The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Appendix B - Catalog of Benchmarking Measures
Pages 185-209

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 185... ... . In many cases, rating scales are not the LOS the customer experiences, but instead are condition ratings. Read the entire page →
From page 186... ... Inches/mile or m/km Yes Well-established procedures and equipment that result in repeatable, reliable, and reasonably accurate results Low incremental cost for agencies already collecting IRI; moderate to high cost of new data collection effort National Quality Initiative (NQI) or other survey question asking customer satisfaction regarding pavement smoothness 1–5 response scale Survey question on pavement smoothness Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey including question on pavement smoothness Pavement smoothness (potholes) Read the entire page →
From page 187... ... Extent and severity of different types of cracking: –alligator –longitudinal –transverse Percent of area covered or length of cracks and rating of severity on a scale Challenge in maintaining consistency among raters; automated distress identification technology not highly accurate Much lower cost to do for sample sections in comparison to comprehensive network coverage Overall pavement condition Health Index Some type of index, say from 0–100 Requires construction of index reflecting key pavement attributes; each attribute can be measured with varying degrees of reliability Low to high cost to develop and apply index, depending upon the availability of data to calculate index components Overall level of service Visual level of service condition rating Rating scale of A, B, C, D, or E Often visual rating scales combine more than one attribute and so it is difficult to portray and to isolate condition of different attributes Mainly useful for communicating to policy makers and general public. Read the entire page →
From page 188... ... Low cost to obtain data if in a Pavement Management System or similar database Safety and preservation attributes (support for vehicles on shoulder and preservation of shoulder shape) Gravel bunched or spread disbursed Lack of agreed-upon, repeatable, reliable, accurate measure Low cost to obtain data if in a Pavement Management System or similar database Preservation, safety, and aesthetics Survey question asking customer satisfaction regarding shoulder condition 1–5 response scale Repeatable, and reliable, if rigorous sampling and administration procedures used; precision and statistical confidence depends on sample size and stratification Moderate to high cost to develop and administer new survey; less costly to add this question to existing survey instrument Visual level of service condition rating Scale of A, B, C, D, and E Often visual rating scales combine more than one attribute and so it is difficult to portray and to isolate condition of different attributes Read the entire page →
From page 189... ... These condition ratings and determinations of structural deﬁciency and functional obsolescence are potentially useful for benchmarking. More recently, states have established a more detailed, widely used, and widely recognized set of bridge condition measures known as condition states corresponding to "commonly recognized (CoRe) Read the entire page →
From page 190... ... Discrete scale of 1 to 3, 4, or 5, depending upon the element Adopted by the AASHTO Bridge Subcommittee in 1995 Well-established, reliable, repeatable, and reasonably accurate measurements based on welldefined bridge inspection procedures Low cost to use bridge condition ratings in bridge inventory and condition databases Preservation (condition) Customer satisfaction 1–5 scale Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than the state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes NQI or similar type of question Preservation (condition) Read the entire page →
From page 191... ... Visual rating scale of nighttime visibility This measure is fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters Cost is a function of the number of signs to be rated and the miles covered. Generally low to moderate cost using windshield survey Read the entire page →
From page 192... ... Low cost Day condition Composite rating reflecting legibility, color fade, contrast, graffiti, and damage Rating scale or index Requires training and retraining to achieve reasonably reliable, accurate, repeatable ratings Low cost if data already available in sign inventory and condition data base; otherwise, potentially high cost Physical appearance Sign condition ratings for contrast, color fade, legibility, and post condition; Pavement marking condition rating for contrast and presence Individual ratings or composite rating scale Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Requires training and retraining to achieve reasonably reliable, accurate, repeatable ratings Low cost if data already available in sign inventory and condition data base; otherwise, potentially high cost Read the entire page →
From page 193... ... This measure is expected to be fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters. Low to moderate cost to estimate using windshield survey Visibility of signs, striping, and markers Customer satisfaction 1–5 scale Yes Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes NQI or similar question Read the entire page →
From page 194... ... Cost and Other Issues Guardrail functionality Percent functioning as intended Percent of components functioning as intended Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. This measure is expected to be fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of rater. Read the entire page →
From page 195... ... Percent damaged so as to require repair, percent requiring replacement, and percent requiring no action Percent of guardrail length in each condition state This measure is fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters. Low to moderate cost if part of other inspection activities Attenuator functionality Percent functioning as Intended Percent of components functioning as intended Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Read the entire page →
From page 196... ... Condition Measures for Ice and Snow Control (continued on next page) Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Read the entire page →
From page 197... ... Crews and managers involved in winter operations keep careful records of duration of time chains are required. Low cost to obtain data from logs Mobility, accessibility, and safety Percent of miles in each functional class where roads have been treated for snow and ice in accordance with ice and snow control plan Percent Data obtain during snowstorms and debriefs after storms may provide reasonably reliable and accurate information Requires careful recordkeeping during freezing conditions and snowfall to compile data. Read the entire page →
