|
|
 
California's Crumbling Roads and Bridges
|
TABLE 1: CALIFORNIA ROAD CONDITIONS BY METROPOLITAN AREA
|
|
METRO AREA |
PERCENT POOR |
RANK
POOR |
PERCENT MEDIOCRE |
PERCENT FAIR |
PERCENT GOOD |
|
Los Angeles |
33% |
1 |
33% |
22% |
22% |
|
San Jose |
30% |
2 |
19% |
27% |
25% |
|
San Francisco-Oakland |
29% |
3 |
22% |
33% |
16% |
|
Sacramento |
25% |
4 |
30% |
24% |
22% |
|
San Diego |
12% |
5 |
25% |
30% |
33% |
|
NAT’L AVG |
19% |
-- |
19% |
29% |
33% |
|
Source: the Road Information Program analysis of Federal Highway Administration data |
|
TABLE 2: CALIFORNIA ROAD CONDITIONS BY COUNTY — 1998
|
|
Rank |
County |
1999 Population |
Total Local Street
Lane-Miles |
Percent of Lane-Miles
In Need of Repair |
|
1 |
Amador |
33,350 |
936 |
89.0 |
|
2 |
San Benito |
48,750 |
1040 |
89.0 |
|
3 |
Mendocino |
86,400 |
2277 |
87.0 |
|
4 |
Lake |
55,300 |
1534 |
78.0 |
|
5 |
Calaveras |
38,300 |
1399 |
75.0 |
|
6 |
Napa |
123,400 |
1515 |
67.0 |
|
7 |
Del Norte |
27,600 |
645 |
65.0 |
|
8 |
Sierra |
3,250 |
791 |
63.0 |
|
9 |
Madera |
115,600 |
3469 |
62.0 |
|
10 |
San Francisco |
793,300 |
2160 |
62.0 |
|
Source: California Transportation Commission, Inventory of Ten Year Funding Needs For California’s Transportation Systems, May 1999. |
|
|
|
