A Cross-State Comparison of Arkansas's Highway Financing and Infrastructure Quality.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Increasing the Navajo County Expenditure Limit: Key Information for Voters “Proudly Serving, Continuously Improving”
Advertisements

Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance Act 374 of 2009.
Comparative Analysis of Emulsion and Hot Asphalt Cement Chip Seal Performance Douglas D. Gransberg, P.E., C.C.E. University of Oklahoma.
Meeting Name Date. Agenda Introductions Transportation Funding 101 Program Development Process Program Projects Strategic Funding Tax Rate Implications.
Senate Committee on Transportation, Technology and Legislative Affairs House Committee on Public Transportation Thursday, July 18, 2013.
Infrastructure Planning and Funding MID-REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS MID-REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION MARCH 19, 2015 NAIOP-NEW MEXICO CHAPTER.
Department of Industrial Engineering1 Economic Evaluation of the Impact of Waterways on the Port of Cincinnati-Tristate Heather Nachtmann, Ph.D. River.
Background Why Plan For Transportation? Facts You Should Know Expectations Projects and Costs Conclusions/ Next Steps.
Meeting Name Date. Agenda Introductions Transportation Funding 101 Program Development Process Program Projects Strategic Funding Tax Rate Implications.
City of Lake Elmo · New Village Workshop-Focus on Infrastructure· January 20, 2007 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT PREPARED: NOVEMBER 16,
SOURCE: PUBLIC EDUCATION FINANCES 2007 ISSUED: JULY 2009 BY: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.
1 04/04. TEA-3 Transportation Enhancements & Physical Activity: Policy Implications Deborah A. Cohen Ross Brownson Henry Feldman R h e a l t h.
Traffic & Congestion In Connecticut State of Connecticut Department of Transportation April 2010.
DRAFT.  Its Mandated for funding › Strategy, activity or project  It is a Guide › How to  It is a story › History (where we were) › Possible look.
2 Presentation Overview Study Objectives Survey Design Trip Purpose and Trip Chaining Overview – Satisfaction with Roadways and Transportation in Communities.
Cedar Rapids Community Schools School Finance Basics.
21 st Century Committee Report Recommendations NC 73 Council of Planning Annual Meeting January 22, 2009.
The Effects of Different Land Uses in Missouri on Local Fiscal Conditions – Cost of Community Services Project Update – 4/12/02.
Optimal Highway Durability in Cold Regions Jia Yan Washington State University 18 June 2015.
1 Major Highway Program Legislative Audit Bureau January 2004.
Putting Hamilton County School Finance into Context David Eichenthal Ochs Center for Metropolitan Studies February 2009.
THE FUTURE OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AN ALDOT PERSPECTIVE December 3, 2014.
Fiscal Years Outlook Preliminary Six-Year Financial Plan and Six-Year Improvement Plan Strategy John W. Lawson, Chief Financial Officer Reta.
State and Federal Funding Programs for Local Agency Projects Alan Lively Local Government Section Project Delivery Specialist.
Linda McKinnon, President & CEO Larry Allen, COO Mental Health & Substance Abuse Florida Facts DCF Funding Data Trends
Charlie Zelle, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation February 18, 2014.
Portland, Oregon Transportation Sustainability. July 1, 2007 emissions.
The Regional Forum for Transportation Planning. Southwestern Pennsylvania 10 Counties >7,000 square miles 2.66 million citizens 548 municipalities 132.
Michigan Infrastructure and Transportation Association A STATE IN NEED.
A M O T I A A N N U A L M E E T I N G 2 3 S E P T E M B E R N A S H V I L L E, T N 1 A View from the State DOTs Joung H. Lee Associate Director.
Quantifying Transportation Needs and Assessing Revenue Options: The Texas Experience presented to The Arkansas Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance.
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY 1 Shashi Nambisan Institute for Transportation Iowa State University Murat Ozen Middle East Technical University Department.
