<%BANNER%>

Transportation Options in Rural Communities

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0025098/00001

Material Information

Title: Transportation Options in Rural Communities The Costs of Travel for Low-Income Populations in Alachua County
Physical Description: 1 online resource (153 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Barone, Cristina
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Urban and Regional Planning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Urban and Regional Planning thesis, M.A.U.R.P.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL COMMUNITIES: THE COSTS OF TRAVEL FOR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS IN ALACHUA COUNTY By Cristina Barone August 2009 Chair: Ruth Steiner Cochair: Kristin Larsen Major: Urban and Regional Planning On average, American families spend more on transportation than on health care, education, or food and usually all three combined. Transportation is the second-largest expense after housing for an average family. The combined costs of transportation and housing accounted for 52% of the average family s budget in 2003 (McCann, 2005). High transportation costs can be particularly burdensome on low-income families. Those earning less than $13,000 pay an average of 42% of their income for the purchase, operation, and maintenance of their automobiles alone (STTP, 2006). This thesis focuses specifically on the burdens facing by rural, low-income families residing in Alachua County public housing trying to seek mobility in an automobile-dominated landscape. A case study of Alachua County transportation solutions to link residents of outlying cities to Gainesville provides insight into what types of programs have been successful in the past. Personal interviews focused on determining daily travel habits, common transportation-related problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasing and cost burden, and possible solutions. Problems in some projects have been a lack of community input and participation. Specifically, this research seeks to account for problems faced by needy populations through engaging a dimension of Alachua County s transportation disadvantaged in a dialogue regarding their transportation problems and needs. Overall, most respondents in this study view automobiles as a necessity. Most of those without an automobile aspire to have one. A car is a symbol of freedom, especially for those who grew up relying on others. When moving to rural areas, many respondents accept the inevitability of driving. Several respondents note the drive until you qualify type of tradeoff that comes with cheaper housing in the country. Despite the freedom that owning an automobile symbolizes, high gas prices emphasize the fact that freedom is conditional. High transportation costs create hard choices. Most people give up freedom of mobility. Many others give up more serious things, such as their health. Even if respondents do not perceive themselves as personally affected by high gas prices, there is universal agreement that high gas prices create hardship for others. However, as gas prices increase, respondents report an increased willingness to utilize alternative forms of transportation. No easy solution exists to solving the transportation problems of low-income rural residents. Several solutions are proposed in this study. Childcare would assist single parents by freeing up daytime schedules to allow for full work days. Providing job training could help low-skilled workers gain additional education necessary to receiving a job. Transportation services should incorporate a mobility strategy to link people from their place of residence to services and employment in other cities. Services should be offered at a reasonable cost to users. Coordination must occur among various local government agencies. Planning should involve a participatory strategy to gain public support. Education about the costs of automobile ownership should be a component of the process. Further research could examine housing and transportation affordability in rural areas as compared to urban areas, including issues such as the amount of additional transportation expenditures, the amount of wealth lost by lack of access to jobs, and additional cost of groceries. Additional research could also link the hardships faced by those with lack of transportation with their access to nutritious food and doctors. Case studies should be conducted in order to determine the types of transportation solutions that are beneficial and proven to work for rural communities.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Cristina Barone.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.U.R.P.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Steiner, Ruth L.
Local: Co-adviser: Larsen, Kristin E.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0025098:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0025098/00001

Material Information

Title: Transportation Options in Rural Communities The Costs of Travel for Low-Income Populations in Alachua County
Physical Description: 1 online resource (153 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Barone, Cristina
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Urban and Regional Planning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Urban and Regional Planning thesis, M.A.U.R.P.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL COMMUNITIES: THE COSTS OF TRAVEL FOR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS IN ALACHUA COUNTY By Cristina Barone August 2009 Chair: Ruth Steiner Cochair: Kristin Larsen Major: Urban and Regional Planning On average, American families spend more on transportation than on health care, education, or food and usually all three combined. Transportation is the second-largest expense after housing for an average family. The combined costs of transportation and housing accounted for 52% of the average family s budget in 2003 (McCann, 2005). High transportation costs can be particularly burdensome on low-income families. Those earning less than $13,000 pay an average of 42% of their income for the purchase, operation, and maintenance of their automobiles alone (STTP, 2006). This thesis focuses specifically on the burdens facing by rural, low-income families residing in Alachua County public housing trying to seek mobility in an automobile-dominated landscape. A case study of Alachua County transportation solutions to link residents of outlying cities to Gainesville provides insight into what types of programs have been successful in the past. Personal interviews focused on determining daily travel habits, common transportation-related problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasing and cost burden, and possible solutions. Problems in some projects have been a lack of community input and participation. Specifically, this research seeks to account for problems faced by needy populations through engaging a dimension of Alachua County s transportation disadvantaged in a dialogue regarding their transportation problems and needs. Overall, most respondents in this study view automobiles as a necessity. Most of those without an automobile aspire to have one. A car is a symbol of freedom, especially for those who grew up relying on others. When moving to rural areas, many respondents accept the inevitability of driving. Several respondents note the drive until you qualify type of tradeoff that comes with cheaper housing in the country. Despite the freedom that owning an automobile symbolizes, high gas prices emphasize the fact that freedom is conditional. High transportation costs create hard choices. Most people give up freedom of mobility. Many others give up more serious things, such as their health. Even if respondents do not perceive themselves as personally affected by high gas prices, there is universal agreement that high gas prices create hardship for others. However, as gas prices increase, respondents report an increased willingness to utilize alternative forms of transportation. No easy solution exists to solving the transportation problems of low-income rural residents. Several solutions are proposed in this study. Childcare would assist single parents by freeing up daytime schedules to allow for full work days. Providing job training could help low-skilled workers gain additional education necessary to receiving a job. Transportation services should incorporate a mobility strategy to link people from their place of residence to services and employment in other cities. Services should be offered at a reasonable cost to users. Coordination must occur among various local government agencies. Planning should involve a participatory strategy to gain public support. Education about the costs of automobile ownership should be a component of the process. Further research could examine housing and transportation affordability in rural areas as compared to urban areas, including issues such as the amount of additional transportation expenditures, the amount of wealth lost by lack of access to jobs, and additional cost of groceries. Additional research could also link the hardships faced by those with lack of transportation with their access to nutritious food and doctors. Case studies should be conducted in order to determine the types of transportation solutions that are beneficial and proven to work for rural communities.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Cristina Barone.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.U.R.P.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Steiner, Ruth L.
Local: Co-adviser: Larsen, Kristin E.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0025098:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL COMMUNITIES: THE COSTS OF TRAVEL FOR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS IN ALACHUA COUNTY By CRISTINA BARONE A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN URB AN AND REGIONAL PLANNING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009 1

PAGE 2

2009 Cristina Barone 2

PAGE 3

To Mom and Dad 3

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document is the result of knowledge and encouragement gained from a wide variety of people. First, I would like to thank Dr. Ruth Steiner and Dr. Kr istin Larsen for taking time out of their hectic schedules to read my work and provide me with their insights. More specifically, I want to th ank Dr. Steiner for being the first to introduce me to many of the concepts discussed in this paper. She first made me realiz e exactly how much transportation affects each and every one of us. I would also lik e to thank Dr. Kristin Larsen for sharing her enthusiasm about affordable housing with me. I would like to thank Doug Robinson at RTS for giving me the opportunity to foster my interest in helping people get where they need to go. I want to thank Bill ODell at the Shimberg Cent er for Housing Studies for encouraging me to pursue this research topic. I also want to thank Dr. Mark Brennan in Family, Youth, and Community Sciences for teaching a city-loving planner to care about rural America, too. Furthermore, I want to thank all of the City and County officials I met with for taking time out of their busy work schedules to answer all of my questions. Of course, I cant leave out my family and frie nds. I would like to thank TJ Harris for his proofreading skills and encour agement throughout my educational career. I would like to especially thank my mom and dad for believing in me and helping me become the first Barone with a Masters degree! Most of all, I would like to thank the residents of Wal do, Hawthorne, Archer, Newberry, and Alachua for sharing th eir stories with me. 4

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................7 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................9 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ ..13 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................16 Population Loss in Cities and Growth of the Suburbs ............................................................16 Commuting Costs ...................................................................................................................18 Housing and Transportation Affordability .............................................................................20 Social Equity: Housing, Jobs, and Transportation ..................................................................25 Spatial Mismatch and Drive Until You Qualify ..............................................................28 Jobs-Housing Balance .....................................................................................................31 Location Efficiency .........................................................................................................34 Solutions .................................................................................................................................38 Rural Transportation ...............................................................................................................40 Summary .................................................................................................................................45 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 48 Data Collection and Analysis .................................................................................................48 4 OVERVIEW OF ALACHUA COUNTY ...............................................................................52 Alachua County Demographic Characteristics .......................................................................52 Alachua County Transportation Services in Rural Communities ...........................................71 Demand Response Public Transportation Service ..........................................................71 The Dignity Project .........................................................................................................75 Archer Shuttle ..................................................................................................................76 City of Alachua Transit System (CATS) .........................................................................77 Greenride .........................................................................................................................79 Deviated Fixed Route ......................................................................................................80 Summary ..........................................................................................................................84 5

PAGE 6

5 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... ..........86 Accessibility assessment .........................................................................................................86 Vehicle Access ........................................................................................................................87 Employment ............................................................................................................................88 Sacrificed Mobility .................................................................................................................91 Difficulty Paying Necessary Expenses ...................................................................................92 Additional Difficulties and Sacrifices ....................................................................................93 Moving for Improved Access .................................................................................................95 Access to Groceries ................................................................................................................95 Park and Ride ..........................................................................................................................96 Public Transportation ..............................................................................................................97 Carpooling ..............................................................................................................................99 Summary .................................................................................................................................99 6 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................. .....101 Accessibility Assessment ......................................................................................................101 Recommendations .................................................................................................................101 7 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS ......................106 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................106 Further Research Recommendations ....................................................................................108 APPENDIX A SAMPLE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ................................................................................110 B RESPONDENT COMMENTS .............................................................................................112 Waldo ....................................................................................................................................112 Hawthorne .............................................................................................................................115 Archer ...................................................................................................................................119 Newberry ..............................................................................................................................122 Alachua .................................................................................................................................125 C RESPONDENT COMMENTS TABLES .............................................................................130 D ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................137 LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................................................148 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................153 6

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Completed Interviews ........................................................................................................51 4-1 Alachua County Population Estimates ...............................................................................56 4-2 Vehicle Availability Distribution .......................................................................................56 4-3 Household Income Distribution .........................................................................................56 4-4 Population and Age Distribution .......................................................................................61 4-5 Labor Force Participation ..................................................................................................61 4-6 Journey-to-Work Mode Split .............................................................................................61 4-7 Alachua County Comprehensive Plan ...............................................................................67 4-8 Travel Time to Work (2000) ..............................................................................................68 4-9 Travel Time to Work (2007) ..............................................................................................68 4-12 Alachua County TD Population in 2007 ............................................................................72 4-13 Alachua County Demand Response Passenger Trip Purposes ..........................................72 4-14 MV Transportation Ridership by Jurisdiction ...................................................................74 5-1 Accessibility Analysis According to Respondents ............................................................87 5-2 Mode of Travel for Respondents Lacking Automobiles ....................................................88 5-3 Vehicle Availability ...........................................................................................................88 5-4 Vehicle Reliability .............................................................................................................88 5-5 Household Employment ....................................................................................................89 5-6 Location of Employment ...................................................................................................89 5-7 Employment and Vehicle Availability Cross Tabulation ..................................................90 5-8 Respondent Reporte d Sacrificed Mobility .........................................................................91 5-9 Average Retail Gasoline Prices, 2007 and 2008 ................................................................92 5-10 Respondent Difficulty Paying Expenses ............................................................................93 7

PAGE 8

5-11 Reported Additional Difficulties and Sacrifices ................................................................94 5-12 Respondent Willingness to Move ......................................................................................95 5-13 Preferred Grocery Store Location ......................................................................................96 5-14 Respondent Opinion about Park and Ride .........................................................................97 5-15 Respondent Opinion about Public Transportation .............................................................98 5-16 Respondent Opinion about Carpooling ..............................................................................99 6-1 Rural Community Businesses ..........................................................................................101 6-2 Accessibility Assessment .................................................................................................102 8

PAGE 9

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-2 Alachua County Population Density ..................................................................................55 4-3 Alachua County Housing Density .....................................................................................57 4-4 Poverty Level .....................................................................................................................58 4-5 Vehicle Ownership .............................................................................................................59 4-6 Alachua County Youth Population ....................................................................................62 4-7 Alachua County Elderly Population ..................................................................................63 4-8 Percent of Commuters Tr aveling by Car, Van, or Truck ...................................................64 4-9 Percent of Commut ers Traveling by Transit ......................................................................65 4-10 Commute Time Gr eater than 30 Minutes ..........................................................................69 4-11 Commute Time Gr eater than 45 Minutes ..........................................................................70 4-12 Greenride Users by Starting Address .................................................................................81 4-13 Greenride Users by Destination Address ...........................................................................82 9

PAGE 10

Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL COMMUNITIES: THE COSTS OF TRAVEL FOR LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS IN ALACHUA COUNTY By Cristina Barone August 2009 Chair: Ruth Steiner Cochair: Kristin Larsen Major: Urban and Regional Planning On average, American families spend more on transportation than on health care, education, or foodand usually all three comb ined. Transportation is the second-largest expenseafter housingfor an average family. The combined costs of transportation and housing accounted for 52% of the average familys budget in 2003 (McCann, 2005). High transportation costs can be particularly burdens ome on low-income families. Those earning less than $13,000 pay an average of 42% of thei r income for the purchase, operation, and maintenance of their automobiles alone (STTP, 2006). This thesis focuses specifically on the burdens facing by rural, low-income families residing in Alachua County public housing trying to seek mobility in an automobile-dominated landscape. A case study of Alachua County transportation solutions to link residents of outlying cities to Gainesville provides insight into what types of programs have been successful in the past. Personal interviews focused on determin ing daily travel habits, common transportationrelated problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasi ng and cost burden, and possible solutions. Problems in some projects have been a lack of community input and participation. Specifically, this research seeks to account for problems faced by needy 10

PAGE 11

populations through engaging a dimension of Alac hua Countys transporta tion disadvantaged in a dialogue regarding their trans portation problems and needs. Overall, most respondents in this study vi ew automobiles as a n ecessity. Most of those without an automobile aspire to have one. A car is a symbol of freedom, especially for those who grew up relying on others. When moving to rural areas, many respondents accept the inevitability of driving. Several respondents note the drive until you qualify type of tradeoff that comes with cheaper housing in the country. Desp ite the freedom that owning an automobile symbolizes, high gas prices emphasize the fact th at freedom is conditional. High transportation costs create hard choices. Most people give up fr eedom of mobility. Many others give up more serious things, such as their he alth. Even if respondents do not pe rceive themselves as personally affected by high gas prices, there is universal ag reement that high gas prices create hardship for others. However, as gas prices increase, respondents report an increased willingness to utilize alternative forms of transportation. No easy solution exists to solving the transportation problems of low-income rural residents. Several solutions are proposed in th is study. Childcare would assist single parents by freeing up daytime schedules to allow for full wo rk days. Providing job tr aining could help lowskilled workers gain additional education necessary to receiving a job. Transportation services should incorporate a mobility strategy to link peop le from their place of re sidence to services and employment in other cities. Services should be o ffered at a reasonable cost to users. Coordination must occur among various local government agenci es. Planning should involve a participatory strategy to gain public support. Education about the costs of automobile ownership should be a component of the process. 11

PAGE 12

12 Further research could examine housing and tr ansportation affordability in rural areas as compared to urban areas, including issues su ch as the amount of additional transportation expenditures, the amount of wealth lost by la ck of access to jobs, and additional cost of groceries. Additional research could also link the hardships faced by those with lack of transportation with their access to nutritious food and doctors. Ca se studies should be conducted in order to determine the types of transportation so lutions that are beneficial and proven to work for rural communities.

PAGE 13

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION An important aspect of social equity in transportation pla nning deals with transportation expenses and the intense burden that automobile s place on low-income households. On average, transportation is the second-largest expenseaf ter housingfor families. Costs are rising in general, and low-income and working families are having trouble keeping up. Real income has been declining while gas and other consumer prices are increasing. From 1990 to 2000, the combined costs of transportation and housing in creased from 41.7% to 52.4% of median income, while the percentage change in incomes was onl y 0.3%, adjusted for inflation (Haas, Dawkins & Casey, 2006). Urban form and spatial patterns ofte n make car ownership essential. The ensuing increase in car ownership has increased transportation costs among those with a yearly income of less than $10,000 by 57% between 1992 and 2000 (C anby, 2003). The mismatch of job location and the placement of low-income housing crea tes long commutes and in creased transportation costs precisely for those househol ds that cannot afford it. While the average household in the United States spends about 20% of their yearly expenditures on transportation, the lowest quint ile spends up to 42% on transportation (STTP, 2006). Furthermore, the necessity of owning one or more vehicles places home-ownership out of reach for many low-income families, and the hou seholds prevented from purchasing a home due to transportation costs are further punished by the depreciating value of automobiles over time. For example, the disparity between investments in housing or vehicles can be demonstrated by the variance in what occurs to an investme nt of $30,000 over a period of 10 years: $30,000 invested in owning a car can be expected to re sult in just $3,000 in equity while investing $30,000 in owning a house on average yields more than $13,000 in equity (STTP, 2006). Lowincome households are also forced to cut expenditures in areas such as education; the percentage 13

PAGE 14

of household members with college educations is significantly lower than higher-income households. Low-income families spend less on entertainment and cultural opportunities. Furthermore, residents of spatially segreg ated areasespecially low-income households lacking a carface many barriers th at are transportation-related. L ack of mobilitythe capacity, capability, and opportunity to moveis a contri buting factor to the difficulties many rural residents face in finding and keeping a job. Difficulties are esp ecially evident in the large proportion of low-income populations in rural areas without the means to pay for transportation (Maggeid, 1982). The low-density, dispersed form of rural communities makes viable transportation necessary in order to reach churches, markets and gr ocery stores, and jobs (Gillis, 1989). Some solutions exist, though no consensus exists how to fix the transportation-housing problem. Devajyoti (2004) suggests that jobs need to be relocated into cen tral cities, low-income residents need to move closer to the wealth of suburban jobs, and transportation needs to be more successful in serving suburban populations. More concretely, Barbara Lipmans (2006) report for the Center for Housing Policy suggests reducin g the costs of commuting by car by implementing policies to encourage car shar ing or make car ownership mo re accessible and affordable (through subsidized loans or insurance, for exam ple) (p. 18). Increasing ease of access to jobs for low-income populations improves the likelihood of wealth accumulation. But the issue is daunting, a nd these suggestions do not offer long-term solutions to the transportation-housing problem. One-third of the American populati on is transportation disadvantaged. This figure includes more than 32 million elderly citizensa number that will only increase as the Baby Boomer generation reaches retirement age. The U.S. Census Bureau predicts that there will be 62 million people a bove the age of 65 by 2025 (Bailey, 2004). Not all 14

PAGE 15

15 low-income and transportation-disadvantaged house holds are centralized w ithin cities. Since the quality of public transit correlates directly with de nsity, the availability of mass transit is insufficient in sprawling urban areas. With an aging population and gas pr ices inevitably rising, the transportation-housing problem will not disappear. This paper focuses specifically on the burdens endured by very low-income families living in public housing trying to seek mobility in an automobile-dominated landscape. Research will focus on low-income households residing in Alachua County Housing Authority public housing in five rural communities in Alachua County, Florida. Income thresholds for residents are based on HUD specificationsa family of four, for example, must earn $29,900 or less per year. Personal interviews will focus on determin ing daily travel habits, common transportationrelated problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasi ng and cost burden, and possible solutions. A case study of Alachua County transportation solutions to link residents of outlying cities to Gainesville will provide insi ght into what types of programs have been successful in the past. Problems in some project s have been a lack of community input and ownership. This research seeks to account for problems faced by needy populations through engaging a dimension of Alachua Countys transportation disadvantaged in a dialogue regarding their transportation problems and needs. A mo re complete understanding of the problems and possible solutions facing Alachua Countys low-inco me residents will assist decision-makers in more adequately addressing transportation needs in the future.

PAGE 16

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Transportation mobility is a necessity. Acce ss to jobs, doctors appointments, education, shopping, and recreation all re quire the ability to travel. In turn, the ability to effectively travel allows people to accumulate wealth by provi ding access to employment. Transportation should be a tool to help people trav el where they need to go. Unfo rtunately, for many low-income families across the United States, it becomes a burden. Transportation costs have risen dramatically in the last several decades. The aver age family now spends about 20% of its income on transportation alone. Working fam ilies making between $20,000 and $50,000 face an increased burdenthey spend nearly 30% per year for transportati on (Lipman, 2006). This chapter enumerates the transportation-related is sues faced by low-income households across the United States in order to determine universal themes regarding the overbearing costs of transportation. Population Loss in Cities and Growth of the Suburbs Cities throughout the United Statesparticularly old, industrial cities located in the Northeast and Midwesthave b een facing disinvestment and population loss for about half a century. After World War II, large numbers of mostly white families took the opportunity of cheap mortgages in the suburbs and vacated th e city (Bonham, Spilka & Restorfer, 2002). The dream of owning a single-family home with a yard seemed a more ideal place to raise a family than the chaotic, crime-ridden city. Even though th e suburban dream played a significant role in decentralization, the policy decisions of the Fede ral government also impacted families. Without the massive financial subsidies provided through mort gage assistance and the construction of highways, the flight from the cities would have been much mo re difficult (Bonham et al., 2002). 16

PAGE 17

Thus, the reasons for disinvestment in cities are numerous. Three trendsindustry moving out of the city, population migration to the suburbs, and urba n decentralizationhave caused massive population loss (Bonham et al., 2002) Many cities throughout the Northeast and MidwestDetroit, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Philad elphia, for examplerelied on labor-intensive industry to supply numerous jobs to their popula tions. When industry relo cated outside of the city, many workers were forced to follow or face joblessness (Bonham et al., 2002). For example, between 1979 and 1987, the City of Milwaukee lost almost 30,000 jobs. In the same time period, Milwaukee suburbs gained more th an 36,000 jobs (Rosenbloom, 1992). Those that remained in the cities frequen tly encountered dislocation due to urban renewal programs. Though supposedly initiated to improve cities, urban renewal often created vacant land in locations that once housed residents before the program forced them to move (Bonham et al., 2002). According to Eisenberg (2004), the transf ormation of Americas economic structure from an industrial to a service econom y, the availability of mortgage credit, technological advances, and consumer demand all contributed to the increasing prominence of the suburbs (p. 3). Additional incentives to leave the city for the suburbs included better schools, more space, and less crime. Because the demand for low-skilled, poorly e ducated labor has dramatically decreased with the diminishing amount of industrial jobs located in the city, the overwhelming proportion of low-income populations face a perpetuating cycl e of joblessness. According to Peter Hall (2002), joblessness presents a para dox. While some low-skilled jobs still existed in cities, the qualifications had been raised, they were so mewhat insecure, and many blacks would no longer do them because they felt that they would lose their self-respect. Beside s, for members of the underclass, illegal activities were more interesting and profitable (p. 455). And so the cycle 17

PAGE 18

continuedchildren grew up in households with out the example of a working adult, never learning the importance of work (Hall, 2002). Most workers living in the suburbs now commute to other locations in the suburbsnot the city (Bonham et al., 2002). In the minds of many Americans, the dream is still to obtain wealth, leave the city, an d move to the suburbs. In the last 20 years or so, the trend of moving to the suburbs has become apparent in populat ions of higher-income minority groups, with increasing populations of African-Americans, Lati nos, and Asian immigrants taking residence in the inner-ring suburbs (Bonham et al., 2002). Because successful minority families are abandoning the cities, those that remain are incr easingly isolated in disadvantaged communities, segregated by race and class (Bonham et al., 2002). For these reasons, many cities are in a state of crisis. De troit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Chicago lost an average of 37% of their populations between 1960 and 1990. In the same period, the suburban population of th ese cities increased by an average of 32% (Bonham et al., 2002). In most instances, suburban job centers locate within moderateto highincome neighborhoods with higher housing costs. These neighborhoods are frequently comprised of low density single-family homes (Haas, Sa nchez & Dawkins, 2006). Urban form in the suburbs was dictated by a sepa ration of uses, making autom obile ownership practically mandatory in many locations. In turn, accommod ating the automobile in policy and planning became common (Eisenberg, 2004). Commuting Costs Between 1960 and 1980, in keeping with populati on loss in center ci ties, 83% of jobs growth was in the suburbs (Rosenbloom, 1992; Hughes, 1995). Eisenberg (2004) cites commutes of two hours or more in many metropolitan areas. In Atlanta, the average commuter drives more than 34 miles a day to and from work (Eise nberg, 2004). Most commuting trips now occur from 18

