Chapter 3-1 - Demonstration Locations - · PDF fileThis chapter summarizes how the ... identifying a project’s needs, developing context ... raised as part of the Plan. Using this

Demonstration Locations 3.1‐1

SECTION 3 – CHAPTER 1

Demonstration Locations

PriorchaptershaverevieweddesignguidelinesanddevelopedpoliciesandstrategiesforaddressingthefuturetransportationchallengesfacingtheCityofNorwalk.Theseefforts,combinedwithanextensiveoutreacheffortsandanalysisofdevelopmentcriteria,ledtothedevelopmentofaseriesof“Demonstration”projectsfortheCitytoconsider.Thischaptersummarizeshowthedemonstrationlocationswereselected,providesabriefdiscussionofthelocationsandwhytheyarerepresentativeofmanyofthecommonissuesandchallengesfacingthecity,andprovidesguidanceonhowthesevariousprojectswouldcompareagainstoneanother.

1.1 Overview

ThecityofNorwalkundertookthisPlaninconjunctionwiththeSouthWesternRegionalPlanningAgency(SWRPA)andtheConnecticutDepartmentofTransportation(CTDOT)todevelopaTransportationManagementPlanthatwouldserveasablueprintforidentifyingaproject’sneeds,developingcontextsensitive/multimodalsolutionstothoseidentifiedneeds,andultimatelycreatingaprocessforprioritizingtheprojectfortheCity.TheultimategoalsofthisPlanisintendedtoprovideguidanceanddirectionfortheCityandprovidetemplatesfortransportationresourcesthatareplanned,designed,andconstructed;allwiththegoalof:

Providingforthesafetyandconvenienceofallusersoftheroadwaysystemincluding:

o Pedestrians(includingthosewhoneedassistancewithmobility)

o Bicyclists

o TransitUsers

o EmergencyServiceOperators

o AutomobileDrivers

o CommercialVehicleOperations

3.1‐2 Demonstration Locations

Facilitatingmulti‐modaluseofthesystem.

Providingconsistencywithtransportationplansandpolicies,environmentalregulations,thecommunity,theregion,thestate,andtheFederalgovernment.

Beingcosteffectiveforthefiscallyconstrainedrealitiesofthecurrenttimesweliveinandforsettingthegroundworkforprioritizingfuturecapitalspending.

WhilethePlanitselfisguidedbytheprinciplesofMultimodalConsiderations,ContextSensitiveDesign,andprovidingaClearDevelopmentProcess;theCityultimatelyrequestedthataseriesofprojectsalsobedevelopedthatwouldconsidertheseguidelinesandadvancethemthroughtheprocessas“Demonstration”efforts.Thefollowingsectiondiscussestheprojectdemonstrationlocations.Itincludesadiscussionofhowspecificlocationswereselected,whichlocationswereselected,describeseachlocationinsomedetailandpresentstheuniquechallengesassociatedwiththeprojectlocationandultimatelypresentsapotentialsolutionforthelocationusingthecriteriapresentedinthePlan.

1.2 Selection of Demonstration Locations

Attheoutsetofthisprocess,theprojectteammetwithresidents,businessowners,citystaffanddepartmentheads,andotherstakeholderstogatherextensiveinputontherealandperceivedchallengesandissuesfacingthetransportationsystemintheCityofNorwalk.Throughthisoutreacheffort,aconsistentsetofchallengesandconcernswereraisedbyallpartiesthatultimatelyformedthebasisforselectionoftheDemonstrationlocations.Acompletesummaryoftheoutreachefforts,thecommentsreceived,andtheoveralldiscussionisprovidedintheAppendixtothisdocument.Afterreviewingallthecommentsanddiscussionsthattookplace,therewerefivegeneralissuesthattendedtore‐appearintheoutreachefforts.Withoutreferringtospecificlocations,thesetrendswerebrokendownintothefollowinggroupings:

Operations–thisincludesintersectionsandlocationsthatexhibitexcessivedelays,congestion,andgenerallypoormobilityforvehiculartraffic.Thesearelocationswherethepublicperceivedthatimprovementscouldbemade,althoughinsomecasestheimprovementswerenotobvious.Italsoincludeslocationswherevehiclesarebeingenticedtotravelalongroadwaysthatarenotintendedtoserveasthroughroutes(cut‐throughtraffic).

Safety‐related–thisincludeslocationsthathavedemonstratedunsafesafetystatistics(highcrashlocations)orthroughperceivedissues(includinganecdotalcommentssuchas,“carsaretravelingatexcessivespeedsalongacorridor”),andthroughlocationsthathavehistoricallybeenchallengingtotransportationprofessionals(includinglocationswithpoorsightlines,etc…).

Section 3 – Chapter 1


Maintenance–thisincludeslocationsthatwerehighlightedasinneedofrepair,upgrade,orenhancementtosomedegree.Inmanycases,thepavementconditionwasthenumberonesourceofconcern,butsidewalkandsignagewerealsohighlightedinthesecases.

Bicycle/Pedestrian–thisincludeslocationsthatareeitherperceivedtobepoorlyservedbybike/pedamenities,havethepotentialtooffergrowthorenhancementtothepedestrian/bicyclecommunity,and/orhavetraditionallybeenignoredingeneral.

Parking–thisincludeslocationswhereparkingdemandisperceivedtobeunderservedforthearea,and/orinappropriatelyprovided.

