Task 3 Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum

Vision 2020 Congestion Mitigation Study

January 25, 2002

Prepared for: South Western Regional Planning Agency

Prepared by: Wilbur Smith Associates

In Association with: KKO and Associates, L.L.C. Buckhurst Fish & Jacquemart, Inc. Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. Urbitran Geomatrix Center for Research and Public Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

1 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Study Background 1-1 1.2 Study Organization and Management 1-2 1.3 Public Outreach 1-2 1.4 Report Purpose and Organization 1-4 1.5 Upcoming Reports 1-4

2 REGIONAL PLANNING CONTEXT 2-1 2.1 Historical Context 2-1 2.2 State and Regional Plans of Development 2-2

3 DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE DATA INVENTORY 3-1 3.1 Population and Employment Trends Historic-Forecasts 3-1 3.2 Highlights of Municipal Plan Review 3-4 3.3 Identification of Major Trip Generators 3-10 3.4 Identification of Development Potential Areas 3-12

4 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVENTORY 4-1 4.1 Factors Influencing Transportation System Demand 4-1 4.2 Highway Characteristics 4-2 4.3 Accident Records 4-9 4.4 Plans, Programs and Projects 4-14 4.5 Rail Station/Rail Service Characteristics 4-14 4.6 Bus Transit Operations 4-23 4.7 Regional Airports 4-26 4.8 Ferries 4-27 4.9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities 4-27 4.10 Ridesharing/Transportation Demand Management 4-36 4.11 Employer Strategy Programs 4-43 4.12 Goods Movements 4-45

ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURE FOLLOWS NUMBER PAGE

1.1 Study Area Regions and Towns 1-1 2.1 Connecticut State Land Use Plan 2-2 2.2 SWRPA Existing Transportation Network 2-4 2.3 HVCEO Existing Transportation Network 2-4 2.4 GBRPA Existing Transportation Network 2-4 2.5 VRPA Existing Transportation Network 2-5 2.6 SCRCOG Existing Transportation Network 2-5 3.1 Population 3-1 3.2 Population Density 3-1 3.3 Employment 3-1 3.4 Employment Concentrations 3-1 3.5 1950-1960 Population Change 3-1 3.6 1960-1970 Population Change 3-1 3.7 1990-2000 Population Change 3-1 3.8 1960-2000 Population Change (in numbers) 3-1 4.1 Existing Transportation Network 4-2 4.2 Historical Traffic Volume Comparisons 4-3 4.3 Historical Traffic Volumes on I-95 (Norwalk Station) 4-4 4.4 Hourly Traffic Volume Variations on I-95 (Norwalk Station) 4-5 4.5 Historical Traffic Volumes on Route 15 (Trumbull Station) 4-6 4.6 Hourly Traffic Volume on Route 15 (Trumbull Station) 4-6 4.7 Historical Traffic Volume on Route 8 (Bridgeport Station) 4-7 4.8 Historical Traffic Volume on Route 1 (Westport Station) 4-8 4.9 Historical Traffic Volume on Route 34 (Orange Station) 4-9 4.10 I-95 Accidents by Time of Day 4-10 4.11 I-95 Accidents by Accident Type 4-11 4.12 SWRPA Transportation Plan Improvements 4-14 4.13 HVCEO Transportation Plan Improvements 4-14 4.14 GBRPA Transportation Plan Improvements 4-14 4.15 VRPA Transportation Plan Improvements 4-14 4.16 SCCOG Transportation Plan Improvements 4-14 4.17 Commuter Growth Rates 1996-2000 4-21 4.18 Non-Commuter Growth Rates 1996-2000 4-21 4.19 Study Area Average Daily Truck Volumes 4-45 4.20 Percentage of Commodity Volumes by Mode 4-46

TABULATIONS

TABLE PAGE

4.1 Accident by Regional Planning Agency 4-10 4.2 Study Area 6 – Lane Limited Access Road Accidents 4-11 4.3 Study Area 4 – Lane Limited Access Road Accidents 4-12 4.4 Study Area 4 – Lane Unlimited Access Road Accidents 4-12 4.5 Study Area 2 – Lane Road Accidents 4-13 4.6 Study Area Rail Line Characteristics 4-14 4.7 New Haven Mainline Number of Trains Passing Stamford On a Typical Weekday 4-15 4.8 New Haven Mainline Station and 1996 Ridership 4-16 4.9 Shoreline Number of Trains Passing Branford On a Typical Weekday 4-17 4.10 Shoreline East Station and Ridership 4-17 4.11 Springfield Line Number of Trains on the Line Daily 4-18 4.12 Springfield Stations and Fares 4-18 4.13 Waterbury Branch Numbers of Trains on the Line Daily 4-19 4.14 Waterbury Branch Stations and Ridership 4-19 4.15 Danbury Branch Number of Trains on the Line Daily 4-19 4.16 Danbury Branch Stations and Ridership 4-20 4.17 New Canaan Line Stations and Ridership 4-20 4.18 Metro-North’s Projected A.M. Peak Inbound Ridership 2000-2010 4-22 4.19 20 Largest Commodity Flows in the Southwest Corridor 4-46 4.20 Study Area Truck Volumes 4-47 4.21 Existing and Possible Truck Parking Spaces at Public Rest Areas in Study Area 4-48

SWRPA Congestion Mitigation Study (CMS) Task 3 Technical Memorandum

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Study Background

As shown in Figure 1.1, the SWRPA Congestion Mitigation Study (CMS) covers a 55- mile east-west corridor along I-95 and the Merritt Parkway in southwestern Connecticut, extending between the New York State Line on the west and the Town of Branford on the east. In a north-south direction, the primary study area reaches Danbury along Route 7, Shelton along Route 8, and Hamden along I-91. This area incorporates a range of land uses, including urban centers, such as Stamford, Norwalk, Bridgeport, Danbury, and New Haven; suburban towns such as Greenwich, Westport, Fairfield and Stratford; and semi- rural areas in the towns of Wilton, Weston, Monroe, and Easton. It often seems that the only thing that brings people in these communities together is sitting in a traffic jam.

In other parts of the State, the study area towns in Fairfield and New Haven counties are often viewed as home to wealthy commuters to New York City with a picturesque shoreline, New England countryside, and spacious, wooded estates. However, the study area also contains many of the State’s largest and fastest-growing employers, such as the financial and professional service firms in Downtown Stamford, Putnam Avenue in Greenwich, or the Merritt 7 complex in Norwalk. The business activity generated by these developments significantly affects the economic health of the State.

In his 1999 report for the Connecticut Regional Institute for the 21st Century, Connecticut Strategic Economic Framework, Dr. Michael Gallis observed, “Coastal Connecticut has one of the strongest concentrations of economic, institutional, cultural and research resources of any corridor in the New York metro region. Stamford has a large concentration of financial and high tech companies and corporate headquarters. New Haven has the institutional resources… Bridgeport… has large new investments in commercial and residential developments and a significant specialty port.”