PAGE 19

suburb-to-suburb, not suburb to central city. By 1980, about five million Americans commuted from the central city to the suburbs, and 5.6% of those trips were by transit, despite inherent difficulties in using public transit in suburban areas In the same year, less than 2% of suburb-tosuburb commuting was by transit (Rosenbloom 1992). Since private, single-occupant automobiles are the most common form of commu ting, a central city resi dent without a car has extremely limited regional mobility. Average commuting distances have increa sed over time. Between 1980 and 1997, vehicle miles traveled increased by 68%, meaning less time for everything else including leisure and families. According to a HUD study, suburban hous eholds drive 3300 more miles a year than urban dwellers (as cited in Eise nberg, 2004). Job dispersal especia lly affects low-skilled workers with low levels of mobility. In fact, low-income households are less than one-sixth as likely to own a vehicle as higher income households (S anchez, 1999). Furthermore, because of the increasing commonality of long commutes, unemp loyed low-income inner-city residents are forced to compete with a much larger radius of workers (Schell, 2000). Congestion has many byproducts including wasted time and fuel. The total cost of congestion, which accounts for the amount of wasted time and fuel, is $707 per traveler in urban areas (Schrank & Lomax, 2007). Costs are risi ngin 2005, the total cost of congestion was about $78.2 billion in the 437 urban areas, compar ed to $73.1 billion in 2004 (Schrank & Lomax, 2007). In 2005, the average amount of wasted fuel pe r traveler in 437 study areas was 26 gallons, or 2.9 billion gallons tota l (Schrank & Lomax, 2007). Research has revealed some of the nega tive physical effects of spending time in congestion, including increased blood pressu re (Handy, 2006). Research has also linked increased driving levels to obesity. One study in Atlanta found that each additional hour of 19

PAGE 20

driving per day was associated with a 6% incr ease in the probability of being obese (Frank, Andresen, & Schmid, 2004). Drivers stuck in congestion are exposed to elevated environmental hazards, including air pollutants such as carbon monoxide and particulate matter (Handy, 2006). Highway travel can be life or death. In 2002, mo re than 42,000 fatalities were linked to highway travel, and almost 3 million people were injured in highway crashes (Handy, 2006). Housing and Transportation Affordability But commuting costs are not the only costs of transportation. On average, American families spend more on transportation than on health care, education, or foodand usually all three combined. Transportati on is the second-largest expe nseafter housingfor a given family. The combined costs of transportation and housing accounted for 52% of the average familys budget in 2003 (McCann, 2005). Househol ds making moderate incomes spend 25 to 38% of their wages on energy aloneutilitie s and gasoline combined (Bernstein, Haas, Heffernan, Markarewicz, Scheu & St ar, 2007). When fuel prices incr ease, costs are even greater. Policies often fail to account for the expenditures of most families who have no choice but to spend heavily on transportation, in part because of decades of inadequate investment in public transit (Canby, 2003, p. 4). High tr ansportation costs can be particularly burdensome on lowincome families. Those earning less than $13,000 in annual income pay 42% of that income for the purchase, operation, and maintenan ce of their automobiles (STTP, 2006). Housing costs by themselves are not insigni ficant. Households are considered cost burdened if housing and related costs exceed 30% of gross income. By 2005, at least 13 million families in America paid more than half their income for housing and more than 4 million of these families worked full-time jobs (Lipman, 2005). In contrast with dominant stereotypes, these households include teachers, police officers, firefighters, and service workers, and most are homeowners living in the suburbs. Higher inco me households may face housing cost burdens 20

PAGE 21

due to having children, wanting to live closer to good schools, illnesses, or divorce. Forty-seven percent of cost burdened households are families with children, and about half have two wage earners. Twenty percent are single females with children, 13% are marri ed couples with two income earners. Twenty-three percent did not finish high school (Lipman, 2005). The numbers simply do not add up. In 2003, in order to afford a two-bedroom apartment at 30% or less of income, a worker would have to earn $15.21 per hour. A retail sales worker and a janitor earn an average of $8.82 and $8.98 respectiv ely, effectively placing affordability out of reach for many low-skilled workers (Lipman, 200 5). Disturbingly, working households with children are more likely to face a greater hous ing cost burden since household size is an important factor. For example, a three-pers on household earning $22,000 per year and spending 50% on housing would only be left with $306 per person per month; a single person would have $916 left over each month (Lipman, 2005). Some of the sacrifices made by households with a high housing cost burden include spending an average of $1,189 less on food, $978 less on healthcare and insurance, and $5,227 less on transportation, among other items (Lipman, 2005). McCann (2005) quantifies what rising fuel costs mean for household transportation expenditures. For example, if gasoline prices rise by 30%, the ensuing costs would equate to more than the typical household spends annua lly on prescription drugs and medicines ($312), dental services ($311), fresh fruits and vegetabl es, and more than a month of utilities and phone service (p. 5). According to Lipman (2005), cutb acks in family spending on food can have dire consequences: Even when parents try to prot ect their children, by skimping on food so their children dont go without, for ex ample, the resulting problems fo r parents, such as depression, place children at higher risk for health and psychological problems (p. 13). Children in households facing food insecurity are more likely to have worse health p hysically and mentally, 21

PAGE 22

be deficient in vitamins and minerals, develop learning disorders and behavioral problems, and be underweight or undernourishe d. Already, low-income house holds spend less in every expenditure category (McCann, 2005). Low-inco me households are also forced to cut expenditures in areas such as educationpercentage of household members with college educations is significantly lower than highe r-income households. Low-income families spend less on entertainment and cultural opportunities. In all, low-inco me households spend about three times more per year on transportation than on retirement, pensions, and Social Security, and about five times less in these areas than higher-income households (McCann, 2005). Furthermore, real income has been declin ing while gas and other consumer prices are increasing. From 1990 to 2000, the combined costs of transportation and housing increase from 41.7% to 52.4% of median income, while the percentage change in incomes was only 0.3%, adjusted for inflation (Haas, Dawkins & Casey, 2006). Food, clothing, and housing are considered the three basic necessities, according to the Bureau of Labor Statisticsremarkably, transportation is not, regardless of the level of importance it plays in allowing people to get to work, school, the doctor, and the grocery stor e. From 1992 to 2003, housing costs rose by 3.6%, but transportation rose by a significant 8.8% (McCann, 2005). For too long, housing costs alone have been the sole consideration in determining affordability. Perhaps now more than ever before, households choose to live further from jobs, and the urban form in many locations necessitate s increased automobile use, even for everyday errands and taking children to school. The interact ion between housing, location choice, and transportation costs provide a clearer measure of affordability than housing cost alone. Energy and transportation costs, though infrequently co nsidered, make up a significant proportion of spending. For low-income households making $10,000 to $20,000 a year, the combined costs of 22

PAGE 23

energy, transportation, and housing leaves le ss than $1,000 per month for food, healthcare, phone, education, housekeeping supplies, and many othe r items that range from every day basics to savings for retirement (B ernstein et al., 2007, p. 4). High transportation costs inhibit many low-income families from pursuing home ownership, education, or other wealth-gaining ventures that could assist them in upward mobility. According to Canby (2003), the necessity of owning one or more vehicles is placing home-ownership out of reach for many low-income families, effectively restricting access to the single most effective tool for increasing family wealth (p. 1). Low-income households prevented from purchasing a home due to tran sportation costs are further punished by the depreciating value of automobiles over time, and as a result, spendi ng on vehicles erodes wealth, while spending on housing can build it (Canby, 2003, p. 5). Take, for example, a demonstration of what happens to $10,000 over a period of 10 years for a household that invests in a home instead of a car: The homeowner can realize a return of more than $4,730 in equitythe car owner receives equity of less than $1,000just $910, on average (Canby, 2003, p. 5). However, households with access to public tran sportation are able to spend considerably less on transportation costs, especially as gas prices increase. Living in a small, efficient residence near transit ca n provide a reduction in costs from a large, inefficient residence in the exurbs. In turn, households in areas with high tr ansit access have more income to spend locally on goods and services other than gasoline. High transit use also correlate s with low automobile ownership and use, creating even greater expendable income for families by eliminating the most significant transportation expenditure for a given household. For example, while Tampa and Miami do not rank highest in a list of cities in te rms of housing costs, the two cities are the least 23

PAGE 24

affordable in the United States when housi ng costs are considered in conjunction with transportation costs. Similarly, areas with high housing costs su ch as San Francisco, San Diego, Honolulu, Boston, New York, and Washington, D.C. are not necessarily the most expensive when transportation costs are considered together with housing costs (McCann, 2005). Urban form characteristicsdensity, block size, trans it connectivity, amenities, presence of jobs greatly influence the number of vehicles and fr equency of use necessary for a given household (Bernstein et al., 2007). Transportation costs and opportunities for work vary by location. While housing in exurban communities is generally affordable, transportation costs are extremely highthe average distance from the central city is 31 mile s. On average, exurban residents spend 23% of their income on transportation, and th ose earning $20,000 to $50,000 spend 30 to 40% (Bernstein et al., 2007). Housing and transporta tion in inner-ring suburbs costs about 59% of average incomes. In addition to a high freque ncy of unemployment and poverty, many residents of inner-ring suburbs have single-family homes but low rates of car ownership, proximity to the central city but a lack of nei ghborhood services and employment cen ters (Bernstein et al., 2007). In a case study of the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, the Center for Transi t-Oriented Development (CTOD) and the Center for Neighborhood Technology (CND) (2006) found that only central city neighborhoods in the region were affordable to low-income families making less than 50% of median income. The authors cite proximity to be tter transit service, access to more jobs, and availability of lower priced housing created more affordability for households (p. 11). Not all low-income and transportation disa dvantaged households are centralized within cities. Unreliable, fragmented transportation systems are a significant contributing factor to poverty. The quality of public tran sit correlates directly with de nsityprecisely the reason why 24

PAGE 25

mass transit is insufficient in sprawling suburban areas, where housing densities are very low, at less than five units per acre. According to Ca nby (2003), the average American family living in a highly decentralized metropolitan area pays roughly $1,300 more per year in transportation expenses (p. 5). The increase in car ownership has increased transportation costs among those with a yearly income of less th an $10,000 by 57% between 1992 and 2000. A significant problem is the fact that most households are not fully aware of the significant expenditures required fo r transportation. There is more to choosing a home than travel time and housing characteristics, and price. Hous eholds with limited budgets need to consider the impact of moving to a community that will require making higher tran sportation expenditures and purchasing additional vehicles. An extra auto mobile could cost at least an additional $4,000 per year (CTOD & CND, 2006). Social Equity: Housing, Jobs, and Transportation Because of the large percentage of inco me needed for both housing and transportation, families face complex decisions about residential location. Is it better to ha ve a newer home or a better school? A transit-oriented neighborhood or single-family home? Commute by automobile or transit? Less expensive housing or closer proxi mity to jobs? In the United States, the highest percentage of job growth occurs in the suburbs, while most affordab le housing is in central cities, inner-ring suburbs, and exurban locations. Hous eholds must weigh paying the costs of commuting versus the costs of housing. Unfortunately for low-income families struggling to keep up with transportation costs, use of transit and carpooling is continually falling. According to the U.S. Census, the percentage of work trips made by using public transit fell from 12.6% in 1960 to 4.7% in 2000. Conversely, reliance on the private automobile for work trips rose from 66.9% to 87.9% (as cited in Pucher & Renne, 2003). Ferguson (1997) obser ved the decline in carpooling from 1970 to 1990. He found 25

PAGE 26

that decreasing densities, sprawling urban fabric rising family incomes, smaller families, and female labor force participation were some of the most salient trends in the decline of carpooling. The study found that diminishing real marginal fuel costs explained one-third of reduced carpooling in the United States from 1970 to 1990 (Ferguson, 1997). According to 2001 National Household Trav el Survey (NHTS) data, automobile ownership has expanded to 91.7% of the Unite d States population; 58.5% own two or more vehicles (as cited in Pucher & Renne, 2003). Less th an half of all Americans live within a quarter mile of a transit stop (Canby, 2003). Lack of auto mobile ownership disproportionately affects the poor. Nearly 27% of households earning less than $20,000 per year have no automobile. The remaining households with a car will use it to ma ke about 75% of their trips. Automobiles are heavily utilized by everyone able to own one. Th e urban form of sprawling metropolitan areas in the United States, though certainly not the sole ca use of automobile use, is probably the most important one. Thus, transit ridership, even among low-inco me households, comprises a tiny portion of all trips. Public transportation is significantly le ss efficient than automobile travel. For example, in the 28 largest metropolitan areas in the United States, the average commute by automobile took about 20 minutes less and covered a distan ce nearly two miles greater than commutes by public transportation (Haas, Dawkins & Casey, 2006). However, public transportation has monetary benefit for users. Commuting on pub lic transportation costs between $800 and $1,500 per worker per year, while the total cost of ow ning and operating a vehicl eincluding insurance, maintenance, registration, fuel, and paymentscosts an average of $6,000 per year (Canby, 2003). 26

PAGE 27

Taking into account transportation disadva ntaged households further demonstrates discrepancies in mode choice, residential locati on, and affordability. One-third of the American population is transportation disadvantaged (B ailey, 2004). The transportation disadvantaged include children, the elderly, peop le with disabilities, poor peopl e, women, and rural residents, including 56 million children under the driving ag e, 32 million senior citizens with diminished driving ability, and 24 million peopl e with disabilities required to depend on transit, paratransit, or expensive private transporta tion services (STTP, 2006). Furthermore, 90% of former welfare recipients do not have access to a car, thus pe rpetuating a cycle of job turnover and poverty. Both welfare recipients and othe r low-income populations are disproportionately young, single minority females with children, without a college education, with health limitations, and without dual household incomes (Garasky, Fletcher, and Jensen, 2006). The number of senior citizens will only incr ease as the Baby Boomer generation reaches retirement age. The U.S. Census Bureau predic ts that there will be 62 million people above the age of 65 by 2025 (Bailey, 2004). Declining health, safety concerns, and lack of access to a vehicle are some of the reasons causing more th an one-fifth of Americans 65 and older not to drive. Non-drivers make 15% fewer trips to the doctor, 59% fewer shopping and restaurant trips, and 65% fewer trips for social, family, and religi ous activities (Bailey, 20 04). Lack of adequate transportation decreases mobility for elderly Amer icans, particularly those living in sprawling suburban or rural areas without a car. According to Bailey (2004), more than 50% of nondrivers age 65 and olderor 3.6 million Americansstay home on any given day partially because they lack transportation options. Livabl e communities with biking, walking, and transit options increase mobility for elderly Americans. However, many in this population cannot use 27

PAGE 28

public transportation services due to health issues Many are forced to get a ride with others or use paratransit or speciali zed transportation services. Lack of an automobile requires provision of alternative forms of transportation, but the options are not always adequate. The literature discussing housing, jobs and transportation has enumerated several often overlapping theories to explain problems of social equity in the United States spatial structur e. The theoriesspatial mismatch, drive until you qualify, jobs-housing balance, and location efficiencywill be descri bed in this section, along with transportation issues faced by rural populations. Spatial Mismatch and Drive Until You Qualify Both the spatial mismatch hypothesis and the drive until you qualify phenomenon deal with the spatial segregation of jobs from af fordable housing. In 1964, John Kain first introduced the concept of spatial mismatch to explain probl ems associated with racial discrimination among inner-city blacks (Arnott, 1998). Spatial mismatch deals with the fact that jobs requiring lower education levels are leaving th e center city, rendering vast nu mbers of low-income residents unemployed or facing increasing levels of poverty (Blumenberg & Ong, 1997). Essentially, spatial mismatch contends that fewer jobs exist per worker in black areas than in white areas, leaving many black workers with lower wages, longer commutes, and greater difficulty in obtaining jobs than their white counterparts (Ihl anfeldt & Sjoquist, 1998). The ability to secure mortgages poses an additional problem for families in determining residential locations. Working families seeking low-cost homeownership face th e dilemma of drive until you qualify (Lipman, 2006). Workers desiring homeownershi p often sacrifice proximity to their jobs and subsequently face increased transportation commuting costs. Several important factors c ontribute to the existence of spatial mismatch. High-growth job markets are generally concentrated in th e suburbs, far from black neighborhoods. Racial 28

PAGE 29

discrimination against blacks prevents them from obtaining housing and mortgages in job-rich locations. Additionally, blacks face difficulties gaining information about job openings, customers and employers discriminate against th em, and poor transportation connections exist to job-rich areas (Ihlanfeldt & Sj oquist, 1998). Spatial mismatch limits the range of jobs available to low-income inner-city residents due to the limite d distance carless residents are able to travel for commuting (McQuaid, Greig & Adams, 2001). Physical distance and lack of accessibility become employment barriers (Ihla nfeldt & Sjoquist, 1998). Schell s (2000) study of poverty in Philadelphia revealed that affordable housing in the region is locat ed almost entirely within the city, where car ownership is low and public tran sit use high. Most residents have no means to access suburban jobs because high-growth areas are located away from transit hubs and corridors. The prevalence of spatial mismatch varies by metropolitan area. Higher levels of spatial mismatch are found in areas with fre quent housing segregation and poor transportation options for workers living in the city and co mmuting to the suburbs (Ihlanfeldt & Sjoquist, 1998). Some researchers argue that spatial mism atch is more accurately an automobile mismatch that encourages inequity and lack of opportunity (Garasky, et al., 2006). Furthermore, Arnott (1998) describes the di fficulty in linking jobs and poor households, not necessarily black ones. Ihlanfeldt & Sjoquist (1998) also conclude that spatial mism atch in its contemporary state applies more to low-skilled, low-income worker s regardless of race. O ng and Miller (2005) find that transportation mismatch is a more important disadvantage than spatial isolation for understanding commuting among low-income city dw ellers. Travel characteristics in a given neighborhood are determined by the built environmen t, and travel options for the transportation disadvantaged are severely limited in communities primarily structured for automobiles. 29

PAGE 30

According to Steiner & Fischman (forthcoming) without an automobile, the transportation disadvantaged will either depend upon others to driv e them to their activities or travel by transit, bicycle or walking and put their personal safety and security at risk or they will be prevented from participating in activities of daily living. The disadvantages of being carless are not unique to a particular race. Many workers seeking homeownership settle in exurban areas due to increased housing affordability. According to Berube, Singer, Wils on, and Frey (2006), exurbs can be defined as communities located on the urban fringe that ha ve at least 20% of their workers commuting to jobs in an urbanized area, exhibit low hous ing density, and have relatively high population growth (p. 1). Exurbs lie beyond the suburbs at the urban-rural periphery. According to Lipman (2006), within metropolitan areas, housing costs tend to fall as one moves further away from employment centers (p. 5). Much exurban grow th is fueled by the drive until you qualify phenomenon that sends middle-income families to fr inge locations in search of affordable new homes in limited supply elsewhere (Berube, et al., 2006). Exurban areas far from employment centers contain less expensive, larger, or better-quality housing. However, with any distance further than a 12-to-15-mile commute, the increased transportation co sts outweigh savings on housing (Lipman, 2006). While housing prices diminish with longer distances, transportation costs increase significantly. Public transportation often cannot meet the needs of carless residents seeking employment in job-rich suburba n locations. In suburban areas, pub lic transportation service is often infrequent, unreliable, and limited in area. Commuting time is often lengthy and unpredictable (Arnott, 1998). Commutes by public transportation in Los Angeles were 75% longer than for those traveling by automob ile (Taylor & Ong, 1995). Workers depending on 30

PAGE 31

public transit face problems accessing jobs, especially when jobs are located in suburban areas. For example, one study demonstrated that 41% of work absences by recently-hired welfare recipients were caused by transportation-rela ted problems (Holzer & Wissoker, 2001). The study also found that suburban employment locations not accessible by transit were associated with higher levels of absenteeism. Reliable transpor tation and improved job accessibility for workers can make the difference in keeping or losing a job. Living in a job-rich neighborhood increases the likelihood that workers will be employed locally, an important consideration for both spatial mismatch and drive until you qualify. Increasing ease of access to jobs by low-income populations improves th e likelihood of wealth accumulation. The prevalence of spatial mismat ch and the drive until you qualify phenomenon are essentially both functions of poor workers residing in locations spatiall y distinct from their work locations. Lack of adequate transportati on, inability to obtain affordable housing, or discrimination in job markets all play roles in perpetuating the spatial segregation of housing and jobs for low-income workers. Furthermore, as will be described in the next section, rural households also face spatial chal lenges in reaching work. Most rural communities have few job opportunities for local residents. In the same way as inner-city or exurba n residents, many rural workers must commute long distances in order to reach job-rich locations, creating inherent affordability problems. Jobs-Housing Balance The jobs-housing balance refers to the ratio of residents and jobs in an area. A ratio of one means the area is balanced (Levinson, 1998). The jobs-housing balance and spatial mismatch are closely connectedthe jobs -housing balance effectively measures spatial mismatch. According to Cervero (1989), the im balance of housing and job location forces workers to reside 31

PAGE 32

further from their jobs than th ey prefer due to affordability issues. Longer commutes result from areas with substantially more housing than jobs (Horner, 2007). The jobs-housing balance is difficult to m easure. Peng (1997) found that both businesses and residents co-locate to reduce commuting. Wh ile the dispersed employment in suburban locations can reduce commutes, it also increas es VMT for other trip purposes (Litman, 2005; Peng, 1997). Those who live and work outside a city center tend to driv e significantly more annual miles than those living closer to the c ity (Litman, 2005). Furthe rmore, while a region might be balanced in terms of housing and j obs, individual neighborhoods may not. In some instances, a local balance of housi ng and jobs does not necessarily mean that residents are locally employed, as one study found in Mountain View a nd Walnut Creek, California (Cervero, 1989). Cervero (1989) identifies five forces that shape the jobs-housing imbalance: fiscal and exclusionary zoning, growth moratoria, worker earnings and housing cost mismatches, two wage-earner households, and job turnover. In tw o-worker households, for example, households may find difficulty locating close to the wor kplaces of both jobholders (Levine, 1998). Job uncertainty also plays a role in long commutes b ecause a worker with an unstable job cannot be expected to move every time they st art a new job (Ma & Banister, 2006). According to Lipman (2005), a common practice for households is to reduce housing costs by enduring longer commutes. Working families spend 77 cents on transportation for every dollar decrease in housing costs, demonstrating the difficult c hoice between affordable housing far from jobs or expensive housing in closer proximity. In a study of 28 Metropolitan areas, Haas et al. (2006) found that expend itures on housing are higher in more densely-developed areas within close proximity to jobs, while expend itures on transportation are lower, suggesting a tradeoff between housing costs and accessibility to jobs. But long commutes overly burden low32

PAGE 33

income households. A study by Blumenberg and Ong (1997) showed that welfare recipients with long commutes must contend with both increased travel time and less net earnings than those working near home. Another study by Blumenbe rg and Ong (1998) demonstrated that better access to jobs decreases commuting distance, an d employers do not compensate workers making long commutes. In turn, workers commuting from far away earn le ss than those with better job access due to increased transportation costs. Lack of reliable transportation and lower wages can cause high turnover rates, perp etuating the cycle of low pay. Cervero (1989) found that cost and availabi lity of housing are among the most important factors influencing residential locations of s uburban workers in the San Francisco Bay Area. Still, affordability is not n ecessarily the only factor househol ds consider when purchasing a home. Residential density, house size, lot size, school districts, and other individual preferences influence location decisions. Higher-income house holds with greater residential options and expendable income historically tend to prefer lo w residential densities far from work, though the trend may be changing due to increased energy co sts (Holtzclaw et al, 2002). Increasing the supply of housing near employment centers represents location e fficiency by reducing the overall cost of travel, especially to suburban employment locations (Levine, 1998). Workers face a choice between accessibility to downtown jobs and larger homes in the suburbs. Increasing urban sprawl and suburban conge stion will renew the cy cle of imbalance if left unchecked (Peng, 1997). Densification and in fill is a solution to improving the jobs-housing balance. In contrast to the h eavy industry of Americas industr ial era, present-day non-polluting office sites have no business being separated from residences. In fact, Cervero (1989) points out that congestion produced by the jobs-housing imb alance is one of the most serious public nuisances today (p. 145). Sin ce an improved jobs-housing balan ce is associated with shorter 33

PAGE 34

commutes (Murray 2003; Levinson, 1998), encour aging more affordable housing in close proximity to jobs will reduce congestion by enco uraging alternative modes of transportation, conserve energy by reducing VMT, and enhanc e environmental quality (Cervero, 1989). Modifying land use regulations and encouraging affordable housing in suburban areas will help to improve jobs-housing balance, increase job ac cessibility for working families, and decrease discrimination (Cervero, 1989). Location Efficiency In light of variables associated with travel patterns and residential location, the concept of location efficiency seeks to obtain a more accurate picture of transportation and housing affordability. According to Holtzclaw et al. (200 2), location efficiency is a method to value neighborhoods in terms of household transporta tion expenditures. In a simplified definition, location efficiency deals with the proximity of homes to transit systems. There are three key components of location efficiencydensity, tran sit accessibility, and pedestrian friendliness (Dittmar & Ohland, 2004). The location efficien cy hypothesis contends that automobile ownership and driving decrease with proximity to trip destin ations, and trips by nonautomotive means increase (Holtzclaw et al., 2002). Proximity to transit increases overall affordability of housing and transportation for households, allowi ng them to accumulate greater wealth and subsequently contribute greater wealth back in to the community. Currently, only about 6 million households live within a half m ile of a transit station. However, that number is predicted to increase. In the next 25 years, demand for housi ng near fixed-guideway transit is likely to increase by as much as a quarter of all new households, or 14.6 million households (CTOD, 2004). Location Efficiency has an important c onnection with Location Efficient Mortgages (LEM), or mortgages that assist homeowners in communities with good transit access and walkability with the goal of saving from reduced transportation costs. Determining the statistical 34

