Table 1-5: Utah Road Condition by Functional System -- Urban

Table 1-5: Utah Road Condition by Functional System -- Urban

(Miles)

Excel | CSV

  1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Interstate (total reported) 169 169 169 167 167 167
Very good 39 36 36 31 16 16
Good 65 65 61 46 63 58
Fair 44 47 51 36 43 41
Mediocre 21 21 21 40 37 44
Poor 0 0 0 14 8 8
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other freeways and expressways (total reported) 8 8 9 7 8 9
Very good 4 3 4 3 1 1
Good 4 4 4 4 6 6
Fair 0 1 1 0 1 2
Mediocre 0 0 0 0 0 0
Poor 0 0 0 0 0 0
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other principal arterial (total reported) 270 268 271 279 278 267
Very good 39 42 42 29 5 5
Good 117 119 121 89 85 87
Fair 105 98 98 139 159 148
Mediocre 9 8 9 15 21 19
Poor 0 1 1 7 8 8
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 11
Urban minor arterial (total reported) N N N N N 325
Very good N N N N N 6
Good N N N N N 69
Fair N N N N N 183
Mediocre N N N N N 54
Poor N N N N N 13
Not reported N N N N N N
Urban collector (total reported) N N N N N 46
Very good N N N N N 0
Good N N N N N 3
Fair N N N N N 17
Mediocre N N N N N 12
Poor N N N N N 14
Not reported N N N N N N

KEY : N = data do not exist.

NOTE: In 2000, the Federal Highway Administration began reporting road condition for urban minor arterials and urban 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.