However, the report also notes, “Severe congestion problems in the lower section of this corridor effectively block access for the upper portions to fully compete for economic activity in the New York metro market.”

Without improvements to the study area transportation system, including enhancement of alternatives to the private car, this growth will create massive traffic congestion and delay along the limited number of access routes through Southern Fairfield and New Haven Counties. Congestion continues to increase not only for passenger transportation, but also for freight transportation. Due to the absence of alternative truck routes or a viable rail freight distribution system, much of the through truck traffic moving between New York and Boston is funneled into the I-95 corridor, further adding to the congestion and safety problems these regions face.

Congestion Mitigation Study 1-1 Existing Conditions Report xi‡ wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex rous—toni™2†—lley2‚egion2@r†giyA f‚shqi‡e„i‚ wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚yyupsivh DEFWI †—lley2‚egion2@†‚€eA ‡evvsxqpy‚h G@U DEFVR rewhix óôIS hexf ‚‰ fi„rex‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ‡yyhf‚shqi re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv ƒi‰wy ‚ exƒyxse wyx‚yi hi‚f‰ xi‡2re†ix ieƒ„ ‚ihhsxq óôV re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ƒriv„yx WS f‚expy‚h DEF y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ wehsƒyx óôPS re†ix ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv óôIS DEFWS ‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h f‚shqi€y‚„ ƒouth2gentr—l2‚egion2@ƒg‚gyqA ‡sv„yx ƒ„‚e„py‚h xi‡ pes‚psivh gexeex ‡iƒ„€y‚„ IS qre—ter2fridgeport2‚egion2@qf‚€eA óô xy‚‡evu ƒ„ewpy‚h DEFWS he‚six q‚iix‡sgr ƒouth2‡estern2‚egion2@ƒ‡‚€eA

xoteX2€rim—ry2study2—re—2towns2shown2in2whiteF

ƒtudy2ere—2‚egions2—nd2„owns

gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2IFI Two solutions for congestion are possible – increase total transportation capacity or decrease demand for services during periods of peak demand. The reduction of vehicular travel demand and automobile dependency in this transportation and land use context is a daunting task. Numerous studies and improvement initiatives over the last twenty years have attempted to address this issue with varying degrees of success.

Four other regional planning agencies have joined with the South Western Regional Planning Agency (SWRPA) in this study effort. These are: the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials (HVCEO), Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency (GBRPA), Valley Regional Planning Agency (VRPA), and South Central Regional Council of Governments (SCROG). The respective regional boundaries are shown on Figure 1.1.

1.2 Study Organization and Management

This study will take a different approach to plan development than prior efforts. The plan will provide vision for transportation in the corridor from the point of view of commuters and shippers as customers.

The seven tasks included in the study are:

Task 1. Project Scoping and Mobilization Task 2. Public Involvement (Continuous) Task 3. Data Collection and Analysis Task 4. Development of Alternatives and Improvements Task 5. Market Research Task 6. Detailing of Recommended Program Task 7. Report Preparation

1.3 Public Outreach

A wide range of public outreach activities have been incorporated into the Work Program for the Vision 2020 Congestion Mitigation Study (CMS). These include public listening sessions; individual outreach meetings with participating agencies, as well as agencies in adjacent areas of New York and New Jersey; production of two project videos; a telephone interview survey; and production and dissemination of technical memoranda and the study final report.

Congestion Mitigation Study 1-2 Existing Conditions Report 1.3.1 Listening Sessions

Four public listening sessions have been conducted to date:

ƒ Business Community Listening Session (October 10, 2001) – Pitney Bowes, Stamford; ƒ New Haven Area Listening Session (October 18, 2001) – SCRCOG, North Haven; ƒ Bridgeport Area Listening Session (October 25, 2001) - Bridgeport City Hall; and ƒ Stamford/Norwalk Area Listening Session (January 17, 2002) – Darien Town Hall.

Key points from the listening sessions included:

ƒ Frustration with existing traffic congestion; ƒ Concern over sustainability of current patterns of land use and transportation; ƒ Interest in alternative modes for commuting and goods movement; ƒ Interest in new land use options and innovations in land use regulation; and ƒ Need for urban revitalization and tax incentives for development in urban areas.

1.3.2 Agency Outreach

As a first step in this process, an introductory letter was sent to towns and cities participating in the study to advise them of project goals and study area boundaries, and to request their assistance in providing background information on existing and future land use issues, availability of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data, and other inputs to the study process. Staff from Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) and land use planning subconsultants, Fitzgerald & Halliday (FHI) and Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart (BFJ), joined the SWRPA Project Manager at meetings with the four other participating regional planning agencies - GBRPA, HVCEO, SCRCOG, and VRPA - to obtain background information on regional land use patterns and prior studies. Meetings were also conducted as requested with individual municipal representatives, and with agencies in New York and New Jersey, such as the New York City Department of City Planning, the New York City Economic Development Corporation and Metro-North Railroad.

1.3.3 Video

During the course of the study, two videos will be developed by WSA and Geomatrix, a professional video production company. The first video was completed in September, 2001. It describes current transportation conditions in both the I-95 and Merritt Parkway corridors, as well as for rail and other transportation modes. The video also provides a brief historical perspective and an overview of the study process. This video was used as an introduction to the public listening sessions, and may be used as a kick-off for focus groups. The second video is intended to describe the results at the study process. It will take the best of the possible alternatives, present a picture of the corridor in the future, and describe the implementation plan resulting from the study recommendations.

Congestion Mitigation Study 1-3 Existing Conditions Report 1.3.4 Telephone Survey

Another component of the public outreach program is a random telephone interview survey conducted by the Center for Research and Public Policy (CRPP) during the period of October 29 – November 3, 2001. Highlights of the survey results are shown below, and a full copy of the survey report is also available as an appendix document to this report. A second round of telephone surveys will be conducted toward the conclusion of the study process to determine the extent to which attitudes and experience have changed through the course of the study. The survey highlights included:

ƒ The large majority (over 90 percent) of respondents identified cars as the mode of transportation used for shopping, medical trips, work trips, and school trips, while train and bus were mentioned as a mode of transportation for work by just over 3 percent each.

ƒ The primary reasons for using a car for commuting to work included: “convenience” and “no mass transit”. Other choices such as, “like driving”, “need vehicle for work”, “odd work hours”, and “proximity to work”, were selected by five percent or fewer of the respondents.

ƒ Two thirds of study area residents consider traffic congestion a very serious problem, and approximately 90 percent believe that traffic has remained congested or become more congested in recent years.

ƒ Commuter suggestions most frequently cited for reducing congestion include: widening highways, car pooling, more mass transit, fewer trucks on the road, provide incentives for alternative modes, construction at night, more train service, more bus service and fix/improve Route 7.

1.4 Report Purpose and Organization

The purpose of this report is to summarize the inventory of existing land use and transportation conditions conducted for Task 3 of the Congestion Mitigation Study. The report is divided into four chapters:

ƒ Introduction; ƒ Regional Planning Context; ƒ Demographic and Land Use Inventory; ƒ Transportation System Inventory.