From page 198... ... Moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes question on customer satisfaction regarding ice and snow control Mobility, accessibility, and safety Clear of unplanned obstructions 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of time road is in this condition Needs to be incorporated into reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument; the percent of time a road is in a certain condition is difficult to measure. Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Roadway clear of ice and snow 1–5 customer rating scale or the percent of time a road is in this condition Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Trucks plowing as soon as snow appears 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Plowing frequency during average snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale or frequency Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Driver comfort, safety Ability to see shoulder striping during snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Needs to be incorporated into reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument; percent of time a road is in a certain condition is difficult to measure. Read the entire page →
From page 199... ... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues Driver comfort, safety Ability to see road edge during snow fall 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Ability to make turns at crossovers and intersections 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility and safety Driving speed during snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale or miles per hour by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Bare wheel paths 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of time there are bare wheel paths, by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Safety Slippery spots 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of centerline miles with slippery spots, by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument. Read the entire page →
From page 200... ... Mobility, safety, driver comfort All driving lanes plowed to bare pavement Percent of centerline miles by functional class Plow operators or patrol supervisors may be able to report this information reliably and accurately. Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument. Read the entire page →
From page 201... ... Periodic measurements may be required because of continual growth and trimming requirements. Low cost to measure at selected intersections; high cost to cover road network Safety and appearance Grass height Inches Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Read the entire page →
From page 202... ... Moderate to high cost to conduct accurate field inspections Aesthetics Aesthetic rating scale 1–5 customer rating scale Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low cost to measure for selected roadway sections; high cost to cover road network Aesthetics Neatness of vegetation 1–5 customer rating scale Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low cost to measure at selected roadway sections; high cost to cover road network Environmental protection Percent of ROW acreage managed to enhance wildlife habitat Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data Safety Clear zone distance: –Vertical clearance, –Horizontal clearance from edge Feet Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data; Low cost to measure for selected road sections; high cost to cover road network Safety Percent of centerline miles with thick trees too close to road to provide safe, clear area for cars running off road Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data; low cost to measure at selected road sections; high cost to cover road network 208 Read the entire page →
From page 203... ... Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data Safety Percent of centerline miles Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and Medium to high cost to establish GIS database Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Read the entire page →
From page 204... ... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues and repeatable measurements cost to cover entire network Preservation Linear feet of ditchline obstructed and unobstructed Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Level of service condition rating of ditches Rating scale Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, safety, mobility Blockage of culverts, cross drains, ditches, curb, gutters, barrier walls, catch basins, and inlets Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, safety, mobility Damage of culverts, cross drains, ditches, curb, gutters, barrier walls, catch basins, and inlets Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Blockage for subsurface drainage Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Moderate cost for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Roadway settlement around and over culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Pass/fail Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Percent of ditchline not maintained Percent Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high 210 Read the entire page →
From page 205... ... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues –In the invert –Outside or near the inlet –Due to deflection or structural damage Preservation, environment Erosion around culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Visual rating scale of none, moderate, or severe Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to entire cover network Preservation Structure distress of culverts, cross drains and storm drains Pass/ fail Requires use of closed circuit television cameras; training needed for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurement Moderate equipment costs; low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Safety, mobility Obstructed and unobstructed barrier walls, curb, and gutter and slotted drains Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to entire cover network Paved and rock lined drainage ditches needing repair versus total length Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, mobility, and safety Flow area inhibited by debris or damage of culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Percent Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Read the entire page →
From page 206... ... Low cost to do for sample sections; high cost to do for all roads Customer satisfaction rating of roadside litter 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Read the entire page →
From page 207... ... Yes or no Somewhat subjective responses; objectivity can be increased through training Delay Average wait time to use restrooms Minutes Reliable and accurate, provided sufficient resources devoted to observe wait time Moderate costs to make occasional observations; high cost to make frequent observations Cleanliness Customer satisfaction rating of cleanliness of rest rooms 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Cleanliness Customer satisfaction rating of cleanliness of outside eating areas 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Neatness Customer satisfaction rating of neatness of outside eating areas 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Maintenance condition Customer rating of overall maintenance condition 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Customer satisfaction rating of animal sanitation 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Read the entire page →
From page 208... ... Performance measures similar to those for traffic signals also apply to other electronic devices, as shown in Table B-12. Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Read the entire page →
From page 209... ... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues Functionality Mean time to failure Days Most agencies keep accurate logs of electronic equipment failure and potentially are able to assess Requires establishment of electronic database; low to moderate cost mean time to failure accurately. Read the entire page →

