1. 1 Update Update MnDOT’s County Roadway Safety Plans CTS Transportation Research Conference May 23, 2012 CH2M HILL, SRF Consulting Group, P.E. Services

2. Agenda Project Overview - Goals, Objectives Crashes – A Data Driven Process Project Development The Case for a Systemic Approach Risk Rating Criteria Results Questions/Comments 2

3. County Road Safety Plans Sponsored by… Funding provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation Almost $3.5 million made available to prepare County Safety Plans for 87 counties over three years 3

4. Goals and Objectives Development of County Safety Plans Establish safety emphasis areas High priority safety strategies At-risk locations Safety investment options Identify high priority safety projects, both proactive and reactive. Position counties to compete for safety funds Highway Safety Improvement Program High Risk Rural Roads Program Minnesota Central Safety Funds Foster safety culture among county stakeholders 4

5. Project Approach – Phase IV 5 Crash Analysis Select Safety Emphasis Areas Identify Short List of Critical Strategies Identify Safety Projects Safety Workshop Develop Comprehensive List of Safety Strategies Project Programming Project Development Implementation Evaluation Refinement & Update SHSP Safety Plan April 2012July 2012 June 2012 April 2012 Oct 2012 January 2013 Sept 2012 Review Mtg w/ Counties Kick-off Video Meeting Nov 2012 June 2012

6. Greater Minnesota Crash Data Overview 5 Year Crashes 156,182 4,902 5 Year Crashes 156,182 4,902 State System 70,808 – 45% 2,000 – 41% State System 70,808 – 45% 2,000 – 41% CSAH/CR 36,716 – 24% 1,963 – 40% CSAH/CR 36,716 – 24% 1,963 – 40% Rural 22,630 – 62% 1,626 – 83% Rural 22,630 – 62% 1,626 – 83% Urban 14,086 – 38% 337 – 17% Urban 14,086 – 38% 337 – 17% All Way Stop 445 – 6% 5 – 3% All Way Stop 445 – 6% 5 – 3% Run off Road 7,891 – 67% 675 – 65% Run off Road 7,891 – 67% 675 – 65% On Curve 3,222 – 40% 339 – 50% On Curve 3,222 – 40% 339 – 50% Example All – % Severe – % Example All – % Severe – % Right Angle – 1,268 (47%), 37 (86%) “Other” – 252 (9%), 9 (21%) Left Turn – 268 (10%), 4 (9%) Rear End – 333 (12%), 3 (7%) Right Angle – 1,268 (47%), 37 (86%) “Other” – 252 (9%), 9 (21%) Left Turn – 268 (10%), 4 (9%) Rear End – 333 (12%), 3 (7%) Thru-Stop 2,697 – 37% 65 – 45% Thru-Stop 2,697 – 37% 65 – 45% Right Angle – 633 (27%), 15 (47%) Rear End – 799 (35%), 5 (16%) Left Turn – 375 (16%), 5 (16%) Head On – 100 (4%), 4 (13%) Right Angle – 633 (27%), 15 (47%) Rear End – 799 (35%), 5 (16%) Left Turn – 375 (16%), 5 (16%) Head On – 100 (4%), 4 (13%) Signalized 2,308 – 31% 32 – 22% Signalized 2,308 – 31% 32 – 22% Inters-Related 5,487 – 29% 463 – 30% Inters-Related 5,487 – 29% 463 – 30% Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, 2006-2010 Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). City, Twnshp, Other 48,658 – 31% 939 – 19% City, Twnshp, Other 48,658 – 31% 939 – 19% Inters-Related 7,332 – 52% 145 – 43% Inters-Related 7,332 – 52% 145 – 43% Not Inters-Related 5,177 – 37% 175 – 52% Not Inters-Related 5,177 – 37% 175 – 52% Run Off Road – 1,202 (23%), 69 (39%) Head On – 366 (7%), 27 (15%) “Other” – 540 (10%), 25 (14%) Rear End – 1,336 (26%), 17 (10%) Run Off Road – 1,202 (23%), 69 (39%) Head On – 366 (7%), 27 (15%) “Other” – 540 (10%), 25 (14%) Rear End – 1,336 (26%), 17 (10%) Animal 4,009 – 18% 60 – 4% Animal 4,009 – 18% 60 – 4% Not Inters-Related 11,849 – 64% 1,042 –66% Not Inters-Related 11,849 – 64% 1,042 –66% Head On, SS Opp. 751 – 6% 132 – 13% Head On, SS Opp. 751 – 6% 132 – 13% On Curve 247 – 33% 46 – 35% On Curve 247 – 33% 46 – 35% Unknown/Other 1,577 – 11% 17 – 5% Unknown/Other 1,577 – 11% 17 – 5% Unknown/Other 1,276 – 7% 61 – 4% Unknown/Other 1,276 – 7% 61 – 4% Other/Unknown 1,881 – 26% 43 – 30% Other/Unknown 1,881 – 26% 43 – 30% Right Angle – 849 (34%), 122 (56%) “Other” – 464 (18%), 33 (15%) Run Off Road – 342 (14%), 21 (10%) Left Turn – 184 (7%), 10 (5%) Right Angle – 849 (34%), 122 (56%) “Other” – 464 (18%), 33 (15%) Run Off Road – 342 (14%), 21 (10%) Left Turn – 184 (7%), 10 (5%) Thru-Stop 2,511 – 46% 216 – 47% Thru-Stop 2,511 – 46% 216 – 47% Run Off Road – 999 (38%), 95 (42%) Right Angle – 268 (10%), 39 (17%) “Other” – 303 (12%), 29 (13%) Head On – 112 (4%), 21 (9%) Run Off Road – 999 (38%), 95 (42%) Right Angle – 268 (10%), 39 (17%) “Other” – 303 (12%), 29 (13%) Head On – 112 (4%), 21 (9%) Other/Unknown 2,600 – 47% 228 – 49% Other/Unknown 2,600 – 47% 228 – 49% Not Animal 18,616 – 82% 1,566 – 96% Not Animal 18,616 – 82% 1,566 – 96% All Way Stop 164 – 3% 15 – 3% All Way Stop 164 – 3% 15 – 3% Signalized 209 – 4% 4 – 1% Signalized 209 – 4% 4 – 1% -ATP’s 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 – NO Metro 6

