Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon in New Canaan Deemed Appropriate

This blog post examines a local controversy in New Canaan over the installation and maintenance of a rapid rectangular flashing beacon (RRFB) at a complex intersection — Main Street with Farm, Old Norwalk and White Oak Shade Roads. It also addresses related concerns at 220 Elm Street.

It summarizes the resident objections and the town’s engineering response. The post also covers practical implications for traffic safety, compliance with federal guidance, and municipal risk management.

Background: the disagreement over RRFB placement

The dispute began when resident Jeff Holland wrote to the Board of Selectmen. He cited state and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidance that RRFBs are intended primarily for mid-block or uncontrolled crossings and typically require an engineering study.

Holland argued the Main-Farm-Old Norwalk-White Oak Shade junction is stop-controlled. He stated the RRFB there may not meet normal guidance.

The Board nevertheless considered the email. They voted to approve a maintenance contract for RRFBs at 16 sites while the town addresses the specific concerns.

New Canaan’s Public Works Director, Tiger Mann, referenced a 2021 traffic engineer review that concluded the device’s installation and location were operationally appropriate. Mann described the intersection as two stop-controlled segments with a middle segment where an RRFB can aid pedestrian movements, especially students crossing Main Street.

Why RRFBs are sometimes controversial

The FHWA guidance commonly describes RRFBs as most suitable for mid-block or uncontrolled crossings. It recommends an engineering study when used outside those contexts.

That is the basis for Holland’s concern and his consultation with an FHWA engineer. Municipalities often face situations where site geometry, traffic patterns, and pedestrian demand create debates about the best treatment.

The town’s approach rests on a site-specific engineering determination made by a traffic engineer. They also noted observed benefits such as clearer visibility for drivers and safer crossings for pedestrians.

The town acknowledged a technical issue at 220 Elm Street with a mis-oriented push-button and a curb ramp that needs repair. The Public Works Department plans to fix these issues.

• Key facts: RRFBs are designed to increase driver yielding at marked crosswalks.
• Controlling guidance: FHWA guidance favors mid-block/uncontrolled applications and recommends engineering judgement for other locations.
• Town action: New Canaan approved a maintenance contract for 16 RRFBs while addressing site-specific concerns raised by residents.

Practical recommendations for towns

If your municipality faces a similar question, consider a short checklist to reduce controversy and increase safety:

• Document the engineering study — publish site evaluations and crash or pedestrian counts that supported the decision.
• Prioritize accessibility — ensure curb ramps, push buttons, and signing meet ADA and best-practice standards.
• Monitor performance — collect yielding, speed, and near-miss data after installation and adjust if needed.
• Engage stakeholders — present findings to neighborhood groups and allow formal comment before expanding installations.
• Maintain rigor — include routine maintenance contracts and a schedule for technical reviews.

 
Here is the source article for this story: Town: RRFB at Main-Farm-Old Norwalk-White Oak Shade Is ‘Appropriate’