MML Capital Conference MML Capital Conference Director Kirk T. Steudle, P.E. Michigan Department of Transportation March 4, 2009.
Financing and regulating highway construction in Scandinavia – experiences and perspectives Svein Bråthen Molde University College
Recent Trend in Vehicle Miles Traveled in the U.S. Katie Zadrozny Khaled Al-Menayes September 3, 2009.
Trends and Comparisons in Higher Education Economics: How has Kentucky Fared? William Hoyt, Acting Director Center for Business & Economic Research Policy.
Data Palooza Workshop May 9, 2013 Rabinder Bains, FHWA – Office of Policy and Government Affairs.
3000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 208 Washington, DC
Health and Welfare Building Harrisburg, PA (717)
Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System – Rural/Tribal NTD Module June 24, 2015 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration.
Total Fatalities in Drunk Driving Crashes Vehicle Miles Traveled Total Drunk-Driving Fatalities Down 39% Despite an 86% Increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled.
ATSSA The American Traffic Safety Services Association “Safer Roads Save Lives” AASHTO - SCOTE American Traffic Safety Services Association Toward Zero.
LD 1: Tax Reform For Maine? _________________________________________ Darcy Rollins, Policy Analyst New England Public Policy Center Presentation to the.
1 Current Funding of Surface Transportation Infrastructure Briefing for the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission April 25,
The Federal Funding Outlook: A Colorado State Budget Perspective Presentation to the Colorado Counties Inc. Summer Conference Amanda Bickel Chief Legislative.
School Funding: Facts and Figures A library of PowerPoint slides compiled by the Association of Metropolitan School Districts Kevin Sampers, Research Director.
CEE 320 Spring 2007 Transportation Facts and Figures CEE 320 Steve Muench 26 March 2007.
Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce, Critical Issues Forum Charlie Zelle, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Getting & Using Transit Data John Semmens Laissez Faire Institute & Arizona Transportation Institute.
Transportation Finance Advisory Committee May 18, 2012.
HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION FUNDING. Highway Transportation Funding Federal and State Revenue has been flat since 2005, not including the one time stimulus.
Tennessee and U.S. Economic Update and Outlook Matthew N. Murray, Ph.D. October 2015.
HPMS Traffic Data Review Highway Information Seminar Oct , 2012 Patrick Zhang, P.E Office of Highway Information Policy, FHWA 1.
Trends in Regional Traffic Volumes: Signs of Change? East-West Gateway Council of Governments March 20, 2008.
Funding Target Formula 32.50% Total VMT (on and off State Hwy System) 22.19% Population 16.88% Lane miles (on System) 14.06% VMT (trucks only) 6.88% Percent.
September 17, 2010 DASNR Fall Faculty Meeting 2010 Fall Faculty Meeting.
Geometric Design: General Concept CE331 Transportation Engineering.
Presentation to the Washington Transportation Commission March 16, 2010 Washington State Association of County Engineers.
Public Awareness and Support for Coastal Restoration Craig A. Miller Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources University of Georgia.
1 Financing in water sector - times of change Antti Tooming Ministry of the Environment / Water department, Head of Project bureau 19/05/2016.
Infrastructure Spending: After the Great Recession and Historically
Transportation Facts and Figures
ZHANG Juwei Institute of Population and Labor Economics
Consumer Price Index CPI is the government’s “most important” statistic Announced monthly by Bureau of Labor Statistics Measures changes in prices of goods.
Chapter 13 – Economic Performance
Minnesota Health Care Spending and Cost Drivers
STIP Development OTO Board Meeting
Economic Performance Chapter 13.
Roads & Bridges.
A Case Study for Williamson County, TN
Presentation transcript:

