09/19/2023 - City Council Public Works Committee
AGENDA
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
September 19, 2023
5:00 – 6:00 PM
Eagan Training Room
I. ADOPT AGENDA
II. APPROVE MINUTES – March 21, 2023
III. WATER METER & AMI PROGRAM - SURCHARGE APPEALS
IV. FOG EXEMPTIONS
V. DUCKWOOD DRIVE/WIDGEON WAY – INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
II. Approve Minutes
Direction to be Considered:
Approve the Public Works Committee meeting minutes as presented for the meeting on March
21, 2023.
Background:
• On March 21, 2023, the Public Works Committee held a meeting.
Attachments: (1)
II-1 March 21, 2023, Public Works Committee Minutes
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 2023
EAGAN CITY HALL
TRAINING ROOM
MEETING NOTES
The Public Works Committee of the City Council consisting of Councilmembers Paul
Bakken and Cyndee Fields convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. before the regular Council
meeting. Also in attendance were City Administrator Dianne Miller, Public Works Director
Russ Matthys, Public Works Deputy Director Tim Plath, Director of Finance Josh
Feldman, and Assistant City Engineer Aaron Nelson.
Councilmembers Bakken and Fields called the meeting to order and adopted the agenda
as presented.
I. Adopt Agenda
II. Approve Minutes
The committee approved the minutes from the October 18, 2022, Public Works
Committee meeting.
III. Surcharge Appeals
Director Matthys reviewed the ordinance and presented a list of property owners
wishing to appeal their surcharges.
Public Works Committee Recommendation: After reviewing the surcharges, the
Committee recommended to waive all $150 and $500 surcharges presented and
forward to the City Council for formal action at the April 4, 2023, regular Council
meeting.
IV. Special Assessment Process/Policy
Director Matthys reviewed the assessment question from the public hearing for Project
1488, Coachman Road/ Four Oaks Road/ Coachman Oaks Street Improvements held
on February 7, 2023. During the hearing, the resident/property owner of 1655 Four
Oaks Road addressed the City Council with a concern that his proposed R1 property
assessment was disproportionate to that of the other residential property types.
o Staff had found details for the past mill and overlay improvements including this
property. The City had previously assessed the same property and property
owner $250 twenty years ago in error. Staff assumed that the newly proposed
assessment of $4,435 was a surprise due to its significant difference.
o Staff confirmed that the calculations for the newly proposed assessments for
Project 1488 were correct, in accordance with the City’s Assessment Policy, and
supported by State Statute 429.
Public Works Committee Recommendation: After reviewing the assessment
details, the Committee took no action. Public Works staff will continue to calculate
all future special assessments on public improvements similarly to Project 1488
and all the other 2023 Street Improvements. Calculations will include the
separating of the R1, R2, and R3 properties, as warranted.
V. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)/Budget Amendments – Construction Cost Overruns
Director Matthys reviewed the recent history of public improvement contract awards and
the apparent impacts to the bid costs creating differences from the original CIP cost
estimates. He presented options to address the remainder of 2023 CIP contract awards
and options to address the cost estimates for the Public Works CIP (2024-2028).
o Recent contract bid awards have occurred with amendments to the Public Works
CIP (2023-2027) specifying cost difference, the year of improvement, and the
funding source.
o This allows public improvements that are determined to be needed to be
completed without impacts to level of service or coordination with other
improvements.
o This incurs costs more than what was anticipated from the present funding
source, but improvement costs likely won’t get cheaper in the future.
o Such contract awards concur with the Finance Director’s recommendation to
utilize present cash reserves.
o The preparation of 5-year CIP cost estimates with inflationary factors, focusing
on the first two years, utilizing the most recent bid history of similar projects,
current economic impacts and material availability, and regional experience with
comparable public improvements provides:
• More accurate estimates over the initial 12-24 months after the CIP
approval. Continue history of conservative estimates.
• Continued transparency with two estimates, the second being a higher
potential cost due to more extreme factor impacts.
• Continuation of option to bring CIP amendments as needed to the Council
(with Finance Department set aside funding for future adjustments) with
reduced anticipation as compared to past present value cost estimates.
o Reduction of inflationary factors for years 3 through 5, keeping it consistent, to
reduce over inflation of cash reserves.
Public Works Committee Recommendation: After reviewing the contract award
details and discussing the present and anticipated construction cost impacts, the
Committee selected Option 4 for addressing the remainder of 2023 CIP contract
awards and selected Option 2 for addressing the cost estimates for the Public
Works CIP (2024-2028). These recommendations will be forwarded to the City
Council as formal action for future 2023 contract awards at upcoming regular
Council meeting and as part of the presentation of the 2024-2028 Public Works
CIP.
o 2023 CIP contract awards with low or best value bids that are above the cost
estimate provided in the PW CIP (2023-2027) – Option 4: Award all contract
bids with amendments to the Public Works CIP (2023-2027), specifying cost
difference, the year of improvement, and the funding source.
o Cost estimates for the Public Works CIP (2024-2028) – Option 2: Prepare
cost estimates with inflationary factors, focusing on the first two years,
utilizing the most recent bid history of similar projects, current economic
impacts and material availability, and regional experience with comparable
public improvements. Reduce inflationary factor for years 3 through 5,
keeping it consistent.
VI. TINA Update
Director Matthys provided a summary of the most current update of the Transportation
Infrastructure Needs Analysis (TINA) and City staff information supporting an earlier
than typical future update. He included recent history of public improvement contract
awards and increases to the bid costs. He is expecting the significant cost increases to
be a long-term situation, creating noteworthy differences from the current TINA update
cost estimates. Discussion also occurred on the plans to coordinate Pavement
Management Program schedules and methods with utility infrastructure repairs and
replacement. The synchronized effort between pavement and utility rehabilitation will
impact the current TINA schedule, as well.
Public Works Committee Recommendation: After comparing the current TINA
estimates and schedule with the provided information, the Committee
recommended forwarding to the City Council for formal action at a future regular
Council meeting that City staff update the current TINA version and the Council
authorize any associated funding for completion.
VII. Other Business - none
The committee adjourned the meeting at 5:36 p.m.
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
III. Water Meter Replacement and Advanced Metering Infrastructure Programs
Surcharge Appeals
Direction to be Considered:
Provide direction to City staff regarding the final disposition of the Water Meter
Replacement/Repair (R/R) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Programs (City Code 3.05
Subd 6.B) surcharges for the identified properties in accordance with the related City Ordinance.
Background:
• On May 15, 2012, the City Council adopted an amendment to City Ordinance 3.05 regarding
the Rules and Regulations relating to Municipal Utilities that requires all properties connected
to the municipal water utility to permit the city's designated utility employee onto the
property and within the structure for purposes of the inspection, repair or replacement of
the water meter. This action, in essence, implemented the Water Meter Replacement/Repair
(R/R) Program to ensure accurate water use measurement and payment.
• On February 16, 2021, the City Council awarded a contract for the Automated Metering
Infrastructure (AMI), Water Meter Reading Radio Installation for all residential municipal
water customers. The AMI system replaced the City’s previous water meter reading service.
The City had been notified that its meter reading services for Eagan’s 19,000+ residential
water meters would no longer be offered after December 31, 2021.
• Part of the ordinance amendment incorporated a fee schedule that provided for a surcharge
to be placed against utility billing accounts for those properties that either didn't schedule an
inspection or did not bring the identified deficiency into compliance within the prescribed
time frame.
• The Surcharge Fee is $150 per month for Single Family properties and $500 per month for all
others.
• In anticipation of appeals, the Council directed the Public Works Committee to review any
appeals and provide their recommendations back to the Council under the Consent Agenda.
Staff has recently heard from the following property owners who want to appeal a related
surcharge.
• The surcharge appeals (in the attachment) are being presented to the Public Works
Committee for the purpose of the corresponding recommendation for future Council action.
The properties have been found to be in compliance with City Code. As a result of the
individual reviews, the related surcharge appeals should be recommended to be supported
(waive surcharge) or denied.
Attachments (1)
III-1 Surcharge Appeals List
Name Address Type Request
STEVEN MCCOMBS 4704 LENORE LANE Meter Exchange 150.00$
ALYSSA DYKSTRA 3831 HEATHER DR Meter Exchange 150.00$
JOSE CASTILLO 3837 LAUREL CT Meter Exchange 150.00$
NICK FENTON 3879 DOLOMITE DR Meter Exchange 150.00$
RENTAL AGREEMENT 1989 GOLD TR Meter Exchange 150.00$
LOUANNE MCDONNELL 1598B CLEMSON DR Meter Exchange 150.00$
DR BABU 3923 DENMARK AVE AMI 150.00$
RENTAL AGREEMENT 1350 EASTER LANE AMI 150.00$
The following surcharge appeals are being presented to the Public Works Committee for the purpose of the
corresponding recommendation for future Council action. The properties have been found to be in compliance with City
Code. As a result of the individual reviews, the related surcharge appeals should be recommended to be supported
(waive surcharge) or denied.
Customer Information
Name STEVEN MCCOMBS Account 0012814604
Address 4704 LENORE LANE Customer 00079579
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-3619 Type Meter Exchange
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied November 22, 2021
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 3
Amount $450.00
Last Date Levied January 22, 2022
UB Entry JBoelter
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date August 29, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date February 14, 2022
WO #98973229
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date August 29, 2023 Date August 29, 2023
Adjustment $300.00 Name Ahammes
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 274
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
11/22/2021, 12/22/2021, 1/21/2022
0
Customer Information
Name ALYSSA DYKSTRA Account 0025014804
Address 3831 HEATHER DR Customer 00085337
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-1624 Type Meter Exchange
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied November 22, 2021
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 5
Amount $750.00
Last Date Levied March 22, 2022
UB Entry JBoelter
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date July 10, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date March 30, 2022
WO #98975142
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date July 17, 2023 Date
Adjustment $600.00 Name
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 306
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
11/22/2021, 12/22/2021, 1/21/2022, 2/22/22, 3/22/2022
0
Customer Information
Name JOSE CASTILLO Account 0025003609
Address 3837 LAUREL CT Customer 00085327
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-1622 Type Meter Exchange
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied November 22, 2021
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 18
Amount $2,700.00
Last Date Levied April 24, 2023
UB Entry 0
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date June 22, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date May 15, 2023
WO #398982417
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date June 22, 2023 Date June 22, 2023
Adjustment $2,550.00 Name Ahammes
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 313
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
2/22/22, 3/22/2022, 4/22/22, 5/22/22, 6/22/22, 7/22/22, 8/22/22, 9/22/22, 10/22/22, 11/22/22, 12/22/22, 1/23/23, 2/22/23,
3/22/23, 4/21/23
0
Customer Information
Name NICK FENTON Account 0025004805
Address 3879 DOLOMITE DR Customer 00084990
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-1617 Type Meter Exchange
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied November 22, 2021
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 17
Amount $2,550.00
Last Date Levied March 27, 2023
UB Entry AHammes
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date April 10, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date April 4, 2023
WO #398981139
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date April 11, 2023 Date April 12, 2023
Adjustment $2,400.00 Name Ahammes
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 315
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
11/22/2021, 12/22/2021, 1/21/2022, 2/22/22, 3/22/2022, 4/22/22, 5/22/22, 6/22/22, 7/22/22, 8/22/22, 9/22/22, 10/22/22,
11/22/22, 12/22/22, 1/23/23, 2/22/23
0
Customer Information
Name RENTAL AGREEMENT Account 0023408602
Address 1989 GOLD TR Customer 00080900
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-1589 Type Meter Exchange
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied November 22, 2021
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 17
Amount $2,550.00
Last Date Levied March 27, 2023
UB Entry AHammes
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date April 12, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date April 6, 2023
WO #398981128
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date April 12, 2023 Date April 12, 2023
Adjustment $2,400.00 Name Ahammes
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 316
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
2/22/22, 3/22/2022, 4/22/22, 5/22/22, 6/22/22, 7/22/22, 8/22/22, 9/22/22, 10/22/22, 11/22/22, 12/22/22, 1/23/23, 2/22/23
0
Customer Information
Name LOUANNE MCDONNELL Account 0012519609
Address 1598B CLEMSON DR Customer 00051993
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55122-1867 Type Meter Exchange
Email jmcdnell@comcast.net
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice October 8, 2021
Final Notice November 5, 2021
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied March 22, 2022
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 4
Amount $600.00
Last Date Levied June 22, 2022
UB Entry JBoelter
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date March 28, 2023 Compliance
Method Phone Date June 28, 2022
WO #98976595
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date March 28, 2023 Date March 25, 1901
Adjustment $450.00 Name Ahammes
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date
Adjustment $150.00 Name
Comments
Archive 0 Entry 386
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
3/22/2022, 4/22/22, 5/22/22, 6/22/22
3/29/23: Resident is in Hospice and her brother is taking care of her finances now.
Customer Information
Name DR BABU Account 24460545
Address 3923 DENMARK AVE Customer 24820
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55123-1474 Type AMI
Email sharada babu <docbabu@hotmail.com>
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice December 22, 2022
Final Notice January 22, 2023
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied February 22, 2023
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 2
Amount $300.00
Last Date Levied March 27, 2023
UB Entry 0
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date April 26, 2023 Compliance
Method Email Date April 17, 2023
WO #398981296
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date April 25, 2023 Date April 26, 2023
Adjustment May 29, 1900 Name DR BABU
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date April 26, 2023
Adjustment $150.00 Name DR BABU
Comments
Archive #N/A Entry #N/A
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
2/22/2023, 3/22/23
#N/A
Customer Information
Name RENTAL AGREEMENT Account 10905008
Address 1350 EASTER LANE Customer 86466
CSZ EAGAN, MN 55123-1732 Type AMI
Email 0
Phone 0
Surcharge Information
Initial Notice May 22, 2023
Final Notice June 22, 2023
Subsequent Notices Sent:
Utility Billing Surcharge Entry
Initial Date Levied July 25, 2023
Rate $150.00
Surcharges 2
Amount $300.00
Last Date Levied August 25, 2023
UB Entry 0
Surcharge Waiver Request Information
Date September 12, 2023 Compliance
Method Phone Date August 28, 2023
WO #398984253
Initial Surcharge Abatement
Public Works Director UB Initial Removal
Approval Date September 12, 2023 Date September 12, 2023
Adjustment May 29, 1900 Name RENTAL AGREEMENT
Final Surcharge Abatement
PWC Date September 19, 2023 UB Final Removal
Council Date September 19, 2023 Date September 12, 2023
Adjustment $150.00 Name RENTAL AGREEMENT
Comments
Archive #N/A Entry #N/A
City of Eagan
Utility Surcharge Summary Information
7/22/2023, 8/22/23
#N/A
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
IV. Fats, Oils, Grease (FOG) Program
Exemptions
Direction to be Considered:
Provide direction to City staff regarding the inclusion of the draft exemptions to the Fats, Oils &
Grease (“FOG”) Discharge Prevention and Prohibitions program (City Code 3.40) for the identified
Food Service Establishments (FSEs) and a corresponding amendment of the related City
Ordinance.
Background:
• On November 4, 2020, the City Council adopted an amendment to Chapter 3 – Municipal and
Public Utilities, Section 3.40, Fats, Oils & Grease (“FOG”) Discharge Prevention and
Prohibitions. Section 3.40 requires all food service establishments (FSE) that discharge its
wastewater into the City of Eagan’s sanitary sewer system to have a FOG disposal system
installed and maintained in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Minnesota State
Plumbing Code and Minnesota Rules.
• An FSE is defined as any facility in which food is prepared or served for commercial or
institutional purposes. Food preparation or service includes cutting/processing, preparing,
handling, cleaning, cooking, or packaging food items of any kind. FSEs include restaurant,
cafe, lunch counter cafeterias, bars and clubs, hotel with food service, hospital, long-term
care or convalescent home/facility, factory or school kitchen, catering kitchen, bakery, meat
packing facility, or other establishment where FOG may be introduced into the
drainage/sewer system. Individual dwelling units which are not otherwise private living
quarters within a long-term care or convalescent home/facility are not food service
establishments.
• Part of the ordinance amendment incorporated a fee schedule that provided for a surcharge
to be placed against utility billing accounts for those properties that failed to install a
complying FOG disposal system. The Surcharge Fee is $500 per month per food service
establishment.
• Staff has worked with all FSEs within the city to ensure they have a proper FOG disposal
system installed and maintained as warranted. As part of this effort, staff has recognized that
it may be appropriate to consider some FSEs exempt from the program due to the lack of
FOG produced as part of their operations. The potential of a FOG program exemption exists
for 40+ businesses.
• Staff compiled a list of the businesses with a summary of practices and recommendations for
each one. There are many businesses that are similar, with only minor differences. For
consistency and equity, it may be appropriate to treat all similar businesses similarly
regarding exemptions.
• Staff have broken down the businesses into five specific groups: 1) Commercial daycare
facilities, 2) Schools, 3) Hotels, 4) Gas stations, 5) Assisted living facilities. Generally, the
businesses in each of these groups should be treated similarly under the following described
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
scenarios regarding food preparation. There may be exceptions to this guidance in unique
circumstances.
o Commercial daycare facilities
Meals prepared on site – No Exemption
No meals prepared on site – Exemption
o Schools
Meals prepared on site – No Exemption
No meals prepared on site – Exemption
o Hotels
Meals prepared on site – No Exemption
No meals prepared on site – Exemption
o Gas stations
Meals prepared on site – No Exemption
No meals prepared on site – Exemption
o Assisted living facilities
Meals prepared on site – No Exemption
No meals prepared on site – Exemption
• These draft FOG program exemptions are being presented to the Public Works Committee
for the consideration of a corresponding recommendation for an ordinance amendment
through future Council action.
Attachments (1)
IV-1 FOG Program Exemption List
Potential FOG Program Exemptions
Commercial Daycare Facilities
Exemption
Primrose School of Eagan - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food.
Becks Montessori - All food is catered in. Wash some dishes on site. televising exemption
All Saints Lutheran Church and Luminary Montessori - Kitchen, but don’t prepare meals as a business or
facility. Kids bring their own meals.
Kindercare locations - All food is catered in. Wash some dishes on site. televising exemption
YMCA - All food is catered in. Wash some dishes on site. televising exemption
New Horizon Academy - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food.
Hour Kids Walk-In Childcare - All food is catered in/pre-packaged.
Creative Wonders - All food is catered in/pre-packaged.
Easter Preschool - Kitchen, but don’t prepare meals as a business or facility. Kids bring their own meals.
Day By Day Child Development Center- All food is pre-packaged or kids bring their own meals.
Especially for Children - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food.
No Exemption
Prestige Academy (Everbrook Academy) - Kitchen that prepares meals from scratch.
Schools
Exemption
Trinity School at River Ridge - They have a kitchen, but they don’t prepare meals as a business or
facility. They warm off-site prepared food or kids bring their own meals in.
Trinity Lone Oak Lutheran Church and School - All food is catered in. They wash some dishes on site.
televising exemption
Minnesota Autism Center - Kitchen, but don’t prepare meals as a business or facility. Kids bring their
own meals.
Hotels/Motels
Exemption
Country Inn and Suites by Radisson - All food is pre-packaged.
Springhill Suites - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is pre-
packaged.
Towneplace Suites - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is pre-
packaged.
Home2Suites - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is pre-
packaged.
Sonesta ES Suites - The community space only offers cold breakfast options.
Best Western Dakota Ridge - Microwave to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is pre-packaged.
Days Inn by Wyndham - Convection/warming kitchen to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is
pre-packaged.
Extended Stay America- Northwest and Denmark - All food is pre-packaged.
Gas Station/Other
Exemption
Marathon Gas (New Mart) - Kitchen to bake off-site prepared food.
Repair Rite Automotive (Marathon Gas Station) - All food is pre-packaged.
Holiday and Speedway Gas Stations - Microwave to warm off-site prepared food. Other food is pre-
packaged.
Eagan Community Center - All food is catered in.
No Exemption
Ecolab - Kitchen that prepares 40 meals a day from scratch.
Assisted Living/Senior Living Facilities
Exemption
Affinity at Eagan (Independent senior living) - Kitchen that residents can use, but don’t prepare meals
as a business or facility.
O’Leary Manor and Lakeside Point (Senior Living facilities) - Kitchen that residents can use, but don’t
prepare meals as a business or facility.
Oakwoods of Eagan and Oakwoods East Apartments (Senior Housing) - Kitchen that residents can use,
but don’t prepare meals as a business or facility.
Applewood Point - Do not offer food service and don’t have a kitchen.
No Exemption
Clare Bridge Brookdale - Kitchen that prepares 130 meals a day from scratch.
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
V. Duckwood Drive/Widgeon Way – Intersection Study
Direction To Be Considered:
Receive the intersection study for Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way, provide staff confirmation
of the study recommendations OR direction for any modifications, and direct staff to forward
recommendations to the City Council.
Background:
On January 9, 2023, City staff received a petition from Juliet Parisi, 1236 Tananger Court,
with 56 signatures representing 32 Eagan properties and 5 signers with residence outside
of Eagan requesting an engineering study be conducted to consider an enhancement of
pedestrian safety at the intersection of Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way, in central
Eagan.
For at least 35 years, vehicle traffic at the intersection of Duckwood Drive and Widgeon
Way has been controlled by stop signs on all four legs. Duckwood Drive is classified as a
collector street, and accordingly has significantly higher volumes of traffic than the two
side streets of Widgeon Way. Past Eagan City Council action had established the traffic
control at this intersection in this manner.
For many years, City staff have received numerous inquiries from neighborhood residents
regarding the current intersection, primarily regarding pedestrian safety and lack of
vehicle compliance with current traffic control signage, similar to the concerns stated in
the current petition.
In 2018, City Police and Public Works staffs led a public engagement meeting and survey
on alternatives to stop signs on Duckwood Drive. Public input did not indicate a clear
consensus on modifications to the intersection.
On February 5, 2023, the City Council received the public petition and authorized the
preparation of an intersection safety study at Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way by a
consultant engineer. One of the City’s traffic engineering consultants, SRF Consulting, was
contracted to perform the current study.
Communication and engagement with neighbors and the walking public incorporated
much of 2023’s typical walking season, with field data collection and evaluations,
As was done previously, public engagement, specifically with the neighborhood, but open
as well to all that travel through this intersection, was included as part of the intersection
evaluation. Engagement included two public meetings (May 24 and June 27) to receive
input on concerns and feedback on improvement options. On-site signage with QR code
linking to a website for feedback and comments from the traveling public was also
provided.
The intersection study report includes existing conditions, public engagement
information and input received, data collection and evaluation of current and anticipated
pedestrian and vehicle volumes and movements, and options for traffic control
modifications.
Agenda Memo
September 19, 2023 Public Works Committee Meeting
The evaluation and study has been completed and is being presented to the Public Works
Committee for their consideration.
Based on the results of the intersection analysis, the study recommends converting the
intersection to a side-street stop control intersection and remove the stop signs along
Duckwood Drive. This will improve both pedestrian and driver expectations at the
intersection by reducing driver/pedestrian confusion of whether a conflicting vehicle will
stop or not by setting clearer expectations of the vehicles along the roadway.
