Table 1-5: New Hampshire Road Condition by Functional System -- Rural

Table 1-5: New Hampshire Road Condition by Functional System -- Rural

(Miles)

Excel | CSV

  1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Interstate (total reported) 176 176 177 176 176 177
Very good 25 25 25 51 51 26
Good 148 148 149 95 95 147
Fair 3 3 3 24 28 4
Mediocre 0 0 0 6 2 0
Poor 0 0 0 0 0 0
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other principal arterial (total reported) 454 454 456 457 463 460
Very good 0 0 0 64 58 57
Good 252 253 260 234 257 233
Fair 192 191 177 135 119 147
Mediocre 3 3 12 19 24 9
Poor 7 7 7 5 5 14
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor arterial (total reported) 493 490 489 485 487 484
Very good 8 8 8 53 33 69
Good 245 234 237 218 238 167
Fair 227 240 241 189 192 206
Mediocre 58 8 3 17 18 14
Poor 0 0 0 8 6 28
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0
Major collector (total reported) N N N N N 1186
Very good N N N N N 27
Good N N N N N 275
Fair N N N N N 321
Mediocre N N N N N 346
Poor N N N N N 217
Not reported N N N N N 0

KEY: N = data do not exist.

NOTE: In 2000, the Federal Highway Administration began reporting road condition for rural major collectors using the International Roughness Index, if available. In prior years, data were only available using the Present Serviceability Rating.

NOTE FOR DATA ON THIS PAGE: Road condition is based on measured pavement roughness using the International Roughness Index (IRI). IRI is a measure of surface condition. A comprehensive measure of pavement condition would require data on other pavement distresses such as rutting, cracking, and faulting.

SOURCE FOR DATA ON THIS PAGE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Statistics, Washington, DC: annual editions, tables HM-63 and HM-64, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ as of Feb. 1, 2002.