Table 1-61: Roadway Congestion Index

Table 1-61: Roadway Congestion Index

Excel | CSV

Population group Urban area 1982 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Percent change: Short-term 1995-1999R Percent change: Long-term 1982-1999R
Percenta Ranka Percenta Ranka
Med Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY R0.46 0.51 0.68 0.67 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.74 0.75 0.75 0.77 7 22 67 61
Med Albuquerque, NM R0.62 0.69 0.85 0.84 0.87 0.92 0.98 R1.02 R1.06 R1.12 1.12 1.13 11 49 82 68
Lrg Atlanta, GA R0.77 0.93 R0.98 0.97 R0.99 1.05 1.13 R1.13 1.17 R1.24 1.28 1.27 12 59 65 59
Med Austin, TX R0.73 0.81 R0.90 0.90 R0.87 0.87 0.90 0.94 R0.97 R1.02 1.04 1.06 13 60 45 38
Sml Bakersfield, CA R0.54 0.56 R0.64 0.67 R0.70 0.68 0.71 0.72 0.74 0.75 0.76 0.77 7 22 43 35
Lrg Baltimore, MD R0.75 0.80 R0.95 0.95 R0.97 0.97 1.00 1.03 R1.03 1.05 1.06 1.07 4 15 43 36
Sml Beaumont, TX R0.68 0.72 R0.74 0.78 R0.83 0.82 0.78 R0.80 0.84 R0.85 0.85 0.86 7 30 26 14
Vlg Boston, MA R0.88 0.98 R1.09 1.09 R1.11 1.17 1.19 R1.21 1.22 R1.25 1.27 1.28 6 20 45 39
Sml Boulder, CO R0.55 0.59 R0.65 0.66 R0.70 0.71 0.72 0.74 R0.76 R0.81 0.83 0.83 12 58 51 46
Sml Brownsville, TX R0.54 0.54 0.62 0.62 0.64 0.68 0.69 0.70 R0.71 R0.73 0.76 0.75 7 25 39 33
Lrg Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY R0.53 0.55 R0.60 0.62 R0.64 0.66 0.68 R0.67 R0.66 R0.68 0.70 0.72 7 29 36 30
Med Charlotte, NC R0.86 1.02 R1.05 1.04 R0.98 0.94 0.93 R0.95 R1.01 R1.07 1.09 1.14 20 68 33 22
Vlg Chicago, IL-Northwestern, IN R0.95 1.02 R1.18 1.19 R1.17 1.17 1.17 R1.22 R1.27 R1.27 1.31 1.31 7 28 38 31
Lrg Cincinnati, OH-KY R0.70 0.78 R0.92 0.90 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 R1.04 R1.09 1.11 1.12 12 55 60 58
Lrg Cleveland, OH R0.68 0.65 R0.83 0.83 R0.85 0.89 0.91 R0.92 R0.94 R0.96 0.98 0.99 8 31 46 40
Sml Colorado Springs, CO R0.50 0.60 R0.62 0.61 R0.64 0.66 0.68 R0.73 R0.76 R0.81 0.83 0.85 16 65 70 63
Lrg Columbus, OH R0.63 0.68 R0.86 0.88 R0.90 0.92 0.94 R0.95 1.00 1.04 1.05 1.05 11 46 67 60
Sml Corpus Christi, TX R0.57 0.65 R0.67 0.66 R0.67 0.65 0.64 R0.64 R0.66 R0.70 0.70 0.71 11 50 25 12
Lrg Dallas, TX R0.78 0.91 0.99 1.01 1.01 0.99 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.04 1.04 1.05 7 25 35 25
Lrg Denver, CO R0.82 0.86 R0.92 0.93 R0.97 0.99 1.02 R1.07 R1.12 R1.14 1.18 1.20 12 57 46 41
Vlg Detroit, MI R0.89 0.91 1.08 1.09 1.16 1.19 1.15 R1.16 R1.18 1.18 1.18 1.20 3 13 35 26
Med El Paso, TX-NM R0.62 0.70 R0.73 0.78 0.82 0.83 0.85 R0.85 R0.84 0.86 0.91 0.94 11 48 52 48
Sml Eugene-Springfield, OR R0.53 0.58 R0.68 0.69 R0.70 0.74 0.75 0.78 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.91 17 66 72 65
Lrg  Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood-Pompano Beach, FL R0.69 0.75 R0.90 0.95 R1.03 1.05 1.03 R1.05 R1.07 R1.12 1.12 1.17 11 52 70 62
Lrg Fort Worth TX 0.73 0.82 0.92 0.89 0.90 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.91 0.94 0.96 10 44 32 21
Med Fresno, CA R0.67 0.65 R0.89 0.88 R0.87 0.85 0.85 0.87 R0.89 R0.92 0.96 1.00 15 63 49 44
Med Hartford-Middletown, CT R0.61 0.74 R0.85 0.85 R0.87 0.84 0.85 R0.86 R0.87 0.90 0.91 0.94 9 41 54 52
Med Honolulu, HI R0.79 0.84 R1.03 1.03 R1.04 1.05 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.06 1.06 1.06 -1 4 34 24
Vlg Houston, TX R1.03 1.11 R1.05 1.00 0.99 1.02 1.00 R1.00 R1.03 1.07 1.10 1.10 10 43 7 1
Lrg Indianapolis, IN R0.64 0.69 R0.83 0.85 R0.91 0.96 1.04 R1.11 R1.11 R1.13 1.12 1.11 0 6 73 66
Med Jacksonville, FL R0.75 0.81 R0.94 0.96 R0.98 1.00 1.02 R1.04 R1.02 R1.01 1.01 1.00 -4 1 33 23
Lrg Kansas City, MO-KS R0.50 0.58 R0.63 0.61 R0.63 0.69 0.71 0.72 0.75 0.76 0.77 0.79 10 42 58 54
Sml Laredo, TX R0.55 0.56 R0.56 0.57 R0.56 0.54 0.54 R0.53 0.56 R0.60 0.63 0.61 15 64 11 4
Lrg Las Vegas, NV R0.69 0.78 R1.08 1.11 R1.08 1.14 1.13 R1.12 R1.12 R1.11 1.13 1.18 5 19 71 64
Vlg Los Angeles, CA R1.29 1.31 R1.59 1.58 R1.56 1.54 1.50 R1.52 R1.56 R1.54 1.58 1.58 4 16 22 11
Med Louisville, KY-IN R0.78 0.78 0.80 0.84 0.89 0.95 0.99 R1.00 1.02 R1.05 1.08 1.09 9 38 40 34