To help address residents’ concerns about crossing safety, consideration may be given to
geometric improvements that may act to reduce the crossing distance that pedestrians
are in a travel lane. The geometric improvements could be constructed easily using paint.
Public Works staff will present study details and address any questions the Committee
may have on this item to assist their confirmation or modification of the study
recommendations.
The timeline for the placement of any geometric improvements to the intersection could
likely occur in 2024.
Attachments (2)
V-1 Intersection Study
V-2 PowerPoint Presentation
www.srfconsulting.com
3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 | Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 | 763.475.0010 Fax: 1.866.440.6364
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Memorandum
SRF No. 16574
To: John Gorder
City of Eagan
From: Tom Sachi, PE, Project Manager
John Maczko, PE, PTOE, Traffic Studies Lead
Chris Brown, AICP, PTP, Transportation Planning Lead
Date: August 27, 2023
Subject: Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
Introduction
SRF has completed an intersection study at the Duckwood Drive/Widgeon Way intersection in the
City of Eagan (see Figure 1: Project Location). There have been concerns from residents that live near
the existing intersection regarding stop compliance, speeds, and pedestrian crossing safety. The main
objectives of the intersection study are to review the past history and existing conditions at the
intersection and determine appropriate traffic control, pedestrian crossing, and traffic calming
alternatives. The following information provides the assumptions, analysis, and study findings offered
for consideration.
History
In reviewing past history of the intersection and discussion with City Staff it was found that the
intersection has been a concern going back decades. The intersection was originally controlled with
side-street stops. However, in response to concerns of speeding, a previous City Council decided to
modify the intersection to an all-way stop. After changing to an all-way stop control, there have been
sign compliance issues. The City has responded by installing oversized stop signs (48 inch), installing
reflective materials on the sign posts, and installed Stop Ahead advance warning signs and reflective
posts to raise attention to the stop signs in an attempt to improve compliance.
In 2018, responding to concerns from residents about intersection safety the City hired a consultant
to review the intersection and make recommendations. Upon completion of study the previous
consultant recommended removal of the all-way stop condition and modification back to a side-street
stop condition. However, after deliberation, the Council opted to leave the intersection as is as an all-
way stop control.
NORTHNorthDuckwood DrWidgeon
Way35E
Yankee Doodle Rd
Lexington Ave SDenmark AvePilot Knob Rd02316574
July 2023
Project Location Figure 1Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of Eagan
Study Intersection
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 3
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions were reviewed to establish a baseline to identify any potential issues and
opportunities, as well as compare alternatives. The evaluation of existing conditions includes a review
of traffic volumes, crash history and stop compliance, roadway characteristics, an all-way stop warrant
analysis and an intersection capacity analysis, which are summarized in the following sections.
Data Collection
Intersection turning movement and pedestrian/bicycle counts were collected by SRF for a 14-hour
period (6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.) during both a typical weekday and weekend day during the week of
May 15th, 2023, at the intersection of Duckwood Drive/Widgeon Way. Vehicle speed data, daily
traffic volumes along Duckwood Drive, and stop sign compliance of the all-way stop control at the
intersection were also collected. The collected speeds indicate the average speeds are 35 to 37 miles
per hour (mph) while 85th percentile speeds are 39 to 42 mph. These speed ranges are not uncommon
for a roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Existing geometrics, traffic and pedestrian/bicycle
volumes, and travel speeds in the study area are shown in Figure 2.
Roadway Characteristics
A field assessment was completed to identify various roadway characteristics at the study location,
such as functional classification, general configuration, and posted speed limit, along with signing,
striping, and lighting. A summary of these roadway characteristics is shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Existing Roadway Characteristics
(1) Functional Classification based on the City of Eagan 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
(2) Roadway width measured from curb face to curb face.
(3) Duckwood Drive is not marked in the field as having a designated on-street biking facility, however, there is presently an on-road 7 foot
“safety shoulder” in both directions.
From a traffic control perspective, the study intersection of Duckwood Drive/Widgeon Way is all-
way stop controlled. Note that the eastbound and westbound stop signs are 48 inch stop signs that
are larger than a standard 30 inch MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) regulation-sized
stop sign, and have red reflectors on both sign posts to increase visibility of the stop sign. The study
intersection currently has lighting, but there is no segment lighting within the study area along either
Duckwood Drive or Widgeon Way. Within the study area, Duckwood Drive is served by local
Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) bus route 446. There are no marked bus stops at the
intersection, however transit users can get on and off at Widgeon Way. Additionally, school buses
stop at the study intersection, and schoolchildren cross Duckwood Drive in both directions.
Roadway Functional
Classification (1)
General
Configuration
Roadway
Width (2)
Posted
Speed
On-Street
Bike Lanes
Duckwood Drive Minor Collector 2-lane undivided 40 feet 35 Yes (3)
Widgeon Way Local Road 2-lane undivided 30 feet 30 No
NORTHNorth12 [3] (10) 2 [1] (0)2 [2] (5) (17) [9] 3
(329) [208] 133
(21) [17] 16
1 [1] (2)
183 [163] (297)
7 [9] (5)
8 [4] (9)
(20) [25] 23 (0) [1] 1(8) [7] 4
1 [1] (1)
6 [1] (0) 1 [1] (1) Widgeon Way Duckwood Dr
Duckwood DrWi
dg
e
on
W
a
y
XX
[XX]
(XX)
- A.M. Peak Hour Volume
- Midday Peak Hour Volume
- P.M. Peak Hour Volume
- All Way Stop Control
- Existing Average Daily Traffic
- Pedestrian/Bicycle Volume
LEGEND
X,XXX
Speed Limit: 35 mph
Avg Speed: 35 mph
85th %ile Speed: 39 mph
6
Speed Limit: 35 mph
Avg Speed: 37 mph
85th %ile Speed: 42 mph
133
25186,600 6,050
80035
0
02316574
July 2023
Existing Conditions Figure 2Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of Eagan
X [X] (X)
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 5
Public Involvement
As part of the existing conditions analysis, a detailed community survey was completed to understand
the issues facing the everyday users of the intersection. The survey was targeted toward residents of
Widgeon Way and community members who walk, bike, or roll along the sidewalk or on-road bike
facility on Duckwood Drive. The survey was aimed at understanding the priorities of the community
when it comes to solving their issues. The following survey summary is provided, which is a sample
of the key questions from the survey. The full detailed survey responses are provided in the Appendix.
In addition to completing a survey, two (2) community meetings were held where members of the
community could interact with the project team, learn about this study, and provide feedback.
Summaries of the meetings and the presentations are also provided in the Appendix.
Key Survey Information
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 6
Top Ranked
Second Ranked
Third Ranked
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 7
The key takeaway from the survey information is that users of the intersection have noticed a
concerning trend regarding a perception of speeding vehicles, poor driving behavior, vehicles not
stopping at the stop signs, and vehicles not stopping for pedestrians. This has led to major concerns
for residents trying to cross the roadway or simply pull out onto Duckwood Drive from Widgeon
Way. Because of these conditions, this can lead to the intersection being unsafe and presenting itself
as a barrier to users. The following sections detail the reported crash history, stop sign compliance,
traffic operations, and warrant analysis which will be used in conjunction with the survey information
in informing the decision on a recommendation for the intersection control and configuration.
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 8
Intersection Crash Analysis
Based on reported crashes within the Minnesota Crash Mapping and Analysis Tool (MnCMAT2) for
the 10-year period of 2013-2022, there were a total three (3) crashes at the study intersection. There
was one (1) possible injury and two (2) property damage only crashes. (see Appendix). All three (3)
crashes were rear end collisions caused by a following vehicle failing to stop for the lead vehicle at the
stop signs located along Duckwood Drive at the study intersection. No additional crashes were
reported by the City of Eagan Police Department.
Intersection Stop Compliance
Video footage was used to observe stopping compliance at the study intersection. Stopping
compliance was defined as the vehicle approaching the intersection coming to a complete full stop,
rather than a rolling stop, slowing to a yield, or completely disregarding the stop sign. Traffic cameras
recorded vehicle movements at the intersection on Tuesday, May 16, 2023. Video footage was
reviewed for the following time periods:
7:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Table 2, along with the inset photo, summarizes the percentage of stopping compliance of vehicles
for each approach on the day of observations. Based on the observed data, there is approximately 40
to 45 percent of vehicles stopping at the stop signs on Widgeon Way, while only 20 to 25 percent of
vehicles stop along Duckwood Drive. Overall, the majority of vehicles at the intersection do not come
to a complete stop at the intersection, regardless of which roadway they are on. This non-compliance
leads to uncertain driver expectations and unsafe conditions for pedestrians.
Table 2. Approach Movement Stop Sign Compliance
Movement Compliant Non-Compliant
Southbound
Widgeon Way 43% 57%
Northbound
Widgeon Way 42% 58%
Westbound
Duckwood Dr. 25% 75%
Eastbound
Duckwood Dr 21% 79%
RIGHT: Photo showing stopping compliance at the
intersection approaches
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 9
Warrants Analysis
A review of the multiway stop warrant was completed to understand if the study intersection currently
meets the traffic volume thresholds to warrant an all-way stop control. A review of the hourly volumes
at the intersection that were collected in May 2023 indicate that the study intersection currently does
not meet multiway stop application requirements based on the guidelines outlined in the MnMUTCD
for either a typical weekday or weekend day. The warrants analysis are shown in the Appendix.
Intersection Capacity Analysis
An intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic software to establish a
baseline condition to which potential alternatives could be compared. The analysis was completed for
the weekday a.m., midday, and p.m. peak hours along with the Saturday midday peak hour. Capacity
analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates how well an intersection is operating.
Intersections are graded from LOS A through LOS F. The LOS results are based on average delay
per vehicle, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table 3. LOS A indicates the
best traffic operation, while LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Overall
intersection LOS A though LOS D is generally considered acceptable within the Twin Cities
metropolitan area.
Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections
LOS Designation Signalized Intersection
Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds)
Unsignalized Intersection
Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds)
A ≤ 10 ≤ 10
B > 10 - 20 > 10 - 15
C > 20 - 35 > 15 - 25
D > 35 - 55 > 25 - 35
E > 55 - 80 > 35 - 50
F > 80 > 50
For side-street stop/yield-controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate
for the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection
with side-street stop/yield control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the
overall intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the
intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these volumes. Second, it is important to
consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of
delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic
volumes to experience high-levels of delay (i.e., poor levels of service) on the side-street approaches,
but an acceptable overall intersection level of service.
An intersection capacity analysis was completed not only for the existing all-way stop control but for
potential alternatives including side-street stop control, side-street stop control with a three-lane
section along Duckwood Drive (center left-turn lane), and a single-lane roundabout. The alternative
traffic control and lane geometry options were developed based on a high level review of the existing
turning movement volumes.
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 10
Results of the existing capacity analysis, shown in Table 4, indicate that all intersection alternatives are
expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS B or better during all four (4) peak hours. The
existing all-way stop control operates at an overall LOS A during all the weekday a.m. and midday
peak hours, and an overall LOS B during the weekday p.m. and Saturday midday peak hours. Note,
while the overall LOS is a B or better, with a side-street stop control there may be delays reaching up
to 17 seconds (LOS C) on Widgeon Way during the p.m. peak hour. These delays are considered
acceptable and typical of an intersection with this control type in the City of Eagan. With a roundabout
control, average delays at the intersection are expected to be six (6) seconds or less during the peak
hours.
Table 4. Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis
Duckwood
Drive/Widgeon Way
Intersection Control
Alternatives
Weekday A.M.
Peak Hour
Weekday Midday
Peak Hour
Weekday P.M.
Peak Hour
Saturday Midday
Peak Hour
LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
All-Way Stop (Existing) A 9 sec. A 9 sec. B 12 sec. B 10 sec.
Side-Street Stop (SSSC) A/B 12 sec. A/B 13 sec. A/C 17 sec. A/B 13 sec.
SSSC w/ Left-Turn Lane A/B 12 sec. A/B 13 sec. A/C 17 sec. A/B 13 sec.
Single Lane Roundabout A 4 sec. A 4 sec. A 6 sec. A 5 sec.
There is not expected to be any queuing issues with either the existing traffic control or potential
alternatives. All average and 95th percentile queuing is expected to be less than two (2) vehicles during
the peak hours for all control options.
Based on the existing operations analysis, any of the potential traffic control alternatives would be
expected to allow for acceptable operations with minimal queuing impacts.
Year 2040 Conditions
When evaluating infrastructure, it is important to understand future operations to help protect the
infrastructure investment. Therefore, year 2040 conditions were reviewed to understand the future
operations associated with the potential alternatives. The following information summarizes the year
2040 conditions.
Traffic Forecasts
To account for general background growth in the area, 2040 traffic forecasts were developed based
on historical traffic growth and the City of Eagan 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Based on this information,
an annual growth rate of one-half percent was applied to the existing traffic volumes at the study
intersection. A summary of the year 2040 traffic forecasts is provided in Figure 3.
02316574
July 2023
Year 2040 Conditions Figure 3Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of EaganNORTHNorth 15 [5] (15) 5 [5] (0)5 [5] (10) (17) [9] 3
(329) [208] 133
(21) [17] 16
5 [5] (5)
200 [180] (325)
10 [10] (10)
10 [5] (10)
(25) [30] 30 (0) [5] 5(10) [10] 5
5 [5] (5)
10 [5] (0) 5 [5] (5) Widgeon Way Duckwood Dr
Duckwood DrWi
dg
e
o
n
W
a
y
XX
[XX]
(XX)
- A.M. Peak Hour Volume
- Midday Peak Hour Volume
- P.M. Peak Hour Volume
- Side-Street Stop Control
- Estimated Average Daily Traffic
- Pedestrian/Bicycle Volume
LEGEND
X,XXX
10
145
30207,200 6,600
87538
5
X [X] (X)
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 12
Year 2040 Intersection Capacity Analysis
Year 2040 conditions were reviewed to understand how the study intersection would operate with
potential intersection controls in the future. Results of the year 2040 intersection capacity analysis,
shown in Table 5, indicate that all intersection alternatives are expected to continue to operate at an
acceptable overall LOS A during all four (4) peak hours, except the all-way stop control alternative.
An all-way stop control is expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS B during the weekday a.m.
and midday and Saturday midday peak hours, and its expected to operate at a LOS C during the p.m.
peak hour. Additionally, the side-street stop control alternatives are expected to have acceptable side-
street delays of 20 seconds or less during the peak hours. Roundabout delays are expected to continue
to be less than 10 seconds on average during the peak hours. Average and 95th percentile queuing is
expected to remain similar to existing conditions, with queues between two (2) to three (3) vehicles
during the peak hours.
Table 5. Duckwood Drive/Widgeon Way Year 2040 Intersection Capacity Analysis
Duckwood
Drive/Widgeon Way
Intersection Control
Alternatives
Weekday A.M.
Peak Hour
Weekday Midday
Peak Hour
Weekday P.M.
Peak Hour
Saturday Midday
Peak Hour
LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
All-Way Stop (Existing) B 10 sec. B 10 sec. C 15 sec. B 10 sec.
Side-Street Stop (SSSC) A/B 14 sec. A/C 15 sec. A/C 20 sec. A/B 13 sec.
SSSC w/ Left-Turn Lane A/B 14 sec. A/C 15 sec. A/C 20 sec. A/B 13 sec.
Single Lane Roundabout A 4 sec. A 5 sec. A 6 sec. A 5 sec.
Pedestrian Crossing Review
In addition to reviewing the traffic volume, crash and operational information, a review of the
pedestrian crossing was also completed. The recently adopted City of Eagan pedestrian crossing
guidelines (see Appendix) were reviewed to determine if the crossing should be marked and if any
enhancements should be considered for the intersection.
Following the guidance, the following items are noted:
The posted speed is 35 mph, there are two (2) lanes, and the AADT is between 4,000 and 9,000.
The crossing currently does not meet the minimum multimodal user volume threshold outlined
in the guidelines and the intersection has not experienced a crash within the last 10 years involving
a multimodal user.
The study intersection serves as an active transportation facility due to the existing MVTA and
school bus route stops at the study intersection.
The intersection meets sight distance requirements
The south side of the roadway does not currently have a pedestrian facility along Duckwood Drive
or Widgeon Way, and there is not an accessible landing on either southern quadrant.
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 13
Based on this information, the crossing qualifies for consideration of the following potential
enhancements:
Crosswalk markings, crossing and warning signage, parking restrictions, adequate nighttime
lighting levels, and in-street pedestrian crossing signage
Potential geometric enhancements such as a curb extension or median refuge island
Given that the intersection currently does not have a pedestrian facility on the south side of the
intersection along either Duckwood Drive or Widgeon Way, and similar intersections (to the east and
west) in the area do not have crosswalk markings, is not recommended to mark the crosswalk. This is
to keep consistency along the corridor and with standard practice in Eagan. Although the crossings
wouldn’t be marked, they are still crosswalks by State law and pedestrians are allowed to cross.
Additionally, it should be noted that the majority of pedestrian crossings are made by kids getting
on/off the school bus when the stop arms and flashing lights are in use.
Based on the past history of the intersection geometric modifications of either curb extensions or a
median refuge island are worth consideration. With the available roadway width, curb extensions, a
median refuge island, or a combination of both could be installed while maintaining two (2) lanes of
traffic. These geometric improvements will improved visibility of pedestrians and based on past
research may have a traffic calming effect on travel speeds along Duckwood Drive. Concepts of these
options are shown in the Appendix.
Summary and Findings
Based on the results of the crash review, stop compliance observations, and warrant analysis for
multiway stop applications, it is recommended to convert the intersection to a side-street stop control
intersection and remove the stop signs along Duckwood Drive. This will improve both pedestrian and
driver expectations at the intersection by reducing driver/pedestrian confusion of whether a
conflicting vehicle will stop or not by setting clearer expectations of the vehicles along the roadway.
In addition, section 2B.06 of the MUTCD states that “safety concerns associated with multi-way stops
included pedestrians, bicyclists, and all road users expecting other road users to stop. Multi-way stop
control is used where the volume on the intersecting roads is approximately equal.” Based on the
current vehicle counts, the volumes along Widgeon Way are only approximately 10 percent of the
vehicles along Duckwood Drive. It is not recommended to place all-way stop control at intersections
where the cross street has low volumes, as road users become conditioned to not stopping as vehicles
are rarely present at the cross street. This is reflected in the current driver behavior at the intersection,
where less than 50 percent of all entering vehicles are compliant with the stop sign. Note, no sight
distance issues are currently present that necessitate the current all-way stop control.
Results of the intersection capacity analysis also show that the existing and year 2040 traffic volumes
would be expected to operate acceptably with a side-street stop control. Side-street delays are expected
to be within acceptable ranges and no queueing issues are expected.
To help address residents’ concerns about crossing safety and speed the city may want to consider
one of the geometric improvements that would reduce the crossing distance that pedestrians are in a
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study August 27, 2023
Page 14
travel lane. Research shows that geometric improvements similar to those presented as part of this
Pedestrian Crossing Review report are worth considering to improve pedestrian comfort with crossing
as well as helping to calm traffic speeds. The geometric improvements could be constructed quickly
using paint/bollards on a trial basis to determine effectiveness and/or need if funding for permanent
construction is not available in the near future.
Residents present at the second public meeting seemed to slightly favor a median and had very little
interest in the roundabout for consideration. While a roundabout would allow for acceptable vehicle
operations, residents raised concerns that a roundabout would have too large of an impact on adjacent
homeowners and the expected costs of construction far greater than the other proposed geometric
options.
Appendix
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
1 / 21
82.61%76
11.96%11
2.17%2
2.17%2
1.09%1
Q1 How frequently do you cross Duckwood Drive?
Answered: 92 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 92
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Dail y
Weekly
At l east
mont hl y
A few times
per year or...
I've never
cr oss ed...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Daily
Weekly
At least monthly
A few times per y ear or less
I'v e nev er crossed Duc k wood driv e before
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
2 / 21
92.39%85
73.91%68
30.43%28
0.00%0
2.17%2
Q2 How do you typically cross Duckwood Drive? (Select all that apply)
Answered: 92 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 92
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 run 5/27/2023 5:23 PM
2 School bus 5/18/2023 9:56 PM
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Drive
Wal k
Bike
Use a mobility
device
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Drive
Walk
Bik e
Use a mobility dev ice
Other (please s pecify)
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
3 / 21
Q3 Please rank your top three concerns about the intersection (rank only
three)
Answered: 92 Sk ipped: 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Speeding
Vehicles
Reckless/Car ele
s s Driving
Car s not
stopping at ...
Cars not
sto pping for...
No sidew alks
on south sid...
Cars not
sto pping for...
Sun bl inds you
at cert ain...
Intersect ion
is no t visib...
Crossing is
not visibl e ...
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
4 / 21
18.48%
17
14.13%
13
22.83%
21
29.35%
27
9.78%
9
3.26%
3
1.09%
1
0.00%
0
1.09%
1
92 6
8.70%
8
9.78%
9
19.57%
18
23.91%
22
28.26%
26
5.43%
5
2.17%
2
1.09%
1
1.09%
1
92 6
41.30%
38
23.91%
22
16.30%
15
8.70%
8
6.52%
6
1.09%
1
2.17%
2
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
92 7
15.22%
14
20.65%
19
13.04%
12
15.22%
14
15.22%
14
15.22%
14
3.26%
3
2.17%
2
0.00%
0
92 6
7.61%
7
8.70%
8
8.70%
8
9.78%
9
19.57%
18
27.17%
25
14.13%
13
1.09%
1
3.26%
3
92 5
3.26%
3
10.87%
10
8.70%
8
9.78%
9
7.61%
7
31.52%
29
14.13%
13
7.61%
7
6.52%
6
92 4
2.17%
2
1.09%
1
3.26%
3
3.26%
3
3.26%
3
11.96%
11
39.13%
36
25.00%
23
10.87%
10
92 3
2.17%
2
3.26%
3
3.26%
3
0.00%
0
2.17%
2
2.17%
2
13.04%
12
55.43%
51
18.48%
17
92 2
1.09%
1
7.61%
7
4.35%
4
0.00%
0
7.61%
7
2.17%
2
10.87%
10
7.61%
7
58.70%
54
92 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL SCO
Speeding Vehicles
Reck less/Careles s
Driving
Cars not st opping
at t he Stop Signs
Cars not st opping
for Pedes trians
No sidewalk s on
south s ide of
Duck wood
Cars not st opping
for s chool bus s es
with flashing lights
Sun blinds you at
certain times of
the day
Intersect ion is not
vis ible t o drivers
Crossing is not
vis ible t o drivers
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
5 / 21
6.74%6
44.94%40
30.34%27
16.85%15
1.12%1
Q4 How often do vehicles stop at the stop signs on Duckwood Drive?