Usingthesefivegroupings(alongwitha“miscellaneous”categorytocoverrandomcommentsunrelatedtothesefivegroupings),theprojectteamreviewedeachofthecommentsprovidedattheoutreachsessionsandlocatedtheissuesonamapoftheCityofNorwalk.Thegraphicindicatesthatthesechallengesarelocatedallthroughoutthecityandwhenreviewedinadetailedfashionrevealthatcharacterofacertainneighborhoodorportionofthecityhasalottodowiththeperceivedissue/concernraisedaspartofthePlan.Usingthisinformation,theProjectAdvisoryteamidentified11candidateroadwaycorridorsand13candidateintersectionswithintheCitylimitsthatexhibitoneormoreoftheabovetransportationchallenges.Usingthislisting,theProjectTeamthenreviewedeachoftheroadwaycorridorandintersectiontoprovideageneralcross‐sectionofgeographicdiversitythroughouttheCity,differentcontextstotheenvironmentthatitexistswithin,andthoselocationsthatofferuniquechallengestotheCommunityasawhole.Ultimately,thisreducedthe11candidateroadwaylocationsdownto2demonstrationcorridorsand5demonstrationintersections.Thefulllistingofcandidateroadwaysalongwiththeselecteddemonstrationlocationsisprovidedbelow:

1.2.1 Candidate Roadways

AttachedattheendofthissectionisafigureshowingwhereeachofthespecificcandidateroadwaysandintersectionsarelocatedwithintheCity.Thefollowingwerelocationswereselectedand/orconsideredfordemonstration‘status’:

WestRocksRoad[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONROADWAY]

WashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenue[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONROADWAY]

o MainStreet/MainAvenue

o RichardsAvenue/RowaytonAvenue

o TaylorAvenue/NorthTaylorAvenue/FillowStreet

o FlaxHillRoad


o MLKDrive/WestAvenue/BeldenAvenue

o Route1/ConnecticutAvenue/WestportAvenue

o EastAvenue[Note:thislocationisunderdesignalreadyandwillbescoredinthePNF/PIFratingsattheendofthischapter]

o StrawberryHillAvenue

o CalfPastureBeachRoad

1.2.2 Candidate Intersections

AttachedattheendofthissectionisafigureshowingwhereeachofthespecificcandidateintersectionsarelocatedwithintheCity.Thefollowingwerelocationswereselectedand/orconsideredfordemonstration‘status’:

Route123/NewCanaanAvenueatBartlettAvenue/EllsStreet[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONINTERSECTION]

Route53/NewtownAvenueatMurrayStreet/DryHillRoad[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONINTERSECTION]

WestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenue[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONINTERSECTION]

TaylorAvenueatFlaxHillRoad[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONINTERSECTION]

FlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenue/RowaytonAvenue[SELECTEDASADEMONSTRATIONINTERSECTION]

o GristMillRoadatBeldenHillRoad/NorthSeirHillRoad

o RichardsAvenueatWestCedarStreet

o NorthTaylorAvenueatBenedictStreet

o MapleStreetatRoute1(VanBurenAvenue)/StevensStreet

o HighlandAvenueatSoundviewAvenue/DevilsGardenRoad

o Route123/MainStreetatRoute1/NorthAvenue

o EastAvenue/ParkStreetatWallStreet/HubbellsLane

o StrawberryHillRoadatTierneyStreet

1.3 Demonstration Location Screening

Thetransportationimprovementstrategiesoutlinedinpart1ofthePlanwereusedtoscreeneachoftheselectedDemonstrationlocations.Inthisprocess,eachlocationwas



screedthroughtheevaluationprocessonthebasisofitstechnicalchallengesandcross‐referenceditwiththepubliccommentarythatwasreceivedduringouroutreachefforts.Thelaterwasespeciallyimportantinthatitidentifiedthe“perceived”issuewitheachlocation~whichwasthencomparedtothetechnicalreviewoftheintersectiontodetermineiftheperceptionmettherealityofthesituation.Inrareinstances,estimateswereusedtoassignascoreonthePNFformsastheinformationwasnotreadilyavailable(fundingsources,forexample,werenotexploredingreatdetail).Similarly,someanswersinthePIFformswerealsoestimatedbasedonlackofrealdata(costofimprovements,forexample).Inthesecases,thescoresarehighlightedinorange(insteadofyellow)tocallouttheassignedscoreforeachlocation.Thefollowingisasummaryofthescreeningperformedateachofthelocations.Wherenoted,alternativeshavebeendevelopedandarepresentedattheendofhitssectionforeachofthecorridorsandintersectionsselected.

1.3.1 Demonstration Corridors

1.3.1.1 Corridor 1: West Rocks Road/France Street/Park Street

ThiscorridorformsamajorconnectionbetweenDowntownNorwalktoRoute7andthentoeitherI‐95ortheMerrittParkway.LandusesalongthecorridorareprimarilysinglefamilyresidentialwiththeWestRocksMiddleSchoolandAllSaintsCatholicSchoolalsofrontingthecorridor.Asacommuterroute,vehicularspeedstendtobehighandoutofcontextwiththelandusesalongthecorridor.Manygapsexistinthesidewalks,crosswalksarenotwellmarkedorinastateofdisrepairwheretheyexist,andbicyclefacilitiesarenonexistent.Thecorridorisalsoatransitroute,withbusserviceandtransitstopsalongthecorridor.Duetothepresenceoftheschools,residences,andtransitriders,pedestrianusageinthecorridorisexpectedbutnotadequatelyaccommodated.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheWestRocksRoad/FranceStreet/ParkStreetcorridorasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthislocationalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,thiscorridorscoreda48.Thespeedingissuesalongthecorridor,lackofadequatepedestrianandbicycleaccommodations,transitservices,trafficvolumes,anddegreeofpublicsupportcontributedtothisscore.Objectivesalongthecorridorincludedthefollowing:

Createseamlesspedestrianfacilities;

Createbicycleconnectionalongcorridor;

Enhancethepedestrianrealmthroughcrosswalksandpedestriansignalheads;


Enhancethetransitridersrealmwithfurnishingsatstops;and

Tamevehicularspeedstobemoreincontextwiththeneighborhoodandexpectednon‐motorizedtravelers.

Exacerbatingtheissuesarethetopographyandunderlyinggeologyofthecorridor;hillyterrainandthepresenceofrockmaymakeimprovementsinfeasibleincertainlocations.Inthoseinstances,facilitiesmaybeconsolidatedononesideoftheroadwayandasafecrossingprovidedtoconnectthesides.InaccordancewiththeobjectiveslistedaboveandthegoalsoftheTMP,thefollowingrecommendationsweredeveloped:

Establishcontinuousbicyclelanesonthecorridorthroughacombinationof

lanedietsandselectivewideningwherefeasible;

Fillingapsinsidewalkcoveragetocreatecontinuoussidewalksonbothsidesoftheentirecorridorlengthwherefeasible;

Enhancepedestriancrossingsatintersectionswithestablishmentofhigh‐visibilitycrosswalksandinstallationofpedestrianheads;and

Enhancetransitstopswithbenchesandpulloutsandshelterswherefeasible.