PAGE 35

relationship of variables such as automobile ownership and driving to a spatial context allows for adequate provision of an LEM to allow households to decrease their tr ansportation costs and increase the amount of income th ey allocate to mortgage payments (Holtzclaw et al., 2002). One methodology for determining location efficiency was developed by CTOD and CND. Their Affordability Index calculates the true affordability of owning a home based on combined costs of transportation, market value, and location. The Affordability Index can help households assess which neighborhoods in a region are most affordable, and it can help policymakers determine where resources should be focused to enhance affordability (p. 2). Household transportation costs are considered by costs of automobile ownership, automobile use, and transit use. In order to determine affordability, the i ndex calculates the sum of average housing costs plus average transportation costs for a neighborhood divided by average neighborhood income. Models for estimating household transporta tion costs use a combination of income and household size. The Federal Highway Administrati on developed several indicators to determine automobile costs, including depreciation, insurance, financing, state fees, fuel, maintenance, repairs, use, and vehicle age. According to th ese indicators, the average costs of owning an automobile are $5,068, and usage costs are 9 ce nts per mile (Haas et al., 2008). Additional factors named by Holtzclaw et al. (2002) that ma y affect location efficiency include age and attractiveness of the central city; differences in attitude toward driving and public transit; differences in the cost of living, or of owning a nd operating a vehicle; cost or quality of transit; highway congestion and travel times; government or private programs to en courage use of transit or carpooling; and climate (p. 20). 35

PAGE 36

Urban form has a significant bearing on gasoline consumption and automobile ownership. Characteristics such as an arterial grid, curvilinear streets, and disconnected cul de sacs dominate in the suburbs (Newman & Kenwor thy, 1995). Edge cities connected by freeways encourage widespread use of automobiles. One study found that residents of American cities consumed nearly twice as much gasoline per capita as Australians, nearly four times as much as the more compact European cities and ten times th at of three compact westernized Asian cities, Hong Kong, Singapore and Tokyo (Newman & Kenw orthy, 1989). Findings in the study suggest that driving is reduced 30% every time de nsity doubles (Newman & Kenworthy, 1989). Litman (2005) found that residents of cen tral locations drive 20 to 40% less and are two to four times more likely to use multi-modal transportation options than suburban residents. Shorter commutes, nearby services, and more options for travel combine to create variations in urban travel patterns. Rural residents ar e the most likely to drive and the least likely to use alternative modes of transportation. Density and transit account for a large proportion of vari ation in VMT per household. A study of traffic analysis zones and census tr acts in the San Francisco Bay Area developed indicators that influence VMT, including household size, auto owne rship, income, weighted jobs within 30 minutes, dissimilarity of the zones ma jor land use from its neighbors, and the balance of land uses within the z one within a half mile (as cited in Holtzclaw et al., 2002). Indicators for automobile ownership included household size, income, weighted jobs within 30 minutes, dissimilarity of the zones major land use from its neighbors, the balance of land uses within the zone, and population density (as cited in Ho ltzclaw et al., 2002). One study found that automobile commutes decrease as employment density increases, and increased employment density tends to support commuting by transit and ridesharing (Litman, 2005). An increase in 36

PAGE 37

densitynot just residential, but also the number of destinations nearbycreates shorter trips. Transit use, local shopping, job availability, a good pedestrian environm ent and slow vehicle speeds usually coincide with high residential density. Clustering different uses together can d ecrease automobile ownership and use and increase the viability of other types of transportation. In urba n areas, such a process involves infill, improving connectivity, and encouragi ng walking and transit. Suburban areas can encourage downtown centers and encourage walkab ility. Rural areas can cr eate village centers and provide basic accommodations for walking and transit service (Litman, 2005). Clustering provides a useful method for promoting travel alternativescombining schools, stores, parks and other commonly-used services within residential neighborhoods and employment centers are ways to discourage automobile use. Litman (2005) draws severa l additional conclusions about the effects of land use factors on travel behavior, including the following: Per capita automobile travel tends to dec line with increasing popul ation and employment density; per capita automobile travel tends to decline with increas ed land use mix and connected street networks; per capita automob ile travel tends to decline in areas with attractive and safe streets that accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel, and where buildings are connected to sidewalks rather th an set back behind parking lots; larger and higher-density commercial centers tend to have lower rates of automobile commuting because they tend to support better travel choices (more transit, ridesharing, better pedestrian facilities, etc.) and amenities such as cafes and shops; per capita automobile travel tends to decline with the presence of a strong, competitive transit system (p. 33). Haas et al. (2008) suggest creating environm ents that reduce automobile ownership and use and increase transit use. Increasing the preval ence of transit-oriented developments may be the answer. In order for transit service to be viable and encourage ridership, it must carefully consider the needs of the local population. Transit should servi ce desirable locations, include nearby affordable housing, entertainment, and empl oyment centers. Service must be frequent and interconnections should be accommodated (C TOD, 2004). While many might assume that 37

PAGE 38

nearby transit availability might drive up housing prices, CTOD (2004) found that median incomes of households located near transit tend to be lower than those of households in the larger metro region, suggesting that overall affordabil ity does not necessarily suffer. Furthermore, higher-income households are less likely to us e transit. Lower-income households are more likely to choose residences n ear transit (Haas et al., 2008). Homeownership rates are lower in transit zones than in other locations within the metropolitan region% versus 66%. Car ownership rates are also lower, at an average of 0.9 cars versus 1.6 cars in the remaining region. Rates of commuting by automobile are nearly 30% lower in transit zones (CTOD, 2004). Households in transit zo nes are less likely to have children a nd more likely to live alone or in couples. The elderly population a bove age 65 is more likely to liv e in transit zones than other locations. Solutions Transportation does not have to be a burden. According to Eisenberg (2004), when used correctly and efficiently, transportation protect s national security, fost ers economic prosperity, preserves and enhances the environment, builds and strengthens communities, and connects people across the distances both great and small (p. 2). Some solutions exist, though research on the subject appears to be uncertain how to fi x the transportation-housing problem. Devajyoti (2004) suggests that jobs need to be relocated into central cities, low-income residents need to move closer to the wealth of suburban jobs, and transportation needs to be more successful in serving suburban populations. More concretely, Barbara Lipmans (2006) report for the Center for Housing Policy suggests reducing the costs of commuting by car by implementing policies to encourage car sharing or make car owners hip more accessible and affordable (through subsidized loans or insurance, for example) (p. 18). McCann (2005) suggests owning fewer vehicles and increasing transi t usehouseholds with one vehi cle or less and above average 38

PAGE 39

transit use spend an average of 10% of their incomes on transportation (p. 14). Hughes (1995) and Ihlanfeldt & Sjoquist (1998) suggest implementing a mobility strategy that reconnects the ghetto, once a job-rich location with affordable housing, to opportuni ties elsewhere. In this way, City residents get access to economic oppor tunity without sacrificing community networks such as extended family and inst itutional affiliations. Suburban employers get access to the entry-level worker s who are hard to find in suburban labor markets. City governments retain voters who have received the benefits of the strategy. Suburban governments get a reduction in housing developm ent pressures driven by the increasing labor demand (p. 288). More beneficial long-term solutions incl ude eliminating housing, job, and mortgage discrimination, improving the job skills of lowskilled workers, and balancing the unequal distribution of jobs (Ihla nfeldt & Sjoquist, 1998). Garaksy, Fletcher, and Jensen (2006), Hughes (1995), and Schell (2000) suggest expanding options by extending tran sit service, encouraging ri de sharing and vanpooling, and providing subsidies for automobile purchase and insurance. Blumenberg and Ong (1998) suggest similar solutions for inner-city workers to r each suburban employment. They also suggest offering support services such as a guaranteed ride-home for unforeseen emergencies or flexible child-care hours. Schell (2000) suggests decreasing the amount of free parking available to encourage transit use. Free, untaxed parking in the United States may influence commuting by automobile, much as free transit passes to worker s in Japan encourages p ublic transit use (Ma & Banister, 2006). Since automobiles are ubiquitous in most American households, alternative modes of transit must offer greater utility or convenience than an automobile in order to encourage mode switch. Making driving more e xpensive and implementing policies to encourage other modes of transportation are two ways to curb driving (Ha ndy, 2006). In terms of carpooling, Ferguson (1997) found that parking fees and road pric ing both likely have a positive effect on carpooling. Furthermore, carpooling provid es more flexibility th an public transit or 39

PAGE 40

other non-motorized forms of transportation. Carpoo ling remains an excellent way to improve air quality, decrease traffic congestion, and sa ve money for travelers (Ferguson, 1997). Several other factors are im portant to consider. Blumenberg and Schweitzer (2006) question the viability of offering expanded tran sportation options to low-income households. They suggest that reverse commute options may not be effective for serving low-income populations because low-income ride rs are less likely to ride long distances. A study in St. Louis found that low-income workers to lerated a commute of about one hour only for jobs that paid well (Forlaw, 1998). Childcare is another serious concern. Many parentseven those without accessibility problems, such as higher-skilled white femaleshave a limited commuting range and decreased job prospects due to the need to provide childcare (M adden, 1981). Blumenberg and Schweitzer (2006) suggest th at extending hours of service ma y not be beneficial since many low-income transit users travel during peak periods; those with non-standard work schedules may fear using transit in the dark. Rural Transportation Transportation accessibility in rural areas is a si gnificant social equity issue. According to a United States Department of Agriculture (US DA) (2005) report, 92.7% of rural households had access to a car in 2000. However, many rural countie s had a high rate of carlessness, indicating that lack of a vehicle wa s significantly more concentrated in so me areas than others, especially in regions such as the South, Appalachia, the S outhwest, and Alaska. Rural residents without automobiles face cycles of poverty and increase d reliance on public transportation. Furthermore, 40% of rural residents have no access to public tr ansportation, and 28% of those existing systems offer only limited service (USDA Economic Res earch Service, 2005). Mobility issues for transportation disadvantaged individuals are a persistent problem in areas lacking public 40

PAGE 41

transportation. Rural households without an automobile are di sproportionately the poor and elderly (Gillis, 1989). Transportation problems for rural households are creating a tremendous drain on alreadyburdened individuals. According to Wilkins on (1999), negative social conditions can interfere with individual well-being, so provisions must be adequate to meet sustenance needsotherwise people will not be free from the primary struggle for survival. Tran sportation and mobility issues can be a huge problem for familiessustenance needs include not only adequate food but also physiological needs like jobs, housing, income, a nd other services. A dispersed, carless rural household faces difficulties reaching employment, health services, and e ducational opportunities only available in more urban areas Access to jobs to provide income is necessary for the wellbeing of rural residents, but even those able to afford to purchas e a vehicle may not be able to pay to keep it running. High transportation costs may cause many families to make sacrifices in other areas, such as purchasing f ooda supposedly primary need. According to Wilkinson (1999), rural areas ar e often associated with the lack of jobs, services, and incomes that comprise material we ll-being. Rural residents, faced with a mounting lack of resources, must either learn to live with out them or look outside the local community for the resources they need. Findings of many studies show that rural residents often travel great distances and to multiple centers to meet their n eeds for work, trade, education, health services, recreation, and government services. Rural comm unities further decrease individual well-being due to their lack of an urban form that encour ages physical activity. The combination of factors such as high automobile dependence, unhealthy di ets, and lack of walkability contribute to the prevalence of obesity and related di seases (Sallis & Glanz, 2006). 41

PAGE 42

Residents of rural areasespecially low-income households lacking a carface many barriers that are transportation-related. Lack of mobility, or the capacity, capability, and opportunity to move, is a contributing factor to the difficulties many rural residents face in finding and keeping a job. Difficu lties are especially evident in the large proportion of lowincome populations in rural areas without the means to pay for transportation (Maggeid, 1982). Gillis (1989) reaches similar conclusions about mobility in rural areas. The low-density, dispersed form of rural communities makes viable transportation necessary in order to reach churches, markets and gro cery stores, and jobs. Several studies provide insights into the problems facing many rural households. A study of rural residents in Arkansas found that many residents lacked local employment options, often due to inadequate transporta tion% reported having no trans portation to major industries located 5 to 25 miles away. While these residents ha d no desire to move to a location with better opportunities, many reported that lack of jobs could drive them to it (Maggeid, 1982). According to a survey of rural employers in Minnesota, 30% claimed that transportation was a principal barrier to hiring former welfar e recipients (Owen, Shelton, Stev ens, Nelson-Christinedaughter, Roy & Heineman, 2000). Even if rural residents ha ve a vehicle, reliability becomes an issue. Furthermore, one study in rural Iowa found that on ly one in four welfare recipients, if they owned a car, had it properly registered (Fletche r & Jensen, 2000). Garasky, Fletcher & Jensen (2006) discuss the gravity of transportation probl ems for low-income rural residents in Iowa: Nearly half (48%) of the lo w-income respondents experience d a financial transportation hardship in the past 12 months such as ne glecting vehicle repair s, lacking money for gasoline, allowing insurance to lapse, missi ng a car payment, and/or having a vehicle repossessed. Less than one in four of the high-income responde nts reported such problems (p. 74). 42

PAGE 43

An employment center in a rural region is li kely to draw from an extensive geographic area. For example, Gillis (1989) reports that ma ny rural industries draw workers from up to 50 miles away. While he considers the highway syst em a critical link to connecting the labor force with jobs, Maggeid (1982) points out that au tomobiles owned by low-income households often lack insurance and are inadequate for l ong commutes and interstate highway travel. Other barriers to work incl ude long commute distances, lack of educational service, lack of available childcare, and lack of public transportation. A reported 75% of rural respondents in one study lacked transportation options because they lived in areas not served by public transportation (Redlener, Brito, Johnson & Grant, 2007). Lack of transportation in rural areas inhibits income generation, effectively restrict ing low-income families from moving into middleincome brackets. Even households with only on e vehicle may be transportation disadvantaged due to the fact that about 87% of rural resident s get to work by private automobiles (Maggeid, 1982). Other family members in one-car households are left stranded while the vehicle-user works. Transit providers in rural areas face many diff iculties in supplying service to low-density areas. Even when public transporta tion is available, it is twice as likely to be demand-responsive rather than fixed-route (Twadell & Emerine, 20 07). Since the majority of rural residents own cars, transportation providers offer less servi ce choices than the past. While company-based carpooling and vanpooling programs are becoming mo re prominent to assist commuters, many demographic segmentsthe elderly, the young, th e disabled, the poor, one -car households, and those with no drivers license, for example are severely disadvantaged without automobile access (Kidder, 1989). The transportation disadv antaged are primarily the groups driving 43

PAGE 44

demand for transit in rural areas. Kidder (1989) discusses some of the problems of service provision in rural areas. First, the demand is less efficiently located. Rather than living al ong a few corridors with high levels of repeated demands, rural reside nts may be scattered over a wide area, with very low density of populationThe transit de pendent are less likely to be predominantly low-income and more likely to have physical limitations that require a higher level of personal attention in solving their mobility problems. The demand tends to be sporadic since trips are not repeated as often as in urban areas. In ur ban areas an important portion of the transit demand comes from the repetit ive journey to work. In rural areas more people use their own or other ca rs to get to work, and the public transportation needs are more for shopping, appointments, and recreation (p. 132). The cost of service provision is high and si gnificantly less cost effective in rural areas. Special funding is required to subsidize the high costs of transit provision. Demand is less frequent, trips are less consolidated, and trips per person may be lower (Kidder, 1989). In order to mitigate high costs, demand-responsive agencies often have strict eligibility requirements and trip purposes for riders. So, there are two solutionsresidents must move, or transportation must become less expensive. A community is unable to function adequately without ach ieving individual and social well-being for its residents. Rural municipali ties with little tax base are unlikely to be able to afford many improvements alone. Coordination is necessary, and available resources must not be wasted. Those implementing services need to be sure to ask people what they want and not assume to be fully aware of all the mobility issues facing rural residents. The truth is that many residents of rural communities leave in orde r to meet their daily needs (Wilkinson, 1999). Clearly something needs to be done in order to increase mobility and offered services for residents in rural areas. However, the task is not a simple one. Fixed-route service is often unfeasible in rural areas. Instead, agencies should pursue alternative forms of transit, such as ride -sharing, demand response transit, and car-sharing 44

PAGE 45

(Twadell & Emerine, 2007). Rosenbloom (1992) ch ronicles the successe s of reverse commute transportation provision in the United States. Su ccessful measures include decreasing the need for transfers and time spent on a bus, providing fe eder services to major employment centers, and encouraging employment centers to establish new bus service with direct routes between workers and jobs. For rural areas, Sutton (1988 ) details various comm unity transportation strategies, including community vanpools, demand -response transit, and car service, including informal ridesharing, organized carpools, and drivers recruited by local agencies. Summary On average, transportation is the second-largest expenseafter housingfor families. Costs are rising in general, and low-income a nd working families are having trouble keeping up. Real income has been declining while gas and other consumer prices are increasing. Urban form and spatial patterns often make car ownership es sential. The mismatch of job location and the placement of low-income housing creates long co mmutes and increases transportation costs precisely for those households that can least afford it. Low-income households are also forced to cut expenditures in areas such as educationp ercentage of household members with college educations is significantly lower than higher-in come households. In all, low-income households spend about three times more per year on transportation than on retirement, pensions, and Social Security, and about five times less in these areas than hi gher-income households (McCann, 2005). Residents of rural areasespecially low-income households lacking a carface many barriers that are transportation-related. Lack of mobility, or the capacity, capability, and opportunity to move, is a contributing factor to the difficulties many rural residents face in finding and keeping a job. Difficu lties are especially evident in the large proportion of lowincome populations in rural areas without the means to pay for transportation (Maggeid, 1982). 45

PAGE 46

Gillis (1989) reaches similar conclusions about mobility in rural areas. The low-density, dispersed form of rural communities makes viable transportation necessary in order to reach churches, markets and gro cery stores, and jobs. Furthermore, living in a job-rich neighbor hood increases the likelihood that workers will be employed locally, an important consideratio n for both spatial mismatch and drive until you qualify. Increasing ease of access to jobs by lowincome populations improve the likelihood of wealth accumulation. The prevalence of spa tial mismatch and the drive until you qualify phenomenon are essentially both functions of poor workers residing in locations spatially distinct from their work locations. Lack of adequate transportation, inability to obtain affordable housing, or discrimination in job markets all play roles in perpetua ting the spatial segregation of housing and jobs for low-income workers. Most rural communities have few job opportunities for local residents. In the same way as inner-city or exurban re sidents, many rural workers must commute long distances in order to reach job-ri ch locations, creating inherent affordability problems. Well-designed service provision to low-income rural dw ellers can greatly enhance mobility and encourage job retention and wea lth accumulation. The problems are grave, but coordinated solutions can provide much-needed assistance. Successful transportation options involve a system that provides mobility for user s. Incentives must be implemented to use the service, especially if it is to be used as anything but a last-resort option. Suggestions for the literature also provide useful recommendations in relation to the case of Alachua County. Garaksy, Fletcher, and Jensen (2006), Hughes (1995), and Sche ll (2000) suggest expanding options by extending transit service, encourag ing ride sharing and vanpooling, and providing subsidies for automobile purchase and insuranc e. Blumenberg and Ong (1998) suggest offering 46

PAGE 47

support services such as a guara nteed ride-home for unforeseen em ergencies. Increasing ease of access to jobs for low-income populations improves the likelihood of wealth accumulation and overcoming cycles of poverty. 47

PAGE 48

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY This paper focuses specifically on the burdens endured by rural, low-income families residing in public housing trying to seek mob ility in an automobile-dominated landscape. Research focuses on low-income households residing in Alachua County Housing Authority housing in five rural communities in Alachua County, Florida. Income thresholds for residents are based on HUD specificationsa family of four, for example, must earn $29,900 or less per year. Alachua County provides a unique location for this study due to it s geography; the five rural communities form a hub-and-s poke link with the City of Gainesville. Each outlying city is approximately the same distance to Gainesville as the others. Similar geographical location is beneficial to this study because requirements for tr ansportation are similar in each of the cities. However, information provided by respondent inte rviews reveals differences in each location. Therefore, the study population reveals differenc es among the outlying cities while still making generalizations about Alachua County as a whole. This research used a case study methodology of Alachua County that involved the collection and analysis of four types of data : (1) review of planni ng existing local planning documents; (2) GIS analysis of Census and other re lated data; (3) interviews with local officials regarding previous attempts to provide transportation to low-inco me residents in outlying cities of Alachua County; and (4) case studies of fi ve public housing projects in five outlying communities in Alachua County. Data Collection and Analysis First, local planning documents, such as the Alachua County Comp rehensive Plan, the Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan, and Department of Transportation studies were reviewed to understand the policie s and program options for transi t to these communities. These 48

PAGE 49

documents revealed information about travel pa tterns in Alachua County. Local comprehensive plans reveal the extent to which existing policie s lack specificity and are too narrow in scope. Without successful local policies, transportation provision for rural residents will be extremely difficult. Demographic information for Alachua C ounty, including population, income, age, number of available vehicles, mode of tran sportation to work, and length of commute was collected in order to gain an understanding of Alachua County tr ends. Demographic information for mapping was obtained from the U.S. Cens us Bureau 2000 Decennial Census, and more updated information for tables was obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau 2007 American Community Survey (ACS). Though beneficial due to its recent release, the lack of detail in the ACS was insufficient for mapping purposes. Information gained from Census data and lo cal plans was supplemented with interviews with seven local officials in order to gain a more comprehensive picture of transportation issues in the study area. Officials repr esented local agencies such as Alachua County, the Gainesville MPO, and the Workforce Board. Interviews specif ically focus on opinions and insights derived from seven local officials dealing with transporta tion and poverty issues. Th e interviews revealed specific transportation-related problems as well as past and current solutions implemented by Alachua County and community-based organizati ons to assist transportation disadvantaged individuals. Finally, the case studies of five public hous ing projects in five outlying communities utilized a stratified sampling methodology among low-income residents residing in public housing in Alachua County. This case study was c onducted in order to gain an understanding of transportation-related issues faced by rural pub lic housing residents. The case study approach 49

PAGE 50

was chosen in order to give a more comple te understanding of the problems and possible solutions facing Alachua Countys low-income re sidents. Accurate knowledge of such issues will assist decision-makers in more adequately addressing transportation needs in the future. A total of 42 semi-structured open-ende d personal interviews focusing on issues regarding transportation in rura l communities were conducted with residents of Alachua County Housing Authority projects in five rural communities in Alachua CountyAlachua, Archer, Hawthorne, Newberry, and Waldo. Interviews were conducted on five separate daysone day for each rural community. The days of interviewing were randomly selected in order to gain the perspective of a cross-section of residents living in each of the communities. The margin of error of the sample population is 11% at a 95% confiden ce interval. All particip ants in the research study were informed of the goals of the re search and asked to sign a consent form. Interviews focused on determining daily travel habits, common transportation-related problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasing and cost burden, and types of solutions they deem most viable. Some interv iews were more in-depth and yielded more information than others, depending on both the interviewees willingness to answer questions and interviewer discretion. Overall, the response rate was very high. Most residents, if able to do so at the time, were very willing to discuss transportation issues. For many, transportation challenges presented a very real drain on financ ial resources, and therefore a topic many had frequently considered recently. As shown in Ta ble 3-1, a total of 21% of the 203 Alachua County Housing Authority units in outlying c ities were represented in the study. Information obtained from interviews was organized and analyzed. Interview subject matter was sorted into a table based on location of interview, respondent name, and content. Comments were then sorted by content into 15 categories. Categories incl uded mode of travel, 50

PAGE 51

Table 3-1. Completed Interviews Rural Community Day of Interview Total Units Number of Refusals Number Not Home Number Skipped Percent of Interviews Completed Percent of Units Surveyed Waldo Saturday 20 5 7 0 72% 40% Hawthorne Wednesday 40 2 26 3 82% 23% Archer Friday 30 3 6 15 67% 20% Newberry Tuesday 33 5 10 10 53% 24% Alachua Sunday 80 3 6 60 79% 14% Total 203 18 55 88 70% 21% automobile availability, employment, work lo cation, vehicle reliability, preferred grocery purchase location, and viability of various tran sportation solutions. Dete rmining the level of commonality in the transporta tion issues facing Alachua C ounty residents revealed the usefulness of transportation solutions such as public transportation, carpooling, and park and ride. The benefits to the interviewee include the opportunity to express their opinions about the transportation issues they face. Responses may assist local decision-makers in developing alternatives that may improve residents transp ortation options. Several limitations of this study include the fact that the housing units survey ed were not randomized. Additionally, time limitations prohibited obtaining a greater number of interviews for this study. Future studies should include a larger sample population. 51

PAGE 52

CHAPTER 4 OVERVIEW OF ALACHUA COUNTY Alachua County, Florida is not immune to transportation problems. Alachua County is located in North Central Florida and is surr ounded by Marion, Levy, Gilchrist, Columbia, Union, and Bradford Counties. Estimates from 2007 show that Alachua Countys population is about 252,000 (BEBR, 2008). Alachua County is comprised of eight incorporated cities. Figure 4-1 depicts each of these municipalities. Gainesville, Florida is th e County seat, home of the University of Florida, and the largest job-ge nerator in Alachua County. Gainesvilles current population is estimated at 125,000, about half of the total County population. The University of Floridas student population is 52,000, and it is the largest single employer in Alachua County. In contrast, many outlying rural communities ha ve little to no job opportunities, with the exception of the City of Alachua (G. Mona han, personal communicati on, October 17, 2008). Of particular concern in this project are the five outlying rural communities in which the Alachua County Housing Authority owns pr operties available to low-inco me residentsAlachua, Archer, Hawthorne, Newberry, and Waldo. The number of units in each community varies roughly by population. Alachua has 80, Archer has 30, Hawthorne has 40, Ne wberry has 33, and Waldo has 20. This chapter provides an overview of both Alachua County demographi c characteristics and transportation services offered in Alachua County rural communities. Alachua County Demographic Characteristics An overview of Alachua County population estimates for Gainesville and outlying communities is provided in Table 4-1 and Figur e 4-3. Alachua Countys eight rural communities have a combined population of 22,846. The largest is Alachua, with an estimated population of 8,742. The population density pattern in the remaining unincorporated areas is low (see Figure 42). Demographic data in this chapter was obtai ned from the United States Census Bureaus 2007 52

PAGE 53

53 American Community Survey (ACS). ACS data is only available for Gainesville, Alachua County, and Florida. Detailed information about the small rural communities in Alachua County is only available from the 2000 Decennial Census Maps of demographic information use data from the 2000 Decennial Census in order to depict this greater level of detail. A multi-modal corridor study of Alachua County conducted in 2005 by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) (2005) found that the av erage bicycle user travels 1.7 miles to get to their destination, the average pedest rian travels one mile to reach their destination, and the average transit user walks less than a quarter mile (.19 m iles) to the bus stop to access the bus. The study also found that about 13% of employed respo ndents live in High Springs, Alachua, Hawthorne, Newberry, or Archer. Another FDOT (2001) study found that more than 65% of Alachua County households ha ve at least two cars, and the majority of respondents in the study traveled by automobile. Transit use was higher than the rest of the nation.6% used transit for non-work purposes including school trips. Transportation issues are part of the cy cle of poverty for many low-income families living in Alachua County, as can be seen in th e relatively large number of households below the poverty level and lacking an au tomobile, shown in Figure 4-4, Figure 4-5, and Table 4-2. Both Gainesville and Alachua County have a higher percentage of households w ithout a vehicle than households in the rest of Florida. Poor househol ds are unlikely to increas e their wealth without adequate transportation; they cannot work if they have no means to travel there. Transportation is a major expense for many low-income households in Alachua County, especially with the cost of housing going up. Table 4-3 shows that Alachua Countys proportion of households earning less than $25,000 is 10% higher than the state average. In all, Alachua County workers earn about $8,000 less than the average Florida median incomeonly $38,243 compared to $46,602.

