FUTURE MOBILITY IN MISSOURI:

Meeting the State’s Need for Safe and Efficient Mobility

APRIL 2011

202-466-6706
www.tripnet.org

Founded in 1971, TRIP ®, of Washington, DC is a nonprofit organization that researches, evaluates and distributes
economic and technical data on surface transportation issues. TRIP is sponsored by insurance companies,
equipment manufacturers, distributors and suppliers; businesses involved in highway and transit engineering,
construction and finance; labor unions; and organizations concerned with an efficient and safe surface
transportation network.
 Executive Summary
Transportation is more than just driving on Missouri’s roads and bridges or using public
transit. It’s about receiving packages in a timely manner, easily grabbing groceries on the way
home, or safety traveling across the state. Transportation provides the connections that keep
businesses up and running. It not only moves people, it makes the movement of goods and
services possible and provides the state’s residents with a high quality of life. The quality of
Missouri’s extensive system of roads, highways, bridges and public transit has a significant
impact on the level of safety and mobility of the state’s residents, visitors and businesses.

As the backbone that supports the Show Me State’s economy, Missouri’s transportation
system affects each resident every day. It provides for travel to work and school, visits to family
and friends, and trips to tourist and recreation attractions. Transportation connects Missouri
businesses with customers and the world. It provides the goods and services people need each
day and plays a role in every product manufactured and every customer businesses serve.

State and local investments in highway and bridge construction in Missouri support
21,653 direct and indirect jobs. On average, every dollar invested in the state’s five-year
construction program generates about $4 in new economic activity. Transportation helps the state
attract new businesses and retain existing ones, add and keep jobs, and build and maintain tax
revenues.

With an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent and with the state’s population continuing to
grow, Missouri must improve its system of roads, highways, bridges and public transit to foster
economic growth and keep business in the state. Highway accessibility is the second leading
factor when companies choose locations (ranked just behind labor costs). The Missouri
Department of Economic Development has identified providing necessary infrastructure as one
of its eight strategic initiatives for companies and communities to succeed. In addition to
economic growth, transportation improvements are needed to ensure safe, reliable mobility and
quality of life for all Missourians.

Missouri has made progress in recent years in improving road and bridge conditions,
largely as a result of transportation funding provided through voter approval of Amendment 3 in
2004. This legislation redirected revenue from the vehicle sales tax to road and bridge
improvements and allowed the state to sell approximately $2 billion in bonds to undertake many
needed highway transportation projects. However, this progress will be reversed in the coming
years, as state spending on needed projects decreases sharply in the future and transportation
spending in the state drops drastically. As a result, Missouri will be able to move forward with
fewer projects to modernize the state’s transportation system. And by 2017 the state will risk
losing millions of dollars for transportation projects because it will be unable to provide the
matching funds needed to obtain federal surface transportation dollars. Additional funding will
be needed if Missouri is to continue to improve its transportation system and maintain the
progress made in recent years.
 In addition to state funding, the federal government is an essential source of revenue for
the ongoing modernization of Missouri’s roads, highways, bridges and transit. Approved in
February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided approximately
$637 million in stimulus funding for highway and bridge improvements and $85 million for
public transit improvements in Missouri. (ARRA also included an estimated $22.5 million in
Federal Transit Administration grants). While this funding helped Missouri tackle some needed
road, highway, bridge and transit improvements, it is not sufficient to allow the state to proceed
with numerous projects needed to modernize its surface transportation system. Meeting
Missouri’s need to maintain and improve its system of roads, highways, bridges and transit will
require a significant, long-term boost in transportation funding at the federal, state and local
levels.

The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU), the current long-range federal surface transportation program, was
originally set to expire on Sept. 30, 2009. Following a series of short term extensions, the
program now expires Sept. 30, 2011. The level of funding and the provisions of a future federal
surface transportation program will have a significant impact on future highway and bridge
conditions and safety as well as the level of transit service in Missouri, which, in turn, will affect
the state’s ability to keep its residents safe, improve their quality of life and enhance economic
development opportunities.

Since 2004, Missouri has used funding made available by voter approval of Amendment 3
to make significant improvements to its highway transportation system. But that progress
may be reversed as state spending on needed projects decreases sharply. An increase in
federal, state and local transportation funding is necessary to continue to make needed
improvements and maintain the progress made in recent years.

• Voter approval of Amendment 3 in 2004 redirected revenue from the state’s vehicle sales
tax that had been diverted to fund other programs in the state budget back to road and
bridge improvements. It also allowed the Missouri Department of Transportation
(MoDOT) to sell approximately $2 billion in bonds to undertake many needed projects.

• Transportation spending in the state is set to drop drastically in the coming years when
bond proceeds are no longer available. After steadily increasing since 2004, highway
capital investment in the state is dropping to pre-2000 levels, leaving less funding
available for projects to modernize, repair and improve safety on the state’s roads,
highways and bridges.

• By 2017, Missouri will be unable to provide state matching funds needed to obtain
federal funds. As a result, Missouri will lose millions of federal dollars for much-needed
transportation projects.

• In addition to state transportation funding, the federal surface transportation program is

an essential source of funding for the construction, maintenance and improvement of
Missouri’s system of roads, highways, bridges and public transit.

2
 • Federal spending levels for highways and public transit are based on the current federal
surface transportation program, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which was approved
by Congress in 2005. Following a series of short-term extensions since its original
expiration date of Sept. 30 2009, the SAFETEA-LU program expires on Sept. 30, 2011.

• From 2000 to 2009, Missouri received approximately $8.4 billion in federal funding for
road, highway and bridge improvements, and $1.1 billion for public transit, a total of
approximately $9.5 billion.
An inadequate transportation system costs Missouri residents a total of $4.4 billion every
year in the form of traffic crashes, additional vehicle operating costs (VOC) and
congestion-related delays.

• A lack of available transportation funding in the future is projected to lead to increasingly

deteriorated road and bridge conditions and additional congestion in Missouri’s major
urban areas. Without additional funds, the state will be unable to complete many needed
transportation improvement projects.

• TRIP estimates that Missouri’s roadways that lack some desirable safety features, have
inadequate capacity to meet travel demands or have poor pavement conditions cost the
state’s residents approximately $4.4 billion annually in the form of traffic crashes,
additional vehicle operating costs and the cost of lost time and wasted fuel due to traffic
congestion.

• TRIP has calculated the cost to Missouri’s residents of driving on roads that are
deteriorated, congested and lack some desirable safety features in the St. Louis and
Kansas City metro areas. The following chart shows the cost breakdown for these areas.

VOC Congestion Safety TOTAL

St, Louis $ 416 $ 772 $ 182 $ 1,370
Kansas City $ 587 $ 498 $ 192 $ 1,277
STATEWIDE $1.6 billion $1.4 billion $1.4 billion $4.4 billion

Without a substantial boost in federal or state highway funding, Missouri will be unable to
complete numerous projects to improve the condition and expand the capacity of roads,
bridges, highways and public transit, hampering the state’s ability to boost mobility,
improve safety and to enhance economic development opportunities.