Answered: 89 Sk ipped: 3
TOTAL 89
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Always (100%
of the time)
Usual l y (75 %
of the time)
So metimes (50%
of the time)
Rarely (25 % of
the time)
Never
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Always (100% of the time)
Usually (75% of the time)
Sometimes (50% of the time)
Rarely (25% of the time)
Never
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
6 / 21
20.22%18
34.83%31
75.28%67
8.99%8
32.58%29
Q5 What would improve your crossing experience? (Please choose up to
two)
Answered: 89 Sk ipped: 3
Total Respondents : 89
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Paint t he s treet : put flashing lights on the st op s ign 6/15/2023 7:44 AM
2 Better signs . Flashing lights 6/1/2023 4:52 AM
3 Enforc ement of s top signs 5/29/2023 4:58 PM
4 Flahing larger s top signs; v isibility at inters ection is sometimes impaired by snow piles and
greenery. Als o, ic y c onditions make it hard to gain trac tion on Widgeon Way turning left on
Duc k wood Driv e from the Wes c ott s ide.
5/27/2023 6:51 AM
5 Flas hing stop s igns 5/24/2023 3:43 PM
6 Radar/Camera to catc h v iolators blowing the s top sign 5/24/2023 3:26 PM
7 Flas hing stop s igns 5/24/2023 11:35 AM
8 flashing lights around the stop sign - more v isible signage 5/24/2023 8:31 AM
9 Flas hing red lights 5/23/2023 9:39 PM
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Slow er vehicl e
speeds
Drivers
stopping for me
Impr oved
cr o ssing saf...
Better lighting
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Slower v ehicle s peeds
Drivers stopping f or me
Improved cros sing safet y features (e.g., cros swalk, medians, short er crossing dist ances, s igns , etc .)
Better lighting
Other (please s pecify)
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
7 / 21
10 Automated c apture of photo or video with fine by mail.5/23/2023 5:47 PM
11 North-South crosswalk across Duc k wood Dr, on wes t (highest) side of intersection 5/22/2023 8:14 PM
12 Signage. There us ed to be 'stop ahead' signs and pav ement painting 5/18/2023 12:58 PM
13 Nothing 5/18/2023 7:55 AM
14 Taking out the s top signs on Duckwood 5/16/2023 9:06 PM
15 Flas hing stop s igns . Des ignated gathering off the street.5/16/2023 7:19 PM
16 What about something like rumble s trips or a visual on the pav ement?5/16/2023 8:54 AM
17 Sidewalks on both sides 5/15/2023 8:37 PM
18 greatly increased police ticketing v iolators 5/12/2023 10:34 AM
19 Don't allow school buses to make stops on Duckwood Dr.5/11/2023 7:34 PM
20 Eliminate the s c hool bus stop on Duckwood. Simply redirect the bus to driv e t he Widgeway
loop on the north and the cul-de-sac s on the s outh.
5/11/2023 9:04 AM
21 Driv ers stopping at the st op s ign 5/10/2023 7:44 PM
22 Fine the drivers who speed and fail to s top 5/10/2023 2:12 PM
23 Flas hing Stop Sign 5/10/2023 8:19 AM
24 35 is a perfect s peed limit for Duc k wood however driv ers continue to drive 10 to 20 miles per
hours above the speed limit
5/9/2023 8:31 PM
25 A sout hern s idewalk would addres s mos t of my c oncerns for pedestrian s afety.5/9/2023 6:40 PM
26 Blinking s top signs or stop writ ten in huge letters on highway or crosswalks 5/9/2023 3:04 PM
27 Flas hing stop s igns 5/9/2023 8:25 AM
28 Unk nown 5/9/2023 12:41 AM
29 A squad parked there; drivers blow that sign more than any other in town!5/8/2023 2:41 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
8 / 21
Q6 Do you have other comments about the safety of crossings at
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way?
Answered: 60 Sk ipped: 32
#RESPONSES DATE
1 When people stop, most people do a “rolling s top” and don’t s top all the way 6/11/2023 6:53 PM
2 I feel like some driv ers don’t see t he s ign due to tree branc hes in the way and the s trong sun
reflection at certain times of the day.
6/2/2023 9:24 PM
3 There are people who don’t even slow down for the s top sign.5/29/2023 4:58 PM
4 The lac k of people stopping is terrifying. I nev er see traf fic enforcement at that intersection. I
have nearly been t-boned 3 t imes by drivers who don’t s top.
5/29/2023 2:24 PM
5 My son was almost hit twic e while getting off the bus. Also one of my children was almost hit
while driving his car bec ause a person failed to st op at st op s ign. I see people daily not
stopping.
5/28/2023 9:20 AM
6 This intersec tion has gotten worse sinc e we moved here in 1987.5/27/2023 6:51 AM
7 Better mark ed c rosswalk s on all s ides . A lot of kids are walking to the bus stop that’s on t he
sout h s ide and they walk on the s ide of t he road.
5/26/2023 8:08 PM
8 I see people blow through that stop s ign at least 3 times a week 5/24/2023 3:43 PM
9 This intersec tion is terrible -- s omething has to be done and c an't be ignored 5/24/2023 3:26 PM
10 All along Duckwood from Pilot knob is a rac eway and needs more traffic policing.5/24/2023 12:56 PM
11 There are problems all over the area. Unfortunately, t his part of Eagan is not pedest rian friendly
at all. I have almost been hit multiple t imes at Lex ingt on and Wes c ott as well.
5/24/2023 9:26 AM
12 I didn't k now it was unsaf e 5/24/2023 8:31 AM
13 I’ve driven this road oft en and only a few times have a seen cars that don’t mak e a complete
stop. The few that I’ve witnes s ed s low way down and slowly roll though wit h no pedestrians
pres ent.
5/24/2023 8:27 AM
14 First of all I don’t understand why we are s pending money on this as they just did a study a
few y ears ago. Sec ond I c an tell you it’s loc als that don’t I obey this s top sign!! Third I really
worry about the k ids at this bus st op c orner. High schoolers are there in the dark before 7am
many months of the y ear. There are many middle sc hoolers and elementary at this s top
morning and afternoon. I k now res ourc es are in short s upply but if law enforc ement was there
some times and citations issued maybe word would get out and the city could make some
money too. In my opinion this isn’t about a poorly c onstructed and s igned intersec tion it’s
about personal res ponsibility of drivers. Don’t ev en think about making is a 2 stop s ign
intersection-it will be a rac eway from Lexington to Denmark . A few y ears ago a young girl biker
was serious ly injured just feet away at Spoonbill Court and Duckwood Drive. Please, please
watch out for our c hildren-of which I don’t have any but am concerned! Thanks for your
consideration of my opinions!
5/23/2023 9:39 PM
15 I've liv ed on Widgeon Way for 40 y ears and this has always been a problem. I don't want
financial res ourc es wasted on c onsultants who were unable to solv e this problem in the past. It
is a waste of time and money. Als o, t here are students and parents who do not live in t he
Widgeon Way or Duckwood Estates area and are in-fact residents of other school districts .
They have applied f or "false res idenc y in Dis trict 196 for their children and they transport their
kids to the neighborhood in order t o c atc h t he s chool bus . I would like to see the bus s tops to
be plac ed deeper into the neighborhoods and not on the street corners of the busiest
intersections . I don't want s tudents who liv e in Burns ville driving to Eagan to catc h a bus so
that they c an att end a better sc hool. It is unfair to the taxpayers of Eagan and District 196.
5/23/2023 5:47 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
9 / 21
16 ?4 how often do they s top? Luc k y if it's a rolling stop!5/23/2023 12:29 PM
17 People are TOO quick to st op, ev en when I don't want to cross the street. Inters ection would
be greatly improv ed if t here were some kind of bike path on the sout h s ide of the street, like a
tar/asphalt sidewalk s outh of the curb, in a better-mowed southern s ide of Duckwood Drive.
Keep t he 4-way s top. Periodically have police ticket s peeders on Duckwood Drive --- s lows
traf fic for s afety AND mak es people stop for s top signs more completely. Although, most of
the time, c ars do stop for the stopsigns --- except may be after dark. It might be worth putting
double s tops igns, one on eac h side (N & S) of Duckwood, f or inc reas ed East-Wes t vis ibility of
the 4-way stop... partic ularly to fight sun glare near the equinoxes .
5/22/2023 8:14 PM
18 May be warning lights around the stop s igns would help??? I honestly think t hat careles s
drivers don't s ee the sign
5/22/2023 6:56 PM
19 It’s a dangerous place for element ary children to go get on a bus .5/22/2023 4:03 PM
20 The speeds on Duc k wood are too high for this residential area. Doesnt s eem t o be much
enforc ement. Would reques t enhanc ements to this road that would require lower speeds or
more frequent st ops
5/21/2023 11:02 AM
21 I'm a Widgeon Way resident. Walk daily. Problem is a majority of driv ers roll through the s top
signs . They t reat it lik e a yield sign. Although they don't yield to pedestrians c ros s ing either, so
they treat it more like a s uggest ed y ield inters ec tion.
5/20/2023 6:57 PM
22 No 5/19/2023 2:55 PM
23 There are little to NO s igns about the school bus s top that happens at that intersection! The
school bus s tops there about half a dozen times a day and how many kids get off the bus , and
how many driver don't care about the "no passing sc hool bus" law & and just dri e right pas t. It
is a mirac le one of those children haven't been hit or killed yet! Paint a frick en crosswalk
already, before it's too late. Or do s omething better that will slow people down and mak e them
see this inters ection, and the people & c hildren who liv e here.
5/18/2023 9:56 PM
24 Many times driv ers don't stop or they barely y ield. My c onc erns are for all, but s pecific ally my
children and other c hildren in the neighborhood. It's not safe to cross.
5/18/2023 8:54 PM
25 This s et stop s igns was put in when Duc kwood bec ame t he only cross s treet between Yankee
Doodle and County 30. It is a bus stop for multiple bus es . Our neighborhood has been
changing ov er and we hav e new families wit h c hildren moving in to it. We need to k eep them
safe and those of us who walk in the area also. I use to see bold cross walk markings and
there are none. The polic e use t o prov ide a presenc e to stop those going through the
intersection. I know they have many duties but in our current c limate stopping at s top signs
and stop lights seem to be a mere s uggest ion and not requirement. I suggest repaint the cros s
walk, provide s ome add police presence and do an all Eagan program of traffic safety f or t he
citiz ens.
5/18/2023 7:01 PM
26 For s ome reason the nex t intersect ion wes t get s more res pec t than ours does , despite being a
schoolbus pick up s pot.
5/18/2023 12:58 PM
27 Same concerns at Duc kwood and Denmark 5/18/2023 12:33 PM
28 It s eems fine 5/18/2023 7:55 AM
29 No 5/17/2023 7:40 PM
30 Driv ers run this stop sign cons tantly 5/17/2023 4:36 PM
31 I think most of the people who blow through the s top sign are coming from Lexington and don’t
expect the intersection to be there. Better s treet des ign would indicate the res idential nature of
the area.
5/17/2023 7:21 AM
32 Driv ers often jus t roll through the stop sign when they are the only c ar at the inters ection. Tak e
out the s top sign on Duckwood. It serves no purpose. The driv ers on bot h Widgeon Ways will
still be able to t urn onto Duc k wood when it is clear. It's not worth guess ing if thos e driv ers on
Duc k wood see the stop sign and actually stop.
5/16/2023 9:06 PM
33 I have lived on Widgeon Way for 2 years and if I’m not in my c ar, I walk, run or bik e and hav e
witnes s ed on a daily basis c ars blowing right through Duckwood inters ec tion at Widgeon Way.
Look forward to the City of Eagan doing what’s right to improve the safet y of the children, their
parents , while waiting for the s c hool bus, and all others who c ome and go on a daily basis .
5/16/2023 7:19 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
10 / 21
34 There are cons tantly vehicles that race up to t he s top sign and the sometimes s top, but c ome
to a screeching s top and sometime s c reec hing st art
5/16/2023 6:04 PM
35 Bik es frequently fail to stop at the stop signs 5/16/2023 9:36 AM
36 This needs to be addressed and not t abled as we hav e s c hool aged children that cros s there
everyday. Safety is of the utmos t concern for them when crossing this s treet.
5/16/2023 9:20 AM
37 This is going to be my son's school bus s top beginning in the f all and I have talked to my
neighbors about the c onc erns about school bus and s tudent safety t here. That s aid, I think
speeds are generally in line wit h s imilar roads - I just think greater awareness needs to be
plac ed on the s top sign it self. I worry about adding ex tra lighting (suc h as a blinking red)
particularly in the winter time - it's a v ery tree-dens e neighborhood and t here isn't muc h in the
way of lights like that.
5/16/2023 8:54 AM
38 Feels v ery safe, just t he s un c an be blinding sometimes 5/16/2023 7:03 AM
39 If s top signs are going to st ay, maybe a flashing s ign to make it more v isible. If s top signs get
pulled, how c an it be improved as it’s a bus stop.
5/15/2023 9:56 PM
40 I wouldn’t need t o c ros s if sidewalk s were on both sides of the st reet.5/15/2023 8:37 PM
41 Speed limit s hould not be reduc ed.5/13/2023 9:13 AM
42 My top 3 c oncerns above are in order: 1, 2, 3. (not sure how to c orrectly answer this question).
I've liv ed in area for 26 years. Problem is drivers not obeying rules, otherwise I don't see a
problem, Ex cept : Bus es s hould not be allowed to STOP on Duckwood Dr. Why not turn onto
Widgeon Way and STOP the bus s o traffic can flow?
5/11/2023 7:34 PM
43 Ins talling s idewalk s on the s outh side of Duc k wood would probably help as well as narrowing
the intersec tion for motorist s on both Widgeon Way & Duckwood Dr. Sidewalk s on both sides
of Duc kwood would giv e MORE visibility to pedest rians & kids getting on & off the bus .
5/11/2023 12:58 PM
44 Just this morning while waiting for the school bus I witness ed a car driv ing f ast enough that a
father and s on c ros s ing to t he bus s top paus e bec ause it looked as though the car wasn't
going to s top, then while 2 s isters were crossing a car drive through the inters ec tion between
the 2 of them instead of wait ing an ext ra 10 seconds , then while the bus was loading s tudents
a c ar turned from south widgeon right onto duck wood. This s ame driver has been s topped by
parents sev eral times and yelled at but he c ontinues t o do it. Every time I am at the bus s top
at least 1 car rolls through without completely stopping. Several c ars are c learly drive ng well
over the speed limit . I hav e been nearly t-boned Turning onto duck wood at least 5 times in the
8 y ears I hav e liv ed here by someone blowing t he s top sign.
5/11/2023 12:51 PM
45 Driv ers speeding and not st opping at the stop sign is the main concern. I don’t k now what are
the bes t way s t o mak e driv ers obey the laws .
5/11/2023 11:40 AM
46 Not the safety of the crossing. However there is a growing problem in the neighborhood with
uncontrolled dog barking. At this meeting , can you pleas e remind ev eryone that unc ontrolled
dog bark ing is against c ity ordinance. Thank y ou.
5/11/2023 9:04 AM
47 I have never seen complete dis regard for a s top sign before on my life. It’s ridiculous. Me and
everyone I know in this neighborhood hav e almos t been hit at that inters ec tion (as drivers, not
pedestrians).
5/10/2023 7:44 PM
48 Many c lose calls with vehicles not stopping for car and when walking.5/10/2023 9:58 AM
49 Somet imes cars nev er st op just eit her cruis e thru or blow by 5/10/2023 8:19 AM
50 Serious ly, we have a running “joke” about the c reativ e non-stopping that tak es place at t he
intersection. We only c ros s when it ’s 1000% clear that the c ars have seen us and have
stopped, or when there are no c ars anywhere. Bec ause we see c ars roll through (or blow
through) that intersect ion all. the. time. And it’s terrify ing. At a minimum, there s hould be a
flashing light. I don’t know if it would help, but it c an’t be muc h wors e than it is now.
5/9/2023 9:13 PM
51 People just don't c are becaus e it's not their neighborhood.5/9/2023 8:31 PM
52 I go for runs a f ew times a week and almost ev ery time I encounter a driv er who either doesn't
stop, or DOES but then cont inues going almost directly into me bec aus e they 're still staring at
their phone or whatever.
5/9/2023 6:40 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
11 / 21
53 I used to watc h my grandson. I was going to cros s duckwood to go to play ground. I thought
the car that was coming from Denmark and down widgeon was going too fast. If I would have
trusted thos e hok ey s top signs, I would not be here t o tell this story. Blew right through and I
know he was going at least 60mph. People driv e at leas t 50-60 mph down duc kwood and blow
through t he s top signs. I tell all of my relatives to not trust ANY car. When I am out walking I
do not cross duckwood. Also people walk on duck wood ins tead of s idewalks. What is up with
that? When we moved here in 2013 there was always a policeman posted up t here. I would be
interested in finding out the number of tickets issued for speeding and not s topping at stop
signs . For the record we do not walk to the park with our grandk ids for any reason. Far too
dangerous. Noone stops at those s igns t hey might s low down but never a c omplete stop.
5/9/2023 3:04 PM
54 It's scary every time I hav e to enter this inters ection, whether I'm walk ing, biking, or driving. It
is not ev en remotely safe.
5/9/2023 1:15 PM
55 Enforc ement is the main problem. The s top sign is necessary to control traf fic, speed and
pedestrian safety
5/9/2023 12:30 PM
56 My son has been almos t 2 times try to c ros s for his bus.5/9/2023 6:47 AM
57 We OK as is . Change unnec essary alt hough sidewalk s would be nic e, if maintained.5/9/2023 12:41 AM
58 Someone is going to get hit and hurt or killed at s ome point. I hav e had people almost hit me
several times. And I'm an adult. If a kid does n't hav e his head const antly going bac k they are
at risk .
5/8/2023 10:01 PM
59 I’d lik e a balance of identified cross walk and respec t for bright or excessive flashing light.5/8/2023 7:50 PM
60 I was almos t t-boned by a teenage girl on her c ell phone- she completely ignored the stop sign 5/8/2023 2:41 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
12 / 21
24.72%22
39.33%35
22.47%20
4.49%4
22.47%20
11.24%10
Q7 Do you.... (select all that apply)
Answered: 89 Sk ipped: 3
Total Respondents : 89
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 North of Duckwood on Town Centre 5/27/2023 5:23 PM
2 I shop in the area 5/24/2023 8:27 AM
3 I like to bike in the ev enings & weekends. I als o walk to around the neighborhood.5/18/2023 9:56 PM
4 walk or bik e to town c entre area 5/18/2023 8:54 PM
5 Retired cros s int ers ec tion multiple times a day running errands , bik ing and walking dog 5/18/2023 7:01 PM
6 Liv e on widgeon way 5/17/2023 7:40 PM
7 walk dog ac ros s duc k wood 5/17/2023 5:02 PM
8 Former Widgeon Way (south of Duck wood) homeowner 5/11/2023 12:58 PM
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Live on
Widgeon Way...
Live on
Widgeon Way...
Live East of
Widgeon Way...
Live West of
Widgeon Way...
Commute to
w ork o r scho...
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Liv e on Widgeon Way North of Duc k wood Driv e (Toward Yank ee Doodle Road)
Liv e on Widgeon Way South of Duckwood Drive (Toward Wes cott Road)
Liv e Eas t of Widgeon Way (Toward Lex ington)
Liv e West of Widgeon Way (Toward Town Center Shopping Center)
Commute t o work or school along Duc k wood Driv e
Other (please s pecify)
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
13 / 21
9 On mourning Dov e and widgeon 5/9/2023 3:04 PM
10 Actually live on Woodthrush Ct whic h is c onnected to Widgeon Way South of Duckwood.5/9/2023 12:41 AM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
14 / 21
Q8 What is your ZIP code?
Answered: 90 Sk ipped: 2
#RESPONSES DATE
1 55123 6/15/2023 2:01 PM
2 55123 6/15/2023 7:44 AM
3 55123 6/11/2023 6:53 PM
4 55123 6/5/2023 6:07 PM
5 55123 6/2/2023 9:24 PM
6 55123 6/1/2023 4:52 AM
7 55123 5/29/2023 4:58 PM
8 55123 5/29/2023 2:24 PM
9 55123 5/29/2023 12:52 PM
10 55123 5/29/2023 7:01 AM
11 55123 5/28/2023 9:20 AM
12 55123 5/27/2023 5:23 PM
13 55123 5/27/2023 6:51 AM
14 55123 5/26/2023 8:08 PM
15 55123 5/25/2023 8:56 AM
16 55123 5/24/2023 7:54 PM
17 55123 5/24/2023 3:43 PM
18 55123 5/24/2023 3:26 PM
19 55122 5/24/2023 12:56 PM
20 55123 5/24/2023 12:43 PM
21 55122 5/24/2023 11:35 AM
22 55123 5/24/2023 10:20 AM
23 55123 5/24/2023 9:26 AM
24 55123 5/24/2023 8:31 AM
25 55123 5/24/2023 8:27 AM
26 55123 5/23/2023 9:39 PM
27 55123 5/23/2023 5:47 PM
28 55123 5/23/2023 12:29 PM
29 55123 5/22/2023 8:14 PM
30 55123 5/22/2023 6:56 PM
31 55123 5/22/2023 4:11 PM
32 55124 5/22/2023 4:03 PM
33 55123 5/21/2023 11:02 AM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
15 / 21
34 55123 5/20/2023 6:57 PM
35 55123 5/20/2023 10:19 AM
36 55123 5/19/2023 2:55 PM
37 55123 5/18/2023 9:56 PM
38 55123 5/18/2023 8:54 PM
39 55123 5/18/2023 7:01 PM
40 55123 5/18/2023 12:58 PM
41 55123 5/18/2023 12:33 PM
42 55123 5/18/2023 7:55 AM
43 55123 5/17/2023 7:40 PM
44 55123 5/17/2023 6:17 PM
45 55123 5/17/2023 5:02 PM
46 55123 5/17/2023 4:36 PM
47 55123 5/17/2023 7:21 AM
48 55123 5/16/2023 9:06 PM
49 55123 5/16/2023 7:19 PM
50 55123 5/16/2023 7:04 PM
51 55123 5/16/2023 6:04 PM
52 55123 5/16/2023 9:36 AM
53 55123 5/16/2023 9:23 AM
54 55123 5/16/2023 9:20 AM
55 55123 5/16/2023 8:54 AM
56 55123 5/16/2023 7:03 AM
57 55123 5/15/2023 9:56 PM
58 55123 5/15/2023 8:37 PM
59 55123 5/15/2023 7:59 PM
60 55123 5/15/2023 4:31 PM
61 55123 5/13/2023 9:13 AM
62 55123 5/12/2023 10:34 AM
63 55123 5/11/2023 7:34 PM
64 55122 5/11/2023 12:58 PM
65 55123 5/11/2023 12:51 PM
66 55123 5/11/2023 11:40 AM
67 55123 5/11/2023 9:04 AM
68 55123 5/10/2023 7:44 PM
69 6 5/10/2023 2:12 PM
70 55123 5/10/2023 9:58 AM
71 55123 5/10/2023 8:19 AM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
16 / 21
72 55123 5/10/2023 6:55 AM
73 55123 5/10/2023 6:30 AM
74 55123 5/9/2023 9:13 PM
75 55123 5/9/2023 9:10 PM
76 55123 5/9/2023 8:31 PM
77 55123 5/9/2023 6:40 PM
78 55123 5/9/2023 4:05 PM
79 55123 5/9/2023 3:04 PM
80 55123 5/9/2023 1:15 PM
81 55123 5/9/2023 1:07 PM
82 55123 5/9/2023 12:30 PM
83 55123 5/9/2023 10:38 AM
84 55123 5/9/2023 8:25 AM
85 55123 5/9/2023 6:47 AM
86 55123 5/9/2023 12:41 AM
87 55123 5/8/2023 10:01 PM
88 55123 5/8/2023 9:39 PM
89 55123 5/8/2023 7:50 PM
90 55123 5/8/2023 2:41 PM
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
17 / 21
3.33%3
3.33%3
48.89%44
16.67%15
27.78%25
0.00%0
Q9 What category contains your age?
