[ a version of the piece appeared in
the Windsor Journal in February of 2025 ]

In a decisive vote Monday night, the Windsor Town Council approved the ordinance for the Broad Street Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Safety Project with a 6-3 bipartisan majority, followed by a unanimous 9-0 vote to send the project to a public referendum on March 11, 2025.

The project has been decades in the making, driven by local residents and advanced through contributions from officials at every level of government. Discussions about improving safety and increasing foot traffic for local businesses began over 20 years ago with the Windsor Center Business Association, a group that later evolved into First Town Downtown. Despite strong local support, the project was repeatedly stalled by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT), which historically opposed town-led changes to state-owned arterial roads. The initiative was later incorporated into Windsor’s 2014 Transit-Oriented Development Master Plan and the 2025 Plan of Conservation and Development, adopted in 2015.

Momentum for the project increased when the state legislature granted towns greater authority over state roads, allowing Windsor to seek funding. State Rep. Jane Garibay worked tirelessly to secure necessary funds, while Congressman John Larson secured federal support. Town staff also obtained grant funding to cover the balance of the road diet portion of the project. In 2023, residents successfully advocated for the inclusion of roundabouts to align the project with CTDOT’s Complete Streets Plan, which saw renewed emphasis under Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto. Town Manager Peter Souza and Economic Development Director Patrick McMahon helped guide the project through extensive design revisions and many public meetings over the years.

During Monday’s meeting, the Democratic caucus reaffirmed its focus on safety and emphasized the importance of giving Windsor residents a direct say in the project. The Republican caucus largely agreed with that principle but voiced concerns about the timing and scope of the initiative.

Among the three opposing votes, Councilors Ron Eleveld and Will Pelkey previously stated that they do not oppose the project on its merits, but believe the public needs more time to evaluate its full scope. Mr. Eleveld also expressed concerns that American drivers struggle to adapt to changes in road design. Pelkey has further suggested expanding the project to include additional pedestrian improvements, such as extending the west sidewalk of Broad Street into the right-of-way, closing the public library parking lot, and eliminating most or all driveway entrances onto Broad Street. Councilor Len Walker, the ranking Republican member, has not publicly explained his opposition. However, at a public meeting last year, he questioned the design philosophy of pedestrian safety features, including pedestrian refuge islands, telling a civil engineer, “Good luck with that.”

During Monday’s meeting, Mr. Eleveld cited a Michigan Department of Transportation study indicating that roundabouts have, in some cases, led to an increase in the total number of crashes, while acknowledging that the same study showed a significant reduction in deaths and serious injuries compared to signalized intersections. The Broad Street roundabouts are designed as single-lane entries and exits, a configuration that CTDOT data shows can reduce total crashes by 40% and serious injuries and fatalities by as much as 80% compared to traditional signalized intersections. The Michigan study cited by Eleveld, “Evaluating the Performance and Safety Effectiveness of Roundabouts – An Update,” highlights the critical difference between single-lane roundabouts, which saw an 8% increase in crashes in Michigan, and multi-lane roundabouts, where crashes rose 123%—while both designs still significantly reduced severe injuries and fatalities. As stated in the first sentence on the The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) roundabout website, “Roundabouts are a Proven Safety Countermeasure because they can substantially reduce crashes that result in serious injury or death.”

Public comments on the project were largely positive, with supporters emphasizing the safety benefits and the potential increase in foot traffic for local businesses. Opponents raised concerns about potential tax implications, whether these projects are more suited for struggling Rust Belt cities, that the current configuration has failed to bring retail back, and the uncertainty of federal spending and its impact on funding. While concerns about the project’s impact on the town budget are understandable, further state funding remains a strong possibility. The notion that roundabouts and road diets are primarily used in Rust Belt towns is misleading—these design principles are standard in modern urban planning across industrialized nations. Supporters of the project agree that the current Broad Street layout is ineffective, which is why change is needed. As for federal funding uncertainty, turning down available funding now because the Supreme Court might overturn the Impoundment Act of 1974 would be a missed opportunity to improve local infrastructure.

Windsor Center has immense potential, but Broad Street remains a barrier to safety, economic activity, and community vibrancy. According to the Connecticut Crash Data Repository, Windsor averages about one crash per day, mostly on four-lane arterial roads. Broad Street alone sees about one crash per month—a concerning statistic for a district that depends on pedestrian activity. Statewide, nearly one person dies on Connecticut roads every day. Windsor has an opportunity to reduce that risk by implementing proven safety measures.

With the Town Council’s approval, the Broad Street Safety Project now moves to a March 11 referendum, where Windsor voters will have the final say. Absentee ballots will be available at Town Hall beginning February 18.

Please join me in making Windsor Center a safer, more vibrant place to walk, ride, and live.