CNT created the Housing and Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index to reveal what it costs to get around in neighborhoods across the country. The Index shows that transportation costs vary between and within regions depending on neighborhood characteristics. People who live in location-efficient neighborhoods—compact, mixed-use areas with convenient access to jobs, services, transit, and amenities—tend to have lower transportation costs. People who live in location inefficient places that require automobiles for most trips are more likely to have high transportation costs.

The differences from one location to another can make a big difference in a family’s ability to service a mortgage. The left map below shows that 7 in 10 neighborhoods (69%) in the Chicago region are considered affordable for the region’s typical household when using the conventional measure. On the right, affordability shrinks to 4 in 10 neighborhoods (42%) when using the expanded view of affordability. This produces a net loss of 1,718 neighborhoods where that typical regional family could afford to live.

CNT created an easy-to-use tool called Abogo to put this information in the hands of individuals seeking to make a decision about where to live. Now when families are evaluating their options, they can take into account not only the amount of the rent or mortgage payments and the number of bedrooms they need, but also the impact of the neighborhood on their transportation costs.

Abogo helps clients discover what it costs a typical family in a particular neighborhood to get around—not just for the commute to work, but for all those little trips that make up the bulk of our time in the car: shopping runs, picking up the kids, medical appointments, and so on. You can also use Abogo to compare the estimated transportation cost at an address to the regional average and to find the estimated carbon impact from driving.

CNT recommends that housing counselors use these tools to give clients a full understanding of the costs associated with living at a particular address. You can use Abogo to compare the average transportation costs at different addresses and determine a combined housing and transportation cost estimate for a client, making sure that a home is truly affordable and sustainable for a family. Figuring out transportation costs is a key part of assessing the total cost of owning a home.

CNT also offers a training guide to housing counselors on how to use the H+T Index in their work. It offers the tools and knowledge to help first-time homebuyers and other clients consider how they can control transportation costs while saving for a home, as part of their home-buying decision and to help them stay in their home over the long term. The guide includes talking points for use in one-on-one meetings, a take-home handout for clients, and two slides that can be used in workshop settings. We have collaborated with The Housing Trust of Santa Fe, New Mexico, and the City of El Paso, Texas, to develop these materials, and are currently working to make the guide available in more areas (for more information, contact Stefanie Shull at sshull@cnt.org)

CNT is committed to creating cities that use resources wisely and are affordable for all. Working with housing counselors to provide families the information they need to understand the transportation cost implications of where they choose to live is a key strategy in meeting that commitment.

(Post originally appears as a guest post on Metropolitan Planning Council’s blog)

CNT’s H+T Index reveals the high cost of transportation in nearly 900 regions across the country

CNT has just released the latest version of the Housing + Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index, using the most up-to-date Census data. While this is exciting news for those who have used the Index in the past, the news on affordability isn’t so bright.

Most places are unaffordable when it comes to combined housing and transportation costs. 72% of American communities are unaffordable for typical regional households when transportation costs—the second largest expense in a family budget—are considered along with housing costs. Under the traditional definition of housing affordability, where a rent or mortgage payment consumes no more than 30 percent of household income, three out of four (76 percent) US communities are considered “affordable” to the regional typical household making their area’s median income. However, under an expanded definition of affordability, where housing and transportation costs consume no more than 45 percent of income, the number of affordable communities decreases to 28 percent, resulting in a loss of 86,000 neighborhoods that are within reach for a typical family.

Transportation costs have risen 39%; much more than income. The analysis also shows that it is much more difficult for the typical household to find a truly affordable place to live today than it was a decade ago, with incomes having increased roughly half as much as transportation and housing costs since 2000. Median housing costs, as reported by the US Census, have increased by nearly 37 percent nationwide, while the national median income has only increased by approximately 22 percent. Average transportation costs in the geographies covered by both Indexes increased by more than 39 percent or $318 per month.

