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 July 2010-September 2010 (FY 2010, Q4)

Urban Congestion Reports

PDF Version 171KB
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®.

A Snapshot of Congestion Trends in the U.S. for July 2010 through September 2010.

Congested Hours

Average duration of weekday congestion

+13 minutes
from last year
red upward arrow - general trend is for declining conditions

Jul-Sep 2010: 4:27
Jul-Sep 2009: 4:14

Travel Time Index

Peak period travel times vs. off-peak travel times

+3 point
from last year
red upward arrow - general trend is for declining conditions

Jul-Sep 2010: 1.21
Jul-Sep 2009: 1.18

Planning Time Index

Unreliability (variability) of travel

+7 points
from last year
red upward arrow - general trend is for declining conditions

Jul-Sep 2010: 1.49
Jul-Sep 2009: 1.42

Summary of Nationwide Trends

  • All three nationwide measures in 2010 showed worsening conditions when compared to the same three months in 2009.
  • One of the 21 cities showed improvements in all three measures.
  • Eleven of the 21 cities showed worsening conditions in all three measures.
  • Nine of the 21 cities had mixed results among the three measures.

Congestion and Reliability Trends for Each UCR City

July 2010 through September 2010 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
2010 Change from 2009 2010 Change from 2009 2010 Change from 2009
Atlanta, GA 3:54 -1:23 1.19 +1 1.52 -4 0% 78%
Boston, MA 5:32 +0:27 1.27 +5 1.63 +7 1% 99%
Chicago, IL 6:47 -1:49 1.33 +3 1.69 +6 5% 75%
Detroit, MI 1:56 -1:40 1.11 +4 1.36 +15 -6% 62%
Houston, TX 3:41 +0:18 1.26 +4 1.61 +9 0% 82%
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 4:26 +1:11 1.19 +4 1.48 +10 0% 99%
Oklahoma City, OK 1:32 -0:05 1.05 +1 1.18 +5 0% 100%
Orange County, CA 4:02 +0:33 1.22 +5 1.48 +9 -1% 100%
Los Angeles, CA 6:47 +0:40 1.29 +3 1.56 +3 1% 100%
Philadelphia, PA 6:10 +1:16 1.24 +4 1.63 +9 0% 95%
Phoenix, AZ n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Pittsburgh, PA 6:53 +1:19 1.20 +4 1.47 +10 4% 98%
Portland, OR 1:50 +0:13 1.25 +3 1.67 +8 0% 33%
Providence, RI 2:27 -0:11 1.09 +1 1.28 +3 1% 99%
Riverside – San Bernardino, CA 2:43 -0:03 1.10 +2 1.28 +7 -1% 100%
Sacramento, CA 2:00 +0:12 1.10 +2 1.23 +3 1% 100%
St. Louis, MO 1:44 -0:38 1.09 +2 1.26 +6 0% 98%
Salt Lake City, UT 1:07 -3:37 1.03 -3 1.10 -9 1% 94%
San Antonio, TX n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
San Diego, CA 2:26 +0:31 1.11 +4 1.33 +12 0% 100%
San Francisco, CA 3:15 +0:26 1.15 +3 1.33 +4 0% 100%
Seattle, WA 5:44 -0:10 1.31 +2 1.71 +4 0% 98%
Tampa, FL 2:18 -0:04 1.11 +3 1.31 +7 -3% 99%

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 2010 to 2009 is for the same three-month period (July-September).

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