Minnesota

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2014 Annual Report

 

Prepared by: MN

 
ii 

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section [HSIP], shall not be 

subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered 

for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or 

addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data.” 

23 U.S.C. 409 states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, 

or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety 

enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway 

crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any 

highway safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid 

highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State 

court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any 

occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
iii 

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 2

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 2

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 5

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 11

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 11

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 14

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 34

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 34

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 49

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................52

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 54

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 59

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 64

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 72
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

1 

Executive Summary

Minnesota distributes HSIP funds based on the percentage of serious injuries and fatalities. This 

approach uses the Strategic Highway Safety Plan as a basis. Road Safety Plans for Minnesota districts 

and counties have further directed the focus of safety funds to lower-cost, systemic strategies. MnDOT 

is currently in the process of updating the 8 Minnesota districts over the next 18 months.

Definition of Terms:

MnDOT: Minnesota Department of Transportation

Greater Minnesota: Minnesota is split into 8 MnDOT districts. District 5 is the Metro District. All other 

districts when referred to as a collective, are called Greater Minnesota.

OTST: MnDOT's Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology. MnDOT's Central Office Safety Unit resides 

within OTST.

SALT: MnDOT's Office of State Aid for Local Transportation. This is the MnDOT office that works most 

directly with local agencies.

ATP: Area Transportation Partnership.Boundaries are synonymous with MnDOT district investment 

boundaries. The partnerships have as their members metropolitan and non-metropolitan stakeholders 

and can include Metropolitan planing organizations, Regional development commissions, cities, 

counties, townships, transit providers, tribal governments, other interests and MnDOT.

SFY: State Fiscal Year
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

2 

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program 

with the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in fatalities and serious 

injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 924.15, States are 

required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP 

implementation and evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent 

with the HSIP MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

District

Other

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program. 

MnDOT distributes funds to local roads through the Greater Minnesota Combined Solicitation. The 

latest solicitation distributed over $20M over three years of local projects for HSIP and Section 164 (MS 

32) Funds. OTST, with representatives from State-Aid, prioritizes the local HSIP projects for each ATP. 

Districts are given the opportunity to comment on the prioritization of projects. 

The allocation of HSIP funds is based on the distribution of fatal and A-injury crashes. Funds are 

distributed as follows: 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Step 1: Funds are split based on % of K and A crashes in each District. 

Step 2: Funds are split again based on % of K and A crashes occurring on State vs. local system. 

The resulting “HSIP Goals” and local/state split of this fund are shown in the table attached to the 

Program Administration section. The file shows 2004-2006 crash data was used to distribute funds for 

SFY 2016 and prior. The next solicitation, held in Fall 2014, will use the newer crash data (2009-2011) 

and the new apportionments to program projects in SFY 2017 and beyond. 

The 2007 Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) is the main guidance for project selection and 

evaluation. The goal for this solicitation is that 70% of Greater Minnesota projects and 30% of Metro 

projects be systemic. Systemic projects make up 63% of all the projects awarded for Minnesota in 

2014. Historically, a subset of that program, local projects in Greater Minnesota, is comprised of 

approximately 95% systemic projects since 2007. Minnesota also dispersed over $7M in Sanction 164 

(MS32) funds, 83% of which were used for systemic projects.

Additionally, Minnesota has funded a County Safety Plan for each of its 87 counties and 8 districts. These 

plans have been completed and are being implemented. They provide each county and district with a 

prioritized list of low-cost, systemic projects. The District safety plans are currently being revised and 

should be completed by April 2016.

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: Other-MnDOT District Traffic Engineers

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

MnDOT's office of Traffic, Safety and Technology (OTST) works closely with the State Aid for Local 

Transportation (SALT) office as well as district traffic engineers in the distribution of HSIP funds. 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

A representative from the state aid office sits on the both the steering and selection committees for 

HSIP. The offices work together to educate local agencies and district personnel on the HSIP program. 

