Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Connecticut DOT staff introduce local traffic contacts, urge earlier coordination on resurfacing and signal changes

Crag Transportation Committee · June 22, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Connecticut Department of Transportation traffic-operations leaders presented new senior-engineer contacts to CRAG towns, explained the limits of non‑project work (maintenance constraints, long programming horizons) and promoted quick-build tests and buffered shoulders as interim safety measures.

Greg Palmer, principal engineer for Traffic Operations at the Connecticut Department of Transportation, told the CRAG Transportation Committee on June 22 that DOT reintroduced named senior engineers as direct town contacts after a 2019 reorganization created an impersonal central mailbox.

"We came out with these well-intentioned mailboxes… and it kind of has resulted in this impersonal kind of connection," Palmer said, adding that the slide deck circulated after the meeting includes direct email and phone contacts for coverage of CRAG towns. The presentation named senior engineers assigned to different districts and encouraged municipalities to use them for follow-up rather than relying solely on the central inbox.

Palmer outlined how DOT’s traffic units divide responsibilities — project delivery and signal capital work, signal asset management, statewide safety programs and a traffic-operations group that reacts to state-highway concerns. He emphasized that when an improvement is not already part of a construction project, DOT’s options are limited: "If it does fit into a project, it's going to take 5 to 7 years," Palmer said, describing the time it can take to program a construction project and deliver built changes.

That limitation shapes local coordination on resurfacing and road-diet proposals. Committee members asked whether towns or DOT should initiate reviews when a maintenance resurfacing project is planned. Palmer said resurfacing segments are reviewed by DOT’s maintenance/resurfacing program and encouraged town staff to contact their district senior engineer; DOT staff agreed to follow up on a Committee question about Route 6 resurfacing and buffered-shoulder proposals.

The presentation also promoted DOT’s Quick-Build directive, a lower-cost, temporary approach using paint, flexible delineators and removable bumpouts to test streetscape changes before permanent construction, and DOT’s use of buffered shoulders in resurfacing contracts to create space for vulnerable users without immediately removing parking. Palmer noted MUTCD compliance limits the use of decorative or brightly colored crosswalk art on state highways and that some quick-build measures will require before-and-after data to judge whether they should be made permanent.

The DOT team offered to participate in Road Safety Audits (RSAs) and technical reviews and invited municipalities to reach out directly to the named district engineers for technical questions and project coordination. The slides and contact list will be posted to CRAG’s meeting page for member reference.