Nevada County CA60 miles from Sacramento

150 miles from San Francisco

Bridgeport Covered Bridge, Nevada County CALongest single span covered bridge in the U.S. (251 feet)

Strategic Growth Plan Pyramid

History & Future of Performance Measures

• The Past: Safety, LOS, Community input & Common Sense.

• The Present: Federal/State regulatory requirements: MAP 21, SB 375, State Transportation Improvement Program Guidelines.

• The Future: Cost effective expenditure of public funding on infrastructure that achieves State, Regional, & Community goals

Definitions & Applications

Performance measures are tools that help us to determine existing conditions across the transportation system and to evaluate the effectiveness of proposed investments by using a "measure" to evaluate anticipated and/or actual progress toward achieving a specific benchmark or "target" that is tied to an overarching goal.

Amador County Transportation Commission, 2014 RTP Update

• Performance measures can be either quantitative (data: e.g. LOS) or qualitative (values: (e.g. historic character).

• A State-level quantitative performance measure may be very different than one that is based on regional data and goals.

• Performance measures are used differently at plan-level, program-level, and project level.

• Plan-level – selecting a plan alternative

• Program-level – establishing project priorities in a Capital Improvement Program (CIP)

• Project-level – screening project alternatives and measuring refined design features.

• The level of analysis needed & data available are not the same at each step.

In California, rural agencies are concerned that performance measures developed by, and for, urban areas of the state will skew the prioritization of funding toward those urban areas.

Rural Counties Task ForceLocal Roads Needs Assessment

Draft Report

RCTF Committee

November 21, 2014

Project Objectives

Compare revenues vs. pavement needs

Perform three funding scenarios– Existing Funding (preventive maintenance first)– Existing Funding (worst first)– $$ to reach specific PCI goals

Review other performance measures

Performance Measures

Must be:– Meaningful– Repeatable & reproducible– Economical

Pavement distress (PCI)– Widespread use nationally and in California– Well known, historical data available

Roughness (IRI)– Not common on local roads– Not appropriate for rural roads e.g. chip seals

Some Facts and Figures

Average PCI

Average PCI

66 (Statewide)

58 (Rural Counties)

This is what 58 looks like …

How Bad is 58?

70

50

25

0

100

Time (years)

PCI 58

$3.85/sy

$17.50/sy

$27.50/sy

$57/sy

Needs Per Capita Comparisons

10 Year Needs 10 Year Needs Per Capita

Funding Shortfall

Pavement Needs*

($ million)

Funding Available($ million)

Shortfall($ million)

Local Roads $ 7,275 $3,080 4,195$ State Highways $ 732**

* Target PCI di ffers by county. Average i s 68.

** State highways are 10 year needs

Unknown

1. Existing Budget (Prev. Maintenance)

Nevada County

2. Existing Budget (Worst First)

Nevada County

3. Reach PCI = 75

Nevada County

Projected Conditions in 2034

Nevada County

1. Existing Budget (Prev. Maintenance)

Alpine County

2. Existing Budget (Worst First)

Alpine County

Conclusions

Average PCI for rural roads = 58

20 year analysis to reach target PCI– Impacts of existing funding ($3.08 billion)• Average PCI drops to 42• Deferred maintenance = $6.7 to $8.1 billion

– Funding to reach target (PCI = 68) is $7.3 billion – Shortfall = $4.2 billion

State highways = $732 million (10 years)

Performance Monitoring Indicators for Transportation Planning

Purpose:

–Standardized, common set of transportation indicators

–California MPOs and State Agencies

Completed: June 2013

200 + Indicators

Most Commonly Used by MPOs and State Agencies

Methods and Data Sources

Input from MPOs

Input from State Agencies

Set of 10 Indicators

MAP-21 Performance Measurement Goals

•Congestion Reduction

•Infrastructure Condition

•System Reliability

•Safety

•Economic Vitality

•Environmental Sustainability

Proposed Performance Monitoring Indicators

1. Vehicle Miles Traveled 5. Fatalities/Serious Injuries

2. Mode Share – travel to work 6. Transit accessibility

3. State of good repair 7. Travel time to jobs

a. Highways 8. Change in agricultural

b. Local streets land

c. Bridges 9. CO2 Emissions reductions

d. Transit Assets

4. Freeway/Highway Travel Time

Reliability (Buffer Index)

Next Steps for Rural California

Complete “Performance Monitoring Indicators for Small Urban and Rural Transportation Planning”

Review and analyze the applicability of the nine performance monitoring indicators identified in the SANDAG study for implementation in small urban and rural areas.

The results of this study will be provided to CALTRANS to inform participation in the MAP 21 process, to the California Transportatiion Commission for inclusion in the 2016 STIP Guidelines and will give guidance to small urban and rural agencies RTP and RTIP processes.