Once projects are selected the state aid office coordinates with the local agencies and provides support 

as necessary. 

The HSIP project selection committee asks for input from the district traffic engineers during the 

selection and award processes. District traffic engineers provide vital background information on 

proposed projects as well as adding the local perspective. 

MnDOT also holds quarterly TEO (Traffic Engineering Organization) Safety Subcommittee meetings, at 

which additional HSIP coordination occurs.

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-City Engineer Safety Committee

Other: Other-County Engineer Safety Committee

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-Beginning with FY 2017, projects will be programmed in a more centralized project 

selection process as described in question 9.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

Beginning with projects programmed in SFY 2017, the way Minnesota administers 

state projects will be changing. Decisions will be made in the central office level 

rather than the district level. Prior to SFY 2017 projects, only the local HSIP projects 

are selected by Central Office. District projects were approved by the district 

personnel in the past, but will now go through Central Office in a more formalized 

process.

The next solicitation, occurring in the fall of 2014, will be the first to use the new 

process. The last solicitation occurred in Fall 2013 and programmed projects 

through SFY 2016. 

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: Other-MnDOT funds 

these countermeasures through 

HSIP.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Program: Other-MnDOT funds these countermeasures through HSIP.

Date of Program Methodology: 10/1/2007

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-Road surface: In one 

particular county, gravel roads 

make up almost half of the 

system but fewer than 15 

percent of all severe crashes 

occur on these roads.

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-Severe Crash Rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate 

the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Other 

Road Safety Plan 1

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 

63

Highway safety improvment program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: Other-County and District Safety Plans

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-NONE

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

HSIP funds are distributed in three separate processes: Met Council HSIP, Greater Minnesota Combined 

Solicitation and the MnDOT districts. Each solicitation utilizes a risk based analysis (Road Safety Plans) 

to select projects. Beginning with projects programmed in SFY 2017, the process MnDOT district projects 

go through will match the Greater Minnesota Combined Solicitation much more closely. This will 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

include approval from Central Office Traffic and additional checks and balances to ensure proper 

funding categories are assigned to each project. 

Lower cost, systemic treatments (lighting, signage, rumble strips and enhanced edgelines) are the focus 

of the Greater Minnesota projects. Any entity that is eligible for State Aid funds can apply directly to the 

Greater Minnesota Combined Solicitation. Cities and Tribes that are not State Aid eligible must apply for 

HSIP funds through their county.

In the Metro District, systemic projects are funded as well as projects that address a spot location safety 

concern. Metro District projects and local metro projects compete side by side for the Metro HSIP funds 

in the Met Council solicitation. 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 37734264 85 % 25925533 75 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU)

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

6900000 15 % 8739063 25 %

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants 

(Section 406)

Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Totals 44634264 100% 34664596 100%

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and maintained) safety projects? 

$19,306,096.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$18,472,492.00

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects? 

$485,000.00

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$485,000.00

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period?

$0.00
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting 

period? 

$16,937,255.00

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

Minnesota continues to see a number of HSIP projects that are let with a significant savings from the 

engineer's estimate as contractors become more familiar with the types of strategies being 

implemented and as the economy fluctuates. The timing of the letting and the end of the fiscal year, 

often make it difficult to realize these savings and turn them into projects. Minnesota has made efforts 

to identify HSIP projects further out in the STIP than in previous years. This provides the State with the 

option of moving projects forward when a savings is realized.

For each year of the STIP, up to $20.5M in safety projects are identified and selected for funding. 

Because Minnesota has a practice of spending all of its Federal dollars within any given fiscal year, some 

safety projects may be coded to something other than HSIP depending on the fiscal resources available 

to the department in that year.

Minnesota's HSIP program has consisted mainly of stand-alone safety projects. Each district is also 

required to spend an additional 2X HSIP on safety add-ons to other projects in their program.

Some higher cost projects, such as roundabouts, while eligible for HSIP funds, have normally been 

funded through other programs.