Byfollowingtheaboverecommendations,thecorridorcanberebalancedtoaccommodatefootandbicycletrafficwithnegligibleadditionaldelaytothemotorvehicletraffic.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheWestRocksRoad/FranceStreet/ParkStreetcorridortoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(shownpreviously)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.Basedontheconceptualplansdevelopedtodate,theproposedimprovementsforthiscorridorscoreda67.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationscoupledwithnoright‐of‐wayimpactsandminimalimpactedtosurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.3.1.2 Corridor 2: Washington Street/Fairfield Avenue

TheWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridorservesmultipleroles:itisaprimarycommuterrouteintoDowntownNorwalk,itservesasacommercialcorridorofferinggoods,services,andemploymenttoNorwalkresidentsanditservesasa“frontdoor”forDowntownNorwalktopeoplearrivingbybothcarandMetroNorth.Forthesereasons,itisimportantthatthecorridorbebalancedbetweenmotorizedandnon‐motorizedtravel,asthereisahighexpectationofpedestrianandcyclistactivitywithinthiscorridor.Furthermore,thiscorridorshouldbedesignedasa“gateway”intoDowntown,withsignaturestreetscapeelementsthatnotonlyenhancetheaestheticsofthecorridor,butalsoserveatrafficcalmingpurposeinchangingdriverbehaviortoslowdownduetothepresenceofnon‐motorizedtraffic.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridorasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthisprojectalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridorscoreda44ontheProjectNeedForm.Thetrafficvolumesandaccesstotransitservices,activitycenters,andcommercialareasalongthecorridorcontributedtothisscore.Specificobjectivesforthedesignofthiscorridorincludedthefollowing:

Createapedestrianscaleandfeeltothecorridorthroughtheuseofmaterials

andlighting,similartothecharacterof“WashingtonHistoricEast;”

Developatransitionzonebetweenthecar‐orientedareastothewestandthepedestrian‐orientedDowntown;

ReactivatethestreetinthisgatewayareaofDowntown;

DevelopabikefacilitytoconnecttoFlaxHillRoad;and

Capitalizeonopenspaceopportunitiestocelebratethe“art”ofthedistrict.

Toaddresstheseobjectivesandtomakethecorridorattractivetoallusersregardlessoftheirmodeoftravel,thefollowingrecommendationsweredevelopedasillustratedintheconceptsketch:

Createatwo‐way‘cycletrack’connectionalongFairfieldAvenuetoFlaxHill

RoadthroughalanediettofacilitateabicycleconnectiontoFlaxHillRoad;

InstallspecialtylightingundertheMetroNorthBridgetostrengthentheconnectionbetweentheartsdistrictinSoNotothewesternsideofthebridge;

Reconfigureplazainfrontof50WashingtonStreettowertoaccommodateafarmersmarket,foodvendorsetc.,creatingagatheringspaceandcenterforthe


District;InstallpublicartinreclaimedpavementareastoserveasagatewayandanextensionwestoftheSoNoArtsDistrict;and

Installpedestrianscalelightinganddecorativesidewalksthroughoutthecorridor.

ThesemeasuresestablishtheareaasagatewaytoDowntownandanextensionoftheSoNodistrict,reenergizingthiscorridorwhilerebalancingthetravelmodestosafelyandefficientlycarrycars,buses,pedestrians,andcyclists.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridortoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(shownpreviously)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.Basedontheconceptualplansdevelopedtodate,theproposedimprovementsfortheWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridorscoreda41ontheProjectInitiationForm.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationscoupledwithminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.3.2 Demonstration Intersections

1.3.2.1 Intersection 1: West Avenue at Belden Avenue/Mott Avenue

LocatedinDowntownNorwalk,thisintersectionisthemosturbanofthedemonstrationintersections.AdjacentusesincludetheCityofNorwalkLibrary,CityTransitCenter,andamixofretailandcommercialuses.WallStreetisahistoricretail“mainstreet”corridor,completewithanintactstreetwallofbuildingsandonstreetparking;thisstreetiscurrentlyunderutilizedfromaretailstandpointduetorelocationofmanyofthebusinesses,butthepotentialforredevelopmentisstrong.Giventheseuses,thepedestrianactivityinthisareaisheavy,andexpectedtoincreaseshouldWallStreetredevelop;however,thegeometriccharacteristicsandexcesscapacityofthestreetsencouragehighvehicularspeedsandcreateanenvironmentthatisnotnecessarilypedestrian‐friendly.Additionally,thereisalocalperceptionofalackofparkinginthearea,duetothefactthatthestreetsaredifficultforpedestriantocross.Theconfluenceoftheroads,presenceofhigh‐speedsliplanes,onewaystreets,andexcesspavementworktogethertoconfuseboththepedestrianandmotorist,whiletheunderutilizationoftheexistinggreenspaceintheislandsanddeficientconditionofthesidewalksandcrosswalksaddtothefeelingthattheareaisnotreallycomfortableforpedestrianuse.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheintersectionofWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenueasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthislocationalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theintersectionofWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenuescoreda55ontheProjectNeedForm.Thehighpedestrianvolumescoupledwithalackofaccommodations,accesstotransitservices,activitycenters,andcommercialareasalongthecorridor,andthedegreeofpublicsupportstatedattheTMPpublicmeetingsandduringtheoutreacheffortscontributedtothisscore.Specificobjectivesforthisintersectionwereasfollows:

Reduceconfusionformotoristsandpedestrians;

Reducetheperceptionofaparkingproblembyextendingthewalkshed;

Enhancepedestriansafety;

Enhancetheconnectionforbothmotoristsandpedestrianstoandfromtheexistingparkinggarage;

Preservevehicularoperationsthroughadditionofturnlaneswherenecessary;and

Right‐sizethestreets.