• Needed projects in Missouri that would require a significant boost in federal or state
funding to proceed include I-70/I-435 interchange improvements in Kansas City, corridor
and safety improvements to I-44 in St. Louis, corridor improvements to US 60 in
Springfield, improvements to the Downtown Loop in Kansas City, rebuilding and
widening the I-70 and I-44 statewide corridors, replacing the MO 47 major bridge over
the Missouri River in Washington, adding capacity to transit service in rural and urban
parts of the state. A list of needed projects is included in the report.

3
 • To ensure that federal funding for highways and bridges in Missouri and throughout the
nation continues beyond the expiration of SAFETEA-LU, Congress needs to approve a
new long-term federal surface transportation program by Sept. 30, 2011.

• The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided approximately $637
million in stimulus funding for highway and bridge improvements and $85 million for
public transit improvements in Missouri. (ARRA also included an estimated $22.5
million in Federal Transit Administration grants.)
Population and economic growth in the Show Me State have resulted in increased demands
on the state’s major roads and highways.
• Missouri’s population reached approximately 6 million in 2009, an increase of 17 percent
since 1990. The state’s population is expected to grow another 14 percent by 2030.
• Vehicle travel in Missouri increased 36 percent from 1990 to 2009 – jumping from 50.9
billion vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 1990 to 69.0 billion VMT in 2009.
• By 2025, vehicle travel in Missouri is projected to increase by another 40 percent.

• From 1990 to 2009, Missouri’s gross domestic product, a measure of the state’s
economic output, increased by 40 percent, when adjusted for inflation.

• In 2010, Missouri’s 36 public transit systems provided 60 million rides.

Although Missouri road conditions have improved in recent years, without additional
transportation funding, road conditions are projected to deteriorate in the next 15 years.
• In 2008, 14 percent of Missouri’s major state and locally maintained roads were in poor
condition.

• Roads rated in poor condition may show signs of deterioration, including rutting, cracks
and potholes. In some cases, poor roads can be resurfaced, but often are too deteriorated
and must be reconstructed. Roads in need of repair cost each Missouri motorist an
average of $380 annually in extra vehicle operating costs – $1.6 billion statewide. Costs
include accelerated vehicle depreciation, additional repair costs and increased fuel
consumption and tire wear.

• In Kansas City, 16 percent of major roads and nearly 40 percent of minor roads on the
state system are in poor condition. Driving on roads in need of repair costs each Kansas
City motorist an average of $587 each year in the form of accelerated vehicle
depreciation, additional repair costs and increased fuel consumption and tire wear.

• Eighteen percent of St. Louis’ major roads and about 38 percent of minor highways are
considered to be in poor condition. It is estimated that this costs the average area driver
$416 annually in extra vehicle operating costs as a result of driving on roads in need of
repair.

• Pavement conditions on state-maintained roads in Missouri have improved in recent

years. However, unless additional funding is made available, MoDOT projects that the

4
 share of major and minor state-maintained roads in good condition will decrease
significantly by 2024. The percentage of major state-maintained highways in good
condition is projected to drop from 86 percent in 2010 to 70 percent in 2024, while the
share of minor state-maintained roads in good condition will drop from 68 percent to 53
percent during the same time period.

• The functional life of Missouri’s roads is greatly affected by the state’s ability to perform
timely maintenance and upgrades to ensure that structures last as long as possible. It is
critical that roads are fixed before they require major repairs because reconstructing roads
costs approximately four times more than resurfacing them.

Twenty-nine percent of bridges in Missouri show significant deterioration or do not meet

current design standards. This includes all bridges that are 20 feet or more in length and
are maintained by state, local and federal agencies. Missouri ranks seventh among states
nationally in the percentage of bridges that are structurally deficient.

• Seventeen percent of Missouri’s bridges were structurally deficient in 2010, the seventh
highest rate nationally. A bridge is structurally deficient if there is significant
deterioration of the bridge deck, superstructure or substructure or if the bridge was
designed to carry light loads. Structurally deficient bridges may be closed in some
situations, but more often are posted for lower weight limits, which restricts or redirects
larger vehicles, including commercial trucks, school buses and emergency services
vehicles.

• Twelve percent of Missouri’s bridges were functionally obsolete in 2010. Bridges that
are functionally obsolete no longer meet current highway design standards, often because
of narrow lanes, inadequate clearances or poor alignment.

• The state projects a decrease of about 300 structurally deficient and functionally obsolete
MoDOT-owned bridges by 2014, as a result of MoDOT’s Safe and Sound Bridge
Improvement Program. However, without long-term funding, those improvements will be
wiped out by 2018, when MoDOT projects that the number of structurally deficient and
functionally obsolete bridges will return to 2008 levels.

• This report contains a list of needed bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects across
the state that would require additional federal or state funding to be completed.
Improving safety features on Missouri’s roads and highways would likely result in a
decrease in traffic fatalities in the state. Roadway design is an important factor in
approximately one-third of all fatal and serious traffic crashes. Missouri’s rural traffic
fatality rate is significantly greater than the fatality rate on all other roads in the state.

• Between 2006 and 2010, 4,747 people were killed in traffic crashes in Missouri, an
average of 949 fatalities per year.

• Missouri’s traffic fatality rate was 1.16 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel in
2010.

5
 • The traffic fatality rate in 2010 on Missouri’s non-Interstate rural roads was 1.73 traffic
fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel, which is more than two times higher
than the 0.83 traffic fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel on all other roads
and highways in the state.

• A disproportionate share of highway fatalities occur on Missouri’s rural, non-Interstate

roads. In 2010, 55 percent of traffic fatalities in Missouri occurred on rural, non-
Interstate routes, while only 37 percent of vehicle travel in the state occurred on these
roads.

• The cost of serious traffic crashes in Missouri in 2009, in which roadway design was
likely a contributing factor, was approximately $1.4 billion. The cost of serious crashes
includes lost productivity, lost earnings, medical costs and emergency services.

• In the Kansas City area, where there were 134 traffic fatalities in 2010, traffic crashes in
which roadway design was likely a contributing factor cost the average driver
approximately $192 per year.

• Traffic crashes in the St. Louis area in which roadway design was likely a contributing
factor cost the average driver approximately $182 per year. In 2010, there were 175
traffic fatalities the St. Louis area.

• Several factors are associated with vehicle crashes that result in fatalities, including
driver behavior, vehicle characteristics and roadway design. It is estimated that roadway
design is an important factor in one-third of fatal traffic accidents.

• Where appropriate, highway improvements can reduce traffic fatalities and accidents
while improving traffic flow to help relieve congestion. Such improvements include
removing or shielding obstacles; adding or improving medians; adding rumble strips,
wider lanes, wider and paved shoulders; upgrading roads from two lanes to four lanes;
and better road markings and traffic signals.

• The Federal Highway Administration has found that every $100 million spent on needed
highway safety improvements will result in 145 fewer traffic fatalities over a 10-year
period.
Commerce and commuting in Missouri are constrained by growing traffic congestion,
which will increase in the future unless additional highway and transit capacity is
provided.

• In 2008, 44 percent of the state’s urban highways carried a level of traffic likely to result
in significant delays during peak travel hours.

