Operations Performance Measurement Program
photos of traffic merging on a multi-level freeway interchange, traffic near a construction zone, variable message sign, train at a crossing, traffic on a river bridge, and a rural highway
21st Century Operations Using 21st Century Technologies

UCR October 2009-December 2009 (FY 2010, Q1)

PDF Version 190KB
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®.

A Snapshot of Congestion Trends in the U.S. for October (Oct) 2009 through December (Dec) 2009.

Congested Hours

Average duration of weekday congestion

-21 minutes
from last year
green downward arrow - general trend is for improving conditions

Oct-Dec 2009: 4:27
Oct-Dec 2008: 4:48

Travel Time Index

Peak period travel times vs. off-peak travel times

-1 point
from last year
green downward arrow - general trend is for improving conditions

Oct-Dec 2009: 1.22
Oct-Dec 2008: 1.23

Planning Time Index

Unreliability (variability) of travel

-4 points
from last year
green downward arrow - general trend is for improving conditions

Oct-Dec 2009: 1.54
Oct-Dec 2008: 1.58

Summary of Nationwide Trends

  • All three nationwide measures showed slight improvements when compared to the same three months in 2008.
  • Ten of the 21 cities showed improvements in all three measures.
  • Three of the 21 cities showed worsening conditions in all three measures.
  • Three of the 21 cities were mostly unchanged.
  • Five of the 21 cities had mixed results among the three measures.

Congestion and Reliability Trends for Each UCR City

October 2009 through December 2009 Quarterly Urban Congestion Report Compared to the same Three Months Last Year
City Congested Hours Travel Time Index Planning Time Index % Change in VMT % Usable Data
2009 Change from 2008 2009 Change from 2008 2009 Change from 2008
Atlanta, GA 3:49 -1:46 1.24 +3 1.66 +9 -6% 58%
Boston, MA 4:33 -0:36 1.25 -1 1.63 -9 1% 98%
Chicago, IL 8:41 -1:20 1.36 -1 1.83 -9 -1% 83%
Detroit, MI n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Houston, TX 4:25 -0:13 1.29 -2 1.71 -6 -4% 80%
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 4:15 -0:24 1.20 -3 1.63 -9 -1% 99%
Oklahoma City, OK 2:14 +0:56 1.06 +1 1.20 +5 -1% 100%
Orange County, CA 3:54 -0:30 1.21 -3 1.50 -6 0% 100%
Los Angeles, CA 6:37 +0:07 1.31 -1 1.62 -8 -1% 100%
Philadelphia, PA 5:04 +0:03 1.24 +5 1.62 +11 0% 92%
Phoenix, AZ 2:18 -0:36 1.13 -6 1.34 -13 -1% 99%
Pittsburgh, PA 6:20 +0:02 1.18 -2 1.43 -3 6% 98%
Portland, OR 1:41 -0:37 1.26 -6 1.72 -21 6% 33%
Providence, RI 2:46 -0:03 1.11 +1 1.33 -2 -1% 100%
Riverside - San Bernardino, CA 2:52 +0:10 1.11 +1 1.30 +2 -1% 100%
Sacramento, CA 2:09 -0:25 1.10 -3 1.25 -9 -3% 100%
St. Louis, MO 2:00 -0:30 1.10 +2 1.31 +2 17% 99%
Salt Lake City, UT 2:35 -0:44 1.07 +1 1.32 +10 -2% 98%
San Antonio, TX n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
San Diego, CA 2:14 +0:05 1.09 -1 1.28 -1 1% 100%
San Francisco, CA 3:20 0:00 1.16 -1 1.38 0 -2% 100%
Seattle, WA 5:41 -0:11 1.33 -2 1.76 -6 5% 99%
Tampa, FL 2:10 -1:17 1.08 -3 1.21 -6 -7% 95%

Notes:
Green bolded values (with sign) indicate improving conditions; red italics (with + sign) indicate worsening conditions.
"n.a." indicates that data was not available or was of insufficient quality.
Comparison of 2009 to 2008 is for the same three-month period (October - December).

For more information on the UCR, contact Rich Taylor (Rich.Taylor@dot.gov).

Office of Operations