Answered: 90 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 90
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Under 1 6
1 6-24
25-5 4
55-64
65-84
85 +
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 16
16-24
25-54
55-64
65-84
85+
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
18 / 21
56.67%51
36.67%33
0.00%0
6.67%6
Q10 Which gender do you identify with?
Answered: 90 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 90
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Female
Mal e
Non-binary
Prefer not to
say
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female
Male
Non-binary
Prefer not to s ay
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
19 / 21
100.00%86
0.00%0
Q11 Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino?
Answered: 86 Sk ipped: 6
TOTAL 86
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
No, I am not
Spanish,...
Yes, I
consider mys...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
No, I am not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino
Yes, I c onsider myself to be Spanish, His panic or Latino
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
20 / 21
1.14%1
4.55%4
1.14%1
81.82%72
11.36%10
3.41%3
Q12 How do you describe your race? (Select all that apply)
Answered: 88 Sk ipped: 4
Total Respondents : 88
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 A consultant is a pers on who asks to borrow your watc h and then charges you when you ask
"What time is it ?" But t hey c an't be abs olutely sure that the time is correct, because af ter all, it
is your watc h. --The s ame is true in this s it uation when it was discussed previously. The c ore
problem is that the people who run through t he s top sign are not s trangers to the neighborhood.
They are YOUR FRIENDS and neighbors. The c it y's original lay out of the retail in Town Centre
was flawed from the beginning and they City s hould ac c ept the respons ibility of fix ing the
problem using "their nickel". There should not be a s ide drive-in at the Walmart st ore on
Duc k wood Driv e. And t he path f rom Lexington to Denmark is too smoot h and eas y to drive. It
should be curved and annoy ing to driv e so that the s peed is automatically retarded by the
lay out and design of the street. Als o, automated tic k eting tied to camera's and s ensors for all
the people who violate the law, would not only generat e enforcement revenue, but it would
reduce the amount of travel on Duckwood Drive. The City with traffic problems is a City who
5/23/2023 5:47 PM
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Amer ican
Indian or...
Asian, Asian
Indian or...
Bl ack or
African...
White
Prefer not to
say
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian, As ian Indian or Pacific Islander
Blac k or African Americ an
Whit e
Prefer not to s ay
Other (please s pecify)
Duc kwood Drive and Widgeon Way Survey
21 / 21
has flawed des ign iss ues with their street grid system and all the rules and s ignage t hat goes
along wit h it.
2 This s urvey has nothing to do with rac e. It’s all about keeping ev ery one s afe espec ially the
children.
5/16/2023 7:19 PM
3 Jewish 5/11/2023 12:58 PM
DUCKWOOD DRIVE AND
WIDGEON WAY INTERSECTION
Eagan, MN
Agenda
▪Introduction/Background
▪Study Process
▪Current Status
▪Discussion/Agreement of Issues
▪Brainstorm Options
Intersection Background
Petition
▪Introduction/Background
▪Study Process
▪Current Status
▪Discussion/Agreement of Issues
▪Tools Available
▪Brainstorm Options
School Bus Routes
High School Middle School Elementary School
Study Process
Study Process
▪Review Past Intersection Studies
o Last studied in 2018
o Intersection did not meet “warrants” for a four way Stop intersection
o Adequate number of gaps in traffic for pedestrians to safely cross
o Recommended removal of STOP signs on Duckwood Drive
o After much discussion City decision was to leave as is.
▪Collect New Data –May 2023
o Vehicle and Pedestrian/Bicycle Volumes
o Traffic Speeds on Duckwood Drive
o Gaps in Traffic
o Stop Compliance
o 10 year Crash History
▪School District 196 Input
▪Resident Survey/Discussion
Current Status
Current Status of Study
▪Traffic Data is being collected (not yet analyzed)
▪Resident Survey and Meeting Invites sent
o Survey results coming in
▪Reached out to School District
▪Resident Discussion (Today)
Preliminary Survey Results
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Top Ranked
Second Ranked
Third Ranked
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Preliminary Survey Results (May 23, 2023)
Discussion
Why did the goose cross
the road?Pedestrian Crossing Safety
Design Options
How do we Improve Safety
▪Use the correct tools
▪Follow Research and Standards
▪Consistency is the KEY to safety
▪Good Street Design
▪Reduce Crossing Distance
RRFB
Growing an Encouragement Campaign
For operations plans and details on how to set up crossing events for this
highly successful program contact Senior Commander Kathleen Brown at:
Kathleen.Brown@ci.stpaul.mn.us
Next Steps
Crossing Evaluation Process
1. Field Review & Preliminary Data Collection
2. Data Collection & Analysis
3. Evaluate Candidate Locations
4. Engineering Review
We are here!
Completing in June 2023
July 2023 after Open House #2
Next Community Meeting
Next Meeting
June 27, 2023
4:30 p.m.
Eagan Room
Thank You!!
Russ Matthys, PE Director of Public Works 651-675-5646
John Gorder, PE City Engineer 651-675-5645
John Maczko, PE, PTOE SRF Consulting Group 651-333-4127
DUCKWOOD DRIVE AND
WIDGEON WAY INTERSECTION
Eagan, MN
Agenda
INTRODUCTION WHAT WE
HEARD
STUDY PROCESS STUDY RESULTS
PUBLIC
FEEDBACK
OPTIONS FOR
CONSIDERATION
NEXT STEPS
Study Process
▪Reviewed Past Intersection Studies
o Last studied in 2018
o Intersection did not meet “warrants” for a four way Stop intersection
o Adequate number of gaps in traffic for pedestrians to safely cross
o Recommended removal of STOP signs on Duckwood Drive
o After much discussion City decision was to leave as is.
▪Collected New Data –May 2023
o Vehicle and Pedestrian/Bicycle Volumes
o Traffic Speeds on Duckwood Drive
o Gaps in Traffic
o Stop Compliance
o 10-year Crash History
▪School District 196 Input
▪Resident Survey/Discussion
Petition
What we Heard
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Top Ranked
Second Ranked
Third Ranked
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Survey Results (June 16, 2023)
Data Results
Data
Collected
Reported Crash History
(2013-2022)
1.Feb 2014: Property
Damage, Angle, Icy
Road
2.Nov 2016: Property
Damage, Rear End,
Distracted Driving
3.Oct 2022: Possible
Injury, Rear End,
Medical Condition
School Bus Routes (High School)Potential Students (2022 –23)
14 on South
4 on North
Potential Students (2022 –23)
5 on South
33 on North
School Bus Routes (Middle School)
Potential Students (2022-23)
4 on South
3 on North
School Bus Routes (Elementary)Potential Students (2022 -23)
8 students
Potential Students (2022 -23)
16 on South
5 on North
School District Observations/Report
▪Intersection has been observed by Safety Specialist several times
▪Sight distance more than 300 yards in both directions
▪Traffic was light during drop-off times
▪Some vehicles made rolling stops in the morning to beat the bus
▪Once bus stopped and deployed stop arms all traffic stopped
▪Bus Drivers report all stop arm violations (none reported for 2022-23)
▪Roadway does not meet hazardous crossing criteria set by district as
only two criteria met
•Street Width
•35MPH Speed
Stop Compliance –Duckwood Drive
▪Percentage of all drivers that came to a complete stop.
Stop Compliance –
Widgeon Way
▪Percentage of all drivers that
came to a complete stop.
Suggestions from Public for Improvement
▪Increase enforcement of the stop signs
▪STOP AHEAD signs (currently exist)
▪Larger stop signs
▪STOP markings in the street
▪Remove the stop signs on Duckwood Drive
▪Flashing lights on the stop signs
▪Mark crosswalks
▪Flashing lights for crossing
▪Roundabout
▪Narrow the roadway
▪Cameras for enforcement of violators (not allowed under current state law)
▪Park a police car near intersection (unstaffed)
▪Add rumble strips
▪Move school bus stops off Duckwood Drive.
▪Add a sidewalk or trail on south side of Duckwood Drive
▪Trim trees so signs are more visible
School District
Glacier Hills Elementary Route
•Stop -Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way
•For students residing south of Duckwood
Drive
•Stop -North end of Widgeon Way at the cut -
out
•Add a Stop
•Widgeon Way and Widgeon Way T
•No changes for Black Hawk MS & Eagan HS
•students remain on the side of the road
they reside on and cross only when the bus
deploys it’s stop arm and the driver signals
them to cross.
Add a
bus stop
Options for Consideration
Safety can be improved by…
▪Using the correct
tools
▪Following research,
best practices, and
standards
▪Providing
consistent
expectations
through good
roadway design
Stop Signs
▪A STOP sign is used to assign right of way at an
intersection and to make sure that traffic flows
smoothly and predictably.
▪All-way stop control is used where the volume of
traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately
equal.
▪A STOP sign should not be used as a speed
control device.
Do STOP Signs Reduce Speeding?
▪MnMUTCD -YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed
control.
▪Research shows that where stop signs are installed as “deterrents” or
“speed breakers,” there are high incidences of intentional violations.
▪When vehicles must stop, the speed reduction is only near the stop
sign, and drivers tend to speed up between stop signs.
▪When not required to stop by cross street traffic:
o 5 to 20% of all drivers come to a complete stop
o 40 to 60% will come to a rolling stop below 5 mph
o 20 to 40% will pass through at higher speeds.
▪Signs placed for the purpose of speed reduction are the most
flagrantly violated.
Geometric Options for Consideration
Median
Curb Extension
Combined Median and Curb Extension
Roundabout
Community-wide Project
For operations plans and details on how to set up crossing events for this highly successful
program contact Senior Commander Kathleen Brown at: Kathleen.Brown@ci.stpaul.mn.us
Next Steps
Next Steps
▪Report to the City in the next few weeks
▪City staff to discuss and determine next steps with the findings of
the report
▪City Council consideration -Workshop or Public Works
Committee
Thank You!!
Russ Matthys, PE Director of Public Works 651-675-5646
John Gorder, PE City Engineer 651-675-5645
John Maczko, PE, PTOE SRF Consulting Group 651-333-4127
May 24th Community Meeting Summary
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Safety
Present: John Gorder (City Engineer), John Maczko (SRF), Tom Sachi (SRF), approximately – 25-30
residents
Overview: John Gorder provided an overview of the intersection history. Stop signs were installed
decades ago in response to concerns about speeding along Duckwood Drive. The intersection has been
studied several times in the last decade related to concerns about safety. The most recent study was
completed in 2018 and recommended removal of the stop signs. After much discussion the final result
was to leave the intersection as is.
Current petition cites the following concerns:
• Vehicles not stopping
at the STOP sign while
students are crossing
• Pedestrians not safe in
current crossing area
• Vehicles not adhering
to the flashing lights of
school buses
• Very low visibility of
crosswalk/no crosswalk
– High danger
Data Collection: John and Tom shared the study process that involves collecting current data and
obtaining community input and discussion. Data to be collected includes:
• Traffic Volumes
• Traffic Speeds on
Duckwood Drive
• Intersection Turn
Counts (Cars, Bikes,
Pedestrians)
• Gaps in Traffic
• Stop Compliance
• 10 year Crash History
• Community feedback
and survey
Data collection is currently underway including tonight’s meeting and a community survey.
John (SRF) shared survey results received to date. 64 responses received with the top three issues
identified:
• Vehicles not stopping
for stop signs
• Cars not stopping for
pedestrians
• Careless
Driving/Speeding
Discussion of issues and thoughts for improvements: Those in attendance agreed that the issues
identified so far in the survey are the top concerns. Discussion then moved to ideas for improvements.
These included:
• Increase enforcement
of the signs – There is
none
• Mark the crosswalks
• STOP ahead signs
• Round-a-bout
• Narrow the street
• Flashing lights on the
stop signs
• Flashing lights for
crossing
• Larger stop signs
• Cameras for
enforcement and mail
the ticket
• Park a police car near
intersection (unstaffed)
• Rumble strips
• Take the signs out
• Move school bus stops
off Duckwood Drive.
• Sidewalk or trail on
south side of
Duckwood Drive so you
don’t have to cross
• Markings in the street
that say Stop
• Trim trees so signs are
more visible
John (SRF) also shared information related to the “Stop for Me Campaign” that had been utilized in Saint
Paul prior to COVID with great success. The program is a community lead program that partners with
Police and Public works to improve both driver and pedestrian knowledge and responsibilities related to
pedestrian crossings. This is a great way to be involved - raise awareness – be successful.
Next Steps: John, John and Tom thanked everyone for their time and input. As next steps, they will be
processing the data that is being collected and developing some options for consideration.
There will be a follow-up meeting on June 27th at 4:30pm at this same meeting location (City Hall -Eagan
Room) to report back to the community the results of the data collection and thoughts for
improvements at the intersection.
June 27th Community Meeting Minutes
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Safety
Present: John Gorder (City Engineer), Luke Nelson (EPD Traffic Enforcement), John Maczko (SRF), Tom
Sachi (SRF), approximately – 15-20 residents
Overview: John (SRF) presented with the use of a powerpoint presentation. The presentation started
with a summary review of the May 24th meeting and why we were here.
Petition cites the following concerns:
• Vehicles not stopping
at the STOP sign while
students are crossing
• Pedestrians not safe in
current crossing area
• Vehicles not adhering
to the flashing lights of
school buses
• Very low visibility of
crosswalk/no crosswalk
– High danger
What We Heard: (92 survey respondents and 25-30 meeting attendees
Top 3 Concerns:
• Vehicles are not stopping for stop signs
• Cars are not stopping for pedestrians
• Careless Driving/Speeding
Data Collection Results: John and Tom shared the results of the data collection.
Traffic Volumes:
Duckwood Drive: 6,050 - 6,600 Vehicles per day Widgeon Way: 350 – 800 Vehicles per
day
Speed Limit:
Average: 35-37 mph 85%ile Speed: 39-42 mph
Pedestrian/Bike:
Crossing Duckwood: 43 Crossings Widgeon Way :139 Crossings
Reported Crashes (10 Years):
Three (3) - 2 rear end and 1 Right Angle Crash
EPD did not have any additional crashes to report
Stop sign Compliance: (Percentage of all Drivers that came to a complete stop)
Duckwood Drive: 21-25% Widgeon Way: 42-43%
School District Observations:
Good sight distance, traffic was light at drop-off times, some vehicles made rolling stops, once
bus stopped and deployed stop arms vehicles stopped, bus drivers reported no Stop arm
violations in 2022-23 and the roadway does not meet hazardous crossing criteria (meets only 2
criteria: 35mph and street width)
School district provided potential 2022-23 student pick up numbers for the Duckwood/Widgeon
Way stop: 21 Elementary school, 7 Middle School and 18 High School) for comparison at
Duckwood and Duckwood Trail there were 38 High School and 0 Middle school students.
(elementary were unreported)
Improved Crossing safety Ideas:
• Increase
enforcement of the
signs
• Mark the crosswalks
• STOP ahead signs
• Roundabout
• Narrow the street
• Flashing lights on the
stop signs
• Flashing lights for
crossing
• Larger stop signs
• Cameras for
enforcement and
mail the ticket
• Park a police car near
intersection
(unstaffed)
• Rumble strips
• Take the signs out
• Move school bus
stops off Duckwood
Drive.
• Sidewalk or trail on
south side of
Duckwood Drive so
you don’t have to
cross
• Markings in the
street that say STOP
• Trim trees so signs
are more visible
John (SRF) shared some comments on some of the suggested ideas for clarification. Stop ahead signs
currently exist; Existing STOP signs are 48” with reflective posts (standard is 30” Like at Denmark and
Duckwood); camera enforcement of STOP sign violations is currently not permitted in Minnesota;
Rumble strips are noisy for adjacent residents.
Officer Luke Nelson provided information related to his experience in doing traffic enforcement in Eagan
for the past 7 years. He explained the difficulties in enforcing stop sign violations. State law says that
you must come to a complete stop at a stop sign or you are in violation of the law. He agreed with the
data that was shared that there is a high violation rate of the law but if he wrote tickets to 80% of the
drivers on Duckwood Drive they would likely get thrown out in court and the validity of a stop sign being
at that location would also likely be challenged. Good discussion followed with those present and it
comes down to a police officer doing what is “reasonable”. That is tough to determine as it is a person’s
individual belief, but it is a reality in how a judge rules.
Options for Consideration
John (SRF) said that the School District has indicated that they will add a stop for the Elementary School
children for the 2023-24 school year on Widgeon Way north of Duckwood Drive so that Elementary aged
children will not have to cross Duckwood Drive to get to the bus.
Other options include:
John indicated that following research, best practices, and standards provide for consistent expectations
of ALL users (pedestrian, biker and driver) and make situations safer for all. One needs to ask the
question: What makes this intersection different than many others in Eagan? (Duckwood Trail and
Duckwood Drive for instance)
Option 1 - Removing the Stop Signs on Duckwood Drive.
• The original stop signs were put in to manage speed. National studies as well as the Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices state that stop signs should not be used for speed control.
• Stop signs are used to assign right of way at an intersection to assure smooth and predictable
traffic flow.
• Four-way stops should be used where the volume of traffic is approximately equal. (Not the case
at this intersection)
• Only 1 in 5 vehicles is currently stopping – there is no consistency.
• Research shows where STOP signs are installed as “speed deterrents” there are high incidences
for intentional violations.
• Signs placed for the purpose of speed reduction are the most flagrantly violated.
Not everyone was in agreement this was a good solution, but most people agreed that people are not
stopping for stop signs and that it is hard to tell who will stop and who won’t. One resident said she
keeps small stones in her pocket and throws them at cars that don’t stop. Some thought adding lights
around the signs would help or paint in the road. While there is some minor tree trimming that should
occur, the Stop signs are oversized, have reflective poles and advance warning signs with reflective poles
in place. The bottom line is the signs are visible and people aren’t stopping, and this is consistent with
research of un-warranted stop signs. Removing the stop signs would improve driver expectations and
make the intersection more predictable of what other drivers are going to do.
Roadway narrowing options.
Research has shown roadway narrowing has been shown to reduce speed and improve pedestrian
safety. Ther are several ways to accomplish this narrowing as indicated below. The cost to implement
can vary depending on option chosen and the construction methodology, concrete and asphalt or paint
or tape.
Option 1: Median with Refuge Area
• Narrows the street
• Provides for two stage pedestrian crossing (i.e. pedestrian only crosses one lane at a time with a
refuge area between lanes)
• Least expensive construction if permanent as it does not affect drainage
• Can be done with paint, though raised infrastructure is more effective and safer.
Option 2: Curb Extension
• Narrows the street
• Allows pedestrians to be more visible
• More costly to construct as it affects drainage design
• Can be done with paint, though raised infrastructure is more effective
Option 3: Combined median and curb extension
• Narrows the street
• Allows pedestrians to be more visible
• Allows for two stage pedestrian crossing
• More expensive to construct as it affects drainage design and includes a median
• Can be done with paint, though raised infrastructure is more effective
Option 4: Roundabout
• Slows traffic
• Requires additional ROW
• Costly to construct
• Mixed research on pedestrian safety for roundabouts
Someone asked if the Stop Sign would be removed if any of the above were implemented. John (SRF)
stated that data would show that they should be as the stop signs are not warranted based on the
MnMUTCD.
People in attendance appeared open to roadway narrowing options 1-3 but were overwhelming against
the roundabout as drivers don’t need to stop making it harder on pedestrians and it would take
additional ROW and be expensive. One resident asked about a mini roundabout as an option but that
too received little support.
People asked about simply marking crosswalks. Officer Nelson asked why folks thought painting
something probably not visible to a driver like it is to a pedestrian would make a driver STOP when they
are not stopping now.
John (SRF) reminded those in attendance that state law is very clear that the driver of a vehicle shall stop
to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or at an
intersection with no marked crosswalk. John also asked what made this intersection any different than
many other intersections in the city (ie Duckwood Drive and Duckwood Trail). Following research and
standards and maintaining consistency is important to maintain safety.
Some suggested the flashing crossing lights when a pedestrian is present (an RRFB). While those are
effective in the right circumstances this location does not meet the criteria established for installation.
John (SRF) also shared information related to the “Stop for Me Campaign” that had been utilized in Saint
Paul prior to COVID with great success. The program is a community lead program that partners with
Police and Public works to improve both driver and pedestrian knowledge and responsibilities related to
pedestrian crossings. This is a great way to be involved - raise awareness – be successful.
A resident asked if more could be done to educate and promote crossing safety and driver awareness in
the city via newsletters and other communications means. John (Eagan) said that this was a good
suggestion and he would look into it.
Next Steps: John, John and Tom thanked everyone for their time and input. As next steps:
• SRF will be producing a report to the city in the next few weeks
• City staff will discuss and determine next steps with the findings
• The report will likely go to a workshop of Public Works committee for discussion and ultimately
to the city council.
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
INCIDENT ID
10943348
ROUTE SYS
05-MSAS
ROUTE NUM
114
MEASURE
0.368
ROUTE NAME
Duckwood Dr
COUNTY
19-Dakota
CITY
Eagan
TOWNSHIP
MNDOT DISTRICT
D-METRO
RELATION TO INT
Four-Way Intersection
LOCAL ID
14001036
CRASH SEVERITY
N - Prop Damage Only
DATE
02/23/14
TIME
15:35
DAY OF WEEK
Sun
INTERSECT WITH
BASIC TYPE
Angle
MANNER OF COLLISION
Angle
NUM VEH
2
NUM KILLED
0
DIV RDWY DIR
East
FIRST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transport
ROADWAY SURF
Ice/Frost
LIGHT CONDITION
Daylight
WEATHER PRIMARY
Clear
WEATHER SECONDARY
Clear
HIT & RUN
No
PUBLIC PRIVATE CODE
YES
WORK ZONE TYPE
NOT APPLICABLE
WORK ZONE LOC
NOT APPLICABLE
WORKERS PRES
Not Applicable (Not in Work Zone)
LAW ENF PRES
ON/OFF TRAFFICWAY
RELATIVE LOC TRAFFICWAY
On Roadway (including alley,
ON BRIDGE?
No
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 1
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 2
Unit 1 - 0
UNIT TYPE
0
VEH TYPE
VAN OR MINIVAN
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
48
SEX
Male
INJURY SEVERITY
N - Prop Dmg Only
ZIP
55123
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
None
RECOMMENDATIONS?
None
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Apparently Normal (Including No Drugs/Alcoh
VIOLATIONS
No
Unit 1 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Not Towed
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
BK SLG/STPG/STNG
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 1 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
No Clear Contributing Action
No Clear Contributing Action
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
BK SLG/STPG/STNG
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
NOT APPLICABLE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
Not Applicable
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 1 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Eastbound
ALIGNMENT
CURVE (pre 2016)
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
2-LANES 1-ECH-WY
NUM LANES
TRAFFIC CONTROL
STOP SIGN ALL WAY
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
NOT APPLICABLE
Unit 2 - 0
UNIT TYPE
0
VEH TYPE
Passenger Car
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
57
SEX
Female
INJURY SEVERITY
N - Prop Dmg Only
ZIP
55123
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
None
RECOMMENDATIONS?
