1 / 82

Highway Maintenance Performance Measurement Annual Report September 2004

Highway Maintenance Performance Measurement Annual Report September 2004. Annual Report Contents. Executive Summary pages 3 - 19 Performance Measurement Index

cheryl
Télécharger la présentation

Highway Maintenance Performance Measurement Annual Report September 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Highway Maintenance Performance MeasurementAnnual ReportSeptember 2004

  2. Annual Report Contents • Executive Summary pages 3 - 19 • Performance Measurement Index • Reallocation Thresholds, FY 04 State Average Performance & Repair Costs to Bring All Districts up to the Reallocation Thresholds • Comparisons of Measures for Four Fiscal Years pages 20 - 57 • Safety • Motorist Services • Preservation • Review of the Start of Calendar Year 2004 Paint Striping pages 59 - 65 • Automated Performance Measures for Snow & Ice Results pages 66 - 76 • Dead Deer Removal Report for Government Oversight Committee pages 77 - 82

  3. Executive Summary • Performance Measurement Index pages 4 - 15 • Composite Index • Road Surface Index • Shoulder Index • Roadside/Drainage Index • Traffic Services Index • Reallocation Thresholds, FY 04 State Average Performance pages 16 - 19 & Repair Costs to Bring All Districts up to the Reallocation Thresholds • Safety • Services • Preservation

  4. Performance Measurement Index The Performance Measurement Index, formerly referred to as weighted scores, utilizes weighting factors to produce yield a possible score of 100 for a composite score and for each of the four categories: Road Surface, Shoulders, Roadside/Drainage and Traffic Services. • Safety elements assigned a weight of 5 for the percent passing include: Pavement Potholes/Spalls & Ruts; Shoulder Drop-off/Build-up; Signs & Delineator/Hazard Markers Missing or Damaged; Pavement Markings; Guard Rail; Trees in the Clear Zone or Interfering with Roadside Safety Features. • Motorist Services elements assigned a weight of 3 for the percent passing include: Pavement Bumps & Depressions; Signs & Delineator/Hazard Markers Height & Vertical; Culvert & Station Markers Missing/Damaged Height/Vertical; Noxious Weeds & Mowing; Dead Animals or Litter Visible from the Roadway. • Preservation elements assigned a weight of 1 for the percent passing include: Pavement Cracks/Joints & Surface Condition; Culverts & Drains Damaged or Obstructed; Obstructed Water Flow in Ditches & Erosion/Slides.

  5. Performance Measurement Index Fiscal Year 2001 through 2004 • Question: What are the statewide trends and variations for the status of the system for the last four fiscal years? • Data: • The Composite, Road Surface, Shoulder State Average Indices show a mild trend downward from the FY 2001 baseline for FY 2002 - 2003 with a mild increase for FY 2004. There is moderate variation among the Districts. • The Roadside State Average Index also shows a mild trend downward from the FY 2001 baseline for FY 2002 - 2003 with a mild increase for FY 2004. There is fairly substantial variation among the Districts, with a mean variation of 15 points for the four fiscal years. • The Traffic Services State Average Index shows a drop of 19 points from the FY 2001 baseline to FY 2002 and then stabilizing for the last two fiscal years. The mean variation of 22 points among the Districts is substantial.

  6. Performance Measurement IndexComposite Index

  7. Performance Measurement IndexComposite Index

  8. Performance Measurement IndexRoad Surface Index

  9. Performance Measurement IndexRoad Surface Index

  10. Performance Measurement IndexShoulder Index

  11. Performance Measurement IndexShoulder Index

  12. Performance Measurement IndexRoadside/Drainage Index

  13. Performance Measurement IndexRoadside/Drainage Index

  14. Performance Measurement IndexTraffic Services Index

  15. Performance Measurement IndexTraffic Services Index

  16. Reallocation Thresholds, FY 2004 State Average Performance& Projected Repair Costs • Selected Performance Measurement Elements are Arranged by: • Safety • Motorist Services • Preservation • Repair costs may be projected when the state average is above the Reallocation Threshold if some Districts are below the Threshold • Paths to Additional Information on DOTNET: • Background on Reallocation Thresholds:DOTNET  Highway Statewide Operations  Maintenance  Performance Measurement  Process  What is a Reallocation Threshold • Reallocation Threshold Values: DOTNET  Highway Statewide Operations  Maintenance  Performance Measurement  Process  Reallocation Threshold Values • Calculations for Projected Repair Costs:DOTNET  Highway Statewide Operations  Maintenance  Performance Measurement  Results  Cost to Fix Data • Measured Elements that are not included in this report: • Paved Shoulder: Potholes/Spalls, Faulting/Rolldown, Cracks/Joints, Bumps/Depressions, Surface Condition • Unpaved Shoulder: Cross-slope, Surface Condition • Cable Guardrail, Concrete Barrier Walls, Illumination

  17. SAFETYReallocation Thresholds, FY 04 State Average Performance& Repair Costs to Bring All Districts up to the Reallocation Thresholds

  18. MOTORIST SERVICESReallocation Thresholds, FY 04 State Average Performance& Repair Costs to Bring All Districts up to the Reallocation Thresholds

  19. PRESERVATIONReallocation Thresholds, FY 04 State Average Performance& Repair Costs to Bring All Districts up to the Reallocation Thresholds