• The average rush hour trip in the Kansas City metropolitan area takes approximately ten
percent longer to complete than during non-rush hour. Congestion related delays cost the
average peak-hour driver in Kansas City $498 each year in lost time and wasted fuel.

6
 • The average rush hour trip in the St. Louis metropolitan area takes approximately 12
percent longer to complete than during non-rush hour. Congestion related delays cost the
average peak-hour driver in St. Louis $772 each year in lost time and wasted fuel.
The efficiency of Missouri’s transportation system, particularly its highways, is critical to
the health of the state’s economy. Businesses are increasingly reliant on an efficient and
reliable transportation system to move products and services. Expenditures on highway
repairs create a significant number of jobs.

• The Federal Highway Administration estimates that each dollar spent on road, highway
and bridge improvements results in an average benefit of $5.20 in the form of reduced
vehicle maintenance costs, reduced delays, reduced fuel consumption, improved safety,
reduced road and bridge maintenance costs, and reduced emissions as a result of
improved traffic flow.

• Every year, $226 billion in goods are shipped from sites in Missouri and another $234
billion in goods are shipped to sites in Missouri, mostly by trucks. Seventy-two percent
of the goods shipped annually from sites in Missouri are carried by trucks and another 14
percent are carried by parcel, U.S. Postal Service or courier services, which use trucks for
part of their deliveries.

• A 2007 analysis by the Federal Highway Administration found that every $1 billion
invested in highway construction would support approximately 27,800 jobs, including
approximately 9,500 in the construction sector, approximately 4,300 jobs in industries
supporting the construction sector, and approximately 14,000 other jobs induced in non-
construction related sectors of the economy.

Two 2010 reports, one by the Treasury Department with the Council of Economic Advisers
and the other by a bipartisan group of transportation experts, found that the U.S. is falling
far behind internationally in providing a modern transportation system and will need to
adopt a more ambitious and focused transportation program to maintain the nation’s
standard of living. The reports call for increased investment to relieve traffic congestion,
improve freight and intermodal access, improve road and bridge conditions, improve
traffic safety, and reduce emissions.
The reports found that now is an optimal time to invest in infrastructure because of
reduced costs due to the economic downturn and that providing adequate resources to
modernize the nation’s transportation system will require increased use of innovative
funding tools including vehicle-miles-traveled fees, public-private partnerships and capital
budgeting.

• The report, “An Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Investment” (The Treasury report),
was prepared by the U.S. Department of the Treasury with the Council of Economic
Advisers.

• The report, “Well Within Reach: America’s New Transportation Agenda” (The Miller
report), was prepared by a group of the nation’s top transportation policy experts chaired

7
 by former U.S. Secretaries of Transportation, Samuel Skinner and Norman Mineta. The
group was assembled by the Miller Center at the University of Virginia to develop
solutions for the funding and planning challenges that confront the nation’s transportation
system.

• The Miller report found that the U.S. faces an annual funding shortfall to maintain
conditions and traffic congestion levels on its transportation system from between $134
and $194 billion and from between $189 and $262 billion to improve conditions and
reduce traffic congestion.

• The Treasury report found that U.S. infrastructure spending as a percentage of gross
domestic product (GDP) has fallen by 50 percent and now accounts for two percent of the
nation’s GDP. In contrast, China spends about nine percent of its GDP on infrastructure
and Europe about five percent.

• The Treasury report found that now is an optimal time to invest in transportation
infrastructure because well-designed projects can provide significant, long-term
economic benefits, significant needs exist and construction and other costs associated
with infrastructure projects are especially low because of high unemployment and a high
level of underutilized resources.
Key recommendations of the reports include:
Program format:

• Adopt an integrated approach to transportation planning that includes freight and goods
movement and stresses intermodal connectivity (Miller).

• Prioritize projects that provide the greatest returns in terms of future U.S.
competitiveness, economic growth and employment (Miller).

• Increase emphasis on urban congestion relief, including adding additional roadway and
transit capacity, making the existing system work more efficiently and adopting regional
policies that may reduce some travel demand (Miller).

• Improve the delivery of transportation projects by reforming the project planning,

permitting and review process to speed actual implementation (Miller).
Funding:

• Establish a National Infrastructure Bank (NIB) that would create conditions for greater
private sector co-investment in infrastructure. The NIB would also perform rigorous
analysis to identify projects with the greatest possible societal and economic benefits
(Treasury).

• Save the public money by investing adequately in transportation to reduce delays, vehicle
maintenance costs, traffic crashes and vehicle emissions (Miller).

8
 • Adopt a federal capital budget that recognizes that transportation expenditures are an
investment and that takes into account future returns on those investments (Miller).
All data used in the report is the latest available. Sources of information for this report include the Missouri
Department of Transportation (MoDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), the Treasury Department, the Council of Economic Advisers, the U.S. Census, The Bureau of
Transportation Statistics (BTS), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Reason
Foundation and the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI).

9
 Introduction

Missouri’s roads, highways, bridges and public transit systems form vital transportation

links for the state’s residents, visitors and businesses, providing daily access to homes, jobs,

shopping and recreation, as well as to technology and research centers, manufacturing plants and

thriving industrial zones.

Today, with the state continuing to experience significant growth in population and

travel, the modernization of Missouri’s transportation system is crucial to providing safe and

efficient mobility, while improving the economic livelihood of the state and accommodating

future growth.

While Missouri has made progress in improving road and bridge conditions in recent

years, this progress may be stalled or reversed, as transportation spending in the state is set to

drop significantly. Additional funding will be needed if Missouri is to continue to improve its

transportation system and maintain the progress made in recent years.

As the nation looks to rebound from the recession, improving Missouri’s transportation

system could play an important role in advancing the state’s economic well being by providing

critically needed jobs in the short term and by improving the productivity and competitiveness of

the state’s businesses in the long term.

While state and local governments are responsible for maintaining most of Missouri’s

roadways, bridges and public transit systems, the federal government plays a significant role in

funding the repairs and improvements to many of the state’s most heavily used roads, highways,

bridges and public transit systems. As Missouri faces the challenge of preserving and improving

its surface transportation system, the future level of federal funding will be a critical factor in

10
whether the state’s residents, businesses and visitors continue to enjoy access to a safe, smooth

and efficient transportation network.

This report examines the condition, use and safety of Missouri’s roads, highways, bridges

and public transit systems, the role of federal funding in the maintenance and improvement of the

state’s surface transportation system and the future mobility and funding needs of the state.

Included in the report are lists of highway, bridge and transit projects that will require significant

state, local and federal funding to proceed.

All data used in the report is the latest available. Sources of information for this study

include the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Treasury Department,

the Council of Economic Advisers, the U.S. Census, The Bureau of Transportation Statistics

(BTS), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Reason Foundation

and the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI).

Population, Travel and Economic Trends in Missouri

Missouri residents and businesses require a high level of personal and commercial

mobility. Despite the recession, population and economic growth in the Show Me State over the

past two decades resulted in a significant increase in the demand for mobility and an increase in

vehicle miles of travel (VMT). To foster a high quality of life in Missouri, it will be critical that

the state provide and preserve a safe and modern transportation system that can accommodate

future growth in population, vehicle travel and economic development.