1.5 Upcoming Reports

Future technical reports will present the results of Task 4 - Development of Alternatives and Improvements; Task 5 - Market Research, and Task 6 - Detailing of Recommendations. These reports will then be incorporated into the study's Draft Final Report.

Congestion Mitigation Study 1-4 Existing Conditions Report 2. REGIONAL PLANNING CONTEXT

2.1 Historical Context

The South Western Regional Planning Agency’s 1995 Regional Plan of Conservation and Development notes that, “Regional plans in the past often seemed to assume that planning began with a blank slate. This is not the case and cannot be an approach to planning in the South Western Region. Southwestern Connecticut, first settled in the seventeenth century, is a region whose development patterns were set in place a long time ago.” The same statement can be applied throughout the larger CMS study area, to the cities of Bridgeport, Danbury and New Haven, and their respective suburban areas.

Throughout the nineteenth century and into the first half of the twentieth, Connecticut’s industrial cities experienced a population boom as manufacturing firms pioneered in inventions and new production techniques. In fact, the introduction of interchangeable parts at Eli Whitney’s New Haven area gun factory constituted a major technological breakthrough equivalent to the personal computer or the internet.

Nonetheless, new patterns of land use have emerged in the last four decades. For more than two generations, one of the attractions of the suburban lifestyle was the ease and flexibility offered by the automobile. In Fairfield and New Haven counties, the construction of the Merritt Parkway and the Connecticut Turnpike spurred the post- World War II suburban growth wave that redefined the region’s patterns of land use originally shaped by the New Haven rail line and local trolleys. Following an initial wave of population growth in the 1950’s, shopping centers, office and industrial parks, and recreational areas were all designed to incorporate convenience for the auto-user. The desire for a more comfortable and spacious environment brought both residents and businesses to the study area, and continues to attract new families and corporations to the area.

By the time of SWRPA’s Second Regional Plan in 1983, it was understood that, “Initially executive offices were welcomed as an addition to the tax base, but by 1980, they were recognized as a ‘mixed blessing,’ worsening the high cost of housing and multiplying traffic problems.” Today, the limitations of this pattern are all too clear. On I-95, the Merritt Parkway, and U.S. Route 1 traffic congestion is increasing year by year, encouraging drivers to use the minor arterials and town roads for through travel. If this trend continues, it could diminish the quality of life for residents and businesses located adjacent to these major travel corridors.

Congestion Mitigation Study 2-1 Existing Conditions Report 2.2 State and Regional Plans of Development

2.2.1 Connecticut State Plan of Conservation and Development/

Overview of State Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) - The fundamental strategies of Connecticut’s state plan are: to reinforce and conserve existing urban areas; to promote staged, appropriate, sustainable development; and to preserve areas of significant environmental value. While the State has a limited statutory role to regulate land use, it generally encourages economic development to be focused within areas that already have urban services, such as sewer and water supply systems, and roadway connections.

Connecticut’s State Plan identifies three levels of urban development, as illustrated in Figure 2.1:

ƒ Regional Centers, shown in deep red on Figure 2.1, such as Stamford, Norwalk, Bridgeport, Danbury and New Haven, containing traditional core area commercial and institutional land use patterns, as well as a high residential population density and a concentrated (downtown) pattern of employment;

ƒ Neighborhood Conservation Areas, shown in pink, contain stable, developed neighborhoods and communities contiguous to Regional Centers, with a high level of existing development. Often these communities have a mix of single-family and multi-family housing, neighborhood shopping streets or suburban shopping centers, and can support the operation of a scheduled bus system; and

ƒ Growth Areas, shown in dark yellow, such as land near Regional Centers or Neighborhood Conservation Areas that provide the opportunity for staged urban expansion in conformance with municipal or regional development plans.

Outside of urban areas, Rural Community Centers, shown in lighter yellow, reflect existing mixed use areas or places that may be suitable for future clustering of the more intensive housing, shopping, employment, and public service needs of municipalities outside of urban development areas. Rural Lands, shown in white, are those areas falling outside of any of the other categories.

In addition, the map contains the land use categories of Existing Preserved Open Space, shown in dark green, and Preservation Areas, shown in lighter green. Within the study area, these land use categories are often utilized as watershed property for more intensively developed urban and suburban areas connected to a public water supply.

Congestion Mitigation Study 2-2 Existing Conditions Report Danbury

Newtown Seymour North Haven Bethel Woodbridge Hamden Ansonia Monroe Derby New Haven Redding Shelton Ridgefield East Haven Branford Orange West Haven Trumbull Easton

Weston Milford Stratford Wilton Bridgeport

Fairfield New Canaan

Westport Norwalk Stamford Darien Greenwich

Connecticut State Land Use Plan Congestion Mitigation Study Figure 2.1 2.2.2 Transportation Planning Process

Connecticut Department of Transportation’s (ConnDOT) 1998 Southwest Corridor Study Update summarizes the existing transportation planning process within the context of federal regulation as follows:

The transportation planning process is a cooperative effort amongst the local municipalities, the metropolitan planning organizations [MPOs], the Connecticut Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration.

The cooperative process dates back over 35 years to the 1962 Federal-Aid Highway Act. This act established the requirement that a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive, or “3C” transportation planning process be carried out in urban areas of over 50,000 population…

The Long Range Transportation Plan addresses a twenty-year planning period. The document includes both long-range and short-range strategies and actions that lead to the development of an integrated intermodal transportation system that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods. The plan must also be financially constrained and updated every three years and attain air quality goals...

A project may be initiated by the state, municipality or designated Federal Transit Administration recipient [bus or rail system].

Figures 2.2-2.6 provide a more detailed view of the individual regional transportation networks, consisting of highway, rail, waterborne and air service modes.

2.2.3 Regional Plans of Development

Each of the five regional planning areas within the study area has produced a Regional Plan of Development. These policy documents typically contain an overview of regional growth and development trends, as well as general guidelines for areas where future development should be encouraged or restricted. However, the regional planning agencies have only an advisory role in guiding implementation of land use policy through local zoning and development permitting.

The highlights of the five plans are noted in the following:

South Western Region (SWRPA) – The SWRPA regional plan notes the developed, urban and suburban nature of the region. It identifies the region’s growth centers as Stamford and Norwalk, each with its individual regional niche. Stamford serves as the major office center, while Norwalk provides an attractive office location and is recommended for new big box retail. The intersection of Route 15 (Merritt Parkway) and

Congestion Mitigation Study 2-3 Existing Conditions Report Route 7 in Norwalk, where office development has occurred, is considered an intermediate center.

The regional plan map does not indicate significant institutional uses. The map does show significant parks and preserved open space in all the constituent towns. Separately designated large conservation areas are apparent in Greenwich, Norwalk, and New Canaan. As shown in Figure 2.2, the major transportation corridors in SWRPA are Interstate 95, the Merritt Parkway (Route 15), and U.S. Route 7. Metro-North’s New Haven Line rail line parallels I-95 throughout the SWRPA region. Metro-North’s branch lines provide additional passenger connections from the SWRPA region to New Canaan and Danbury.