None
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Apparently Normal (Including No Drugs/Alcoh
VIOLATIONS
Yes
Unit 2 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Not Towed
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
BK SLG/STPG/STNG
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 2 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
No Clear Contributing Action
No Clear Contributing Action
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
BK SLG/STPG/STNG
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
NOT APPLICABLE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
Not Applicable
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 2 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Eastbound
ALIGNMENT
CURVE (pre 2016)
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
2-LANES 1-ECH-WY
NUM LANES
TRAFFIC CONTROL
STOP SIGN ALL WAY
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
NOT APPLICABLE
ROUTE ID
0500023945860114-I
LATITUDE
44.826286
LONGITUDE
-93.154406
UTM X
487794.3
UTM Y
4963664.0
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
Unit 3
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 3 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 3 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 4
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 4 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 4 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
OFFICER SKETCH
NO OFFICER SKETCH WAS FOUND.
NARRATIVE
BOTH VEHICLES WERE TRAVELING EAST ON DUCKWOOD DR
APPROACHING THE INTERSECTION OF DUCKWOOD DR AND
WIDGEON WAY. VEHICLE ONE WAS BEHIND VEHICLE TWO. VEHICLE
TWO LOST CONTROL WHILE ATTEMPTING TO STOP ON THE ICY ROAD
AND SPUN AROUND. VEHICLE ONE ALSO LOST CONTROL WHILE
ATTEMPTING TO STOP ON THE ICY ROAD AND SPUN OUT AS WELL.
THE REAR PASSENGER BUMPER OF VEHICLE ONE STRUCK THE
PASSENGER SIDE OF VEHICLE TWO. NO INJURIES WERE REPORTED.
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 2 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
INCIDENT ID
01052405
ROUTE SYS
05-MSAS
ROUTE NUM
114
MEASURE
0.403
ROUTE NAME
DUCKWOOD DR
COUNTY
19-Dakota
CITY
Eagan
TOWNSHIP
MNDOT DISTRICT
RELATION TO INT
Four-Way Intersection
LOCAL ID
22005843
CRASH SEVERITY
C - Possible Injury
DATE
10/18/22
TIME
15:55
DAY OF WEEK
Tue
INTERSECT WITH
WIDGEON WAY
BASIC TYPE
Rear End
MANNER OF COLLISION
Front to Rear
NUM VEH
2
NUM KILLED
0
DIV RDWY DIR
FIRST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transport
ROADWAY SURF
Dry
LIGHT CONDITION
Daylight
WEATHER PRIMARY
Clear
WEATHER SECONDARY
HIT & RUN
No
PUBLIC PRIVATE CODE
No
WORK ZONE TYPE
NOT APPLICABLE
WORK ZONE LOC
WORKERS PRES
LAW ENF PRES
ON/OFF TRAFFICWAY
Trafficway, On Road
RELATIVE LOC TRAFFICWAY
On Roadway (including alley,
ON BRIDGE?
No
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 1
None
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 2
Unit 1 - Motor Vehicle in Transport
UNIT TYPE
Motor Vehicle in Transport
VEH TYPE
Passenger Car
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
41
SEX
Female
INJURY SEVERITY
N - Prop Dmg Only
ZIP
551231082
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
None
DL RESTRICTIONS
Corrective Lenses
RECOMMENDATIONS?
None
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Apparently Normal (Including No Drugs/Alcoh
VIOLATIONS
No
Unit 1 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Towed Due to Disabling D
INITIAL CONTACT
Rear
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
Vehicle Stopped or Stalled in Roadway
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
VSN OBSCRD-WNDSH
Unit 1 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
No Clear Contributing Action
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
Not Distracted
SPEEDING RELATED
Not Speeding
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
No
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
No
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 1 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Westbound
ALIGNMENT
Straight
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
Two-Way, Not Divided
NUM LANES
1
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Stop Sign
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
Operational
Unit 2 - Motor Vehicle in Transport
UNIT TYPE
Motor Vehicle in Transport
VEH TYPE
Passenger Van (Se
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
59
SEX
Female
INJURY SEVERITY
C - Possible Injury
ZIP
55123
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
None
DL RESTRICTIONS
None
RECOMMENDATIONS?
None
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Apparently Normal (Including No Drugs/Alcoh
VIOLATIONS
No
Unit 2 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Not Towed
INITIAL CONTACT
Front
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
Moving Forward
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 2 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
Driver Distracted
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
Other Activity, Electronic Device
SPEEDING RELATED
Unknown
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
No
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
No
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 2 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Westbound
ALIGNMENT
Straight
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
Two-Way, Not Divided
NUM LANES
1
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Stop Sign
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
Operational
ROUTE ID
0500023945860114-I
LATITUDE
44.826282
LONGITUDE
-93.155115
UTM X
487737.7
UTM Y
4963664.6
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 3 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
Unit 3
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 3 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 3 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 4
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 4 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 4 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
OFFICER SKETCH NARRATIVE
UNIT 1 WAS TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON DEERWOOD DR FROM THE
INTERSECTION OF DEERWOOD/LEXINGTON. UNIT 1 APPROACHED
THE INTERSECTION OF DEERWOOD DR/WIDGEON WAY AND STOPPED
AT THE INTERSECTION. UNIT 2 WAS TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON
DEERWOOD BEHIND UNIT 1 AND DID NOT NOTICE UNIT 1 STOPPED AT
THE INTERSECTION DUE TO BEING DISTRACTED. UNIT 2 COLLIDED
WITH THE REAR END OF UNIT 1 AT THE INTERSECTION OF
DEERWOOD DR/WIDGEON WAY. UNIT 1 SUSTAINED MODERATE
DISABLING DAMAGE TO THE REAR LEFT CORNER OF THE VEHICLE.
UNIT 2 SUSTAINED MINOR DAMAGE TO THE FRONT RIGHT CORNER OF
THE VEHICLE. UNIT 1 WAS TOWED FROM THE SCENE AND UNIT 2
DROVE AWAY FROM THE SCENE.
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 4 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
INCIDENT ID
00398275
ROUTE SYS
05-MSAS
ROUTE NUM
114
MEASURE
0.404
ROUTE NAME
DUCKWOOD DR
COUNTY
19-Dakota
CITY
Eagan
TOWNSHIP
MNDOT DISTRICT
D-METRO
RELATION TO INT
Four-Way Intersection
LOCAL ID
16008912
CRASH SEVERITY
N - Prop Damage Only
DATE
11/27/16
TIME
14:10
DAY OF WEEK
Sun
INTERSECT WITH
BASIC TYPE
Rear End
MANNER OF COLLISION
Front to Rear
NUM VEH
2
NUM KILLED
0
DIV RDWY DIR
Not Applicable
FIRST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transport
ROADWAY SURF
Dry
LIGHT CONDITION
Daylight
WEATHER PRIMARY
Clear
WEATHER SECONDARY
HIT & RUN
No
PUBLIC PRIVATE CODE
No
WORK ZONE TYPE
NOT APPLICABLE
WORK ZONE LOC
WORKERS PRES
LAW ENF PRES
ON/OFF TRAFFICWAY
Trafficway, On Road
RELATIVE LOC TRAFFICWAY
On Roadway (including alley,
ON BRIDGE?
No
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 1
None
ROAD CONTRIB CIRCUM 2
Unit 1 - Motor Vehicle in Transport
UNIT TYPE
Motor Vehicle in Transport
VEH TYPE
Passenger Car
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
59
SEX
Female
INJURY SEVERITY
N - Prop Dmg Only
ZIP
551230000
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
None
DL RESTRICTIONS
Corrective Lenses
RECOMMENDATIONS?
Physical Exam
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Physical Disability (Short Term or Long Term)
VIOLATIONS
No
Unit 1 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Towed Due to Disabling D
INITIAL CONTACT
Front Right Quarter Panel
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
Moving Forward
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
VSN OBSCD-SUN/LTl
Unit 1 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
Failure to Yield Right-of-Way
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
Unknown
SPEEDING RELATED
Unknown
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
No
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
No
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 1 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Westbound
ALIGNMENT
Straight
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
Two-Way, Not Divided
NUM LANES
2
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Stop Sign
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
Operational
Unit 2 - Motor Vehicle in Transport
UNIT TYPE
Motor Vehicle in Transport
VEH TYPE
Passenger Car
DL STATUS
Valid
PERSON TYPE
Driver
AGE
21
SEX
Female
INJURY SEVERITY
N - Prop Dmg Only
ZIP
55123
DL STATE
MN
DL CLASS
D The Normal (Not Commercial) Driver License
DL ENDORSEMENTS
None
DL RESTRICTIONS
None
RECOMMENDATIONS?
None
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
Apparently Normal (Including No Drugs/Alcoh
VIOLATIONS
No
Unit 2 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
Normal
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
Not Towed
INITIAL CONTACT
Rear Left Quarter Panel
MOST HARMFUL
Motor Vehicle In Transpor
TRAILERS
No
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Motor Vehicle In Transport
MANEUVER
Vehicle Stopped or Stalled in Roadway
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
VSN OBSCRD-WNDSH
Unit 2 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
No Clear Contributing Action
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
Not Distracted
SPEEDING RELATED
Not Speeding
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
No
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
No
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
No, Test Not Given
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 2 - Roadway Characteristics
DIRECTION
Westbound
ALIGNMENT
Straight
GRADE
Level
SPEED LIMIT
35
ROADWAY DESIGN
Two-Way, Not Divided
NUM LANES
2
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Stop Sign
TRAF CONTRL WORKING CODE
Operational
ROUTE ID
0500023945860114-I
LATITUDE
44.826285
LONGITUDE
-93.155144
UTM X
487736.0
UTM Y
4963664.0
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 5 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
Unit 3
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 3 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 3 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
Unit 4
UNIT TYPE
VEH TYPE
DL STATUS
PERSON TYPE
AGE
SEX
INJURY SEVERITY
ZIP
DL STATE
DL CLASS
DL ENDORSEMENTS
DL RESTRICTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS?
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS
VIOLATIONS
Unit 4 - Vehicle Information
VEH USE
EMERGENCY VEH USE
TOWED?
INITIAL CONTACT
MOST HARMFUL
TRAILERS
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
MANEUVER
VEHICLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Unit 4 - Person Information
CONTRIB FACTORS
DRIVER DISTRACTED BY
SPEEDING RELATED
NON-MOTORIST MANEUVER
NON-MOTORIST LOCATION
LE SUSPECTS ALCOHOL
LE SUSPECTS DRUG
ALCOHOL TEST GIVEN
ALCOHOL TEST TYPE
ALCOHOL TEST RESULT
DRUG TEST GIVEN
DRUG TEST TYPE
DRUG TEST RESULT
OFFICER SKETCH NARRATIVE
VEHICLE 2 WAS STOPPED AT THE STOP SIGN WESTBOUND ON
DUCKWOOD DR AT WIDGEON WAY. VEHICLE 1 WAS ALSO WESTBOUND
ON DUCKWOOD DR APPROACHING WIDGEON WAY. DRIVER 1 FAILED
TO STOP AND REAR ENDED VEHICLE 2. DRIVER 2 SAID IT LOOKED
LIKE VEHICLE 1 WAS GOING TOO FAST. DRIVER 1 SAID SHE SUFFERS
FROM SPINAL STENOSIS AND APPEARED TO HAVE VERY SLOW
REACTION TIMES AND MOVEMENTS. A DRIVER EVALUATION FOR WAS
COMPLETED AND SENT TO THE STATE FOR A PHYSICAL EXAMINATION.
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 6 of 7
Crash Detail Report - Long Form Report Version 1.0
February 2020
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659464') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Tom Sachi
Notes:
Report Generated 05/15/2023 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 7 of 7
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
Full Length (6 AM-8 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-16 6:00AM 2 5 1 0 88 0 0 15 0 0 1515 0 1 0 1 0 22 0 2 0 0 0 22 1 2727
6:15AM 1 9 0 0 1010 0 1 12 0 0 1313 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 0 0 11 1 2626
6:30AM 5 15 2 0 2222 0 0 28 1 0 2929 0 0 0 6 0 66 0 2 0 0 0 22 3 5959
6:45AM 2 17 1 0 2020 1 0 31 0 0 3131 0 1 0 6 0 77 0 3 0 0 0 33 2 6161
Hourly Total 10 46 4 0 6060 1 1 86 1 0 8888 0 2 0 15 0 1717 0 8 0 0 0 88 7 173173
7:00AM 2 24 1 0 2727 1 0 42 0 0 4242 0 2 0 5 0 77 0 0 0 1 0 11 3 7777
7:15AM 1 27 1 0 2929 2 0 36 1 0 3737 0 4 0 11 0 1515 0 5 0 2 0 77 2 8888
7:30AM 7 25 1 0 3333 0 1 37 2 0 4040 0 1 0 7 0 88 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 8181
7:45AM 2 36 2 0 4040 2 2 37 0 0 3939 1 4 0 5 0 99 0 1 0 3 0 44 9 9292
Hourly Total 12 112 5 0 129129 5 3 152 3 0 158158 1 11 0 28 0 3939 0 6 0 6 0 1212 15 338338
8:00AM 5 32 3 0 4040 0 1 50 2 0 5353 0 2 0 4 0 66 0 3 0 1 0 44 2 103103
8:15AM 2 29 0 0 3131 1 0 45 1 0 4646 0 2 0 5 0 77 2 2 0 1 0 33 4 8787
8:30AM 1 29 2 0 3232 0 1 36 2 0 3939 0 4 0 7 0 1111 0 3 0 0 0 33 4 8585
8:45AM 7 37 0 0 4444 1 0 42 0 0 4242 0 1 0 6 0 77 0 2 0 1 0 33 2 9696
Hourly Total 15 127 5 0 147147 2 2 173 5 0 180180 0 9 0 22 0 3131 2 10 0 3 0 1313 12 371371
9:00AM 2 30 1 0 3333 5 1 41 3 0 4545 0 0 1 7 0 88 1 3 2 0 0 55 0 9191
9:15AM 4 27 1 0 3232 0 0 54 2 0 5656 1 0 0 4 0 44 0 5 0 1 0 66 1 9898
9:30AM 3 39 1 0 4343 0 0 46 2 1 4949 0 3 0 6 0 99 0 2 0 0 0 22 5 103103
9:45AM 1 36 0 0 3737 0 0 34 0 0 3434 0 1 0 5 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 7777
Hourly Total 10 132 3 0 145145 5 1 175 7 1 184184 1 4 1 22 0 2727 1 10 2 1 0 1313 7 369369
10:00AM 2 30 0 0 3232 0 0 37 1 0 3838 0 0 1 2 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 7373
10:15AM 1 34 1 1 3737 0 0 29 1 0 3030 0 0 0 6 0 66 0 2 0 0 0 22 0 7575
10:30AM 2 30 2 0 3434 0 0 45 0 0 4545 0 0 0 6 0 66 0 1 0 0 0 11 1 8686
10:45AM 6 36 1 0 4343 0 0 34 0 0 3434 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 2 0 0 0 22 0 8181
Hourly Total 11 130 4 1 146146 0 0 145 2 0 147147 0 0 1 16 0 1717 0 5 0 0 0 55 2 315315
11:00AM 7 37 0 0 4444 0 0 45 3 0 4848 0 1 0 6 0 77 1 1 0 0 0 11 1 100100
11:15AM 8 40 3 0 5151 0 1 46 3 0 5050 0 1 0 1 0 22 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 104104
11:30AM 4 47 3 0 5454 1 1 42 1 0 4444 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 2 0 0 0 22 1 104104
11:45AM 5 35 2 0 4242 0 0 50 1 0 5151 0 0 1 5 0 66 0 3 0 1 0 44 1 103103
Hourly Total 24 159 8 0 191191 1 2 183 8 0 193193 0 3 1 15 0 1919 1 6 0 2 0 88 3 411411
12:00PM 6 47 1 0 5454 0 0 49 0 0 4949 0 1 0 7 0 88 0 1 0 0 0 11 2 112112
12:15PM 5 37 2 0 4444 0 0 40 3 0 4343 1 2 1 6 0 99 0 3 0 0 0 33 3 9999
12:30PM 2 54 0 0 5656 1 0 39 0 0 3939 0 0 0 4 0 44 0 1 0 0 0 11 1 100100
12:45PM 5 41 2 0 4848 0 0 45 4 0 4949 0 0 0 8 0 88 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 106106
Hourly Total 18 179 5 0 202202 1 0 173 7 0 180180 1 3 1 25 0 2929 0 6 0 0 0 66 6 417417
1:00PM 5 57 1 0 6363 0 1 45 0 0 4646 1 1 0 6 0 77 1 1 0 0 0 11 0 117117
1:15PM 2 48 2 0 5252 1 0 38 3 0 4141 0 3 1 8 0 1212 0 1 1 1 0 33 4 108108
1:30PM 5 62 4 0 7171 0 0 35 2 0 3737 0 3 0 3 0 66 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 115115
1:45PM 4 46 2 0 5252 2 0 36 3 0 3939 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 2 0 0 0 22 2 9696
Hourly Total 16 213 9 0 238238 3 1 154 8 0 163163 1 8 1 19 0 2828 1 4 1 2 0 77 6 436436
2:00PM 10 61 2 0 7373 0 1 44 3 0 4848 0 0 0 5 0 55 0 4 0 0 0 44 2 130130
2:15PM 5 37 1 0 4343 0 1 35 1 0 3737 0 3 0 3 0 66 0 2 1 0 0 33 1 8989
2:30PM 5 65 1 0 7171 0 2 68 3 0 7373 0 0 0 7 0 77 0 2 0 0 0 22 0 153153
2:45PM 6 57 0 0 6363 0 1 59 4 0 6464 2 2 0 3 0 55 0 1 0 1 0 22 5 134134
Hourly Total 26 220 4 0 250250 0 5 206 11 0 222222 2 5 0 18 0 2323 0 9 1 1 0 1111 8 506506
3:00PM 5 55 3 0 6363 0 1 36 0 0 3737 0 4 0 4 0 88 0 2 0 1 0 33 1 111111
3:15PM 11 66 1 0 7878 0 1 46 4 0 5151 0 1 0 4 0 55 0 0 0 1 1 22 7 136136
3:30PM 8 80 1 0 8989 0 1 66 1 0 6868 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 2 0 0 0 22 0 161161
3:45PM 9 74 2 0 8585 0 1 68 2 0 7171 1 4 0 5 0 99 0 4 0 1 0 55 1 170170
Hourly Total 33 275 7 0 315315 0 4 216 7 0 227227 1 9 0 15 0 2424 0 8 0 3 1 1212 9 578578
4:00PM 6 50 3 0 5959 0 2 55 2 0 5959 0 4 0 5 0 99 0 2 0 1 0 33 5 130130
4:15PM 7 72 1 0 8080 0 0 77 3 0 8080 0 5 0 7 0 1212 0 1 0 0 0 11 2 173173
4:30PM 6 75 5 0 8686 0 0 72 0 0 7272 1 2 0 4 0 66 0 2 0 2 0 44 4 168168
4:45PM 4 85 6 0 9595 0 1 90 0 0 9191 0 1 0 7 0 88 0 4 0 1 0 55 2 199199
Hourly Total 23 282 15 0 320320 0 3 294 5 0 302302 1 12 0 23 0 3535 0 9 0 4 0 1313 13 670670
5:00PM 4 97 5 0 106106 0 1 58 2 0 6161 0 0 0 2 0 22 1 3 0 2 0 55 1 174174
5:15PM 6 71 3 0 8080 0 2 64 0 0 6666 0 1 0 8 0 99 0 3 2 0 0 55 4 160160
5:30PM 6 73 3 0 8282 2 1 57 2 0 6060 0 3 1 5 0 99 0 1 0 1 0 22 2 153153
5:45PM 11 66 3 0 8080 2 1 49 4 0 5454 0 0 0 6 0 66 0 4 0 0 0 44 1 144144
Hourly Total 27 307 14 0 348348 4 5 228 8 0 241241 0 4 1 21 0 2626 1 11 2 3 0 1616 8 631631
6:00PM 3 71 2 0 7676 0 0 53 4 0 5757 0 1 0 1 0 22 0 0 0 2 0 22 1 137137
6:15PM 3 42 3 0 4848 1 1 45 1 0 4747 0 2 1 6 0 99 0 1 2 0 0 33 4 107107
1 of 9
6:30PM 2 53 1 0 5656 0 2 50 1 0 5353 1 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 1 0 22 4 113113
6:45PM 3 61 0 0 6464 0 2 34 2 0 3838 4 0 0 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 00 7 103103
Hourly Total 11 227 6 0 244244 1 5 182 8 0 195195 5 3 1 10 0 1414 0 2 2 3 0 77 16 460460
7:00PM 4 40 3 0 4747 2 0 29 0 0 2929 2 1 0 3 0 44 0 0 0 3 0 33 6 8383
7:15PM 6 36 1 0 4343 0 0 33 3 0 3636 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 2 0 1 0 33 5 8383
7:30PM 4 43 6 0 5353 0 1 26 2 0 2929 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 2 0 0 0 22 3 8787
7:45PM 4 45 1 0 5050 0 0 28 3 0 3131 3 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 0 0 11 7 8484
Hourly Total 18 164 11 0 193193 2 1 116 8 0 125125 5 2 0 8 0 1010 0 5 0 4 0 99 21 337337
TotalTotal 254 2573 100 1 29282928 25 33 2483 88 1 26052605 18 75 7 257 0 339339 6 99 8 32 1 140140 133 60126012
% Approach% Approach 8.7%87.9%3.4%0%---1.3%95.3%3.4%0%---22.1%2.1%75.8%0%---70.7%5.7%22.9%0.7%----
% Total% Total 4.2%42.8%1.7%0%48.7%48.7%-0.5%41.3%1.5%0%43.3%43.3%-1.2%0.1%4.3%0%5.6%5.6%-1.6%0.1%0.5%0%2.3%2.3%--
LightsLights 250 2515 95 1 28612861 -32 2433 83 1 25492549 -71 7 252 0 330330 -95 7 31 1 134134 -5874
% Lights% Lights 98.4%97.7%95.0%100%97.7%97.7%-97.0%98.0%94.3%100%97.9%97.9%-94.7%100%98.1%0%97.3%97.3%-96.0%87.5%96.9%100%95.7%95.7%-97.7%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 9 0 0 99 -0 4 0 0 44 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -13
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0.3%0%0%0.3%0.3%-0%0.2%0%0%0.2%0.2%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0.2%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 4 49 5 0 5858 -1 46 5 0 5252 -4 0 5 0 99 -4 1 1 0 66 -125
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 1.6%1.9%5.0%0%2.0%2.0%-3.0%1.9%5.7%0%2.0%2.0%-5.3%0%1.9%0%2.7%2.7%-4.0%12.5%3.1%0%4.3%4.3%-2.1%
Pedestrians -----25 -----18 -----4 -----121
% Pedestrians -----100%-----100%-----66.7%-----91.0%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----2 -----12
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0%-----0%-----33.3%-----9.0%-
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
2 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
Full Length (6 AM-8 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 281
Total: 689 Total: 5286Total: 5768Out: 141
Out: 350 Out: 2681Out: 2840In: 140
In: 339 In: 2605In: 2928 8 2483
7 2573 1 32 99 33
1 88
75 257 100
