Professional Documents
Culture Documents
rop et
tan oli
rid B
Ra e
ing k
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
TRANSPORTATION FOR AMERICA // OCTOBER 2011
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
This report was written by Stephen Lee Davis with additional contributions from Kevin DeGood, Nick Donohue and David Goldberg of Transportation for America. Our thanks also go to the USDOT and FHWA for their cooperation on the National Bridge Inventory Data. Released October 19, 2011.
Executive Committee
Smart Growth America (co-chair) Reconnecting America (co-chair) Alternatives for Community & Environment America Bikes American Public Health Association (APHA) Apollo Alliance at the Blue Green Alliance LOCUS: Responsible Real Estate Developers and Investors National Association of City Transportation Officials National Association of Realtors National Housing Conference Natural Resources Defense Council PolicyLink Rails-to-Trails Conservancy The Surface Transportation Policy Partnership Transit for Livable Communities U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Contact us
Transportation for America 1707 L Street NW, Suite 250 Washington, D.C. 20036 202.955.5543 info@t4america.org
2
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
headlines as Louisville traffic was snarled and millions of Americans wondered about the condition of the busy bridges they have to cross each day. With the majority of American bridges soon due for major maintenance, overhaul or replacement, scenarios such as this could begin playing out with increasing frequency absent concerted effort and investment.
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
McDonalds vs. deficient bridges in 102 largest US metropolitan areas ~14,000 Number of US locations 18,239 Number of deficient bridges 64 million Daily customers served worldwide 210 million Trips taken daily on deficient bridges
taken on a deficient bridge each day. In fact, deficient bridges in the largest 102 metropolitan areas carry three-quarters of all traffic crossing a deficient bridge. Put another way, there are more deficient bridges in these 102 regions than there are McDonalds restaurants in the entire country 18,239 versus about
monitoring and critical, near-term maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement. Structurally deficient bridges in metropolitan areas carry a disproportionate share of all trips About the data
The bridge data used in this report is derived from the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) 2010 National Bridge Inventory (NBI) released in February 2011. NBIs annual data provides a significant level of detail on the condition of over 700,000 bridges nationwide. Bridges are inspected every two years, unless theyre in very good condition (four years) or structurally deficient (every year.)
14,000. Worldwide, McDonalds serves a staggering 64 million people a day. But here in America, 210 million trips are taken daily across deficient bridges in just these 102 regions. Pennsylvania leads all other states in the nation with six metropolitan areas with a high percentage of deficient bridges. Pittsburgh leads the way with 30 percent of area bridges rated deficient higher even than the state average of 26.5 percent. It is important to note that these numbers would be worse without the intensive bridge repair program implemented by Pennsylvania in the last several years, including a quadrupling of state funding for bridge repairs. California leads the nation with the busiest deficient bridges. In Los Angeles, for example, 396 cars drive across a structurally deficient bridge every second of each day, on average. When ranking metros by the sheer volume of traffic on deficient bridges, California regions take several of the top spots, with the daily volume in Los Angeles at number one, more than double that of second place New York.
4
In the time since the data was gathered, some bridges have been repaired or replaced and others have deteriorated and become deficient. But this data set is the best way to compare and rank different states and counties in this complex and dynamic system. It is the most recent, most comprehensive data we could obtain for the country as a whole.
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
1133 380 907 211 296 617 308 286 213 778
4,944,931 15,600,871 9,355,193 5,135,871 5,020,110 2,041,581 7,872,648 4,212,716 2,453,811 17,505,467
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Two key problems persist: First, while Congress has repeatedly declared bridge safety a national priority, existing federal programs offer no real incentives or assurances that aging bridges will actually get fixed. Second, the current level of investment is nowhere near what is needed to keep up with our rapidly growing backlog of aging bridges.