Housatonic Valley Region (HVCEO) - HVCEO’s 1977 Regional Growth Guide Map identifies Danbury as the regional center. The towns of New Milford, Ridgefield, Brookfield, Bethel, and Newtown each contain limited areas with a “new central developed area” designation, similar to the State plan’s Growth Areas. For the HVCEO region, the primary growth areas extend from the northern extents of Danbury up to New Milford along U.S. Route 7. Lower density neighborhood areas, primarily in Newtown and New Milford, are where additional residential growth is expected. These areas are typically served with on-site community wells and/or septic systems. As illustrated in Figure 2.3, major transportation corridors are I-84, U.S. Route 6 and U.S. Route 7. Rail service is provided by Metro-North’s Danbury branch line runs parallel to the U.S. Route 7 corridor.

Greater Bridgeport Region (GBRPA) - The Greater Bridgeport Planning Region can be characterized as having one major urban center surrounded by suburban communities that are predominantly single-family residential. The 1997 Regional Profile (GBRPA, December 1997) notes that over 52 percent of the land use in the region is residential. Development in the region is concentrated primarily along the Connecticut shoreline. Lower density residential land use in the region occurs primarily north of Route 15. Rural and open space lands are concentrated in the northern towns of the region, Monroe and Easton.

As shown in Figure 2.4, Bridgeport is the urban center within the GBRPA region and the hub of its highway and rail transportation network. While its historic role as a manufacturing center has diminished in recent years, Downtown Bridgeport still contains the highest concentration of commercial and industrial land use in the region. Stratford serves as a regional subcenter, with concentrations of high-density residential development as well as the region’s largest industrial employer – Sikorsky – and other significant industrial concentrations adjacent to Sikorsky Airport and U.S. Route 1.

Other commercial and industrial centers exist in Fairfield along U.S. Route 1 and Route 59 (Black Rock Turnpike), in Monroe along Route 25 and in various locations in Trumbull adjacent to the Merritt Parkway interchanges. Most industrial and commercial land uses are concentrated around the I-95 and U.S. Route 1 corridors. Other major transportation corridors in the region with pockets of concentrated non-residential land

Congestion Mitigation Study 2-4 Existing Conditions Report r óôSQ

óôQQ ‡sv„yx óôSU ‡iƒ„yx g—nnond—ler

‡iltonr

U xi‡2gexeex G@ IQT QQ ÷ø ÷øIPR ÷øIPQ óô

óôIS ÷øIHR xew2g—n——nr werritt2Ur ‡iƒ„€y‚„ r ƒ„ewpy‚h G@I r ÷øIQU xy‚‡evu r rqreen9s2p—rms „—lm—dge2rillr DFEWS ‡estport q‚iix‡sgr ri—st2xorw—lk DEFTVR óôIS r wetroxorth2ƒt—tions ÷øIPR rƒouth2xorw—lkÎ ƒpringd—ler÷øIHT he‚six xorw—lk Î €orts h—rien r—r˜or r r‚ow—yton Ƙ emtr—k2ƒt—tions qlen˜rookr ÷øIQT e rxoroton2reights ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports ‡est™hester2gounty e eirport e qener—l2evi—tion2eirports r DFEWS Ƙ ƒt—mford ‚—il2line ‚iverside G@I r ryld2qreenwi™h ‡—ter rgos2go˜ Î ƒt—mford ‚o—ds rqreenwi™h r—r˜or ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—y FƒF2‚outes yther2erteri—l ƒ‡‚€e2ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2PFP ‚yfi‚„ƒyx

f‚sƒ„yv €ve egy x„‰ e

ƒy „rsxq„y

e g—ndlelight ƒri‚wex eirport r ôóQW ôóQU

wi‚shi

griƒrs‚i xi‡2pes‚psivh r ÷øIQQ e @U G f‚yyupsivh ôóQW ôóPS ôóQU G@PHP r DEFVR wetroxorth2ƒt—tions FVR G@T r hexf ‚‰ DE €orts G@PHP r Î rewhix h—n˜ury ôóQR r fi„riv ÷øQHP w—y˜rook2fr—n™h @freight2onlyA emtr—k2ƒt—tions xy‚„r xi‡„y‡x fethel Ƙ e r PS h—n˜ury2wuni™ip—l ôó ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports eirport e qener—l2evi—tion2eirports G@U re ‚edding r ôóSV r ‚—il2line ÷øIIT ôóQS ôóSQ ÷øIHU xi‡2re†ix ‚ihhsxq ‡—ter gISHUieƒ„ r ‚shqipsivh ‚o—ds Ƙr Î ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—y ÷øIHP FƒF2‚outes fr—n™hviller „‡iihExi‡2re†ix ôóQQ yther2erteri—l e

ôó wsvpy‚h r†giy2ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2PFQ r øIIH wyx‚yi ÷ r r ÷øIII

r óôPS „‚ wf vv ÷øIHV ieƒ„yx óôV óôSW óôIS

÷øIIH ÷øIQT ƒ„‚e„py‚h r r f‚shqi€y‚„ wetroxorth2ƒt—tions óôSV r ÷øIPU Î €orts r G@I emtr—k2ƒt—tions óôIS óôV rƒtr—tford Ƙ ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports pes‚psivh e fridgeportr FEWS G@I Ƙ D e qener—l2evi—tion2eirports Î ÷øIIQ €ort2of2fridgeport e ‚—il2line ƒikorsky2wemori—l ‡—ter r DFEWS eirport ‚o—ds rp—irfield ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—y rƒouthport FƒF2‚outes yther2erteri—l r qf‚€e2ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2PFR use include Routes 8, 15, and 25. Easton and Monroe are both predominantly low- density residential areas with substantial areas of undeveloped, open space. Local zoning has established and maintains this pattern that dictates primarily large lots exclusively for single-family homes.

Valley Region (VRPA) - The Valley Region generally encompasses a former manufacturing region that is undergoing very gradual transition to more suburban residential land use with associated regional retail activity. Older industrial areas are concentrated in Ansonia and Derby. Open spaces and rural areas are scattered throughout the northwestern side of Shelton and eastern and western edges of Seymour. There are no urban centers, although the downtowns in Ansonia and Derby form a regional subcenter. Shelton and Seymour each have a traditional town center. In all four towns a traditional, “Main Street” commercial district contains higher density housing, small storefront businesses, and community government activities. For the Valley Region as a whole, most residential use occurs in broad areas of low density, single-family homes.

The growth spurt in Shelton appears to have accompanied the growth in employment with several corporate office developments. Shelton is geographically the largest of the region’s municipalities and also has historically been the least densely populated. Shelton is emerging as a new regional subcenter. There are a growing number of large corporate office complexes there and the town continues to attract new office park uses. Major transportation corridors with associated commercial and industrial development include Routes 8, 25, and 34, as shown in Figure 2.5.