Thisintersectionhadthepotentialtobea“signature”projectduetotheconfluenceofusesandcontextgearedtowardawalk‐friendlyurbancoreandtheabilityfortravelers


tochooseamongvariousmodesoftransportavailablewithinthearea.Specificrecommendationsforthisintersectionareasfollows:

ShortTermActions

o ImplementCompleteStreetsprinciplesonallstreetstorebalancetravelmodes;

o Elicitaroaddiet(4lanesto3laneswithspotmedians)onWestAvenuethroughthecorearea,addbikelanesandmedian/leftturnlanes;

o Reclaim/increasegreenspacethrougheliminationofrightturnchannelsonWallStreetandWestAvenue;

o Enhancesidewalkwidthandrepairsidewalkswithinarea;and

o Addpedestrianamenitiessuchashigh‐visibilitycrosswalksandmid‐intersectionrefuges.

LongTermActions

o Addstreetnetworktoenhancecirculationandreduceblocklength,suchasaneweast‐westconnectionbetweenWestAvenueandRiverStreet;

o ExtendpedestrianconnectionstotheRiver;and

o ReconstructWallStreetasa“festivalstreet”(flushsectionbetweenbuildingswithbrickpavers)thatcandefinethecorridorasalocal“mainstreet”andwalkablearea.

Byelicitingthisslateofrecommendations,thisintersectionandareahasthepotentialtonotonlyrebalancemovementamongthevariousmodesoftravel,butalsotorepositiontheareaforreinvestmentwitha“signature”infrastructureprojectleveragingpublicinvestment.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenuetoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(attached)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.Basedontheconceptualplansdevelopedtodate,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionofWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenuescoreda62ontheProjectInitiationForm.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationsandprojectedreductionsinvehicularspeedstogetherwithminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.3.2.2 Intersection 2: Taylor Avenue at Flax Hill Road

Whilelocatedinapredominatelyresidentialare,thisintersectionservesnotonlylocalvehiculartrafficbutalsoahealthyamountof“cutthrough”trafficasitisacontinuousroutethatroughlyparallelsI‐95andUS1.Additionally,theintersectionisproximatetotheSouthNorwalkMetro‐NorthStationaswellasFlaxHillPark,whichisattractivetobothpedestrianandbicycletravelalongthesecorridors.Currently,theintersectionistwooffset“T”intersections,causingqueuingissuesbetweentheoffsetnorth‐southlegswhenopposingvehiclesdesiretomakealeftturnontoLoweStreet.Characterizedbylargecornerradii,theintersectionsencouragehighvehicularspeedsbyturningvehiclesattheexpenseofthepedestrianandbicyclingenvironment.Furthermore,excesspavementcouldbereclaimedforplantingopportunitiesto“green”theintersectionarea,whichfeelsmuchwiderthanitactuallyis.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheintersectionofFlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatLoweStreetasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthisprojectalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatLoweStreetscoreda40ontheProjectNeedForm.Vehicularspeeds,lackofadequatepedestrianandbicycleaccommodations,trafficvolumes,andheavyvehiclevolumescontributedtothisscore.Specificobjectivesconsideredindevelopingaprogramofenhancementsforthisdemonstrationprojectareasfollows:

Implementbicyclefacilityoncorridor;

Increasesafetyforvehicles,pedestrians,andcyclists;

Rebalanceroadwaystoaneighborhoodscale;

Createsafepedestriancrossings;and

Installstreettreeswhereappropriatetocreateshadecanopy.

Tworecommendedoptionsweredeveloped:

BothoptionsnormalizetheLoweStreetintersectionintoa90‐degreeT‐intersectionandreclaimsomeofthepavementonthenortheastquadrantforagreenplantedarea,

Elicitlanedietstoaddbikelanes,and

Enhancethepedestriancrossingsthroughhighvisibilitycrosswalks.

TheoptionsvaryinthetreatmentoftheTaylorRoadintersection:

Thefirstconsidersatrafficsignal,while

ThesecondoptionincorporatesaroundaboutatTaylorRoadandFlaxHillRoad.


Thevarioustreatmentshelprebalancetheroadwaytomakeitmoreuser‐friendlyforpedestriansandcyclists,whileimprovingthetrafficoperationsbynormalizingtheintersectionsandmitigatingtheopposingleft‐turnblockagethatcurrentlyoccurs.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheFlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatLoweStreetintersectiontoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(attached)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.BasedontheconceptualplansdevelopedforOption1andOption2,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatLoweStreetscoreda70ontheProjectInitiationForm.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationscoupledwithminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.3.2.3 Intersection 3: Flax Hill Road at Rowayton Avenue and Richards Avenue

SimilartotheFlaxHillRoaddemonstrationintersectionlocatedtotheeast,thisareathatencompassestwointersectionsandfrontsprimarilysinglefamilyresidentialuses.Theroadwayservesasignificantamountoftrafficnotrelatedtotheneighborhood,andmustbalancethatmovementwithpedestrianandbicycledemand.Theintersectionconfigurationandangleisnot90‐degrees,whichcompoundsvehicularspeedingasanissue;furthermore,theexistingtriangleconfigurationoftheRowaytonAvenueintersectionlendstopotentialmotoristconfusion.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheintersectionofFlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenueasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthisprojectalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenuescoreda41ontheProjectNeedForm.Thelackofadequatebicycle,trafficvolumes,anddegreeofpublicsupportcontributedtothisscore.Objectivesforthisdemonstrationprojectwerearticulatedasfollows:

Increasetheamountoflightingattheintersection;

Makesafetyforallmodesoftravelthepriority;

Enhanceandcreatenewgreenspacewherepossible,andincorporategreeninfrastructurewherecontextuallyconsistent;

Createabicyclefacilitytoenhancecyclistsafety;

Calmtrafficspeeds;and

Returntheroadwayandintersectiontoaneighborhoodscale.

Theproposedreconfigurationoftheintersectionaddressestheaboveconcernsasshownintheillustration.