2006
$48 billion $4.6 billion $51.6 billion $5.1 billion $61.4 billion $5.2 billion $70.9 billion $5.2 billion
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2007
2008
2009
Billions
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
plexity of working around thousands of motorists each day. They are extremely expensive to overhaul or replace. In Louisville, KY, for example, replacing the Sherman Minton bridge and another key span in need of attention would cost an estimated $4 billion. With the federal governments current level of funding for bridge repair, that project would take 14 years and consume every dollar of the combined repair funds apportioned to Ohio and Kentucky.
cant be spent on other things, and is directed to the most pressing needs. It is important to note that while many of the nations busiest structurally deficient bridges are located in metropolitan regions, current practices dont always achieve the level of shared responsibility and coordination among state and local governments that is needed to prioritize the most urgent repair work. While many of the biggest bridges are owned by state departments of transportation, some are owned by city or county governments. Under federal law, federal funds for bridge repair flow only to the states, not local governments. Ultimately, decisions concerning the use of federal funding for bridge repair reside with the states. Local governments must play a stronger role in setting transportation investment priorities, which can be accomplished through greater coordination and so-called suballocation of transportation funding to regional and local governments. Without better coordination, priority setting, and suballocation there is little guarantee that additional funding will be directed to the most pressing repair needs. Finally, it would be a tragic and shortsighted trade-off to do as some members of Congress have suggested and eliminate funding for safe walking and bicycling in the name of bridge repair. Existing sums for those safety projects are far too small to make a significant dent in bridge repair, but they are vital in preventing fatalities and addressing the demand for safe access by foot and bicycle.
Recommendations
As an increasing number of our bridges reach and pass their original design life spans, repairing the nations biggest and busiest bridges will require a national strategy that is not possible under a program where money is distributed to states by formula with little accountability. Simply put, the current federal program does not provide enough dedicated funding to repair and rebuild the most critical high-traffic bridges. From 2006 to 2009 the cost to fix structurally deficient bridges rose almost 50% from $48 billion to $70.9 billion, while the amount of funding provided to states for bridge repair only increased 13%. However, we cannot solve this problem simply by providing more money. We need a fundamental shift in policy to ensure that we take care of our existing infrastructure. States should be required to develop asset management plans that prioritize the repair and maintenance of aging roads and bridges. We need clear priorities to ensure that money set aside for repair
7
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
These following tables contain the full metropolitan area rankings. The following 6 tables are broken up by metropolitan area population: 1) 500,000-1 million, 2) 1-2 million, and 3) over 2 million. And each grouping of metros by population are ranked two ways: 1) percentage of metropolitan area bridges that are deficient, and 2) by volume of average daily traffic that travels over deficient bridges in metropolitan areas.
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Percent Deficient
Total Bridges
Deficient Traffic on
24 25
639,617 659,191
11.20% 11.10%
126 76
440,658 294,962
5 3
26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
835,063 672,220 570,025 778,009 803,701 807,407 786,947 907,574 606,376 848,006 501,228 857,903 626,227 612,683 685,488
Dayton, OH Toledo, OH Madison, WI Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Worcester, MA Bakersfield, CA Baton Rouge, LA Honolulu, HI Boise City-Nampa, ID New Haven-Milford, CT Durham, NC Albuquerque, NM Colorado Springs, CO Wichita, KS Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR
11.00% 10.90% 10.60% 10.00% 9.90% 9.80% 9.50% 7.90% 7.10% 6.50% 6.50% 6.40% 6.10% 5.70% 5.10%
1,155,286 838,717 534,658 513,603 1,118,314 832,601 524,433 1,574,730 383,995 1,323,898 224,390 229,128 381,762 213,646 1,008,476
13 10 6 6 13 10 6 18 4 15 3 3 4 2 12
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
699,247 524,303 555,551 541,569 536,357 741,152 751,296 688,126 583,403 586,908
Knoxville, TN Chattanooga, TN-GA Provo-Orem, UT Ogden-Clearfield, UT Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX El Paso, TX Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL
5.00% 4.90% 3.30% 3.20% 3.00% 1.60% 0.80% 0.80% 0.60% 0.30%
56 49 10 10 7 6 5 4 2 1
172,655 799,870 297,479 304,190 98,736 1,430 72,380 18,202 12,030 101
2 9 3 4 1 0 1 0 0 0
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Table 2: Metros 500,000 - 1 million ranked by avg. daily traffic on deficient bridges
Rank Metro Population 2009 Metro Area Name Percent Deficient Total Bridges Average daily Deficient Bridges drivers crossing deficient bridge every second 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 929,015 674,860 907,574 901,208 816,012 848,006 915,267 549,454 835,063 803,701 802,983 698,903 699,935 714,765 685,488 Tulsa, OK Stockton, CA Honolulu, HI Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ New Haven-Milford, CT Fresno, CA Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA Dayton, OH Worcester, MA Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Springfield, MA Akron, OH Greensboro-High Point, NC Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR 16 17 18 19 20 536,919 672,220 807,407 524,303 562,963 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Toledo, OH Bakersfield, CA Chattanooga, TN-GA Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 21 22 23 24 744,730 507,766 857,592 677,094 Columbia, SC Lancaster, PA Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY 25 26 27 646,084 562,906 570,025 Syracuse, NY Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Madison, WI 11.90% 24.30% 10.60% 104 358 97 588,596 559,735 534,658 7 6 6 14.60% 26.50% 11.90% 12.20% 159 198 132 98 751,028 734,532 676,318 662,288 9 9 8 8 18.40% 10.90% 9.80% 4.90% 18.90% 175 144 61 49 228 891,188 838,717 832,601 799,870 789,241 10 10 10 9 9 27.50% 18.00% 7.90% 12.90% 21.50% 6.50% 11.50% 26.10% 11.00% 9.90% 11.80% 13.10% 12.70% 16.00% 5.10% 783 115 52 107 234 56 101 239 184 98 57 127 104 199 76 3,809,427 2,453,016 1,574,730 1,381,796 1,374,885 1,323,898 1,192,214 1,157,189 1,155,286 1,118,314 1,050,590 1,027,770 1,022,023 1,014,005 1,008,476 44 28 18 16 16 15 14 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 12
Deficient Traffic on
10
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Rank
Percent Deficient
Total Bridges
Deficient Traffic on
28 29 30
155 74 96
6 6 6
31 32 33 34 35 36 37
Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Boise City-Nampa, ID Colorado Springs, CO Ogden-Clearfield, UT Provo-Orem, UT Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC
492 126 51 40 10 10 76
5 5 4 4 4 3 3
38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
540,866 857,903 501,228 510,385 612,683 539,154 699,247 536,357 751,296 688,126 583,403 741,152 586,908
Jackson, MS Albuquerque, NM Durham, NC Modesto, CA Wichita, KS Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC Knoxville, TN Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL El Paso, TX Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL
11.30% 6.40% 6.50% 11.50% 5.70% 13.40% 5.00% 3.00% 0.80% 0.80% 0.60% 1.60% 0.30%
205 51 53 44 166 89 56 7 5 4 2 6 1
253,077 229,128 224,390 222,872 213,646 196,635 172,655 98,736 72,380 18,202 12,030 1,430 101
3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0
11
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1,745,524 1,035,566 1,801,848 1,743,658 1,304,926 1,131,070 1,125,827 1,238,187 1,559,667 1,123,804 1,258,577 1,195,998
Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Rochester, NY Columbus, OH Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Memphis, TN-MS-AR Birmingham-Hoover, AL Raleigh-Cary, NC Richmond, VA Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT
12.10% 12.00% 11.10% 10.90% 9.90% 9.70% 9.70% 9.10% 8.80% 8.60% 8.40% 7.90%
217 142 323 346 247 227 105 175 128 99 163 108