PAGE 54

Figure 4-1. Alachua Count y Incorporated Cities 54

PAGE 55

55 Figure 4-2. Alachua C ounty Population Density

PAGE 56

Table 4-1. Alachua Count y Population Estimates POPULATION ALACHUA COUNTY CITIES Community 2000 Census 2008 Estimates % Change Gainesville 95,447 124,491 30.4% Alachua 6,098 8,742 43.4% High Springs 3,863 4,855 25.7% Newberry 3,316 4,914 48.2% Archer 1,289 1,225 -5.0% Hawthorne 1,415 1,436 1.5% Waldo 821 836 1.8% Micanopy 653 636 -2.6% Lacrosse 143 202 41.3% Unincorporated 104,910 105,051 0.1% TOTAL 217,955 252,388 15.8% Source: US Census Bureau, BEBR Table 4-2. Vehicle Ava ilability Distribution Geographic Area Number of Vehicles Available Zero One Two Three or More Gainesville 9.3% 45.9% 33.1% 11.7% Alachua County 7.0% 41.0% 36.5% 15.5% Florida 6.4% 39.7% 39.0% 14.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007 Table 4-3. Household Income Distribution Geographic Area $0$9,999 $10,000$14,999 $15,000$24,999 $25,000$34,999 $35,000$49,999 $50,000$74,999 $75,000 & Over Gainesville 19.5% 8.4% 16.5% 12.2% 13.9% 13.0% 16.6% Alachua County 14.0% 6.9% 14.2% 11.8% 13.3% 15.5% 24.3% Florida 7.3% 5.8% 12.0% 12.3% 15.9% 19.1% 27.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007 56

PAGE 57

Figure 4-3. Alachua County Housing Density 57

PAGE 58

Figure 4-4. Poverty Level 58

PAGE 59

59 Figure 4-5. Vehicle Ownership

PAGE 60

Alachua County has a smaller population above 65 and under 18 to contend with than the remainder of Florida, perhaps easing some difficulties of tran sportation provision for transportation disadvantaged populations. Ta ble 4-4, Figure 4-6, and Figure 4-7 depict population and age distribution in Alachua Count y, specifically those under 18 and more than 65 years old. Table 4-5 demonstrates that Alachua Countys employed la bor force is on par with the remainder of the state, at 94% An important problem among low-income familie s with cars is lack of proper registration and insurance, and sometimes lack of a valid driv ers license. Often, people who are least able to pay own vehicles that frequently break dow n, get poor gas mileage, or have no carpooling options. As soon as many low-income familie s have enough money, they will usually buy a car. In addition to being a necessity for many househol ds, owning an automobile is a status symbol, usually perceived as a higher priority than buying a house (G. Monahan, personal communication, October 17, 2008). In Alachua Count y, as in many other locations, automobiles comprise the most common commute mode, as shown in Table 4-6 a nd Figure 4-8. Figure 4-8 shows that the pattern of high automobile usag e is consistent across Alachua County with the exception of the areas near Downtown Gainesvill e and the University of Florida. Figure 4-9 illustrates those who commute to work by transit. Transit represents a larger proportion of commuting trips in Gainesville and Alachua County than in the remainder of Florida High gas prices in 2008 negatively affected Alachua Countys low-income households. Households, forced to pay transportation costs to keep their jobs, cut back on other goods and services, such as food and medicine. Low-income families eat less nutritious food; they do not go to the dentist; and they do not visit the doctor until health becomes an issue serious enough to visit the emergency room (J. Skelly, persona l communication, October 8, 2008). Many families 60

PAGE 61

61 Table 4-4. Population and Age Distribution Geographic Area Age 0 17 18 24 25 44 45 64 65+ Gainesville 14.9% 33.2% 26.5% 16.7% 8.7% Alachua County 18.9% 23.0% 26.2% 21.9% 10.0% Florida 22.3% 8.8% 26.7% 25.4% 16.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007 Table 4-5. Labor Force Participation Geographic Area Percentage of Total Population in Labor Force Percentage of Labor Force Employed Percentage of Labor Force Unemployed Gainesville 61.5% 92.6% 7.4% Alachua County 64.7% 94.1% 5.9% Florida 61.8% 94.1% 5.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007 Table 4-6. Journey-to-Work Mode Split Travel Mode Geographic Area Drive Alone Carpool Public Transit Motorcycle Walk or Bike Other Work at Home Gainesville 76.5% 12.4% 3.1% 0.7% 5.7% 0.2% 1.4% Alachua County 76.2% 12.3% 2.6% 0.6% 5.3% 0.3% 2.7% Florida 79.6% 10.9% 1.9% 0.3% 2.2% 1.2% 4.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007

PAGE 62

Figure 4-6. Alachua C ounty Youth Population 62

PAGE 63

63 Figure 4-7. Alachua C ounty Elderly Population

PAGE 64

Figure 4-8. Percent of Commuters Traveling by Car, Van, or Truck 64

PAGE 65

65 Figure 4-9. Percent of Comm uters Traveling by Transit

PAGE 66

make the choice between gas and eating. Even gett ing to the grocery store can be a problemthe City of Waldo, for example, has no grocery stor e. Even in communities with grocery stores, those lacking an automobile have difficulty tran sporting large loads of gr oceries back to their homes without some type of assistance. Often employers have a prejudice against carpooling. For exam ple, even if two employees work in the same company, if Joes ge tting a ride with John, and Johns out sick, then Joe doesnt have a ride. Two peopl e are out instead of one because the sick person has the car, and thus the means to get to work (J. Skell y, personal communication, October 8, 2008). If an employer finds out in an interview that a potenti al employee does not have a vehicle or drivers license, that likely puts the job-se eker out of contention. Particularly in service-oriented jobs jobs with positions often filled by low-income populationsemployers are going to be ones that are the most intolerant of lack of reliable transportation. Employers do not want to put a lot of effort into training a helper in a particular trade when they do not think the person is going to stay on the job more than a month or two (J Skelly, personal communication, October 8, 2008). Though Alachua County, and Gainesville especi ally, have a significantly higher level of work trips by transit than the rest of Florid a, the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan makes surprisingly few provisions for transit. Existing policies are often narrow in scope or lacking in specificity. Table 4-7 presents a summary of tran sit provisions in local plans. Transportation issues and congestion mitigation should be a part icular focus in the future, especially when considering the differences in commute time s from 2000 to 2007. Nine percent fewer workers had commutes less than 20 minutes in 2007, as depicted in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9. Furthermore, Figure 4-10, and Figure 4-11 reveal lengthier commutes faced by those living in outlying areas of Alachua County compared to th ose residing near Gaines ville due to distance 66

PAGE 67

and lack of good capacity roads. Thus, mobility for residents of Alachua Countys outlying communities is an important consideration. Table 4-7. Alachua County Comprehensive Plan ALACHUA COUNTY COM PREHENSIVE PLAN: TRANSIT ISSUES Future Land Use Element Policy 1.3.9.2: Multi-family development in the Medium-High Density and High Density Residential land use categories shall provide bus shelters Policy 2.5.4: Development at Archer Road and 34th Str eet shall include an area for an RTS shelter and parking area designated for park and ride passengers. The shelter shall be provided and the parking designated at such time as RTS officials determine it is needed Policy 2.5.6: At Tower Road and 24th Avenue, comfortable, multi-functional space shall be provided for transit riders waiting for buses Policy 2.5.6: At Tower Road and 24th Avenue, bicycle storage shall be requi red with particular emphasis accorded the need for park and ride bicycle storage for transit riders Policy 3.2.4: All Neighborhood, Community, and Regional shopping centers shall include bus bays and bus shelters Policy 3.5.1: Regional Shopping Centers shall be served by mass transportation routes and shall be designed to accommodate mass transit, bicycles, and pedestrians Policy 5.4.1: Civic and government facilities, including futu re branch libraries, should be located on transit routes Policy 5.4.5: Major health facilities should be accessible by mass transit Policy 8.5.5: Coordinate with the MTPO and the City of Gainesville to establish a Bus Rapid Transit system connecting east Gainesville with centers of employment and commerce (Plan East Gainesville) Transportation Mobility Element Policy 1.1.5a: Ride sharing promotion and assistance (contingent upon funding) from FDOT in terms of assistance for the RTS and park and ride lots Policy 1.2.5: TCEA mitigation strategies, including construction of bus shelters or stations Policy 1.2.5: TCEA mitigation strategies, including construction of bus turn-out facilities Policy 1.2.5: TCEA mitigation strategies, including provisions for bus pass programs for employees/residents Policy 1.2.5: TCEA mitigation strategies, including payments to the RTS to increase frequencies or extend service Policy 1.2.5: TCEA mitigation strategies, including provision of ride-sharing or van-pooling programs Policy 1.2.6: Measure effectiv eness of TCEA through criteri a including an increase in bus ridership, an increase in number of transit routes and/or transit frequencies Policy 3.1.1: Receive pertinent data from Alachua Coun ty to enhance planning for the RTS service area in the unincorporated portion of the County. Policy 3.2.2: Support the operation of paratransit services in unincorporated Alachua County to provide 24-hour ambulatory and wheelchair service on a demand-responsive basis within available financial resources Policy 3.3.1: Coordinate with the City of Gainesville to establish future mass transit rights-of-way and/or corridors (such as exclusive mass transit lanes). Alachua County shall protect such future rights-of-way through its development review process. Policy 3.6.1: Mass transit, and other measures such as van or car pooling and provision with the private sector of park and ride facilities, shall be developed as a part of Transportation Demand Management strategies to maintain or improve levels of service on roadway segments through non-capital intensive means Policy 3.6.2: Coordination between Alachua County and RTS regarding transit issues and transportation disadvantaged programs 67

PAGE 68

68 Table 4-8. Travel Time to Work (2000) Geographic Area Travel Time in Minutes (percent of workers) 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-44 45+ Gainesville 18.6% 49.6% 18.2% 7.7% 5.9% Alachua County 14.6% 40.1% 23.4% 14.2% 7.8% Florida 11.2% 30.0% 21.6% 22.3% 14.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Dicennial Census, 2000 Table 4-9. Travel Time to Work (2007) Geographic Area Travel Time in Minutes (percent of workers) 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-44 45+ Gainesville 10.8% 35.4% 23.1% 18.7% 12.1% Alachua County 12.1% 33.8% 22.6% 19.0% 12.5% Florida 11.2% 28.0% 21.9% 23.3% 15.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Am erican Community Survey, 2007

PAGE 69

Figure 4-10. Commute Time Greater than 30 Minutes 69

PAGE 70

70 Figure 4-11. Commute Time Greater than 45 Minutes

PAGE 71

Alachua County Transportation Services in Rural Communities In the past and presently, Alachua C ountythrough both governmental and communitybased initiativeshas made attempts to incr ease the mobility of populations living in the outlying communities. Some programs have been more successful than others, and many are subject to the volatility of gove rnment funding. The following sect ion chronicles transportation services offered in Alachua County rural communities. Demand Response Public Transportation Service The State of Floridas Transportation Disa dvantaged (TD) Program is a demand-response public transportation service th at covers all of Alachua C ounty. Alachua County receives funding from the State to provi de transportation services to the low-income, elderly, and disabledbasically people w ho cannot transport themselves or have no other means of transportation. Funding supports me dical, shopping, and education-re lated trips. Medical trips receive priority because Alachua County only re ceives a certain amount of money each month to fund trips. Therefore, if there is unusually high demand one month, dial ysis and chemotherapy patients will not be left stranded because someone else went to the mall. The priorities are put into effect only when money is tight (L. Godfrey, personal communi cation, November 13, 2008). Table 4-12 shows that Alachua Countys TD populat ion comprised about 37% of all residents in 2007, a number higher than the national average. This occurrence may be due to the unique nature of local conditions in Alachua Count yspecifically the larg e number of students attending the University of Fl orida and Santa Fe College. Tabl e 4-13 shows the number of trips taken by purpose. Medical trips comp rise the majority of trips. 71

PAGE 72

Table 4-12. Alachua Count y TD Population in 2007 Demographics Number Percentage Total County Population/Percent of State Total 240,800 13.44% Potential TD Population/Percent of County Total 89,389 37.12% UDPHC/Percent of TD Passengers Served 3,090 3.46% Source: Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged Table 4-13. Alachua County Demand Response Passenger Trip Purposes Passenger Trips by Trip Purpose 2006 2007 Percent Change Medical 96,199 104,241 8.36% Employment 104,429 68,908 -34.01% Education/Training/Daycare 19,080 21,115 10.67% Nutritional 4,125 1,447 -64.92% Life-Sustaining/Other 68,520 15,877 -76.83% Total Trips 292,353 211,588 -27.63% Source: Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged MV Transportation is responsible for pr oviding demand response service in Alachua County for both TD trips and Medicaid trips. Me dicaid trips are only provided for Medicaid beneficiaries. In order to determine eligibil ity for the TD Program, MV Transportation mails potential clients an application, wh ich tries to ascertain if the hous ehold owns and uses a vehicle. The application also determines age, income, number of people living in the household, whether or not a family member has a vehicle, and whethe r or not the potential cl ient has the physical capability to use fixed route services. Applications are denied if the applicant has a vehicle or has an income higher than the poverty level. The purpose of the TD Pr ogram is to serve as a lastresort method of transportation. MV Transportation normally does not deny trips to any qualifying passengers unless theres a continual issue, such as a client who is a constant no-show or makes a large number of 72

PAGE 73

cancellations. For the most part, MV Transpor tation will not penalize riders, but no-shows do hurt them because they waste time, gas, and ot her clients time to attempt to pickup someone who does not show up (H. Perez & D. Simps on, personal communication, November 21, 2008). In order to receive service, a user can call up to 14 days in advance. The latest they can call is 5 p.m. on the day before the ride is n eeded in order to schedule a pick-up. Take, for example, a client with a 9 a.m. appointment. A ccording to specifications in the Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan, if th ey live in Alachua County areas outside the City of Gainesville, they are picked up an hour and a half or less befo re the appointment. The soonest the client can be picked up is an hour after their scheduled appointment time. So, with a 9 a.m. appointment, the client will be picked up no earlier than 7:30 a.m., and the earliest they could be picked up from their appointment would be 10 a.m. to retu rn home. For people that live in the County, it is against the rules of the Transportation Disadvant aged Service Plan to keep them on board for more than 90 minutes. For people who live in the c ity, it is against the rule to keep them for over an hour (H. Perez & D. Simpson, personal co mmunication, November 21, 2008). Perhaps more than anything else, the trans portation disadvantaged sacrifice the time and freedom to move around as someone with a car would (M. Craw ford, personal interview, December 3, 2008). Paying for the $3 copay pricerecently in creased from $2places a burden on many users. Many riders have very limited financia l resources, especially t hose who need dialysis, chemotherapy, and those with Alzheimers. U nder those conditions they cannot work, though they may get a disability check. A senior citi zen, for example, may be on limited income of about $800 per month. However, it could take about $300 from a limited budget to heat a home during winter or to cool it in summer (M. Crawford, personal interview, December 3, 2008). Then they still have to pay rent. The number s do not add up. Patients often have to choose 73

PAGE 74

between eating and going to dialysis. On a bus y day, MV Transportation will provide about 560 trips. However, since people get their Disability and Social Secu rity checks at the beginning of the month, the number of trips people take dimi nishes to about 425 per day by the end of the month (H. Perez & D. Simpson, personal commun ication, November 21, 2008). Trips originating in Gainesville comprise the bulk of total ride rship. A survey of ride rship by jurisdiction for October 2008 revealed that 1,224 of 10,063 total tr ips originated in rural areas of Alachua County. As shown in Table 4-14, the destination of approximately two-thirds of these trips was Gainesville. Table 4-14. MV Transportation Ridership by Jurisdiction MV Transportation Ridership, October 2008 Origin Destination Rural Gainesville Total Rural 418 806 1224 Gainesville 775 8064 8839 Total Trips 1193 8870 10063 Source: MV Transportation When money gets short, clients will not trav el unless it is a necessity. They will try to find a ride through neighbors and rela tives, if their health permits it. Another option is to not make the trip at all. It also puts more elderly drivers on the roa dpaying $6 for a round trip forces some clients to drive even though it mi ght be unsafe for them to do so. Shopping also becomes complicated. Users are not permitted to bring large loads of bags onto the bus. Therefore, some clients will use the demand response system to go to the grocery store, but they get someone else to pick them up. At the $3 rate it becomes more expensive to go once a week to get two bags of groceries. Pe ople try to arrange some other way to get home (H. Perez & D. Simpson, personal communication, November 21, 2008). In contrast, some people ride the system all the time. They use it as a social act ivity, since many clients use the system frequently. 74

PAGE 75

Some clients, especially seniors, have ended up dating or becoming friends because of the system (L. Godfrey, personal communication, November 13, 2008). Feedback regarding the system is both posit ive and negative. Compla ints might include a late trip, not getting to appoint ment on time, or driver courtesy (H. Perez & D. Simpson, personal communication, November 21, 2008). On-time pe rformance is generally lower for MV Transportation during pickup for return trips. Still, MV Transportation has one of the highest ontime performance rates in the state, though ther e is always room for improvement. Alachua Countys demand-response public transportation system provides a lifeline for many County residents. Without it, many low-income and disa bled residents would have no other means to travel to necessary locations. The Dignity Project The Dignity Project, a community-based or ganization in Gainesville, began in 1998. The program was initially designed to give high-school dropouts a second chance by providing them with technical skills to fix automobiles, while at the same time providing free automobiles to needy families in Alachua County. Currently, the Di gnity Project includes volunteers and interns from the University of Florida, Santa Fe Colle ge, and high schools in Gainesville and Alachua County. In the first nine years of the program more than 645 cars were donated to needy families. The Dignity Project receives cars donated from people in the community. FloridaWorks, the Alachua and Bradford County Workforce Board, pays for 66 cars each year to be given to low-income families. The funding provides for th e cost of these repair s, including parts and labor. To be eligible for the cars, potential recipients have to be working, a parent, and earn less than 200% of the poverty rate. Potential recipients are not permitted to have another car. They must have a valid drivers license, proof of in surance, and demonstrate sufficient income to 75

PAGE 76

afford automobile upkeep. Referrals are screened by FloridaWorks, and then their name goes on a waiting list. Sometimes the Dignity Project might have exactly what is needed immediately, but other timessuch as if there is a large family in need of a minivanfamilies will remain on the waiting list until the needed vehicle is donated and repaired. However, completing 66 vehicles in one year equates to completing more than one per week, so the waiting list usually is not very long (R. Selvester, personal comm unication, November 10, 2008). Though the vehicles are only expected to last about six months to one year, the program provides an important intermediary step for poverty-stricken households. Other people who may not qualify for the fr ee cars provided thr ough the FloridaWorks program can purchase other vehicles repaired by the Dignity Project at low costusually about $500 to $2500. Though a red car might have a blue door, it allows low-income families an opportunity to improve their lives. The Dignity Pr oject provides low-income families with an important intermediate step to improving their mobility. Archer Shuttle The Archer Shuttle began in 2004 and lasted a total of four years. It made one morning and one afternoon trip. The Archer Shuttle made three stops in the City of Archer in the morning, and dropped people off at three locations in Gaines ville that were major Regional Transit System (RTS) route connectionsButler Plaza, Shands, and the Downtown Transfer Station. In the evening, the Archer Shuttle picked people up at th e three Gainesville stops starting in Downtown Gainesville at 5:30 p.m. and travel ed directly back to Archer, a rriving about 6:15 p.m. (J. Skelly, personal communication, October 8, 2008). The Archer Shuttle was a twelve-passenger bus that was wheelchair-lift equipped. The ridership started out fairly low in the first three to six months, but it developed to the point where there were about 8 to 10 passengers riding in and riding back at the height of ridership. Overall, 76

PAGE 77

the Archer Shuttle worked well. Ideas at th e beginning included ma king a loop around Alachua County, or at least going to Newberry. However, in order to make a viab le, employment-oriented service, the transportation needed to travel into Gainesville quickly and return back to Archer fairly directly. If it was raining, or if a rider had grocery bags to carry, the driver could take them directly to their house for an extra $.50 charge (J. Skelly, pe rsonal communication, October 8, 2008). The first two years of service were f unded through a HUD grant for poverty-reduction projects in Archer. When asked what would assi st with poverty reduction in Archer, residents responded with four solutions, one of which was transportation to employment. The costs were about $30,000 a year. After the HUD grant ended, the City of Archer partnered with FDOT to keep it running. During the four y ears of operation, Archer never pa id for anything. The first two years were free rides, and passengers in the last two years paid $1 per trip At the end of four years, the City of Archer was unwilling to enter in to a cost-sharing agreement to keep the Archer Shuttle running, and the program ended. Twelve miles might as well be 50 if you dont have a car (J. Skelly, personal co mmunication, October 8, 2008). City of Alachua Transit System (CATS) CATS began operation in September 2006 and ended in October 2008. The idea for the system arose from the City of Alachuas recr uitment of distribution centers and other major employers into the area. The original intent of the route was to get people in East Gainesville largely a group of low-income workersto the distri bution centers and employment sites. The system also served to transport Alachua resi dents into Gainesville for employment, medical appointments, and shopping. The system cost about three times as much to run as the Archer Shuttlea total of about $90,000 per year, thoug h they did run more service between the 77

PAGE 78

outlying community and Gainesvill e. Each trip cost riders $2. Additional goals of CATS included achieving 30 riders per day and alleviating traffic congestion on the 441 corridor. A significant problem with CATS was the lack of input they received from the community. In its first incarnation, CATS had only a limited number of stops. According to John Skelly, Director of Poverty Reduction for Alachua County, those in charge of the system did not review where their stops were or the timing of th em until about a year and a half into the system (personal communication, October 8, 2008). The syst em was notable for the places where it did not stop. For example, while it stopped at the cen trally located Hitchcocks Grocery Store in Alachua, it did not stop at Alachua County Housing Authorit y housing located about a mile and a half away. If potential users had a car to get to Hitchcocks, they would probably drive to Gainesville instead (R. Selvester, personal communication, November 10, 2008). Furthermore, the first stop in Gainesville, at the Alachua County Health Department, was at 5:50 a.m. This timing likely proved difficult for potential users with school-aged children who needed to go work after their children were already on the way to school. John Skelly provided an anecdotal example of how route structure di d not cater to users needs: A driver did tell me about one woman who liv ed right here in this neighborhood, but the bus was leaving at like 5:45 a.m. and she was afra id to sit out in front here in the dark at 5:45 in the morning. So she was walking downt own to catch the bus. It was safer to sit downtown at the bus transfer place. So th ere was this fairly older woman walking downtown, she caught the bus, and would ride out to Alachua. She worked at Hunter Marine. The closest dropoff point was Hitchcoc ks Grocery Store, which is about a mile from Hunter Marine (persona l communication, October 8, 2008). Perhaps because CATS planners were made aware of some of these problems, CATS revised their schedule to include many additional stops. While this wa s beneficial in getting users where they needed to go, it also may have cau sed a deal of confusion, especially since the change occurred long after the ini tiation of CATS. Ridership in some of the slowest months still 78

PAGE 79

equated to only one or two riders per day. In these months, subsidies per passenger trip equaled more than $100. For the duration of the CATS service, there was a gr eat disparity between revenues, ridership, and expenses. Finally, in a nation where people are already disinclined to take public transportation, the CATS service did not seem to provide any incentives for use. Alachua County already provides the TD program that picks riders up at their doors and takes them directly where they want to go. What is the incentive to use a less convenient fixed-route serv ice if you can go door-to-door? (L. Godfrey, personal communication, November 13, 2008) Despite what it could have been, CATS represented a lack of coordina tion and community involvement that proved costly to both taxpayers and, in the end, to those wh o really needed such a service. Greenride Greenride is an online carpool matching se rvice that seeks to link members of the community making similar commutes. The program was sparked in 2007 from discussion among the Poverty Reduction Advisory Board regardin g the three barriers to employmentchildcare, housing, and transportation (R. Selvester, pe rsonal communication, November 10, 2008). Instead of developing a complicated transit scheme, th e board decided to support the introduction of a carpooling program that would have little capital cost. Users register online and fill out information about their travel plans and commuti ng schedule. Registered users do not have to provide their phone number or any other details unless they choose to do so. Unfortunately, people are not necessarily eager to inconvenience themselves to begin carpooling unless they have a good reason to do so. Unless it will save a good deal of money, many commuters may not be eager to change their lifestyle and lose the flexibility that comes with having a personal vehicle. Many people w ho own automobiles may not be desperate enough that they need someone else to help with gas. Furthermore, carpoolers may be a little 79

PAGE 80

80 apprehensive of meeting somebody online (R. Selvester, personal communication, November 10, 2008). Additionally, potential carpoolers may not be w illing to take extra ti me to pick someone else up, or work shifts may not coordinate. As of November 2008, the program had 310 registered users. The most common starting address for users was SW Gainesville, while the most common ending locations were West Gainesville and Downtown Gainesville. Figure 412 and Figure 4-13 depict these locations. The actual number of functional matches was not avai lable, but the number likely is low. Proper promotion and incentives to use the program ar e key. Making large employers aware of the program should be an effective way to increase use of the program. At large employment centers, employees may not know all of their cowork ers. It might turn out that a coworker lives right around the corner, and both pa rties could save money by taki ng one car to work instead of two. Furthermore, a larger number of registered usersprobably close to 1,000is necessary to make the system viable (R. Selvester, personal communication, November 10, 2008). In places where carpooling is successful, car poolers benefit from incentives such as special parking spots or gift cards. With improved awareness of and incentives to use the program, Greenride could become a viable option for Alachua County and surrounding area residents. Deviated Fixed Route Alachua Countys Deviated Fixed Route servi ce is scheduled to be gin around the end of January, 2009. The service is being developed to assist rural residents who have no alternative transportation (B. Hinson, personal comm unication, December 5, 2008). The $198,000 FDOT grant that funds the program specifies that the route cannot serve anyone residing within Gainesville city limits. Anyone living outside Gainesv ille city limits is eligible to use the service, not just the elderly or TD populations. The serv ice will cost riders $1 per trip (B. Hinson, personal communication, December 5, 2008).