11
 Missouri’s population grew 17 percent between 1990 and 2009, increasing from 5.1

million in 1990 to approximately 6 million residents in 2009. 1 The population of Missouri is

projected to increase another 14 percent by 2030. 2

Missouri also has experienced moderate economic growth since 1990. From 1990 to

2009, Missouri’s gross domestic product (GDP), a measure of the state’s economic output,

increased by 40 percent, when adjusted for inflation. 3

Steady population and economic growth in Missouri have resulted in a significant

increase in vehicle travel in the state. From 1990 to 2009, annual vehicle miles of travel in

Missouri increased 36 percent, from 50.9 billion miles traveled annually to 69.0 billion miles

traveled annually. 4 Based on population and other lifestyle trends, TRIP estimates that travel on

Missouri’s roads and highways will increase 40 percent by 2025. 5

Chart 1: Missouri’s population, GDP and Vehicle Travel growth (1 = 1990 level ).

1.4

1.2

0.8 1990
2009
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
Population VMT GDP

Source: TRIP analysis of federal data

12
 Condition of Missouri’s Roads

The life cycle of Missouri’s roads is greatly affected by the state's ability to perform

timely maintenance and upgrades to ensure that road and highway surfaces last as long as

possible. The pavement condition of the state's major roads is evaluated and classified as being

in poor, mediocre, fair or good condition.

In 2010, 14 percent of Missouri’s state maintained major roads were rated in poor

condition, providing motorists with a rough ride. 6 Roads rated poor may show signs of

deterioration, including rutting, cracks and potholes. In some cases, poor roads can be resurfaced

but often are too deteriorated and must be reconstructed. Most pavements in mediocre condition

can be repaired by resurfacing, but some may need more extensive reconstruction to return them

to good condition.

Pavement conditions on Missouri’s state-maintained roads have improved in recent years,

largely as a result of MoDOT’s Smooth Roads Initiative. But, that progress could be lost if

additional funding is not made available. MoDOT projects that the share of major and minor

roads in good condition will decrease significantly by 2024. Under current funding projections,

the percentage of state-maintained major highways in good condition is projected to drop from

86 percent in 2010 to 70 percent in 2024, while the share of minor state-maintained roads in

good condition will drop from 68 percent to 53 percent during the same time period. 7

Pavement failure is caused by a combination of traffic, moisture and climate. Moisture

often works its way into road surfaces and the materials that form the road’s foundation. Road

surfaces at intersections are even more prone to deterioration because the slow-moving or

standing loads occurring at these sites subject the pavement to higher levels of stress. It is

13
critical that roads are fixed before they require major repairs because reconstructing roads costs

approximately four times more than resurfacing them. 8

As Missouri’s roads and highways continue to age, they will reach a point where routine

paving and maintenance will not be adequate to keep pavement surfaces in good condition and

costly reconstruction of the roadway and its underlying surfaces will become necessary.

The Costs to Motorists of Roads in Inadequate Condition

TRIP has calculated the additional cost to motorists of driving on roads in poor or

unacceptable condition. Roads in poor condition – which may include potholes, rutting or rough

surfaces – increase the cost to operate and maintain a vehicle. These additional vehicle operating

costs include accelerated vehicle depreciation, additional vehicle repairs, increased fuel

consumption and increased tire wear. TRIP estimates that additional vehicle operating costs

borne by Missouri motorists as a result of poor road conditions total of $1.6 billion annually, or

$380 per motorist, higher than the national average of $324.

In Kansas City, 16 percent of major roads and nearly 40 percent of minor roads on the

state system are in poor condition. Driving on roads in need of repair costs each Kansas City

motorist an average of $587 annually in the form of accelerated vehicle depreciation, additional

repair costs and increased fuel consumption and tire wear. 9

Eighteen percent of St. Louis’ major roads and about 38 percent of state minor highways

are considered to be in poor condition. It is estimated that this costs the average area driver $416

annually in extra vehicle operating costs as a result of driving on roads in need of repair. 10

14
 Additional vehicle operating costs have been calculated in the Highway Development

and Management Model (HDM), which is recognized by the U.S. Department of Transportation

and more than 100 other countries as the definitive analysis of the impact of road conditions on

vehicle operating costs. The HDM report is based on numerous studies that have measured the

impact of various factors, including road conditions, on vehicle operating costs. 11

The HDM study found that road deterioration increases ownership, repair, fuel and tire

costs. The report found that deteriorated roads accelerate the pace of depreciation of vehicles

and the need for repairs because the stress on the vehicle increases in proportion to the level of

roughness of the pavement surface. Similarly, tire wear and fuel consumption increase as roads

deteriorate since there is less efficient transfer of power to the drive train and additional friction

between the road and the tires.

TRIP’s additional vehicle operating cost estimate is based on taking the average number

of miles driven annually by a motorist, calculating current vehicle operating costs based on

AAA’s 2010 vehicle operating costs and then using the HDM model to estimate the additional

vehicle operating costs paid by drivers as a result of substandard roads. 12 Additional research on

the impact of road conditions on fuel consumption by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) is

also factored into TRIP’s vehicle operating cost methodology.

Bridge Conditions in Missouri

Missouri’s bridges form key links in the state’s highway system, providing communities

and individuals access to employment, schools, shopping and medical facilities, and facilitating

commerce and access for emergency vehicles.

15
 In 2010, a total of 29 percent of Missouri’s bridges were rated as structurally deficient or

functionally obsolete. Seventeen percent of Missouri’s bridges were rated as structurally

deficient in 2010, the seventh highest rate among states nationally. 13 This includes all bridges

that are 20 feet or more in length and are maintained by state, local and federal agencies.

A bridge is structurally deficient if there is significant deterioration of the bridge deck,

superstructure or substructure or if the bridge was designed to carry light loads. Bridges that are

structurally deficient may be closed in some situations, but more often are posted for lower

weight limits if their condition warrants such action. Deteriorated bridges can have a significant

impact on daily life. Restrictions on vehicle weight may cause many vehicles – especially

emergency vehicles, commercial trucks, school buses and farm equipment – to use alternate

routes to avoid posted bridges. Redirected trips also lengthen travel time, waste fuel and reduce

the efficiency of the local economy.

Twelve percent of Missouri’s bridges were rated as functionally obsolete in 2010. 14

Bridges that are functionally obsolete no longer meet current highway design standards, often

because of narrow lanes, inadequate clearances or poor alignment with the approaching roadway.

The state projects a decrease of 300 structurally deficient and functionally obsolete

MoDOT-owned bridges between 2008 and 2014, as a result of MoDOT’s Safe and Sound Bridge

Improvement Program. However, without additional funding, those improvements will be wiped

out by 2018, when MoDOT projects that the number of structurally deficient and functionally

obsolete bridges will return to 2008 levels. 15

The service life of bridges can be extended by performing routine maintenance such as

resurfacing decks, painting surfaces, insuring that a facility has good drainage and replacing

16
deteriorating components. But, most bridges will eventually require more costly reconstruction

or major rehabilitation to remain operable.