South Central Region (SCRCOG) - In general, the SCRCOG region can be characterized as having one major urban area (New Haven, West Haven, and East Haven) with regional subcenters in Hamden, Meriden, North Haven, and Wallingford. There are traditional town centers in Branford, Guilford, Madison, Milford, North Branford, and Woodbridge. Consequently, development is fairly evenly distributed throughout the region with open space, rural lands, and very low-density residential uses concentrated in the eastern and western edges of the region in Bethany, Guilford, and Madison. The suburban corridor between Meriden and New Haven and the coastline of the region have a mix of typical suburban uses including some regional malls and large areas of single-family residential use.

New Haven is the region’s urban center with a mix of older manufacturing sites, office and institutional uses downtown (including Yale University and Yale/New Haven Hospital), cultural attractions, and dispersed neighborhood commercial uses amongst high-density residential areas. Areas of concentrated commercial and industrial activity also occur in Meriden, Wallingford, and along major highway and arterial roadway corridors. Major transportation corridors include I-91, I-95 and Routes 1, 5, 10, 15, and 34, as illustrated in Figure 2.6.

Congestion Mitigation Study 2-5 Existing Conditions Report xi‡„y‡x rƒeymour rewhix

óôV ÷øQIQ ƒi‰wy ‚

÷øIIS exƒyxse ÷øQQR r ensoni— óôQR ÷øIIH hi‚f‰ ÷øPRQ ƒriv„yx r her˜yEƒhelton r wetroxorth2ƒt—tions €orts ÷øIHV Î xi‡2re† Ƙ emtr—k2ƒt—tions e ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports ÷øIIH e qener—l2evi—tion2eirports ‚—il2line óôV ‡—ter ‚o—ds „‡iih ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—y FƒF2‚outes yther2erteri—l óô †‚€e2ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2PFS r wetroxorth2ƒt—tions gyv r DEFTWI €orts Ƙ Î weriden2w—rkh—m2wuni™ip—l emtr—k2ƒt—tions eirport Ƙ e G@S e ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports IS óô qener—l2evi—tion2eirports r e e DEFWI ‚—il2line ieƒ„2rehhew ‡—ter Ƙ ‚o—ds r ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—ye FƒF2‚outes yther2erteri—l óôIH óôTQ r óôTU óôTW óôUU e óôIU G@S óôPP óôVH r ÷øQIQ óôUW óôIH WI DEF óôVH r óôIS IQW ÷ø I óôQR xew2r—ven ÷øIHH G@ Ƙr Î DEFWS ÷øISP xew2r—ven IIR G@I r—r˜or ÷ø ÷øQQU e ÷øIRT ÷øIPI FWS „weed2E2xew2r—ven DE eirport

r wilford

r ƘrÎ ƒg‚gyq2ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2PFT 3. DEMOGRAPHIC AND LAND USE DATA INVENTORY

3.1 Population and Employment Trends – Historic & Forecasts

As illustrated in Figures 3.1 and 3.2, the residential population of the entire study area is concentrated along the I-95 and Merritt Parkway corridors, with a continuation of this corridor leading northward along I-91 through Hamden, Wallingford and Meriden. The five traditional core cities remain the largest population centers, with respective populations of:

ƒ Stamford – 117,000 ƒ Norwalk – 83,000 ƒ Danbury – 75,000 ƒ Bridgeport – 139,000 ƒ New Haven – 124,000

Not surprisingly, employment is also concentrated along the same I-95/I-91 corridor, as shown in Figures 3.3 and 3.4. Stamford is the single largest employment concentration in the study area, with approximately 40,000 employees working in the downtown area, and an additional 45,000 working elsewhere in the city. Downtown New Haven is the next largest concentration with over 25,000 employees working in the downtown office center, Yale University and the two major hospitals (Yale-New Haven and St. Raphael’s), and approximately 55,000 elsewhere in the city. Downtown Bridgeport has approximately 15,000 employees, with 40,000 elsewhere in the city. Greenwich, Norwalk and Danbury all have over 35,000 employees on a citywide or townwide basis.

As shown in Figures 3.5-3.8, over the last five decades, several of the core cities, including Stamford, Norwalk and Danbury have experienced an increase of population, while the two largest study area cities (Bridgeport and New Haven) have stable or moderately declining population. Historically, this trend dates back to the 1950’s (Figure 3.5) and 1960’s (Figure 3.6), when explosive growth occurred throughout the South Western Region, as well as in many portions of the Greater Bridgeport and South Central regions. During these two decades, many families moved to suburban towns and many new residents moved into the study area from the New York area as well. In more recent years (Figure 3.7), significant population growth (over one percent annually) has occurred only in a few of the lower density and rural municipalities, such as Weston, Easton and Newtown. For a comparison of population growth in terms of numbers rather than percentage, Figure 3.8 shows the population change from 1960 to 2000 by number of people in each town.

3.1.1 South Western Region

The SWRPA Region has maintained a steady population level since the 1970 census, with a slight dip between 1970 and 1980, due to a maturing population base, and then a very gradual rise (less than one percent) over the 1980-2000 period. SWRPA’s 1995 Regional Plan projects:

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-1 Existing Conditions Report xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx

pes‚psivh xi‡ f‚shqi€y‚„

gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h €opul—tion2@PHHHA ‡iƒ„€y‚„ `2IHDHHH2people ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu IHDHHI2E2PHDHHH2people q‚iix‡sgr PHDHHI2E2RHDHHH2people he‚six RHDHHI2E2VHDHHH2people b2VHDHHH2people

ƒour™eX2PHHH2 ƒ2gensus €opul—tion gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFI xi‡2wsvpy‚h

TW I ƒri‚wex DEF f‚shqi‡e„i‚ wi‚shix

xi‡2pes‚psivh DEFWI f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h ôóIH VR DEF rewhix hexf ‚‰ G@T fi„rex‰ QR fi„riv ôó xy‚„r2re†ix xi‡„y‡x ‡yyhf‚shqi ƒi‰wy ‚ IU ôóxy‚„r f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx exƒyxse ôóVH WI wyx‚yi DEFieƒ„ re†ix q svpy‚h hi‚f‰ xi‡2re†ix ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx ‚shqipsivh ôóQR f‚expy‚h DEFWS óôV ‡iƒ„ óôPS y‚exqi re†ix ôóSV „‚ wf vv ieƒ„yx FWS ‡iƒ„yx DE wsvpy‚h ôóQQ f‚shqi€y‚„ ‡sv„yx óôV ôóIS ƒ„‚e„py‚h U pes‚psivh xi‡2gexeex G@ FWS ‡iƒ„€y‚„ DE ÷øIQU ƒ„ewpy‚h €opul—tion2density xy‚‡evu b2PH2peopleG—™re q‚iix‡sgr ôóIS he‚six IH2E2PH2peopleG—™re S2E2IH2peopleG—™re P2E2S2peopleG—™re H2E2P2peopleG—™re