Beginning with FY 2017, the more centralized process for programming MnDOT projects should make it 

easier to utilize more HSIP funds. Minnesota will be able to shift dollars from one district to another 

more easily to utilize any left over funds. MnDOT has also moved to a more balanced letting schedule in 

the past year. This should allow for fewer surprises in cost estimates and project schedules at the end of 

the fiscal year.

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement Category Outpu

t 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundi

ng 

Categ

ory

Functiona

l 

Classifica

tion

AA

DT

Spe

ed

Roadwa

y 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

'2514-119' Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - extend 

acceleration/deceleratio

n lane

1 

Numb

ers

416086.

54

462318.

38

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'018-070-

009'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

451 

Numb

ers

163170 181300 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'3403-

68','3404-

55'

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add 

right-turn lane (freeflow)

2 

Numb

ers

262938.

56

292153.

96

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

'0704-

88','137-

122-

002','007-

617-

016','137-

123-008'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control -

traffic signal to 

roundabout

1 

Numb

ers

944469.

07

1049410

.08

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'5006-

50002B','5

509-

70','5006-

19','5006-

50001B'

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

2 

Numb

ers

347838.

3

386487 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'5209-

66S','5209-

66','5209-

66F','5209-

66H','7211

-35'

Alignment Vertical 

alignment or elevation 

change

2 

Miles

1258889

.09

1398765

.65

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Removin

g or 

relocatin

g objects 

in 

hazardou

s 

locations

Roadway 

Maintenan

ce

'002-596-

020'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

1 

Numb

ers

468000 468000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

'002-605-

018'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal - add additional 

signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

936000 1040000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'002-678-

020'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal - add additional 

signal heads

1 

Numb

ers

842400 842400 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'004-070-

011','004-

070-

008','004-

070-012'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

12 

Miles

506887 699109 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'008-070-

004'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

19 

Miles

27934.8

3

31038.7 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'013-030-

003'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

11 

Miles

190286 241045 HSIP 

(Sectio

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Roadway 

Departur

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

markings - new n 148) Agency e Departure 

Improvem

ents

'013-030-

003'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

14 

Numb

ers

0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'013-618-

004'

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics 

- modify skew angle

1 

Numb

ers

97200 110558 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'016-070-

005','016-

070-

006','016-

070-

007','016-

070-008'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

62 

Miles

282534 376633 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'1906-57' Miscellaneous 0 

Numb

ers

967164.

71

1074627

.46

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

ents

'019-632-

028'

Intersection geometry 

Auxiliary lanes - add leftturn lane

1 

Numb

ers

327600 783552 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'024-070-

016','024-

070-

015','024-

617-018'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

14 

Miles

403658 403658 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'025-070-

007'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

15 

Miles

88676 88676 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'141-030-

027'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal - add additional 

signal heads

10 

Numb

ers

769600 1206355 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

'027-030-

034'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

7 

Miles

84500 84500 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'030-070-

004'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

87 

Numb

ers

156355 173728 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'030-070-

005'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

35 

Miles

259776 259776 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'033-070-

004'

Lighting Intersection 

lighting

29 

Numb

ers

241200 268000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'034-070-

006'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

49 

Numb

26123 37350 HSIP 

(Sectio

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Roadway 

Departur

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

and flashers ers n 148) Agency e Departure 

Improvem

ents

'037-620-

019','037-

070-004'

Shoulder treatments 

Widen shoulder - paved 

or other

4 

Miles

160219 178021 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'042-070-

006'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

11 

Miles

357219 357219 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'043-070-

008'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

54 

Miles

315000 393137 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'044-070-

004'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

31 

Numb

ers

44775 44775 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

ents

'047-070-

007'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

47 

Miles

268481 298312 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'048-070-

009'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

2 

Miles

95606 95606 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'048-070-

008','048-

070-007'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

5 

Miles

169200 169200 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'052-070-

003'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

121 

Numb

ers

103092.