1,060,518 1,171,304 1,736,553 2,069,074 1,320,211 1,284,706 670,610 2,257,134 1,498,923 591,016 2,875,341 1,168,144
12 14 20 24 15 15 8 26 17 7 33 14
16 17
1,189,981 1,674,498
6.50% 5.30%
81 58
769,701 671,266
9 8
18 19
1,328,144 1,582,264
Jacksonville, FL Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN
4.10% 3.70%
45 144
444,517 1,187,820
5 14
20 21 22 23
31 20 30 13
3 4 1 2
12
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Table 4: Metros 1-2 million ranked by average daily traffic on deficient bridges
Rank Metro Population 2009 Metro Area Name Percent Deficient Total Bridges Average daily Deficient Bridges drivers crossing deficient bridge every second 1 2 1,839,700 1,600,642 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 18.70% Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1,258,577 1,238,187 1,743,658 1,227,278 1,801,848 1,559,667 1,304,926 1,131,070 1,582,264 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Richmond, VA Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Oklahoma City, OK Columbus, OH Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Memphis, TN-MS-AR Birmingham-Hoover, AL Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN 12 13 1,035,566 1,195,998 Rochester, NY Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 14 15 16 1,745,524 1,189,981 1,674,498 Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1,125,827 1,123,804 1,328,144 1,130,293 1,020,200 1,902,834 1,705,075 Raleigh-Cary, NC Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Jacksonville, FL Salt Lake City, UT Tucson, AZ Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Austin-Round Rock, TX 9.70% 8.60% 4.10% 2.70% 3.10% 0.20% 1.10% 105 99 45 20 31 13 30 670,610 591,016 444,517 334,204 251,314 157,650 62,874 8 7 5 4 3 2 1 12.10% 6.50% 5.30% 217 81 58 1,060,518 769,701 671,266 12 9 8 12.00% 7.90% 142 108 1,171,304 1,168,144 14 14 8.40% 9.10% 10.90% 19.80% 11.10% 8.80% 9.90% 9.70% 3.70% 163 175 346 685 323 128 247 227 144 2,875,341 2,257,134 2,069,074 1,857,956 1,736,553 1,498,923 1,320,211 1,284,706 1,187,820 33 26 24 22 20 17 15 15 14 18.60% 189 212 5,906,551 3,933,150 68 46 Deficient Traffic on
13
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
9,580,567 2,828,990
71 28 396 35 16 44 14 21
12,874,797 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 2,690,886 2,171,896 2,552,195 5,475,213 3,269,814 Baltimore-Towson, MD Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Denver-Aurora, CO Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MNWI
19
5,476,241
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DCVA-MD-WV
5.70%
215
3,611,401
42
20 21 22 23 24
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL
79 81 99 166 54
40 10 16 8 7
25
6,447,615
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
14
2.20%
193
1,716,729
20
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Percent Deficient
Total Bridges
Deficient Traffic on
26 27 28 29
31 15 20 7
5 2 0 0
Table 6: Metros over 2 million ranked by average daily traffic on deficient bridges
Rank Metro Population 2009 Metro Area Name Percent Deficient Total Bridges Avg. daily Deficient Bridges 1 12,874,797 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 2 19,069,796 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 3 4 4,317,853 5,968,252 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PANJ-DE-MD 5 6 7 4,588,680 9,580,567 2,127,355 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA 8 9 10 11 12 4,143,113 2,354,957 4,403,437 2,552,195 5,476,241 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Pittsburgh, PA Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Denver-Aurora, CO Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DCVA-MD-WV 13 14 15 3,053,793 2,690,886 2,091,286 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Baltimore-Towson, MD Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
15
Deficient Traffic on
8.30%
386
34,174,712
9.80%
778
17,505,467
203
20.90% 20.00%
380 907
15,600,871 9,355,193
181 108
91 71 59
58 57 49 44 42
79 167 213
40 35 28
T4 AMERICA
The Fix Were In For: The State of Our Nations Busiest Bridges
Percent Deficient
Total Bridges
Deficient Traffic on
16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23
20 16 16 14 10
24 25
5,867,489 5,547,051
2.70% 2.50%
166 54
688,744 600,252
8 7
26 27 28 29
31 15 20 7
5 2 0 0
16