Highway Funding and Maintenance of Infrastructure

Figure 14 outlines NCDOT's fourteen highway divisions.  Several of the illustrations that follow Figure 14 are based on data summaries for these 14 field divisions of the North  Carolina Division of Highways.  The following figures illustrate a summary of North Carolina’s highway funding over the past decade, plus trends in traffic safety, and bridge and highway maintenance conditions. 

Figure 15 shows overall highway expenditures by division as an average annual funding commitment, as reflected in the annual Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) for 1990 through 2002.  Again, as would be expected, the more heavily urbanized divisions that include the metro areas of the Research Triangle, the  Piedmont Triad, and the Charlotte Metropolitan Area have received more funding on average than have the less urbanized divisions. 

For the past two decades, the field divisions of the North Carolina Division of Highways have conducted biennial surveys of the structural condition of pavements and periodic surveys of bridges.  The NCDOT analyzes these data and develops pavement and bridge condition indices as condition measures in order to prioritize scarce maintenance and repair funds for pavement and bridge repairs. 

An index of pavement conditions is based on a 100-point scale (Figures 16 and 17).  Points are deducted for each segment of highway with structural failures or various types of cracking resulting from heavy traffic, environmental conditions such as freezing and thawing, flooding, substructure failure, inadequate pavement design, and other conditions.  Conditions that existed on the highways in each Division are shown as “snapshots” of the indices in 1998 and 2002.   It should be noted that due to environmental conditions alone, highway engineers expect pavement condition to be worse in the mountainous areas due to more extreme winter temperatures and the freezing and thawing cycle that dramatically affects asphalt pavements. 

The indices shown in these two tables include both Asphaltic Concrete (i.e., “asphalt”) and Portland Cement Concrete pavements.  As expected, pavement conditions in general are in a greater need of repair in both years in the western divisions, although in 2002 one of the coastal plain divisions showed condition indices that on average were similar to the west.  Such patterns are not unusual and various factors such as funding shortfalls may affect some areas, traffic may become heavier and more large trucks impact the pavement condition, etc.  In the case of the coastal counties in 2002, at times flooding such as that experienced after Hurricane Floyd can affect the structural condition of road segments to such an extent that the overall average condition index for a division is affected. 

Bridges on the State highway system are also evaluated regularly with a set of factors that rate the bridge substructure, deck, railings and parapets, trusses and bridge pilings.  Bridges are graded on adequacy of structure and function.  Structurally deficient bridges are those that are given the highest priority for replacement or repair.  Bridges that are functionally obsolete are generally older structures that could soon be structurally deficient.  The difference between the bridge condition and pavement condition ratings is that pavement conditions subtract from a “perfect” 100 score, but bridge condition indices are evaluated with units that start at zero and are added as positive factors (Figures 18 and 19).

Highway Traffic Safety

Figures 20 and 21 are again (like the data on pavement and bridge conditions) not reflecting trends but illustrate data on highway crashes in “typical” years over the past decade.  The most commonly used measures of highway traffic safety are all indices that are a ratio whose denominator is 100 million vehicle miles traveled (100 MVMT).  Fatalities per 100 MVMT are commonly used, but these rates are highly variable for geographical areas as small as counties on an annual basis.  Therefore, rather than track the fatalities, crashes per Million Vehicle Miles Traveled (MVMT) are used as a measure.

Between 1990 and 2002, crash ratios improved statewide, similar to the national trend over this period of time.  Referring to Figure 20, a majority of counties had between 1.00 and 1.5 crashes per million vehicle miles traveled.  However, Figure 21 reveals that a majority of the state’s counties had between 0.50 and 1.00 crashes per million vehicle miles traveled.  Several regions remained the same between these years while only a few counties had values that increased.  Only two counties had less than 0.5 crashes per million-vehicle miles traveled for both 1990 and 2002, Polk and Swain.

To illustrate the trends on a year-to-year basis, Table 6 presents important indicators of crashes on streets and highways. These data include all types of accidents, including motorcycle, bicycle and pedestrian fatalities, injuries, and crashes.  While the total number of crashes illustrates a gradual upward trend (primarily due to increased travel), the number of injury crashes and fatal crashes seems to be holding steady or slightly decreasing over this five-year period. 

Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation

North Carolina has over three thousand miles of designated and signed bicycle routes  with nine different primary bike routes across the state  (Figure 22).  These routes generally parallel major highways.  Most routes are on state-maintained secondary roads.

1. Provide  bicycle  and  pedestrian facilities  necessary to support the mobility needs and economic vitality of communities  throughout the state.


2. Provide a comprehensive program of education and enforcement strategies that will improve the safety of all bicyclists and pedestrians.


3. Institutionalize bicycle and walking considerations to enhance current transportation practices at the state, regional, county, and local level.


4. Identify and promote new and innovative ways to advance bicycle and pedestrian safety and enjoyment through research and needs assessment.


5. Encourage bicycling and walking as viable transportation options.

Transportation Chapter Index