254
1
60
73
513241015
3 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
AM Peak (8:45 AM - 9:45 AM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-16 8:45AM 7 37 0 0 4444 1 0 42 0 0 4242 0 1 0 6 0 77 0 2 0 1 0 33 2 9696
9:00AM 2 30 1 0 3333 5 1 41 3 0 4545 0 0 1 7 0 88 1 3 2 0 0 55 0 9191
9:15AM 4 27 1 0 3232 0 0 54 2 0 5656 1 0 0 4 0 44 0 5 0 1 0 66 1 9898
9:30AM 3 39 1 0 4343 0 0 46 2 1 4949 0 3 0 6 0 99 0 2 0 0 0 22 5 103103
TotalTotal 16 133 3 0 152152 6 1 183 7 1 192192 1 4 1 23 0 2828 1 12 2 2 0 1616 8 388388
% Approach% Approach 10.5%87.5%2.0%0%---0.5%95.3%3.6%0.5%---14.3%3.6%82.1%0%---75.0%12.5%12.5%0%----
% Total% Total 4.1%34.3%0.8%0%39.2%39.2%-0.3%47.2%1.8%0.3%49.5%49.5%-1.0%0.3%5.9%0%7.2%7.2%-3.1%0.5%0.5%0%4.1%4.1%--
PHFPHF 0.571 0.853 0.750 -0.8640.864 -0.250 0.847 0.583 0.250 0.8570.857 -0.333 0.250 0.821 -0.7780.778 -0.600 0.250 0.500 -0.6670.667 -0.942
LightsLights 16 129 2 0 147147 -1 179 6 1 187187 -4 1 22 0 2727 -11 2 2 0 1515 -376
% Lights% Lights 100%97.0%66.7%0%96.7%96.7%-100%97.8%85.7%100%97.4%97.4%-100%100%95.7%0%96.4%96.4%-91.7%100%100%0%93.8%93.8%-96.9%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0 4 1 0 55 -0 4 1 0 55 -0 0 1 0 11 -1 0 0 0 11 -12
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0%3.0%33.3%0%3.3%3.3%-0%2.2%14.3%0%2.6%2.6%-0%0%4.3%0%3.6%3.6%-8.3%0%0%0%6.3%6.3%-3.1%
Pedestrians -----6 -----1 -----1 -----8
% Pedestrians -----100%-----100%-----100%-----100%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0%-----0%-----0%-----0%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
4 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
AM Peak (8:45 AM - 9:45 AM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 21
Total: 53 Total: 332Total: 370Out: 5
Out: 25 Out: 140Out: 218In: 16
In: 28 In: 192In: 152 2 183
1 133 2 12 1
1 7
4 23 3
16
3
5
1142
5 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
Midday Peak (12:45 PM - 1:45 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-16 12:45PM 5 41 2 0 4848 0 0 45 4 0 4949 0 0 0 8 0 88 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 106106
1:00PM 5 57 1 0 6363 0 1 45 0 0 4646 1 1 0 6 0 77 1 1 0 0 0 11 0 117117
1:15PM 2 48 2 0 5252 1 0 38 3 0 4141 0 3 1 8 0 1212 0 1 1 1 0 33 4 108108
1:30PM 5 62 4 0 7171 0 0 35 2 0 3737 0 3 0 3 0 66 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 115115
TotalTotal 17 208 9 0 234234 1 1 163 9 0 173173 1 7 1 25 0 3333 1 3 1 2 0 66 4 446446
% Approach% Approach 7.3%88.9%3.8%0%---0.6%94.2%5.2%0%---21.2%3.0%75.8%0%---50.0%16.7%33.3%0%----
% Total% Total 3.8%46.6%2.0%0%52.5%52.5%-0.2%36.5%2.0%0%38.8%38.8%-1.6%0.2%5.6%0%7.4%7.4%-0.7%0.2%0.4%0%1.3%1.3%--
PHFPHF 0.850 0.839 0.563 -0.8240.824 -0.250 0.906 0.563 -0.8830.883 -0.583 0.250 0.781 -0.6880.688 -0.750 0.250 0.500 -0.5000.500 -0.953
LightsLights 17 205 8 0 230230 -1 159 8 0 168168 -7 1 24 0 3232 -2 1 2 0 55 -435
% Lights% Lights 100%98.6%88.9%0%98.3%98.3%-100%97.5%88.9%0%97.1%97.1%-100%100%96.0%0%97.0%97.0%-66.7%100%100%0%83.3%83.3%-97.5%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 11 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -1
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0.5%0%0%0.4%0.4%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0.2%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0 2 1 0 33 -0 4 1 0 55 -0 0 1 0 11 -1 0 0 0 11 -10
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0%1.0%11.1%0%1.3%1.3%-0%2.5%11.1%0%2.9%2.9%-0%0%4.0%0%3.0%3.0%-33.3%0%0%0%16.7%16.7%-2.2%
Pedestrians -----1 -----1 -----0 -----4
% Pedestrians -----100%-----100%-----0%-----100%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----1 -----0
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0%-----0%-----100%-----0%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
6 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
Midday Peak (12:45 PM - 1:45 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 17
Total: 60 Total: 390Total: 425Out: 11
Out: 27 Out: 217Out: 191In: 6
In: 33 In: 173In: 234 1 163
1 208 2 3 1
9
7 25 9
17
1
3
111
7 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
PM Peak (4:15 PM - 5:15 PM) - Overall Peak Hour
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-16 4:15PM 7 72 1 0 8080 0 0 77 3 0 8080 0 5 0 7 0 1212 0 1 0 0 0 11 2 173173
4:30PM 6 75 5 0 8686 0 0 72 0 0 7272 1 2 0 4 0 66 0 2 0 2 0 44 4 168168
4:45PM 4 85 6 0 9595 0 1 90 0 0 9191 0 1 0 7 0 88 0 4 0 1 0 55 2 199199
5:00PM 4 97 5 0 106106 0 1 58 2 0 6161 0 0 0 2 0 22 1 3 0 2 0 55 1 174174
TotalTotal 21 329 17 0 367367 0 2 297 5 0 304304 1 8 0 20 0 2828 1 10 0 5 0 1515 9 714714
% Approach% Approach 5.7%89.6%4.6%0%---0.7%97.7%1.6%0%---28.6%0%71.4%0%---66.7%0%33.3%0%----
% Total% Total 2.9%46.1%2.4%0%51.4%51.4%-0.3%41.6%0.7%0%42.6%42.6%-1.1%0%2.8%0%3.9%3.9%-1.4%0%0.7%0%2.1%2.1%--
PHFPHF 0.750 0.848 0.708 -0.8660.866 -0.500 0.825 0.417 -0.8350.835 -0.400 -0.714 -0.5830.583 -0.625 -0.625 -0.7500.750 -0.897
LightsLights 21 323 17 0 361361 -2 295 5 0 302302 -8 0 20 0 2828 -10 0 5 0 1515 -706
% Lights% Lights 100%98.2%100%0%98.4%98.4%-100%99.3%100%0%99.3%99.3%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-98.9%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0 6 0 0 66 -0 2 0 0 22 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -8
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0%1.8%0%0%1.6%1.6%-0%0.7%0%0%0.7%0.7%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-1.1%
Pedestrians -----0 -----1 -----0 -----9
% Pedestrians -----------100%-----0%-----100%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----1 -----0
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----------0%-----100%-----0%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
8 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - 14 Hour Count - TMC
Tue May 16, 2023
PM Peak (4:15 PM - 5:15 PM) - Overall Peak Hour
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1070874, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 646Total: 694Total: 34
Total: 54 Out: 342Out: 327Out: 19
Out: 26 In: 304In: 367In: 15
In: 28
297
329 5 10 2
5
8 20 17
21
4
5
11
9 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
Full Length (6 AM-8 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-20 6:00AM 1 4 0 0 55 0 0 3 1 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 99
6:15AM 0 5 0 0 55 0 0 8 0 0 88 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1515
6:30AM 1 6 0 0 77 0 0 9 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1616
6:45AM 0 5 0 0 55 0 1 18 1 0 2020 0 1 0 1 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 2727
Hourly Total 2 20 0 0 2222 0 1 38 2 0 4141 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 6767
7:00AM 0 12 0 0 1212 0 0 19 0 0 1919 0 1 0 5 0 66 1 1 1 1 0 33 0 4040
7:15AM 1 13 1 0 1515 0 0 16 0 0 1616 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 3333
7:30AM 1 7 0 0 88 1 0 19 1 0 2020 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 3333
7:45AM 1 19 0 0 2020 0 0 33 0 0 3333 0 1 0 5 0 66 0 2 0 0 0 22 2 6161
Hourly Total 3 51 1 0 5555 1 0 87 1 0 8888 0 3 0 15 0 1818 1 4 1 1 0 66 2 167167
8:00AM 1 10 1 1 1313 0 0 37 0 0 3737 0 3 0 5 0 88 0 0 0 1 0 11 1 5959
8:15AM 1 24 1 0 2626 2 1 35 4 0 4040 1 1 0 3 0 44 0 0 0 1 0 11 1 7171
8:30AM 1 31 0 1 3333 0 0 39 0 0 3939 0 2 0 5 0 77 0 1 0 1 0 22 0 8181
8:45AM 5 29 1 0 3535 0 0 49 0 0 4949 0 2 0 6 0 88 1 3 0 1 0 44 4 9696
Hourly Total 8 94 3 2 107107 2 1 160 4 0 165165 1 8 0 19 0 2727 1 4 0 4 0 88 6 307307
9:00AM 0 22 0 0 2222 0 1 42 0 0 4343 0 2 0 4 0 66 0 3 0 0 0 33 0 7474
9:15AM 4 37 1 0 4242 0 3 45 0 0 4848 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 3 0 0 0 33 0 9696
9:30AM 3 45 1 0 4949 0 0 53 0 0 5353 0 0 0 5 0 55 0 5 0 1 0 66 0 113113
9:45AM 5 39 2 0 4646 0 0 57 2 0 5959 0 3 0 4 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 112112
Hourly Total 12 143 4 0 159159 0 4 197 2 0 203203 0 6 0 15 0 2121 0 11 0 1 0 1212 0 395395
10:00AM 0 40 3 0 4343 0 1 51 1 0 5353 0 1 0 4 0 55 0 1 0 1 0 22 3 103103
10:15AM 4 60 1 0 6565 0 0 58 0 0 5858 0 2 0 3 0 55 0 1 1 1 0 33 0 131131
10:30AM 1 42 2 0 4545 0 2 55 0 0 5757 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 1 0 22 5 106106
10:45AM 2 50 2 0 5454 0 1 59 1 0 6161 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 2 0 1 0 33 3 120120
Hourly Total 7 192 8 0 207207 0 4 223 2 0 229229 0 3 0 11 0 1414 0 5 1 4 0 1010 11 460460
11:00AM 4 47 1 0 5252 2 0 60 1 0 6161 0 2 0 6 0 88 0 5 0 1 0 66 6 127127
11:15AM 7 50 2 0 5959 0 2 57 1 0 6060 0 1 0 7 0 88 0 5 0 0 0 55 10 132132
11:30AM 6 41 2 0 4949 0 2 54 1 0 5757 0 0 0 7 0 77 0 1 0 1 0 22 2 115115
11:45AM 5 66 0 0 7171 0 2 59 2 0 6363 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 4 0 1 0 55 3 141141
Hourly Total 22 204 5 0 231231 2 6 230 5 0 241241 0 3 0 22 0 2525 0 15 0 3 0 1818 21 515515
12:00PM 1 67 0 0 6868 0 2 42 1 0 4545 0 3 0 3 0 66 1 2 0 1 0 33 4 122122
12:15PM 4 56 5 0 6565 0 0 53 1 0 5454 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 1 0 2 0 33 3 125125
12:30PM 3 66 2 0 7171 0 0 59 2 0 6161 0 1 0 4 0 55 1 4 0 2 0 66 1 143143
12:45PM 6 56 3 0 6565 0 1 41 1 0 4343 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 3 0 1 0 44 9 116116
Hourly Total 14 245 10 0 269269 0 3 195 5 0 203203 0 6 0 12 0 1818 2 10 0 6 0 1616 17 506506
1:00PM 2 43 4 0 4949 1 0 34 0 0 3434 0 3 0 5 0 88 2 2 2 2 0 66 4 9797
1:15PM 5 63 4 0 7272 0 0 62 2 0 6464 1 5 0 2 0 77 0 4 0 0 0 44 5 147147
1:30PM 4 62 0 0 6666 0 0 54 6 0 6060 0 2 0 5 0 77 0 2 0 1 0 33 4 136136
1:45PM 2 51 5 0 5858 0 0 49 3 0 5252 0 5 0 5 0 1010 0 2 0 1 0 33 3 123123
Hourly Total 13 219 13 0 245245 1 0 199 11 0 210210 1 15 0 17 0 3232 2 10 2 4 0 1616 16 503503
2:00PM 2 51 1 0 5454 0 1 39 3 0 4343 0 2 0 3 0 55 2 5 0 0 0 55 2 107107
2:15PM 4 50 3 0 5757 0 1 64 1 0 6666 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 2 0 0 0 22 0 128128
2:30PM 3 46 4 0 5353 0 2 43 2 0 4747 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 3 0 2 0 55 3 109109
2:45PM 3 63 2 0 6868 0 2 47 0 0 4949 0 1 0 4 0 55 0 4 0 0 0 44 5 126126
Hourly Total 12 210 10 0 232232 0 6 193 6 0 205205 0 5 0 12 0 1717 2 14 0 2 0 1616 10 470470
3:00PM 2 42 1 0 4545 0 0 43 2 0 4545 0 0 0 4 0 44 0 2 0 0 1 33 3 9797
3:15PM 6 61 2 0 6969 0 0 46 1 0 4747 0 1 0 5 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 00 2 122122
3:30PM 4 49 1 0 5454 0 5 52 0 0 5757 0 0 0 3 0 33 0 2 0 0 0 22 1 116116
3:45PM 7 45 0 0 5252 0 3 46 0 0 4949 0 1 0 8 0 99 0 1 0 2 0 33 4 113113
Hourly Total 19 197 4 0 220220 0 8 187 3 0 198198 0 2 0 20 0 2222 0 5 0 2 1 88 10 448448
4:00PM 11 55 0 0 6666 0 1 46 0 0 4747 0 1 0 5 0 66 0 3 0 0 0 33 3 122122
4:15PM 4 43 0 0 4747 0 2 44 2 0 4848 0 2 0 5 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 102102
4:30PM 4 50 3 0 5757 0 0 51 2 0 5353 0 2 0 4 0 66 0 1 0 0 0 11 2 117117
4:45PM 8 44 1 0 5353 0 0 41 1 0 4242 0 1 0 5 0 66 0 6 0 0 0 66 3 107107
Hourly Total 27 192 4 0 223223 0 3 182 5 0 190190 0 6 0 19 0 2525 0 10 0 0 0 1010 9 448448
5:00PM 4 58 2 0 6464 0 1 51 5 0 5757 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 0 0 11 10 124124
5:15PM 10 41 2 0 5353 0 1 39 2 0 4242 0 2 0 3 0 55 0 2 0 0 0 22 1 102102
5:30PM 6 49 6 0 6161 0 0 56 1 0 5757 0 4 0 6 0 1010 0 4 0 0 0 44 3 132132
5:45PM 3 49 3 0 5555 0 1 45 0 0 4646 0 4 0 0 0 44 0 2 0 0 0 22 3 107107
1 of 9
Hourly Total 23 197 13 0 233233 0 3 191 8 0 202202 0 10 0 11 0 2121 0 9 0 0 0 99 17 465465
6:00PM 5 44 2 0 5151 0 0 40 0 0 4040 0 2 0 6 0 88 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 9999
6:15PM 0 62 2 0 6464 0 0 40 2 0 4242 0 0 0 5 0 55 0 3 0 1 0 44 0 115115
6:30PM 5 41 0 0 4646 0 0 37 2 0 3939 0 2 0 1 0 33 0 4 0 0 0 44 3 9292
6:45PM 0 50 1 0 5151 0 0 30 0 0 3030 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 4 0 0 0 44 2 8888
Hourly Total 10 197 5 0 212212 0 0 147 4 0 151151 0 5 0 14 0 1919 0 11 0 1 0 1212 6 394394
7:00PM 5 37 3 0 4545 0 0 37 4 0 4141 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 3 8686
7:15PM 1 43 3 0 4747 0 0 29 0 0 2929 0 0 0 4 0 44 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 8181
7:30PM 4 40 0 0 4444 0 0 28 0 0 2828 0 0 0 3 0 33 0 0 0 1 0 11 5 7676
7:45PM 4 41 0 0 4545 0 0 30 2 0 3232 0 0 0 1 0 11 0 1 0 0 0 11 2 7979
Hourly Total 14 161 6 0 181181 0 0 124 6 0 130130 0 0 0 8 0 88 0 2 0 1 0 33 10 322322
TotalTotal 186 2322 86 2 25962596 6 39 2353 64 0 24562456 2 73 0 198 0 271271 8 110 4 29 1 144144 136 54675467
% Approach% Approach 7.2%89.4%3.3%0.1%---1.6%95.8%2.6%0%---26.9%0%73.1%0%---76.4%2.8%20.1%0.7%----
% Total% Total 3.4%42.5%1.6%0%47.5%47.5%-0.7%43.0%1.2%0%44.9%44.9%-1.3%0%3.6%0%5.0%5.0%-2.0%0.1%0.5%0%2.6%2.6%--
LightsLights 185 2317 86 2 25902590 -37 2344 63 0 24442444 -72 0 197 0 269269 -109 3 29 1 142142 -5445
% Lights% Lights 99.5%99.8%100%100%99.8%99.8%-94.9%99.6%98.4%0%99.5%99.5%-98.6%0%99.5%0%99.3%99.3%-99.1%75.0%100%100%98.6%98.6%-99.6%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 2 0 0 22 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -2
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0.1%0%0%0.1%0.1%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 1 5 0 0 66 -2 7 1 0 1010 -1 0 1 0 22 -1 1 0 0 22 -20
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0.5%0.2%0%0%0.2%0.2%-5.1%0.3%1.6%0%0.4%0.4%-1.4%0%0.5%0%0.7%0.7%-0.9%25.0%0%0%1.4%1.4%-0.4%
Pedestrians -----6 -----2 -----3 -----101
% Pedestrians -----100%-----100%-----37.5%-----74.3%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----5 -----35
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0%-----0%-----62.5%-----25.7%-
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
2 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
Full Length (6 AM-8 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 270
Total: 525 Total: 4880Total: 5259Out: 126
Out: 254 Out: 2424Out: 2663In: 144
In: 271 In: 2456In: 2596 4 2353
2322 1 29 110 39
64
73 198 86
186
2
66
70
24433
3 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
AM Peak (WKND) (10 AM - 11 AM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-20 10:00AM 0 40 3 0 4343 0 1 51 1 0 5353 0 1 0 4 0 55 0 1 0 1 0 22 3 103103
10:15AM 4 60 1 0 6565 0 0 58 0 0 5858 0 2 0 3 0 55 0 1 1 1 0 33 0 131131
10:30AM 1 42 2 0 4545 0 2 55 0 0 5757 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 1 0 1 0 22 5 106106
10:45AM 2 50 2 0 5454 0 1 59 1 0 6161 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 2 0 1 0 33 3 120120
TotalTotal 7 192 8 0 207207 0 4 223 2 0 229229 0 3 0 11 0 1414 0 5 1 4 0 1010 11 460460
% Approach% Approach 3.4%92.8%3.9%0%---1.7%97.4%0.9%0%---21.4%0%78.6%0%---50.0%10.0%40.0%0%----
% Total% Total 1.5%41.7%1.7%0%45.0%45.0%-0.9%48.5%0.4%0%49.8%49.8%-0.7%0%2.4%0%3.0%3.0%-1.1%0.2%0.9%0%2.2%2.2%--
PHFPHF 0.438 0.800 0.667 -0.7960.796 -0.500 0.945 0.500 -0.9390.939 -0.375 -0.688 -0.7000.700 -0.625 0.250 1.000 -0.8330.833 -0.878
LightsLights 7 192 8 0 207207 -4 221 2 0 227227 -3 0 11 0 1414 -5 1 4 0 1010 -458
% Lights% Lights 100%100%100%0%100%100%-100%99.1%100%0%99.1%99.1%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-100%100%100%0%100%100%-99.6%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 1 0 0 11 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -1
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0.4%0%0%0.4%0.4%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0.2%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 1 0 0 11 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -1
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0.4%0%0%0.4%0.4%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0.2%
Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----7
% Pedestrians -----------------------63.6%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----0 -----4
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----------------------36.4%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
4 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
AM Peak (WKND) (10 AM - 11 AM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 22
Total: 24 Total: 428Total: 446Out: 12
Out: 10 Out: 199Out: 239In: 10
In: 14 In: 229In: 207 1 223
192 4 5 4
2
3 11 8
7
7
4
5 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
Midday Peak (WKND) (11:45 AM - 12:45 PM) - Overall Peak Hour
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-20 11:45AM 5 66 0 0 7171 0 2 59 2 0 6363 0 0 0 2 0 22 0 4 0 1 0 55 3 141141
12:00PM 1 67 0 0 6868 0 2 42 1 0 4545 0 3 0 3 0 66 1 2 0 1 0 33 4 122122
12:15PM 4 56 5 0 6565 0 0 53 1 0 5454 0 1 0 2 0 33 0 1 0 2 0 33 3 125125
12:30PM 3 66 2 0 7171 0 0 59 2 0 6161 0 1 0 4 0 55 1 4 0 2 0 66 1 143143
TotalTotal 13 255 7 0 275275 0 4 213 6 0 223223 0 5 0 11 0 1616 2 11 0 6 0 1717 11 531531
% Approach% Approach 4.7%92.7%2.5%0%---1.8%95.5%2.7%0%---31.3%0%68.8%0%---64.7%0%35.3%0%----
% Total% Total 2.4%48.0%1.3%0%51.8%51.8%-0.8%40.1%1.1%0%42.0%42.0%-0.9%0%2.1%0%3.0%3.0%-2.1%0%1.1%0%3.2%3.2%--
PHFPHF 0.650 0.951 0.350 -0.9680.968 -0.500 0.903 0.750 -0.8850.885 -0.417 -0.688 -0.6670.667 -0.688 -0.750 -0.7080.708 -0.928
LightsLights 12 254 7 0 273273 -4 212 6 0 222222 -5 0 11 0 1616 -11 0 6 0 1717 -528
% Lights% Lights 92.3%99.6%100%0%99.3%99.3%-100%99.5%100%0%99.6%99.6%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-99.4%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 1 1 0 0 22 -0 1 0 0 11 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -3
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 7.7%0.4%0%0%0.7%0.7%-0%0.5%0%0%0.4%0.4%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0.6%
Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----6
% Pedestrians -----------------0%-----54.5%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----2 -----5
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----------------100%-----45.5%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
6 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
Midday Peak (WKND) (11:45 AM - 12:45 PM) - Overall Peak Hour
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 489Total: 510Total: 28
Total: 35 Out: 266Out: 235Out: 11
Out: 19 In: 223In: 275In: 17
In: 16
213
255 6 11 4
6
5 11 7
13
1
10
2
7 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
PM Peak (WKND) (1:15 PM - 2:15 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
Leg Duckwood Dr Duckwood Dr Widgeon Way Widgeon Way
Direction Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Time R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*R T L U AppApp Ped*IntInt
2023-05-20 1:15PM 5 63 4 0 7272 0 0 62 2 0 6464 1 5 0 2 0 77 0 4 0 0 0 44 5 147147
1:30PM 4 62 0 0 6666 0 0 54 6 0 6060 0 2 0 5 0 77 0 2 0 1 0 33 4 136136
1:45PM 2 51 5 0 5858 0 0 49 3 0 5252 0 5 0 5 0 1010 0 2 0 1 0 33 3 123123
2:00PM 2 51 1 0 5454 0 1 39 3 0 4343 0 2 0 3 0 55 2 5 0 0 0 55 2 107107
TotalTotal 13 227 10 0 250250 0 1 204 14 0 219219 1 14 0 15 0 2929 2 13 0 2 0 1515 14 513513
% Approach% Approach 5.2%90.8%4.0%0%---0.5%93.2%6.4%0%---48.3%0%51.7%0%---86.7%0%13.3%0%----
% Total% Total 2.5%44.2%1.9%0%48.7%48.7%-0.2%39.8%2.7%0%42.7%42.7%-2.7%0%2.9%0%5.7%5.7%-2.5%0%0.4%0%2.9%2.9%--
PHFPHF 0.650 0.901 0.500 -0.8680.868 -0.250 0.823 0.583 -0.8550.855 -0.700 -0.750 -0.7250.725 -0.650 -0.500 -0.7500.750 -0.872
LightsLights 13 226 10 0 249249 -1 203 13 0 217217 -13 0 14 0 2727 -13 0 2 0 1515 -508
% Lights% Lights 100%99.6%100%0%99.6%99.6%-100%99.5%92.9%0%99.1%99.1%-92.9%0%93.3%0%93.1%93.1%-100%0%100%0%100%100%-99.0%
Articulated TrucksArticulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0 0 0 0 00 -0
% Articulated Trucks% Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-0%
Buses and Single-UnitBuses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0 1 0 0 11 -0 1 1 0 22 -1 0 1 0 22 -0 0 0 0 00 -5
% Buses and Single-Unit% Buses and Single-Unit
TrucksTrucks 0%0.4%0%0%0.4%0.4%-0%0.5%7.1%0%0.9%0.9%-7.1%0%6.7%0%6.9%6.9%-0%0%0%0%0%0%-1.0%
Pedestrians -----0 -----1 -----1 -----9
% Pedestrians -----------100%-----50.0%-----64.3%-
Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----1 -----5
% Bicycles on Crosswalk -----------0%-----50.0%-----35.7%-
*Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn
8 of 9
Duckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMCDuckwood Drive & Widgeon Way - Weekend 14 Ho… - TMC
Sat May 20, 2023
PM Peak (WKND) (1:15 PM - 2:15 PM)
All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on
Crosswalk)
All Movements
ID: 1072924, Location: 44.826267, -93.155262
Provided by: SRF Consulting Group,
Inc.
