1 Efficiently preserve and maintain the transportation system

Efficiently preserve and maintain the regional transportation system in a state of good repair.

1.1 Bridge condition

The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) uses a measure to assess system-wide trunk highway bridge performance. The measure is the Bridge Structural Condition Rating. Based on the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) scale from 0 to 9, this measure uses a combination of condition code and appraisal rating to assign a good, fair, or poor condition ¹.

Figure 1.1: Percent of Twin Cities bridge surface area in ‘Good’ condition

Bridge condition in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) area, as well as Statewide, has worsened since 2015, with the percentage of bridges (weighted by surface area) falling into the “poor” category increasing by 0.6% per year on average. In the most recent year of measurement (2021), the percent of bridges in poor condition was 4.5%, just under the MnDOT-set target of 5%.

Figure 1.2: Percent of Twin Cities bridge surface area in ‘Poor’ condition

Of the bridges in poor condition, there are three bridges that make up the bulk of this surface area in 2022: I-494 over the Minnesota River, MN-65, and MN-3 over the Mississippi River. The graphic below shows the MPO bridge surface area in poor condition by bridge. The I-494 bridge over the Minnesota River alone comprised 2.2% of total regional bridge surface area. This bridge is set to be rehabilitated in the 2023-2026 MnDOT Capital Highway Investment Plan (CHIP) and is anticipated to materially affect this measure.

Figure 1.3: MPO bridge surface area in poor condition by bridge, 2021

1.2 Pavement condition

Pavement condition reflects the overall ride quality of the highway system. The Met Council, in coordination with MnDOT, sets two and four year targets for both the interstate highway system and all other highways that are on the National Highway System (NHS). During the most recent performance period (2023), the Met Council adopted the same pavement condition targets as MnDOT.

The pavement condition targets are set based upon the forecasted ride quality of roadways derived from the expected condition and any programmed projects that address pavement. The measure includes overall roughness, rutting, faulting, and cracking calculations. MnDOT predicts when certain roadways no longer meet the acceptable standard and sets targets based upon these predictions. Pavement condition is anticipated to become worse over the next five years.

Generally, more non-interstate NHS roadways within the metro region fall within the poor category than in the state as a whole. Similarly, less pavement in the metro region meets the good condition rating. Overall, both MnDOT and the Met Council have placed greater emphasis on ensuring that pavement does not fall into poor condition, particularly on the Interstate System. This tends to fluctuate from year to year based on programmed projects, but generally an overall small percentage of pavement is categorized as poor annually.

Figure 1.4: Percent of pavement in ‘Poor’ category, divided by location

Figure 1.5: Percent of pavement in ‘Good’ category, divided by location

1.2.1 Pavement condition by road type

Figure 1.6: Twin Cities interstate pavement in ‘Poor’ condition

Figure 1.7: Twin Cites non-interstate pavement in ‘Poor’ condition

Figure 1.8: Twin Cites interstate pavement in ‘Good’ condition

Figure 1.9: Twin Cites non-interstate pavement in ‘Good’ condition

Figure 1.10: Map of pavement condition in Twin Cities

1.3 Runway condition

The graph in Figure 1.11 depicts the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for each of the six reliever airports owned by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). PCI measures the overall quality of the runway pavement. PCI values less than 40 will likely require reconstruction, while values above 60 indicate that a runway only needs preventive maintenance. Values between 40 and 60 may require major rehabilitation.

The green line in Figure 1.11 represents the PCI value of 60. Runways with values beneath this threshold are the highest priority for improvement. Crystal Lake, Lake Elmo, and the Saint Paul Downtown Airport all have runways that will likely require reconstruction.

Figure 1.11: Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for reliever airport runways

1.4 Transit asset management

Transit providers in the Twin Cities metro region manage a substantial number of facilities and fleet vehicles of multiple types that provide services to the region. For example, Metro Transit operates a fleet of 598 buses, 118 light rail cars, 18 commuter rail cars, and 6 commuter rail locomotives. Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) maintains a fleet of roughly 160 buses.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requires that transit agencies measure and set goals for the status of four capital asset classes:

Rolling stock vehicles used to provide transit services
Facilities like garages
Infrastructure like rail tracks if used by the agency
Service vehicles used by the agency for non-revenue service purposes.

The Met Council is a Tier 1 provider and must provide all elements that the FTA calls for in a transit asset management plan.

Transit agencies manage their vehicle fleets, including rolling-stock and service vehicles, based on their useful life in years. Vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark are not unsafe to operate but are at a point where the agency should begin working to replace them in order to maintain service reliability. Generally, transit agencies look to keep the proportion of their fleet that meets or exceeds useful life benchmark under a certain percentage. For example, Metro Transit’s 2022 goal for articulated buses was no more than 18% of the fleet meeting or exceeding the useful life benchmark.

Table 1.1: Equipment - Percent of service vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark.
Vehicle type	2021 % of service vehicles	2022 % of service vehicles
Metro Transit
Automobiles	32%	29%
Trucks and other Rubber Tire Vehicles	30%	21%
Metropolitan Council
Trucks and other Rubber Tire Vehicles	0%	0%
SouthWest Transit
Trucks and other Rubber Tire Vehicles	0%	0%
Minnesota Valley Transit Authority
Automobiles	23%	44%

Table 1.2: Facility - Percent of facilities rated below 3 on the condition scale
Vehicle type	2021 % of facilities	2022 % of facilities
Metro Transit
Administrative / Maintenance Facilities	3%	0%
Passenger / Parking Facilities	3%	0%
SouthWest Transit
Administrative / Maintenance Facilities	0%	0%
Passenger / Parking Facilities	0%	0%
Minnesota Valley Transit Authority
Administrative / Maintenance Facilities	50%	50%
Passenger / Parking Facilities	0%	0%

Table 1.3: Infrastructure - Percent of track segments with performance restrictions
Vehicle type	2021 % of track segements	2022 % of track segments
Metro Transit
LR - Light Rail	1%	1%

Table 1.4: Rolling Stock - Percent of revenue vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark
Vehicle type	2021 % of revenue vehicles	2022 % of revenue vehicles
Metro Transit
AB - Articulated Bus	19%	18%
BR - Over-the-road Bus	0%	0%
BU - Bus	8%	14%
LR - Light Rail Vehicle	0%	0%
RL - Commuter Rail Locomotive	0%	0%
RP - Commuter Rail Passenger Coach	0%	0%
Metropolitan Council
BU - Bus	0%	0%
CU - Cutaway	0%	40%
SouthWest Transit
BR - Over-the-road Bus	0%	0%
BU - Bus	0%	0%
CU - Cutaway	0%	0%
VN - Van	0%	0%
Minnesota Valley Transit Authority
BR - Over-the-road Bus	26%	14%
BU - Bus	14%	18%
CU - Cutaway	37%	29%

Regional bridge condition is weighted by total deck surface area, meaning that larger bridges account for more of the total percentage than smaller bridges↩︎