Crosswalkswereenhancedatbothintersectionsusinghighvisibilitymarkings;

TheintersectionofRichardsAvenuewasrealignedtobringitintoFlaxHillRoadata90‐degreeangleandreclaimgreenspacefromtheexcesspavement;and

AroundaboutwasdevelopedtoreplacetheawkwardtriangleconfigurationoftheRowaytonAvenueintersectionwhilepreservingthetreesinthecenterisland.

Twoconfigurationsforbicyclefacilitiesweredeveloped:thefirstwidenstheroadwayslightlytoa32‐footsectioninordertoaccommodatededicatedbicyclelanes.Thesecondoptionmaintainsthe24‐footsectionwhileusingsharrowstodesignatethesharedconditionofthebicyclefacilityandtoalertmotoriststothepotentialpresenceofcyclists.


Eitheroptionmeetstheobjectivessetforthforthedemonstrationproject.OneotherconceptalternativedevelopedwouldincorporateasecondroundaboutattheRichardsAvenueintersection,providingatandemsetofroundaboutsinthislocation.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheFlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenueintersectiontoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(attached)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.BasedontheconceptualplansdevelopedforOption1,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenuescoreda70ontheProjectInitiationForm.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationscoupledwithminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.BasedontheconceptualplansdevelopedforOption2,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenueandFlaxHillRoadatRichardsAvenuescoreda64ontheProjectInitiationForm.ThedifferencebetweenthetwooptionsisthatOption2providessharrowstoassistinthebicycleroutes,whileOption1providesfullbicyclelanes.Otherwise,theimprovementsareidentical.



1.3.2.4 Intersection 4: Route 53 (Newtown Avenue) at Dry Hill Road and Murray Street

TheintersectionofRoute53(NewtownAvenue)andDryHillRoad/MurrayStreetissurroundedandfrontedwithsinglefamilyresidentiallanduses.Theintersectionischaracterizedbyasignificantamountofpavement,andalmostconstitutesan“intersectionwithinanintersection”asbothMurrayStreetandDryHillRoadaccessRoute53throughasharedintersection.Thecurrentconfigurationisconfusingformotoristsandperceivedasunsafe,withsignificantconfusionastowhohastherightofwayattheintersectionbetweentheMurrayStreetandDryHillRoadapproaches.Exacerbatingtheissueisthepotentialforpedestrianscrossingtheintersectionandencounteringturningvehiclesonapproachesthatareextremelyclosetogether.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheintersectionofNewtownAvenue(Route53)atDryHillRoadandMurrayStreetasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthisprojectalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theintersectionofNewtownAvenue(Route53)atDryHillRoadandMurrayStreetscoreda33ontheProjectNeedForm–thelowestscoreofalldemonstrationprojects.Contributingtothislowscorearealackofactivityorcommercialcentersinthevicinitycoupledwithlowpedestrianandbicyclevolumes.Objectivesindevelopingthedesignconceptforthisintersectionweretwofold:

reworktheintersectiontoenhancesafetyforallmodes(perceivedandreal);

keepinganyenhancementincharacterandscalewiththesurroundingneighborhood.

Asshownintheillustration,tworecommendedoptionsweredeveloped,withbothclearingtheconfusingconfigurationattheintersectionwithRoute53:

Option1createsasquareattheintersection,separatinginboundandoutboundtrafficintotwoapproaches.Thesquareactsasaninternal“roundabout”anddistributestraffictoandfromDryHillRoadandMurrayStreetbymovingtheconflictpointbetweentheroadstotheeast,outsideoftheconflictareaofthemainlineRoute53.Thisconfigurationalsoaffordsanopportunitytocreateagatewayandplantingareafortheneighborhood.

Option2simplifiestheintersectionbyteeingDryHillRoadintoMurrayStreetjusteastoftheRoute53intersection.ItrequiresathreelaneapproachontheRoute53intersectiontoalleviatequeuingfromturningvehiclesblockingtheadjacentintersection,andmayrequirefuturesignalizationoftheintersectionwithRoute53.LikeOption1,reclaimedexcesspavementcanbeplantedandutilizedasagatewayoropenspaceopportunityfortheneighborhood.

BothoptionsaddressthedesignobjectivesandareinkeepingwiththeoverallguidingprinciplesoftheTrafficManagementPlan.


AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheNewtown Avenue (Route 53) at Dry

Hill Road and Murray Street intersectiontoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(attached)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.BasedontheconceptualplansdevelopedforOption1andOption2,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionofNewtownAvenue(Route53)atDryHillRoadandMurrayStreetscoreda48ontheProjectInitiationForm.Improvementstosafetyandpedestrian/bicycleaccommodationscoupledwithminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.3.2.5 Intersection 5: Route 123 (New Canaan Avenue) at Bartlett Avenue and Ells Street

Route123connectsbetweentheMerrittParkwaytothewestandRoute7totheeast,andthisintersectionatBartlettAvenueandEllsStreetisaneighborhoodcommercialnode,withsmallretailandrestaurantusesadjacent.Geometrically,theintersectionis5legs,andoffsetwithBartlettAvenueintersectingataskewedangle.Drivewaystothebusinessesconsistofelongatedaprons,contributingtotheoveralllackofaccessmanagementintheintersectionarea.ThereisalsoabusstoponthewestapproachoftheintersectionalongRoute123,andpedestriansutilizingtransitmustnavigatethisconfusingintersectionwithvehicleconflictsinmultipledirections.Additionally,thecorridordoesnothavededicatedbicyclelanes,whichcouldbeutilizedbyresidentsandcommuters.AProjectNeedFormwascompletedfortheintersectionofNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreetasameansofmeasuringthetransportationneedsofthisprojectalongsideotherdemonstrationprojects.Basedonavailableinformation,theintersectionofNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreetscoreda51ontheProjectNeedForm.Thehighpedestrianvolumescoupledwithalackofaccommodations,accesstocommercialareasalongthecorridor,andhightrafficvolumescontributedtothisscore.

