Dataset
Where Saint Paul Motor Vehicle Crashes Concentrate, and What That Means for Injury Cases
A public-record reference compiling motor vehicle crash concentrations across the City of Saint Paul, the corridors and intersection types where injury severity rises, and the Minnesota statutes that govern liability when those crashes go to claim. Built for any Minnesota driver, cyclist, or pedestrian who needs to understand the road they were on.
Dataset Overview
What This Heatmap Compiles
A motor vehicle crash heatmap is only useful if it answers the right question. The right question for an injured Minnesotan is not how many crashes happened, but where the crashes that produce serious injury concentrate, and which liability rules attach when they do. This page compiles that view for the City of Saint Paul, drawn from the public crash record and the Minnesota statutory framework that governs every motor vehicle case in the state.
Three legal frameworks shape every entry on the heatmap. Modified comparative fault under Minn. Stat. § 604.01 sets the baseline — a Minnesota plaintiff is barred only if their fault exceeds 50 percent. The Minnesota No-Fault Auto Insurance Act under Minn. Stat. § 65B controls first-dollar medical and wage benefits, with a six-month notice deadline under Minn. Stat. § 65B.55. The tort threshold under Minn. Stat. § 65B.51 determines whether a claim can step outside no-fault and proceed in district court. The data scope is Saint Paul; the framing scope is statewide because every claim that arises from these crashes runs on the same Minnesota law and is filed in Ramsey County District Court.
Corridor Concentration
Where Crashes Cluster Across Saint Paul
Crash density in Saint Paul does not distribute evenly. The published Minnesota Department of Public Safety crash records and the City of Saint Paul Public Works Vision Zero corridor analyses both identify a recurring set of high-volume conflict points along the major arterial and freeway interfaces. The table below summarizes the corridor categories where injury crashes concentrate, the right-of-way and driving rules under Minn. Stat. § 169.20 and Minn. Stat. § 169.18 that most often anchor the liability theory, and the predominant crash mechanism documented in the public record.
| Corridor category | Representative segment | Primary statutory framework | Predominant injury mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|
| Urban freeway interface | Interstate 94 and Interstate 35E through downtown | Minn. Stat. § 169.18; following distance and lane-change rules | Rear-end and chain-reaction collisions in congestion bottleneck |
| Major signalized arterial | University Avenue, Snelling Avenue, West Seventh Street | Minn. Stat. § 169.20 right-of-way; Minn. Stat. § 169.06 traffic-control devices | Left-turn-across-path; pedestrian struck mid-crosswalk |
| Transit corridor with rail at-grade | University Avenue Green Line corridor | Right-of-way; Minn. Stat. § 169.222 bicycle rights | Cyclist struck at signalized rail crossing; pedestrian struck near platform |
| Commercial truck route | Industrial corridors connecting freight to I-94 and I-35E | 49 CFR § 395.3 hours of service; 49 CFR § 393.100 cargo securement | Tractor-trailer conflict at intersection; jackknife in lane-change |
| Neighborhood collector with arterial cut-through | Marshall Avenue, Maryland Avenue, Rice Street | Minn. Stat. § 169.14 speed; Minn. Stat. § 169.475 hands-free | Distracted-driving impact; speed-related severity escalation |
Two corridor categories drive a disproportionate share of the catastrophic crashes in the public record. The urban freeway interface produces the highest concentration of high-velocity rear-end and chain-reaction collisions, and the major signalized arterial produces the highest concentration of left-turn-across-path conflicts that injure pedestrians and cyclists. Both categories generate distinct evidentiary needs at the claim stage.
Severity Bands
How the Public Record Codes Crash Severity
The Minnesota Department of Public Safety codes every reported crash on the standard KABCO scale: K — fatal, A — suspected serious, B — suspected minor, C — possible injury, O — property-damage only. The severity coding governs how the case enters the no-fault system, whether the tort threshold under Minn. Stat. § 65B.51 is met, and how comparative-fault analysis under Minn. Stat. § 604.01 applies. The table below maps each band to the Saint Paul corridor type where it concentrates and the liability theory most often available.
| Severity (KABCO) | Representative Saint Paul concentration | Governing statute or rule | Liability posture most often available |
|---|---|---|---|
| K — Fatal | Urban freeway interface; commercial truck route conflict | Minn. Stat. § 573.02 wrongful death; Minn. Stat. § 169.18; FMCSA hours of service under 49 CFR § 395.3 | Wrongful death framework; comparative-fault analysis under Minn. Stat. § 604.01 |
| A — Suspected Serious Injury | Major signalized arterial; left-turn conflict at high-volume intersection | Minn. Stat. § 169.20; Minn. Stat. § 65B.51 tort threshold | Failure-to-yield negligence; tort claim outside no-fault available where threshold is met |
| B — Suspected Minor Injury | Transit corridor; neighborhood collector at signalized intersection | Right-of-way; bicycle rights under Minn. Stat. § 169.222; pedestrian rights under Minn. Stat. § 169.21 | No-fault PIP under Minn. Stat. § 65B.44; tort claim available if threshold met |
| C — Possible Injury | Neighborhood collector cut-through; low-speed signalized intersection | General duty of care; Minn. Stat. § 169.475 when distracted-driving evidence exists | No-fault PIP first; tort threshold typically not met without latent injury work-up |
A practical consequence falls out of this mapping. A C-coded crash on the public record is not the same as a non-injury crash. Soft-tissue and concussive injuries often present below the KABCO B threshold at the scene and emerge over the days that follow. The no-fault notice deadline under Minn. Stat. § 65B.55 is six months, and that clock starts at the crash date regardless of when the injury declares itself.