People living in walkable, transit-accessible places are better off. Despite the increase in transportation costs from 2000 to 2009, the Index shows that people living in location efficient neighborhoods—characterized by access to transit, jobs, and amenities—experienced a smaller increase than those living in car-dependent places. The typical family living in a location efficient neighborhood in 2000 (where transportation costs were less than 15 percent of the national median income), saw average transportation costs increase by approximately $1,400 annually. Meanwhile, families living in inefficient neighborhoods (where 2000 transportation costs were greater than 15 percent of the national median income), had average transportation costs increase by more than twice as much, or slightly over $3,900 annually. The difference between these two numbers, $3,900 and $1400 per year, is a benefit of $200 per month “less exposure” to the rising cost of gas during the decade.

CNT used the Index to rank the metropolitan areas that had the highest and lowest average monthly transportation costs for a typical family earning the national median income. Be sure to check out the Index and create your own custom comparisons.

See the rankings of metropolitan areas that had the highest and lowest average monthly transportation costs ››
Read the full press release ››
Use the H+T Affordability Index ››
Listen to the H+T webinar ››

Prospering in Place builds on the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s visionary GO TO 2040 plan, translating that blueprint into a detailed framework that prioritizes specific places and projects that connect people to jobs.

The report documents how past development patterns have harmed the regional economy. Of Chicago’s 25 top industries, for example, the region is outperforming the nation in only five. Hallmarks of the regional economy—manufacturing, freight, logistics, finance/insurance/real estate, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals—lag behind national performance.

The report shows how to turn that situation around by exploiting the region’s unique assets and advantages: a robust freight rail network, the second largest passenger rail system in the country, vacant land near rail for development, and demographic demand for a vibrant urban lifestyle.

Places matter. But we’ve disregarded the region’s historic, compact, transit-served neighborhoods in favor of urban sprawl, cars, and cheap gas. The cost of this shift was less apparent in good times, but stagnant incomes, high unemployment, and historic fuel prices have exposed its failings.

The analysis prioritizes economic development opportunities based on three strategies: transit-oriented development (TOD), cargo-oriented development (COD), and job centers that need better transit and recommends how to implement these priority strategies.

Moving forward, we need to live closer to where we work, take transit more often than not, and strengthen walkable neighborhoods that meet needs locally. This report shows where and how to begin.

Read the full press release ››
Download Prospering in Place ››

In an unprecedented move, the bill, HR7, would remove dedicated mass transportation funding from the Highway Trust Fund and use it solely to fund highways. It would also eliminate the already miniscule amount of federal funding that makes our roads safer for bikers and pedestrians. Read more about the failings of the bill here.

The bill is not what our country needs. If it passes, it will leave more people with no other option than to drive, just as gas prices have hit new records and are expected to top $4.60 a gallon in the Chicago region by May.

The typical US family pays more than $1,100 dollars per month on transportation—largely owning, maintaining, and fueling cars. This bill would further strain people’s pocketbooks and put the brakes on the nation’s fragile economic recovery.

Please take a moment to contact your representative and voice your opposition to this legislation.

Photo by Steven Vance - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesbondsv/

If the House Ways and Means Committee’s proposed transportation bill passes as currently drafted, it stands to fundamentally alter transportation policy as we know it and roll back mass transit funding by 30 years.

This unprecedented move kicks transit funding out of the Highway Trust Fund and into the annual appropriations process, which means that every year transit will have to compete against all federal domestic spending. Meanwhile, funding for highways would go back to having all the user fee funding— as it was until the Reagan Administration, despite clear evidence over decades of transit’s contribution to congestion relief, clean air, among other benefits.

This isn’t just bean counters putting money in different pots. The Chicago region, for example, could lose nearly $1.2 billion over the next five years if the legislation passes as currently written.

The Ways and Means Committee will mark up their portions of the reauthorization bill on February 3rd at 9 am EST. Please take 2 minutes to call the committee office (202.225.3625) and voice your opposition to getting rid of transit funding. Make it known that you want the House leadership to craft a funding proposal that maintains the nation’s historic commitment to public transportation.

