Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State refuses signal at Bradley–Amity; town plans flashing beacons and traffic‑calming
Summary
Town engineers say state DOT concluded the Bradley–Amity intersection did not meet signal warrants despite the consultant's analysis; the state agreed instead to rectangular rapid flashing beacons and other calming measures; officials said a signal could cost about $1,000,000.
Consultants and town leaders told residents the state Department of Transportation will not allow a traffic signal at the Bradley–Amity intersection for this project, even though the engineering team’s analysis found the intersection met signal warrants.
Paul DeStefano of SLR said the team compiled town and state records — including accident history, speeds and average daily traffic — and concluded a signal was warranted. "We found that it warranted a signal. The state did not agree," DeStefano said. Residents pressed why the state rejected the signal; DeStefano said the agency sometimes considers distance to nearby signals and operational impacts.
First Selectman Mika Cardoza said he and town staff have raised the issue with DOT leadership but that the state has been "emphatic" the project will not include a traffic light for this phase; he added that a traffic signal of that size would cost close to $1,000,000. As a near‑term compromise, the presenters said DOT had agreed to rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) and other traffic‑calming elements to improve pedestrian safety without installing a full signal.