Methodology
How This Dataset Was Built
This page does not have a separate methodology companion as of this revision. The build is documented here so any reader can audit the source mix and the analytic choices.
Crash data source. Saint Paul-level crash counts and severity codes are pulled from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Traffic Safety crash records and the Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Traffic Engineering crash query system. Both are public-record systems. Severity uses the published KABCO scale exactly as coded by the reporting agency. No private accident-reconstruction data, defense-expert reports, or non-public records are used.
Corridor categorization. Corridor categories follow the City of Saint Paul Public Works arterial and freeway classification system in combination with the Vision Zero corridor analyses published by the city. Where a city corridor analysis names a segment, the segment is grouped with the published category. Where a Minnesota Department of Transportation district report names a freeway interface, the published district designation is used.
Public-records access. Underlying crash reports are public under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, with law enforcement crash data specifically governed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82. Any reader can request the source crash report for a specific location through the originating agency. Where a corridor analysis cites a contractor or consulting study, the reference points to the city or state public-record series rather than the consultant's private file.
What is not in this dataset. No individuals are named on this page. No specific case outcomes, settlement values, or claimant identifiers appear. Where a public news source has named a driver or victim in connection with a particular crash, that detail is not reproduced here. The framing is categorical because the public record at that level supports the patterns described above without identifying any individual case.
Why This Page Exists
How a Crash Heatmap Connects to Andrade Law's Methodology
This dataset sits squarely on two pillars of the four-pillar evidence and recovery framework we run on every Minnesota injury file. The Forensic Foundation pillar drives the evidence side of any crash that lands in one of the corridor categories above — preserving Event Data Recorder downloads from the involved vehicles, requesting MnDOT and city traffic-camera footage before the retention window closes, and filing the spoliation hold under Minn. R. Civ. P. 37.05 that gives the case a sanctions remedy if electronically stored information is destroyed. Our companion step-by-step protocol for preserving MnDOT traffic-camera footage documents that workflow.
The Clinical Correlation pillar drives the medical side. KABCO C coding at the scene routinely understates the eventual diagnosis, and insurers run the scene-coded severity hard against the claim. Objective imaging, electrodiagnostic studies, and pathology mapping convert subjective complaint into documentable injury that survives the carrier's algorithmic severity analysis. Where road-surface defect adds a second liability theory, the build pattern is the one used in our Ayd Mill Road pothole and road decay timeline — a dated public-record chronology that supports the notice element of any Minnesota Government Claims Act claim under Minn. Stat. § 466.
Most claims that arise from the corridor categories above resolve into one of a handful of service-class doctrines. Auto-on-auto crashes route to auto accident litigation and collision claims. Vulnerable-road-user crashes split into pedestrian accident and crosswalk injury claims and bicycle accident and cyclist injury litigation. The corridor data above narrows the statutory framework that applies to each.
Frequently Asked Questions
Crash Heatmap Questions Minnesotans Ask
How long do I have to file an injury claim after a Saint Paul crash?+
Minnesota's general personal-injury limitation under Minn. Stat. § 541.05 is six years from the date of the crash. The no-fault notice window under Minn. Stat. § 65B.55 is far shorter — six months from the crash for first-dollar medical and wage benefits. Wrongful death actions are governed by Minn. Stat. § 573.02, with cross-referenced limits in Chapter 541. Tolling for minors and incapacitated parties under Minn. Stat. § 541.15 can extend some windows. We calendar all applicable deadlines at intake.
What does the comparative fault rule mean if I was driving in a known high-crash corridor?+
Under Minn. Stat. § 604.01, Minnesota uses modified comparative fault. A plaintiff is barred only if their share of fault exceeds 50 percent. At exactly 50 percent, a plaintiff can still recover with damages reduced proportionally. Driving through a corridor that has a documented crash history does not, on its own, shift fault to the injured driver — the analysis turns on the specific conduct of each driver at the moment of the crash, not on the corridor's reputation.
How do I get the actual crash report for the intersection where I was hurt?+
Under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, law enforcement crash data is public, and access is governed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82. The originating agency — Saint Paul Police, Ramsey County Sheriff, the Minnesota State Patrol, or a suburban municipal department — maintains the crash report and accepts public-record requests directly. Aggregate crash counts and severity codes for an intersection or corridor are also pulled regularly into the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Traffic Safety published crash files.
My crash happened on a freeway segment that the city has called a high-crash corridor. Does that help my case?
It can, but it is rarely dispositive. A documented corridor crash history is foreseeability evidence — useful in a road-design or signage claim against the responsible public entity under Minn. Stat. § 466, where prior notice of a hazard is part of the legal element. In a vehicle-on-vehicle case, the corridor history matters mostly as context. The decisive evidence is still the Event Data Recorder data, the traffic-camera footage, and the police-reported sequence at the moment of the crash.
Where can I look up the actual statutes and public records cited above?+
Minnesota statutes are published by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes at revisor.mn.gov/statutes. Crash records are maintained by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Traffic Safety. MnDOT crash query data is available through the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Saint Paul corridor analyses and Vision Zero records are published by the City of Saint Paul Public Works.
Authored by Gabriel E. Andrade, attorney, Andrade Law PLLC. · Published · Last reviewed
Public-record dataset. Sources: Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Traffic Safety crash records, MnDOT Office of Traffic Engineering crash query system, City of Saint Paul Public Works arterial and freeway classification, City of Saint Paul Vision Zero corridor analyses. Educational guide only. Not legal advice for any specific matter.