€opul—tion2hensity gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFP xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡

pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx

pes‚psivh xi‡ f‚shqi€y‚„

gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h

‡iƒ„€y‚„ „ot—l2imployment2@IWWRA ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu `2SDHHH2people q‚iix‡sgr he‚six SDHHI2E2IHDHHH2people IHDHHI2E2PHDHHH2people PHDHHI2E2SHDHHH2people b2SHDHHH2people ƒour™eX2g„2hep—rtment2of2v—˜or imployment gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFQ 5 5 5 5 555 xi‡2wsvpy‚h55 55 TWI 5 ƒri‚wex 5 F 55555 DE 555 5 555 5555 5 f‚shqi‡e„i‚ 5wi‚shix555 5 55 5 55 5 5 5 55 555 5 xi‡2pes‚psivh 55 WI5 5555 DEF55 5 5 5 55 55 f‚yyupsivh 5 5 5‡evvsxqpy‚h 5 555 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 óôIH 55 55 5 5 5 FVR 55 5 5 5 DE rewhix5 55 hexf ‚‰ 55 555 T 5 fi„rex‰ 5 5 5 5555 G@ 5 5 55 5555 5 5 5 5 5555 5 5 5 5 555 5 5 5 5 5555 555555 5 5 QR 55 555 5 5 555 5 fi„riv 5 óô xy‚„r2re†ix 555 5 5 xi‡„y‡x ‡yyhf‚shqi 5 5 5 55 5 ƒi‰wy ‚ 5 5 5 55 IU 5 55 55 55 55 óôxy‚„r 5 5 5 wehsƒyx 5 5 5 f‚expy‚h 5 5 5 5 5 5exƒyxse5 5 5 5 5 óôVH 5 5555 5 5 5 55 5 5 555 5 WI ieƒ„ 5 wyx‚yi 55 55 5 5 DEF5 5 5 5 5 55 555 re†ix5 q svpy‚h 5 5555hi‚f‰ 5555 5 55 5 5 5 5 55 5555xi‡2re†ix5 555555 5 55 ‚ihhsxq 5 5 ƒriv„yx 555555555 55 55555555 f‚expy‚h55 WS ‚shqipsivh 5 5 55 55 5 óôQR 55555555 5 5555 F 5 5 5 5 55 55 5 5 5 55 DE 555 5 óô55V5 5 5‡iƒ„555 55 5 5 55 5 5 PS 5555 5 y‚exqi 5re†ix 5 555 5 5ôó 55 5 5 55 5 5 5 55 5 5 SV 5 5 55 55 5 5 5 óô 5„‚ wf vv 5555 55 5 5 5 ieƒ„yx 5 5WS 5 55 5 5 5 DEF5 ‡iƒ„yx 5 5555 555 55 wsvpy‚h 55 555 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 5 555 5 555 QQ 5 5 f‚shqi€y‚„5 5 5 55 5 óô 5 5 5 5 5 V 5 ‡sv„yx5 555óô5 55 5555 555 5 IS 5 5ƒ„‚e„py‚h555 5 555 5 55 óô 5 5 555 5 5 pes‚psivh 5 5555 5 5 G@U 5 5 5 555555 55 xi‡2gexeex 5 55555555 5 5 5 555WS55555 5 5555 5 5 5 55DEF555 55 5 5 5 ‡iƒ„€y‚„5 5 5 ÷øIQU 55 55 5 5 5 5 5555 5 5555 5 5 5 5555 555 55 5 55 ƒ„ewpy‚h 5 5 55 55 5 5 xy‚‡evu55 5 55 555 5 5 5 5 5 555 5 5 5 5 55 55 5 q‚iix‡sgr 5 55 5 555555555 IS 5 5 he‚six 555 5 óô 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 55 5 55 5 5 5 5 55 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5555 55 5 vo™—tions2of2imployers2with 555555555 55 55555555 5 5 5 55 555 555 IHH2imployees2or2wore 55 55 55 555 5 55 5 5 5 ƒour™eX2gonne™ti™ut2ƒt—te2v—˜or2hep—rtment imployment2gon™entr—tions gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFR xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx

pes‚psivh xi‡ f‚shqi€y‚„ gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h €opul—tion2gh—nge ‡iƒ„€y‚„ `2H7 H72E2IS7 ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu q‚iix‡sgr IS72E2QH7 he‚six QH72E2TH7 b2TH7 ƒour™eX2IWSH2 ƒ2gensusD2 IWTH2 ƒ2gensus IWSH2E2IWTH2€opul—tion2gh—nge gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFS xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi€y‚„ €opul—tion2gh—nge gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h `2H7 ‡iƒ„€y‚„ H72E2IS7 ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu IS72E2QH7 q‚iix‡sgr he‚six QH72E2TH7 b2TH7 ƒour™eX2IWTH2 ƒ2gensusD2 IWUH2 ƒ2gensus IWTH2E2IWUH2€opul—tion2gh—nge gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFT xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx €opul—tion2gh—nge pes‚psivh xi‡ f‚shqi€y‚„ `2H7 gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h H72E2IS7 ‡iƒ„€y‚„ IS72E2QH7 ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu QH72E2TH7 q‚iix‡sgr he‚six b2TH7

ƒour™eX2IWWH2 ƒ2gensusD2 PHHH2 ƒ2gensus IWWH2E2PHHH2€opul—tion2gh—nge gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFU xi‡2wsvpy‚h

ƒri‚wex wi‚shix

xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi‡e„i‚ f‚yyupsivh ‡evvsxqpy‚h

fi„rex‰ rewhix hexf ‚‰ xi‡„y‡x xy‚„r xy‚„r ƒi‰wy ‚ re†ix f‚expy‚h fi„riv exƒyxse hi‚f‰ wyx‚yi

‡yyhf‚shqi xi‡2re†ix q svpy‚h ‚shqipsivh ‚ihhsxq ƒriv„yx f‚expy‚h wehsƒyx ieƒ„yx „‚ wf vv y‚exqi ‡iƒ„ re†ix ieƒ„2re†ix

‡iƒ„yx wsvpy‚h ‡sv„yx €opul—tion2gh—nge xi‡ pes‚psivh f‚shqi€y‚„ €opul—tion2he™line gexeex ƒ„‚e„py‚h H2E2SDHHH2people ‡iƒ„€y‚„ SDHHH2E2IHDHHH ƒ„ewpy‚h xy‚‡evu IHDHHH2E2PHDHHH q‚iix‡sgr he‚six b2PHDHHH2people

ƒour™eX2IWTH2 ƒ2gensusD2 PHHH2 ƒ2gensus IWTH2E2PHHH2€opul—tion2gh—nge2@in2num˜ersA gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2QFV

“The SWRPA region will maintain its share of total population in the State over the next 25 years, and… population will increase by some 27,890 persons… to 357,340 in 2020… Moderate growth is predicted for Stamford, Norwalk, Darien, New Canaan, Westport and Wilton.”1

3.1.2 Housatonic Valley Region

The Housatonic Valley Region experienced substantial growth in the 1970-2000 period, and continues to grow at a faster rate than any of the coastal regional planning areas due to greater availability of land, particularly in outlying towns such as New Milford.

