Supporting Sustainable Rural Communities
Partnership for Sustainable Communities
\
* 5
In collaboration with the U.S. Department of Agriculture
USDA
V
Fall 2011
-------
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities
On June 16, 2009, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood, U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson announced the formation of the interagency Partnership for
Sustainable Communities. This action marked a fundamental shift in the way the federal government
structures its transportation, housing, and environmental policies, programs, and spending, and
Americans are already seeing the impacts. The three agencies are working together to support urban,
suburban, and rural communities' efforts to attract economic growth, expand housing and
transportation choices, protect their air and water, and provide the type of development residents
want.
Through the Partnership and guided by six Livability Principles (below), HUD, DOT, and EPA are
coordinating investments and aligning policies to support sustainable communities—places that provide
homes working families can afford, reliable and economical transportation options, shopping and other
daily needs close to where people live, and vibrant and healthy neighborhoods that attract young
people and businesses.
The Partnership breaks down the traditional silos of housing, transportation, and environmental policy
to consider these issues as they exist in the real world—inextricably connected. Coordinating federal
investments yields better results for communities and uses taxpayer money more efficiently by meeting
multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives with each dollar spent. For example,
investing in the revitalization of a town's Main Street can spur business development, catalyze the
renovation of historic structures, save taxpayer dollars by avoiding the need for new streets and water
infrastructure, encourage healthy walking and bicycling, and give residents transportation choices that
can save them money and reduce air pollution.
Partnership for Sustainable Communities Guiding Livability Principles
Provide more transportation choices. Develop safe, reliable, and economical transportation choices to
decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil, improve air
quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health.
Promote equitable, affordable housing. Expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices for
people of all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities to increase mobility and lower the combined cost of
housing and transportation.
Enhance economic competitiveness. Improve economic competitiveness through reliable and timely
access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services and other basic needs by workers, as
well as expanded business access to markets.
Support existing communities. Target federal funding toward existing communities—through strategies
like transit-oriented, mixed-use development and land recycling—to increase community revitalization
and the efficiency of public works investments and safeguard rural landscapes.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment. Align federal policies and funding to remove
barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the accountability and effectiveness of all levels
of government to plan for future growth, including making smart energy choices such as locally
generated renewable energy.
Value communities and neighborhoods. Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities by
investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods—rural, urban, or suburban.
Front cover photo credits (clockwise from top left): National Trust for Historic Preservation, City of Ithaca, Clark Anderson, National Trust
for Historic Preservation, EPA, Worcester County.
-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 2
How the Livability Principles Support Rural Communities 5
HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA Programs At Work in Rural Communities 8
Performance Measures for Success 15
Conclusion and Next Steps for the Partnership 20
Appendix A: Case Studies of Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities 22
Appendix B: Partnership for Sustainable Communities Charge to the Rural Work Group 47
Appendix C: Rural WorkGroup Members 48
-------
Executive Summary
Rural communities across America are working to strengthen their economies, provide better
quality of life to residents, and build on assets such as traditional main streets, agricultural and
working lands, and natural resources. The Partnership for Sustainable Communities, in collaboration
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), established a Rural Work Group to reinforce these
initiatives and ensure that the four agencies' spending, policies, and programs support rural
communities' efforts to be economically vibrant and environmentally sustainable. This report
summarizes the Rural Work Group's findings and creates a framework for the Partnership's future
work with rural communities.
The report includes the following sections:
• How the Livability Principles Support Rural Communities: The Livability Principles that
guide the Partnership provide a useful policy framework for supporting sustainable rural
communities, making a critical connection between economic competitiveness, agricultural
and natural land preservation, the leveraging of existing infrastructure, and quality of life.
This section articulates how the Livability Principles apply in the rural context.
• HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA Programs at Work in Rural Communities: HUD, DOT, EPA, and
USDA each make significant investments and implement policies in rural America and are
positioned to support sustainable community development in rural communities and
regions. This section provides examples of federal programs at work in rural communities.
• Performance Measures for Success: Communities of all sizes are using performance
measurement to understand the impacts of their programs, policies, and investments. This
section identifies a sample set of performance measures tailored to the rural context and
organized under four broad goals: promoting rural prosperity, supporting vibrant and
thriving rural communities, expanding transportation choices, and providing affordable
housing opportunities.
• Conclusion and Next Steps for the Partnership: This section outlines a set of next steps the
Partnership agencies are considering to support the efforts of rural communities and small
towns to invest in a sustainable future.
• Case Studies of Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities: Across the country,
rural communities are strengthening their existing neighborhoods, providing more
transportation and housing choices, and promoting economic development that
complements their rural character. Appendix A provides some examples of how federal
agencies are supporting these efforts.
-------
Introduction
Background
Rural communities across America are working to strengthen their economies, provide better
quality of life to residents, and build on assets such as traditional main streets, agricultural and
working lands, and natural amenities and resources. The Partnership for Sustainable
Communities—made up of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—is
coordinating with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to reinforce these initiatives and
ensure that the four agencies' spending, policies, and programs support rural communities' efforts
to be economically vibrant and environmentally sustainable.
HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA already make significant investments and implement policies in rural
America through mechanisms such as USDA Rural Development loans and grants, HUD's State and
Small Cities Community Development Block Grant and Housing Choice Voucher programs, DOT's
rural transit expenditures, and EPA's clean water and drinking water state revolving funds.
Additionally, the Partnership supports community and regional planning efforts in rural areas. For
example, in 2010, HUD awarded $28 million in Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants
to regions with populations less than 500,000 and $15 million in Community Challenge Planning
Grants to rural places with fewer than 200,000 people. The 13,000-resident City of Glens Falls, New
York, for instance, received funding to develop a strategy to provide affordable workforce housing
downtown, identify vacant properties for infill development, and amend its zoning ordinance to
increase energy efficiency. The Housing Authority of Randolph County, with a population of 28,000,
received a grant to develop a county-wide plan that identifies areas for farmland preservation,
assesses opportunities for expanding bus service, and increases pedestrian and bike connectivity.
Strengthening federal support for rural communities by coordinating and aligning these programs is
a key Partnership goal. In August 2010, the Partnership established a Rural Work Group comprised
of staff from HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA to guide its approach to rural sustainable communities. This
report, which summarizes the work group's efforts, explores how the Partnership can contribute to
more resilient economies, healthy environments, and quality of life in rural America. It also sets out
a framework for the Partnership's future work with rural communities.
The report includes the following sections:
• How the Livability Principles Support Rural Communities: This section articulates how the
six Livability Principles that guide the Partnership apply in the rural context.
• HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA Programs at Work in Rural Communities: This section describes
programs at work in rural communities at each of the four agencies.
• Performance Measures for Success: This section identifies performance measures that
local, regional, and federal policymakers can use to assess the effectiveness of sustainable
communities approaches in small towns and rural places.
-------
• Conclusion and Next Steps for the Partnership: This section outlines a set of steps the
Partnership agencies can take to support the efforts of rural communities and small towns
as they invest in a sustainable future.
• Case Studies of Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities: Appendix A describes
rural communities that have successfully implemented sustainable communities approaches
with assistance from federal agencies.
The Rural Context
Rural is difficult to define. A rural community in a relatively high-population state can look
dramatically different from a similarly sized rural community in a less populous state. One definition
cited by the USDA Economic Research Service describes rural areas as nonmetropolitan counties. By
this definition, nearly two-thirds of the nation's 3,142 counties are rural, and rural communities
comprise 17 percent of the population (49 million people) and about 80 percent of the country's
total land area.1 However, these statistics, while important, do not describe the interaction
between communities and their surrounding landscapes that is so integral to understanding the
challenges and opportunities in rural areas.
From a land use and development perspective, rural America includes towns and small cities as well
as working lands, or lands that are managed for economic value such as farms, prairies, forests, and
rangelands. Historically, rural land was often used for the production and extraction of resources.
Towns were developed at transportation hubs—rail stations, river ports, major crossroads-
providing the places where agricultural or natural resources could be traded or shipped. Many rural
communities were built around main commercial streets and relatively compact, walkable
neighborhoods, along with valuable infrastructure that served their civic, cultural, and social needs.
The working lands surrounding the towns often provided the reason for their existence, and
continue to do so in many places. The rural landscape is more than attractive vistas—it is integral to
the social and economic life of the community.2
Today, rural communities face an array of challenges. Resource-based economies are vulnerable to
the impacts of commodity prices, technological changes, land value dynamics, and other market
influences. Some communities whose economies are contracting are experiencing unemployment,
poverty, population loss, the aging of their workforces, and increasing demands for social services
with fewer dollars to pay for them. In some rural areas, these are not new trends, but generations-
old issues. Additionally, residents of remote communities have limited access to jobs, services, and
transportation options. Long, expensive commutes to distant employment centers can eat up a
large percentage of the family budget, or families have to live sparsely on the small amount of local
work available. People who don't have access to personal vehicles or who do not drive, such as low-
income residents and senior citizens, lack mobility and have even less access to jobs, healthcare,
and other services.
1 U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. Rural Population and Migration Briefing Room.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Population/.
2 International City/County Management Association. Putting Smart Growth to Work in Rural Communities.
http://www.icma.org/ruralsmartgrowth.
-------
Other rural communities located close to metropolitan areas or amenities such as ski areas, national
parks, and other tourist destinations are struggling to preserve their rural character in the face of
growth pressures. These places are experiencing the conversion of farmland and natural land to
development, which has an impact not only on the environment, but also on resource- and tourism-
based economies. The new property development in these communities is often spread out,
resulting in increasing demands for infrastructure in places where it is difficult and costly to provide.
Rural communities often lack the capacity or financial resources to address these issues. Some
small, rural jurisdictions have limited local government staff, experience, or funding, which can
mean few resources dedicated to comprehensive planning, regional collaboration, and other efforts
to identify shared community goals and visions that can help shape growth and development.
What's more, rural communities may lack access to private and public capital, making it difficult for
them to obtain funds for economic development and revitalization. For example, philanthropic
organizations that exist in larger communities are less present in rural areas, reducing resources
that might assist local governments and organizations. The result can be development that fails to
take advantage of the communities' assets, has limited long-term benefits, and creates long-term
costs for the community.
An increasing number of rural communities are looking for development approaches beyond the
conventional dispersed land use patterns that make it difficult for them to meet their fiscal, social,
public health, and environmental goals. They are using a range of strategies to pursue economic
opportunities while maintaining the rural character that residents value.
Sustainable communities approaches are as diverse as rural America itself. Communities select the
most appropriate approaches for their context and adapt them to respond to local needs and
interests. Some places are exploring new ways to generate income from working lands with the
development of renewable energy facilities, including wind farms and solar panels. Others are
directing public and private investments to main streets and village centers. Still others are planning
and building walkable, convenient, and affordable neighborhoods. As the case studies in this report
show, rural communities are finding solutions that allow them to take advantage of their assets,
attract and retain businesses and residents of all ages, and ensure that economic development
results in lasting improvements.