The following charts list some of the major bridges in Missouri that need to be replaced

or rehabilitated. These bridge projects would require additional federal or state funding to be

completed.

Chart 2. Needed major bridge replacement projects in Missouri that would require additional
federal or state funding to be completed.

Cost
Route Carried County Route/Feature Intersected ADT Project Description mil.
KANSAS CITY
I-70 Jackson Manchester Trafficway 85,500 Replace with new bridge $104
US 69 Platte Missouri River 14,700 Replace with new bridge $49
MO 291 N Jackson Missouri River 10,200 Replace with new bridge $47
ST. LOUIS
I-44 St. Louis Meramec River 65,200 Replace with new bridge. $86
I-270 St. Louis Mississippi River 56,600 Replace with new bridge. $174
Warren/
MO 47 Franklin Missouri River 12,500 Replace with new bridge $70
St. Louis
I-64 City Vandeventer 43,900 Perform major rehabilitation $27
STATEWIDE
Cooper/
I-70 Boone Missouri River 16,000 Replace with new bridge $160
MO 51 Perry Mississippi River 6,500 Replace with new bridge $70
US 54 Pike Mississippi River 4,000 Replace with new bridge $63
US 24 Marion Mississippi River 9,800 Replace with new bridge $63
US 160 Ozark White River 2300 Perform major rehabilitation $21
MO 13 S Henry Truman Lake 14,800 Replace with new bridge $17
Rt. H Dade Stockton Lake 600 Perform major rehabilitation $5
US 62 E Dunklin St. Francis River 1,200 Replace with new bridge $11
MO 215 Cedar Stockton Lake 800 Perform major rehabilitation $11
US 36 W Buchanan Platte River 5,400 Perform major rehabilitation $7

Source: MoDOT response to TRIP survey. (ADT = Average Daily Traffic)

17
 Traffic Congestion in Missouri

Traffic congestion in Missouri is a growing burden in key urban areas and threatens to

impede the state’s economic development. Congestion on Missouri’s urban highways is growing

as a result of increases in vehicle travel and population.

In 2008, 44 percent of Missouri’s major urban highways were congested, carrying traffic

volumes that result in significant rush hour delays. 16 Highways that carry high levels of traffic

are also more vulnerable to experiencing lengthy traffic delays as a result of traffic accidents or

other incidents.

The average rush hour trip in the Kansas City metropolitan area takes approximately ten

percent longer to complete than during non-rush hour. Congestion related delays cost the average

peak-hour driver in Kansas City $498 each year in lost time and wasted fuel. In St. Louis, where

the average rush hour trip takes approximately 12 percent longer to complete than during non-

rush hour, congestion related delays cost the average peak-hour driver in St. Louis $772 each

year in lost time and wasted fuel. 17

The following projects, needed to increase the capacity of the state’s major roadways to

relieve traffic congestion, improve safety and support economic development, cannot proceed

without additional state or federal funding.

18
Chart 3. Needed capacity expansion projects of regional or statewide importance that would require
additional state or federal funding to be completed.
Cost
Route County From To Dist. ADT Description mil.
Kansas City Region
US 71 Jackson 155th St. Parkway 5 69,400 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $43
MO 92 Platte, Clay Kansas Smithville 20 11,100 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $56
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
I-435 Clay at MO 210 1 82,500 safety $41
Interchange improvements at I-70, including the
replacement of the Manchester Bridge to address
I-435 Jackson at I-70 2 88,700 mobility, safety and bridge conditions $169
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
US 169 Clay at 108th St. 1 17,000 safety $10
MO 210 Clay Eldon Rd MO 291 5 13,700 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $23
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
US 50 Jackson Chipman Rd. MO 291 N 3 69,200 mobility and safety $149
I-435 Jackson Holmes Rd. W/O US 71 3 152,600 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $29
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
I-435 Jackson at 104th St. 1 62,000 safety $9
at Broadway Interchange improvements to address mobility and
I-70 Jackson Blvd. 1 80,000 safety $41
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-70 Jackson Downtown loop Oak Grove 25 118,700 mobility and safety $216
I-70 Jackson/Lafayette Oak Grove Odessa 11 37,500 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $59
St. Louis Region
Interchange improvements at 22nd Street to address
I-64 St. Louis City at 22nd St. 1 94,000 mobility and safety $28
Corridor improvements to address mobility, safety and
Rt. H St. Louis City I-270 Hall St. 4 15,600 flooding $41
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-44 St. Louis MO 141 I-270 4 96,600 mobility and safety $37
St. Louis, St. Louis Mississippi Corridor improvements and bridge replacements to
I-270 City US 67 River 10 141,600 address mobility, safety and bridge conditions $231
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-55 Jefferson Rt. Z US 67 6 57,200 mobility and safety $147
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
US 50 Franklin Union I-44 5 52,200 mobility and safety $51
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
I-64 St. Louis City at Grand 1 17,100 safety $14
MO 47 Franklin MO 100 MO 30 13 32,700 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $52
I-270 St. Louis MO 100 MO 30 11 202,100 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $57
St. Louis City Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-44 St. Louis City limits 6 142,000 mobility, safety and bridge conditions $177
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-170 St. Louis Rt. D I-64 4 115,800 mobility and safety $109
St. Louis, St. Louis Interchange improvements to address mobility and
I-44 City at Shrewsbury 1 138,000 access to transit. $41
Route W Jefferson MO 30 MO 109 6 9,100 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $66
T.R. Hughes Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-70 St. Charles Blvd. Rt. K 1 116,000 mobility and safety $51
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
I-70 Warren, St. Charles MO 47 I-64 17 76,800 mobility and safety $123