From page 185...

... . In many cases, rating scales are not the LOS the customer experiences, but instead are condition ratings.

Read the entire page →

From page 186...

... Inches/mile or m/km Yes Well-established procedures and equipment that result in repeatable, reliable, and reasonably accurate results Low incremental cost for agencies already collecting IRI; moderate to high cost of new data collection effort National Quality Initiative (NQI) or other survey question asking customer satisfaction regarding pavement smoothness 1–5 response scale Survey question on pavement smoothness Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey including question on pavement smoothness Pavement smoothness (potholes)

Read the entire page →

From page 187...

... Extent and severity of different types of cracking: –alligator –longitudinal –transverse Percent of area covered or length of cracks and rating of severity on a scale Challenge in maintaining consistency among raters; automated distress identification technology not highly accurate Much lower cost to do for sample sections in comparison to comprehensive network coverage Overall pavement condition Health Index Some type of index, say from 0–100 Requires construction of index reflecting key pavement attributes; each attribute can be measured with varying degrees of reliability Low to high cost to develop and apply index, depending upon the availability of data to calculate index components Overall level of service Visual level of service condition rating Rating scale of A, B, C, D, or E Often visual rating scales combine more than one attribute and so it is difficult to portray and to isolate condition of different attributes Mainly useful for communicating to policy makers and general public.

Read the entire page →

From page 188...

... Low cost to obtain data if in a Pavement Management System or similar database Safety and preservation attributes (support for vehicles on shoulder and preservation of shoulder shape) Gravel bunched or spread disbursed Lack of agreed-upon, repeatable, reliable, accurate measure Low cost to obtain data if in a Pavement Management System or similar database Preservation, safety, and aesthetics Survey question asking customer satisfaction regarding shoulder condition 1–5 response scale Repeatable, and reliable, if rigorous sampling and administration procedures used; precision and statistical confidence depends on sample size and stratification Moderate to high cost to develop and administer new survey; less costly to add this question to existing survey instrument Visual level of service condition rating Scale of A, B, C, D, and E Often visual rating scales combine more than one attribute and so it is difficult to portray and to isolate condition of different attributes

Read the entire page →

From page 189...

... These condition ratings and determinations of structural deﬁciency and functional obsolescence are potentially useful for benchmarking. More recently, states have established a more detailed, widely used, and widely recognized set of bridge condition measures known as condition states corresponding to "commonly recognized (CoRe)

Read the entire page →

From page 190...

... Discrete scale of 1 to 3, 4, or 5, depending upon the element Adopted by the AASHTO Bridge Subcommittee in 1995 Well-established, reliable, repeatable, and reasonably accurate measurements based on welldefined bridge inspection procedures Low cost to use bridge condition ratings in bridge inventory and condition databases Preservation (condition) Customer satisfaction 1–5 scale Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than the state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes NQI or similar type of question Preservation (condition)

Read the entire page →

From page 191...