7. Metro ATP Crash Data Overview Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, 2006-2010 -- Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). 5 Year Crashes Metro 214,139 3,157 5 Year Crashes Metro 214,139 3,157 State System 83,784 – 39% 924 – 29% State System 83,784 – 39% 924 – 29% CSAH/CR 68,322 – 32% 1,339 – 42% CSAH/CR 68,322 – 32% 1,339 – 42% Rural 2,848 – 4% 164 – 12% Rural 2,848 – 4% 164 – 12% Urban 65,433 – 96% 1,171 – 87% Urban 65,433 – 96% 1,171 – 87% All Way Stop 1,376 – 4% 23 – 4% All Way Stop 1,376 – 4% 23 – 4% Run off Road 719 – 61% 56 – 61% Run off Road 719 – 61% 56 – 61% On Curve 345 – 48% 33 – 59% On Curve 345 – 48% 33 – 59% Example All – % Severe – % Example All – % Severe – % Right Angle – 3,121 (42%), 80 (51%) Rear End – 1,803 (25%), 15 (10%) Left Turn – 757 (10%), 15 (10%) Head On – 208 (3%), 11 (7%) Right Angle – 3,121 (42%), 80 (51%) Rear End – 1,803 (25%), 15 (10%) Left Turn – 757 (10%), 15 (10%) Head On – 208 (3%), 11 (7%) Thru-Stop 7,344 – 19% 156 – 27% Thru-Stop 7,344 – 19% 156 – 27% Right Angle – 6,372 (28%), 141 (51%) Rear End – 8,514 (37%), 51 (18%) Left Turn – 3,374 (15%), 29 (10%) Head On – 807 (4%), 17 (6%) Right Angle – 6,372 (28%), 141 (51%) Rear End – 8,514 (37%), 51 (18%) Left Turn – 3,374 (15%), 29 (10%) Head On – 807 (4%), 17 (6%) Signalized 23,077 – 61% 277 – 49% Signalized 23,077 – 61% 277 – 49% Inters-Related 924 –39% 61 – 39% Inters-Related 924 –39% 61 – 39% City, Twnshp, Other 62,033 – 29% 894 – 28% City, Twnshp, Other 62,033 – 29% 894 – 28% Inters-Related 38,045 – 60% 569 – 60% Inters-Related 38,045 – 60% 569 – 60% Not Inters-Related 15,560 – 25% 290 – 31% Not Inters-Related 15,560 – 25% 290 – 31% Run Off Road – 2,264 (15%), 77 (27%) Rear End – 5,575 (36%), 62 (21%) Head On – 1,097 (7%), 61 (21%) “Other”– 1,262 (8%), 29 (10%) Right Angle – 1,619 (10%), 24 (8%) Run Off Road – 2,264 (15%), 77 (27%) Rear End – 5,575 (36%), 62 (21%) Head On – 1,097 (7%), 61 (21%) “Other”– 1,262 (8%), 29 (10%) Right Angle – 1,619 (10%), 24 (8%) Animal 483 – 17% 6 – 4% Animal 483 – 17% 6 – 4% Not Inters-Related 1,176 – 50% 92 – 58% Not Inters-Related 1,176 – 50% 92 – 58% Head On, SS Opp 93 – 8% 16 – 17% Head On, SS Opp 93 – 8% 16 – 17% On Curve 34 – 37% 4 – 25% On Curve 34 – 37% 4 – 25% Unknown/Other 9,314 – 15% 87 – 9% Unknown/Other 9,314 – 15% 87 – 9% Unknown/Other 264 – 11% 5 – 3% Unknown/Other 264 – 11% 5 – 3% Other/Unknown 6,241 – 16% 113 – 20% Other/Unknown 6,241 – 16% 113 – 20% Right Angle – 199 (37%), 15 (44%) Run Off Road – 50 (9%), 4 (12%) Head On – 37 (7%), 4 (12%) Right Angle – 199 (37%), 15 (44%) Run Off Road – 50 (9%), 4 (12%) Head On – 37 (7%), 4 (12%) Thru-Stop 539 – 58% 34 – 56% Thru-Stop 539 – 58% 34 – 56% Run Off Road – 81 (32%), 6 (25%) Head On/SS Opp – 19 (7%), 4 (17%) Right Angle – 20 (8%), 3 (13%) Run Off Road – 81 (32%), 6 (25%) Head On/SS Opp – 19 (7%), 4 (17%) Right Angle – 20 (8%), 3 (13%) Other/Unknown 256 – 28% 24 – 39% Other/Unknown 256 – 28% 24 – 39% Not Animal 2,364 – 83% 158 – 96% Not Animal 2,364 – 83% 158 – 96% All Way Stop 47 – 5% 2 – 3% All Way Stop 47 – 5% 2 – 3% Signalized 82 – 9% 1 – 2% Signalized 82 – 9% 1 – 2% Ped/Bike 2,486 – 4% 225 – 19% Ped/Bike 2,486 – 4% 225 – 19% Non Ped/Bike 62,923 – 96% 946 – 81% Non Ped/Bike 62,923 – 96% 946 – 81% Ped 1,076 – 43% 145 – 64% Ped 1,076 – 43% 145 – 64% Bike 1,410 – 57% 80 – 36% Bike 1,410 – 57% 80 – 36% Int 767 – 71% 93 – 64% Int 767 – 71% 93 – 64% Signal 536 – 70% 51 – 55% Signal 536 – 70% 51 – 55% Int 1,101 – 78% 52 – 65% Int 1,101 – 78% 52 – 65% Signal 683 – 62% 32 – 62% Signal 683 – 62% 32 – 62% 4/11/2012