Specificobjectivesindevelopingapaletteofdesignsolutionsincludedthefollowing:

Provideaccessmanagementwithintheareaoftheintersection;

Increasepedestriansafetyandenhancecrosswalks;

Reduceconflictsforallmodesoftravel;and

Provideadedicatedbicyclefacility.

Asshownintheconceptillustration,allobjectivesweremetwithaseriesofconstructionandpolicyinitiatives/recommendations:

TheintersectionofEllsStreetwouldbe“T’ed”uptomeetarealignedBartlettStreetatanormal90‐degreeintersection.

Bartletttothesouthwouldalsoberealignedintoa90‐degreeapproach.

Considerationofanall‐redpedestrianphasewouldsimplifycrossingsoftheintersection,andenhancedcrosswalkswouldbeincorporatedtoincreasemotoristawarenessofpedestrians.

Abikelanecouldbedevelopedthroughright‐sizingthetravellanesto11feet,andchannelizingtheturnlanes.

Finally,drivewayconsolidationshouldbeaccomplishedthroughredevelopmentofthefrontingparcelstobetterdefinerealmsforthevehiclesaccessingthebusinesses.


ThecomprehensiveapproachadherestotheprinciplesofCompleteStreetsinmakingthefacilitiessafeandefficientforallusers,andaffordingtruealternativesabouttravelchoicewithinthearea.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedfortheNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreetintersectiontoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheproposedsolution(attached)ataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofotherdemonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.Basedontheconceptualplansdevelopedtodate,theproposedimprovementstotheintersectionofNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreetscoreda70ontheProjectInitiationForm–thehighestscoreofalldemonstrationprojects.Improvementstosafety,pedestrian/bicycleaccommodations,andvehicularoperations;projectedreductionsinvehicularspeeds;andminimalimpactstoright‐of‐wayorthesurroundingresourcescontributedtothisscore.



1.4 Evaluation Summary

Basedontheevaluationsofeachdemonstrationlocation,theresultingProjectNeedFormandProjectInitiationFormratingsaresummarizedbelow(actualformsareintheAppendixtothissection).Asthisinformationisreviewed,it’simportanttoconsiderthateachlocationisfirstratedonneedandthentheactualconceptplanthathasbeendevelopedisratedonitsabilitytoaddressthatneed.Projectlocationsthatdonothaveawelldefinedneedwilllikelynotgetcontinueintothedesignprocess.Conversely,projectlocationsthathaveawelldefinedneedandhaveahighscoreattachedtothemwillmorelikelyadvanceintothedesignstage.TheEastAvenueprojectwasnotincludedasademonstrationlocationbecausethedesignprocesshadadvancedfurtherthanotherprojectsselectedanditwasagreeduponthatthiscorridorwouldnotbenefitbyallocatingprojectresourcesto‘redesign’theplan.However,itshouldbenotedthatthisprojectisseenasavitalsteptoimprovemobilityforallmodesoftransportationwithinthisareaoftheCity.Thisprojectiscurrentlyunderdesign,hasfundingallocatedtoit,andincludesthefollowingimprovements:

WideningoftheEastAvenuerailroadunderpassfrom2‐lanesto4‐lanesandincreasingtheheightofthecrossing;

WideningofEastAvenuewithassociatedintersectionimprovementsfromWinfieldStreet(Route136)totheI‐95Exit16ramps;and

Sidewalkandstreetscapeimprovements.

1.4.1 Project Need

Ofthefiveintersectionsandtwocorridorsreviewed,theprioritizationofeachlocationsneedsaredefinedinExhibit1‐1below.FullProjectNeedFormsareincludedasanattachmenttothisdocument.


Exhibit 1‐1 Project Need Form Score Summary

Location Project Need Form Score Notes

Roadway Corridors

West Rocks Rd / France St / Park St

48 Speeding; transit services; lack of ped/bike facilities; high traffic volumes; public support.

Washington St / Fairfield Ave 44 High traffic volumes; transit services; access to activity centers/commercial areas.

East Ave 54 Ped/bike crashes; transit access; high traffic volumes; access to commercial areas; funding.

Intersections

West Ave @ Belden Ave/ Mott Ave

55 Adjacent to priority development site; high ped volumes; transit, parking needs; public support.

Flax Hill Rd @ Taylor Ave/ Lowe St

40 Speeding; lack of ped/bike facilities; high traffic and heavy vehicle volumes.

Flax Hill Rd @ Rowayton Ave/ Richards Ave

41 Lack of ped/bike facilities; high traffic volumes; public support.

Newtown Ave (Rt 53) @ Dry Hill Rd / Murray St

33 Safety; lack of ped/bike facilities.

New Canaan Ave (Rt 123) @ Bartlett Ave / Ells St

51 Lack of ped/bike facilities; high traffic volumes; access to activity centers/commercial areas.

AsExhibit1‐1indicates,whencomparingthefivedemonstrationintersections,theWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenuelocationscoredthehighest(55)withrespecttoprojectneed.ThislocationisfollowedcloselybyNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreet(51).ThelowestscoringlocationwasNewtownAvenue(Route53)atDryHillRoad&MurrayStreet(33).Similarly,theroadwaycorridorsincludedEastAvenue(54),followedbytheWestRocksRoad/FranceStreet/ParkStreetcorridor(48)andthentheWashingtonStreet/FairfieldAvenuecorridor(44).AssumingtheseprojectsweretheonlyprojectsinfrontoftheCity(thefulllistofprojectisincludedintheAppendix),itwouldindicatethattheintersectionofWestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenueshouldbeprioritizedfromaCityresourceperspectiveasithasthegreatestneedforimprovement.