... Visual rating scale of nighttime visibility This measure is fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters Cost is a function of the number of signs to be rated and the miles covered. Generally low to moderate cost using windshield survey

Read the entire page →

From page 192...

... Low cost Day condition Composite rating reflecting legibility, color fade, contrast, graffiti, and damage Rating scale or index Requires training and retraining to achieve reasonably reliable, accurate, repeatable ratings Low cost if data already available in sign inventory and condition data base; otherwise, potentially high cost Physical appearance Sign condition ratings for contrast, color fade, legibility, and post condition; Pavement marking condition rating for contrast and presence Individual ratings or composite rating scale Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Requires training and retraining to achieve reasonably reliable, accurate, repeatable ratings Low cost if data already available in sign inventory and condition data base; otherwise, potentially high cost

Read the entire page →

From page 193...

... This measure is expected to be fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters. Low to moderate cost to estimate using windshield survey Visibility of signs, striping, and markers Customer satisfaction 1–5 scale Yes Standard NQI survey question; not accurate for jurisdictions lower than state level, unless separate survey administered Low cost to use NQI survey results; moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes NQI or similar question

Read the entire page →

From page 194...

... Cost and Other Issues Guardrail functionality Percent functioning as intended Percent of components functioning as intended Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. This measure is expected to be fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate, provided there is rigorous training and retraining of rater.

Read the entire page →

From page 195...

... Percent damaged so as to require repair, percent requiring replacement, and percent requiring no action Percent of guardrail length in each condition state This measure is fairly reliable, repeatable, and accurate provided there is rigorous training and retraining of raters. Low to moderate cost if part of other inspection activities Attenuator functionality Percent functioning as Intended Percent of components functioning as intended Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established.

Read the entire page →

From page 196...

... Condition Measures for Ice and Snow Control (continued on next page) Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO?

Read the entire page →

From page 197...

... Crews and managers involved in winter operations keep careful records of duration of time chains are required. Low cost to obtain data from logs Mobility, accessibility, and safety Percent of miles in each functional class where roads have been treated for snow and ice in accordance with ice and snow control plan Percent Data obtain during snowstorms and debriefs after storms may provide reasonably reliable and accurate information Requires careful recordkeeping during freezing conditions and snowfall to compile data.

Read the entire page →

From page 198...

... Moderate to high cost to develop and administer your own survey that includes question on customer satisfaction regarding ice and snow control Mobility, accessibility, and safety Clear of unplanned obstructions 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of time road is in this condition Needs to be incorporated into reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument; the percent of time a road is in a certain condition is difficult to measure. Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Roadway clear of ice and snow 1–5 customer rating scale or the percent of time a road is in this condition Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Trucks plowing as soon as snow appears 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Plowing frequency during average snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale or frequency Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Driver comfort, safety Ability to see shoulder striping during snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Needs to be incorporated into reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument; percent of time a road is in a certain condition is difficult to measure.

Read the entire page →

From page 199...

... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues Driver comfort, safety Ability to see road edge during snow fall 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Ability to make turns at crossovers and intersections 1–5 customer rating scale Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility and safety Driving speed during snowfall 1–5 customer rating scale or miles per hour by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Mobility, accessibility, and safety Bare wheel paths 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of time there are bare wheel paths, by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument Safety Slippery spots 1–5 customer rating scale or percent of centerline miles with slippery spots, by functional class Needs to be incorporated into a reliable, accurate, and repeatable survey instrument.

Read the entire page →

From page 200...

... Mobility, safety, driver comfort All driving lanes plowed to bare pavement Percent of centerline miles by functional class Plow operators or patrol supervisors may be able to report this information reliably and accurately. Low to medium cost to incorporate into existing survey instrument; medium to high cost to include in new instrument.

Read the entire page →

From page 201...

... Periodic measurements may be required because of continual growth and trimming requirements. Low cost to measure at selected intersections; high cost to cover road network Safety and appearance Grass height Inches Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established.