3

114547 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

'056-070-

009','056-

070-008'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

155 

Miles

581720 646355 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'056-070-

011','056-

070-010'

Intersection traffic 

control Pavement 

markings - add advance 

stop ahead

43 

Numb

ers

0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'056-070-

011','056-

070-010'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

23 

Numb

ers

126619 140688 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'056-070-

013','056-

070-012'

Roadway Roadway 

widening - curve 

85 

Numb

ers

555291 616990 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'056-070-

014'

Lighting Intersection 

lighting

20 

Numb

182700 251375 HSIP 

(Sectio

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

ers n 148) Agency n 

Improvem

ents

'060-070-

006','060-

070-

007','060-

070-005'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

13 

Miles

567672.

3

912252.

2

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'060-070-

006','060-

070-

007','060-

070-005'

Roadway Rumble strips -

center

5 

Miles

0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'062-631-

009'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

1 

Numb

ers

1497556 1654045 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'062-030-

016'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

miscellaneous/other/un

specified

49 

Numb

ers

333216 469000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

ents

'062-630-

059'

Roadway Roadway -

restripe to revise 

separation between 

opposing lanes and/or 

shoulder widths 

1 

Miles

304516 340053 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 City of 

Municip

al 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'063-070-

002'

Lighting Intersection 

lighting

10 

Numb

ers

34290 38100 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'064-070-

004'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

10 

Miles

39548.0

4

43942.2

7

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'065-070-

006'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

141 

Miles

67497 67497 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

'065-070-

005'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

14 

Miles

93636 93636 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'066-637-

010','066-

070-011'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

6 

Miles

250000 2157698

.98

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'069-070-

010','069-

070-

011','069-

070-012'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

148 

Miles

626786 696430 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'166-020-

014','166-

104-

010','070-

617-025'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

3 

Numb

ers

1101600 1101600 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'071-070-

023'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

169 

Miles

126900 372482 HSIP 

(Sectio

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Roadway 

Departur

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

markings - new n 148) Agency e Departure 

Improvem

ents

'071-070-

024','071-

070-022'

Intersection geometry 

Intersection geometrics 

-

miscellaneous/other/un

specified

1 

Numb

ers

700844 700844 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'073-070-

009'

Lighting Intersection 

lighting

7 

Numb

ers

81900 81900 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'073-070-

010'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control -

traffic signal to 

roundabout

1 

Numb

ers

405000 405000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'074-070-

003'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

22 

Miles

136539 155178 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

ents

'7401-39' Roadside Barrier - cable 2 

Miles

246786.

75

274207.

5

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'079-070-

006'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

111 

Miles

350000 398355 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'079-070-

005'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

118 

Numb

ers

120474 120474 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'083-605-

039','083-

608-

019','083-

070-006'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

14 

Miles

448140 448140 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

'085-626-

021','085-

070-009'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

5 

Miles

0 43108 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'087-070-

005'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

12 

Miles

81792 97171 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'019-609-

018','070-

602-020'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control -

all-way stop to 

roundabout

1 

Numb

ers

0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'088-070-

038'

Roadway signs and 

traffic control Curverelated warning signs 

and flashers

528 

Numb

ers

542025 602250 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'8822-167' Lighting Intersection 

lighting

8 

Numb

310500 345000 HSIP 

(Sectio

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

ers n 148) Agency n 

Improvem

ents

'8825-389' Lighting Intersection 

lighting

12 

Numb

ers

159109.

2

176788 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents

'088-070-

040'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

640 

Miles

569041 569041 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'088-070-

041'

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

41 

Miles

807890 916880 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'088-070-

041'

Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

83 

Miles

0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

ents

'8824-115' Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

0 0 0 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'6982-

299','0980-

183'

Roadside Barrier - cable 9 

Miles

1121959 1246622 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'1480-

165','2180-

103','2680-

43'

Roadside Barrier - cable 0 50365.6

2

55961.8 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'8680-

86803','86

80-

158','8680-

86526','86

80-86530'

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add lane(s) 

along segment

2 

Miles

1366933

.52

1518815

.02

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

'5209-

66S','5209-

66','5209-

66F','5209-

66H','7211

-35'

Alignment Vertical 

alignment or elevation 

change

0 

Miles

973798.