PAGE 81

Source: FloridaWorks Figure 4-12. Greenride Users by Starting Address 81

PAGE 82

82 Source: FloridaWorks Figure 4-13. Greenride Us ers by Destination Address

PAGE 83

Currently, MV Transportation, th e service provider fo r the Deviated Fixed Route, is still in the process of developing the routes. MV Transportation has been studying ridership in Alachua County in order to determine what cities w ill be most viable for service. Phase I of the program will include three fixed routes operating on alternating days that will deviate of a mile off the fixed route for riders who call ahead The three routes will serve east, west, and north Alachua County respectively. For exam ple, route one and two may run Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, and route three may r un Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. The route will run six days a week and no more than 10 hour s a day. If the service is successful, more grant money will be secured to increase the service. The route serving Alachua and High Springs is identified as the most important due to jobs located along the US-441 corridor (H. Perez & D. Simpson, personal communication, November 21, 2008). Depending on their limitations, MV Transporta tion will try to encourage people to use the Deviated Fixed Route instead of the regular demand response se rvice. Most likely the riding time will be longer on the route. If riders have a doctors appoin tment, they will probably use Medicaid to go directly there. Th e fixed route only takes users to designated locations, such as the Downtown Station in the City of Gainesville. A large ridership is necessary for the success and continuation of the program. Proper promotion is an important element of the success of the deviated fixed route. Currently, Alachua County has plans to bu ild a senior center at US-441 and NW 53rd Avenue. The senior center will be a place where the elderly can go to get meals and socialize. The current senior center provide s transportation services, and the Center for Independent Living stresses that a successful center needs ad equate transportation (L. Godfrey, personal 83

PAGE 84

communication, November 13, 2008). The Deviated Fixed Route will provide a reliable means of transportation for senior citizens in outlying areas to visit the center. Some potential problems exist that will affect the success of the route. First, Alachua County and MV Transportation have no plans to survey any communities or potential riders due to lack of funds. Additionally, advertising and prom otion may prove difficult. Still, as a for-profit provider, MV Transportation has a vested interest in making the system successful in order to keep the contract. Alachua County s hould strive to have riders use the most cost efficient system possible in order to cut down on the cost s of providing demand response service. Summary Providing mobility for Alachua County reside nts is an important concern. Previous and current programs in Alachua County have attemp ted a variety of solutions in order provide transportation links for residents, including de mand response, shuttle service, carpooling, and automobile provision. This overview reveals that the most successful programs incorporate input from the potential users of the system before its implementation and during the course of its operation. Residents must buy in to a program in order for it to be successful. Table 4-15 provides a summary of each progr am discussed in this chapter. 84

PAGE 85

85 Table 4-15. Alachua County Transportation Options Summary of Alachua Count y Transportation Options Status Target Popu lation Sponsor Method TD Program Active Low-income, elderly, disabled Alachua County Demand response The Dignity Project Active Low-income Communitybased; some funding from FloridaWorks Provide free and low-cost automobiles Archer Shuttle Discontinued Low-income commuters HUD, FDOT Van shuttle CATS Discontinued Low-income, unemployed City of Alachua Public transportation Greenride Active Unemployed FloridaWorks Carpooling Deviated Fixed Route Not Yet Initiated Rural Alachua County residents FDOT Public transportation and demand response

PAGE 86

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS This paper focuses specifically on the burdens facing rural, low-income families residing in public housing trying to seek mobility in an automobile-dominated landscape. Interviews of Alachua County Housing Authority residents located in five rural communities in Alachua County were conducted in order to gain an understanding of transportation-related issues they face. Interviews focused on determining daily travel habits, common transportation-related problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasing and cost burden, and possible solutions. In all, a total of 21% of the 203 Alachua County Hous ing Authority units in outlying communities were represented in the study. Accessibility assessment Many respondents dislike the f act that the rural community in which they reside lacks the amenities of Gainesville. Based on observation and comments, residents of the larger rural communities are better off, as shown in Table 5-1. In Waldo, the smallest of the rural communities surveyed, residents must travel outside the city for nearly all services. In contrast, Alachua, the largest of the communities, has a co nsiderably larger proportion of services nearby. While Alachua residents still lacked amenities, they also had better access to schools, doctors offices, and local employment than residents in other outlying communities. During the interviewing process, respondents were asked to name missing amenities from their community of residence. Particularly concerning is the reported lack of medical facilities in Waldo, Hawthorne, Archer, and Newberry. 86

PAGE 87

Table 5-1. Accessibility Anal ysis According to Respondents Reported Lacking Amenities Waldo Hawthorne Archer Newberry Alachua Adequate grocery store X X Doctor's offices X X X X Dentist (or no dentist accepting Medicaid) X X Pharmacy X X Middle School X X High School X X Adequate shopping (including Wal-Mart) X X X X X Cleaner/Laundromat X X Bank X Hairdresser X X Government assistance offices, food charities, and HR Services X X X X Sufficient entertainment (movies, restaurants, etc.) X X X Vehicle Access Many respondents living in outlying rural communities in Alachua County do not have reliable personal transportation. Lack of relia ble transportation aff ects respondents in many ways, from completing everyday errands to access to jobs. Thirty-eight percent of respondents 16 peoplereported not having a ve hicle available in the househol d. All 16 of those without a vehicle reported getting rides with others, as seen in Tabl e 5-2. Eight respondents reported walking or using MV Transportation to get around in addition to getting rides with others. Furthermore, owning a vehicle does not neces sarily mean respondents have reliable transportation. Of those with vehicles, 31% repo rted having problems with vehicle reliability. These figures suggest an inhere nt lack of dependable transpor tation among 57% of respondents. Table 5-3 and Table 5-4 depict vehicle availa bility and reliability reported by respondents. 87

PAGE 88

Table 5-2. Mode of Travel for Respondents Lacking Automobiles Mode of Travel by Those Without Vehicle Access Gets Rides with Others Only Gets Rides with Others and Walks Gets Rides with Others and Uses MV Transportation Total Waldo 2 1 0 3 Hawthorne 0 2 2 4 Archer 0 1 1 2 Newberry 4 0 0 4 Alachua 2 0 1 3 8 4 4 16 Table 5-3. Vehicl e Availability Car Currently Available in Household Yes No Total Percent Without Vehicle Waldo 5 3 8 38% Hawthorne 5 4 9 44% Archer 4 2 6 33% Newberry 4 4 8 50% Alachua 8 3 11 27% 26 16 42 38% Table 5-4. Vehicle Reliability Reliable Vehicle in Household Yes No Total Percent with Unreliable Vehicle Waldo 4 1 5 20% Hawthorne 3 2 5 40% Archer 3 1 4 25% Newberry 2 2 4 50% Alachua 6 2 8 25% 18 8 26 31% Employment Consensus from respondents is that many more people would have jobs if it were easier to get to them. Those who are cu rrently unemployed but seeking work realize that Gainesville is the place where job opportunities exist. Unfo rtunately, joblessness is prevalent among respondents and their families. As shown in Tabl e 5-5, 56% of all respondents and their families 88

PAGE 89

89 are currently unemployed, though so me of these responses include those who are disabled, retired, or otherwise unable to work. Table 56 shows that among those currently employed, 65% work outside their community of residence, sugg esting lack of local job access and the necessity for reliable transportation. Fo r those without adequate transp ortation, looking for a job is extremely difficult. Table 5-7 demonstrates that ve hicle availability does not necessarily relate to employment. Forty-one percent of respondents both work and have a vehicle, while 37% do not work and do not have a vehicle. Table 5-5. Household Employment Member of Household Currently Employed Yes No Total Percent Unemployed Waldo 5 3 8 38% Hawthorne 3 6 9 67% Archer 3 3 6 50% Newberry 2 5 7 71% Alachua 5 6 11 55% 18 23 41 56% Table 5-6. Location of Employment Work in City of Residence Yes No Total Percent Employed Out of Town Waldo 2 2 4 50% Hawthorne 1 2 3 67% Archer 1 2 3 67% Newberry 0 2 2 100% Alachua 2 3 5 60% 6 11 17 65%

PAGE 90

Table 5-7. Employment and Vehicl e Availability Cross Tabulation Employment and Vehicle Availability Employed with Available Vehicle Percent Employed with Available Vehicle Employed without Available Vehicle Percent Employed without Available Vehicle Unemployed with Available Vehicle Percent Unemployed with Available Vehicle Unemployed without Available Vehicle Percent Unemployed without Available Vehicle Total Waldo 4 50% 1 13% 1 13% 2 25% 8 Hawthorne 3 33% 0 0% 2 22% 4 44% 9 Archer 3 50% 0 0% 1 17% 2 33% 6 Newberry 2 29% 0 0% 1 14% 4 57% 7 Alachua 5 45% 0 0% 3 27% 3 27% 11 17 41% 1 2% 8 20% 15 37% 41 90

PAGE 91

Sacrificed Mobility High gas prices in 2008 had an extremely negative effect among respondents almost universally. Table 5-9 demonstrates skyrocketing gasoline pri ces facing Americans during 2008. The summer months were particularly difficult fo r many respondents, though prices at the end of 2008 offered them some reprieve. Even those without vehicles reported greater difficulty securing rides with others when gas prices we re high. A full 90% of respondents reduced some aspect of their normal mobility due to high gas prices, as can be seen in Table 5-8. Depending on individual financial situations sacrificed mobility took on different forms. Some respondents switched modes of transportation to a more fuel efficient vehicle if one was available in the household. Some started carpooling. Many respondents reported not leaving the house unless it was necessary in order to conserve gasoline fo r necessary trips. Respondents reported more severe mobility-related consequences such as missing scheduled doctors appointments. Some had to call in to work because of lack of gas mo ney to get there. Others would not visit with outof-town family as frequently. Some had to mi ss family-related events such as children or grandchildrens sports games. Others neglected shopping trips. Table 5-8. Respondent Reported Sacrificed Mobility Sacrificed Mobility Due to Lack of Adequate Transportation or High Costs Yes No Total Percent with Sacrificed Mobility Waldo 6 2 8 75% Hawthorne 8 1 9 89% Archer 6 0 6 100% Newberry 8 0 8 100% Alachua 10 1 11 91% 38 4 42 90% 91

PAGE 92

Table 5-9. Average Retail Gasoline Prices, 2007 and 2008 Motor Gasoline Retail Prices (2007-2008) Year U.S. City Average Retail Price (U.S. Dollars) 2007 January 2.32 2007 February 2.33 2007 March 2.64 2007 April 2.91 2007 May 3.18 2007 June 3.10 2007 July 3.01 2007 August 2.83 2007 September 2.84 2007 October 2.84 2007 November 3.12 2007 December 3.07 2007 Average 2.85 2008 January 3.10 2008 February 3.08 2008 March 3.31 2008 April 3.49 2008 May 3.81 2008 June 4.12 2008 July 4.14 2008 August 3.84 2008 September 3.75 2008 October 3.23 2008 November 2.21 2008 December 1.74 2008 Average 3.32 Source: Energy Information Administration (2009) Difficulty Paying Necessary Expenses Necessary bill payments proved troublesome for many respondents. As shown in Table 5-10, 64% of respondents reported problems with making on-time payments, especially when gas prices were high. Many missed car payments, were late with rent, or had trouble buying groceries. Many also missed utility payments and c onsequently had their electricity, gas, or water shut off. Furthermore, this figure does not include those respondents who we re forced to cut back in other areas in order to save money for these necessary expenses. Especially when gas prices 92

PAGE 93

were high in 2008, gasoline became another bill to pile on top of already-overwhelming expenses. Table 5-10. Respondent Di fficulty Paying Expenses Difficulty Paying Necessary Expenses Yes No Total Percent with Difficulty Paying Necessary Expenses Waldo 6 2 8 75% Hawthorne 8 1 9 89% Archer 3 3 6 50% Newberry 5 3 8 63% Alachua 5 6 11 45% 27 15 42 64% Additional Difficult ies and Sacrifices Respondents recognized that pa ying for transportationespecially when gas prices were highcaused them to make many difficult choice s in their daily lives. Table 5-11 summarizes the difficult choices that respondents had to make, most often in order to pay for high transportation costs. The summary table also in cludes, for example, those who chose to pay utilities over other necessary payments or those who made groceries a prio rity over other types of purchases. For example, one respondent in Archer had her furniture repossessed; though she had enough money at the time to get it back, she opted to purchase groceries instead. The work and transportation link was reiterated many ti mes by respondents. Those seeking employment faced many difficulties finding work without a car. Furthermore, two respondents reported losing their job due to not having adequate transporta tion to work. One respondent was late too often due to carpooling, while the othe r had her car repossessed and lost her job when the person she was carpooling with fell ill. Difficult choices between seemingly-essential daily activities were commonplace in the lives of many respondents. Pa ying for transportation costs was one of many tradeoffs, though high gasoline prices were a significant contributor to hardship. 93

PAGE 94

Table 5-11. Reported Additional Difficulties and Sacrifices Difficulties, Sacrifices, or Changes to Daily Activities Due to Lack of Transportation or High Transportation Costs Number of Respondents CHANGES TO TRAVEL PATTERNS Increased Trip Chaining and Fewer Individual Trips 13 Stayed Home More 8 Switched to More Fuel-Efficient Vehicle 4 Increased Walking 4 Harder to Get Rides with Others 3 Giving Rides to Reliant Family Members 3 Not Making Trip if Unable to Get a Ride 2 Carpooling 1 Stranded During Workday without Vehicle 1 BILLS AND EXPENSES Paying Utilities 13 Problems Purchasing Groceries 13 Increased Budgeting 3 Making Car Payments 2 Paying for Vehicle Repairs 2 Purchasing 2 Paying for Prescriptions 2 No Money to Pay for Rides with Others 2 Borrowed Money 1 Furniture Repossessed 1 Purchasing Diapers 1 IMPACTS IN OTHER AREAS Missed Family and School-Related Events 7 Missed Doctor Appointments 6 Hard to Get Work without Transportation 4 Lost Job 2 Changed Churches 1 EXTRAS Stopped Eating Out 2 Unable to Purchase Toys or Spend Extra Money on Children 2 Getting Nails Done 2 Entertainment 1 Cigarettes 1 Sacrificing utility payments, increased trip chaining, fewer overall trips, and problems purchasing groceries were the most prevalent problems cited by respondents. Groceries are a particular concern. For about one-third of res pondents, high gasoline prices affected eating 94

PAGE 95

habits. Respondents were either not able to buy the food they needed, not able to shop at the grocery stores they desired, or were generally unable to buy any extras like snacks or more expensive meat. Though this research did not consid er specific changes in eating habits, it is fair to assume that nutrition likely suffered as families more frequently focused on purchasing inexpensive food in grocery stores. Moving for Improved Access Table 5-12 summarizes respondent willingness to move for improved access to services and employment. Sixteen respondents discussed the possibility of moving to Gainesville in order to increase proximity to needed amenities. Of that number, 13 were against the idea. Reasons given included fear of drugs, tra ffic, the opinion that their current residence was better for raising children, or a preference for the peace of the co untry. Only three of 16 would consider actually moving to Gainesville. Two of that number expre ssed desire to move but fear the ability to find affordable housing. Only one of the 16 actually has concrete plans to move to Gainesville. Since many residents do not consider moving an option, in creased mobility in their current places of residence appears to be the only viable option fo r connecting residents to necessary services and amenities located elsewhere. Table 5-12. Respondent Willingness to Move Willing to Move to Gainesville for Better Access to Amenities Yes No Total Percent Willing to Relocate 3 13 16 19% Access to Groceries Many residents do not have easy access to grocery stores. The vast majority of respondents in Waldo and Archer shop outside of town for groceries; respondents claimed that the local stores do not have the selection they need and the prices are too high. With the exception of residents of Alachua, the vast majority of respondents%preferred shopping 95

PAGE 96

at a grocery store outside thei r community of residence, as shown in Table 5-13. Even when including the Alachua figures, 45% of respondents would rather s hop at a grocery store outside their communityusually stores in Gainesville, which are generally considered to be cheaper and better. In this situation, transportation ag ain becomes an issue. Respondents living in outlying communities generally must drive to the gr ocery store or rely on someone else to take them there. Residents in Newberry and Hawthorne expressed that they will walk to the grocery store if necessary. However, the walk in Hawthorne requires respondents in that community to walk a circuitous route around an overpass, an es pecially difficult feat for older people and women with small children. Table 5-13. Preferred Grocery Store Location Preferred Grocery Store Locat ed in Community of Residence Yes No Total Percent Pref erring External Grocery Store Waldo 0 3 3 100% Hawthorne 2 2 4 50% Archer 0 3 3 100% Newberry 3 1 4 25% Alachua 7 1 8 13% 12 10 22 45% Park and Ride More than any other form of alternative transportation solutio n, respondents doubted the viability of park and ride. In this study, base d on present transportation options in Alachua County, park and ride was defined as driving from the community of residence to a hypothetical Gainesville park and ride facility. Several held the opinion that if someon e had a car, they would prefer to simply drive to thei r destination. Michael from Waldo had a prescient opinion about the viability of park and ride. If he has time availabl e, he will drive to Gainesville, park at a large shopping center such as Wal-Mart and use public transportation for the remainder of his trips 96

PAGE 97

because he can purchase an all-day bus pass cheapl y. His opinion of the viability of park and ride is that its a time issue. If someone is on a tight schedule, they likely will not want to take extra time to catch the bus. As Michael responded, I only do it when I have a lot of time. Essentially, there are locations for people to park and ride already if they choose to. Table 5-14 summarizes respondent opinion abou t park and ride. Table 5-14. Respondent Opin ion about Park and Ride Park and Ride is a Vi able Transportation Solution Yes No Not Sure Total Percent Responding "Yes" Waldo 0 4 2 6 0% Hawthorne 1 1 2 4 25% Archer 0 3 0 3 0% Newberry 0 1 0 1 0% Alachua 0 2 1 3 0% 1 11 5 17 6% Public Transportation Of all alternative tr ansportation solutions, bus service was generally agreed upon as being the most likely to succeed. Table 5-15 demonstrat es that 83% of respon dents said they thought public transportation of some sort was a viable solution. Several respondents stated they would rather ride the bus than pay for ga s; therefore, if gas prices rise as drastically as they did in 2008, many respondents would likely be pushed to use a bus. In the present, many respondents said a bus would help them personally, though others said they would only use it in an emergency. Almost universally, respondents said they though t a bus would help others. Quite a few people expressed that the presence of a bus would help them to be able to look for a job in Gainesville. Without a car and access to loca l jobs, their options are severe ly limited. One respondent in Archer stated that because thos e using the bus are unlikely to ha ve a good job or much cash flow, fare prices need to be reasona bleno more than $2 per trip. The same respondent thought bus 97

PAGE 98

service should run until at least 10 p.m. in order to gain th e most riders. Interestingly, this respondent saw public transportation as a wealthbuilding tool. She made the point that people might use the bus in order to save enough mone y to purchase their own vehicle. The general consensus of respondents in this study is that for a viable bus service to exist, the route structure and schedule must conform to the needs of the systems usersotherwis e it will not survive. Table 5-15. Respondent Opinion about Public Transportation Public Transportation is a Viable Transportation Solution Yes No Not Sure Total Percent Responding "Yes" Waldo 5 1 2 8 63% Hawthorne 8 0 1 9 89% Archer 5 0 1 6 83% Newberry 8 0 0 8 100% Alachua 7 0 2 9 78% 33 1 6 40 83% CATS The CATS system in Alachua provides insight into what users are looking for in a public transportation system. Only one respondent in Al achua, Rashidha, had ever used the system. She used the route once or twice per week to do er rands in Gainesville. Another respondent had a daughter who had tried to use it a few times. Two people had never even heard about the system. Several complaints were prevalent: Trips were not frequent enough. Respondents want ed to see more than just two trips per day. One respondent wanted the bus to come every two hours; anot her thought it should come at least three times per day. The first trip in the morning was too early. The last trip in the afternoon returned too early. Riders had a difficult time making it back to the bus stop in time to catch the route home. Rashidha reported that she had to ask her sister for a ride home on multiple occasions because she missed her home connection. A general lack of advertising and information about the route. 98

PAGE 99

People had to walk too far to catch the route. The failure of the CATS system stresses the impo rtance of taking user needs into account when designing a route. Asking users wh at they need is essential to maintaining ridership as well as helping people get where they need to go. Carpooling Opinions about carpooling were fairly split among respondents, according to Table 5-16. About 40% considered it a viable solution. Most respondents recogni ze the benefits of carpooling if it is convenient for both carpoolers. Many people stated they know people who carpool because they work right down the street from each other. However, most people do not want to wait for others. If they own their own ve hicle, they want to have the full independence and freedom that comes along with it. They do not wa nt to have to stop with other people to run errands. They do not want to be bothered with adhering to someone elses schedule. However, some also recognize the cost saving aspect of carpooling and would do so if necessary. In keeping with Fergusons (1997) study, the preval ence of carpooling would likely increase with a rise in gas prices. Table 5-16. Respondent Op inion about Carpooling Carpooling is a Viable Transportation Solution Yes No Not Sure Total Percent Responding "Yes" Waldo 2 3 1 6 33% Hawthorne 4 1 0 5 80% Archer 0 3 2 5 0% Newberry 1 2 1 4 25% Alachua 5 4 1 10 50% 12 13 5 30 40% Summary Overall, cars are viewed as a necessity by mo st respondents. Most of those without an automobile aspire to have one. A car is a sym bol of freedom, especially for those who grew up 99

PAGE 100

relying on others. When moving to rural areas, many respondents accept the inevitability of driving. According to Sophia from Archer, I f you dont have a car, you are through. Several respondents noted the drive until you qualify-type tradeoff that comes with cheaper housing in the country. For example, Ruthie from Newb erry knew when she moved there that her transportation costs were going to increase. As she put it, Sometimes you have to weigh the good with the bad. Despite the freedom that owni ng an automobile has come to symbolize, high gas prices highlight the fact that freedom is c onditional. High transportation costs create hard choices. Most people gave up freedom of mobility. Many others gave up more serious things, such as their health. As Al from Waldo stat ed rather pointedly, It was either gas or McDonalds. Both Al and Sophia stated that time s were very hard, and they were about ready to give up when gas prices were high in 2008. For t hose with and without a car, reliance on family members was important for nearly all respondents. If a car breaks down, if a bus is missed, if someone lacks the gas money to drive home from workrespondents report that local family members were always there to assist them. Some, however, realized a limit to family obligationsthose family members have bills to pay themselves. Transportation costs and lack of adequate mobility create many problems for the wellbeing of respondents in this study. Even if respo ndents did not perceive themselves as personally affected by high gas prices, there was universal agreement that high gas prices were hard on people. With the nearly-inevitable rise of gas pr ices in the future, viable solutions must be available for this population in order to assist in wealth accumulati on and overall poverty reduction. 100

PAGE 101

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION The results of this study reveal that pub lic housing residents in rural communities face many transportation-related barriers. Lack of mobilitycombined with the limited availability of services in rural communitiesare contributing factors to the difficulties many rural residents face in meeting daily needs. Households lacki ng a car are especially vulnerable. Means of mobility for these households are often unreliable and costly. Several strategies, however, will assist in easing problems of mobility and accessibility for respondents in this study. Accessibility Assessment An assessment of available amenities in each rural community in this study reveals the extent to which some residents rely on services located outside thei r place of residence. Interviews with respondents revealed that Waldo residents had the l east access to amenities, while Alachua residents had the most access. An assessment of number and types of businesses in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 reveals this to be the case. Generally, the population in each rural community was proportional to the number of businesses. Table 6-1. Rural Community Businesses Community Number of Businesses Number of Business Types 2008 Population Estimates Waldo 10 9 836 Hawthorne 54 42 1,436 Archer 74 60 1,225 Newberry 221 136 4,914 Alachua 482 253 8,742 Source: InfoUSA 2007 and US Census Bureau Recommendations Low-income Alachua County residents are burdened by high transportation costs. However, many are forced to pay because families are unlikely to generate income if they cannot 101