-------
How the Livability Principles Support Rural Communities
Rural America is tremendously diverse—economically, demographically, and environmentally—and
approaches to supporting sustainable rural communities should be equally varied. The Livability
Principles guiding the Partnership for Sustainable Communities provide a useful policy framework
for investments to support sustainable rural communities. The six principles are listed below, along
with descriptions of how they can enhance economic prosperity and quality of life in rural places.
Livabilitv Principles
Provide more transportation choices.
Many rural communities have limited transportation options. Rural roadways are often not
designed to accommodate multiple modes of transportation, particularly walking, bicycling, and
transit. Rural areas have also seen intercity bus service reduced over the past decades. This lack of
options can limit access to jobs, medical care, and educational opportunities. In particular, seniors,
low-income, and disabled persons living in rural America may be unable to reach necessary
resources. For those who do drive, commutes to distant employment centers can be time
consuming and require a large percentage of the family budget to be spent on transportation.
Residents of rural communities, like their counterparts in urban and suburban areas, benefit from
neighborhoods that foster healthy and convenient walking, bicycling, and public transportation
where feasible. Many rural communities were built on transportation corridors such as state
highways, rail lines, or rivers and traditionally had compact, mixed-use designs with interconnected
street networks that made it easy to walk or bicycle between neighborhoods and downtown.
Village centers were ideal locations for regional transit services to pick up passengers. This
foundation for expanded transportation choice both within and between towns still exists in many
places. Looking at rural transportation through an intra- and inter- community lens can help guide
investments from HUD, DOT, EPA, USDA, and other federal agencies.
In addition, intercity and regional mobility are drivers of economic growth in rural communities.
Well planned transportation systems improve the quality of life and economic attractiveness of
small towns by providing access to regional job markets, facilitating the transport of locally made
goods to markets, and bringing tourists and other consumers to community businesses.
Promote equitable, affordable housing.
Some rural communities lack housing options. Much of their housing stock may be aging, resulting
in low energy efficiency and high utility costs. Communities that offer a variety of housing types,
such as single-family homes, townhouses, duplexes, and apartments in varying price ranges, are
best positioned to attract and retain residents at all life phases—from single-person households to
young families to retirees. The location of new housing can also provide a competitive advantage,
as homes that are near schools, jobs, shopping, and services reduce residents' combined housing
and transportation costs. Housing integrated into commercial areas, such as residences above first-
floor stores and offices on main streets, may make it more convenient and affordable for residents
to reach daily destinations while providing a local consumer base for businesses.
-------
Enhance economic competitiveness.
Rural communities and small towns can thrive only if there are employment opportunities that
support a good standard of living. While rural incomes may be substantially lower than those in
metropolitan areas, rural regions possess unique resources and opportunities for economic
development. Farms, ranches, renewable energy production facilities, and recreational amenities
such as national parks and national forests all have economic value for rural communities.
Innovations in agriculture can expand local and regional markets for agricultural products, resulting
in more diverse, resilient economies. Continued expansion of broadband can also help strengthen
and diversify rural economies, opening up new markets, connecting residents to job centers in
larger communities, and reducing the need to travel to conduct business.
Federal investments are most effective if they are made in accordance with a community's
economic vision. As a result, the Partnership should support rural communities' efforts to identify
their competitive advantages through planning and visioning efforts.
Support existing communities.
Rural American communities are largely defined by their relationship to the agricultural and natural
landscape, so conserving working and natural lands is a key strategy for protecting quality of life
and the long-term economic viability of farming, forestry, tourism, and other natural resource-
based activities. Redevelopment in small towns should support economic vitality without sacrificing
the beauty and utility of the surrounding landscape. Rural America is home to many once-vibrant
main streets with historic buildings and vacant commercial properties. Channeling investments into
existing main streets can revitalize infrastructure and spur new economic opportunities. These
assets can be the foundation for place-based economic development that promotes rural wealth
creation. Outside of towns, directing and prioritizing investments can also meet community goals.
For example, improving water and wastewater systems can protect subsurface fresh water sources
and help farm families ensure the viability of agricultural operations.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment.
Given the size and scale of rural communities, federal investments can make a significant impact, so
it is critical that they support community goals and are coordinated across agencies. Federal
investments are catalysts for additional public and private investment and can reinforce—or
counteract—community plans that help guide development. However, many rural communities lack
the capacity or resources to create plans and policies that codify their goals. As a result, the
Partnership can support rural communities' efforts to craft visions for future development and to
create and implement plans and policies that guide public and private investments.
Coordinating housing, transportation and environmental policies and funding produces better
results for local residents. It uses taxpayer money more efficiently, meeting multiple economic,
environmental, and community objectives with each dollar spent. To make their programs work as
well as possible for the nation's communities, federal agencies must remove barriers to
collaboration and provide opportunities to leverage funding.
-------
For instance, federal investments in renewable energy development can improve economic
conditions in rural America by creating jobs and reducing carbon emissions and dependence on oil
imports. Where companies are investing in renewable energy facilities, coordinating transportation
and infrastructure funding can ensure that employees have the housing and amenities they need,
communities offer a high quality of life to attract a strong workforce, the environment is protected,
and economic advances are sustainable. This same integrated approach can create opportunities in
other areas such as recreation, tourism, and local and regional food systems.
Value communities and neighborhoods.
Rural communities and small towns should be valued for their distinctive and historic features.
Communities that conserve and build upon these resources, such as historic downtowns and main
streets, important natural features, and long-standing cultural and religious institutions will be
better positioned to enhance quality of life for their residents. Iconic rural landscapes are often
defined by farmsteads, historic barns, and working agricultural structures—visual representations
of American agricultural traditions. Historic preservation, adapting old structures for new purposes,
and designing to complement local character will strengthen existing communities while
contributing to renewed economic vitality.
-------
HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA Programs at Work in Rural Communities
Working with its partners, the federal government has for many years played a significant role in
rural America. The Partnership agencies and USDA have a variety of programs that support
economic development, infrastructure, and conservation in rural communities. While some of these
programs reflect the Partnership's objectives of enhancing economic competitiveness, supporting
existing communities, and coordinating federal activities, others can be implemented without
regard for the location of investments, their impacts on economic development and environmental
outcomes, or potential leveraging of related federal, state, and local efforts. The effectiveness of
these programs could be increased by better coordinating them with other federal efforts and
incorporating the Livability Principles where appropriate.
This section lists some of the programs affecting the natural and built environments and economic
development in rural communities. Each agency also has many other programs that can be helpful
to rural communities. For more information, see each agency's website.
U. S. Department of Agriculture
USDA is comprised of multiple agencies that support agriculture, natural resources, and rural
development. USDA's current strategic plan reflects a commitment to rural sustainability:
USDA is working to enhance the livability of rural communities. The department uses 21st-
century technology to rebuild infrastructure, ensure that rural residents have decent housing
and homeownership opportunities, clean water, adequate systems for handling waste,
reliable electricity and renewable energy systems, and critical community facilities including
health-care centers, schools, and public safety departments. USDA also helps communities
invest in strategic green infrastructure planning and protection of critical natural resources.3
While much of the department's work affects rural communities, three agencies stand out:
• Rural Development: Through its Rural Housing Service, the Rural Business-Cooperative
Service and the Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development provides loans, loan guarantees,
grants, and technical assistance to rural America. Resources are available for housing,
community facilities, renewable energy and energy conservation, utility services (energy,
water, and waste water), broadband, economic development, and capacity building. Rural
Development administers over $20 billion per year in loans, loan guarantees and grants.
• Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS): Recognizing that over 70 percent of the
United States' land area is privately owned, the Natural Resources Conservation Service
partners with landowners to support and implement conservation planning that will result
in productive lands and healthy ecosystems. NRCS brings expertise in watershed
management and soil science, and its programs can help rural communities manage diverse
landscapes.
3 U.S. Department of Agriculture. Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2010-2015.
http://www.ocfo.usda.gov/usdasp/sp2010/sp2010.pdf.
-------
• Forest Service: The mission of the Forest Service is "to sustain the health, diversity, and
productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future
generations."4 National forests comprise 193 million acres across the country5 and are an
important presence in many rural communities, responding to many community needs from
recreational opportunities to mining and timber resources to regional economic
development. In areas where extensive public ownership of national forests affects the local
tax base, the Forest Service provides direct financial support for community needs such as
schools.
USDA is also spearheading various regional economic development initiatives. For instance, the
Stronger Economies Together program aims to strengthen the capacity of rural regions to
collaboratively develop and implement economic development blueprints. In another example, the
first stage of the Great Regions initiative provided Rural Business Opportunity Grants to economic
development projects that could have regional impacts, with the goal of further supporting these
efforts through other USDA programs.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Many HUD programs operate in rural as well as metropolitan areas, but their funds might pass
through state agencies or other entities to rural communities, making it less evident that the
funding comes from HUD. HUD invests around $6.2 billion per year in rural areas. The majority of
these funds provide affordable housing to low-income residents. More than 800,000 families in
rural communities currently receive assistance through HUD's Housing Choice Voucher, Public
Housing, and Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Multifamily programs, with assistance totaling
more than $4 billion per year.
The State and Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program enables rural
communities to obtain grant funds for infrastructure, equitable affordable housing, economic
development, and community planning. The State CDBG program provides about $840 million per
year for economic development and other public investments in rural areas through state
governments. The largest investments through the State and Small Cities CDBG are in public
infrastructure, particularly for water and sewer projects, keeping Main Streets across rural America
viable and directly supporting over 8,500 jobs per year. CDBG funds can also be used as the local
match for other federal funding. HUD also funds over $500 million annually in affordable housing
and homeownership programs in rural areas through another block grant to states, the HOME
Investment Partnership. These two block grant programs also provide crucial additional funds to
support communities rebuilding from disasters, serving as the vehicle for the supplemental
appropriations Congress makes available to presidentially declared disaster areas.
HUD's Rural Housing Stability Grant Program assists individuals and families who are homeless, in
danger of losing their homes, or in the worst housing situations in the geographic area - an
increasing problem in rural communities. HUD's FHA insures more than $220 billion in mortgages,
U.S. Forest Service. About Us - Mission, http://www.fs.fed.us/aboutus/mission.shtml.
5 U.S. Forest Service, http://www.fs.fed.us/.
-------
allowing over 1.5 million first-time homebuyers and other qualified families in rural areas to
purchase their own homes. The FHA similarly insures loans on nursing homes, assisted living
facilities, board and care facilities, and acute care hospitals, including a current total of over $545
million in loans to hospitals designated "critical access hospitals" in rural areas. Additionally, HUD
ensures the quality of over 40,000 manufactured homes a year, more than 60 percent of which are
located in rural areas. Less waste in construction and better energy efficiency make these homes
more affordable to buy and live in.
HDD's Indian and Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grants, Home Loan Guarantees, and Community
Development Block Grants support economic development and almost 40,000 homes, the single
largest source of funding for housing on Indian tribal lands today at over $780 million per year. HUD
supports these communities and their right to self-determination by allowing the recipients to
design and implement housing programs according to local needs and customs.