Minneapolis, MN, US
[N] Widgeon Way
[E] Duckwood Dr[S] Widgeon Way[W] Duckwood DrTotal: 462Total: 482Total: 26
Total: 56 Out: 243Out: 232Out: 11
Out: 27 In: 219In: 250In: 15
In: 29
204
227 2 13 1
14
14 15 10
13
10
4
12
9 of 9
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekday
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Location : City of Eagan, Dakota County Speed (mph)Lanes
Date: 5/16/2023 35 1 Major Approach 1:
Zach Toberna 35 1 Major Approach 3:
Population Less than 10,000:No 30 1 Minor Approach 2:
Seventy Percent Factor Used:No 30 1 Minor Approach 4:
Major Major Total Minor Minor Largest
Hour Approach 1 Approach 3 1 + 3 500 750 Approach 2 Approach 4 Minor App.150 75 Condition A Condition B A B 300 200
6 - 7 AM 60 88 148 17 8 17
7 - 8 AM 129 158 287 39 12 39
8 - 9 AM 147 180 327 31 13 31 X
9 - 10 AM 145 184 329 27 13 27 X
10 - 11 AM 146 147 293 17 5 17
11 - 12 AM 191 193 384 19 8 19 X
12 - 1 PM 202 180 382 29 6 29 X
1 - 2 PM 238 163 401 28 7 28 X
2 - 3 PM 250 222 472 23 11 23 X
3 - 4 PM 315 227 542 X 24 12 24 X
4 - 5 PM 320 302 622 X 35 13 35 X
5 - 6 PM 348 241 589 X 26 16 26 X
6 - 7 PM 244 195 439 14 7 14 X
7 - 8 PM 193 125 318 10 9 10 X
8 - 9 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 - 10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 - 11 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
MWSA (C):Multiway Stop Applications Condition C
Warrant 1A:Minimum Vehicular Volume
Warrant 1B:Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Warrant 1C:Combination of Warrants
Warrant 2:Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Warrant 3B:Peak Hour
MWSA (C)
0 8 Not MetBackground InformationApproach
Eastbound Duckwood Drive
Westbound Duckwood Drive
Northbound Widgeon Way
Southbound Widgeon Way
Analysis Prepared By: Warrants Analysis: Warrants 1A, 1B, and 1CWarrant Met CombinationWarrant Met Met Same Hours
Not Met
0
4
Met/Not Met
0 8 Not Met
Hours Met Hours Required
Warrant SummaryWarrant and Description
0
Not Met
0 8 Not Met
0 8
Not Met
0 1
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekday
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Number of Hours Satisfying Requirements:
Notes:1. 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS
THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
Warrants Analysis: Warrant 20
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH -- VPH
MAJOR STREET -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -- VPH
WARRANT 2 - FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekday
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Number of Hours Satisfying Requirements:
Notes:1. 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS
THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
0Warrants Analysis: Warrant 30
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH -- VPH
MAJOR STREET -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -- VPH
WARRANT 3 - PEAK HOUR
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekend
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Location : City of Eagan, Dakota County Speed (mph)Lanes
Date: 5/16/2023 35 1 Major Approach 1:
Zach Toberna 35 1 Major Approach 3:
Population Less than 10,000:No 30 1 Minor Approach 2:
Seventy Percent Factor Used:No 30 1 Minor Approach 4:
Major Major Total Minor Minor Largest
Hour Approach 1 Approach 3 1 + 3 500 750 Approach 2 Approach 4 Minor App.150 75 Condition A Condition B A B 300 200
6 - 7 AM 22 41 63 4 0 4
7 - 8 AM 55 88 143 18 6 18
8 - 9 AM 107 165 272 27 8 27
9 - 10 AM 159 203 362 21 12 21 X
10 - 11 AM 207 229 436 14 10 14 X
11 - 12 AM 231 241 472 25 18 25 X
12 - 1 PM 269 203 472 18 16 18 X
1 - 2 PM 245 210 455 32 16 32 X
2 - 3 PM 232 205 437 17 16 17 X
3 - 4 PM 220 198 418 22 8 22 X
4 - 5 PM 223 190 413 25 10 25 X
5 - 6 PM 233 202 435 21 9 21 X
6 - 7 PM 212 151 363 19 12 19 X
7 - 8 PM 181 130 311 8 3 8 X
8 - 9 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 - 10 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 - 11 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
MWSA (C):Multiway Stop Applications Condition C
Warrant 1A:Minimum Vehicular Volume
Warrant 1B:Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Warrant 1C:Combination of Warrants
Warrant 2:Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Warrant 3B:Peak HourWarrant SummaryWarrant and Description
0
Not Met
0 8 Not Met
0 8
Not Met
0 1 Not Met
0
4
Met/Not Met
0 8 Not Met
Hours Met Hours Required
MWSA (C)
0 8 Not MetBackground InformationApproach
Eastbound Duckwood Drive
Westbound Duckwood Drive
Northbound Widgeon Way
Southbound Widgeon Way
Analysis Prepared By: Warrants Analysis: Warrants 1A, 1B, and 1CWarrant Met CombinationWarrant Met Met Same Hours
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekend
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Number of Hours Satisfying Requirements:
Notes:1. 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS
THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
Warrants Analysis: Warrant 20
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH -- VPH
MAJOR STREET -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -- VPH
WARRANT 2 - FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME
WARRANTS ANALYSIS Existing Year 2023 - Weekend
Duckwood Drive at Widgeon Way
Duckwood & Widgeon Intersection Study
City of Eagan, Dakota County
Number of Hours Satisfying Requirements:
Notes:1. 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS
THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
0Warrants Analysis: Warrant 30
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH -- VPH
MAJOR STREET -- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -- VPH
WARRANT 3 - PEAK HOUR
CITY OF EAGAN
PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK POLICY
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF EAGAN
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
May 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Minnesota State Statute ............................................................................................................................................. 1
Jurisdictional Authority ............................................................................................................................................... 2
Crossing Guidance ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Field Review and Preliminary Data Collection ........................................................................................... 4
2. Data Collection .................................................................................................................................................... 5
Crossing Identification ........................................................................................................................................... 5
Roadway Characteristics ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Traffic Data ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Multimodal Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
3. Evaluate Candidate Locations ......................................................................................................................... 7
Crossing Types ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Crossing Considerations ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Criteria Definitions .................................................................................................................................................. 11
4. Engineering Review ...........................................................................................................................................12
Step 1: Traffic Volume Review ........................................................................................................................... 12
Step 2: Roadway Geometric Treatment Assessment ................................................................................. 14
Step 3: Evaluate Crossing Infrastructure Enhancements ........................................................................... 15
Step 4: Further Analysis of Major Enhancements ........................................................................................ 16
Crossing Infrastructure Treatments ................................................................................................................. 18
Removal of Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................... 22
1
INTRODUCTION
The City of Eagan encourages multimodal transportation to access destinations in daily life and
recreate via the community’s many parks and trails. Eagan continues to receive high citizen survey
satisfaction ratings for ease of walking and biking and for the availability of such infrastructure.
Eagan strives to provide safe, accessible, and efficient travel for all modes of transportation, while
prioritizing the transportation network’s most vulnerable users: people walking, rolling, and
bicycling. As the City strives Toward Zero Deaths within the city’s transportation network, a
consistent application of pedestrian crossing enhancements is critical to best serve all users. Dakota
County began using a pedestrian crossing guidance process developed as a part of the County’s
Pedestrian Crossing Safety Assessment in July 2022. As a partner jurisdiction in Dakota County, the
City of Eagan has adopted Dakota County’s guidance to maintain a consistent application of
crossing enhancements along all city and county roadways.
The purpose of this policy is to leverage the County’s process to guide the City in evaluating and
implementing a pedestrian crossing program that provides people walking, rolling, and bicycling a
safe place to cross while providing motorists reasonable and consistent expectations for where and
what that may look like. This consistent process and application are important for the safety of all
as it sets reliable expectations while traveling throughout the transportation network. The intent is
to ensure a mutual understanding between the City Council, Staff, and residents of Eagan when
presented as part of a public improvement project, or by a citizen or City staff request.
MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE
Minnesota State Statute Chapter 169 defines a crosswalk and pedestrians, as well as the rights of
pedestrians and motorists regarding when and where to yield right-of-way. The definitions and
legal language detailed in this section provide a foundation for how pedestrian crossings are
viewed in Minnesota and considered by this assessment.
169.011 Definitions
Subdivision 20. Crosswalk.
"Crosswalk" means (1) that portion of a roadway ordinarily included with the prolongation or
connection of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections; (2) any portion of a roadway distinctly
indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.
Subdivision 20. Pedestrian.
"Pedestrian" means any person afoot or in a wheelchair.
169.21 Pedestrian
Subdivision 2. Rights in absence of signal.
2
(a) Where traffic-control signals are not in place or in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop to
yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or at an
intersection with no marked crosswalk. The driver must remain stopped until the pedestrian has
passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped. No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other
place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for
the driver to yield. This provision shall not apply under the conditions as otherwise provided in this
subdivision.
(b) When any vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked
crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching
from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle.
(c) It is unlawful for any person to drive a motor vehicle through a column of school children
crossing a street or highway or past a member of a school safety patrol or adult crossing guard,
while the member of the school safety patrol or adult crossing guard is directing the movement of
children across a street or highway and while the school safety patrol member or adult crossing
guard is holding an official signal in the stop position. A peace officer may arrest the driver of a
motor vehicle if the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the driver has operated the
vehicle in violation of this paragraph within the past four hours.
(d) A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who violates this
subdivision a second or subsequent time within one year of a previous conviction under this
subdivision is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Subdivision 3. Crossing between intersections.
(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or at an
intersection with no marked crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian
crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall
not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
(d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section every driver of a vehicle shall (1) exercise
due care to avoid colliding with any bicycle or pedestrian upon any roadway and (2) give an
audible signal when necessary and exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any
obviously confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway.
JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY
This policy applies to streets owned and maintained by the City of Eagan, though Dakota County
will perform the same assessment for their county facilities. The City and County will coordinate
when applicable on projects to ensure proper application of crossing enhancements.
3
CROSSING GUIDANCE
This section provides an evaluation process and guidance for when to consider enhancing a
crossing at uncontrolled intersections and mid-block crossing locations. Enhanced crossing
infrastructure is a key method of improving the safety and comfort of people walking, rolling, and
bicycling (herein referred to as “multimodal users”) traveling throughout the transportation
network, with research on the safety effects of appropriately enhanced crosswalks expanding in
recent years.
An uncontrolled crossing refers to a location where no traffic control (i.e., yield or stop sign, traffic
signal) exists at the point in which people walking, rolling, or bicycling may cross. Uncontrolled
crossings require additional review during planning and design because drivers are not consistently
required to stop. Instead, a driver must recognize the presence of a person crossing and stop
accordingly as required by Minnesota state law. This lack of consistency can create safety
challenges acutely connected to these crossing locations. The FHWA states, “By focusing on
uncontrolled crossing locations, local and state agencies can address a significant national safety
problem and improve quality of life for pedestrians of all ages and abilities.”1 Uncontrolled crossing
locations can be barriers for any multimodal user, notably children, older, and disabled
populations, and require special attention to create a safe environment. Higher speed and traffic
volume environments with multiple lanes are especially challenging and are locations where simply
marking a crosswalk is insufficient.
The objective of this section is to document a process for evaluation and design of crossing
locations and ensure that anyone who wishes to be informed may understand how, where, and
why crossing enhancements are recommended at certain locations based upon a variety of factors
and contexts.
INTRODUCTION
The safety of multimodal users requires a holistic approach that focuses on engineering
(implementing infrastructure improvements), education (for all roadway users), evaluation
(continually collecting key data metrics to better inform decision-making), and encouragement (of
following state laws). Engineering is the first step of this process to ensure the roadway and
associated crossing design can effectively accommodate all users as safely and effectively as
possible. It is important to focus upon the most vulnerable users of the transportation network
throughout the process. Crashes are unacceptable and preventable, and though humans will make
mistakes, Safe System of roadway design must always be considered to ensure a person’s mistake
does not lead to serious injury or death.
1 Federal Highway Administration. (2018). Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations, page ii.
4
Determining the appropriateness of enhanced crossing infrastructure requires a thorough review of
the crossing location. The following steps are guidance for using or reviewing this process. Each
crossing location requires staff review and engineering judgement beyond the basic guidelines
included in this chapter and must include context-specific solutions beyond the scope of this
document. Ideally this process is completed during the roadway design process, however, in many
cases review occurs after the roadway is built or a new facility is added. This process is intended to
help guide the reviewer through a methodical and data driven process such that engineering
judgment can be effectively applied.
1. Performing field review and preliminary data collection to understand existing conditions
and potential issues. Preliminary data collection includes existing, easily accessible data that
is expected to take the reviewer less than 30 minutes and will determine if the crossing is
acceptable for additional review performed by steps 2, 3, and 4.
2. Collect data to complete the review using recommended data points included in the Data
Collection Form. The process includes the following steps:
a. Identify crossing location.
b. Collect roadway geometric and configuration data.
c. Collect traffic and operational data.
d. Collect multimodal data.
3. Evaluate the point of crossing using the flowchart and perform a high-level review to
understand if a location is appropriate for consideration of an enhanced crossing.
4. If the flowchart leads to the conclusion that the consideration of an enhanced crossing is
appropriate, continue to engineering review which includes the following steps:
a. Review traffic volumes to determine proper roadway configuration/number of lanes.
b. Determine if roadway geometric treatments are appropriate.
c. Evaluate crossing infrastructure enhancements.
d. Conduct specific warrant analyses or review of grade separation feasibility if applicable.
1. FIELD REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY DATA COLLECTION
Upon identification of a crossing location by preemptive review (e.g., future development, etc.) or
reactive evaluation (e.g., community input, recent crash, etc.), initial field review should be
completed. This first step will aid in determining if an issue(s) is/are present, if other mitigation
measures can be performed external to the process defined by this assessment, or if no additional
follow up is necessary. Staff time and capacity is understood to be limited, and this will ensure that
only crossings with the highest estimated need are provided the level of review described in the
following sections.
5
2. DATA COLLECTION
Data collection is a key component of this analysis. The Data Collection Form should be used for
each study to collect all required data inputs. It is critical that all data points identified below are
collected and properly organized to ensure the crossing location is successfully reviewed for
potential improvements. Sometimes the planner or engineer is very familiar with the location and
may have a good understanding of operations which may allow some of the data to be
“approximated”, though it is important that all data inputs are completed to maintain the integrity
of the process.
Crossing Identification
▪ Major Street: Name of the street crossed by the location under review.
▪ Minor Street or Crossing Location: The connecting street of an intersection or specific
location identified for the mid-block crossing.
▪ Multimodal Generating Land Uses, Destinations, or Activity Centers: Within 660 feet of the
crossing, are there land uses, destinations, or activity centers that could generate trips by
walking, rolling, or bicycling and list those that are pertinent. These could be existing
locations or those planned in the near-term (less than five years).
Roadway Characteristics
▪ Cross-section Type: Urban (curb and gutter) or rural (shoulder and ditch) cross-section.
▪ Roadway Configuration: Configuration of the roadway at the point of crossing which
includes the total number of lanes and if it is divided or undivided.
▪ Total Number of Lanes to Cross: The total number of lanes present at the point of crossing.
▪ Number of Left-turn Lanes: The total number of left-turn lanes present at the point of
crossing.
▪ Number of Right-turn Lanes: The total number of right-turn lanes present at the point of
crossing.
▪ Stopping Sight Distance: The stopping sight distance in both directions from the point of
crossing based upon guidance found in the AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets.
▪ Obstruction: Sight distance obstruction present such as a tree, pole, sign, etc. that directly
affects the crossing under review.
Traffic Data
▪ Traffic Control: If a crossing under review is at an intersection, identify the traffic control
present (side-street stop control, all-way stop, or traffic signal).
▪ Posted Speed Limit: Posted speed limit at the point of crossing.
6
▪ 85th Percentile Speed: The 85th percentile speed recorded at the point of crossing.
▪ Existing AADT: The most recent average annual daily traffic available at the point of
crossing.
▪ Future AADT: The future average annual daily traffic identified at the point of crossing if
available.
▪ Existing V/C: The vehicle-to-capacity based upon the number of lanes and existing AADT at
the point of crossing
▪ Future V/C: The vehicle-to-capacity based upon the number of lanes and future AADT at
the point of crossing
▪ Total Crashes: The total number of crashes (all modes) that are recorded at the point of
crossing in the last five years. Highlight serious injury or fatal crashes if present.
Multimodal Data
▪ Sidewalk: Identify if a sidewalk directly connects to the crossing under review.
▪ Shared-use Path: Identify if a shared-use path, sidepath, or multiuse trail directly connects
to the crossing under review.
▪ Crosswalk Lighting: Identify if lighting is present that would illuminate the crossing and
specifically note if that lighting is pedestrian-scale.
▪ Transit Stop: Identify if a bus or transit stop is within 300 feet of the crossing under review.
▪ Multimodal User Volume: Record the three peak hour totals for multimodal users and
specifically identify pedestrians versus bicyclists. User types are further defined under the
“Criteria Definitions” section. A best practice is collecting data between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m.
during warmer months (i.e., April-June or September-October) and when school is in
session. Collecting both a weekday and weekend count is also recommended. Previously
collected count data within two years of this assessment can be applied if location
conditions have not changed significantly.
▪ Multimodal User Volume – Vulnerable Population: Record the three peak hour totals for
multimodal users that would identify as vulnerable (i.e., young, older, and/or disabled). User
types are further defined under the “Criteria Definitions” section.
▪ Pedestrian Crashes: The total number of pedestrian-involved crashes that are recorded at
the point of crossing in the last ten years. Highlight serious injury or fatal crashes and
remove preventable crashes (e.g., driver impaired, etc.) if present.
▪ Bicycle Crashes: The total number of bicycle-involved crashes that are recorded at the point
of crossing in the last ten years. Highlight serious injury or fatal crashes and remove
preventable crashes (e.g., driver impaired, etc.) if present.
▪ Distance to Next Marked Crosswalk: The distance (in feet) between the closest marked
crosswalk and the crossing under review.
7
▪ Distance to Next Controlled Crossing: The distance (in feet) between the closest controlled
crossing (i.e., traffic/pedestrian signal, all-way stop, PHB, or RRFB) and the crossing under
review.
▪ Two-stage Crossing Distance: Total distance to cross (in feet) on either side of the
pedestrian refuge island.
▪ Total Crossing Distance: The total crossing distance (in feet) to complete the roadway
crossing from curb ramp to curb ramp or curb face to curb face if curb ramps are not
present.
3. EVALUATE CANDIDATE LOCATIONS
Once data collection is complete, the candidate crossing location should be evaluated using the
flowchart. Starting at the top, proceed through each criteria box following the path of whether the
data meets that criterion. Progress through the flowchart until reaching one of three boxes at the
bottom which include:
▪ No Action Recommended: The crossing location does not meet one or more criteria and is
not recommended. Directing users to the nearest marked crosswalk should be considered
to reduce risk taking behavior. The nearest marked crosswalk should be consistent with the
guidelines defined in this evaluation process or approved following staff review and
engineering judgement.
▪ Consider an Unmarked Crossing: An “unmarked crossing” is any treatment that improves a
person’s ability to cross a roadway, short of a marked crosswalk with signage or other
enhancements detailed in Step 3 at the crossing location. Installation of this type of
crossing is subject to staff review and engineering judgement and must include ADA-
compliant curb ramps, appropriate pedestrian warning signage in advance of the crossing,
and roadway geometric improvements if applicable (list of options found below in step 3,
the engineering review process). No markings or additional signage beyond pedestrian
warning signage are provided to attract or recommend that nonmotorized users cross at
the location. The crossing is intended to operate as an improvement for a low volume
pedestrian crossing where nonmotorized users are already crossing and will continue to
cross at this location or to provide consistency where enhancements are not warranted.