19
 Cost
Route County From To Dist. ADT Description mil.
Springfield Region
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
MO 14 Christian Nixa Ozark 5 18,900 mobility and safety $21
US 65 Christian US 60 Rt. F 5 38,400 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $50
Corridor and interchange improvements to address
US 60 Greene US 65 Rogersville 8 28,100 mobility and safety $112
US 60 Greene Republic Monett 30 12,000 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $147
Corridor, interchange, and intelligent transportation
systems improvements on James River Freeway to
US 60 Greene I-44 US 65 14 72,400 address mobility and safety $27
US 160 Greene Springfield Nixa 6 27,800 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $22
US 160 Greene Willard Springfield 6 14,300 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $12
I-44 Greene US 160 MO 744 9 52,500 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $71
Outstate Region
I-70 Multiple counties Kansas City St. Louis 180 Varies Rebuild entire corridor $3,100
I-44 Multiple counties Joplin St. Louis 291 Varies Rebuild entire corridor $4,100
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
US 169 Buchanan at I-29 1 11,400 safety $21
Interchange improvements to address mobility and
US 36 Dekalb at I-35 1 8,700 safety $18
US 63 Adair, Schuyler Kirksville Iowa 25 10,700 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $38
US 65 Livingston, Saline Marshall Chillicothe 58 10,200 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $82
US 54 Audrain, Pike, Ralls Mexico Green 49 9,700 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $160
S/O Alternate roadway west of Hannibal to address mobility
US 61 Marion, Ralls N/O Hannibal Hannibal 10 13,500 and safety $75
MO 47 Warren Warrenton Washington 20 12,500 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $10
US 61 Lincoln, St. Charles Lincoln Drive Rt. W 16 32,700 Construct interchanges to address mobility and safety $102
MO 19 Montgomery Florence 1 5,000 Replace railroad underpass to address safety $9
Henry, Johnson, Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety,
MO 13 Lafayette Lexington Clinton 49 9,300 including new Warrensburg alternate roadway $229
Moniteau, Morgan, Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety,
US 50 Pettis California Sedalia 41 28,600 including new Sedalia alternate roadway $238
Cole, Maries, Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety,
US 63 Osage, Phelps US 50 Cabool 113 10,000 including new Rolla alternate roadway $547
MO 740 Boone US 63 I-70 3 33,200 New roadway to address mobility and safety $45
MO 5 Camden, Morgan Niangua Bridge Beach 7 7,700 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $58
US 50 Cole Missouri Blvd. Eastland Dr. 2 34,000 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $47
US 50 Gasconade, Osage Linn Union 55 10,000 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $317
MO 37 Barry Monett Arkansas 33 15,000 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $184
MO 43 Jasper, Newton MO 171 I-44 7 16,700 New Joplin alternate roadway $72
US 65 Hickory Warsaw Buffalo 44 7,200 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $121
MO 465 Stone, Taney MO 76 MO 376 3 3,800 New roadway (Ozark Mountain Highroad) $21
US 412 Dunklin Kennett Arkansas 12 6,500 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $78
I-55 Scott Scott City Fruitland 16 19,300 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $77
MO 34 Girardeau, Wayne US 67 MO 72 51 2,000 Corridor improvements to address mobility and safety $72

Source: MoDOT response to TRIP survey (ADT = Average Daily Traffic)

Transit in Missouri
In addition to roads and bridges, public transportation is an important element of a

modern and efficient surface transportation system. In 2010 there were over 60 million transit

trips taken in Missouri on 36 public transit systems. 18

20
 Yet, statewide, transit is underfunded compared to needs. MoDOT has identified needed

transit projects in the state that cannot proceed without additional federal transportation funding.

In some rural portions of the state, public transit service is only available two days per week. To

double this amount approximately $23 million annually would need to be invested. Minimally,

providing state assistance to simply stabilize current transit systems operations would require

approximately $20 million per year.

Transit groups in Missouri are currently developing a report that will address the state's

comprehensive transit needs, which will be released later this Spring.

Passenger Rail in Missouri

Passenger rail services in Missouri connect St. Louis and Kansas City and have over one

half million passengers, annually. AMTRAK trains and the rail line used need necessary

improvements to keep pace with increasing passenger and freight movement. Necessary

improvements include stabilization of operating funds, acquisition of new train sets, station

improvements, and expanded service. These improvements are estimated to cost $250 million. 19

Traffic Safety in Missouri

A total of 4,747 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes in Missouri from 2006

through 2010, an average of 949 fatalities per year. 20

Missouri’s traffic fatality rate was 1.16 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel in

2010. The national rate for 2009 was 1.13. 21

21
Chart 4. Traffic fatalities in Missouri from 2006 – 2010.

Year Fatalities
2006 1,096
2007 992
2008 960
2009 878
2010 821
Total 4,747

Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Missouri’s rural, non-Interstate roads have a fatality rate significantly higher than other

roads in the state. The traffic fatality rate in 2010 on Missouri’s non-Interstate rural roads was

1.73 traffic fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel, which is more than two times

greater than the 0.83 traffic fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles of travel on all other roads

and highways in the state. 22

A disproportionate share of highway fatalities occur on Missouri’s rural, non-Interstate

roads. In 2010, 55 percent of traffic fatalities in Missouri occurred on rural, non-Interstate

routes, while only 37 percent of vehicle travel in the state occurred on these roads. 23

The cost of serious traffic crashes in Missouri in 2009, in which roadway design was

likely a contributing factor, was approximately $1.4 billion. 24 The cost of serious crashes

includes lost productivity, lost earnings, medical costs and emergency services.

In the Kansas City area, where there were 134 traffic fatalities in 2010, traffic crashes in

which roadway design was likely a contributing factor cost each driver approximately $192.

Traffic crashes in the St. Louis area in which roadway design was likely a contributing factor,

cost each driver approximately $182 per year. In 2010, there were 175 traffic fatalities the St.

Louis area. 25

22
 Three major factors are associated with fatal vehicle accidents: driver behavior, vehicle

characteristics and roadway design. It is estimated that roadway design is an important factor in

one-third of all fatal and serious traffic accidents. Improving safety on Missouri’s roadways can

be achieved through further improvements in vehicle safety; improvements in driver, pedestrian,

and bicyclist behavior; and a variety of improvements in roadway safety features.

Where appropriate, the severity of serious traffic crashes could be reduced through

roadway improvements such as adding turn lanes, removing or shielding obstacles, adding or

improving medians, widening lanes, widening and paving shoulders, improving intersection

layout, and providing better road markings and upgrading or installing traffic signals..

Roads with poor geometry, with insufficient clear distances, without turn lanes,

inadequate shoulders for the posted speed limits, or poorly laid out intersections or interchanges,

pose greater risks to motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.

Importance of Transportation to Economic Growth

All of Missouri's businesses are dependent on an efficient, safe, and modern

transportation system, one that will foster continued business diversification and opportunity.

Today's culture of business demands that an area have well-maintained and efficient roads,

highways, bridges and public transit if it is to remain economically competitive. The advent of

modern national and global communications and the impact of free trade in North America and

elsewhere have resulted in a significant increase in freight movement. Consequently, the quality

of a region’s transportation system has become a key component in a business’s ability to

compete locally, nationally and internationally.

23
 Businesses have responded to improved communications and the need to cut costs with a

variety of innovations including just-in-time delivery, increased small package delivery, demand-

side inventory management and by accepting customer orders through the Internet. The result of

these changes has been a significant improvement in logistics efficiency as firms move from a

push-style distribution system, which relies on large-scale warehousing of materials, to a pull-

style distribution system, which relies on smaller, more strategic movement of goods. These

improvements have made mobile inventories the norm, resulting in the nation’s trucks literally

becoming rolling warehouses.

Highways are vitally important to continued economic development in Missouri. As the

economy expands, creating more jobs and increasing consumer confidence, the demand for

consumer and business products grows. In turn, manufacturers ship greater quantities of goods

to market to meet this demand, a process that adds to truck traffic on the state’s highways and

major arterial roads.