HUD also administers several programs that link housing and economic development in rural areas.
HUD's Rural Housing and Economic Development Program is designed to address problems of
poverty, inadequate housing, and lack of economic opportunity in rural communities that are
outside of metropolitan regions and have populations of 20,000 or less. It specifically focuses on
high-need communities such as those in the Lower Mississippi Delta Region, the Colonias, and
Appalachia, as well as federally recognized Indian tribes and seasonal farmworker communities. The
program develops state and local capacity to support innovative rural housing and economic
development approaches. Grants are awarded directly to local rural nonprofits, community
development corporations, federally recognized Indian tribes, state housing finance agencies, and
state community or economic development agencies.
Since fiscal year 1999, HUD's Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development has received an
average of $22 million annually for the Rural Housing and Economic Development Program.
Appropriations increased from $27 million in fiscal year 1999 to $248.7 million in fiscal year 2009,
and grantees leveraged $850.9 million over that period. Grant awards increased from 91 in fiscal
year 1999 to 964 in fiscal year 2009. Rural Housing and Economic Development grantees have
created 13,005 jobs, trained 38,347 people, created 2,058 new businesses, assisted 5,557 existing
businesses, constructed 8,595 housing units, and rehabilitated 9,267 housing units.
On a smaller scale, Rural Innovation Fund grants build homes and community facilities and support
job-training programs and other economic development projects. This funding to federally
recognized Indian tribes, local rural non-profits, community development corporations, and state
housing and economic development agencies lets communities address local issues and builds their
capacity to serve residents.
Launched in 2004, HUD's Rural Gateway serves as a clearinghouse of innovative ideas on rural
housing, economic development, and revitalization, with a specific focus on communities in the
Colonias, the Lower Mississippi Delta Region, Appalachia, and federally recognized Indian Tribes, as
well as seasonal farmworker communities. The Rural Gateway builds the capacity of local, state,
and regional organizations working on housing, economic development, and infrastructure
development in rural areas. It also serves as a promoter and facilitator of private sector based
10
-------
partnerships to support housing, economic development, infrastructure, and capacity building
activities.
HUD has historically been a key federal resource for community planning, and the Sustainable
Communities Regional Planning Grant and Community Challenge Planning Grant programs, recent
Partnership initiatives, focus on helping communities create plans that integrate economic
development, housing, and transportation. These grant programs provide a useful example of
broadly applicable initiatives that set aside a portion of funding for rural and small communities. For
instance, $28 million in Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants was awarded to regions
with populations less than 500,000 and $15 million in Community Challenge Planning Grants went
to rural places with fewer than 200,000 people. The interest from rural areas in the first year was
great—52 percent of applicants to the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program
were from small towns and rural areas.
U.S. Department of Transportation
Like HUD, most programs in DOT, including safety research, highway and transit construction, and
transportation planning, have a rural component. Most federal transportation funding is distributed
by formula to state and local transportation agencies.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) administers a variety of programs that provide access to
public transportation in rural communities, particularly to prevent the economic and social isolation
of elderly and low-income residents and to support intercity mobility. FTA's formula grant programs
provide over $500 million for public transportation in and between rural communities, in addition
to targeted technical assistance for rural transit providers, grants to tribes for transit and roads, and
grants that support sustainable transportation for visitors to national parks and federal lands. Since
1979, FTA has provided grants to states under the Section 5311 Non-urbanized Transit Program to
establish and maintain transit systems in communities with populations under 50,000.
The Rural Transit Assistance Program provides funding for training and technical assistance projects
and other support services tailored to meet the needs of transit operators in rural areas. Additionally,
the Tribal Transit Program provides approximately $45 million in direct funding to federally recognized
tribes to support tribal public transportation in rural areas. The tribes can use this funding for capital,
operating, planning, and administrative expenses for transit projects that meet the growing needs of
rural tribal communities.
The Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks Program provides funding for sustainable transportation
systems, such as shuttle buses, rail connections, and bicycle trails in America's national parks,
national forests, and wildlife refuges. The program seeks to conserve natural, historical, and cultural
resources; reduce congestion and pollution; improve visitor mobility and accessibility; enhance the
visitor experience; and ensure access to everyone, including persons with disabilities. FTA awarded
$27 million through this program in 2010.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) plays an important role in supporting the
transportation needs of rural communities with its investments in America's highway and road
network, including state highways that often serve as main streets through rural towns and villages.
11
-------
In fiscal year 2008, nearly 39 percent of all federal highway funds obligated—approximately $13.7
billion—were for highways classified as rural.
FHWA also administers the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) to reduce traffic fatalities
and injuries on public roads. The High Risk Rural Roads Program was established through a set-aside
from each state's apportionment of HSIP funds for construction and operational improvements on
high-risk rural roads. A total of $90 million is set aside nationally per year and is applied
proportionally from the states' HSIP apportionments.6
The Federal Lands Highway Program provides transportation infrastructure for the 30 percent of
America that is federally owned (national parks, forests, monuments, reserves, rangelands, etc.).
Similarly, the National Scenic Byways Program invests in transportation corridors to support the
environmental and cultural features that make them economically valuable.
With a more regional focus, FHWA also supports the Appalachian Development Highway System
Program. This program provides funds for the construction of highways in 13 states in Appalachia to
promote economic development and meet the region's transportation needs. The Appalachian
Development Highway System is 76 percent complete.
Additionally, FHWA supports freight movement, which often passes through rural areas and is
critical for bringing rural products to market. Freight operations and planning are dealt with across
many of FHWA's program areas. The agency also sponsors peer-to-peer exchanges and seminars on
freight movement and planning, and on linking freight transportation and livability.
The FTA and FHWA jointly administer the State Planning and Research Programs, through which
states are required to conduct comprehensive and collaborative intermodal statewide
transportation planning that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods. As part of this
process, states are required to consult with officials from places outside of metropolitan areas.7
The Federal Railroad Administration administers the Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement
Financing Program which provides direct federal loans and loan guarantees to finance development
of railroad infrastructure that can particularly benefit large projects in rural areas.
Rural areas also compete successfully in DOT's discretionary livability grant programs. In 2009 and
2010, with the support of the Partnership, the TIGER (Transportation Investments Generating
Economic Recovery) and TIGER II programs provided approximately $288 million in funding to
support the planning and construction of transportation infrastructure in rural areas.
6 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. What We Do.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/whatwedo/topics/.
7 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. What We Do.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/whatwedo/topics/.
12
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA's mission is to protect the environment and public health, and a healthy environment is
essential to a healthy economy. Programs that most explicitly integrate environmental, economic,
and community outcomes in rural places include technical assistance offered by the Office of
Sustainable Communities; support for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure provided by
the Office of Water; and brownfields assessment, cleanup, and area-wide planning grants from the
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization. These programs do not formally set aside funds for
rural communities, but they have worked with many rural places.
For example, the Office of Sustainable Communities has provided intensive technical assistance to
rural communities through its Smart Growth Implementation Assistance program as well as offering
more targeted, short-term help on growth and development challenges in small towns through its
Sustainable Communities Building Blocks program. Fifteen of the 31 Building Blocks technical
assistance projects served small towns and rural communities, bringing approximately $180,000 in
technical assistance services. The Office of Sustainable Communities also provides funding for the
Governors' Institute on Community Design, which offers technical assistance to governors and their
staffs, some of whom have asked for help with rural issues. The office has funded and helped to
create the Smart Growth Network publication Putting Smart Growth to Work in Rural
Communities,8 which highlights smart growth strategies that leaders from rural communities and
small towns can use to help guide growth while protecting natural and working lands and
preserving rural character. Smart growth is development that is good for the economy, the
environment, and the community, providing more choices for residents, greater opportunity across
the community, good return on public investment, and clean air and water.9 Smart growth
techniques look different in different places because they are meant to be adapted to local needs,
but many communities use smart growth strategies to foster neighborhoods that have stores,
offices, schools, and houses of worship near homes; to preserve open space for agriculture,
recreation, and aesthetic value; and to ensure that people can find a safe, convenient, and
affordable place to live.
EPA's Brownfields Program, in the Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization, empowers states,
communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together to prevent,
assess, clean up, and reuse brownfields. A brownfield is a property, the expansion, redevelopment,
or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Brownfields can exist in urban and rural communities. The
Brownfields Program offers grants to support revitalization efforts by funding environmental
assessment, cleanup, and job training activities. Brownfields Assessment Grants provide funding for
brownfield inventories, planning, environmental assessments, and community outreach.
Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund Grants provide funding to capitalize loans that are used to clean
International City/County Management Association. Putting Smart Growth to Work in Rural Communities.
http://www.icma.org/ruralsmartgrowth.
9 Smart growth is further described by the ten smart growth principles, developed by the Smart Growth Network
based on the experiences of urban, suburban, and rural communities around the nation that have used smart
growth approaches to create and maintain great neighborhoods. See the Smart Growth Network website for a
discussion of these principles: http://www.smartgrowth.org.
13
-------
up brownfields. Brownfields Job Training Grants provide environmental training for residents of
brownfields communities. Brownfields Cleanup Grants provide direct funding for cleanup activities
at certain properties with planned green space, recreational, or other nonprofit uses. In 2010, the
Brownfields Program worked with the Partnership to give out Area-Wide Planning Grants to help
selected communities create a shared vision for brownfields redevelopment that will inform
cleanup decisions. Five out of 23 of those grants, representing nearly $1 million in funding, supported
rural communities with populations less than 20,000.
The Office of Water provides grants to states to operate revolving loan programs that provide low-
interest financing for wastewater, drinking water, and other water quality projects. In 2010, these
programs issued guidance recommending that states make funding decisions that are consistent
with the Partnership's Livability Principles and discourage expanding infrastructure to
accommodate growth if there are available facilities in existing communities. In fiscal year 2009, 78
percent of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund assistance agreements—approximately $1.2
billion—were established with communities of fewer than 10,000 people.10 About $608 million in
assistance was provided to communities of fewer than 10,000 people through the Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund in fiscal year 2009.n
Other EPA programs at work in rural areas include AgSTAR, which advances the capture and use of
biogas at livestock facilities; Smartway Transport, which works with the freight sector to improve
energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions, and improve energy security;
and the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Grant Program, which provides grants for the
planning, design, and construction of wastewater and drinking water facilities to communities
within 60 miles of the border.
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Water State Revolving Fund Programs 2009 Annual Report.
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/cwsrf/upload/2009 CWSRF AR.pdf.
11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Drinking Water State Revolving Fund: 2009 Annual Report.
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/upload/dwsrf-annualreport2009nov2010.pdf.
14
-------
Performance Measures for Success
Communities of all sizes are using performance measurement to better understand the impacts of
their decisions. Performance measures document changes in human behavior, demographics,
economic trends, or development patterns. By translating data and statistics into a succinct and
consistent format, performance measures quantify the degree to which programs, policies, and
investments achieve community goals. Performance measures allow decision-makers to quickly
observe the expected effects of a proposed plan or project or to monitor trends in its performance
overtime.
