By Erik Noonan

If you’ve ever tried to cross a state highway on foot or by bike and thought, “this feels like it was not designed with me in mind” — or maybe just a general “Oofda, this is TERRIBLE” — well, you were right. But the good news? MnDOT is working to change that, and recently we got a front-row seat to hear how.

Sonja Piper, an active transportation safety engineer with MnDOT’s Office of Traffic Engineering, joined us to walk through two big ideas shaping how the agency thinks about road design right now: the Safe System Approach and Complete Streets. If those terms make your eyes glaze over a little, stay with me — the real-world stuff is actually pretty exciting.

The Problem in Plain Terms

We’ve made real progress reducing motor vehicle fatalities over the years — a lot of that credit goes to Toward Zero Deaths. But that downward trend hasn’t shown up for people walking and biking. At all. That gap is exactly what the Safe System Approach is trying to fix.

The core insight is almost annoyingly simple: human bodies are fragile, and humans make mistakes. So instead of designing roads that only work when everyone does everything right, design roads that don’t kill people when someone screws up. It’s a shift from “how do we stop crashes” to “how do we stop crashes from killing people.” Different question. Different answers.

Speed Is a Design Choice

Here’s the thing Sonja said that I keep thinking about: speed can be a choice we make when we design a road. Not just a speed limit sign — the actual physical design of the street.

The numbers are stark. A pedestrian hit at 20 mph has roughly a 10% chance of a fatal outcome. At 60 mph, it’s over 90%. That’s not a behavior problem. That’s a physics problem, and we can do something about it.

Roundabouts are one of the few tools that actually slow cars down — and keep them slow. Sonja walked through a case study from Golden, Colorado where a corridor redesign dropped the 85th-percentile speed from 48 mph to 33, cut total crashes by 36%, and reduced injury crashes by 97%. And — this is the part that kills the “road diet = gridlock” argument — travel times through the corridor improved. Cars were going slower and getting through faster. File that one away.

Complete Streets Isn’t “Bike Lanes Everywhere”

Worth saying clearly because this comes up: MnDOT’s updated Complete Streets policy (revised in 2022) is not a mandate to slap bike lanes on every rural highway between here and Bemidji. It’s a framework for asking better questions — who’s using this road, what do they actually need, and what’s the context?

MnDOT has mapped nine land use context categories to help sort that out project by project. It’s a more honest way to have the tradeoffs conversation than pretending a highway through downtown Mora and a county road through farm country are the same design problem.

Why This Window Matters

MnDOT is looking at projects 6 to 8 years out right now and actively asking where walking and biking infrastructure should go. That’s the window. Early engagement from advocates and community members can shape what actually gets built — before the design is locked in and everyone’s telling you it’s too late to change anything.

Sonja shared a quote from a transportation engineer that stuck with me: “It has always been our job to make streets complete.” The whole reason we have Complete Streets policies is because somewhere along the way that got forgotten. The policy exists to make us remember.

Okay But What Do You Actually Do

Here’s the practical part.

Find out what’s coming. The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and MnDOT’s district project lists are public. If there’s a reconstruction coming to your town in 2029, that window is open right now. Look it up. Tell people.

Show up early, not at the ribbon cutting. Sonja was blunt about this: showing up at a public hearing for a project already in final design is theater. A scoping meeting is where the real conversation happens. Better yet, call your MnDOT district office before one is even scheduled. That’s where the leverage actually is.

Use MnDOT’s own language back at them. “Safe System Approach” and “Complete Streets” are official MnDOT policy commitments, not advocacy wishlist items. When you say “this project should reflect MnDOT’s Complete Streets policy” in a comment letter or at a city council meeting, you’re not asking for a favor — you’re asking them to follow their own policy. Harder to dismiss.

Bring your whole neighborhood, not just the bike people. The folks most harmed by fast roads and missing crosswalks are often seniors, kids, and people who don’t own a car. This is not only a cycling issue and it shouldn’t be framed that way. If a highway cuts your town in half and crossing it feels like a video game, that affects everyone. Build that coalition.

Keep the roundabouts numbers handy. Roundabouts and road diets almost always get pushback from businesses worried about access and customers. The Golden case study is a direct rebuttal: slower speeds, better travel times, fewer crashes, and — tell the businesses this part — positive impacts on development and commerce along the corridor. Print it. Bring it. Use it.

The fear of change is real. Sonja and CJ both talked about it in the Q&A. Good projects get watered down all the time because the opposition is organized and the benefits feel abstract. Your job is to make the benefits concrete, and to be in the room early enough that there’s still something to fight for.

Go Watch the Full Thing

Sonja covered a lot more than what’s here — including a detailed walkthrough of a potential redesign for Highway 65 in Mora and the full Safe System framework. Worth a half hour of your time, especially if you’re doing any advocacy, planning, or local government work.

Youtube Link to Full Presentation

Thanks to Sonja Piper and MnDOT’s Office of Traffic Engineering for sharing this with our community.