PAGE 102

Table 6-2. Accessibility Assessment Accessibility Assessment: Actual Amenities Business Type Waldo Hawthorne Archer Newberry Alachua Grocery Store N Y Y Y Y Clinic N N N N Y Physician N Y Y Y Y Church Y Y Y Y Y Post Office Y Y N Y Y Dialysis N N N N Y Dentist N Y N Y Y Child Care N Y Y Y Y Fire Department N N Y Y Y Pharmacy N N N Y Y Library N Y Y Y Y School N Y Y Y Y Clothing-Retail N N N Y Y Cleaner/Laundromat N N Y Y Y Health Club N Y N Y Y Bank N Y Y Y Y Hairdresser/Salon N Y Y Y Y Government Offices N Y Y Y Y Restaurant N Y Y Y Y Source: InfoUSA 2007 get to work. Well-designed serv ice provision to low-income rura l dwellers can greatly enhance mobility and encourage job retention and wea lth accumulation. The problems are difficult to solve, but coordinated soluti ons can provide much-needed a ssistance. In Alachua County, successful transportation options likely involve a spoke system that provides mobility for users and also does not cost them gr eat amounts of time. In centives must be impl emented to use the service, especially if it is to be used as anything but a last-resort option. Suggestions for the literature also provide useful recommendations in relation to the case of Alachua County. Garaksy, Fletcher, and Jensen (2006), Hughes (1995), and Sche ll (2000) suggest expanding options by extending transit service, encourag ing ride sharing and vanpooling, and providing subsidies for automobile purchase and insuranc e. Blumenberg and Ong (1998) suggest offering support services such as a guaranteed ride-home for unforeseen emergencies. 102

PAGE 103

Additional resources could augment the mob ility of Alachua Countys rural dwellers. Several are not as obviously tran sportation-related as others. Fo r example, providing some form of after-school childcare would assist single pare nts by freeing up daytime schedules to allow for full work days. Currently, job opportunities for single parents without childcare are limited due to time restrictions that require parents to be home after school to look after their children. Additionally, providing job training could help low-skilled work ers gain additional education necessary to receive a job. Intergovernmental coordination is necessary. Programs are much less likely to be successful with the combined expertise of va rious government agencies. For example, the Alachua County Housing Authority could coordinate with both FloridaWorks and Alachua County Community Support Services in order to pr ovide job training for re sidents. Furthermore, these agencies could coordinate to provide af ter-school child care for residents. Training and education could be performed on-site to allo w for greater accessibility for Alachua County Housing Authority residents. These agencies could also unite to help residents meet daily needs, such as obtaining groceries. For example, local agencies could organize a delivery service with local grocery stores in order to provide groceries for the elderly and other residents lacking a vehicle. Transportation strategies should focus on mob ility. According to the results of this study, most respondents are not willing to change th eir residential location. The solution, then, is making it easier for people to get from their present location to services and employment in other cities. In order for services to be viable, however, those who will be using transportation services need to be involved in planning them. The Al achua County case study re veals that a top-down approach is not necessarily the most successful means of providing public transportation. Extra 103

PAGE 104

effort needs to be extended to create a participatory approach to public transportation planning. Additionally, any public transportation provided from outlying communities into Gainesville must coordinate with the Regi onal Transit System (RTS) in or der to provide good connectivity for system users. Without public support and intergovernmental coordination, services cannot be viable. Education should be a component of the process. Fa milies need to realize that car ownership is a significant drain on family resources. If low-in come residents of Alachua County more fully understand the costs associated with car owners hip, they will likely be more receptive to alternative forms of transportation. Furthermore, public transportation mu st be provided at a reasonable price for users. Finally, as gas prices increased, respondents reported an increased willingness to utilize alternative forms of transpor tation. If gas prices rise again, this population will likely be receptive to proposed solutions. Generally, park and ride lots should be less of a focus within the City of Gainesville for the type of resident interviewed in this study. If people have a car, they ge nerally prefer to drive the entire distance to their destination. Potent ial park and ride loca tions already exist if automobile owners choose to make use of th em. Still, despite respondent comments, it is important to note the unique set of circumstances presented the presence of the University of Florida in Alachua County. For any of those commu ting to the university or the adjacent Shands and VA hospitals, park and ride lots make more sense due to the difficulty and expense of parking on campus. While the respondents in this study were so lely public housing residents, other lowincome rural residents face many of the same issues. Transportation costs can become overwhelming for all households struggling to make ends meet. No easy solution exists to 104

PAGE 105

105 solving the transportation problems of low-income rural residents. But the struggles are real. Public participation and intergove rnmental coordination are necessary to meet the needs of this population. Mobility and accessibility to goods and services are necessary to the well-being of low-income rural residents. Adequate transp ortation and programmingsuch as child care, job training, and educationcan augment both wealth accumulation and personal health of lowincome rural dwellers.

PAGE 106

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusion On average, transportation is the second-largest expenseafter housingfor families. Costs are rising in general, and low-income a nd working families are having trouble keeping up. Real income has been declining while gas and other consumer prices are increasing. Urban form and spatial patterns often make car ownership es sential. The mismatch of job location and lowincome housing creates long commutes and increa sed transportation costs precisely for those households that cannot afford it. This thesis focuses specifically on the burdens facing rural, low-income families in Alachua County seeking mobility in an automobile -dominated landscape. Specifically, it seeks to account for problems faced by needy populations through engaging a dimension of Alachua Countys transportation disadvantag ed in a dialogue regarding their transportation problems and needs. An overview of Alachua County transpor tation solutions to link residents of outlying communities to Gainesville provides insight into wh at types of programs have been successful in the past. Providing mobility for Alachua County re sidents is an important concern. Previous and current programs in Alachua County have attemp ted a variety of solutions in order provide transportation links for residents, including de mand response, shuttle service, carpooling, and automobile provision. Successful programs incorpor ate input from the potential users of the system before its implementation and during the course of its operation. In this study, a total of 42 semi-structured open-ended pers onal interviews focusing on issues regarding transportation in rural commun ities were conducted with residents of Alachua County Housing Authority proj ects in five rural communitie s in Alachua CountyAlachua, Archer, Hawthorne, Newberry, a nd Waldo. Interviews focused on determining daily travel 106

PAGE 107

habits, common transportation-related problems, impacts on other areas of life such as food purchasing and cost burden, and types of solutions they deem most viable. Some interviews were more in-depth and yielded more information than others, depending on both the interviewees willingness to answer questions and interviewer discretion. Residents of rural commun itiesespecially low-income households lacking a carface many barriers that are transportation-related. The results of this study reveal that public housing residents in rural communities face many transportation-related barriers. Lack of mobility combined with the limited availability of services in rural communitiesare contributing factors to the difficulties many rural residents face in m eeting daily needs. Households lacking a car are especially vulnerable. Means of mobility for these households ar e often unreliable and costly. Still, most respondents in this study view autom obiles as a necessity. Most of those without an automobile aspire to have one. A car is a sym bol of freedom, especially for those who grew up relying on others. When moving to rural areas, many respondents accept the inevitability of driving. Several respondents noted the drive until you qua lify type of tradeoff that comes with cheaper housing in the country. Despite the freedom that owning an automob ile has come to symbolize, high gas prices drive home the fact that freedom is conditional. High transportation costs created hard choices. Most people gave up freedom of mobility. Many others gave up more serious things, such as their health. Even if respondents did not perceive themselves as personally affected by high gas prices, there was universal agreem ent that high gas prices created hardship for others. However, as gas prices increased, respondent s reported an increased willingness to utilize alternative forms of transportation. For those with and without a car, reliance on family members was important for nearly all respondents. If a car breaks down, if a bus is missed, if someone lacks the gas 107

PAGE 108

money to drive home from workrespondents repor t that local family members were always there to assist them. Some, however, realiz ed a limit to family obligationsthose family members have bills to pay themselves. No easy solution exists to solving the transportation problems of low-income rural residents. Several solutions were proposed in this study, including chil dcare, job training, and intergovernmental coordination. Transportation services should incorporate a mobility strategy to and be offered at a reasonable cost to users. Planning should involve a pa rticipatory strategy to both educate and gain public support. Further Research Recommendations Currently, research on rural communities and their link to nearby urban areas is lacking. For the rural residents of Alachua County, liv ing in outlying communities often involves a conscious choice to do so. Furt her research could examine those choices and compare the conditions of low-income housing in urban areas w ith the conditions in rural areas. Furthermore, housing and transportation affordability in rural areas needs additional attention. Research could examine the amount of money spent to live in ru ral areas as opposed to better-connected urban areas. For example, further research could ex amine the amount of additional transportation expenditures, the amount of wealth lost by la ck of access to jobs, and additional cost of groceries. Since the health of those living in rural areas is also likely to suffer, further studies could link the hardships faced by those with lack of tr ansportation with their ac cess to nutritious food and doctors. A study could compare differences in health level among those with access to reliable transportation and those without it. An additional area of research dealing with the differences between those with and without acce ss to reliable transportation is employment. A 108

PAGE 109

109 study could track the job acquisition rates among cu rrently unemployed rural residents with and without reliable transportation. Finally, when rural transporta tion alternatives are implemented, systems need to work for those who will be using them. Case studies shoul d be conducted in order to determine the types of transportation solutions that are beneficial a nd proven to work for rural communities. The case studies should include information from pre-planning stages, including any public and stakeholder involvement processes. Developing an understanding of be st practices in select rural communities will assist in serv ing a greater number of rural residents throughout the nation.

PAGE 110

APPENDIX A SAMPLE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS I want to begin by getting an idea of how you routinely travel in your daily life. Related questions: For example, how do you and your family travel to: work, school, the doctor, or to run errands? How often do you travel to these activities? Where is your job located? By what mode of transportati on do you currently get there? How long does it take you to get there? Do you have a car? If yes: Do you have insurance? Do you have a valid drivers license? How reliable is it? How much do you spend on repairs and gas? If no: How much do you pay for a trip to go places? Do you have a car, or do you have access to a car? Do you have a valid drive rs license? If no, why not? If you borrow a car, do they charge you fo r it? Do you have to put gas in it? Would you ride a bike if you could? I want to get an idea of what kind of transp ortation-related problems you routinely face. What problems do you have getting where you want to go? If work related: Have you ever lost a job due to lack of transportation? Have you ever had to unwillingly change jobs due to lack of transportation? Have you ever moved or thought about moving so you would have better access to a higher-paying job? If non-work related: Have you missed school functions for children? Have you missed medical exams or appointments because of lack of transportation? What are your perceptions about problems that friends and neighbor s are having right now getting where they want to go? Next, I want to get an idea of how trans portation impacts other areas of your life. Related questions: Have high costs of gasoline and the current economic climate limite d where you can go? Do you have trouble paying rent or buying groceries, etc? If you dont work, would you work if you had transportation? If you had better transportation, what changes would you make in your life? How does transportation affect the way you eat? How do you get a big load of groceries home? What have you had to give up b ecause of higher gas prices? 110

PAGE 111

Is it recreation for your kids? Food? Have you ever avoided going to scho ol functions for your children? Have you missed medical exams or a ppointments because of lack of transportation? Has the gas issue made you more mindf ul of doing errands in one trip? If you dont have transportation, what things do you do so that it do esnt matter? (Mail rent and utility bills, walk to the store). Do you have everything you need nearby? How do you figure out how to pay for gas? Weve talked about how you travel and some of the problems that you face in getting where you want to go. I want to get your opini on about some possible solutions. Related questions: Would you use public transportation if it was available? Would you park at a location in Gainesville and take the bus th e rest of the way to work? Would you participate in a carpool or vanpool program? How often would you use such services and how much would you be willing to pay for them? Would you be more willing to use alternativ e forms of transportation if you had a guaranteed ride home? Would you be more willing to use alternativ e forms of transportation if there was a shuttle bus to nearby shopping or other locations from your place of work? Are there any issues youd like to talk about that we haven t touched on today? 111

PAGE 112

APPENDIX B RESPONDENT COMMENTS Waldo Respondent Name Response Means of transportation in daily life Gladys Ride with family No car Hardly ever goes to Gainesville Goes to doctor every three months Walks 5-10 minutes to work at Waldo Community School Goes to Acorn Clinic in Brooker Ellis Works about 7 miles away Goes to Gainesville for serv ices not available in Waldo Angela Drives usually Van currently disabled due to missing paym ent (program for first-time buyers-disabled 4 days after a missed payment) Currently getting rides by son's truck Currently out of work Michael Travels by car, has had few problems with it Does odd jobs Al Works at Hardee's and Wendy's (9-4, 5-10!)walks to work Mother uses MV Transportation, now carpools a lotcan't drive stickshift (Al's truck is stick) Brothers and sisters trav el by school bus and activity bus to Hawthorne Only family member with a car, but does n't use it much because he works a lot and "I don't really have anywhere to go" In Waldo, can walk pr etty much everything Once rode bike from Gainesville to Waldo for work beca use of gas prices Pearl Used to live in Waldo, visiting mom Mom pays someone to take her placesstressful sometimes. Lives with niece and nephew Takes MV for medical appointments Gets along decently despite living in the outskirts Guesses mom spends about $100 a month on about five or six rides a month. Most people work in Gainesville No Name Uses car to get to work and take kids to school Mildred Used to work at the local library and walked there Pay someone to come and take her to pay monthly bills and get groceries Transportation-related problems Gladys Sometimes has to cancel doctor's appointments due to ride cancelling Hard to get to store Pays $10, $15 for rides Often has to miss granddaughter's basketball games Daughter has to make car payments every week--sometimes car shut off Lives near a lot of family Daughter buys her groceries in Gainesville or Starke Doubts making changes with better transportation 112

PAGE 113

Concerns about drug dealing in Gainesville--would not move Rent price is going up from $340 to $550 a month Ellis Drives to work Used to spend $30 per week in gas, now $15 or so Car was currently in shop, but has a backup Problems making car payments Will get groceries in Waldo, but al so goes to Star ke and Ha wthorne Angela Has often has transmission problems with vehicle--can't afford to fix Has to choose to fix car or make ca r paymentshas to choose to make the payments at this point Used to paying $5 for half tank of gas; saving money was and is hard Only one income Gave up buying new clothes Got divorce and moved back to Waldo right as gas prices were rising Thought about moving--but wanted to be closer to family because of her kids Lost job due to being late from carpooling Shops in Hawthorne for groceries; wishes Dollar General would sell groceries Would eat better if grocery store was closer; would save her a lot of trips out of town Walks to pay utility bills, shopping, kids to school Maintenance of vehicle is the hardest thing Michael No major transporta tion problems to speak of Drove a different, slightly more fuel effi cient vehicle when gas prices were very high Made fewer, larger grocery trips Less driving around with high gas prices Stayed home more when gas prices were high Al Family had a hard time with high gas prices Grandmother stopped visiting so much due to high gas prices Brother and sisters had a hard time getting to sports practice Family is from Gainesville, moved to Waldo in 2003more peaceful, fewer problems Car in driveway has a full tank, ready for when gas prices go back up Times when family had to go without in order to get where they needed to gopractices, get togethers Mother was a school bus driver.had to either take her to work or she would have to carpool Groceries in the house were a priority "thank god for deals at wal-mart" "About six months ago, times was very hard. I didn't think we could pull through." Shop at Super Wal-mart in Starke, make one big trip usually with his truck Pearl Pretty common for people to ask for money for ridesthey'll say "I don't have much gas"they do need money for gas Younger people might not have a car, older people might not have enough money for gas. You put gas in your car, but it's limitedit can only go so far, either that week or that month When gas prices were high, people hardly went anywere 113

PAGE 114

People getting rides with others had to pay double when gas prices were high, up to about $20 for a ride from Waldo to Gainesville or Starke. Doesnt even include what you buy when you get there Mother calls someone and pays them to take her grocery shopping Pearl's daughter and nephew will take their grandmother places, but they need the gas money too. "A car don't run on air." Mother cannot afford a car. Older lady on a fixed income. Church will sometimes take her places for free. Rent now above $600 per month. Only makes $674 from SSI. Has no money to pay for transportation No Name Gas prices did not really affect him Prefers to raise kids in the country, concerned about dr ugs in Gainesville Transportation is necessary for bettering yourself Many people in rural areas depend on friends and family Mildred Has medical problems that make getting around harder than before Started walking to work because of high gas prices "I'd rather smoke than drive"--made that choice Likes to go to Super Wal-Mart in Starke Friends, neighbors and family transportation-related problems Gladys Complaining about not having gas to get places Lot of handicapped people High charges for rides from neighbors--one man charged $20, and then extra for any stops Knows family and friends who have moved to Gainesville Just about everyone drives to work in Gainesville Neighbor had water shut off because she needed to buy gas instead of paying bill Some people catch Greyhound to go to Gainesville Money to fix cars is a problem--many households need two cars Ellis Know people who have lost jobs, had hours cut Heard talk about people wanting to move Michael Willing to give rides to neighbors if they need it "Too many cars around here to be stranded" Recognizes that people without a car have it hard Al People were making a lot of hard choices with high gas prices, like feeding children.."It was either gas or McDonald's" Mildred Many people walk where they need to go Very difficult to not have a car in a rural area Solutions Gladys Bus--used to have a bus years ago (fare was about $1.50); now, "whatever they charge, I have to pay" Has not heard of deviated fixed route Park and ride might work if it saved people money Lot of people don't want to ride with other people--give excuses about having to make a lot of stops "Just the way peoples is around here"; think their cars are bettter than everyone else's Does not use MV; particular about who she rides with Ellis Thinks bus would cost too much; Greyhound costs $10; thinks $3 would be a reasonable fair 114

PAGE 115

Park and ride a possiblility for people who work in places with bad parking situations Would not carpool--works late sometime s, has other things to do; not an option Angela Doesnt like carpooling because she doe sn't want to feel like a burden on anyone; does it when necessary or if someone needs her help; likes freedom of driving herself; don't want people knowing business Would use bus only as a last resort Does not think people would use park and ride (they could do that now) Michael Would not carpool "I'm going when I'm going and I come back when I come backdont need no riders" Thinks shuttle bus could be helpful and people would take it if it was available "still go to Alachua and Archer" Would take the bus if absolutely necessary Goes into Gainesville, takes his car, and uses RTS (PARK AND RIDE!)less expensive that way "I can ride t he bus all day that way for $2" Opinion of park and ride: "It's a time issue"if you don't have a lot of time, you don't want to catch the bus "I only do it when I have a lot of time" Al Need a shuttle bus to go to Gainesville Park and ride more viable when gas prices are high Pearl City bus to run to Gainesville, bus stop at Sunoco Service to assist elderly by coming out in a car and taking them directly where they need to go Community carpooling, especially to help elderly Would be willing to carpool. Doesn't understand opinions of neighbors. Does not think park and ride would work; people would rather drive the whole way No Name Community-based carpooling or bus syst em with a bus station for users; allows for an element of regulation Pooling money to give people transportation Mildred Doesn't think people would use bus; people could only go to where the bus takes them Found bus system in Gainesville hard to understand when she used to live there Hawthorne Respondent Name Response Means of transportation in daily life Rockell Uses car Kids go to school in Hawthorne Works in NW Gainesville, about an hour drive Shakela Drives Works at Tacachale in Gainesville No Name (1) No car Walks to nearby things Gets rides with mother to places further away Out of work 115

PAGE 116

Lives with sons Travels to Gainesville once or twice per week for dental appointments Wanda No longer works due to health Uses car when not broken down Goes to doctor in Gainesville once per week Gets rides from son when car is broken down 43 years old; lived in same house si nce she was 5; lives by herself No Name (2) Family uses car Car breaks down a lot and can only go about 30 mph currently Lot of health problems in family 27 years old; has 5 children Not supposed to walk much due to health problems She and husband both out of work Brenda Doesn't work No car Friends take her places Only needs to go to Gainesville on the 1st of the month or to take son to doctor Charge $15 or $20 for a ride to Gainesville Calls MV Transportation sometimes if can't get a ride to other places No Name (3) Walks kids to school Get rides from boyfriend Doesn't drive Doesn't work Travels to Gainesville 2 to 3 times per week for doctor's appointments and paying bills Gets rides with neighbors if boyfriend can't give her a ride Angela Uses car Works as school bus driver in Hawthorne Husband works in Gainesville Owns two cars Lealer Uses MV Transportation, happy with it Goes to the hairdresser every two weeks 75 years old Also gets rides with daughter Daughter gets her groceries Used to travel to Gainesville often, but not anymore; calls MV Transportation to go to the Health Department in Gainesville; sometimes every three months, less when she is healthy Transportation-related problems Rockell Started riding motorcycle to save gas Does not use motorcycle regularly because of weather Had to carpool with friend when car broken down Had trouble paying utility bills with high gas prices Shakela People charge $5 to $10 for a ride to Hitchcock's grocery store in town No Name (1) With high gas prices, spent $100 every two weeks on gas Gas became an extra expense, hard to pay Car broke for one month, spent $20 every day for a ride to work in Gainesville Hard to find a job without a car Neighbor would charge $5 or $10 in gas money to go to Gainesville 116

PAGE 117

Mother comes from Archer to pick her up gets rides with her for the most part More people would not give her a ride when gas prices were high Likes that she can walk to everything in Hawthorne Most people need to go to Gainesville at least a few times a week Easier to get a job with better transportation--more options Would not move to Gainesville--too full, concerned about drugs Walks to pay bills and has mother pay ones that need to be paid in Gainesville Hopes gas prices stay down Wanda Sometimes misses doctor appointments when car is broken down Neighbors chanrge $5 just to go to the grocery store "Didn't go nowhere" when gas prices were high; often wanted to go shopping Cannot walk far due to physical limitations On food stamps--lowered to $14; would rather eat than drive Does not have problems paying rent No Name (2) Even relatives ask for money to give rides Charge $20 to go to Gainesville Used to be able to fill tank with $10 No job opportunities in Hawthorne; small towns need more jobs so people don't have to drive so far Cheaper to live in Hawthorne, but more expensive for transportation costs If you travel to Gainesville for work, still have to be back in time to pick up kids from school A lot of traffic in Gainesville tryi ng to get back to Hawthorne on time Hard to pay for prescriptions People carpooling charge $20 per PERSON Hard to cross busy streets with kids when walking in Hawthorne Has had problems with dishonest car dealerships "Without family, it's very hard"but re cognizes they have bills to pay too No Name (3) Doesn't have a job due to lack of transportation; been unemployed two years When gas prices were higher, ma de fewer trips to Gainesville Would make stops on the way home instead of making more trips Angela Used car with cheaper gas (other one takes premium) when gas prices were high Wouldn't do extra things or make extra trips when gas prices were high Go to church in High Springs; switched temporarily to a chur ch in Gainesville when prices were high Need to pay bills and shop in Gainesville and go to the Super Wal-Mart Weren't able to pay whole utility bill some months Family decided to use only one car when gas prices were high Sometimes wouldn't go places if had no gas; reserved gas for work trips Lealer Goes to emergency room when health gets bad Hard to pay utility bills sometimes Sends bills right away after getting paid Wants to go to the mall sometimes, but can't go Hard to pay the increased fare from MV Transportation--$3 each way A lot of people work in Gainesville Friends, neighbors and family transportation-related problems Rockell Trouble pay ing utility bills Trouble buying diapers 117

PAGE 118

Shakela Most people couldn't balance gas for the car and food for kids Many had to call into work because they couldn't afford gas Doesn't know anyone who lost their job due to calling in No Name (1) Most people afraid to drive, almost always out of gas Borrowed a friend's car, and her tr ip literally cost $20 each way Most people work a regular schedule be cause of their kids--need to be home when they're home Wanda People being able to get to the store, into Gainesville, and pay bills Most people have to go to Gainesville to pay bills and buy groceries Travel to Winn Dixie, Food Lion, and Wal-Mart in Gainesville Hitchcock's grocery store doesn't have everything, and prices are going up Angela Complained about not having gas Borrowing money to get gas Lealer Hard to keep money when gas prices were high; not so much talk now Solutions Rockell Willing to carpool when gas prices are high Would take a bus from Hawthorne if available Thinks some would park and ride Shakela Thinks a lot of people carpool Thinks people would use a bus fr om Hawthorne to Gainesville Bus to Gainesville would help peo ple get to work and save on gas No Name (1) Bus to Gainesville would help--cheaper than getting rides Doubts PNR would work, most people with a car wouldn't switch to a bus Archer Shuttle helped a lot of people Wanda Thinks many people would ride a minibus Many people carpool Most kids walk to school; should have a bus or van to get them there on a rainy day Thinks people would park and ride Would park and ride if RTS went where she needed to go (behind North Florida Regional Hospital) No Name (2) City buses would be a big help Help with utility reconnect fees; should allow a grace period for payment and should put small unpaid amounts on the next month's bill Has PNR before, but still have to be home to pick up kids; if one is sick, need to be able to get home quickly Brenda Thinks people would use a bus fr om Hawthorne to Gainesville No Name (3) Bus would help a lot, especially for work Tried to carpool, but hasn't worked--hard to find someone leaving at the same time Angela A bus would have to run good hours Husband and a coworker carpool People in really small places need help getting to town Local transportation for elderly needed, especially for people without kids to take them places Lealer A bus would help people get to work in Gainesville 118