▪ Consideration of a Crossing Enhancement is Appropriate: The crossing location is
appropriate for consideration of infrastructure enhancements. Proceed to the engineering
review process to complete context-specific analysis, staff review, and engineering
judgement.
8
Crossing Types
A pedestrian crossing is the section of the road at an intersection that acts as the prolongation, or
extension, of the sidewalk for people walking, rolling, or bicycling to cross from one side of the
road to the other and at all legs of any intersection. When no sidewalks exist, the crossing is the
portion of the roadway within ten feet of the intersection unless modified by crosswalk markings,
signage, or other infrastructure at a different location such as mid-block (i.e., between two
intersections).
▪ Unmarked crosswalk: A legal crosswalk that does not feature any crosswalk striping or
markings.
▪ Marked crosswalk: A legal crosswalk that features crosswalk striping or markings.
▪ Uncontrolled crossing: A legal crossing of a roadway intersection approach or mid-block
crossing of a roadway between two intersections not controlled by a stop sign, traffic
signal, pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), or pedestrian signal.
▪ Controlled crossing: A legal crossing of a roadway intersection approach or mid-block
crossing of a roadway between two intersections controlled by a stop sign, traffic signal,
pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), or pedestrian signal.
Typical crosswalk marking implementation and designs are highlighted in the Minnesota Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) and can include a variety of materials. To improve
motorist vision of a crossing, high visibility markings are recommended (e.g., thermoplasti c) when
applicable and notably for higher volume crossings.
Source: Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (left); National Association of City Transportation Officials (right)
Crosswalks that are appropriately marked and enhanced provide pedestrians with convenient
opportunities to cross the street, while maintaining safety. Marked crosswalks are valuable as they
direct pedestrians to a designated place to cross, alert drivers to the potential presence of
pedestrians, and legally establish the crosswalk at non-intersection locations.
9
The MN MUTCD states that a marked crosswalk should not be installed alone without other
measures designed to reduce traffic speeds, shorten crossing distances, and/or provide active
warning of pedestrian presence if the posted speed limit exceeds 40 mph and:
1. Four or more lanes present with no pedestrian refuge island and >12,000 AADT, or
2. Four or more lanes present with a pedestrian refuge island and >15,000 AADT
Crossing Considerations
External to crossing infrastructure, other considerations are important to review prior to potentially
implementing infrastructure enhancements.
Distance Between Crossings
Crosswalk spacing criteria should be determined according to the pedestrian network, built
environment, and observed desire lines. NACTO identifies that if it takes a person more than a
three-minute walk to a crossing, wait to cross the street, and then resume their journey, they may
decide to cross along a more direct, but unsafe or unprotected, route based upon perceived time
savings. While this behavior depends heavily on the speed and volume of motorists, it is imperative
to understand crossing behaviors from a pedestrian’s perspective (i.e., slower travel via a reduced
travelshed). Of note, no state or national guidance exists identifying specific measured distances
between crosswalks or enhanced crossings. Crossing placement is heavily dependent upon the
surrounding context, land use and destinations, network connectivity, block length, and other
factors. A high-level analysis of agency best practices in the United States showed typical marked
crossing spacing from 200 to 600 feet when warranted. A minimum spacing of 300 feet between
signalized crossings is identified in the MN MUTCD (page 4D-1). This spacing could fluctuate based
upon engineering judgement and applicability given the roadway design, configuration, and
intersection placement.
Delay to Cross a Roadway
The multimodal network should be designed in such a way where users are not unreasonably
forced to wait for a gap in traffic or walk out of their way to access a crossing. The Highway
Capacity Manual 6th Edition states that when a pedestrian is forced to wait 30 seconds or more,
they are highly likely to exhibit risk-taking behavior. NACTO also has guidance regarding delay at
signalized and unsignalized crossings. Delays exceeding 40 seconds at signalized crosswalks and
20 seconds at unsignalized, or yield-controlled crosswalks, may cause the pedestrian to exhibit risk-
taking behavior. These are important considerations as another metric to proactively determine
how a crossing could be made safer.
10
11
Criteria Definitions
Additional detail regarding how to navigate each criterion is included by the corresponding
number in the flowchart and footnotes.
▪ Meets minimum multimodal volume threshold: The multimodal user crossing demand
during a 24-hour period meets one or more of the following criteria. This is the total after
the 1.33 volume conversion factor is applied for vulnerable population (i.e., children/young
adults (ages 0-17), older adults (60+), and persons with disabilities).
o 1 hour (any hour): 20 crossings per hour
o 2 hours (any two hours): 15 crossings per hour
o 3 hours (any three hours): 10 crossings per hour
Of note, the two- or three-hour counts do not need to be consecutive. Multimodal users
include a person walking, rolling (e.g., skateboard, scooter, or other nonmotorized or
motorized riding device), bicycling (pedal-powered or e-bike), or using a wheelchair,
mobility aid, or other battery power-driven mobility device.
▪ Pedestrian or bicycle involved crash in the last ten years: ≥1 crash involving a multimodal
user at the existing point crossing under review over the last ten years. A crash not
addressable by engineering design (e.g., impaired driver, etc.) does not count.
▪ Location meets the sight distance requirement: The required sight distance for a vehicle to
come to a complete stop at the point of crossing per AASHTO’s stopping sight distance
outputs using the roadway’s design speed.
▪ Location directly serves a key destination or active transportation facility: Subject to staff
review and engineering judgement, examine the surrounding land uses to determine if the
proposed crossing directly serves, or is within close proximity, to a key destination or active
transportation facility.
Key destinations for consideration could include, but are not limited to: school, hospital,
senior center, recreation or community center, library, park, bus stop or transit station, or a
key activity center, destination, and/or land use subject to staff review.
Active transportation facilities may include a multiuse trail, shared use path, sidepath, or
greenway adopted by a City of Eagan plan, or other local planning document subject to
staff review and approval.
▪ Location from the nearest marked crossing: The NACTO defines an approximate three
minute out-of-direction walk as the threshold in which risk-taking behavior by a multimodal
user may then occur. Pedestrians naturally desire to travel along the quickest and most
direct pathway of travel. Utilizing the MN MUTCD’s 3.5 feet per second calculation for
pedestrian travel, that equates to 600 feet total, or 300 feet in either direction from the
crosswalk. These distances could vary and are dependent upon the surrounding context
(i.e., urban, suburban, or rural) and characteristics of the roadway. The minimum distance
allowable is 300 feet between crossings per the MN MUTCD (page 4D-1).
12
Exceptions to Criteria
In some cases, it may be reasonable to allow exceptions to the criteria previously described. Any
exception may require review, consideration, and discussion from city staff and must be clearly
documented including the reason why the criteria exception was required. Examples could include
a location that is identified for consideration of a crossing enhancement but does not meet the
criteria outlined in this document though it has other factors where crossing enhancements may be
applicable. The city may choose not to construct crossings that have a high cost, are not justified
by the project’s benefits, or have constraints present that require significant design. Developers
should coordinate planning, design, and implementation of all crossings with the City of Eagan’s
Public Works Department.
4. ENGINEERING REVIEW
If a location is identified as appropriate for consideration of crossing enhancements in the
flowchart, then the following process should be completed to determine if additional crossing
infrastructure enhancements could be implemented. This is a methodical process that potentially
highlights items not previously considered.
Step 1: Traffic Volume Review
The first step of this process is important as the Potential Crossing Enhancement Matrix relies upon
the number of lanes as one of three key inputs. This step ensures that the number of lanes (travel
and turn lanes) at the point of crossing is adequate for the traffic volumes. Right sizing the crossing
distance is critical to all modes of travel, but particularly important to non-motorized users, as the
goal is to minimize their time in the hazard zone.
1. Analyze existing (and future traffic volumes subject to site-specific engineering judgement)
using the Dakota County capacity thresholds to determine if the roadway design is
appropriate (see Table 1).
Table 1. Dakota County Roadway Capacities
Roadway Design Capacity Range 110% of Capacity
2-lanes 10,000 11,000
3-lanes 18,000 19,800
4+ lanes 35,000 38,500
Source: Dakota County 2040 Transportation Plan
13
▪ Four-to-Three Conversion: Often referred to as a “road diet” it reduces the number of
travel lanes from four through lanes to two through lanes with a two-way left-turn lane
in the center of the roadway. This can both calm traffic, slow speeds, and provide
additional roadway space for crossing enhancements such as a pedestrian refuge
island. This is an option if the capacity is found to be appropriate for such a conversion
based upon county guidance and engineering judgement.
▪ Multilane Threat: Removing lanes can also improve visibility and remove the multilane
threat which is when two or more lanes in one direction approach a crossing. When
one car stops for a person crossing the roadway, the second car may not be visible to
the person crossing nor is that person visible to the second driver.
2. Engineering review of right- and left-turn lanes if applicable at the point of crossing to
verify if they are necessary or if they can be removed.
3. If roadway design or turn lanes are appropriate, proceed to Step 2: Roadway Geometric
Treatment Options.
4. If roadway design or turn lanes are not appropriate, consider lane reductions or turn lane
removal before proceeding. If this is not a near-term option, proceed to Step 2: Roadway
Geometric Treatment Options.
14
Step 2: Roadway Geometric Treatment Assessment
Marking a crosswalk is one of many tools that can be used to improve pedestrian conditions.
Before considering additional signage, markings/striping, signals, etc., staff should evaluate the
feasibility of roadway geometric improvements. Minimizing the time that multimodal users are
crossing in the travel lane(s) is important as it reduces crossing width/distance, as well as helps
manage vehicle speeds by narrowing the cross-section and tightening curb radii.
In some cases, moving a crossing away from an intersection to a mid-block location can
significantly reduce the number of conflict points between vehicles and multimodal users thereby
improving overall safety.
The following process reviews opportunities to slow speeds, reduce crossing distance, and improve
visibility of people crossing the roadway.
1. Narrow Travel Lanes: MnDOT identifies the following lane width best practices per the
Performance-Based Practical Design – Process and Design Guidance. These are superseded
by MnDOT’s own design standards though used as an example for consideration by the
City of Eagan. Studies have credited tighter lane widths by neutrally or positively impacting
safety without affecting traffic operations.
▪ Rural Roadways: 11- or 12-foot-wide lanes
▪ Urban and Suburban Roadways: 10-foot-wide lanes (≤35 mph and turn lanes), 11-foot-
wide lanes (suitable for all other typologies), 12-foot-wide lanes (≥50 mph and/or non-
motorized traffic is absent).
2. Reduce Conflict Points: Consider moving the crossing to a location with the least number of
conflict points depending upon engineering judgement. This could include an intersection
leg with lower turning vehicles or overall traffic, as well as moving a crossing entirely out of
an intersection and to a mid-block location.
15
3. Crossing Lighting: Ensure lighting is present that illuminates the entire crossing (curb ramp
to curb ramp) per state and federal guidance.
4. Traffic Calming: Context-specific traffic calming measures using geometric improvements
should always be considered. Each item is further defined in the section below.
▪ Curb Radius: Review the turning curb radius to understand if a reduced radius can be
achieved based upon context-specific needs and design vehicles (i.e., if the roadway is a
freight or bus route). Reducing the radius to as small as practical can create significant
benefits via reduced crossing distance and vehicle turning speeds. Curb radius design
should be based upon roadway type, crossing activity, and turning vehicle needs.
▪ Curb Extension: An extension or bump out of the curb into the roadway and typically a
minimum of six-feet-wide though design is context specific. This could include removal
or narrowing of a roadway shoulder to reduce the crossing distance. Special attention
should be given to existing on-street bicycle infrastructure (e.g., bike lane) to ensure it
does not remove space at the intersection for that connection.
▪ Pedestrian Refuge Island: A raised median that is a minimum of eight-feet-wide though
ten-feet or greater is preferred to ensure it is wide enough to accommodate bikes.
▪ Several more traffic calming infrastructure opportunities are identified in best practice
documents and guidance (e.g., NACTO, ITE, FHWA, etc.) and could be implemented
based upon staff review and engineering judgement.
Step 3: Evaluate Crossing Infrastructure Enhancements
Review the crossing enhancement evaluation matrix to determine potential infrastructure
improvements at the point of crossing. The improvement options are divided into four options
which are further described in the matrix table below.
▪ Consider Lane Reduction: Review the existing and future roadway volumes to determine if
a lane reduction can be implemented prior to potential crossing improvements to
maximize crossing infrastructure and minimize cost.
▪ Markings and Signage: The most basic treatment for a location that qualifies for enhanced
crossing. Two different scenarios for marking and signage (M&S 1 and M&S 2) specify
which signs and roadway markings are included.
▪ Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon: Rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) are
generally designed for locations with higher traffic volumes and pedestrian activity. Three
different scenarios for RRFBs (RRFB 1, RRFB 2, and RRFB 3) specify which combination of
markings and signs should be used in coordination with the RRFBs.
▪ Further Analysis Required: An engineering assessment is required to determine if a
pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) or pedestrian signal are warranted per the MN MUTCD
(which both require higher pedestrian volumes), as well as pedestrian demand, roadway
conditions and context, and available gaps in traffic. The need for, and feasibility of, a
grade-separated pedestrian crossing requires a more detailed engineering review to
16
understand the feasibility and cost. They are most applicable for highly used trail or
greenway crossings, as well as high demand locations of high speed, multi-lane roadways,
expressways, and freeways.
Step 4: Further Analysis of Major Enhancements
This step considers warrants found in the MN MUTCD for pedestrian hybrid beacons or pedestrian
signals subject to engineering judgement and review of applicability. The feasibility of grade-
separation may also be studied and is dependent upon context-specific needs.
17
18
Crossing Infrastructure Treatments
The following section describes crossing infrastructure to illustrate the universe of opportunities to
mark/stripe, sign, and implement geometric improvements to upgrade locations for crossing a
roadway by walking, rolling, or bicycling. The list is not exhaustive and only highlights key
treatments beyond typical pedestrian crossing and warning signage, or in-street pedestrian signs.
Guidance of infrastructure treatments and best practices continues to grow nationally and should
be reviewed during some frequency to ensure the latest enhancements are understood (i.e., type,
impact, cost, etc.). Of note, construction estimates, and crash reduction percentages are from
MnDOT’s Best Practices for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety (2021) or the FHWA.
Lane Reduction
A road diet reconfigures the roadway by converting a
four-lane (or sometimes more), undivided roadway into
a three-lane roadway with two through lanes and a
two-way left-turn lane in the center of the roadway. The
three-lane configuration provides added space to
implement a pedestrian refuge island or landscaped
median, bike infrastructure, and other elements for
traffic calming. This is a candidate treatment for any
undivided road with wide travel lanes or multiple lanes
that can be narrowed or repurposed to improve
pedestrian crossing safety. It is a proven safety strategy for reducing crashes per the FHWA with a
typical crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent. Typically, a roadway with 20,000 AADT or less is a good
candidate for a four- to three-lane conversion, though some examples in the United States have
shown successful conversions with traffic volumes as high as 26,000 AADT in addition to lower
turning volumes. Average cost of implementation is $25,000 to $40,000 per mile.
Curb Radii
Source: Federal Highway Administration
Source: Federal Highway Administration
19
Tightened curb radii provide several benefits including shortened crossing distance, slowed turning
vehicle speeds, and a larger pedestrian-realm. An actual curb radius of five to ten feet should be
considered whenever possible, and not to exceed 30 feet.2 The effective curb radius should be
minimized whenever possible and increased to accommodate turning buses or large trucks when
absolutely required. In most conditions, the roadway has passenger vehicles or smaller trucks and,
in some cases, large vehicles overtaking a lane to complete their turn should be acceptable unless
specific issues are identified per staff review and engineering judgement. Creative designs can also
be employed such as staggered stop bars and/or truck aprons to accommodate larger vehicle
turning movements.
Curb Extension
The impact for driver sight of people crossing with the addition of curb extensions shown at right.
Source: National Association of City Transportation Officials.
A curb extension is an extension of the sidewalk and curb line into the roadway to reduce
pedestrian crossing distance and exposure to vehicles. They also provide visual cues to drivers and
improve vision of pedestrians crossing while reducing turning speeds. It is a proven safety strategy
for reducing crashes per the FHWA with a typical crash reduction of 45 percent. Curb extensions
can double as a traffic calming device in mid-block locations as pinch points or chicanes. Average
cost is $2,000 to $3,500 per corner without storm sewer impacts and $10,000 to $20,000 per corner
if storm sewer is impacted.
2 Minnesota Department of Transportation. (January 2016). Infrastructure Reference Guide.
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnsaferoutes/assets/downloads/MnDOT_SRTS_InfrastrctureReferenceGuide.pdf
20
Pedestrian Refuge Island
Source: Federal Highway Administration
Crossing Lighting
A pedestrian refuge island (i.e., a median) are raised
areas that are constructed in the center of the roadway
and serve as a place of refuge for people who cross
mid-block or at an intersection and shorten the
crossing distance. They allow people crossing to
concentrate their attention on one direction of traffic at
a time and allow users to wait for motorists and find an
adequate gap in traffic before crossing the second half
of the street. It is a proven safety strategy for reducing
crashes per the FHWA with a typical crash reduction of
46 to 54 percent. Average total costs vary.
Crosswalk lighting is a strategy that installs streetlights at, and in advance of, intersections and
crosswalks to improve visibility and safety of the person crossing. It is a proven safety strategy for
reducing crashes per the FHWA with a typical crash reduction of 42 percent. The lux (amount of
light in lumens per square meter) is recommended at 20 to 40 lux at five feet above the road
surface to provide adequate vertical illumination within a crosswalk. Lighting is particularly
important at mid-block crossings and should illuminate the entire crossing form curb ramp to curb
ramp as illustrated above. Average cost is $10,000 to $40,000 per intersection.
Advanced Stop Bar and Signage
Source: National Association of Transportation Officials
An advanced stop bar is typically striped 20 feet to
50 feet in advance of a marked crosswalk to
encourage drivers to stop further back from the
crossing which enhances the comfort for those
crossing. The stop bar and corresponding sign also
provides the key benefit for multilane roadways of
removing the multilane threat by improving the
visibility of a crossing pedestrian for motorists.
Source: National Association of Transportation Officials (left), Federal Highway Administration (right)
21
Source: National Association of Transportation Officials
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
A crossing enhancement that is activated by a
pedestrian and uses two rapid and alternate
flashing yellow rectangular beacons. RRFBs are
applicable on roadways with higher pedestrian
demand, traffic volumes, and traffic speeds. It is a
proven safety strategy for reducing crashes per the
FHWA with a typical crash reduction of 47 percent.
Average cost is $15,000 to $50,000 per crossing or
$80,000 to $100,000 for an overhead system.
Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB)
A pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), formerly known
as a HAWK, is a beacon installed to warn and
control traffic by having vehicles stop with a red
light. It consists of two red lenses and one yellow
lens and is dark until pedestrian activated. PHBs are
applicable on high speed, multilane roadways, with
higher traffic volumes and where RRFBs are no
longer a viable safety solution, such as when gaps
in traffic are not sufficient. If PHBs are not already
familiar to a community, agencies should conduct appropriate education and outreach as part of
implementation. It is a proven safety strategy for reducing crashes per the FHWA with a typical
crash reduction of 55 percent. Average cost is $100,000 to $170,000 per crossing. Of note, if
pedestrian demand is higher, a pedestrian signal should be explored in lieu of a PHB. A pedestrian
signal is a traffic signal placed at a pedestrian crossing and does not refer to a signalized
intersection.
22
Grade-separated Crossing
Vertical separation of a pedestrian crossing (over or under a roadway) are most applicable for high
volume and high speed roadways, railroads, and other topographically challenging locations or
physical barriers. The overpass or underpass should always try to be conveniently located to
reduce out-of-direction travel. It is a proven safety strategy for reducing crashes per the FHWA
with a typical crash reduction of 87 percent. Cost is typically significant and can vary wildly and is
dependent upon the surrounding context.
Removal of Infrastructure
Conditions that contribute to the need for a crossing enhancement may change over time, or a
crossing may no longer be needed. When a roadway surface is to be impacted by reconstruction
or resurfacing, a review should be performed to determine their use and need. If a crosswalk or
crossing meets the criteria outlined in this assessment, it should be maintained. If it does not meet
the criteria, it should be brought to the City Engineer for consideration of removal. In lieu of a
removal, a crossing may also be reviewed for changes to align with the latest guidance or changing
conditions.
Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation
NORTHNorth 9’
13’
13’
9’
9’
13’
13’
9’
Duckwood Drive
Widgeon Way02316574
June 2023
Curb Extension Concept
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of Eagan
DRAFT
Concept Purposes Only
NORTHNorth 5’
11’
11’
5’
Duckwood Drive
Widgeon Way 12’
5’
11’
11’
5’
12’
02316574
June 2023
Median Concept
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of Eagan
Median Length: 75 to 100 feet
DRAFT
Concept Purposes Only
NORTHNorth 5’
13’
13’
5’
Duckwood Drive
Widgeon Way 8’
5’
13’
13’
5’
8’
02316574
June 2023
Combined Concept
Duckwood Drive and Widgeon Way Intersection Study
City of Eagan
Median Length: 75 to 100 feet
DRAFT
Concept Purposes Only
Duckwood Drive
& Widgeon Way
Intersection
September 19, 2023
Public Works Committee Meeting
History/ Existing Conditions
2018 Study/Action
No strong public opinion to remove stop signs –Duckwood Drive
Council/staff left intersection as is
Resident Petition January 2023
Existing Conditions
4-Way Stop Intersection –not warranted
Installed at direction of Council 30+ years ago
Sidewalk North side only
Duckwood Drive –collector street –6,000-6,600 ADT
Widgeon Way –local residential street –350-800 ADT
No multimodal crashes in past 10 years
3 property damage crashes in past 10 years
Existing Conditions
Study Process
Public Involvement
•Petition –Council Approval
•Online Survey
•Two Neighborhood Meetings (May 24 and June 27)
Concerns:
Speeding
Non-compliance at stop signs
Not stopping for pedestrians
•Review of Operations with ISD 196 Bus Routes/Stops
•Eagan Police Department Input
Study Process
Public Engagement -Pedestrian and Data Collection/Evaluation
Report –Findings
Stop Sign Compliance
Pedestrian/ Bus Stop Crossing Review
ISD 196 –Glacier Hills Elementary School bus stop modifications
2023/2024 year
-Eliminates need for elementary students to cross Duckwood Drive
Pedestrian Crossing Policy (2023)
Ped/Bike Volume thresholds not met
No multimodal crashes within past 10 years
No pedestrian ramps on south side
Future consideration of sidewalk/trail south side (Bike/Ped
Transportation Plan 2020)
Summary/ Options for Consideration
•Leave as is
•Remove stop signs on Duckwood Drive
•Painted or raised physical improvements –curb
extensions or median refuge
Title•Does the Public Works Committee support the
recommendation for the removal of the stop signs along
Duckwood Drive?
•Does the Public Works Committee support the placement
of painted geometric improvements to reduce the
designated travel lane width?
Thank you!