8. Project Development The key questions: Is every element of the county system equally at risk? Where to Start? A new approach to safety planning Old Approach Crashes = Risk & No Crashes = No Risk New Approach No Crashes ≠ No Risk Use surrogates of crashes (roadway and traffic characteristics) to identify risk and prioritize – the 5  (or 6) Ranking System 8 Reactive Approach Reactive Approach – Identifying Black Spot locations with crash rate above the critical crash rate and/or experienced multiple severe crashes in the 5-year study period. The Systemic Approach The Systemic Approach – Applying high priority/low cost safety strategies at the at-risk locations across each county’s system of highways.

9. Support for the SYSTEMIC Approach 68 Greater Minnesota Counties Segments: Segments: 786 severe road departure crashes on 21,000 miles of rural paved county roads Average Density = 0.01 severe road departure crashes/year No segments average one severe road departure crash per year Curves Curves: 327 severe crashes on 15,000 curves Average Density = 0.004 severe crashes/curve/year 85% of curves had NO crashes (during 5-year study period) 5 curves with 2 fatal crashes (0.03% of curves), 19 curves with 2 severe crashes (0.1% of curves) No curve averaged one severe crash per year Intersections Intersections: 640 severe crashes over 10,000 rural thru/STOP intersections Average Density = 0.01 severe crashes/intersection/year No intersection averaged one severe crash per year 9 RARE The target crash types are RARE. No rural segment, curve or intersection qualifies as a High Crash Location – use the systemic approach to identify risk and prioritize candidate locations for safety investment. RARE The target crash types are RARE. No rural segment, curve or intersection qualifies as a High Crash Location – use the systemic approach to identify risk and prioritize candidate locations for safety investment. Target Crash Types The most frequently occurring crashes which represent the greatest opportunity for reduction. Target Crash Types The most frequently occurring crashes which represent the greatest opportunity for reduction. Source: MnCMAT 2006-2010 Severe Crashes = Fatal + A Injury

10. Support for the SYSTEMIC Approach 1 Metro County Signalized Intersections: Signalized Intersections: 919 signalized intersections RIGHT ANGLE: RIGHT ANGLE: 95 severe right angle crashes Average Density = 0.02 severe right angle crashes/intersection/year 90% of intersections had NO severe right angle crashes, 2% had TWO, and 8% had ONE No signalized intersection averaged one severe right angle crash per year PED/BIKE: PED/BIKE: 54 severe ped/bike crashes Average Density = 0.01 severe crashes/intersection/year 94% of intersections had NO severe right angle crashes, 5% had ONE, 0.5% had TWO, 0.2% had THREE No signalized intersection averaged one severe ped/bike crash per year Segments Segments: 32 severe rear end crashes over 560 miles of county highway Average Density = 0.01 severe rear end/mile/yea 87% of corridors had NO severe right angle crashes, 10% had ONE, 2% had TWO, 1 corridor had THREE No corridor averaged one severe rear end crash per year 10 RARE The target crash types are RARE. No intersection or segment qualifies as a High Crash Location – use the systemic approach to identify risk and prioritize candidate locations for safety investment. RARE The target crash types are RARE. No intersection or segment qualifies as a High Crash Location – use the systemic approach to identify risk and prioritize candidate locations for safety investment. Target Crash Types The most frequently occurring crashes which represent the greatest opportunity for reduction. Target Crash Types The most frequently occurring crashes which represent the greatest opportunity for reduction. Source: MnCMAT 2006-2010 Severe Crashes = Fatal + A Injury

