Making Rural Transit Work

Transit in rural areas is tricky. Folks need to go farther, the passengers are more dispersed, and there’s less money to go around.

Allendale County, South Carolina dramatically improved transit availability by better coordinating existing, fragmented service providers. Pictured above is its "Scooter" bus. Photo: Reconnecting America

But that doesn’t make it any less necessary. On the contrary, according to a new report from Reconnecting America [PDF], nearly 40 percent of the United States’ transit-dependent population — including senior citizens, the disabled and low-income individuals — lives in rural areas.

There are 1,358 transit agencies working hard to serve these people. But they operate much differently than urban transit providers. Only 31 percent of rural transit operators use fixed-route service. Meanwhile, 86 percent provide demand-response service, which operates much more like a public taxi service than a big-city bus.

Despite the challenges, investment in rural transit is improving, Reconnecting America reports, and communities that prioritize services are seeing economic results.

Consider Allendale County, South Carolina. “Do more with the same” should be this county’s motto. In 2003, Allendale County leaders came together to solve a vexing mobility problem: a finely dispersed population with a staggering 28 percent poverty rate. They discovered that the county was already running a number of fragmented transit services — those that served only the disabled, for example, or Medicaid recipients in need of healthcare services.

From the report:

Allendale’s Regional Transit Authority agreed to station a “mobility manager” in Allendale to implement this project. The mobility manager would match residents with available seats on existing vehicles operated by agencies in the region, depending on the destination of the resident. For passengers who needed to reach destinations that were not along a scheduled route, participating agencies would transport them on their demand-response vehicles, agreeing on a common per passenger mile rate for transporting the general public on these seats.

Funding for the project came from sources such as South Carolina University Transportation Center, Sisters of Charity, Allendale County, Allendale Alive, a non-profit rural development organization, the South Carolina Department of Transportation, and the LSCOG [Lower Savannah Council of Governments]. LSCOG also coordinated FTA Section 5310 Elderly and Disabled program funds with providers including aging services, the disability board, the rural health center, and the Medicaid transit providers. Whereas previously all of those providers operated their services separately, often with excess capacity on their vehicles, under the new system those seats would be in use  by residents who otherwise might have no means of accessing employment, educational opportunities, or medical services.

As a result, Allendale County’s transit providers were able to serve far more people. According to Reconnecting America, prior to the launch of Scooter — the county’s coordinated transit service — local agencies were providing about 113 trips per month. Following the implementation of the system, that figure rose to 871. Furthermore, 44 percent of those riders were using the system to travel daily to work.

That’s one example of how rural transit systems can be an economic catalyst and an important community service. But more examples can be found in the full report [PDF]. What all the success stories have in common is coordination — between metropolitan planning organizations, area agencies serving the elderly, healthcare providers and other stakeholders. The other thing they share is an understanding of local travel patterns. Do work trips cluster around centralized employment centers? Or are Main Street retail destinations a more magnetic draw? Are riders and destinations so dispersed that fixed-route service does not make sense?

As in Allendale County, many rural areas must piece together funding from the federal government and local institutions — even volunteer service is an important resource. (In Maine during 2011, volunteer drivers donated $16 million worth of services, according to the report.)

In some ways though, rural areas are just like urban ones. Reconnecting America had this advice for small-town communities: “It is particularly important for those with responsibility for transportation and those with responsibility for land use to be coordinating their efforts to ensure that the transit investment can be integrated into the future vision for the community.”

3 thoughts on Making Rural Transit Work

  1. I moved to Allendale from Greenville (SC) 18 months ago, and it is true that transportation is a huge challenge here. It has one of the lowest automobile ownership per capita, so transit assistance is a must. Thankful for the companies and organizations that have worked to serve the residents.

  2. Thanks for this article. It’s amazing how many things “transit” can be, and it’s a shame when people in rural areas rule it out because they can’t imagine the New York City subway serving a stop at their farm. This is a great resource.

  3. For the past 2 decades, many major metropolitan areas have pour so much money building rails. There is great excitement about building HSR. Those are good. However, transit agencies across nation only have budgets to build rails .How the people get to rail station is none of their concern. The worst thing, to build rails, budgets are siphoned  from bus to built rails. Many rail supporters have a lot scientific fact to support it is ok to build rails even at the cost of reducing bus budgets. Of course, many rail riders could drive to rail stations which no choice riders have tough time.
    Many of improvement of public transportation is just rail and cutting of non overlapped bus system. Ironically, those are in heavily dense populated area near downtown. It is more irony to see big parking lot structure in those areas. Funny, reduce the local congestion was one of the reason to build rail
    The public transportation gets worst in suburb area of major cities. Let’s not forget expensive railroads are improved in the suburbs. People tend to forget that many jobs and shopping are in suburb areas, but rail supporters (does that include streetsblog) believe all the jobs are in DOWNTOWN ONLY.
    It is already bad in suburb of major cities. I will not be surprise that rural are even worst

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Rasmussen: Americans Want More Federal Support for Transit

Rasmussen Reports, the polling firm that got the 2012 election completely wrong, asked 1,000 Americans last week how they feel about public transportation [PDF]. The takeaway they reported was this: “74% Rarely or Never Use Mass Transit.” On the flip side, 6 percent said they used transit every day or nearly every day, and another […]

Commuting Tips for the Incrementalist: Small Changes, Big Savings

Rob Perks couldn’t understand why his friend, Megan, drove to work every day instead of taking public transportation. She said driving was cheaper and more convenient, but Perks had almost an identical commute and he was pretty confident he was saving a lot by taking transit. A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation of all Megan’s driving costs […]

Rich People Love Sidewalks, And Other Livability Lessons From USDOT

When asking people what transportation options are important in their communities, why do poll-takers never ask them to choose between different options? Here comes another survey in which people say they want everything and are never asked to make the tradeoffs that come in the real world. USDOT’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics asked 1,000 households […]