Read the entire page →

From page 202...

... Moderate to high cost to conduct accurate field inspections Aesthetics Aesthetic rating scale 1–5 customer rating scale Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low cost to measure for selected roadway sections; high cost to cover road network Aesthetics Neatness of vegetation 1–5 customer rating scale Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low cost to measure at selected roadway sections; high cost to cover road network Environmental protection Percent of ROW acreage managed to enhance wildlife habitat Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data Safety Clear zone distance: –Vertical clearance, –Horizontal clearance from edge Feet Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established. Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data; Low cost to measure for selected road sections; high cost to cover road network Safety Percent of centerline miles with thick trees too close to road to provide safe, clear area for cars running off road Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data; low cost to measure at selected road sections; high cost to cover road network 208

Read the entire page →

From page 203...

... Medium to high cost to establish GIS database and collect inventory and condition data Safety Percent of centerline miles Percent Requires training for reliable, repeatable, and Medium to high cost to establish GIS database Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate?

Read the entire page →

From page 204...

... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues and repeatable measurements cost to cover entire network Preservation Linear feet of ditchline obstructed and unobstructed Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Level of service condition rating of ditches Rating scale Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, safety, mobility Blockage of culverts, cross drains, ditches, curb, gutters, barrier walls, catch basins, and inlets Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, safety, mobility Damage of culverts, cross drains, ditches, curb, gutters, barrier walls, catch basins, and inlets Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Blockage for subsurface drainage Percent of each drainage structure Yes Protocol for commonly recognized measure needs to be established; requires training for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurements Moderate cost for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Roadway settlement around and over culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Pass/fail Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation Percent of ditchline not maintained Percent Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high 210

Read the entire page →

From page 205...

... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues –In the invert –Outside or near the inlet –Due to deflection or structural damage Preservation, environment Erosion around culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Visual rating scale of none, moderate, or severe Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to entire cover network Preservation Structure distress of culverts, cross drains and storm drains Pass/ fail Requires use of closed circuit television cameras; training needed for reliable, repeatable, and accurate measurement Moderate equipment costs; low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Safety, mobility Obstructed and unobstructed barrier walls, curb, and gutter and slotted drains Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to entire cover network Paved and rock lined drainage ditches needing repair versus total length Linear feet Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network Preservation, mobility, and safety Flow area inhibited by debris or damage of culverts, cross drains, and storm drains Percent Requires some training for reasonably accurate, reliable, and repeatable measurements Low to moderate cost to do for sample road sections; high cost to cover entire network

Read the entire page →

From page 206...

... Low cost to do for sample sections; high cost to do for all roads Customer satisfaction rating of roadside litter 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO? Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate?

Read the entire page →

From page 207...

... Yes or no Somewhat subjective responses; objectivity can be increased through training Delay Average wait time to use restrooms Minutes Reliable and accurate, provided sufficient resources devoted to observe wait time Moderate costs to make occasional observations; high cost to make frequent observations Cleanliness Customer satisfaction rating of cleanliness of rest rooms 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Cleanliness Customer satisfaction rating of cleanliness of outside eating areas 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Neatness Customer satisfaction rating of neatness of outside eating areas 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Maintenance condition Customer rating of overall maintenance condition 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort Customer satisfaction rating of animal sanitation 1–5 scale Reasonably reliable, repeatable, and accurate if included in welldesigned survey administered using scientific sampling Moderate to low cost if added to questions in existing survey; moderate to high cost if part of a new survey effort

Read the entire page →

From page 208...

... Performance measures similar to those for traffic signals also apply to other electronic devices, as shown in Table B-12. Attribute Measure Units Commonly Recognized by AASHTO?

Read the entire page →

From page 209...

... Repeatable, Reliable, & Accurate? Cost and Other Issues Functionality Mean time to failure Days Most agencies keep accurate logs of electronic equipment failure and potentially are able to assess Requires establishment of electronic database; low to moderate cost mean time to failure accurately.

Read the entire page →

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.

Appendix B - Catalog of Benchmarking Measures Pages 185-209

Appendix B - Catalog of Benchmarking Measures
Pages 185-209