Along with helping rural communities track progress toward their own sustainable communities
goals, performance measurement can also aid the Partnership agencies in assessing the
effectiveness of their investments in rural communities and small towns. Performance measures
can help HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA translate the Livability Principles into concrete outcomes, target
their resources toward planning and capital programs that support sustainable communities, and
evaluate federal initiatives.
Rural communities, given their distinctive characteristics, require customized performance
measures. The measures provided here are suggestions for communities or regions interested in
performance evaluation at the community or regional scale. Each measure can also be used or
adapted to assess the performance of federal programs at a national scale. However, some
measures may require local data that are not available in a nationally consistent format. For
example, while the U.S. Census counts housing units every 10 years, more timely and geographically
precise information on the location of new home construction would have to be acquired from each
county building permitting office or tax assessor. As a result, it is difficult to accurately measure at a
national scale the percentage of new housing units built on previously developed land or near rural
town centers, or the average density of new residential development. Likewise there is no single
consistent database describing land use or land value at a parcel level. As a consequence, it is
impossible to assess how different places across the country arrange and balance residential,
commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses, or how property values change over time.
The following framework for performance measurement is organized in terms of broad goals and
specific strategies that can help attain each objective. Each rural community can choose a different
set of strategies that best fits its opportunities and challenges. The implementation measures
evaluate the effectiveness with which each strategy is pursued. Other indicators can be used to
track a community's progress toward the broader goals. These measures reflect changes in
behavior or outcomes on the ground that would be anticipated to result if strategies are
implemented successfully. All the measures described here are examples that can be helpful to
rural communities trying to become more environmentally and economically sustainable, but they
are a starting point, not a definitive list.
15
-------
Goal 1: Promote Rural Prosperity
Create an economic climate that enhances the viability of working lands, preserves natural
resources, and increases economic opportunities for all residents in rural communities.
Strategies
Implementation measures
Other indicators
Pursue regional
collaboration
Creation of a regional
economic development plan
based on a clear
understanding of comparative
economic advantages and
existing or emerging
economic clusters
Implementation of a regional
economic development plan
Integration of regional
economic development plan
with transportation, housing,
land use, natural resources,
workforce development, and
other regional or local plans
Cultivate economic
development that
promotes the
sustained economic
potential of working
rural lands
Successful development of
supplementary economic uses
for rural lands and their
byproducts (e.g., wind farms,
biomass power generation)
Implementation of policies to
promote sustained economic
viability of agricultural and
natural resource land uses
Rate of agricultural and
natural resource land lost to
development
Percentage of prime rural
land lost to development
Percentage of prime
agricultural land placed
under permanent
conservation easement
Cultivate economic
development that
sustains a high
quality of life in
rural communities
Creation of economic
development plans or
strategies that are based on
unique assets and include
measurable goals
Implementation of policies to
promote natural resource
conservation and
environmental quality
Percentage of jobs at region's
three largest employers13
Percentage of jobs in small-
to medium-sized firms
Percentage of jobs in locally
owned firms
Percentage of new jobs in
high-wage occupations
Regional exports
Growth of sectors that are
part of asset-based or cluster
development
These implementation measures (unlike those in Goals 2, 3, and 4) focus not on outcomes on the ground, but
rather the development and implementation of plans or policies that can shape those outcomes. At the
community scale, they are measured nominally (e.g., whether a plan/policy is in place). They can also be adapted
for national-scale program evaluation. One example of a national measure might be the percentage of grant-
receiving communities that have created a regional economic development plan that is based on a clear
understanding of comparative economic advantages and existing or emerging economic clusters.
13 Sustaining long-term economic opportunity in rural communities sometimes means increasing the number of
employers. Rural communities that rely upon a few major employers are less economically resilient when one of
those employers chooses to reduce or close down operations. Therefore an economic development strategy might
encourage increasing the percentage of jobs in small to medium-sized firms or locally owned firms that are more
likely to have a long-term interest in the community.
16
-------
Goal 2: Support Vibrant and Thriving Rural Communities
Enhance the distinctive characteristics of rural communities by investing in rural town centers, Main
Streets, and existing infrastructure to create places that are vibrant, healthy, safe, and walkable.
Strategies
Implementation measures
Other indicators
Invest public funds
in existing rural
communities
Percentage of public
investments in rural areas
spent on projects within Yi
mile of rural town centers15
Common elements in
transportation, land use,
housing, economic
development, natural
resources, and water plans
promoting public investment
in existing communities
Encourage private-
sector investment in
existing rural
communities
Percentage of new or
rehabilitated housing units
within Yi mile of rural town
centers
Percentage of new
commercial development (or
major rehab) within Yi mile of
rural town centers
Percentage of new housing
units built on previously
developed land
Percentage of new
commercial development on
previously developed land
Percentage of households
within Yi mile of rural town
centers
Percentage of employment
within Yi mile of rural town
centers
Number of jobs within Yi mile
of rural town centers
Number of brownfields
remediated for
redevelopment
Make it easy to
build compact,
walkable, mixed-use
places
Percentage of new homes
built in mixed-use
neighborhoods
Average density (units per
acre) of new residential
development
Percentage of households
with walkable/convenient
access to stores, services,
parks, and/or schools16
Street network connectivity
of new development (block
length or number of three- or
four-way intersections)
This measure could be adapted to evaluate either investments from a single state or federal program or a
collection of different programs.
15 The term "rural town center" can refer to historic Main Streets as well as newer developments in which a variety
of jobs, housing, retail, and services are concentrated. One potential way to identify rural town centers is to use
Census-designated urban area boundaries for towns or cities of between 2,500 (the minimum) and 49,999 in
population. Additionally, the Partnership for Sustainable Communities working group on Performance
Measurement is developing a national dataset to define the locations of activity centers in both urban and rural
communities across the U.S.
16 The range of services available in a rural community will depend on that community's population. For example, a
community of 15,000 residents might be capable of supporting a full-service grocery store while a community of
1,000 residents might not be. Therefore, this indicator should be adjusted to reflect realistic expectations and local
context.
17
-------
Goal 3: Expand Transportation Choices
Create communities where everyone—including elderly, disabled, and low-income residents—can
conveniently, affordably, and safely access local and regional goods and services.
Strategies
Implementation measures
Other indicators
Increase multimodal
mobility and access
for rural
communities
Percentage of non-urbanized
area population covered by
demand-response service17 at
least three days per week18
Availability of fixed route
transit service in key travel
corridors, where appropriate19
Availability of scheduled
intercity bus or rail service
Average number of daily
scheduled intercity bus and
rail departures from a rural
town center to larger
communities where health
care, schools, jobs centers
and other regional services
are available
Transit trips per capita
Design roadways
that support all
modes of travel:
transit, biking,
walking, and
automobile
Percentage of new or
improved roadways (by mile)
that include sidewalks and/or
bicycle/pedestrian
infrastructure
Adoption of "complete
streets"20 policy in the long-
range/short-range
transportation plan
Biking mode share for trips to
work
Walking mode share for trips
to work
Transit mode share for trips
to work
Pedestrian and bicyclist
fatality rate21
Demand-response service is a form of public transportation with small or medium-sized vehicles operating on
flexible routes and schedules according to passenger needs. An example is Dial-a-Ride service.
18 Note that this measure should be adapted as appropriate for the size of the community. Smaller rural
communities may only offer demand-response service such as paratransit while larger rural communities may be
able to support and benefit from fixed-route transit service along key corridors.
1 See previous note.
"Complete streets" are roadways designed and operated to enable safe and comfortable access and travel for all
users.
21 Note that this indicator alone is a poor measure of the success of programs seeking to promote walking and
biking in rural communities. For example, a community where no residents walk or bike will have a low fatality
rate. Nevertheless, in communities with limited data regarding bike and pedestrian activity, this measure may
provide one useful perspective on progress towards improved walking and biking conditions.
20 „
18
-------
Goal 4: Expand Affordable Housing
Create communities where everyone—including elderly, disabled, and low-income residents—can
afford housing and transportation expenses.
Strategies
Implementation measures
Other indicators
Increase in
affordable housing
near rural town and
employment centers
Number of affordable for-
purchase and rental homes in
or near rural town centers
Implementation of policies to
ensure that housing is
affordable to working
families, the elderly, and low-
income residents
Percentage of low-income
households within a 30-
minute commute of regional
employment centers
Median household housing
plus transportation costs
19
-------
Conclusion and Next Steps for the Partnership
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities will continue working to ensure that its policies,
programs, and investments support rural communities that are economically resilient, provide good
quality of life for residents, and have healthy environments. To strengthen federal support of rural
communities and use Partnership resources efficiently, HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA will consider the
following next steps.
Short Term (3-6 months)
• Form a Rural Implementation Group made up of staff from the four agencies to implement
the steps identified in this report.
• Create a Leveraging the Partnership for Rural Communities guide, modeled on the
Leveraging the Partnership document,22 describing funding and technical assistance
programs available to rural communities from each of the four agencies.
• Facilitate collaboration between Rural Development state staff and Partnership regional
teams on ongoing HUD, DOT, EPA, and USDA projects with rural components.
• Determine the potential for philanthropic resources to help build rural capacity for strategic
planning and implementation of specific projects.
• Explore the feasibility of a capacity-building workshop on sustainable communities
strategies for rural grantees of HUD's Regional Planning Grant program.
• Conduct outreach to rural stakeholders on the Partnership's activities.
Medium Term (6-12 months)
• Post online case studies on rural communities that have used smart growth and sustainable
communities approaches to achieve job growth, resource protection, and housing and
community facility improvements.
• As follow-up to the Rural Roundtable held by the Rural Work Group in August 2010, conduct
additional listening sessions with agency leadership and stakeholder groups.
• Collaborate with USDA Economic Research Service to identify how its online Rural Atlas can
become an effective information tool for current and future Partnership grantees.23
• Engage in collaborative technical assistance and/or grant implementation.
• Consider ways to streamline and improve grant processes so that rural communities can
access federal resources more easily.
• Address capacity issues related to grant writing and planning capacity in rural communities.
• Identify regional collaboration opportunities that will help the four agencies assess how well
their programs work together.
• Prepare guidelines for planning effective transit programs in rural areas.
• Support rural sessions and networking at the 2012 New Partners for Smart Growth
conference.
22 Partnership for Sustainable Communities. Leveraging the Partnership.
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/2010 0506 leveraging partnership.pdf.
23 U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. Rural Atlas.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/RuralAtlas/index.htm.
20
-------
Longer Term (12-18 months)
• Continue to incorporate the Livability Principles, as appropriate, into rural-focused
community and economic development Notices of Funding Availability and grant
applications.
• Evaluate the impacts of the Partnership's rural efforts through performance measurement.
• Deliver Partnership resources to rural communities through training and technical
assistance.
• Explore how the Partnership can help support scenario planning workshops in rural areas.