Med Memphis, TN-AR-MS R0.71 0.70 R0.88 0.88 R0.89 0.89 0.94 R0.96 R0.98 R0.98 0.99 0.98 2 10 38 32
Lrg Miami-Hialeah, FL R0.95 0.99 R1.20 1.17 R1.20 1.19 1.22 R1.25 R1.23 R1.23 1.22 1.23 -2 3 29 18
Lrg Milwaukee, WI R0.71 0.80 R0.92 0.92 R0.92 0.89 0.91 R0.94 R0.99 1.01 1.02 1.05 12 53 48 43
Lrg Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN R0.66 0.76 0.89 0.91 0.93 0.98 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.13 1.18 1.20 13 62 82 67
Med Nashville, TN R0.83 0.81 0.85 0.84 R0.85 0.85 0.90 0.93 R0.93 R0.98 0.97 1.01 9 37 22 10
Lrg New Orleans, LA R0.92 0.97 R0.94 0.96 R0.95 0.94 0.99 R0.99 R0.96 R0.97 1.00 0.99 0 6 8 2
Vlg New York, NY-Northeastern, NJ R0.77 0.84 R0.99 0.98 R0.97 0.99 1.02 1.04 R1.08 R1.13 1.14 1.15 11 47 49 45
Lrg Norfolk, VA R0.89 1.01 R0.96 0.90 R0.87 0.88 0.91 0.93 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.97 4 17 9 3
Lrg Oklahoma City, OK R0.65 0.71 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.78 0.77 0.82 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.88 7 27 35 28
Med Omaha, NE-IA R0.62 0.70 R0.75 0.76 R0.79 0.80 0.80 R0.81 R0.84 R0.85 0.87 0.90 11 51 45 37
Lrg Orlando, FL R0.82 0.93 R0.95 0.97 R0.97 0.97 0.96 R0.97 R1.00 R1.04 1.05 1.05 8 35 28 16
Vlg Philadelphia, PA-NJ R0.82 0.86 R0.94 0.99 0.98 0.96 0.97 R0.97 R0.98 R1.02 1.05 1.06 9 40 29 17
Lrg Phoenix, AZ R0.95 0.98 R1.01 1.03 1.06 1.05 1.04 R1.08 R1.14 R1.12 1.16 1.21 12 56 27 15
Lrg Pittsburgh, PA R0.70 0.73 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.78 0.78 3 11 11 6
Lrg Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA R0.81 0.90 R1.01 1.03 1.07 1.10 1.12 1.15 1.20 1.22 1.22 1.24 8 33 53 51
Med Providence-Pawtucket, RI-MA R0.70 0.83 R0.89 0.88 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.84 0.87 R0.89 0.93 0.95 13 61 36 29
Med Rochester, NY R0.51 0.57 R0.69 0.70 R0.72 0.72 0.74 R0.77 R0.77 R0.76 0.77 0.78 1 8 53 50
Lrg Sacramento, CA R0.76 0.88 R1.05 1.05 R1.07 1.09 1.12 1.12 R1.17 1.14 1.18 1.20 7 24 58 53
Sml Salem, OR R0.56 0.64 R0.79 0.81 R0.79 0.79 0.79 0.77 R0.79 0.82 0.86 0.85 10 45 52 49
Med Salt Lake City, UT R0.66 0.71 R0.84 0.89 0.91 0.95 1.01 1.04 1.05 R1.01 1.01 1.00 -4 1 52 47
Lrg San Antonio, TX R0.69 0.79 R0.74 0.74 R0.77 0.78 0.81 R0.87 0.89 0.92 0.96 1.02 17 67 48 42
Lrg San Bernardino-Riverside, CA R0.78 0.90 R1.15 1.16 1.15 1.14 1.12 1.16 R1.18 R1.16 1.20 1.24 7 21 59 57
Lrg San Diego, CA R0.79 0.90 R1.19 1.18 R1.18 1.16 1.16 R1.16 R1.16 R1.15 1.19 1.25 8 32 58 55
Vlg San Francisco-Oakland, CA R1.06 1.17 R1.35 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.31 1.34 R1.35 R1.36 1.37 1.39 4 14 31 19
Lrg San Jose, CA R1.07 1.13 R1.24 1.25 R1.22 1.18 1.15 R1.13 R1.11 R1.11 1.13 1.19 5 18 11 5
Lrg Seattle-Everett, WA R1.07 1.17 1.21 1.21 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.22 R1.25 1.26 1.30 8 36 21 9
Sml Spokane, WA R0.66 0.71 R0.74 0.77 R0.74 0.73 0.77 0.76 R0.78 R0.80 0.81 0.83 9 39 26 13
Lrg St. Louis, MO-IL R0.87 0.94 R0.91 0.90 R0.92 0.95 0.99 1.00 1.01 R1.02 1.01 1.03 3 12 18 7
Med Tacoma, WA R0.75 0.78 R0.91 0.96 R1.02 1.08 1.10 1.10 1.11 1.15 1.18 1.19 8 34 59 56
Med Tampa, FL 0.91 0.87 1.02 1.07 1.09 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.09 R1.08 1.08 1.10 -1 5 21 8
Med Tucson, AZ R0.80 0.76 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.95 0.94 R0.97 1.00 1.04 1.05 12 53 31 20
Vlg Washington, DC-MD-VA 0.99 1.13 R1.24 1.23 R1.28 1.31 1.34 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.35 1.34 2 9 35 27
68 Area Averageb 0.83 0.90 1.02 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.07 1.09 1.11 1.13 1.14 7   38  
Very Large Area Averageb 0.97 1.04 1.19 1.19 1.18 1.19 1.19 1.21 1.23 1.25 1.27 1.28 6   32  
Large Area Averageb 0.75 0.83 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.06 1.09 8   44  
Medium Area Averageb 0.68 0.74 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.91 0.93 0.95 0.96 0.98 0.99 7   45  
Small Area Averageb 0.56 0.62 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.74 0.77 0.78 0.79 10   39  