3.1.3 Greater Bridgeport Region

While Greater Bridgeport’s regional population grew by four percent between 1990 and 2000, its core city, Bridgeport, continued to decline in population as it has for the last five decades. In this respect, the region’s population changes mirror statewide and national trends. Still, the majority of the region’s population remains concentrated in Bridgeport and the adjacent areas of Fairfield, Stratford, and Trumbull. The towns of Easton and Monroe had the most significant population growth of the region’s communities yet have the lowest residential density. Easton has less than 100 housing units per square mile, while Bridgeport has more than 1,600 housing units per square mile.

Employment in the region remained essentially stable over the past decade. It grew by only one percent between 1995 and 2000. There was significant contrast in the change in employment amongst the region’s communities, however. The towns of Trumbull, Fairfield, and Monroe all had substantial increases in their employment base, while employment in Bridgeport fell by 4 percent between 1995 and 2000.

3.1.4 Valley Region

The Valley Region experienced a gradual increase in population over the past ten years. This slow growth was distributed primarily between Shelton and Seymour while population change in Ansonia and Derby was negligible. Shelton had the most substantial growth with a 7.5 percent increase in population between 1990 and 2000. Shelton also had the most substantial increase in housing units with more than 1,700 units built between 1990 and 2000. This compares with Derby where about 300 new housing units were developed in the past decade.

Employment in the Valley Region has grown by approximately 20 percent over the last five years due to strong employment growth in Shelton and Seymour associated with the location of major corporate office complexes there. The towns of Ansonia and Derby experienced a loss of employment in the same time period.

1 Based on Connecticut Office of Policy and Management (OPM) projections Congestion Mitigation Study 3-2 Existing Conditions Report 3.1.5 South Central Region

The South Central Region had a three percent overall drop in population between 1990 and 2000, from 536,853 to 521,282. While nine of the region’s 15 municipalities had some growth, the urban center and regional subcenters all experienced population declines. New Haven population fell by five percent. West Haven had a three percent population loss. Meriden and Wallingford each had a two percent population decline.

As in all the other portions of the study area, population and housing density remain concentrated along the Connecticut coastline and along the developed corridor between New Haven and Meriden. The three towns that experienced the greatest growth were Madison (fifteen percent), Woodbridge (thirteen percent) and Bethany (nine percent). These were among the most rural, least densely populated towns in 1990, and have retained their large-lot residential character over time.

The South Central Planning Region’s Vision for the Future, Regional Plan of Development (November 2000) states that the region overall is “a housing market in the truest sense of the word”. About 80 percent of the people who live in the region work in the region. This suggests that the region’s residents are relocating over time from the urban core and regional subcenters to the more suburban communities and rural areas, yet remaining within the region itself. A limited percentage of residents are relocating outside the region altogether.

Employment in the South Central region grew by 6 percent between 1995 and 2000. The urban core, the City of New Haven, had minimal growth in employment (only 0.5 percent). The greatest growth in employment occurred in suburban communities adjacent to New Haven and in Wallingford. Aside from New Haven, municipalities with the largest number of employed persons include Milford, North Haven, Meriden, and Wallingford. Interestingly, significant growth in employment occurred in some towns that had a corresponding population loss. These include West Haven, Wallingford, and Meriden. The contrast between population trends in the region and employment trends indicates that while both residential and employment growth is occurring in the region’s suburban communities, the regional subcenters have also retained employment and remained attractive for new business development.

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-3 Existing Conditions Report 3.2 Highlights of Municipal Plan Review

3.2.1 South Western Region Municipalities

Greenwich (1998 Plan of Conservation and Development) – Greenwich’s 1998 Town plan emphasizes the preservation of existing neighborhoods. The plan notes that additional residential development potential is limited, but that up to 4,500 dwelling units could be accommodated with lot splits, subdivision, and one to two family conversions, with the majority of this potential within established neighborhoods. The plan also identifies development potential for over four million square feet of additional office space. This would entail full development on vacant parcels, additions to existing buildings and conversion of some residential properties. The plan also recognizes that there are significant transportation issues. It recommended that SWRPA’s plans to relieve congestion be implemented.

Stamford (1985 Master Plan Amendment) - The master plan allows for concentrated commercial development within the city’s core and south of I-95 along the waterfront. Typically commercial designations allow for residential uses within the core. There are also large campus-style office developments and neighborhood commercial shopping areas in the northern section of the City. Growth potential in these areas is limited.

Norwalk (1990 Plan of Development) - The city intends to update the current plan. The current policies set a number of goals for residential, commercial and industrial land uses. City housing policies focus on neighborhood preservation. Commercial policies restrict large-scale development to the downtown cores (Norwalk and South Norwalk) and north of the Merritt Parkway. Mixed uses are encouraged in the downtown areas. With a reduction of industrial activity, the plan calls for protection of existing industrial areas from encroachment by non-industrial zones. The plan supports the completion of Route 7 up to the intersection of Route 33 within the 1990-2000 timeframe. It also supports completion of Route 7 to Danbury. Support for traffic management measures that improve mass transit is also given first priority in the plan.

Weston (1987 Plan of Development) – Weston’s plan indicates that there is no growth potential for employment areas and little growth potential for residential development on minimum of one acres lot sizes.

Wilton (1996 Plan of Conservation and Development) - The only growth potential within the Town is an Adaptive Re-use Area along Route 7. The area largely contains offices that were formerly residences. The development potential for the Town is relatively small. The Plan does note that widening of Route 7 or the construction of Super 7 should be avoided.

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-4 Existing Conditions Report 3.2.2 Housatonic Valley Region Municipalities

Danbury is the urban center within the Housatonic Region. It contains the main employment centers and has developable areas for additional office space. The secondary centers are residentially oriented towns surrounding Danbury, including Ridgefield, Redding, Newtown, Brookfield, New Fairfield, Bridgewater, Sherman and New Milford. Municipalities north of Danbury are not within the study area, but include some of the fastest growing residential areas in the region. Two communities to the south of Danbury contain growth areas.

Danbury (2000 Plan of Conservation and Development) Materials developed in 2000 for a Plan of Conservation and Development Update by planning consultant John Hayes for HVCEO and the City of Danbury indicate the pattern of overall continuing growth for the City: “After four decades of nearly explosive population growth, Danbury in 1990 was a cosmopolitan small city with a diverse and highly sophisticated economy. Except for the southern and western fringes of the city, suburban residential development now spread across large areas of the landscape. All categories of developed or committed land use had increased greatly since 1950. Developed land totaled about 4,550 acres in 1950 and 14,400 acres in 1990. Recreation and open space land had also increased over the same period, from about 700 acres to nearly 2,300 acres. After allowing for undevelopable water supply lands, wetlands and water bodies, less than 28% of Danbury was by 1990 undeveloped.”

“Danbury's population reached 74,848 in 2000, a stunning increase of 14% over 1990, with Connecticut as a whole increasing by a lesser 3.6% during that same period. Such a major population gain for a city in Connecticut is unprecedented, and is clearly indicative of social and economic health. Looking into the twenty first century, Danbury will be the vibrant center of Western Connecticut and a City with suburbs proud to be associated with it.”