21
-------
Appendix A: Case Studies of Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Across the country, rural communities are creating development that strengthens their economies,
takes advantage of assets like traditional Main Streets and agricultural lands, and provides residents
with more housing and transportation choices. These case studies are examples of rural
communities working with federal agencies to attain their quality of life, environmental, and
economic goals. These case studies are in alphabetical order by state.
22
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Grand Canyon National Park: Enhancing Visitor Experiences through
Multimodal Transportation Improvements
!M5
•^jtg>/
GRAND CANYON
NATIONAL PARK
Photos courtesy of the National Park Service
Location: Grand Canyon National Park,
Arizona
Focus: Multimodal transportation
improvements
Partners:
U.S. Department of Transportation
National Park Service
Funding:
Federal Lands Highway Program
Project Description:
To ensure positive experiences for the Grand Canyon National Park's 5 million visitors each year, the
Federal Lands Highway Program supported enhanced shuttle services within and outside the park, bike
rental facilities, pedestrian facility upgrades, and other transportation improvements.
Established in 1919, Grand Canyon National Park is an icon in the national parks system. The canyon
itself includes over 277 river miles and can be as much as 18 miles wide and a mile deep. The park is
home to breathtaking and unique geographic features and important archeological and cultural
resources.
In 2007, the National Park Service and the Forest Service conducted the South Rim Visitor
Transportation Plan Environmental Assessment to address the park's pressing traffic, parking, and
access issues, specifically those in Grand Canyon Village, where many visitors stay. Most of the
components of the plan have been or are being implemented.
-------
Grand Canyon National Park: Enhancing Visitor Experiences through
Multimodal Transportation Improvements
Project Components:
• A new shuttle route to transport
visitors to the South Rim from the
gateway community of Tusayan,
seven miles outside the park.
• Expanded shuttle service from the
visitor center to multiple South Rim
destinations.
• Bike rental facilities at the Canyon
View Information Plaza.
• Entrance station improvements to
reduce long wait times entering the
park.
• Improved shuttle stops, pedestrian
improvements, roadway
realignments, and new parking at the
Canyon View Information Plaza.
• Intelligent Transportation Systems,
which integrate communications and
electronics technologies into
transportation infrastructure to
improve traveler information and
enhance safety and mobility.
For more information about this project,
contact:
Elijah Henley, DOT, elijah.henley(S)dot.gov
Livability Principles Addressed:
Provide more transportation choices:
Recognizing the park's worsening traffic,
parking, and visitor access, the plan's
implementation increases the
transportation choices for getting to and
around the park. With enhanced shuttle
service and bike rentals available, visitors
have transportation options that allow
them to connect more closely with their
environment while reducing congestion.
Additionally, the shuttle service provides
another transportation option to park
employees, many of whom live along its
route inside the park.
Enhance economic competitiveness:
Providing enhanced transportation
services to nearby gateway communities
can strengthen their economies. For
example, the shuttle service increases
visitors' access to the hotels and
restaurants in Tusayan.
Support existing communities: The South
Rim Visitor Transportation Plan works with
neighboring communities such as
Tusayan to provide transportation to and
from the national park, improving
residents' access to the park and visitors'
access to the community.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies
and investment: Grand Canyon National
Park is coordinating with the Arizona
Department of Transportation on a
complementary streetscape improvement
project in Tusayan.
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities (JSDA
Case Studies
Rural
Development
Committed to the future of rural communities.
Lake Village: Reusing a Historic Building to Support Downtown
Photos: Historic Lake Villaae. John Tushek Buildina before renovation. Courtesv of Aaron Rubv.
Location: Lake Village, Arkansas
Focus: Historic preservation and downtown
revitalization
Funding:
USDA Community Facilities Program: $840,000
Arkansas Energy Efficiency Conservation Block
Grant Program: $750,000
Partners:
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Rural
Development Arkansas State Office
City of Lake Village
Project Description:
In 2010, the community of Lake Village, Arkansas, population 2,823, received funding to rehabilitate a
historic structure in its town center in an effort to consolidate public service providers into one location and
channel future development into the Main Street area of an economically distressed community.
Like many small communities whose main streets have declined, Lake Village had seen public and private
investments migrate to the outskirts of town over the years, leaving Main Street a shadow of its once-vibrant
self. In an effort to reverse that trend, Lake Village leaders explored ways to revitalize their community and
decided that reusing an existing building, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, would be
one way to provide a boost to the community. With the mayor, police, and court clerk all using inadequate
spaces in separate buildings, the town hoped that combining those departments into one centrally located
building would help provide services to the community more efficiently while also bringing people and
economic activity back to Main Street.
Once complete, the historic John Tushek Building will be among the first LEED-certified buildings in
Arkansas, will be the home of all the town's public service providers, and will be a gathering place that, in the
coming years, can help attract other offices and businesses to locate on Main Street.
-------
Lake Village: Reusing a Historic Building to Support Downtown
Community Outreach:
In the 1990s, the local chamber of commerce
decided to retain a downtown location rather
than relocate out of the town center to the
nearby state highway. Supporting this decision,
economic consultants recommended to the city
council in 2006 that city administrative services
be consolidated and located in the town center.
The decision to redevelop the Tushek Building
resulted from this strategic planning process.
Livability Principles Addressed:
Enhance economic competitiveness: By
consolidating public services into one building,
Lake Village will create a critical mass of
employment downtown, which can help attract
other businesses to Main Street and renew its
vitality.
Support existing communities: Using an existing
building is a more efficient use of scarce
resources than building a new facility, and all the
utilities needed to serve it, from scratch.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and
investment: Combining USDA-Rural
Development and state funds is enabling the city
to rehabilitate the Tushek Building using LEED
development standards, which will reduce energy
costs and advance the community's goal of
revitalizing its Main Street.
Value communities and neighborhoods:
Rehabilitation and reuse of the Tushek Building
as a civic space is a testimony to the
community's appreciation for this historic asset,
as well as for their distinctive Main Street and the
surrounding neighborhoods.
NEIGHBORHOOD
OUTREACH CENTER
(POLICE CHIEF, CHIEF'S
SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL
COURT CLERK)
TUSHEK
BUILPING
LAKE
CHICOT
0 ARMORY (PARKS &
ECREATION. POLICE
FFICERS, FIRE DEPARTMENT
Images, top to bottom: USDA, City of Lake Village
For more information about this project,
contact:
Steve Horsman, USDA-Rural Development
Arkansas State Office, 870-367-8400,
steve. horsman(S)ar. usda.gov
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Waverly: Disaster Resiliency Through Smart Planning
Photos, left to riaht: Downtown Waverlv Market Studv Summarv. Downtown Waverlv Market Studv Summarv. EPA
Location: Waverly, Iowa
Focus: Disaster resiliency and mitigation
through smart growth
Funding:
EPA: About $60,000
FEMA: About $5,000
Project Description:
Partners:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Rural
Development
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Rebuild Iowa Office
Iowa Department of Economic Development
Iowa Northland Region Council of Governments
City of Waverly
The city of Waverly, Iowa (population 8,968) was one of several Iowa communities selected by EPA and
FEMA to receive technical assistance to help recover from flooding that took place in June 2008.
Recognizing an opportunity to prepare for future challenges, the city asked for assistance with conducting an
audit of its policies and development regulations to assess whether the policies integrated smart growth
concepts and approaches, identifying green infrastructure strategies that could connect vacant lots in the city
as part of a larger open space plan, and exploring options for infill and affordable, mixed-income housing.
EPA, USDA, FEMA, and other partners assembled a technical assistance team of national experts in
community design and planning. At the Waverly Smart Planning Workshop on May 26-27, 2010, the team
worked with the community to help the city develop policies and project designs that could be incorporated
into the city's comprehensive plan. The event included a tour of the city, meetings with stakeholders to
discuss preliminary policy ideas, a community workshop to present draft policy ideas and project designs,
and a community open house to gather feedback on refined policy ideas and project designs.
Based on the input gathered during the Waverly Smart Planning Workshop, the technical assistance team
developed a memo outlining policy options and project design ideas that the city is now using to inform its
Open Space Master Plan and the comprehensive plan, which is being revised. The city is already beginning
to implement many of the concepts discussed at the workshop, including community gardens, complete
streets with bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, mixed-use development, and affordable housing.
-------
Waverly: Disaster Resiliency Through Smart Planning
Community Outreach:
Community involvement was an important part
of the Waverly Smart Planning Workshop. The
planning team conducted interviews with
stakeholders prior to the workshop to help
shape and refine initial options. The city of
Waverly also conducted public outreach to
ensure that stakeholders were represented
throughout the workshop. The city's
comprehensive plan revision process, which is
building on the work that was done at the
workshop, also involves significant public
outreach.
Livability Principles Addressed:
Provide more transportation choices: The Smart
Planning Workshop discussed strategies for
better connecting Waverly's street grid, making it
easier to walk and bicycle in the city.
Promote equitable, affordable housing: The
workshop explored building affordable and
workforce housing in areas that are adjacent to
existing neighborhoods, allowing future residents
to live close to jobs, schools, and other
amenities.
Enhance economic competitiveness: The options
developed in the workshop can position Waverly
to attract and retain residents, to enhance local
businesses, and to build on its existing economic
assets.
Support existing communities: The policy options
would support and enhance existing
neighborhoods in the city.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and
investment: USDA Rural Development's
involvement in the workshop provided an
opportunity to explore how USDA funds could
help implement the smart growth strategies
discussed during the workshop.
Value communities and neighborhoods: The
workshop highlighted many of Waverly's great
qualities and provided options for the city to
consider on how to build on those assets.
DRY RUN CREEK
OPEN SPACE NETWORK
CONCEPT PLAN
Photos, too to bottom: EPA. FEMA
For more information about this project,
contact:
Stephanie Bertaina, EPA
202-566-0157
bertaina.stephanie(S)epa.gov
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
<
-x
\
s
Greensburg: Rebuilding a Community with Green Design
Photos courtesy of EPA
Location: Greensburg, Kansas
Focus: Greensburg has embraced green
building, sustainable design, and renewable
energy strategies as the community rebuilds
after a devastating tornado in 2007, including
requiring public buildings to be certified LEED
Platinum and developing a ten turbine wind
farm.
Federal Partners:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Commerce (Economic
Development Administration)
U.S. Department of Energy (National
Renewable Energy Laboratory)
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Small Business Administration
Project Description:
On May 4, 2007, Greensburg was hit by an EF-5 tornado which killed 11 people and destroyed 95% of the city.
In the wake of the tragedy, those residents who chose to return to Greensburg decided to rebuild the city by
embracing green building, sustainable design, and renewable energy. In December 2007, as part of its
recovery plan, Greensburg passed a resolution requiring all new public buildings to achieve a LEED Platinum
rating. These buildings utilize wind turbines, solar panels, high-efficiency windows, recycled materials, and
other techniques which reduce energy consumption and save hundreds of thousands of dollars in energy bills.
Additionally, the city receives its power from a ten turbine wind farm which provides enough energy to serve
Greensburg and nearby communities.