11. Metro/Out-State Crash Data Overview Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, 2006-2010 -- Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, 2006-2010 -- Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). 5 Year Crashes State 382,452 8,285 5 Year Crashes State 382,452 8,285 State System 156,620 – % 2,962 – % State System 156,620 – % 2,962 – % CSAH/CR 108,173 – % 3,393 – % CSAH/CR 108,173 – % 3,393 – % Example All – % Severe – % Example All – % Severe – % City, Twnshp, Other 116,408 – % 1,913 – % City, Twnshp, Other 116,408 – % 1,913 – % Metro Urban 65,433 – 96% 1,171 – 87% Metro Urban 65,433 – 96% 1,171 – 87% All Way Stop 1,376 – 4% 23 – 4% All Way Stop 1,376 – 4% 23 – 4% Right Angle – 3,121 (42%), 80 (51%) Rear End – 1,803 (25%), 15 (10%) Left Turn – 757 (10%), 15 (10%) Head On – 208 (3%), 11 (7%) Right Angle – 3,121 (42%), 80 (51%) Rear End – 1,803 (25%), 15 (10%) Left Turn – 757 (10%), 15 (10%) Head On – 208 (3%), 11 (7%) Thru-Stop 7,344 – 19% 156 – 27% Thru-Stop 7,344 – 19% 156 – 27% Right Angle – 6,372 (28%), 141 (51%) Rear End – 8,514 (37%), 51 (18%) Left Turn – 3,374 (15%), 29 (10%) Head On – 807 (4%), 17 (6%) Right Angle – 6,372 (28%), 141 (51%) Rear End – 8,514 (37%), 51 (18%) Left Turn – 3,374 (15%), 29 (10%) Head On – 807 (4%), 17 (6%) Signalized 23,077 – 61% 277 – 49% Signalized 23,077 – 61% 277 – 49% Inters-Related 38,045 – 60% 569 – 60% Inters-Related 38,045 – 60% 569 – 60% Not Inters-Related 15,560 – 25% 290 – 31% Not Inters-Related 15,560 – 25% 290 – 31% Run Off Road – 2,264 (15%), 77 (27%) Rear End – 5,575 (36%), 62 (21%) Head On – 1,097 (7%), 61 (21%) “Other”– 1,262 (8%), 29 (10%) Right Angle – 1,619 (10%), 24 (8%) Run Off Road – 2,264 (15%), 77 (27%) Rear End – 5,575 (36%), 62 (21%) Head On – 1,097 (7%), 61 (21%) “Other”– 1,262 (8%), 29 (10%) Right Angle – 1,619 (10%), 24 (8%) Unknown/Other 9,314 – 15% 87 – 9% Unknown/Other 9,314 – 15% 87 – 9% Other/Unknown 6,241 – 16% 113 – 20% Other/Unknown 6,241 – 16% 113 – 20% Ped/Bike 2,486 – 4% 225 – 19% Ped/Bike 2,486 – 4% 225 – 19% Non Ped/Bike 62,923 – 96% 946 – 81% Non Ped/Bike 62,923 – 96% 946 – 81% Ped 1,076 – 43% 145 – 