Every year, $226 billion in goods are shipped from sites in Missouri and another

$234 billion in goods are shipped to sites in Missouri, mostly by trucks. 26 Seventy-two percent

of the goods shipped annually from sites in Missouri are carried by trucks and another 14 percent

are carried by parcel, U.S. Postal Service or courier services, which use trucks for part of their

deliveries. 27

Trucking is a crucial part of Missouri’s economy, as commercial trucks move goods from

sites across the state to markets inside and outside the state. Commercial truck travel in Missouri

is expected to increase significantly over the next decade. Based on federal projections, TRIP

estimates that commercial trucking in Missouri will increase by 34 percent between 2009 and

2020. 28

24
 A 2007 analysis by the Federal Highway Administration found that every $1 billion

invested in highway construction would support approximately 27,800 jobs, including

approximately 9,500 in the construction sector, approximately 4,300 jobs in industries supporting

the construction sector, and approximately 14,000 other jobs induced in non-construction related

sectors of the economy. 29

The cost of road and bridge improvements are more than offset because of the reduction

of user costs associated with driving on rough roads, the improvement in business productivity,

the reduction in delays and the improvement in traffic safety. The Federal Highway

Administration estimates that each dollar spent on road, highway and bridge improvements

results in an average benefit of $5.20 in the form of reduced vehicle maintenance costs, reduced

delays, reduced fuel consumption, improved safety, reduced road and bridge maintenance costs

and reduced emissions as a result of improved traffic flow. 30

The employment impact of highway construction is particularly important during periods

of high unemployment. Missouri’s unemployment rate has increased significantly from 5.3

percent in March 2008 to 9.6 percent in March 2010, before decreasing to 9.1 percent by March

2011. 31

State Funding for Missouri’s Surface Transportation System

Since 2004, Missouri has used funding made available by voter approval of Amendment

3 to make significant improvements to its highway transportation system. But that progress may

be stalled or reversed in the coming years as state spending on needed projects decreases sharply.

25
Without an increase in transportation funding, the progress made in recent years may be lost and

needed projects will be unfunded.

Voter approval of Amendment 3 in 2004 provided Missouri with additional

transportation funds by redirecting revenue from the state’s vehicle sales tax to road and bridge

improvements. It also allowed MoDOT to sell approximately $2 billion in bonds to undertake

many needed projects. The state used these funds to improve road conditions, widen key routes

to four lanes, replace deficient bridges, add interchanges and reconstruct critical routes.

However, the progress made in recent years is set to come to a halt. Highway capital

investment in Missouri is set to drop drastically as bond proceeds are no longer available. After

steadily increasing since 2004, highway capital investment in the state will drop to pre-2000

levels.

Chart 5. 2004 – 2012 Highway capital investment.

Highway Capital Investment (mil.)

2004 $581
2005 $947
2006 $1,123
2007 $1,138
2008 $1,157
2009 $1,365
2010 $1,154
2011 (projected) $662
2012 (projected) $628
2013 (projected) $602
2014 (projected) $599

Source: Missouri Department response to TRIP survey.

26
 Federal Funding for Missouri’s Surface Transportation System

The construction, repair and upkeep of Missouri’s roads, bridges, highways and public

transit systems are paid for by local, state and federal governments. Roads and highways are

maintained largely by state and local governments, and transit systems are operated largely by

local transit agencies.

Significant federal funding for highways and transit is provided to both state and local

governments. Federal funding for Missouri’s highways and bridges comes from the Federal

Highway Trust Fund, under funding levels and formulas determined by Congress. Federal

spending levels for highways and public transit are based on the current federal surface

transportation program, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act

– A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which was approved by Congress in 2005. Following a

series of short-term extensions since its original expiration date of Sept. 30, 2009, SAFETEA-LU

is scheduled to expire on Sept. 30, 2011.

From 2000 to 2009, Missouri received approximately $8.4 billion in federal funding for

road, highway and bridge improvements, and $1.1 billion in funding for public transit – a total of

approximately $9.5 billion in federal surface transportation funding during the 10-year period. 32

As a result of this level of federal support, since 2000 Missouri has been able to complete

numerous projects on the state’s highway system, rehabilitate deteriorated roadways and bridges,

and expand transit systems and access to improve traffic safety, relieve traffic congestion and

enhance economic development opportunities.

27
 Future Federal Surface Transportation Program

To ensure that federal funding for highways and public transit in Missouri and throughout

the nation continues beyond the expiration of the current federal surface transportation program

(SAFETEA-LU), Congress will need to approve new long-term federal surface transportation

legislation by Sept. 30, 2011.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), approved in February 2009,

provided approximately $637 million in stimulus funding for highway and bridge improvements

and $85 million for public transit improvements in Missouri, a total of $722 million. The act also

included an estimated $22.5 million in Federal Transit Administration grants. This funding can

serve as a down payment on needed road, highway, bridge and transit improvements, but it is

still not sufficient to allow the state to proceed with numerous projects needed to improve and

enhance its surface transportation system.

Crafting a new federal highway and transit program is occurring during a time when the

nation’s surface transportation program faces numerous challenges, including significant levels

of deterioration, increasing traffic congestion, a high number of traffic deaths and a decline in

revenues going into the Federal Highway Trust Fund.

National Reports Highlight Need for Increased Transportation Investment

Two 2010 reports, one by the Treasury Department with the Council of Economic

Advisers and the other by a bipartisan group of transportation experts, found that the U.S. is

falling far behind internationally in providing a modern transportation system and will need to

28
adopt a more ambitious and focused transportation program to maintain the nation’s standard of

living. The reports call for increased investment to relieve traffic congestion, improve freight

and intermodal access, improve road and bridge conditions and reduce emissions.

“An Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Investment” (The Treasury report) was

prepared by the U.S. Department of the Treasury with the Council of Economic Advisers.

The report, “Well Within Reach: America’s New Transportation Agenda” (The Miller

report) was prepared by a group of the nation’s top transportation policy experts chaired by

former U.S. Secretaries of Transportation, Samuel Skinner and Norman Mineta. The group was

assembled by the Miller Center at the University of Virginia to develop solutions for the funding

and planning challenges that confront the nation’s transportation system.

The reports concluded that now is an optimal time to invest in infrastructure because of

reduced costs due to the economic downturn. The report also found that providing adequate

resources to modernize the nation’s transportation system will require increased use of

innovative funding tools including vehicle-miles-traveled fees, public-private partnerships and

capital budgeting.

The Miller report found that the nation faces an annual funding shortfall between $134

and $194 billion to maintain conditions and traffic congestion levels on its transportation system.

The report also found an annual funding shortfall to improve conditions of America's

transportation system and reduce traffic congestion from between $189 and $262 billion. 33

The Treasury report found that U.S. infrastructure spending as a percentage of gross

domestic product (GDP) has fallen by 50 percent and now accounts for two percent of the

29
nation’s GDP. In contrast, China spends about nine percent of its GDP on infrastructure and

Europe about five percent. 34

The Treasury report found that now is an optimal time to invest in transportation

infrastructure because well-designed projects can provide significant, long-term economic

benefits, because significant needs exist and construction and other costs associated with

infrastructure projects are especially low due to high unemployment and a high level of

underutilized resources. The report found that the unemployment rate among those likely to gain

employment from infrastructure investment is currently over 15 percent. 35 The U.S. Department

of Transportation also reports that it was able to complete an additional 2,000 projects with funds

from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as a result of low bids or projects

being completed under budget. 36

The reports included a number of key recommendations for the nation’s transportation

program to insure that it keeps America’s roads, skies, rails and waterways well-funded, in good

repair, and functioning with optimal efficiency and safety.