Prior to the 2007 tornado, Greensburg had been facing economic challenges common to many other small
Midwestern communities. Impacted by changes in the agricultural industry, by the year 2000 Greensburg was a
struggling city of 1,500 people with a per capita income of around $18,000. After the destruction of the city,
residents and local officials saw an opportunity to rebuild in a way that was "stronger, better, greener" -
Greensburg's new motto.
Receiving assistance from many federal agencies as well as support at the state level, Greensburg has begun its
path to a sustainable recovery. Following the new guidelines established for the city under the 2007 green
building resolution, Greensburg has built its school, city hall, hospital, county building, courthouse, and an arts
center. The city hall was built with bricks that were collected from a power plant that was destroyed by the
tornado and also utilizes geothermal heating and cooling and solar panels for energy.
-------
Greensburg: Rebuilding a Community with Green Design
The new K-12 school uses geothermal heat and a wind
generator as well as other green systems that make the
building 50 percent more efficient than if built under the
traditional code. Additionally, in this time of fiscal challenges
and constraints, Greensburg's new buildings provide a
substantial amount of savings in energy costs. The new school
saves an estimated $150,000 a year, the hospital around
$120,000, and the courthouse $14,000. In addition to the city's
new structures, Greensburg's Main Street has been
redeveloped as a narrower, more walkable space. The street
also utilizes a green stormwater design system that nourishes
plants during the dry season with water collected and stored in
underground cisterns. Main Street has also supported some of
Greensburg's new businesses, including an insurance agency,
coffee shop, home furnishings store, and others. The city
established a "business incubator" to nurture new businesses
by providing space at an affordable rent until the business is
ready to expand.
Greensburg's wind farm, located three miles outside of the city,
consists of ten 300 foot turbines. The wind farm produces 12.5
MW of energy, enough to generate power for the entire city as
well as other nearby communities, making Greensburg a green
energy provider for the region. Technical assistance for the
wind farm, as well as for the city's master plan and energy-
efficient buildings, was provided by the Department of Energy's
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. FEMA was also
instrumental in supporting the first phase of Greensburg's
recovery efforts.
Following the disaster and the town's new commitment to
sustainable redevelopment, the Greensburg GreenTown
grassroots organization was established to support residents,
businesses, and the local government in achieving its vision.
GreenTown has launched a variety of programs, including
technical assistance, educational trainings, fundraising
initiatives for local sustainable development projects, and a
GreenTour map and book for visitors and residents.
GreenTown also created the "Chain of Eco-Homes" project,
featuring model green homes built to educate local residents
and attract visitors who pay to stay in the homes as overnight
guests. Local residents have also adopted many of the green
building techniques in their own new home construction, such
as double-pane windows, thicker walls, solar panels, and geo-
thermal heating.
Greensburg has embraced its role as a model green town and
is turning its strategy into a commercial venture not only
through its wind farm and green jobs, but also through a
budding eco-tourism industry. While Greensburg has always
had visitors to see its 109 foot deep well (the largest hand-dug
well of its kind), the city's green buildings are becoming the
community's newest attractions.
Photo: EPA
Visitors pay around $100 dollars per night to
stay in the Chain of Eco-Homes. Tours are
also given for visitors to learn about
Greensburg's redevelopment plans.
Greensburg and GreenTown have worked
hard to encourage other communities,
especially those impacted by natural
disasters, to adopt similar redevelopment
strategies. Recently, a group of leaders from
Reading, Kansas visited Greensburg to learn
how to rebuild their town after a tornado hit in
May 2011. Officials would like the city to serve
as an example for other communities such as
Joplin, Missouri and Tuscaloosa, Alabama
seeking to rebuild sustainably after disasters.
For more information about this project,
contact:
David Doyle, EPA
913-551-7667
doyle.david(S)epa.gov
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Greening the Block in Bowling Green
Photos courtesy of HUD and the Housing Authority of Bowling Green
Location: Bowling Green, Kentucky
Focus: Home energy efficiency, access to
opportunity
Funding:
HUD: About $1.28 million
Partners:
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
U.S. Department of Labor
U.S. Department of Energy
Housing Authority of Bowling Green
Kentucky Housing Corporation
Community Action of Southern Kentucky, Inc.
Barren River Area Development District
Workforce Investment Board
Project Description:
The Housing Authority of Bowling Green (population 56,000) used funding from the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act to replace more than 2,000 old, inefficient windows in its public housing units with
new energy-efficient windows. The Housing Authority, HUD, and the Kentucky Housing Corporation
partnered with Green the Block, the local Workforce Investment Board, and the local Community Action
Agency to connect low-income families with green jobs and environmental education opportunities.
Green the Block, a partnership between Green for All and the Hip Hop Caucus, aims to ensure that low-
income communities, particularly communities of color, participate in and have a voice in the clean
energy economy.
-------
Greening the Block in Bowling Green
Livability Principles Addressed:
Promote equitable, affordable housing: Energy-
efficient retrofits of public housing units help keep
energy costs low, making these homes more
affordable for low-income residents of Bowling
Green.
Enhance economic competitiveness: Thirty
percent more Bowling Green residents have
enrolled in colleges, technical trade schools, and
other post-high school educational programs since
2008. Training for green jobs improves the local
workforce's competitiveness.
Support existing communities: The retrofit of
public housing and other homes helps local
families stay in their communities.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and
investment: HUD funding to retrofit public housing
units not only preserved affordable housing, but
also created a larger local market for
weatherization services, taking better advantage
of Department of Labor programs that train
residents for these jobs. These programs also
work in tandem with the Department of Energy's
weatherization assistance to low-income families,
providing even more jobs for these trained
workers.
Photos courtesy of HUD and the Housing Authority of Bowling Green
For more information about this
project, contact:
Krista Mills
HUD Louisville
502-618-8140
Krista.Mills(S)hud.gov
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Downeast Transportation and Island Explorer
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Transit
Administration
Photos, left to right: Downeast Transportation, Volpe Center, Downeast Transportation
Partners:
Federal Transit Administration
National Park Service
Maine Department of Transportation
Friends of Acadia
L.L.Bean
Jackson Laboratories
Communities in Hancock County
Location: Hancock County, Maine
Focus: Rural transit
Funding:
FTA rural and job access funds
National Park Service
L.L.Bean and other local businesses
Municipalities
Project Description:
Downeast Transportation, a private non-profit agency, partners with public and private entities to provide
seasonal and year-round transportation services. The 12 Downeast routes connect the towns of Bangor,
Bar Harbor, Blue Hill, Ellsworth, and Southwest Harbor. Residents and visitors rely on the service to
access jobs, shopping, ferry terminals, trails, and recreation. All transit vehicles carry bicycles, further
expanding the range of destinations reachable by transit.
Downeast Transportation runs two primary services—commuter access to major employers such as
Jackson Laboratories in Bar Harbor and the Island Explorer shuttle system on Mount Desert Island.
Downeast routes bring employees from as far as 60 miles away to Jackson Laboratories and nearby
businesses and support multiple shifts. Downeast helps employers create transit-friendly shifts so
employees can ride transit to work. Downeast leverages FTA jobs access funds to help provide other
transit service in the county at off-peak times. To support riders with special needs, Downeast serves
passengers at destinations up to three-quarters of a mile from the fixed-route service at no additional
fee.
Through a partnership with the National Park Service, L.L.Bean, and local businesses, Downeast
Transportation also operates the seasonal Island Explorer shuttle on Mount Desert Island. The eight
routes serving Acadia National Park and the town of Bar Harbor carried more than 400,000 people in
2010. The service provides access to a variety of destinations, reducing pollution and traffic on
congested roads. The system enhances the visitor experience by using intelligent transportation
systems that provide real-time service information. Transit vehicles include bicycle racks and trailers to
support longer trips.
-------
Downeast Transportation and Island Explorer
Community Outreach:
Downeast Transportation began as support
for the "Meals for Me" program, bringing
seniors to meals, community centers,
shopping, and medical appointments. It has
evolved to provide access to a range of
services to meet community needs.
SHOP IN BANGOR
Downeast is planning a new Welcome
Center in Trenton to include offices, vehicle
storage and maintenance, an intermodal
transit facility, and an Acadia Gateway
Visitor Center. This will provide better
access to the region for inter-city and day
visitors.
STONINGTON BUS
COMMUTE
to Bar Harbor
to Ellsworth
to Blue Hill
SHOPJN ELLSWORTH
IN-TOWN
SHUTTLES
Bucksport
Ellsworth 0
Bar Harbor
Southwest Harbor
Image: Downeast Transportation
Livability Principles Addressed:
Provide more transportation choices: Downeast's services provide visitors, residents, and commuters
with additional travel options. Bicycle racks and trailers on vehicles further expand the range of
destinations accessible by transit.
Enhance economic competitiveness: Commuter services accommodate multiple shifts, providing
flexibility to support both employers and employees. Access to businesses and tourist destinations
supports the local economy.
Support existing communities: Hancock County residents rely on Downeast Transportation services to
commute to work, access nearby shopping, and travel to neighboring towns. The seasonal Island
Explorer helps to maintain community character by reducing traffic congestion and pollution and
supporting the local community.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment: Downeast has partnered with public and
private entities, securing long-term funding support from the NPS and L.L. Bean for the Island Explorer
service. The agency also creatively combines federal funding sources to better support year-round
access to jobs and services throughout Hancock County.
For more information about this project, contact:
Paul Murphy
Downeast Transportation,
General Manager
Paul@ExploreAcadia.com
Peter Butler
Director, Planning and Program Dev.
Federal Transit Administration
Peter.Butler@dot.gov
Prepared for FTA by the U.S. DOT Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center
This case study, and others related to Livable
and Sustainable Communities, is available at:
http://fta.dot.gov/publications/publications 109
91.html
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Opportunity Link: Making Connections with Transit
Opportunity'
!Unk
North CtntfalMonlona
Transit
North Central Montana Transit 2215
Monthly Ridership (September 2009 to June 2010)
1825
1659
1529
1415 '«5
«, I
Illl
131
1212
Mat Apt U,,
2010
Opportunity
Link
Uniting people.
Linking resources.
Fighting poverty.
Photos courtesy of Opportunity Link
Location: North central Montana
Focus: Rural and tribal transportation
Partners:
U.S. Department of Transportation
Funding:
Government, business, social service
organizations, and educational institutions
Project Description:
With the nearest metropolitan area over 100 miles away, residents of north central Montana lacked
access to jobs, educational opportunities, medical case, shopping, and other needed destinations and
services. In response to this challenge, Opportunity Link, a non-profit organization that aims to reduce
poverty, engaged a broad range of community stakeholders in a regional planning process in 2007. This
planning effort convened an unprecedented partnership of government, businesses, and educational
institutions from remote tribal and rural communities to explore public transit options. The outcome was
the creation of four new rural transit systems: North Central Montana Transit in Hill and Blaine Counties,
Fort Belknap Transit Service at Fort Belknap Indian Community, Rocky Boy Transit at the Chippewa
Cree Tribe's Rocky Boy Reservation, and Northern Transit Interlocal serving Toole, Pondera, and Teton
Counties. Each is designed to respond to the most pressing transportation needs of low-income
residents as identified through a needs assessment.