“By definition, families living in affordable housing are guaranteed that their housing costs will not exceed 30 percent of their income, but transportation costs can negate that affordability if housing agencies aren’t careful about location decisions,” said Kathryn Tholin, CEO of CNT. “Illinois has made gains in siting affordable housing in communities that meet fair housing goals. Our report reveals that we could do better, by choosing locations that offer greater access to employment, better transportation connectivity, and improved access to amenities.”

CNT applied our Housing and Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index to 248 multifamily properties financed by the Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA) from 2001 to 2008 in the Chicago region. The study reveals the average transportation costs in these locations and measures the degree to which residents enjoyed access to local amenities, regional jobs, public transit, and other opportunities—all major factors in the affordability equation. Safe, Decent and Affordable pulls together key findings and recommendations that IHDA can use to help improve access to jobs, lower transportation costs, and enhance livability for its affordable housing residents.

Read more in the press release, including key findings and recommendations ››
Download Safe, Decent and Affordable ››

Finally! The long overdue transportation reauthorization bill is at last going somewhere. Three years ago, CNT and our national partners, such as Transportation for America, began working with various users and operators of our transportation systems, business leaders, and political leaders to gather information about what worked and what did not work in the last national transportation legislation.

We shared what we learned with Members of Congress, who are responsible for the re-authorization and funding of the federal transportation legislation. The U.S. House of Representatives has released its transportation bill to the public. They listened to some of what we told them, but they failed to address some crucial needs. In particular, it looks like they forgot that this is supposed to be a transportation bill that serves all users of the transportation network—transit riders, cyclists, pedestrians, car sharers—and assures that they get where they are going safely. The bill as drafted fails to do that.

On February 2rd, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will start finalizing their version of the bill. In particular, CNT and our partners believe that two amendments should be added:

• The first would restore funding for safe biking and walking
• The second would make repairing the nation’s deficient bridges a priority.

Please take a moment to contact your Member of Congress now and tell him or her to support those two amendments. Our elected leaders need to know that the public is paying attention and wants better transportation for all modes of travel.

“Gas prices remain high, and there’s no sign of relief as the year progresses. Public transportation is an affordable and convenient way for people to get where they need to go save money in the process,” said President Toni Preckwinkle. “TRIP makes it even more cost-effective for people to travel by bus or train and we encourage employers and employees to sign up.”

Normally, employees earn their income, are taxed, and then pay to ride transit to get to work. With employers offering a pre-tax transit benefit program through TRIP, employees can lower their tax burden by hundreds of dollars per year, depending on their transit costs and tax bracket. In addition to saving employees money increased transit use helps reduce congestion and improve air quality.

“The Center for Neighborhood Technology and RTA answered our questions, walked us through the initial process, and supported us in offering our employees transit benefits,” said Kathi Roccanova, Daley, Mohan and Groble’s office manager. “Our employees love the tax savings and we love being able to offer them this monthly benefit.”

TRIP benefits employers as well. Participating businesses will reduce their payroll taxes while providing a valuable benefits program to their employees. Between now and February 10th, Cook County employers that join TRIP will receive direct payouts that can total hundreds of dollars. Participating employers will receive:
• $30 for any new employee who signs up for the pre-tax transit benefits.
• An additional $200 for companies that are introducing a pre-tax transit benefit program for the first time and enroll five of more employees.

CNT, which helps administer TRIP, provides one-on-one consultation with businesses interested in enrolling in the program, addresses company concerns, and walks through the initial steps in providing these low-cost, money-saving, employee benefits.

Companies and employees are encouraged to visit www.lesstaxingcommute.com to learn more about pre-tax transit benefits and TRIP or contact James Drew jdrew@cnt.org for more information.

A new incentive will provide $50 in transit credit for people who get the Chicago Card Plus I-GO card before Feb. 29.

