NYSDOT FUNDING ALLOCATION DISPARITY (20062011)

RESEARCH SUMMARY

November 2012

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |1

ABSTRACT The Rochester area highway construction industry requires increased state funding. With the decline of traditional tax revenues for the city (Kodak, Xerox and Bausch & Lomb), the Rochester regions funding needs are significantly greater than in past decades. Research was undertaken by the Building a Better Rochester coalition to determine state funding patterns, to identify funding gaps and to pinpoint funding disparity sources. The Building a Better Rochester coalition was formed in 2011 by leaders in the area construction industry to advocate for state and federal funding to build, repair, revitalize, and keep Rochester working. For further coalition information, visit www.buildingabetterrochester.com.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & CRITERIA Building a Better Rochester made the preliminary determination that the funding gap could be bridged with increased state aid, and to support its stance, conducted NYSDOT funding research and analysis over a six-year period (20062011) using the following criteria: Annual state funding per county, MSA and region, with research emphasis placed on comparably sized MSAs to Rochesters, commonly Syracuse, Albany, and Buffalo (sources: NYSDOT and Open Book NY) Population per county, MSA and region (source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 statistics) State and local highway lane miles per county, region and MSA (source: NYSDOT 2004 Highway Mileage Summary; prepared by NYSDOT Planning & Programming Managementnote: 2004 is the most recent source year available) State and local bridge maintenance statistics per county, region and MSA (sources: NYSDOT, Federal Highway Administration) For more detailed source information, please refer to Sources section.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |2

MSAs IN REPORT: ALBANY: Includes Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady and Schoharie counties. BUFFALO: Includes Cattaraugus, Erie and Niagara counties. ROCHESTER: Includes Genesee, Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Orleans, Seneca and Wayne counties. SYRACUSE: Includes Cayuga, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego and Otsego counties. NYSDOT REGIONS: (Categorized by NYSDOT) REGION 1 (Albany): Albany, Essex, Greene, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren and Washington counties. REGION 2 (Utica): Fulton, Hamilton, Herkimer, Madison, Montgomery and Oneida counties. REGION 3: (Syracuse): Cayuga, Cortland, Onondaga, Oswego, Seneca and Tompkins counties. REGION 4: (Rochester): Genesee, Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Orleans, Wayne and Wyoming counties. REGION 5: (Buffalo): Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie and Niagara counties. REGION 6: (Hornell): Allegany, Chemung, Schuyler, Steuben, Yates counties. REGION 7: (Watertown): Clinton, Franklin, Jefferson, Lewis and St. Lawrence counties. REGION 8: (Poughkeepsie): Columbia, Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Ulster and Westchester counties. REGION 9: (Binghamton): Broome, Chenango, Delaware, Otsego, Schoharie, Sullivan and Tioga counties. REGION 10: (Happauge) Nassau and Suffolk counties. REGION 11: (L.I. City): Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens and Richmond counties.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |3

The NYSDOT Lane Miles by MSA graph below illustrates the Rochester metropolitan statistical area (MSA)s state lane miles in comparison to the three Thruway corridor city MSAs. Rochesters lane miles are second in length to Albanys, but are significantly lengthier than those of the Syracuse and Buffalo MSAs.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |4

The NYSDOT Lane Miles by Region graph offers comparable data in the NYSDOT region grouped system. The Rochester area is Region 4, and its lane miles are second in length to Region 1 (the Albany area). The two State Lane Miles graphs illustrate the similarity of lane mile length in both MSA and Region. Both the Rochester MSA and Regions total lane miles exceed those of comparably sized cities Buffalo and Syracuse, but Rochesters funding significantly trails that of Buffalo and Albany, even with weighted consideration for respective MSA populations.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |5

The graph below, NYSDOT Classified Structurally Deficient Bridges (MSA), illustrates the fact that the Rochester MSA contains the highest number of structurally deficient bridges (174) of the four comparable MSAs studied. Classification criteria: NYSDOT defines a deficient bridge as one with a State condition rating less than 5.0.1 Delaying repairs to these bridges will result in more extensive damages and will hamper efficient mobility of the population.

NYSDOT CLASSIFIED STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES (MSA)

Albany MSA 130

Syracuse MSA

158

Rochester MSA

174

Bualo MSA 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

134 140 160 180 200

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |6

1

NYSDOT (4/4/12). The Key to New York State Highway Bridge Data.