  20. Comparison of Measures for Four Fiscal Years • Measurements of Percent Passing are shown for all of the Fiscal Years of the program: Fiscal YearCalendar Year Survey Cycles • 2001 Summer 2000, Fall 2000, & Spring 2001 • 2002 Summer 2001, Fall 2001, & Spring 2002 • 2003 Summer 2002, Fall 2002, & Spring 2003 • 2004 Summer 2003, Fall 2003, & Spring 2004 • The same Elements from the previous section are arranged by Safety, Motorist Services & Preservation • Each graph shows for each Fiscal Year the State Average with the Scores for the Districts with the Highest Average & Lowest Average • Each graph indicates the Reallocation Threshold & Mean Sample Size for that Element per Fiscal Year • Paths to Additional Information on DOTNET: • Element Definitions & Measurement Methodology:DOTNET  Highway Statewide Operations  Maintenance  Performance Measurement  Process  Printable Performance Measurement Manual • Data from individual Survey Cycles:DOTNET  Highway Statewide Operations  Maintenance  Performance Measurement  Results  Tabulated & Graphed Data  Percent Passing

  21. Comparisons of Measures for Four Fiscal Years • Safety pages 23 - 36 • Pavement Markings • Beam Guardrail • PCC Potholes/Spalls • ACC Potholes • ACC Wheel Ruts • Paved Shoulder Drop-off or Build-up • Unpaved Shoulder Drop-off or Build-up • Signs Missing or Damaged • Delineators & Hazard Markers Missing or Damaged • Trees in Clear Zone or Interfering with Roadside Safety Features • Motorist Services pages 37 - 48 • PCC Bumps or Depressions • ACC Bumps or Depressions • PCC Faulting • ACC Rolldown • Sign Height & Vertical • Delineators & Hazard Markers Height & Vertical • Culvert & Station Markers Missing or Damaged • Culvert & Station Markers Height & Vertical • Noxious Weeds • Mowing • Litter Visible from Roadway • Dead Animals Visible from Roadway

  22. Comparisons of Measures for Four Fiscal Years [continued] • Preservation pages 49 - 57 • PCC Pavement Cracks & Joints • ACC Pavement Transverse & Random Cracks • ACC Pavement Longitudinal Cracks • PCC Surface Condition • ACC Surface Condition • Culverts Damaged or Obstructed • Drains Damaged or Obstructed • Obstructed Water Flow in Ditches • Slope Erosion & Slides

  23. Questions: • Are comparisons of amounts passing [counts, linear feet, square feet] better indicators of condition for some performance measurement elements than the current standard measure of sample sites passed? • How much of guardrail defects are due to height? • Discussion: In some District meetings in late 2003, there was discussion of whether some elements, such as pavement markings and guardrail, would have their condition portrayed more accurately by the percentage of linear feet passing instead of the percentage of sample sites passing. In general, percentage of sites passing are used to describe system status and amounts passing are used to calculate projected repair costs. • Data: • The next four pages compare the two different approaches for pavement markings and beam guardrail. • Whichever approach is used, height is the prevalent defect, based on the last 4 survey cycles. Comparisons of Measures for Four Fiscal Years

  24. SAFETYPavement Markings by Sample Sitesreallocation threshold = 75% mean sample per fiscal year = 5,144 sites

  25. SAFETYPavement Markings by Linear Feet of Paint Stripingreallocation threshold = 75% mean sample per fiscal year = 5,903,499 linear feet

  26. SAFETYBeam Guardrail by Sample Sitesreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per fiscal year = 294 sites

  27. SAFETYBeam Guardrail by Linear Feet of Guardrailreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per fiscal year = 63,867 linear feet

  28. SAFETYPCC Potholes/Spallsreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per fiscal year = 1,773

  29. SAFETYACC Potholesreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per fiscal year = 3,556

  30. SAFETYACC Wheel Rutsreallocation threshold = 80% mean sample per fiscal year = 3,556

  31. SAFETYPaved Shoulder Drop-off/Build-upreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per fiscal year = 1,127

  32. SAFETYUnpaved Shoulder Drop-off/Build-upreallocation threshold = 80% mean sample per fiscal year = 4,021

  33. SAFETYSigns Missing or Damagedreallocation threshold = 80% mean sample per fiscal year = 3,051

  34. SAFETYDelineators & Hazard Markers Missing or Damagedreallocation threshold = 80% mean sample per fiscal year = 1,867

  35. SAFETYTrees/Shrubs in Clear Zone or Interfering with Roadside Safety Featuresreallocation threshold = 95% mean sample per fiscal year = 4,991

  36. SERVICESPCC Pavement Bumps/Depressionsreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per cycle = 1,745

  37. SERVICESACC Pavement Bumps/Depressionsreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per cycle = 3,536

  38. SERVICESPCC Faultingreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per cycle = 1,743

  39. SERVICESACC Rolldownreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per cycle = 3,533

  40. SERVICESSign Height & Verticalreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per cycle = 3,051

  41. SERVICESDelineators & Hazard Markers Height & Verticalreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per cycle = 1,862

  42. SERVICESCulvert & Station Markers Missing or Damagedreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per cycle = 4,692

  43. SERVICESCulvert & Station Markers Height & Verticalreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per cycle = 4,692

  44. SERVICESNoxious Weedsreallocation threshold = 70% mean sample per cycle = 4,964

  45. SERVICESMowingreallocation threshold = 85% mean sample per cycle = 4,872

  46. SERVICESDead Animals Visible from Roadwayreallocation threshold = 90% mean sample per cycle = 5,134

  47. SERVICESLitterreallocation threshold = 65% mean sample per cycle = 5,048

  48. PRESERVATIONPCC Pavement Cracks/Jointsreallocation threshold = 70% mean sample per cycle = 1,730

  49. PRESERVATIONACC Pavement Transverse & Random Cracksreallocation threshold = 55% mean sample per cycle = 3,528

More Related