-------
Opportunity Link: Making Connections with Transit
Livability Principles Addressed:
Provide more transportation choices: Opportunity Link enhances transportation options for
rural residents, which is particularly important for those who do not have access to private
vehicles.
Enhance economic competitiveness: By linking residents of formerly isolated rural towns and
tribal reservations, Opportunity Link provides low-income residents with dependable
transportation to employment and schooling, enhancing their ability to obtain and keep good
jobs and earn a living.
Support existing communities: Opportunity Link serves existing rural towns and
neighborhoods, helping to keep them viable places to live.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment: Opportunity Link coordinated
funding contributions from government, businesses, social service organizations, and
educational institutions, demonstrating an ability to leverage private, local, and federal funds
to develop and operate public transportation services.
sToole
Hill
Blame
Phillips
Image: Opportunity Link
For more information about this project, see:
http://www.opportunitylinkmt.org/downloads.php
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities ^^s Rural
_ _., .. ^1 I Development
Case Studies
Committed to the future of rural communities.
Maupin Market: Modernizing a Small Town Grocery Store
Photos courtesy of Dennis Ross, Mayor of Maupin
Funding:
Local bank: $400,000
Small Business Administration: $279,000
Business owner equity: $100,000
Mid-Columbia Economic Development District
loan (via USDA-RD Intermediary Relending
Program): $100,000
Location: Maupin, Oregon
Focus: Modernizing a rural downtown grocery
store
Partners:
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Rural
Development
City of Maupin
Project Description:
The town of Maupin, Oregon, population 411, is located along the Deschutes River, one of the nation's prime
fishing and Whitewater rafting streams, and is the most popular destination point along the river. Just 90
minutes from the Portland metropolitan area, Maupin is both a recreation hub and a business service center
for the surrounding rural area. Once a typical Oregon mill town, the economy began the transition away from
timber in the 1990s and is now dominated by the outdoor recreation market.
When the town's only grocery store was considering closing after 90 years, which would have meant
residents would have to travel 40 miles to the next closest grocery store, a vacation homeowner decided to
step up and buy the business. After initially considering constructing a new building on the edge of town, the
business owner, with encouragement from city leaders, instead opted to purchase and renovate the existing
store, which is in the midst of the town's small business district.
A combination of private-sector and federal agency loans helped bring this business proposal to fruition. The
result is a completely remodeled building on Maupin's main street, bringing new vitality to its downtown while
maintaining a critical community service.
-------
Maupin Market: Modernizing a Small Town Grocery Store
Community Outreach:
In 2005, Maupin's leaders held community
meetings to develop a strategic plan. The plan
called for reinvestment in the town's historic
center where infrastructure already existed and
for better walking conditions for the town's
many senior residents.
Livability Principles Addressed:
Enhance economic competitiveness: Maintaining
a full-service market on the main street keeps
residents and visitors coming into downtown
Maupin, enhancing the viability of other local
businesses and the attractiveness of the town as
a place to live and vacation.
Support existing communities: Choosing a
centrally located site for the reopened grocery
store over a more remote site takes advantage of
existing infrastructure and saves public resources
that might be required to develop a new site.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and
investment: After typical private loans for
business and construction were secured, an
additional USDA-RD loan was essential for
covering up-front inventory costs.
Value communities and neighborhoods: Keeping
the newly opened Maupin Market on Deschutes
Avenue, the town's main street, provides an
easily accessible service that strengthens the
historic town center.
CITY OF MAUPIN
WASCO COUNTY, OREGON
MAY, 1998 'amtKff^aa
Images, top to bottom: USDA, City of Maupin
For more information about this project,
contact:
Chris Beck, USDA,
Chris. Beck(S)osec. usda.gov
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities g^g Rural
Case Studies
Committed to the future of rural communities.
Howard: Bringing Green Opportunities and Strengthening Downtown
/mooes courtesv of Rural Learnina Center
Location: Howard, South Dakota
Focus: Economic development, main street
revitalization, green energy
Funding:
USDA American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act: $3,200,000 guaranteed loan
USDA Rural Economic Development Loan
Program: $740,000 loan and $300,000 grant
Project Description:
Northeast South Dakota Economic Corporation:
$150,000
Grow South Dakota revolving loan fund: $100,000
Partners:
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Rural Development
City of Howard, Miner County
Heartland Consumer Power District
Howard Industries
Citi Foundation
In an effort to spur economic development, Miner County leaders developed a plan for a rural learning center
that, in addition to being a community gathering place, will train rural residents on new economic
opportunities in rural South Dakota.
In the past 70 years, Miner County has seen a 40 percent decline in farms and businesses and has recently
begun diversifying its economy with non-agricultural industries. As a strategy to reduce energy costs and
create more business opportunities, the community is developing renewable energy industries. Wind turbines
are dotting the landscape, and other green projects are underway.
In 2001, Miner County's efforts were given a boost when the Northwest Area Foundation committed to invest
$5.8 million in the Miner County Community Revitalization program over a ten-year period. This support, and
the increased revitalization activity it generated, eventually led to a proposal for a Rural Learning Center.
Although 40 acres on the outskirts of town were offered free of cost for the center, the project's leaders
believed that a more central location on Main Street, while more expensive, would bring more benefits to the
community and the local economy. With its location in the heart of Howard, a town of 1,071 people, and its
goal of LEED platinum building certification, the Maroney Rural Learning Center demonstrates the
community's commitment to downtown revitalization and the new green economy.
-------
Howard: Bringing Green Opportunities and Strengthening Downtown
Community Outreach:
In the 1990s, public concern over the future of
Miner County eventually led to the
establishment of Miner County Community
Revitalization, a predecessor organization to
the Maroney Rural Learning Center. Rural
Learning Center leaders engaged the
community in a public process that ultimately
resulted in the adoption and implementation of
a strategic vision and plan for Miner County.
Livability Principles Addressed:
Enhance economic competitiveness:
Establishment of the Maroney Rural Learning
Center and related convention facilities will
enhance business opportunities in Howard. In
addition to new employees, an influx of visitors
will create new markets for Main Street
businesses. Increased sales tax revenues will
support future infrastructure investments in town.
Support existing communities: Using a centrally
located site takes advantage of existing
community infrastructure and saves public
resources that might be required for developing a
new site outside of town.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and
investment: The Maroney Rural Learning Center
combines funding from various federal, state, and
private sources to support the community's goals
of promoting economic development, revitalizing
its Main Street, and saving money on energy
costs.
Value communities and neighborhoods: The
Maroney Rural Learning Center's location in the
heart of Howard strengthens and builds off of
Howard's distinctive business district and
adjacent neighborhoods.
J
Airport
Parks & Recreation
IB Public Places
*=^ Future Site of Maroney Rural
Learning Center
1. Municipal Building/Library
2. Rural Learning Center
3. MinerCountyCourthouse
4. Howard High School
5. HowardElementarvSchool
8. Farm Service Administration
9. Whispering Winds Asst. Living
....
Industrial Park Road
Howard
/mooes, too to bottom: USDA. Citv of Howard
For more information about this project,
contact:
Joe Bartmann, Rural Learning Center, 605-
772-5153, joe@rurallearningcenter.org
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Renewing the Community in Thunder Valley
Ovate Omniciye
* OGLALA LAKOTA PLAN *
Photos courtesy of Oyate Omniciye
Location: Pine Ridge Reservation (Oglala
Lakota tribe), South Dakota
Focus: Community building and
preservation, economic development
Funding:
HUD: $996,100
Partners:
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation
BNIM, Inc.
inNative
Tribal President's Office
Project Description:
With support from HUD's Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program, the Thunder Valley
Community Development Corportation and the Oglala Lakota Tribe are leading an effort to develop a
Regional Plan for Sustainable Development in their remote area of southwestern South Dakota covering
the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The reservation has no active planning department, and this will be its
first comprehensive and integrated plan.
Oglala Lakota community members hope the plan will help address the long standing challenges they
have faced. Economic opportunity is scarce on the reservation, and the unemployment rate is near 47
percent. Additionally, many low-income families cannot find affordable housing and end up leaving the
reservation, moving into crowded households with family members, or joining the reservation's homeless
population. The Tribal Council estimates that at least 4,000 new homes are needed. Residents also have
limited access to services. There is one medium-sized grocery store on the reservation and no bank. 80
percent of the money spent on retail is spent outside the reservation.
HUD funding is enabling the reservation's Housing Authority, Environmental Protection Program,
Chamber of Commerce, Health Administration, and other agencies to collaborate on the development of
the regional plan. These local partners are supported by BNIM, Inc., a private firm with experience
working with rural and tribal communities. BNIM has placed a full-time staff member on the reservation in
order to better understand the priorities and visions of the community.
-------
Renewing the Community in Thunder Valley
Livability Principles Addressed:
Promote equitable, affordable housing: To address the
reservation's housing shortage, the consortium will conduct a
housing and market analysis that takes into account
employment patterns, regional industries, tourism trends, and
local skills.
Enhance economic competitiveness: The consortium will
identify sectors that could be competitive in the regional
economy, clarify business regulations to enhance access to
capital, and increase worker opportunities through skills
training, especially for the youth population.
Support existing communities: Planning that strengthens tribal
culture, rebuilds the spiritual fibers of society, and preserves
the unique knowledge of the Lakota is at the heart of the
consortium's work. The Oglala Lakota language and cultural
traditions are the foundations of any planning process, whether
it is for economic development, housing, or transportation.
Planning will draw on Lakota values and focus on self-
sufficiency.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment: The
consortium has recognized the importance of leveraging this
HUD grant to obtain resources from other agencies. They have
already reached out to various agencies' field offices to help
identify applicable funding sources for projects on the
reservation.
Value communities and neighborhoods: The plan seeks to
continue the healing and strengthening of the Oglala Lakota
people by bolstering identity and opportunity through the
unique perspective of Lakota knowledge, culture, and
language.
Community Involvement:
i
.
•
Photos courtesy of Oyate Omniciye
For more information about this
project, contact:
Dwayne Marsh, HUD Office of Sustainable
Housing and Communities
Dwayne.S.Marsh@hud.gov
Residents will be involved in all stages of the planning process. Members of the Thunder Valley Community
Development Corporation attend community meetings, and a steering committee will be appointed to make
decisions about the plan. The consortium has changed its name to Oyate Omniciye, a Lakota phrase meaning
"Circle Meetings of the People," to better reflect the cultural community-based process they will use in developing
the plan.
Youth involvement is particularly important to ensure broad community support for the plan. Project staff are using
Facebook, where the project has over 300 fans, and also appearing on radio shows to discuss what sustainable
community planning means for the Pine Ridge Reservation.