PAGE 119

Archer Respondent Name Response Means of transportation in daily life Sophia Uses car Works at UF in Gainesville Has four kids Anna Drives to work Walks around Archer Works in Dixie County Car currently broken down Takes daughter to school at SFC and uses her vehicle during the day Does not go into Gainesville often--daughter picks up groceries, etc. on her drive home Rides bike with granddaughter, but roads are dangerous for bikes No Name (1) Uses car Not currently working--son diagnosed with leukemmia No problems with car breaking down Have to go into Gainesville for doctor's appointments 3 times per week, and more if her son isn't doing well Gets groceries in Gainesville No Name (2) Pays to get rides No car $20 for a ride to Gainesville Needs to go to Gainesville about twice per month Walks to stores in town Gets a ride to Hitchc ock's in Newberry No Name (3) Gets ride with mom to school at Santa Fe Mom has to drop her off more than an hour early so she can be back at work on time in Gainesville Aunt lives in property --works in Gainesville Aunt has four children Watches Aunt's children in Archer on weekends Has taken MV Transportation to get to school and back No Name (4) Uses car Husband works in Archer Volunteers in various locations Goes to Gainesville 4 or 5 times per month Transportation-related problems Sophia Gas became a significant extra bill in the house Furniture got repossessed Hard to squeeze money for food and other things Lower gas is a nice break Tried to pay whatever she could Put off a lot of things for gas--took money from other places to pay for it Shops for groceries in Gainesville No problems with car breaking down Was paying $318 biweekly for a rental car at one point Worth the money to have a car in order to be guaranteed transportation 119

PAGE 120

Refused to lose job due to not having a car Gainesville doesn't have the pr ivacy and space of Archer "If you don't have a car, you are through." With high gas prices, "I was about ready to give up." Has stayed with mother in Gainesville in the past because she lives right by Sophia's work Only does errands on Friday because she needs to get her paycheck A lot of people would have jobs if it was easier to get to them Often sees people waiting to try to get rides back to Archer (at Tower Square, etc) When furniture was about to be repossessed, had the option to pay $152 to keep it--decided it was more important to buy groceries instead Anna When gas was high, stopped using one car Daughter picks things up on the way home Cut back on everything inessential Had to watch carefully about all spending Incorporated a weekly gas budget Wasn't able to visit sons in Jacksonville when gas prices were higher Lives on SSI income--sometimes couldn't go to work because of gas Daughter's school a priority--would rath er miss work than have her miss school Arranges to work on days daughter has school Regarding driving, "To me, it's very expensive."--high insurance costs, etc Needs to use a car during work hard to do without a vehicle No Name (1) Increase in gas prices caused her to stop eating out so much--pack lunch for trips to Gainesville now Groceries effected--wouldn't buy extr a snacks and couldn't eat out as much Cancer Foundation helped providing some gas money Gas was a necessity Refused to miss son's doctor appointme nts--would wait until the appointment to do errands and do them all in one trip Has missed meetings and school events for daughter because of no gas Once could not pick up fiance from work in Gainesville due to no gas, he had to stay the night at a relative's house Missed taking son to his home school teacher once Wouldn't live in Gainesville because not a good place to raise children--more peace, serenity and moral values in Archer Can take care of everything on west side of Gainesville No Name (2) Gets a lot of groceries in one trip Paid $25 or $30 to go to Gainesville when gas prices were high Expensive bills due to high energy costs One month had to get utility assistance from the Community Action Agency-couldn't pay and live on a fixed income Doesn't go out much--usually goes to elderly center in Archer when she does Daughters work in Gainesville Has easier access to transportation when daughters are off work on weekends No Name (3) Aunt would ask for gas money to get to work Gas prices cause family to go withou t extras--on drive up to Georgia, not allowed to buy any food Costs $5 to get to Santa Fe, and can cost $10 or $20 to get to Gainesville 120

PAGE 121

Sometimes wants to go get nails done but has no way to get there Sometimes Aunt does not have gas money to pick her up to watch her kids No Name (4) When car has broken down (hasnt happened often), did not make trip "Bad times" when gas prices were high Has had problems paying bills Buys groceries whenever passing a store Mails bills Friends, neighbors and family transportation-related problems Anna Friends and neighbors carpooled Had to prioritize activities Had to do without things A lot of people don't have cars and get into a rut with no job People don't think they ca n live without convenience No Name (1) Everybody griping about gas Not able to be as flexible as normal No Name (2) People having a hard time--knows someone who spent $100 per week traveling from Bronson to Gainesville Solutions Sophia Would have used Archer Shu ttle only if absolutely necessary Would not carpool--works 5 p.m. to 1 a.m., hard to find people with same schedule Would not PNR--too afraid to leave car Anna People need transportation Has taken Archer Shuttle, bus have to go when it goes Took bus a lot in Jacksonville When living in Gainesville, bus routes oriented to students-had to make sure she was in walking distance of things she needed Unsure about PNR because people are so independent about their cars-"People want to do what they want to do when they want to do it." Places need to develop transportation c hoices, but doesn't necessarily think people are open to alternative solutions No Name (1) Thinks very affordable transit from Archer to Gainesville would help people without a car Likely, if people don't have a car then they don't have a good job or much cash flow--fares should be no more than $2 per trip Bus should run until 10 p.m. Thinks Archer should have a community center for teens to bring more people to the area Would not carpool--hate to be committed to someone else, takes long enough to get her own stuff done Would give rides to people if they needed it Would not PNR No Name (2) Bus to Gain esville would help people Thinks $5 round trip would be a reasonable fare Some people who work at the same place and need to go at the same time do carpool Quite a few people used Archer Shuttle No Name (3) A bus would be good for people Fares would have to be reasonable 121

PAGE 122

Thinks Aunt and family would use bus, especially when they don't have gas money No Name (4) Never used Archer Shuttle because didn't know when it came Thinks having another bus would help Doesn't know anyone to carpool with Would only need to go to Tower Road on bus Would not want to wait around to catch the bus--just wants to come home Would prefer to use bus instead of paying for gas Newberry Respondent Name Response Means of transportation in daily life Mary Ann Uses car Walks nearby Does not work--disabled Has to call someone for rides when car is broken, but hard because doesn't have much family Just got a new car, running well so fa r--"You have to have transportation here." Old car was in bad shape, couldn't make it to Gainesville Has used MV Transportation to reach doctor's appointments; sometimes late Amount people charged for rides depended on gas and where she needed to go Shops for groceries at Save-a-Lot (f or a quick trip) or at Hitchcock's Paulette Shares car with mom Kids go to school in Trenton--used to live there Works in Trenton Mom has to be at work early--drops her off and then drops the kids off at school When car breaks down, tries to pay someone or doesn't make trip No one can work or go to school if car is broken Kids doctor's appointments are in Gainesville Sometimes walks to Hitchcock's Yolanda Car was repossessed about two months ago Either has to bum a ride or pay--about $20 each way to Gainesville Aunt lives in Gainesville--will sometimes give her a ride home Worked in Gainesville at McDonald's on Archer Rd Walks to grocery store and pushes cart back--shops at Hitchcock's or Dollar General Kids walk or bike to school Florence Doesn't work No car Goes to doctor in Gainesville about once a week Gets rides with sister--$10 for a ride to Gainesville Gets groceries in Newber ry--sister takes her, $2 Rosie Gets rides with friends Does not work Goes to Alachua to buy groceries--$20 for a ride there Buys a bunch of groceries at once Johnnie No car 122

PAGE 123

Does not work Daughter rides bike to school; a friend drives her on rainy days Pays people for rides Has to pay bills in Gainesville Ruthie Has a van Pays neighbor to take kids to school Works at Oak Hammock in Gainesv ille--has to leave at 6:30 a.m. No Name No bus service for kids Uses van or walks Kids walk or ride bikes--could be late or get hurt Transportation-related problems Mary Ann When gas prices were high, didn't go anywhere Had to save gas for necessary things--only appointments and groceries Had to give up all extras and extra trips Groceries: gave up expensive meat, had to eat cheaper things--sometimes just sandwiches Had problems paying utilities-get cut off right away Went to Catholic Charities Bureau and other services, but they only help once a year Would not move to Gainesville--concerned about drugs and disrespectful children in Gainesville, worried about raising kids there A lot of low-income places in Gainesville are really bad Quiter in Newberry--"At least dr ugs aren't in front of my house." Paulette Gas prices affected her a lot--has to drive kids far for school Gas became a bill; all costs when up Had to cancel of a lot of doctor's appointments and work Doesn't go many unnecessary places Yolanda Had problems getting to work--had to quit job at McDonald's because person she was getting a ride with fell ill Plans to get a new car with tax return--something affordable where she does not need to make payments Had to make choices about groceries vs. gas High gas affected every aspect of life Still has to come up with $1000 per month for bills Car is a necessity out here Used to live in Gainesville--no conges tion in Newberry likes it better Florence With high gas prices, couldn't go many places because people would charge too much A lot of people would not take her places At one point, had to go to physical therapis t in Gainesville 3 times per week; at $20 each time, it became very expensive Likes to make a lot of stops when she is in Gainesville Rosie Can't get to shopping and entertainment Not much for kids to do in Newberry Would not move to Gainesville--concerned about traffic, wrecks; used to the country Needs to go back and forth to Gaines ville to go to doctor's appointments With high gas prices, had to start getting groceries in Newberry When people turned her down for rides, wouldn't make trip 123

PAGE 124

Uses MV--often late, wait too long for rides home Johnnie With high gas prices, people would charge $25 to $30 for the ride and to wait for her to do all her errands; now $20 Groceries: pays people to go to Hitchcock's; gets everything at one time; if she runs out of something, will walk there With high gas prices, often didn't have the money to pay people for rides; when she had money, people would take her--if not, she couldn't make trip and would have to wait until she could scrape up the money to go somewhere Will sometimes have to pay for two separate trips from people No school bus for kids, very hard when it's raining Because of the high cost for rides, didn't have as much money for bills or to give to kids--affected everything If someone with a car is going to the store, will ask others without transportation if they need anything Ruthie Had to cut back on groceries and ne cessities--couldn't buy snacks for kids Couldn't get nails done, cut back on cell phone bill and cable bill Always close to getting utilities shut off; gas did get shut off once Used to take kids out to eat on paydays-can't do that anymore; can't buy toys for kids Can only buy necessities Son plays football--missed some games because of gas Can't go to the movies or get out of the house Makes stops after work in Gaines ville, doesn't make extra trips Dollar General and Hitchcock's are close by--walks sometimes Transmission broke on old car--had to get new car immediately to not miss work If she misses work, her kids miss a meal Mails utilities Moved to Newberry because it's better for kids--lower teacher-student ratio Knew transportation would be more ex pensive in Newberry, but she needed something affordable--"But sometimes you have to weigh the good with the bad." No Name High gas--had to cut back, less entertainment for kids Sometimes had problems paying water bill Shops at whatever grocery stores offer best bargains If she doesn't have gas money, will shop closer to home Thinks Newberry is better for kids--"It's not about me right now, it's about my kids." Cheaper in Newberry Need more activities for kids Will give people rides if she's going somewhere Friends, neighbors and family transportation-related problems Mary Ann Stuck; had to preserve little gas they had for emergencies and necessary trips Paulette Had problems with cars breaking down Yolanda All costs going up--food, rent, etc. Have to have a car to live out here Rosie With high gas prices, people started riding bikes to get around A lot of people lost their jobs Johnnie Everybody talking about hi gh gas prices--hard for everybody Ruthie Those on fixed income only go into town when they have to 124

PAGE 125

Solutions Mary Ann Bus would help people--should come every hour, or at least in the morning and afternoon Some people work normal hours, but not many Will give neighborhood kids a ride when bringing son to school Paulette Taxis charge extra if they have to come from Gainesville Bus would help Does not think carpooling is a good solution--most people are not going in the same direction Yolanda Need a bus going to Gainesville or Chiefland No local cab companies Choice to be either stuck in Ga inesville or stuck in Newberry Does not think carpooling is an option-"People around here are so selfish." People always think you want something from them. Florence Bus to Gainesville would help--would use it Rosie Bus would help a lot--daily, maybe four trips per day Thinks 50 cent fare is reasonable, woul d not use if cost more; disabled fare should be 25 cents Knows people who carpool because it is convenient--work down the street from each other Does not think PNR would work--too much traffic, waste too much time Johnnie Bus would help--would use it Thinks $1.50 or so is a fair price Ruthie Would use bus--$1.50 or $2 a fair price, better than filling up car Carpools with adopted mom almost ev eryday--she helps out with gas No Name Bus to Gainesville would he lp--son goes to Terwiliger Kids need more reliable transportation to school Alachua Respondent Name Response Means of transportation in daily life Freddie Two children ride bus to school Uses car, works in Gainesville--20 min. drive No car problems Schools very close by Can get pretty much everything done in Alachua except entertainment Antoinetta Uses car Out of work, looking fo r job in Gainesville Walks to take kids to doctor in town Sarah Uses one vehicle Does not work Gets groceries at Hitchcock's Goes to doctor in Gainesville Tonyetta Uses car Works at UF Gets groceries in Alachua; other shopping at Wal-Mart Car is about to break down, plans to fix with next paycheck 125

PAGE 126

James Uses car Does not travel very far Goes to High Springs for errands On a fixed income, not much money left for shopping No Name Uses car, family has one Does not work, but husband has a job in Gainesville Shops for groceries at Food Lion in Alachua Bernice Takes MV Transportation to doctor in Gainesville No car Calls brother-in-law to get rides to do errands, does most in Alachua, about $5 Has to go to Gainesville to pay rent Shops at Hitchcock's and tries to buy whatever is on sale Can't walk far due to health Ebony Doesn't have car, gets rides with friends About to purchase first car Does most errands in Alachua; goes to Wal-Mart in Gainesville Buys groceries at Food Lion; they have pretty much everything Not currently working; trying to get a job at Wal-Mart Supercenter Rashidha Has a car No problems with it breaking down Works in Alachua, about 5 min. away Does everything in Alachua except clothes shopping Buys groceries at Hitchcock's; have everything except cheap meat--goes to Gainesville for it Mary Gets rides with sister; pays a neighbor when she has money $5 to Hitchcock's, $10 to High Springs, $20 to Gainesville ($30 if they have to wait for you to do errands) Currently not working, wants to look for a job in Gainesville Bianca Has a car Works in Alachua, about 3 or 4 min. away Goes to Gainesville for shopping and entertainment Recently put in a doc tor's office in Alachua, used to have to go to Gainesville Goes to Gainesville 3 or 4 times per week Drives one child to school, other takes bus Buys groceries at Hitchcock' s; have everything she needs Transportation-related problems Freddie With high gas, only drove when needed, no extra riding around Only went to grocery stores, doctor, work Shops at Food Lion and Hitchcock's in town No problems with bills Antoinetta Doesn't want to raise kids in Ga inesville--more control of them in Alachua With high gas, cut back on a lot of things Had to reschedule appointments and make them all for the same day Missed a lot of appointments Kids couldn't go anywhere Light bills very expensive, had problems paying with high gas Gas became another bill Often could barely eat--has 7 kids Not many low-skill jobs in Alachua 126

PAGE 127

Work schedules in Alachua often dont work out for people with kids Sarah With high gas, started walking to grocery store, drug store To go to Gainesville, would have to scrape up gas money Missed doctor's appointments Always made sure to pay house bills before anything else Had problems with car breaking down--currently broken down and she doesn't have money to fix it With broken car, uses daughter's car in between her work schedule Tonyetta Utility prices very hi gh, had lights turned off twice Son had whole in shoes for a long time, no money to buy new stuff kids needed due to high gas prices (shoes, underwear) When it started getting cold, had jackets donated for kids Works overnight at UF and then has a pa rt time job after that--with high gas prices, couldn't keep coming back and fort h to Alachua; most times would get Aunt to pick up daughter at Westwood and bring her back to Alachua Daughter had to transfer out of Honor s Program at Westwood Middle because Tonyetta had a hard time picking her up--bus took her in morning only; not doing nearly as well at new scho ol--recently got into a fight Had to make a lot of hard choices--prescriptions vs. gas, groceries vs. lights James Bad with high gas prices, wanted to go a lot of places and couldn't Didn't have problems paying utilities, but had little money left over No problems with car breaking down--"Good thing, because I wouldn't have the money to fix it." No Name With high gas prices, took $50 or $60 to fill up vehicle, husband has long commute Gas became another bill; already exp ensive to buy diapers for her twins Had to be careful about how many diapers used--only change twins when necessary Left stranded while husband has car; boring, but usually busy with kids Walks to appointments for kids, but has to cancel if it's raining Cheaper to live in Alachua, but has thought about moving to Gainesville; husband would like to be in biking distance to work, but afraid rent would be too high With high gas prices, "You can't really go nowhere." Everything getting more expensive Doesn't work in order to take care of kids; if she worked, then she would have to pay for daycare instead--not worth it Bernice High gas did not really affect her Does not buy groceries in bulk--only what she can afford at the time Brother-in-law available pretty much whenever to take her places Ebony With high gas, put off taking trips Would not want to bother people to give her a ride Would make a bunch of trips at once when she could get a ride Moved to Alachua because it was cheaper Plans to move to Gainesville in Section 8 housing In Gainesville, plans to use car only when necessary and RTS rest of the time Rashidha Bad with high gas prices; had to borrow money, set aside money for gas, make a budget Had trouble paying b ills and groceries 127

PAGE 128

Couldn't go out of town when she wanted to Mary Getting rides with people is too expensive If she has no money to pay people, walks or does not make trip With higher gas prices, people charged more to go places Would get turned down or wouldn't get a ride unless she had money to pay Majority of jobs in Alachua at 441 and I-75, about a two-mile walk; probably would get fired if it was too cold or raining, etc. Had problems paying utility bills and getting to the Community Action Agency in Gainesville for assistance Bianca Considered moving to Gainesville, but it's hard to find a place to live With higher gas prices, had to save to be able to go places Sometimes had to choose between gas or cable bill Made buying food for family her first priority Friends, neighbors and family transportation-related problems Freddie People like to hang out and ride around for fun, couldn't do that anymore Antoinetta Had trouble going ba ck and forth to Gainesville Doesn't know a lot of people working; some without transportation work nearby People without rides have to walk places Tonyetta People couldn't pay for medications, do not have insurance James "Everything went up sky high."--p aying for gas and food prices very hard Minimum wage not enough to pay for everything No Name No one made unnecessary trips Bernice People didn't have a lot of money to go places, would only go where necessary Ebony Would have to wait for paychecks to come before buying gas Doesn't know anyone who had to sacr ifice utilities and food, etc. Mary People couldn't afford to put gas in their cars Bianca Couldn't go out and do things with family People with SUVs couldn't really drive places; wish they had more economical cars Solutions Freddie Used to work at Dollar General, saw 3 or 4 people at a time getting on CATS Would not carpool--works at TV20 in Gainesville, doesn't know anyone else who works nearby Antoinetta CATS--2 trips per day not enough Sometimes hard to get back in time to catch CATS home Daughter tried to use CATS, but it didn't end up working out Needs to make more trips, at least 3 times per day First trip was too early, couldn't have ki ds waiting at the bus stop at 5 a.m. People don't necessarily have a 9-5 schedule Used to carpool to appointments and grocer y store in Gainesville to save gas; worked ok, but when someone was done with their errands, they were ready to go home Still carpools sometimes Daughter has PNR before, but still a long way to drive just to get to Gainesville Sarah Never used CATS--didn't know schedule, lack of info, lack of advertising, left too early in the morning and came ba ck too early in the evening; people needed later times 128

PAGE 129

129 Carpooling depends on the type of pers on; people particular about their cars Would use bus in an emergency if car broke down Tonyetta Never used CATS--"Not like the ci ty bus." Doesn't know anyone else who used it Would not carpool--doesn't really know neighbors and works odd hours James Did not know about CATS Would not carpool No Name Did not know about CATS Thinks people would use a bus to save money Husband would carpool if he knew someone who worked near him Does not think PNR would work Bernice Bus would help people get places, especially the elderly Transportation needs to be available at a reasonable price No taxis in Alachua Need a place to call and get transportation around Alachua Ebony Need an effective bus route; people had to walk too far to get to CATS MV Transportation works fine for people with Medicaid Need a bus within Alachua to get downtown Used to carpool when working at Wal-Mart on 13th St. in Gainesville For PNR, if you drive to Gainesville you might as well go the whole way Rashidha Used CATS; not better than a car Used CATS for errands in Gainesville once or twice a week Schedule sometimes worked and sometimes didn't; had to call sister if she missed her home connection Other people said it takes too long, had to wake up too early to use it, a lot of people (not her) had to walk too far to catch it Would not carpool Mary Would use bus to go to Gainesville to try to get a job More people would try to get a job if there was a bus Bianca Would ride with other people and carpool (trade weeks of driving) to do errands in Gainesville CATS bus should come more often, maybe every two hours CATS came too early and there were not enough trips A couple of dollars is a fair price

PAGE 130

APPENDIX C RESPONDENT COMMENTS TABLES 130

PAGE 131

Mode of Travel Car Currently Available in Household Currently Employed Location of Work Reliable Vehicle Cost for Rides to Gainesville Waldo No car, gets rides, walks to work No Yes Waldo $10 to $15 Car Yes Yes 7 Miles from Waldo Yes Car Yes No No Car Yes Yes Various Yes Has car, uses only when necessary; walks to work and around Waldo; mother uses MV; younger siblings use school bus Yes Yes Waldo Yes No car, gets rides No No $20 Car Yes Yes Yes No car, gets rides, used to walk to work when had that job No No Hawthorne Car Yes Yes Gainesville Yes Car Yes Yes Gainesville Yes $5 to $10 (local) No car; walks nearby, gets rides No No $5 or $10 Car, gets rides Yes No No $5 (local) Car Yes No No $20 No car, gets rides, uses MV No No No car, walks, gets rides No No Car Yes Yes Hawthorne Yes No car, uses MV, gets rides No No Mode of Travel Car Currently Available in Household Currently Employed Location of Work Reliable Vehicle Cost for Rides to Gainesville 131

PAGE 132

Archer Car Yes Yes Gainesville Yes Car Yes Yes Dixie County No Car Yes No Yes No car, gets rides, walks around Archer No No $20 No car, gets rides, uses MV No No $10 to $20 Car Yes Yes Archer Yes Newberry Car Yes No No Shares car Yes Yes Trenton No Car repossessed, gets rides, children walk or ride bikes to school No No $40 No car, gets rides No No $10 No car, gets rides No No $20 No car, gets rides, daughter rides bike to school No No Car Yes Yes Gainesville Yes $20 Car, children walk or ride bikes to school Yes Yes Alachua Car; children use school bus Yes Yes Gainesville Yes Car Yes No Yes Car Yes No No Car Yes Yes Gainesville No Car Yes No Yes Car Yes Yes Gainesville Yes No car, uses MV or gets rides No No $5 (local) No car, gets rides No No $5 (local) Car Yes Yes Alachua Yes No car, gets rides No No $20, $5 (local) Car Yes Yes Alachua Yes 132

PAGE 133

Preferred Grocery Purchase Location Would move to Gainesville for Better Access Sacrificed Mobility due to Lack of Adequate Transportation or High Costs Trouble Paying Necessary Expenses Difficult Choices and Sacrifices Waldo Gainesville, Starke No Yes Yes Cancelled doctor's appointments, missed granddaugher's basketball games Starke, Hawthorne No Yes Car payments Hawthorne No Yes Yes Chooses between fixing car or making payments on it; new clothes; lost job due to being late from carpooling; better food Yes No Drove a more fuel-efficient vehicle; fewer, larger grocery trips; stayed home more No Yes Yes Grandmother stopped visiting as much; brother and sister difficulty in getting home from sports practice; groceries were a priority over gas Yes Yes Harder to get rides from people No No No Yes Yes Started walking more; chose to pay for cigarettes over gas Hawthorne Yes Yes Started riding motorcycle to save gas; started carpooling; trouble paying utilities Hawthorne No No Hawthorne No Yes Yes Hard to find a job without a car; harder to find rides Gainesville Yes Yes Missed doctor's appointments; stayed home more; chose to eat rather than drive Yes Yes Yes Yes Hard to find a job; concerned about being able to pick up kids from school; prescriptions Yes No job due to lack of transportation; made fewer trips Gainesville Yes Yes Made fewer trips; changed churches to one closer; used more fuel-efficient car Yes Yes Hard to pay utilities; shopping; goes to emergency room when health gets bad 133

PAGE 134

Preferred Grocery Purchase Location Would move to Gainesville for Better Access Sacrificed Mobility due to Lack of Adequate Transportation or High Costs Trouble Paying Necessary Expenses Difficult Choices and Sacrifices Archer Gainesville No Yes Yes Furniture repossessed--chose to use money to buy groceries instead of getting it back; hard to pay for food; took money from other places to pay for gas; refused to quit job due to not having a car; stays home a lot Gainesville Yes No Used more fuel-efficient car; cu t back on everything inessential; wasn't able to visit sons in Jacksonville; Sometimes had to choose getting daughter to school over going to work Gainesville No Yes No Stopped eating out; wouldn't buy extra snacks for kids; missed meeting and school events for daughter; refused to miss son's doctor appointments; once missed taking son to home school teacher; once could not pick up fiance from work Yes Yes Gets groceries in one trip; missed utility payment; stays home a lot Yes No Can't get nails done; Aunt has problems picking her up to babysit Yes Yes Sometimes would not make trip; problems paying bills Newberry Newberry No Yes Yes Stayed home; only went to appointments and to buy groceries; had to eat cheaper things; problems paying utility bills Yes No Doesn't go unnecessary places; cancelled doctor's appointments and work Newberry No Yes Yes Lost job due to lack of transportation; chose between buying groceries and gas Newberry Yes No Couldn't go many plac es; cut back on going to physical therapist Alachua No Yes No Couldn't go many places; started buying groceries locally Newberry Yes Yes Often didn't have money to pay for rides; didn't have enough money for bills or to give kids for spending money; No Yes Yes Cut back on groceries; couldn't get nails done; cut back on cell phone and cable bill; trouble paying all bills; can't take kids out to eat or buy toys; missed son's football games; can't miss work or kids miss a meal No Yes Yes Cut back on entertainment; problems paying water bill; shops at grocery stores offering best bargains or close to home if she has no gas money 134

