment of abandoned or contaminated sites and buildings. Improving public health is another livability challengeâ rates of obesity and obesity-related diseases are higher in rural areas than in urban areas. Unhealthy diets, automobile de- pendence, a built environment that does not encourage recre- ational activity, and limited opportunities to integrate physical activity into daily life are the major contributing factors.11 13