The planning process being led by Oyate Omniciye is a model for tribes around the country. The work being done
by the Oglala Lakota is now nationally known in tribal circles, and they are sharing their experience and
encouraging other tribes to develop collaborative planning efforts and applications for the Sustainable
Communities Regional Planning Grant program.
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Tennessee Intercity Bus Program: Providing Rural Opportunity
Photo courtesy of the Tennessee Department of Transportation
Location: Rural Tennessee
Focus: Rural transit, access to opportunity
Partners:
U.S. Department of Transportation
Funding:
DOT: $3.1 million
Project Description:
In response to growing public demand, the State of Tennessee implemented the Tennessee Intercity
Bus Demonstration Program in 2008. The intercity bus program provides Tennesseans in rural areas
with reliable daily access to health care, jobs, schools, and other destinations in the state's metropolitan
areas. It offers the Amish community and other rural residents more transportation choice and greater
access to opportunities and services.
-------
Tennessee Intercity Bus Program: Providing Rural Opportunity
Livability Principles Addressed:
Provide more transportation choices: This program increases transportation choices, particularly for
citizens in rural areas who do not drive.
Enhance economic competitiveness: The intercity bus program boosts the economic
competitiveness of rural residents by connecting them to employment and education in metropolitan
areas, allowing them to make a living and build their skills.
Support existing communities: The bus routes serve many rural towns and village centers, making
them more attractive to new and existing residents.
Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment: The project was implemented through
coordination among many stakeholders, including the Nashville metropolitan planning organization
and local city and county officials from 15 counties.
Tennessee Intercity Bus Network
2008-ARRA-2009 Routes
Legend
— ARRA
^^— W«rcHy_J=xist>fvg_l=» port
Image courtesy of the Tennessee Department of Transportation
For more information about this project, see:
http://www.fta.dot.gov/publications/about FTA 10999.html
-------
Federal Support for Sustainable Rural Communities
Case Studies
Ranson-Charles Town Corridor Revitalization
Photos courtesy of City ofRanson
Partners:
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
U.S. Department of Transportation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
West Virginia Department of Transportation
Location: Ranson and Charles Town, West
Virginia
Focus: Corridor revitalization, complete
streets, green infrastructure
Funding:
HUD: $271,500
DOT: $708,500
EPA: $620,000
West Virginia Department of Transportation:
$174,000
Project Description:
Ranson and its partner community, Charles Town, launched the Commerce Corridor Initiative in 1999 to
revitalize a corridor that runs through their nearby downtowns. More recently, the two cities launched a
complete street/green corridor revitalization project for a boulevard that intersects the commerce corridor.
The two cities have received almost $2 million in federal and state grants to help support the two projects.
The cities of Ranson and Charles Town, with populations of 4,000 and 4,274 respectively, are combating
the effects of recent manufacturing and other facility closures, as well as increasing growth pressures
from the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. In the past several years, Ranson alone has lost more
than 1,500 jobs, leaving the community with contaminated, idled, and vacant sites and a downtown area
that was increasingly falling into disrepair. At the same time, the Jefferson County population has steadily
grown, transforming the rural area into an exurb, with few strategies to guide the growth. More than 25
percent of nearby residents live below the poverty line. Furthermore, over the years, the main corridor
between the two towns has turned into an auto-dominated roadway that is unsafe for pedestrians and
bicyclists due to the lack of sidewalks and safe cross-walks. To combat the disrepair, preserve the
character and history of the towns, and promote economic development, the cities of Ranson and
Charles Town have developed two corridor revitalization initiatives.
-------
Ranson-Charles Town Corridor Revitalization
In 1999, Ranson and Charles Town launched the Commerce
Corridor Initiative with the goal of creating a high-tech commerce
corridor, complete with high-tech and commercial offices, retail,
entertainment amenities, infill housing, parks and recreational
areas, and government facilities. It will be located on a corridor of
formerly vacant properties, many of which are brownfield sites, that
runs through the cities' downtowns. The cities put together a
Commerce Corridor Council to advise the effort, and several city
resolutions and agreements advanced the initiative.
Ranson and Charles Town received federal financial support from
EPA to help fund brownfields assessment, the creation of clean up
and reuse plans for certain sites, and community outreach efforts.
EPA awarded Ranson and Charles Town Brownfields Assessment
Grants in 2001, 2004, and 2006. More recently, they received an
EPA Brownfields Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program grant in 2010
to help them develop an area-wide plan. The area-wide plan will
help Ranson and Charles Town prioritize brownfields site
assessment and clean up and develop site-specific reuse plans
based on community input.
Ranson also received EPA Sustainable Communities Building
Blocks assistance to help the city identify and address common
barriers to smart growth implementation and help them develop in a
way that is environmentally and economically sustainable.
Ranson and Charles Town have already made some progress in
their goal of economic revitalization in the commerce corridor. For
example, Powhatan Place is a new, mixed-use, infill development
that is designed to meet LEED for Neighborhood Development
standards and is located on the site of a former foundry. The
development includes a mix of housing types, stores, public spaces,
recreation areas, trails, and green infrastructure elements to
manage stormwater runoff.
In a related effort, Ranson and Charles Town recently received
DOT TIGER II and state funding to redesign the Fairfax Boulevard-
George Street corridor, which runs through both downtowns and
intersects the commerce corridor. This boulevard will become a
"complete street," a street designed and operated to enable safe
access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and
transit riders. It will also incorporate green infrastructure elements.
Additionally, these funds will support the redesign of an adjacent
historic building as a new regional commuter center in downtown
Charles Town, which will provide residents and workers with access
to regional rail and bus transit.
A HUD Community Challenge Planning Grant will help Ranson
create a new zoning code to foster environmentally and
economically sustainable community development. The code will
link a green downtown overlay district with a new zoning approach
for the city's undeveloped, outlying areas. This effort will help
Ranson and Charles Town create a vibrant, mixed-use corridor that
E
Green Corridor
Charles Washington
Commuter
Center
Image courtesy of City of Ranson
is transit-oriented, walkable, and
bikeable and that provides access to
regional job centers and community
facilities.
Stakeholder involvement has been
important in many of the assessment,
planning, and revitalization efforts and
will continue to be vital. For example,
city of Ranson staff and consultants will
work with community members to
determine the vision for the complete
street design and the preliminary
sketches for the commuter center. In
addition, they will host a two-day public
workshop on zoning codes and a
seven-day workshop to produce
illustrative plans for mixed-use corridor
redevelopment and the downtown
green overlay district.
For more information about this
project, contact:
Sunaree Marshall, HUD, 202-402-6011,
sunaree.k.marshall(S)hud.gov
-------
Appendix B: Partnership for Sustainable Communities Charge to the Rural Work Group
August 2010
Rural America makes up about 16 percent of the country's population and covers 75 percent of the
land area. Rural America includes towns and small cities, as well as working lands, farms, prairies,
forests, and rangelands. Challenges in rural communities include a declining agriculture, natural
resources economy, and the smaller scale manufacturing economy (especially in rural areas
removed from metro-areas and natural amenities), farmland and natural-area land conversion in
high amenity or areas adjacent to metro areas, and the lack of capacity and technical expertise to
address these challenges. The Partnership's Livability Principles apply to rural, urban, and suburban
communities alike. To rural communities and supporters of the interests of rural communities, the
work of the Partnership and the benefits to rural America need to be made clear.
Work Group Charge:
1. Create a concise framework describing how the Partnership's Livability Principles support
rural communities across the country. The framework may address policy efforts of the
Partnership and the member agencies as well as messaging and framing the work. One
question that likely needs to be answered is "How do the Livability Principles increase
economic opportunity and increase quality of life for all rural Americans."
2. As a first step towards identifying important policy leverage points, describe current efforts
in Partnership agencies (across the Administration?) that are focused on the built
environment in rural communities. These could include programs, policies, rules, and
statutes within in agencies and departments. Particular emphasis could be placed on
economic development opportunities and existing policies, etc, that leverage other
investments.
3. Identify a set of case studies showing rural communities successfully using smart
growth/sustainable community approaches to achieve better economic, environment,
community, and public health outcomes.
4. Identify stakeholder groups - locally in communities and nationally - NGOs, trade
associations, and other groups that do work around the built environment in rural
communities. Put forward a method for ensuring the variety of rural voices are heard in the
context of the work of the Partnership.
5. Propose an approach to outcome-based livability performance measures for rural
communities / regions.
-------
Appendix C: Rural Work Group Members
Partnership for Sustainable Communities Rural Work Group Contact List
Agency
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
HUD
HUD
HUD
HUD
HUD
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
DOT
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
EPA
White House
First Name
Chris
Megan
Annie
Doug
David
Daniel
Stewart
Carrie
Rachel
Mariia
Eric
Fred
James
Mary Martha
Charlie
Aung
Bryna
Linda
Yuh Wen
Kate
Kenneth
Jeffrey
Gabe
Rebecca
John
Lorna
Stephanie
Ann
Matthew
Rabi
Megan
Carolyn
Kevin
Tim
David
Last Name
Beck
Bolin
Goode
O'Brien
Sears
Lurie
Sarkozy-Banoczy
Schuettpelz
Thornton
Zimmerman
Beightel
Bowers
Cheatham
Churchman
Goodman
Gye
Heifer
Lawson
Ling
Mattice
Petty
Reczek
Rousseau
Searl
Sprowls
Wilson
Bertaina
Carroll
Dalbey
Kieber
McConville
Mulvihill
Ramsey
Torma
Lazarus
Email Address
Chris.Beck@osec.usda.gov
Margaret.Bolin@osec.usda.gov
Annie.Goode@wdc.usda.gov
Doug.O'Brien@osec.usda.gov
David.Sears@wdc.usda.gov
Daniel.B.Lurie@hud.gov
Stewart.G.Sarkozv-Banoczv@hud.gov
Carrie.A.Schuettpelz@hud.gov
Rachel.J.Thornton@hud.gov
Mariia.Zimmerman@hud.gov
Eric.Beightel@dot.gov
Frederick.Bowers@dot.gov
james.cheatham@dot.gov
MarvMartha.Churchman@dot.gov
Charles.Goodman@dot.gov
Aung.Gye@dot.gov
bryna.helfer@dot.gov
Linda.Lawson@dot.gov
Yuhwen.ling@dot.gov
Katherine.Mattice@dot.gov
Kenneth.Pettv@dot.gov
jeffrey.reczek@dot.gov
Gabe.Rousseau@dot.gov
Rebecca.searl@dot.gov
John.Sprowls@dot.gov
lorna.wilson@dot.gov
Bertaina.Stephanie@epa.gov
Carroll.Ann@epa.gov
Dalbey.Matthew@epa.gov
Kieber.Rabi@epa.gov
Mcconville.Megan@epa.gov
Mulvihill.Carolyn@epa.gov
Ramsey.Kevin@epa.gov
Torma.Tim@epa.gov
David J. Lazarus@who.eop.gov
-------
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Sustainable Communities
EPA231-K-11-001
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth
For more information on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, please visit
http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov
------- |