1.4.2 Project Initiation

Conceptualimprovementsweredevelopedtoaddressthedemonstratedneedsidentifiedforeachofthefiveintersectionsandtwocorridorsreviewed.AProjectInitiationFormwascompletedforeachlocationtoevaluatetheeffectivenessoftheprojectataddressingidentifiedneeds/issuesfromtheProjectNeedForm,assessthereadinessleveloftheproject,andevaluateprojectdetails.CompletionoftheProjectInitiationFormresultsinanumericalscorethatcanbecomparedtothescoresofother



demonstrationprojectsinordertorankconceptualsolutionsagainsteachother.AsummaryoftheProjectInitiationscoresisincludedinExhibit1‐2below.FullProjectInitiationFormsareincludedasanattachmenttothisdocument.Exhibit 1‐2 Project Initiation Form Score Summary

Location Project Initiation

Form Score Notes

Roadway Corridors


67 Improved safety; ped/bike accommodations; minimal impact to ROW/resources.

Washington St / Fairfield Ave 41 Improved safety; ped/bike accommodations; minimal impact to ROW/resources.

East Ave 69 Improved safety; ped/bike accommodations; vehicular operations; funding; project plan development; minimal impact to resources.

Intersections


62 Improved safety; ped/bike accommodations; speed reduction; minimal impact to ROW/resources.

Flax Hill Rd @ Taylor Ave/ Lowe St


Flax Hill Rd @ Rowayton Ave/ Richards Ave


Newtown Ave (Rt 53) @ Dry Hill Rd / Murray St

48 Ped/bike accommodations; minimal impact to ROW/resources.


70 Improved safety; ped/bike accommodations; vehicular operations; speed reduction; minimal impact to ROW/resources.

AsExhibit1‐2indicates,whencomparingthedemonstrationintersections,conceptualimprovementforthreeofthefivelocationsscoredveryhighly(70):

FlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenue/LoweStreet;

FlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenue/RichardsAvenue;and

NewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreet.

WestAvenueatBeldenAvenue/MottAvenuelocationfollowedclosely(62).Similartotheprojectneedevaluation,thelowestscoringlocationwasNewtownAvenue(Route53)atDryHillRoad&MurrayStreet(48).TheroadwaycorridorsincludedEastAvenue(69),followedbytheWestRocksRoad/FranceStreet/ParkStreetcorridor(67)andthentheWashingtonStreet/Fairfield


Avenuecorridor(41).AsEastAvenueiscurrentlyunderdesignandhasfundingalreadyallocatedtoitfromStateandlocalresources,itscoredhighly.AssumingtheseprojectsweretheonlyprojectsinfrontoftheCity,itwouldindicatethatimprovementstotheintersectionsofFlaxHillRoadatTaylorAvenue/LoweStreet;FlaxHillRoadatRowaytonAvenue/RichardsAvenue;andNewCanaanAvenue(Route123)atBartlettAvenue/EllsStreetshouldbeprioritizedfromaCityresourceperspectiveastheseprojectswouldaddressidentifiedneeds.Whencomparedwiththeotherprojectsdevelopedaspartofthiseffort,theEastAvenueprojectcontinuestobethepriorityprojectfortheCity.

1.4.2.1 Cost Estimates

Inadditiontotheactualscores,theCityrequestedthatconceptualcostestimatesbeprovidedforeachoftheAlternatives.Thesecostestimateswerebasedontheconceptualalternativesdevelopedfortheproject(shownlaterinthischapter)andarebasedonConnecticutDOTstandardpricingformulasandincludeescalationfactorsforengineeringcost(8%oftotalestimatedconstructioncosts),contingencies(10%),incidentalitems(25%),andutilities(2%).Rightofwayacquisitionwasnotincludedinthesecosts.Exhibit 1‐3 Cost Estimate Summary

Location Project Cost Estimate Notes

Roadway Corridors


$19,375,000 Assumes $1,250 per linear foot of corridor (total corridor length = 15,500 ft)

Washington St / Fairfield Ave $4,521,000

Intersections


$6,265,000

Flax Hill Rd @ Taylor Ave/ Lowe St (alt 1)

$2,147,000

Flax Hill Rd @ Taylor Ave/ Lowe St (alt 2)

$1,881,000

Flax Hill Rd @ Rowayton Ave/ Richards Ave (alt 1)

$2,436,000 As shown in the graphic

Flax Hill Rd @ Rowayton Ave/ Richards Ave (alt 2)

$675,000 As shown in the graphic

Newtown Ave (Rt 53) @ Dry Hill Rd / Murray St (alt 1)

$1,523,000

Newtown Ave (Rt 53) @ Dry Hill Rd / Murray St (alt 2)

$940,000


$1,494,000

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

West Rocks Rd

Fairfield Ave

Washington St

Main Ave

Main St

Richards Ave

Rowa

yton

Ave

Fillow StN Taylor Ave

Taylor Ave

Flax Hill Rd

Marti

n Lut

her K

ing D

r

Wes

t Ave

Belden Ave

Connecticut Ave

Westport Ave

East Ave

Strawberry

Hill Av

e

Calf PastureBeach Rd

North Ave

Cross St

§̈¦95

§̈¦95

§̈¦95

£¤7

£¤7

£¤1

£¤1

£¤1

UV106

UV136

UV136

UV136

UV136

UV57

UV814

UV53

UV53

UV123

UV118

UV33

UV33

UV124

UV123

UV15

UV15

Darien

NewCanaan

Westport

Wilton

2

3

1

4

5

1

6

7

4

3

2

8

5

11

10

9

TMP Roadways and IntersectionsNorwalk Transportation Management PlanNorwalk, Connecticut

\\ctmiddat\projects\41706.00\graphics\FIGURES\Demonstration_Roadway11x17.indd p1 01/06/12

0 1500 3000 Feet

Demonstration Roadway

Other TMP Roadway

Demonstration Intersections

Other TMP Intersections

1. Grist Mill Road at Belden Hill Road/North Seir Hill Road2. Richards Avenue at West Cedar Street 3. North Taylor Avenue at Benedict Street4. Maple Street at Route 1 (Van Buren Avenue)/Stevens Street5. Route 123/Main Street at Route 1/North Avenue6. East Avenue/Park Street at Wall Street/Hubbells Lane7. Strawberry Hill Road at Tierney Street8. Highland Avenue at Soundview Avenue/Devils Garden Road9. East Avenue at I-95 Ramps (Exit 16)10. East Avenue at St. John Street/Raymond Terrace/Olmstead Place11. Calf Pasture Beach Road/Ludlow Manor at Fifth Street/Marvin Street

1. Route 123/New Canaan Avenue at Bartlett Avenue/Ells Street2. Route 53/Newtown Avenue at Murray Street/Dry Hill Road3. West Avenue at Belden Avenue/Mott Avenue4. Taylor Avenue at Flax Hill Road5. Flax Hill Road at Richards Avenue/Rowayton Avenue

N

.