PAGE 135

135 Preferred Grocery Purchase Location Would move to Gainesville for Better Access Sacrificed Mobility due to Lack of Adequate Transportation or High Costs Trouble Paying Necessary Expenses Difficult Choices and Sacrifices Alachua Alachua Yes No Would drive only when needed--groceries, doctor, work; stayed home more; Gainesville No Yes Yes Missed a lot of doctor's appointments; now schedules all appointments for the same day; difficulty paying utility bill; has 7 kids and barely eats Alachua Yes No Started walking to do errands; missed doctor's appointments; pays house bills first; car curr ently broken down and doesn't have money to fix it Alachua Yes Yes Trouble paying utility bills; no money for new clothes, shoes, and underwear for children; needed donated jackets for children; had to take daughter out of Honors Program at Westwood Middle in Gainesville because she couldn't pick her up there anymore-Alachua school not nearly as good; chooses between prescriptions, gas, groceries, and utilities Yes No Stayed home a lot; not much money left over after all bills payed Alachua Yes Yes No Hard to buy diapers for children--only change when necessary; left stranded during day while husband has car; walks to do errands; doesn't work to care for kids, would have to pay for daycare otherwise No No Only buys the groceries she can afford at a particular time Alachua Yes Yes Yes Put off trips; would try to make many stops at once; did not want to bother people for rides; Alachua Yes No Had to borrow money and set aside money for gas; Stayed home more Yes Yes Hard to pay for rides; if she has no money, either walks or does not make trip; too far to walk to jobs at I-75 and US-441; problems paying utilities Alachua Yes Yes Yes Hard to save money to go places; chose between gas or cable bill; chose groceries as firs t priority for her family

PAGE 136

Public Transportation Carpool Park and Ride Acceptable Fare Per Trip Waldo Yes No Maybe Maybe Maybe No $3 Maybe No No Yes No No Yes Maybe Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Hawthorne Yes Yes Maybe Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Maybe Yes Yes No Maybe Yes Yes Archer Maybe No No Yes Maybe No $2 Yes No No Yes Maybe $2.50 Yes Yes No Newberry Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Maybe No $0.50 Yes $1.50 Yes Yes $2 Yes Alachua Maybe No Yes Yes Maybe Maybe Maybe No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes $2 136

PAGE 137

APPENDIX D ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT 137

PAGE 138

BUSINESS TYPE BY CITY WALDO HAWTHORNE ARCHER Automobile & Truck Brokers (Whol) Air Conditioning Contra ctors & Systems Air Conditi oning Contractors & Systems Clergy Apartments Air Make-Up Heaters (Wholesale) Electric Contractors Automobile Repairing & Service Apartments Fence Contractors Banks Architects Hardware-Retail Beauty Salons Associations Pay Telephones & Booths Equipment & Svc Bingo Games Attorneys Pianos Caterers Auctioneers Post Offices Child Care Service Automobile Dealers-Used Cars Storage-Household & Commercial Churches Automobile Parts & Supplies-Retail-New City Government-Executive Offices Automobile Repairing & Service Concrete Contractors Banks Convenience Stores Bathroom Remodeling Cosmetics & Perfumes-Retail Beauty Salons Counter Tops Billiard Equipment & Supplies (Whol) County Government-Public Health Programs Business Services NEC Dentists Cash Registers & Supplies (Wholesale) Florists-Retail Child Care Service Furniture-Dealers-Retail Churches Gift Shops Cleaners Grocers-Retail Convenience Stores Health Clubs Studios & Gymnasiums Dr aperies & Curtains-Retail/Custom Made Interior Decorators Design & Consultants Electric Contractors Libraries-Public Entertainment Producers Locks & Locksmiths Feed-Dealers (Wholesale) Museums Fence (Wholesale) Nonclassified Establis hments Fire Departments Physicians & Surgeons Glass-Auto Plate & Window & Etc Post Offices Government Offices-City, Village & Twp Real Estate Grocers-Retail Restaurants Gun Safety & Marksmanship Instruction Schools Hardware-Retail 138

PAGE 139

Senior Citizens Service Home Builders Social Service & Welfare Organizations Home Improvements Surveyors-Land House Cleaning Tanks & Tank Components (Ma nufacturers) Landscape Contractors Tax Return Preparation & Filing Lawn & Grounds Maintenance Telephone Equipment & Systems-Svc/Repair Libraries-Public Title Companies Machine Shops (Mfrs) Trailers-Automobile Utility Sports Etc Nonclassifie d Establishments Variety Stores Painters Video Tapes & Discs-Renting & Leasing Periodicals-Publishing & Printing (Mfrs) Website Design Service Pet Boarding & Sitting Physicians & Surgeons Pizza Printing Equipment-Repairing Publishers-Book (Mfrs) Real Estate Restaurants Roofing Contractors Schools-Universities & Colleges Academic Senior Citizens Service Social Service & Welfare Organizations Storage-Household & Commercial Swimming Pool Contrs Dealers & Designers Swimming Pool Coping Plastering & Tiling Thrift Shops Timber & Timberland Companies (Whol) Tree Service Variety Stores Veterinarians 139

PAGE 140

BUSINESS TYPE BY CITY NEWBERRY ALACHUA Accountants Accountants Accounting & Bookkeeping General Svc Accounting & Bookkeeping General Svc Acupuncture Acoustical Contractors Air Conditioning Contractors & System s Advertising-Agencies & Counselors Animal Shows & Organizations Air Conditioning Contractors & Systems Apartments All Terrain Vehicles Appliances-Household-Major-Repairing Alte rnators & Generators-Automotive-Rpr Archery Instruction Animal Hospitals Automobile Body-Repairing & Painting Animals-Laboratory Use Automobile Dealers-Used Cars Antiques-Dealers Automobile Lubrication Service Apartments Automobile Parts & Supplies-Retail-New Architects Automobile Parts & Supplies-Wholesale Art Instruction & Schools Automobile Repairing & Service Artists Materials & Supplies Bakers-Retail Associations Banks Attorneys Barbers Automobile Body-Repairing & Painting Beauty Salons Automobile Dealers-Used Cars Book Dealers-Retail Automobile Parts & Supplies-Retail-New Broadcasting Companies Automobile Renting Building Contractors Automobile Repairing & Service Buildings-Portable Automobile Transporters & Drive-Away Co Cabinet Makers Banks Cabinets Barbers Carpet & Rug Cleaners Bars Carpet & Rug Dealers-New Baseba ll Sports Cards & Memorabilia Chambers of Commerce Beauty Salons Child Care Service Biologica l Products (Manufacturers) Chimney & Fireplace Cleaning Build/Rpr Biotechnology Products & Services Chiropractors DC Boat Dealers Sales & Service Churches Boat Transporting 140

PAGE 141

City Government-Executive Offices Boats-Manufacturers City Govt-Regulation/Adm-Comms/U tilities Book Dealers-Retail Civil Defense Agencies Boxes-Corrugated & Fiber (Wholesale) Computer Software Bridal Shops Computers-System Designers & Consultants Building Contractors Concrete Products (Wholesale) Burial Vaults (Wholesale) Convenience Stores Business Management Consultants Dairies (Milk) Business Records & Documents-Storage Demolition Contractors Cabinet Makers Dentists Cabinets Electric Contractors Candy & Confectionery-Retail Electric Motors-Controls-Wholesale Canvas-Wholesale Engineers Car Washing & Polishing Farms Carpet & Rug Cleaners Feed-Dealers (Wholesale) Caterers Fire Departments Cellular Telephones (Services) Funeral Directors Cellular Telephones-Equipment & Supls Furniture-Dealers-Retail Chambers of Commerce Gas-Liquefied Petro-Bttld/Bulk (Whol) Check Cashing Service General Contractors Chemicals (Wholesale) Gourmet Shops Chemicals-Manufacturers Government Offices-City, Village & Twp Child Care Service Government Offices-State Chiropractors DC Grading Contractors Churches Grocers-Retail City Govern ment-Executive Offices Guns & Gunsmiths City Govt-R egulation/Adm-Comms/Utilities Hardware-Retail Cleaners Health Clubs Studios & Gymnasiums Clinics Heat Pumps Clothing-Retail Heating Contractors Clubs Holding Companies (Non-Bank) Cocktail Lounges Home Builders Commercial Printing NEC (Mfrs) Hotels & Motels Computer & Equipment Dealers Human Resource Consultants Computer Software Industrial Equipment & Supplies (Who l) Computers-Service & Repair 141

PAGE 142

Insulation Contractors-Cold & Heat Concrete Contractors Insurance Concrete ProdsEx Block & Brick (Mfrs) Landscape Contractors Consignment Shops Laundries Construction Companies Laundries-Self Service Convenience Stores Lawn Mowers Credit Unions Libraries-Public Dental Equipment & Supplies-Mfrs Limousine Service Dentists Liquors-Retail Detectives-Private Loans Dialysis Mailing & Shipping Services Doors-Garage Manufacturers Education Centers Massage Therapists Electric Contractors Meat Packers (Mfrs) Electron ic Equipment & Supplies-Mfrs Music & Live Entertainment Electronic Equipment & Supplies-Retail Nonclassified Establishments Electronic-Mfrs Representatives (Whol) Nurseries-Plants Trees & Etc-Wholesal e Employment Service-Employee Leasing Office Buildings & Park s Engineers-Consulting Parking Area/Lots Maintenance & Marking Engineers-Environmental Parks Environmental & Ecological Services Paving Contractors Exporters (Whol) Pest Control Farm Supplies (Wholesale) Pet Boarding & Sitting Fence Contractors Pet Services Fiber Glass Fabricators (Mfrs) Pharmacies Fiber Optics Photographers-Po rtrait Fill Contractors Physical Therapy Equipment-Manufacturers Financial Planning Consultants Physicians & Surgeons Fire Departments Plumbing Contractors Floor Laying Refinishing & Resurfacing Plumbing Fixtures & Supplies-New-Re tail Floors-Contractors & Builders Post Offices Florists-Retail Ranches Forensic Consultants Ready-Mixed Concrete-Manufacturers Freight-Traffic Service Real Estate Fruits & Vegetables-Wholesale Real Estate Developers Fund Rais ing Counselors & Organizations 142

PAGE 143

Real Estate Loans Furniture-Repairing & Refinishing Real Estate Management Garbage Collection Rehabilitation Services General Contractors Rental Agencies General Merchandise-Wholesale Repair Shops & Related Services NEC Gift Shops Restaurants Glass-Auto Plate & Window & Etc Restaurants-Food Delivery Glass-Stained & Leaded Roofing Contractors Golf Courses-Public Roofing Materials Government Offices-City, Village & Twp Satellite Equipment & Systems-Reta il Government Offices-State Schools Grocers-Retail Screen Printing (Mfrs) Hardware-Retail Second Hand Stores Health & Diet Foods-Retail Shock Absorbers Health Clubs Studios & Gymnasiums Spas-Beauty & Day Health Services Stables Heating Contractors State Government-Public Health Programs Home Builders Storage-Household & Commercial Hospital Equipment & Supplies (Whol) Swimming Pool Contrs Dealers & Designers Hotels & Motels Swimming Pool Coping Plastering & Tiling Housewares-Retail Tapes (Wholesale) Housing Authorities Tax Return Preparation & Filing Insu lation Contractors-Cold & Heat Thrift Shops Insurance Title Companies Insurance Adjusters Tractor-Dealers (Wholesale) Interior Decorators Design & Consultants Tree Service Irrigation Sy stems & Equipment (Whol) Truck Renting & Leasing Janitor Service Trucking-Heavy Hauling Laboratories Variety Stores Laboratories-Medical Veterinarians Laboratories-Research & Development Video Tapes & Discs-Renting & Leasing Landscape Contractors Wedding Supplies & Services Lawn Mowers Welding Lawn Mowers-Sharpening & Repairing Western Apparel Libraries-Public Window Replacement Lighting Fixtures-Retail 143

PAGE 144

Loans Lubricants-Synthetic (Wholesale) Lumber-Manufacturers Mailing & Shipping Services Manufacturers Manufacturing-Augers & Trenchers Marble-Natural (Wholesale) Marketing Consultants Marketing Programs & Services Martial Arts Instruction Massage Therapists Metals-Precious Sheet Wire Tubing (Whol) Mobile Homes-Parks & Communities Mobile Homes-Transporting Motorcycle Instruction Motorcycles-Customizing Mufflers & Exhaust Systems-Engine Music Instruction-Instrumental News Dealers Newspapers (Publishers/Mfrs) Nonclassified Establishments Non-Profit Organizations Notaries-Public Nurserymen Oil & Gas Producers Optical Goods-Retail Organizations Painters Parks Paving Contractors Pawnbrokers Pest Control Pharmaceutical Products-Wholesale Pharmacies Physical Therapists 144

PAGE 145

Physicians & Surgeons Physicians & Surgeons Equip & Supls-Whol Physicians Assistants Pianos-Tuning Repairing & Refinishing Plastering Contractors Police Departments Post Offices Printers (Mfrs) Publishers (Mfrs) Ranches Real Estate Real Estate Developers Real Estate Inspection Real Estate Loans Real Estate Management Recreational Vehicle Parks Recreational Vehicles Rehabilitation Services Research Service Restaurant Flue Cleaning Restaurants Road Building Contractors Roof Maintenance Roofing Contractors Schools Schools-Nursery & Kindergarten Academic Scientists-Consulting Security Control Equip & Systems-Whol Services NEC Sheds-Tool & Utility Shoe & Boot Repairing Social Service & Welfare Organizations Sod & Sodding Service Sporting Goods-Retail Sprinklers-Garden & Lawn-Retail 145

PAGE 146

Stables State Government-Agricultural Programs State Government-Finance & Taxation State Government-Legal Counsel State Government-Public Health Programs State Government-Public Health Programs State Govt-Correctional Institutions Steel-Distributors & Warehouses (Whol) Storage-Household & Commercial Surgical Appliances-Manufacturers Surveyors-Land Surveyors-Land Swimming Pool Equipment & Supls-Retail Tailors Tanning Salons Tanning Salons Tax Return Preparation & Filing Tile-Ceramic-Contractors & Dealers Tire-Dealers-Retail Title Companies Transmissions-Automobile Travel Agencies & Bureaus Tree Service Truck Accessories (Wholesale) Truck Renting & Leasing Truck-Dealers-Used Trucking-Heavy Hauling Truck-Repairing & Service T-Shirts-Wholesale Uniforms Upholsterers Utility Contractors Variety Stores Veterans' & Military Organizations Veterinarians 146

PAGE 147

147 Video Production & Taping Service Video Tapes & Discs-Renting & Leasing Warehouses-Mini & Self Storage Water Softening Equipment Svc & Supls Water Well Drilling & Service Welding Well Drilling Wheel Chair Lifts & Ramps (Wholesale) Wood-Household Furn-Ex Upholstered (Mfr) Woodworkers Wrecker Service X-Ray Apparatus & Supplies (Wholesale) Source: InfoUSA 2007

PAGE 148

LIST OF REFERENCES Bailey, L. (2004). Aging Americans: Stranded w ithout options. Retrieved April 6, 2008, from http:// www.transact.org/library/re ports_html/seniors/aging.pdf Bernstein, S., Haas, P., Heffernan, K., Markarew icz, C., Scheu, R., Star, A. (2007). Growing More Affordably: Connecting the Dots on Housing, Energy and Transportation Costs. Retrieved November 7, 2008, from http:// www.knowledgeplex.org/showdoc.html?id=374791 Berube, A., Singer, A., Wilson, J.H., & Frey, W.H. (2006). Finding Exurbia: Americas FastGrowing Communities at the Metropolitan Fringe. The Brookings Institution: Living Cities Census Series. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://www.brookings.edu/%20reports/2006/10metropolitanpolicy_berube.aspx Blumenberg, E. & Ong, P. (1997). Can welfare r ecipients afford to work far from home? Access, 10, 15-19. Blumenberg, E. & Ong, P. (1998). Job access, commute, and travel burden among welfare recipients. Urban Studies, 35(1) 77-93. Blumenberg, E. & Schweitzer, L. (2006). Devol ution and transport policy for the urban poor: The case of the US job acce ss and reverse commute program. Planning Theory & Practice, 7 (1) 7-25. Bonham, Jr., J.B., Spilka, G.J. & Restorfer, D. (2002). Old Cities/Green Cities: Communities Transform Unmanaged Land. Planning Advisory Service 506-507. Chicago: The American Planning Association. Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR). (2007). Estimates of Population by County and City in Florida, Apr il 1, 2007. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from http:// www.bebr.ufl.edu Canby, A. (2003). Affordable housing and transportation: Creating new linkages benefiting low-income families. Housing Facts and Findings, 5(2) 1, 4-7. Center for Transit-Oriented Development. (2004). Hidden in Plain Sight: Capturing the Demand for Housing Near Transit. Retrieved November 7, 2008, from http:// www.reconnectingamerica.org/public/projects Center for Transit-Oriented Development and Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2006). The Affordability Index: A New Tool for Meas uring the True Affordability of a Housing Choice. The Brookings Institution: Urban Market s Initiative Market Innovation Brief. Retrieved November 7, 2008, from http:// www.reconnectingamerica.org/public/projects Cervero, R. (1989). Jobs-housing ba lancing and regional mobility. Journal of the American Planning Association 55 136-150. 148

PAGE 149

City of Alachua Transit System (CATS). (2007). CATS Business Plan, December, 2007. Davis, J. (2008). Impact of Transit-Orient ed Developments on Housing and Transportation Affordability: Applying Case Study Results a nd Previous Knowledge to Gainesville in 2060. University of Florida. Retrieved November 5, 2008, from http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0022221/davis_j.pdf Devajyoti, D. (2004). Social and environmental justice issues in urban transportation. In S. Hanson and G. Guiliano (Eds.), The Geography of Urban Transportation (3rd Ed). (pp. 332-355). New York: The Guilford Press. Dittmar, H. & G. Ohland (Eds.). (2004). The New Transit Town Island Press. Eisenberg, A.C. (2004). The Housing and Transportation Connection Housing/Transportation Task Force (pp. 1-19). Retrieved November 5, 2008, from http://govinfo.library.unt.e du/mhc/papers/eisenberg.pdf Energy Information Administration. (2009). Motor Gasoline Retail Prices, U.S. City Average. Retrieved February 13, 2009 from http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_top.asp Ferguson, E. (1997). The rise and fall of the American carpool: 1970-1990. Transportation 24(4) 349-376. Fletcher, C.N. & Jensen, H.H. (2000). Iowa Rural Welfare to Work Strategies Project: Final Report to the Iowa Department of Human Services Ames: Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University. Florida Department of Transportation (2001). Travel Survey 2000: Nort h Florida Household Travel Survey Florida Department of Transportation. (2005). Gainesville Multimodal Corridor and Park and Ride Study. Forlaw, B. (1998). Work, Wheels, and Wages. St. Louis, MO/IL: East-West Gateway Coordinating Council. Frank, L. D., Andresen, M. A., & Schmid, T. L. (2004) Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 27 (2), 87-96. Garasky, S., Fletcher, C.N. & Jensen, H.H. ( 2006). Transiting to work: The role of private transportation for low-income households. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40 (1), 6489. 149

PAGE 150

Gillis, W.R. (1989). Introduction: The relevance of rural transportation. In W. Gills (Ed.), Profitability and Mobility in Rural America. (pp. 4-14). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Haas, P. M., Makarawicz, C., Benedict, A., Sanchez, T.W. & Dawkins, C.D. (2006). Housing & Transportation Cost Trade-Offs and Burden s of Working Households in 28 Metros Virginia Tech. Blacksburg: Center for Neighborhood Technology. Retrieved November 5, 2008, from http:// www.cnt.org/repository/H-T-Tradeoffs-for-Working-Families-n-28Metros-FULL.pdf Haas, P.M., Makarewicz, C., Benedict, A., & Bernstein, S. (2008). Estimating Transportation Costs for Households by the Characte ristics of the Neighborhood and Household. Paper 08-2761 submitted for Publication in th e Transportation Research Record. Hall, Peter. (2002). Cities of tomorrow (3rd Ed.). England: Blackwell Publishers. Handy, Susan. (2006). The Road Less Driven. Journal of the Americ an Planning Association, 72(3) 274-278. Holtzclaw, J., Clear, R., Dittmar, H., Goldstei n, D., & Haas, P. (2002). Location Efficiency: Neighborhood and Socio-Economic Characteris tics Determine Auto Ownership and UseStudies in Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Transportation Planning and Technology, 25 (1), 1-27. Holzer, H.J. & Wissoker, D.A. (2001). How Can We Encourage Job Retention and Advancement for Welfare Recipients? Assessing the New Federalism Se ries A, A-49. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Hughes, M.A. (1995). A mobility strategy for improving opportunity. Housing Policy Debate, 6(1) 271-297. Ihlanfeldt, K.R. & Sjoquist, D.L. (1998). The sp atial mismatch hypothesis: A review of recent studies and their implications for welfare reform. Housing Policy Debate, 9 (4), 849-982. Kidder, A. E. (1989). Passenger transportation problems in rural areas. In W. Gillis (Ed.), Profitability and Mobility in Rural America. (pp. 131-145). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Levine, J. (1998). Rethinking accessibility and jobs-housing balance. Journal of the American Planning Association 64 (2), 133-149. Lipman, B.J. (2005). Somethings Gotta Give: Working Families and the Cost of Housing. New Century Housing, 5(2) Retrieved November 7, 2008, from http:// www.nhc.org/pdf/pub_nc_sgg_04_05.pdf 150

PAGE 151

Lipman, B.J. (2006). A heavy load: The comb ined housing and transportation burdens of working families. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http:// www.nhc.org/pdf/pub_heavy_load_10_06.pdf Madden, J.F. (1981). Why Wome n Work Closer to Home. Urban Studies, 18(1) 181. Maggeid, H.S. (1982). Transportation for the Poor: Research in Rural Mobility. Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing. McCann, B. (2005). Driven to Spend: The Impact of Sprawl on Household Transportation Expenses Retrieved November 5, 2008, from http:// www.transact.org/library/re ports_pdfs/driven_to_spend/Driven_to_Spend_Report.p df McQuaid, R.W., Greig, M. & Adams, J. (2001) Unemployed job-seeker attitudes towards potential travel-to-work times. Growth and Change, 32 (3) 355-368. Newman, P.W.G. & Kenworthy, J.R. (1989). Cities and Automobile Dependence: An International Sourcebook Aldershot, UK: Gower Publishing. Newman, P.W.G. & Kenworthy, J.R. (1995.) The land use-transport connection: An overview. Land Use Policy, 13 (1), 1-22. Owen, G., Shelton, E., Stevens, A.B., Nelson-Christinedaughter, J., Roy, C. & Heineman, J. (2000). Whose Job Is It? Employe rs Views on Welfare Reform. Chicago: Joint Center for Poverty Research, Northwestern Univer sity. Accessed accessed on January 28, 2009, from http:// www.northwestern.edu/ipr/jcpr/work ingpapers/wpfiles/Owen_Shelton.PDF. Pucher, J. & Renne, J.L. (2003). Socioeconomic of urban travel: Evidence from the 2001 NHTS. Transportation Quarterly, 57 (3) 49-77. Redlener, I., Brito, A., Johns on, D. & Grant, R. (2007). The Growing Healthcare Access Crisis for American Children: One in Four at Risk. New York: The Childrens Health Fund. Accessed January 28, 2009, from http://www.childrenshealthfund.org/ calendar/WhitePaper-May2007-FINAL.pdf Reed, Malcolm C. (2004). The role of transport in delivering social justice in the west of Scotland. Scottish Geographical Journal, 120 (4), 277-287. Rosenbloom, S. (1992). Reverse commute transportation: Emerging provider roles United States Department of Transportation. Sallis, J.F. & Glanz, K. (2006). The role of bui lt environments in physical activity, eating, and obesity in childhood. The Future of Children, 16 (1) 89-108. Sanchez, T.W. (1999). The connection between public transit and employment: The cases of Portland and Atlanta. Journal of the Americ an Planning Association, 65 (3), 284-296. 151

PAGE 152

152 Schell, M. (2000). Poverty in Philadelphi a: Transportation as a change agent. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 20 (3) 185-190. Schrank, D. & Lomax, T. (2007). The 2007 Urban Mobility Report. Texas Transportation Institute. Retrieved November 19, 2008, from http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/mobility_report_2007_wappx.pdf Surface Transportation Policy Project (STTP). (2006). Transportation and social equity. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from http://www.transact.org/libra ry/factsheets/equity.asp Sutton, J. (1988). Transport Coordination and Social Policy. Aldershot, England: Avebury. Twadell, H. & Emerine, D. (2007). NCHRP Report 582: Best Pr actices to Enhance the Transportation-Land Use Connection in the Rural United States. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board. United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. (2005). Rural transportation at a glance. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/publi cations/IB795/AIB795_lowres.pdf Wilkinson, K.P. (1999). The Community in Rural America. Middleton, WI: Social Ecology Press.

PAGE 153

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Cristina Barone is currently pursuing a Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Florida in Gainesville, FL. She received a Bachelor of Ar ts in English from the University of Florida in 2007. Cristina has been involved in the Gainesville community in many different capacities over the course of the last si x years. She worked as a planning intern for the Regional Transit System, the Shimberg Center fo r Housing Studies, and th e City of Gainesville Neighborhood Improvement Department. She served as a member of the Downtown Redevelopment Advisory Board. She also volunteer ed at the Alachua Count y Crisis Center as a phone counselor and crisis in tervention trainer. Upon graduating, she hopes move to San Francisco, CA. 153