Between now and February 29, people who sign up for a joint Chicago Card Plus I-GO card for use on the CTA and in I-GO Car Sharing vehicles will receive $50 in transit credit and a heavily discounted I-GO membership. The Chicago Card Plus I-GO card is the only one of its kind in the nation, allowing a seamless transfer between public transit and a car sharing vehicle.

Participants can enroll at http://tinyurl.com/ye6flbe ››

“If you’ve been thinking about ditching your car and simplifying your life with transit and car sharing, there’s never been a better time to make the leap,” said Kathryn Tholin, director of Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT), which is administering the incentive program on behalf of Cook County. “Owning a car is expensive, a hassle, and can have a large carbon footprint. Using integrated transit and car sharing instead of owning a car is good for people’s budgets, stress levels, and the environment.”

Chicago Card Plus I-GO incentive at a glance:

• Ends February 29, 2012
• Applicants must be new I-GO members and pass a driving record check
• I-GO membership is $15 (a savings of $60)
• $50 in transit fare credit loaded to card within 10 days after application approval.

The Cook County Department of Environmental Control is administering the program in coordination with CNT. Funding for this initiative is made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to promote sustainable transportation options.

Read the full press release ››
Learn more about this offer ››

CNT helped develop a sustainable transportation plan to reduce carbon emissions in the city of Oberlin over the next 40 years. After the jump, you can see the 10 strategies to achieve zero carbon emissions by 2050.

10 strategies to achieve zero carbon emissions by 2050 include:

1. Promote walking as a major mode of transportation in Oberlin. Currently, 32 percent of trips to work are made on foot.
2. Increase bicycling’s share of trips in Oberlin. Six percent of residents bike to work today.
3. Create public transportation options. This includes stabilizing and growing the Oberlin Connector, which runs on Mondays and Thursdays. Lorain County is the only county in Ohio that lacks a dedicated revenue stream for public transit.
4. Promote fuels and vehicles that can reduce motorized transportation’s carbon profile to zero or nearly zero. Given that Oberlin is expected to acquire 85 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2013, great electric vehicle usage and expanded infrastructure could help Oberlin reduce carbon emissions.
5. Encourage people to use alternate modes of transportation and take fewer and shorter trips by reduce car ownership. Eighty-three percent of Oberliners own at least one car. CNT recommends that Oberlin expand its car sharing program to include at least 4,000 students and residents.
6. Reduce the number of driving trips Oberlin workers and residents need to take. This includes telecommuting, videoconferencing, and combining trips. If 18 percent of employees were to eliminate one trip to work weekly by 2050, it would reduce 1.5 million vehicle miles traveled and save 411 metric tons of emitted carbon dioxide annually.
7. Encourage land use and urban form that supports reduced car ownership, fewer and shorter trips and alternative transportation modes. Households living in downtown Oberlin drive 6,100 miles less per year than families living in other parts of Oberlin. CNT recommends reversing current trends toward low-density development at the outskirts of the city.
8. Change parking infrastructure and policies to incentivize low-carbon transportation. Most of Oberlin’s parking is free or subsidized by employers. Employers could allow employees to opt for payment equal to the value of free or subsidized parking to put low-carbon transportation on equal footing.
9. Encourage use of low-carbon solutions for cargo transport to and from Oberlin. Implementing green procurement standards along Oberlin businesses’ supply chains can help reduce the carbon footprint of cargo transport.
10. Create options for low-carbon long distance travel to and from Oberlin. CNT estimates that long distance travel accounts for nearly a third of Oberlin’s total transportation emissions footprint. Although high speed rail and low-emissions plane travel isn’t something Oberlin can do on its own, it can collaborate regionally to promote low-carbon alternatives to driving.

The figure below illustrates the relative savings in fossil fuels from the implementation of each strategy at the three benchmark years (Strategy 10 is not included in the figure because emissions from travel outside of Oberlin’s boundaries were not part of CNT’s analysis). Note that reduced vehicle ownership provides the greatest fossil fuel savings of all the approaches. Although no single strategy moves Oberlin to a zero carbon transportation future, the combined savings from all strategies can accomplish that goal.