M

A

I

N

S

T

W

.

W

A

S

H

I

N

G

T

O

N

S

T

D

R

M

A

R

T

I

N

L

U

T

H

E

R

K

I

N

G

J

R

D

R

S. M

AIN

ST

HAVIL

AN

D S

T

WASH

ING

TO

N ST

146 HARTFORD ROADMANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT 06040860.646.2469www.fando.com

NORWALK, CT.

W WASHINGTON ST

OPTIONS

FARMER'S MARKET

FOOD VENDORS

PUBLIC ART SPACE

TWO-WAY CYCLE TRACK

OBJECTIVES

PEDESTRIAN FEEL/SCALE

- SIMILAR TO WASHINGTON

HISTORIC "EAST"

(MATERIALS/LIGHTING)

TRANSITION ZONE

REACTIVATE STREET

BIKE LANE CONNECTION TO FLAX HILL RD

CELEBRATE THE "ART"

PUBLIC ART SPACE

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

FARMER'S MARKET

VENDORS

PERFORMANCE STAGE

SPECIALTY LIGHTING

M

O

T

T

A

V

E

B

E

L

D

E

N

A

V

E

B

U

R

N

E

L

L

B

L

V

D

R

I

V

E

R

S

T

W

A

L

L

S

T

W

E

S

T

A

V

E


NORWALK, CT.

WEST AVE @ BELDEN & MOTT AVE

OPTIONS

COMPLETE STREET

LANE REDUCTION

WIDER SIDEWALKS

PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES

LONG-TERM

NETWORK ADDITIONS

WALL ST AS "FESTIVAL STREET"

(LEONARD TO ISAACS ST)

RIVER FRONT ACCESS

OBJECTIVES

REDUCE CONFUSION

REDUCE PARKING PROBLEM

PERCEPTION

SIGNATURE PROJECT

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

ENHANCE PUBLIC/PEDESTRIAN

TO/FROM PARKING GARAGE

TURN LANES

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

2 LANE WITH CENTER

MEDIAN/TURN LANE,

BIKE LANES/SHARROW

WOONERF/

FESTIVAL STREET

ANGLED PARKING

T

A

Y

L

O

R

A

V

E

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

HAM

ILTO

N A

VE

LO

W

E ST


NORWALK, CT.

TAYLOR AVE @ FLAX HILL RD OPTION 1

OBJECTIVES

BIKE LANE

SAFETY

NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE

STREET TREE PROGRAM

PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

T

A

Y

L

O

R

A

V

E

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

HAM

ILTO

N A

VE

LO

W

E ST


NORWALK, CT.

TAYLOR AVE @ FLAX HILL RD OPTION 2

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

R

I

C

H

A

R

D

S

A

V

E

R

O

W

A

Y

T

O

N

A

V

E

W

O

O

D

C

H

U

C

K

L

N


NORWALK, CT.

FLAX HILL ROAD @ ROWAYTON AVE & RICHARDS AVE OPTION 1

OPTIONS

32' DEDICATED BIKE LANE

24' SHARROWS

SECOND ROUNDABOUT

OBJECTIVES

LIGHTING

SAFETY PRIORITY

GREEN SPACE

BIKE LANE

TRAFFIC CALMING

NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

CROSSWALKS (TYP)

FOCAL POINT

POTENTIAL DRIVE

RELOCATION

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

F

L

A

X

H

I

L

L

R

D

R

I

C

H

A

R

D

S

A

V

E

R

O

W

A

Y

T

O

N

A

V

E

W

O

O

D

C

H

U

C

K

L

N


NORWALK, CT.

FLAX HILL ROAD @ ROWAYTON AVE & RICHARDS AVE OPTION2

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

M

U

R

R

A

Y

S

T

R

E

E

T

D

R

Y

H

I

L

L

R

D

R

T

E

5

3

(

N

E

W

T

O

W

N

A

V

E

)

R

T

E

5

3

(

N

E

W

T

O

W

N

A

V

E

)

A

L

L

E

N

R

D

CLARA DR


NORWALK, CT.

ROUTE 53 @ DRY HILL RD & MURRAY ST OPTION 1

OBJECTIVES

SAFETY - PERCEIVED & REAL

NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

M

U

R

R

A

Y

S

T

R

E

E

T

D

R

Y

H

I

L

L

R

D

R

T

E

5

3

(

N

E

W

T

O

W

N

A

V

E

)

R

T

E

5

3

(

N

E

W

T

O

W

N

A

V

E

)

A

L

L

E

N

R

D

CLARA DR


NORWALK, CT.

ROUTE 53 @ DRY HILL RD & MURRAY ST OPTION 2

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

E

L

L

S

S

T

B

A

R

T

L

E

T

T

A

V

E

R

T

E

1

2

3

(

N

E

W

C

A

N

A

A

N

A

V

E

)

R

T

E

1

2

3

(

N

E

W

C

A

N

A

A

N

A

V

E

)

B

A

R

T

L

E

T

T

A

V

E


NORWALK, CT.

ROUTE 123 @ BARTLETT AVE & ELLS ST

OPTIONS

LANE CHANNELZATION

SIGNAL TIMING

POLICY/ACCESS MANAGEMENT

TEE UP BARTLETT

(THROUGH TRAFFIC CONTINGENT)

OBJECTIVES

ACCESS MANAGEMENT

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY CROSSWALKS

REDUCED CONFLICTS

BIKE CORRIDOR

OPPORTUNITY AREAS

WITHIN ROW (TYP.)

Documents

Chapter 3-1 - Demonstration Locations - · PDF fileThis chapter summarizes how the ... identifying a project’s needs, developing context ... raised as part of the Plan. Using this