64% Ped 1,076 – 43% 145 – 64% Bike 1,410 – 57% 80 – 36% Bike 1,410 – 57% 80 – 36% Int 767 – 71% 93 – 64% Int 767 – 71% 93 – 64% Signal 536 – 70% 51 – 55% Signal 536 – 70% 51 – 55% Int 1,101 – 78% 52 – 65% Int 1,101 – 78% 52 – 65% Signal 683 – 62% 32 – 62% Signal 683 – 62% 32 – 62% Out State Rural 22,630 – 62% 1,626 – 83% Out State Rural 22,630 – 62% 1,626 – 83% Run off Road 7,891 – 67% 675 – 65% Run off Road 7,891 – 67% 675 – 65% On Curve 3,222 – 40% 339 – 50% On Curve 3,222 – 40% 339 – 50% Inters-Related 5,487 – 29% 463 – 30% Inters-Related 5,487 – 29% 463 – 30% Animal 4,009 – 18% 60 – 4% Animal 4,009 – 18% 60 – 4% Not Inters-Related 11,849 – 64% 1,042 –66% Not Inters-Related 11,849 – 64% 1,042 –66% Head On, SS Opp. 751 – 6% 132 – 13% Head On, SS Opp. 751 – 6% 132 – 13% On Curve 247 – 33% 46 – 35% On Curve 247 – 33% 46 – 35% Unknown/Other 1,276 – 7% 61 – 4% Unknown/Other 1,276 – 7% 61 – 4% Right Angle – 849 (34%), 122 (56%) “Other” – 464 (18%), 33 (15%) Run Off Road – 342 (14%), 21 (10%) Left Turn – 184 (7%), 10 (5%) Right Angle – 849 (34%), 122 (56%) “Other” – 464 (18%), 33 (15%) Run Off Road – 342 (14%), 21 (10%) Left Turn – 184 (7%), 10 (5%) Thru-Stop 2,511 – 46% 216 – 47% Thru-Stop 2,511 – 46% 216 – 47% Run Off Road – 999 (38%), 95 (42%) Right Angle – 268 (10%), 39 (17%) “Other” – 303 (12%), 29 (13%) Head On – 112 (4%), 21 (9%) Run Off Road – 999 (38%), 95 (42%) Right Angle – 268 (10%), 39 (17%) “Other” – 303 (12%), 29 (13%) Head On – 112 (4%), 21 (9%) Other/Unknown 2,600 – 47% 228 – 49% Other/Unknown 2,600 – 47% 228 – 49% Not Animal 18,616 – 82% 1,566 – 96% Not Animal 18,616 – 82% 1,566 – 96% All Way Stop 164 – 3% 15 – 3% All Way Stop 164 – 3% 15 – 3% Signalized 209 – 4% 4 – 1% Signalized 209 – 4% 4 – 1% 11

12. Urban Signalized Intersection Pedestrian Crash Risk Rating Criteria 12 Characteristics (NOT causation!) Traffic Signal Speed Limit Four Legged Undivided Roadway Bus Stop Pedestrian Generator Percent of Severe Pedestrian Crashes

13. Rural Road Segment – Risk Rating Criteria (Part 1) 13 Characteristics Traffic Volume Access Density Edge Risk Assessment Curve Density Crash Density (786 crashes)