The Rochester area, Region 4 in the NYSDOT Classified Structurally Deficient Bridges (Region) graph, has the second-highest number of NYSDOT classified structurally deficient bridges with a total of 185. The Albany area (Region 1) has the greatest number with a total of 233, but in the NYSDOT regional classification model, the Albany region encompasses eight counties. The Rochester region includes seven counties.

NYSDOT CLASSIFIED STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES (Region)

Region 1 (Albany) 233

Region 3 (Syracuse)

174

Region 4 (Rochester)

185

Region 5 (Bualo) 0 50 100 150

182 200 250

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |7

The NYSDOT Spending per Lane Mile by MSA (6 Year Average 20062011) graph below identifies the trend of disparity in state funding. Despite having more lane miles and NYSDOT classified structurally deficient bridges, the Rochester MSA has received consistently lower DOT funding in dollars spent per lane mile than Buffalo, Syracuse and Albany in the sixyear period studied.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |8

The NYSDOT Spending per Lane Mile by Region (6 Year Average 20062011) graph points to disparity in favor of Region 5, which trails Rochesters Region 4 in total lane miles and number of structurally deficient bridges.

NYSDOT Funding Disparity |9

The NYSDOT Spending by MSA chart below points again to spending bias in favor of the Buffalo and Albany MSAs over the six-year period analyzed, despite consistent statistical evidence of Rochesters need for greater funding.

N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 10

The NYSDOT Spending by Region 20062011 graph illustrates the trend of funding disparity in Region 4 (Rochester) through total amount spent in the six-year period analyzed. Previous graphs in this report reveal more lane miles and greater structural deficiency in Region 4, but the bulk of state funding has been allocated to Regions 1 and 5.

N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 11

The NYSDOT Spending per MSA Dollars per Resident graph below verifies Building a Better Rochesters research conclusions on the emerging trend of funding disparity through a six-year spending average by MSA.

N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 12

Building a Better Rochester created the NYSDOT Spending per Region Dollars Per Resident graph to examine funding from both an MSA and NYSDOT region point. There is a greater regional disparity than that of comparable MSAs over the same six-year period.

N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 13

SOURCES Federal Highway Administration (2012). FHWA Bridge Programs Highway Bridge by Owner. Report sent by Daniel Byer, Division Bridge Engineer, Federal Highway Administration on May 2, 2012. (This source used to identify federal bridges per county, region, and MSA) Federal Highway Administration (2012). Federal Recording and Coding Guide. Report sent by Daniel Byer, Division Bridge Engineer, Federal Highway Administration on May 2, 2012. (This source used to identify counties and highway/bridge jurisdictions per county, region and MSA) Federal Highway Administration (2011). Matrix Report Results: Simple County, Rows by County. Report sent by Daniel Byer, Division Bridge Engineer, Federal Highway Administration on May 2, 2012. (This source used to determine state and local bridges per county, region and MSA) New York State Department of Transportation (2012). Detailed Highway Inventory Listings Description of Data Headings and Codes. Report sent by Michael Fay, Supervisor, Highway Data Section, NYSDOT on May 8, 2012. (This source used to identify codes within federal highway lane miles data) New York State Department of Transportation (2012). New York State Federal Highway MileageCenterline and Lane Miles. Report sent by Michael Fay, Supervisor, Highway Data Section, NYSDOT on May 8, 2012. (This source used to determine federal highway lane miles per county, MSA and region) New York State Department of Transportation (2004). Highway Mileage Summary; Centerline Highway Mileage by Jurisdiction. NYSDOT Planning and Programming Management. N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 14 Report sent by Joseph Lomonico, NYSDOT, Traffic Department, May 1, 2012. (This source used to determine state and local center highway lane miles per county, region and MSA)

New York State Department of Transportation (4/4/12). New York State Highway Bridge Data: Structurally Deficient Bridges; report filed 4/30/12. Retrieved via https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/page/portal/main/bridgedata?nd=nysdot on 5/8/12. (This source used to determine need for bridge-specific funding per county in the Rochester, Syracuse, Buffalo and Albany MSAs) Shevlin, Mary (2012). Freedom of Information Law Request FMO-12-007743. New York State Department of Transportation. Report sent by Mary Shevlin, NYSDOT Records Access Officer, April 4, 2012. SOURCE OBTAINED, BUT NOT USED. (This source was obtained via FOIL request, but did not contain needed information) United States Census Bureau (2010). Population Finder. Retrieved via http://www.census.gov/popfinder/ on March 5, 2012. (This source used to determine total population data per county, region and MSA)

N Y S D O T F u n d i n g D i s p a r i t y | 15