KEY: R = revised.

Vlg = very large urban areas - over 3 million population.

Lrg = large urban areas - over 1 million and less than 3 million population.

Med = medium urban areas - over 500,000 and less than 1 million population.

Sml = small urban areas - less than 500,000 population.

a Percent change was calculated using the numbers in this table and were not obtained from the source mentioned below. Rank is based on the calculated percent change with the lowest number corresponding to a rank of 1.

b For the years 1982, 1992, and 1999, the average RCI was obtained from table A-17 from the Texas Transportation Instutute's The 2001 Annual Urban Mobility Report referenced below. For other years, the average RCI was calculated using data obtained from the web site and the RCI formula in the report.

NOTES: The roadway congestion index (RCI) is a measure of vehicle travel density on major roadways in an urban area.

An RCI exceeding 1.0 indicates an undesirable congestion level, on average, on the freeways and principal arterial street system during the peak period.

The cities shown represent the 50 largest metropolitan areas, as well as others chosen by the states sponsoring the Texas Transportation Institute study on mobility.

Due to changes in methodology, data for all years shown were revised. For a detailed explanation of the formulas used, see the source document.

SOURCE: 1982-1999: Texas Transportation Institute, The 2001 Annual Urban Mobility Report (College Station, TX: 2001); RCI data and population groups were obtained from Internet site http://mobility.tamu.edu accessed on Sept. 14, 2001.