 |
|
|
|
Figure 1-1: Rural Road Conditions in Michigan: 2000
Excel | CSV | Graphic Version
(Miles)
| Total |
742 |
2,749 |
4,113 |
N |
| Very good |
67 |
470 |
878 |
N |
| Good |
257 |
1,117 |
1,666 |
N |
| Fair |
185 |
1,022 |
1,406 |
N |
| Mediocre |
185 |
107 |
96 |
N |
| Poor |
48 |
33 |
67 |
N |
(Percent)
| Total |
100 |
100 |
100 |
N |
| Very good |
9 |
17 |
21 |
N |
| Good |
35 |
41 |
41 |
N |
| Fair |
25 |
37 |
34 |
N |
| Mediocre |
25 |
4 |
2 |
N |
| Poor |
6 |
1 |
2 |
N |
NOTE: Numbers may not add to 100 due to rounding.
KEY FOR DATA ON THIS PAGE: N = data do not exist.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