The following are some of the key recommendations from the Miller report.

9 Improved planning and increased investment in state-of-the-art freight transportation

facilities and systems would improve the efficiency of the supply chain, improve
business efficiency and enhance economic competitiveness. It was recommended that
an integrated approach to transportation planning be adopted that includes freight and
goods movement and stresses intermodal connectivity. 37
9 To insure that investments in infrastructure build a foundation for prosperity, the Miller
report recommended that a priority be placed on funding projects that provide the
greatest returns in terms of future U.S. competitiveness, economic growth and
employment. 38
9 Notwithstanding the recent economic downturn, traffic congestion continues to be a
significant burden to the public and businesses. The total annual cost of wasted fuel and
lost productivity in the U.S. due to traffic congestion was $87.2 billion in 2007, the

30
 equivalent of $750 for every U.S. driver. 39 The Miller report recommends an increased
emphasis on urban congestion relief, including adding additional capacity roadway and
transit capacity, making the existing system work more efficiently and adopting
regional policies that may reduce some travel demand. 40
9 Just as the nation’s roadways are slowed by congestion, the process of planning,
winning approval for, and implementing transportation improvements can by stymied
by gridlock among the many federal, state and local agencies involved. The Miller
report recommended improved delivery of transportation projects by reforming the
project planning, permitting and review process to speed actual implementation. 41

There is very little direct private investment in our nation’s highway and transit systems

due to the current method of funding infrastructure. The Treasury report also recommended the

establishment of a National Infrastructure Bank (NIB) that would create conditions for greater

private sector co-investment in infrastructure. The NIB would also perform rigorous analysis to

identify projects with the greatest possible societal and economic benefits.

The Miller report called for the adoption of a federal capital budget that would recognize

that transportation expenditures are an investment and that takes into account future returns on

those investments. An increased investment in transportation would actually save the public

money by reducing delays, vehicle maintenance costs, traffic crashes and vehicle emissions, the

Miller report found.

Conclusion

Roads, highways, bridges and public transit are the lifeline of the Show Me State’s

economy. Today, Missouri’s surface transportation system is under multiple pressures from

aging roads and bridges and increasing traffic congestion. As it looks to enhance and build a

thriving, growing and dynamic state, it will be essential that Missouri is able to provide a 21st

31
Century network of roads, highways, bridges and public transit that can safely and efficiently

accommodate the mobility demands of a modern society.

Since 2004, Missouri has used funding made available by voter approval of Amendment

3 to make significant improvements to its highway transportation system. But that progress may

be stalled or reversed as state spending on needed projects decreases sharply. An increase in

federal, state and local transportation funding is necessary to continue to make needed

improvements and maintain the progress made in recent years.

Missouri has an immediate need to move forward with numerous bridge, rehabilitation,

expansion and transit projects, but without a substantial level of federal, state and local funding,

the state will be unable to fund many vital projects. Enhanced transportation funding would

permit Missouri to upgrade important sections of its Interstate highways, improve traffic safety,

replace obsolete bridges and expand transit services statewide. Preservation work, such as

rehabilitation and maintenance, performed on Missouri’s network of roads and bridges will pay

off in future years by protecting the state’s past investment in surface transportation and

extending the life of its aging infrastructure.

A modernized highway system in Missouri will help the state accommodate continuing

population growth, offer congestion relief and improve safety. Completing critical, unfunded

projects would increase mobility, better support commerce and tourism, enhance economic

development and improve traffic safety statewide, boosting the quality of life for residents and

visitors alike.

As the nation looks to rebound from the recession, the U.S. will need to modernize its

surface transportation system, improve the physical condition of its transportation network and

enhance the system’s ability to provide efficient and reliable mobility for motorists and

32
businesses. Making needed improvements to Missouri’s roads, highways, bridges and transit

could provide a significant boost to the state’s economy by creating jobs in the short term and

stimulating long-term economic growth as a result of enhanced mobility and access.

Without a substantial boost in surface transportation funding, numerous needed projects

to expand capacity and upgrade the condition of Missouri’s roads, bridges, highways and transit

will not move forward, hampering the state’s ability to enhance mobility and economic

development statewide. The future provisions and funding levels of the next federal surface

transportation program will be a critical factor in whether Missouri is able to reap the benefits of

a modern surface transportation system.

###

33
 Endnotes
1
U.S. Census Bureau annual population estimate.
2
Missouri Office of Administration. Population projections.
3
TRIP analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. The nation’s Gross Domestic Product has been
adjusted for inflation based on the Consumer Price Index.
4
U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration: Highway Statistics 1990 and Federal
Highway Administration.
5
TRIP calculation based on Census and FHWA data.
6
MoDOT.
7
Ibid.
8
Selecting a Preventative Maintenance Treatment for Flexible Pavements. R. Hicks, J. Moulthrop, Transportation
Research Board. 1999. Figure 1.
9
Hold the Wheel Steady: America’s Roughest Roads and Strategies to Make our Pavements Smoother. TRIP,
September 2010.
10
Ibid.
11
Highway Development and Management: Volume Seven. Modeling Road User and Environmental Effects in
HDM-4. C. Bennett, I. Greenwood. 2000.
12
Your Driving Costs. AAA. 2010.
13
USDOT Federal Highway Administration National Bridge Inventory 2010.
14
Ibid.
15
MoDOT response to TRIP survey.
16
TRIP analysis of FHWA data. Highway Statistics 2008, Table HM-61. Interstate and Other Freeways and
Expressways with a volume service ratio above 0.70, which is the standard for mild congestion, are considered
congested.
17
Texas Transportation Institute. 2010 Urban Mobility Report.
18
MoDOT.
19
Ibid.
20
MoDOT.
21
MoDOT.
22
TRIP analysis of FHWA and NHTSA data.
23
Ibid.
24
TRIP estimates based on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data.
25
Ibid.
26
Bureau of Transportation Statistics, USDOT. 2007 Commodity Flow Survey, State Summaries.
27
Ibid.
28
TRIP estimates based on USDOT data: Office of Freight Management and Operations.
29
Federal Highway Administration, 2008. Employment Impacts of Highway Infrastructure Investment.
30
FHWA estimate based on its analysis of 2006 data. For more information on FHWA’s cost-benefit analysis of
highway investment, see the 2008 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges and Transit: Conditions and
Performance.
31
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Local unemployment statistics.
32
TRIP analysis based on data obtained from FHWA and Federal Transit Administration.
33
Miller Center of Public Affairs (2010). “Well Within Reach, America’s Transportation Agenda.” P. 28.
34
Department of the Treasury with the Council of Economic Advisors (2010). “An Economic Analysis of
Infrastructure Investment.” p. 13.
35
Ibid. p. 2.
36
Ibid. p. 2.
37
Miller Center of Public Affairs (2010). “Well Within Reach, America’s Transportation Agenda.” P. 38.
38
Ibid. p. 34.
39
Texas Transportation Institute. 2010 Urban Mobility Report.
40
Miller Center of Public Affairs (2010). “Well Within Reach, America’s Transportation Agenda.” P. 40.
41
Ibid. p. 45.

34