58

973798.

58

Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Removin

g or 

relocatin

g objects 

in 

hazardou

s 

locations

Roadway 

Maintenan

ce

'8828-158' Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

20 

Miles

501338.

14

501338.

14

Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'8826-156' Roadway delineation 

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

73 

Miles

684542.

17

684542.

17

Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'8828-164' Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or shoulder

67 

Miles

130281.

74

343653.

13

Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

32

'8816-

2141'

Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

6 

Numb

ers

485000 485000 Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Coordina

te TZD 

Efforts

Coordinat

e TZD 

Efforts

'1480-

165','2180-

103','2680-

43'

Roadside Barrier - cable 5 

Miles

2290867 2290867 Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'1480-

167','2680-

45','8480-

35','5680-

135'

Roadside Barrier - cable 24 

Miles

3673235

.2

3673235

.2

Penalt

y 

Transf

er –

Sectio

n 164

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Cost 

Effective 

Lane 

Departure 

Improvem

ents

'002-030-

007'

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replacem

ent

4 

Numb

ers

353808 446146 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersecti

ons

Cost 

effective 

Intersectio

n 

Improvem

ents
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the state for the past five years. 

Performance Measures* 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Number of fatalities 487.8 458.2 433 410 396.4

Number of serious injuries 1684.6 1519 1382 1288.4 1221

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.856 0.802 0.758 0.718 0.696

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

2.958 2.664 2.42 2.262 2.146

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

35
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

37

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2013

Function 

Classification

Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

12.6 30.6 0.31 0.75

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

65.8 128.2 0.91 1.77

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

58.6 126 1.18 2.53

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

26 58.2 1.93 4.32

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

68.4 164 1.61 3.86

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

32.8 88 1.23 3.31

URBAN PRINCIPAL 15.6 88.8 0.19 1.07
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

6 44.2 0.17 1.24

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

25.6 20.8 0.55 0.44

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

55 94 0.64 1.1

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

14 262.8 0.53 10.07

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

15 83.4 0.33 1.85
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

41
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

42
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

Year - 2013

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 183.2 450 0.56 1.37

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 156.4 480 1.14 3.52

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 23.2 76 1.82 6.15

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 33.6 211 0.37 2.2

STATE PARK, FOREST, OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL PARK, FOREST OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER THAN RAILROAD) 0 0 0 0

RAILROAD 0 0 0 0

STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

LOCAL TOLL AUTHORITY 0 0 0 0

OTHER PUBLIC INSTRUMENTALITY (E.G. AIRPORT, 

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

"Rural Principal Arterial - Other Freeways and Expressways" data is included in the "Rural Principal Arterial - Other" Functional Classification.

"Urban Minor Collector" data is included in the "Urban Major Collector" Functional Classification.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate.

In 2013, overall traffic crashes increased by 10% in Minnesota while traffic fatalities fell 2% from the 

previous year. A long, harsh winter contributed to an overall increase in property damage crashes. The 

387 deaths in 2013, represent a 41% reduction in traffic deaths from a decade ago, when 655 people 

died on Minnesota roads. The 2013 fatality count is the second lowest annual death figure (behind 

2011) since 1944.

Miles traveled increased again from 56.9B to 57B in the last year. 

Motorcycle fatalities rose again in 2013, while pedestrian fatalities decreased. In addition to 60 

motorcyclist deaths, the 2013 statistics include 68 fatalities that were caused by inattention and 94 

motor vehicle occupants who were killed that weren't buckled. The VMT-based fatality rate for 2013 is 

0.68, one of the lowest in the nation. The VMT fatality rate has shown dramatic improvement in the last 

five decades (it was 5.52 in 1966).