A Cross-State Comparison of Arkansas's Highway Financing and Infrastructure Quality

Arkansas Highway Facts Total Arkansas public roadways 1 99,558 Rural roadway miles 1 87,592 Urban roadway miles 1 11,966 The annual average daily traffic per lane 1 1,911 The annual vehicle-miles traveled[1][1]33,171,000 Total Highway Department expenditures for fiscal year 2008[2][2] $978,320,514 Per capita Highway Department expenditures for fiscal year 2008 $ Highway Department expenditures per mile for fiscal year 2008 $9, [1][1] Source: Federal Highway Administration (2007) [2][2] Source: Bureau of Legislative Research (2008)

Arkansas and the Surrounding States Population (Millions) Land Area (Square Miles) Vehicle Miles Traveled (Millions) State- Maintained Hwy. Miles Total Hwy. Miles* Arkansas 2.852, ,43299,558 Louisiana 4.243, ,68761,008 Mississippi 2.946, ,97074,622 Missouri 5.868, ,681129,122 Oklahoma 3.668, ,287112,922 Tennessee 6.041, ,83691,058 Texas , ,849305,855 Source: Snyder, J. (2008) *Source: Federal Highway Administration (2007 )

A Comparison of Arkansas’s Highway Funding with the Surrounding States All the values presented exclude federal funding, thus only state-level highway department revenues are included. Historical data covers the last 25 years. ( ) All values presented are in real terms.

Highway Construction Cost Index vs. Inflation

Total Highway Revenues from Source: Federal Highway Administration

Total Highway Revenues from Source: Federal Highway Administration

Average Change in Total Highway Funding from Year Average Funding 25-Year Average Change in Funding Arkansas $ 514,051, % Louisiana $ 1,003,046, % Mississippi $ 581,889, % Missouri $ 975,812, % Oklahoma $ 816,366, % Tennessee $ 949,696, % Texas $ 3,099,940, %

Per Capita Highway Revenues from Source: Federal Highway Administration

Per Capita Highway Revenues from Source: Federal Highway Administration

Average Per Capita Highway Funding from Year Average Per Capita Highway Funding Arkansas $ Louisiana $ Mississippi $ Missouri $ Oklahoma $ Tennessee $ Texas $162.34

State Highway Department Revenues per Mile from Source: Federal Highway Administration

Arkansas Arkansas Highway Department Revenues per Mile from Source: Federal Highway Administration

25 Year Average Highway Funding per Mile ARLAMSMOOKTNTX $5,997$16,853$7,987$7,961$7,286$11,024$10,463 Louisiana ranks first in funding per mile Arkansas ranks last among the states in this sample.

A Comparison of Arkansas’s Current Road Quality with the Surrounding States Road Quality measured objectively using the International Roughness Index (IRI). –The IRI is an objective equipment-based measure that allows for cross-state comparisons of road quality. Based on the IRI, a score value was calculated and the 7 states within the sample were ranked according to road quality.

Rural Area - International Roughness Index Score StateScoreRanking Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Oklahoma Tennessee Texas0.74 3

Urban Area - International Roughness Index Score StateScoreRanking Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Oklahoma Tennessee Texas0.62 6

Overall - International Roughness Index Score StateScoreRanking Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Oklahoma Tennessee Texas

Arkansas Road Quality Categories Compared To The National Average Very Good GoodFairMediocrePoor Arkansas11.39%35.67%39.28%9.81%3.86% National Average[1][1] 13.00%27.00%41.00%11.00%7.00% [1][1] Source: American Society of Civil Engineers (2006)

Overall Trends Tennessee spends less per capita and per highway mile, but ranks highest in road quality. Louisiana leads the region in highway funding per mile and ranks second in funding per capita, but has the poorest quality roads.

Overall Trends The bottom line: Based on our analysis, there is not a significant correlation between the IRI road quality index and funding. This suggests that other factors may affect road quality other than the amount of funding received.

Conclusion Arkansas’s average highway funding since 1982 has increased 3.10%. (in real terms) Among the 7 surrounding states, Arkansas ranks: –4 th in per capita funding –7 th in funding per highway mile –3 rd overall road quality (measured by the IRI) Arkansas’s road quality is also above the national average.