14. Edge Risk Assessment 2 2 -No Usable Shoulder but Reasonable Clear Zone 1 Usable Shoulder, Reasonable Clear Zone 3 No Usable Shoulder, Roadside with Fixed Obstacles 14 2 – Usable Shoulder but Roadside with Fixed Obstacles Rural Road Segment – Risk Rating Criteria (Part 2)

15. Rural Horizontal Curve– Risk Rating Criteria 15 Characteristics Curve Radius Traffic Volume Intersection Visual Trap Severe Crash

16. Rural Thru STOP Intersection Risk Rating Criteria Characteristics Geometry Skewed minor leg approach Intersection on/near horizontal curve Volume Minor ADT/Major ADT ratio Proximity Previous STOP sign Railroad crossing Intersection Related Crashes Commercial Development in quadrants 16

17. Example Rural County Prioritization 17 Segments Intersections Curves Is the County’s entire system at-risk?

18. Example Urban County Prioritization 18 Intersections - Pedestrians Intersections – Right-Angle

19. Do the Rating Criteria Really Identify At-Risk Locations? Phase I and II Curves – 3,990 curves included in analysis of each risk factor. Minimum of 1,500 curves and 76 severe crashes in each category Phase I and II - 5,725 intersections included in analysis of each risk factor. Minimum of 150 intersections and 16 severe crashes in each category 19 Curve Risk Criteria Intersection Risk Criteria

20. 6/6/201120 Project Development – Urban Signalized Intersections 115/220 had 5 or 6 Stars 24/115 are on Lake St 9/115 are on Penn Ave 9/115 are on Broadway Ave 9/115 are on Cedar Ave 8/115 are on Lyndale Ave 7/115 are on Lowry Ave 7/115 are on Franklin Ave Risk Factor RankingCorridor Projects Over 60% of the at-risk intersections occurred on only a few urban corridors

21. Project Development – Urban Signalized Intersections 21 Focus of Project Development is on adding Confirmation Lights because the density of severe right angle crashes does NOT appear to be related to the number of overhead indications.

22. Project Development – High Priority Curves 22

23. Project Development – High Priority Rural Intersections 23

24. Example Project Summary Sheets 24 Rural Intersection Urban Intersection - Corridors

25. Example Urban Corridor Project Summary 25

26. Rural County Project Summary 26 Round- about All-Way STOP Directional Median Dynamic Warning Sign Street Lights Upgraded Signs &/or Markings Review Signs & CST Total Project Value Total (intersections)12461331,5092,628208$30,964,900 2' Shoulder Pave+RS+Safety Wedge Rumble Strip Rumble StripE 6-inch Edge Lines Ground In Wet- Reflective Markings Total Project Value Total (miles)8871,4083,5198081,636$65,078,340 Currently Installed Chevrons  RankingProximity HP Seg + Crit Rad Total Project Value Total (curves)2,7792,4283,2453,364$69,881,367 Segments Curves Intersections

27. Urban County Project Summary 27 StrategyNumber of Locations Estimated Project Implementation Cost Signalized Intersections Red Light Confirmation Lights207 intersections$196,000 Countdown Timers/Advanced Walk146 intersections$1,460,000 Unsignalized Intersections Medians and Curb Extensions38 intersections$1,485,000 Segments Conversion to Two Way Left Turn Lanes19 corridors$740,500 6” Edge Lines15 corridors$63,990 $3,945,490 ATP TotalsIntersectionsSegmentsCurvesTotal Urban County $3,141,000 $804,490 $3,945,490 Rural Counties $30,964,900 $67,867,578 $69,881,367 $168,713,845 $34,105,900$68,672,068$69,881,367$172,659,335 Total Summary

28. More Information Mn/DOT State Aid website www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid Otter Tail County Safety Plan http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/sa_county_traffic_safety_plans.html Contact Information Howard Preston, CH2M HILL, 651.365.8514, howard.preston@ch2m.com Nikki Farrington, CH2M HILL, 651.365.8536, nicole.farrington@ch2m.com Mike Marti, SRF Consulting Group, 763.249.6779, mmarti@srfconsulting.com Carla Stueve, SRF Consulting Group, 765.249.6797, cstueve@srfconsulting.com Renae Kuehl, SRF Consulting Group, 765.249.6783, rkuehl@srfconsulting.com Ann Johnson, P.E. Services, 612.275.8190, johns421@umn.edu 28 Questions?