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fatality rate (per 

capita)

0.524 0.5 0.486 0.454 0.438

Serious injury rate 

(per capita)

0.822 0.764 0.734 0.692 0.668

Fatality and serious 

injury rate (per capita)

1.362 1.278 1.234 1.142 1.102

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

YEARFHWA METRIC(5- POPULATIONFATALITIESA Fatality Serious Fatal 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

50

year rolling 

average)

INJURIES Rate Injury 

Rate

and 

Serious 

Injury 

Rate

Value Comp. 

Year

2005 - - - 116 60 116 0.52 1.00 1.52

2006 - - - 122 64 95 0.52 0.78 1.30

2007 - - - 122 84 108 0.69 0.89 1.57

2008 - - - 125 66 95 0.53 0.76 1.29

2009 1.36 2007 - 127 58 86 0.46 0.68 1.13

2010 1.28 2008 - 129 51 91 0.40 0.71 1.10

2011 1.24 2009 0.9 131 59 83 0.45 0.63 1.08

2012 1.14 2010 0.9 136 59 92 0.43 0.68 1.11

2013 1.10 2011 0.9 140 63 89 0.45 0.64 1.09
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-Minnesota is tracking the number of miles touched by HSIP as an indicator of success. 

Each group of countermeasures will be studied for their effectiveness at reducing fatal and serious injury 

crashes. Six-inch edgelines are the first countermeasure to have enough years to be studied properly. 

As more years of data are collected, Minnesota will conduct more studies.

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: 

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

N/A
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2013

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Lane Departure 207.8 548.4 0 0 0 0 0

Intersections 139.4 525.8 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrians 38.4 96.2 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclists 7.6 48.6 0 0 0 0 0

Older Drivers 86.2 167.6 0 0 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 53 204.2 0 0 0 0 0

Work Zones 8.4 16.6 0 0 0 0 0
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

55
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

56
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

57
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

58
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

Groups of similar project types

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

HSIP Subprogram TypesTarget 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

60
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

61
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

62
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

63
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

64

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

65
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

66
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

67
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

68

See attached report on Minnesota's Six Inch Edgeline Project on Rural 2-lane/2-way Roads
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

69

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

Minnesota is trying to balance out our investment between prevention and reduction. Projects focusing 

on prevention tend to be low-cost systemic projects touching a large number of miles with our HSIP 

dollars. Local HSIP projects in rural areas tend to fall under the prevention category. Reduction refers 

to the high crash locations that focus more dollars on fewer miles. Projects in the Metro area tend to be 

in the reduction category.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

70

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

Minnesota 

Edgeline 

study

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - new

80 80 69 69

Six-inch edge lines are an effective countermeasure for overall crashes and run-off-road right crashes. While crashes decreased across all four 

hypotheses tested, larger sample sizes may lead to more conclusive findings for severe crashes and severe run-off-road right crashes. 

These analyses do not account for driver adaptation to six-inch edge lines. Future research should consider possible driver adaptation to well 

delineated roads – such as increased travel speeds.

See attached Six Inch Edgeline for study details.
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

71

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached

Program Structure: Program Administration dollar distribution.xls

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 

Improvements (Program Evaluation): SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Minnesota Critical Emphasis Areas.pdf

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 

Improvements (Program Evaluation): Groups of 

similar project types

Cable Median Barrier Before-After Study, 11-

2012.pdf

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 

Improvements (Program Evaluation): Systemic 

Treatments

Six Inch Edge Lines Phase 1 and Phase II Final 9-25-

2014.pdf
2014 Minnesota Highway Safety Improvement Program

72

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. 

annual fatality rate).

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety improvement project means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are 

consistent with a State strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location 

or feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled.

Non-infrastructure projects are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of noninfrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, 

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement 

activities.

Older driver special rule applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and 

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data 

are available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance dated 

February 13, 2013. 

Performance measure means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor 

changes in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives.

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects.

Roadway Functional Classification means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into 

classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety 

data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systemic safety improvement means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk 

roadway features that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned for the fiscal 

year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.