Newtown (1993 Plan of Conservation and Development) - The plan allows for a number of industrial and commercial areas, but retains the majority of land for residential purposes. Future build out is projected to be between 3,051 and 3,793 new homes and 936,547 and 1,137,335 square feet of non-residential development. (The majority of residential development will be in the R-2 districts that specify a minimum of two acres per building per lot.) However, the plan further states that only 339 acres of industrially zoned land is developable. The majority of the Industrial land is located along the I84 corridor.

Business zones are virtually built-out. Development potential may be increased by use of the Affordable Housing Development regulations which can be implement in any residential zone outside the borough and which allows a maximum of six dwelling units per acre. Route 25 is a commercial and industrial corridor through southern Newton that links the east to Route 84. Commercial development should be located in clusters along the corridor and future residential development should be accessible by roadways off of Route 25. There are current environmental constraints to development. The significant

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-5 Existing Conditions Report regional/local growth of the 1990’s has put great stress on the existing infrastructure (i.e. crowded roadways, failing septic systems, water quality, etc.). Higher residential densities are not desired in areas served by public sewers and public water.

Bethel (Plan of Development 1997) - In Bethel, vacant land without environmental constraints totals 2,235 acres. The RM-O Zone (Apartment Professional Office) is nearly built-out with 3/4 acre remaining. The C Zone is entirely built-out. The three sites with economic development potential are the Francis J. Clarke Industrial Park, the Berkshire Corporate Park and the Route 6 corridor. The corridor has a CI zoning classification (highway/commercial office) and the remaining vacant parcels are large lots. Most of the vacant, residentially zoned land is in the R-80 Zone (one unit per two acres) is outside the sewer service areas. Sewers may be possible in the case of a large conservation subdivision.

Bethel has a relatively hilly terrain and growth has occurred on many hilltops. The plan proposes a ridge protection overlay zone be mapped wherever hillsides measure 20% or more in grade to prevent damaging construction atop ridgelines.

3.2.3 Greater Bridgeport Region Municipalities

Bridgeport - The Bridgeport Master Plan of Development – 1996 (Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency, 1996) includes a future land use plan and map. The map was prepared in 1997 by GBRPA. Goals and objectives for the following subjects are addressed in the Plan: regional context of Bridgeport, economic development, transportation, housing, land use, environmental remediation, and port and waterfront development. Also included is mapping showing future land use patterns such as a Central Business District Plan Map, General Business Plan Map, Neighborhood Business Plan Map, Light Industrial Land Use Map, Heavy Industrial Land Use Map, Port Development Plan Map, Mixed Use Plan Map, Parks and Recreational Open Space Plan Map, and Waterfront Development Plan Map.

Easton - Easton is currently updating their Plan of Development, which will address the possibility of allowing limited commercial zoning in the area of the intersection of Route 59 and Center Road. There is nothing planned at this point. Future land use mapping will also be addressed in the update of the Easton Plan of Development.

Fairfield - Fairfield’s Plan of Conservation and Development (Town Plan and Zoning Commission, 2000) identifies eleven planning areas and provides characteristics and policies for each area. The boundaries are shown on a map prepared by the Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency in 1998. The Plan identifies the Commerce Drive Area as being deemed underdeveloped by the Economic Development Commission with excellent access to Interstate 95. The Hoydens Hill area is identified as having large expanses of undeveloped land with more than 60 percent devoted to open space and recreational areas such as golf courses and the Bridgeport Hydraulic Company reservoir property. There is no future land use map included in the Town Plan. The Fairfield Planning and Zoning Director indicated that the Zoning Regulations combined with the

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-6 Existing Conditions Report Town Plan of Conservation and Development provides a good representation of the future land use in Fairfield.

Monroe - The Monroe 2000 Plan of Conservation and Development (Planimetrics, May, 2000) identifies that 43 percent of the land area in Monroe is residential, 3 percent is business, 18 percent is open space and public land and 25 percent is vacant. There is estimated potential for between 1000 and 1500 additional housing units in Monroe and 700,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of commercial floor space under current zoning and physical environmental constraints. There has been steady growth in housing and population in Monroe over the past two decades. Most businesses in Monroe are located along Route 25 and Route 111 (south of Jeanette Street) in the Stevenson area and in the industrial area between Route 25 and Fan Hill Road south of the Newtown town line.

Stratford - Stratford Visions: 2001 (Stratford Planning Commission, 1993) includes maps prepared by the GBRPA and a future land use plan. The town is 44% residential with only 11 percent of land used for commercial or industrial activity. Thirteen percent of the land in Stratford was vacant as of 1992. The majority of vacant land occurs in residentially zoned areas north of the Merritt Parkway. Much of this land has natural constraints (such as steep slopes) that may inhibit development. Public sewers serve the majority of Stratford. Major commercial districts are located along Barnum Avenue, Stratford Avenue, Ferry Boulevard, Honeyspot Road, and along Main Street at the town center, at Paradise Green, and in the Oronoque area.

Trumbull - The Trumbull Plan of Development (Trumbull Planning and Zoning Commission, 1984) is the most recent planning document available for the Town of Trumbull. Issues raised include diversity of housing options, preservation of community character, retaining planned commercial centers and avoiding strip development, desire for infill of existing industrial areas, and addition of recreational open space in Trumbull neighborhoods. There is no reproducible mapping in this plan.

3.2.4 Valley Region Municipalities

The town Plans of Development for Ansonia and Derby were prepared in the 1960s and are currently being updated. The latest Plan of Development for Seymour is from 1989 and includes a proposed land use map.

Shelton - The Shelton Plan of Development (The Mayor’s Special Planning Committee, 1992) estimates that approximately 7,000 acres of the City’s 19,500 acres of land are vacant or under-developed within residential zoning districts, not including public, semi- public, or private institutional open lands. If developed to the fullest potential, there could be an additional 6,100 to 7,100 additional dwelling units. This does not account for infrastructure constraints such as sewers, water supply, roads, and solid waste disposal. Shelton currently has about 10 million square feet of non-residential floor area. Vacant and under-utilized non-residentially zoned land could account for an additional 10.8 to 13.8 million square feet of floor area under existing zoning along Route 110 South, the Route 8 Corridor, and Shelton’s Central Business District.

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-7 Existing Conditions Report

3.2.5 South Central Connecticut Planning Region Municipalities

The SCRCOG region can be characterized as having one major urbanized area (New Haven and adjacent communities) and two other important urban centers (Meriden and Wallingford). The areas in between Meriden and New Haven and along the coastline of the region are a mix of typical suburban uses including some regional malls and large areas of single-family residential use. Rural lands are concentrated primarily in Bethany, Guilford, Madison, North Branford and Woodbridge.

Areas of concentrated commercial and industrial activity occur primarily in the New Haven urbanized area (including East Haven, Hamden, North Haven, and West Haven), in Meriden, Wallingford, and along major highway and arterial roadway corridors. Major transportation corridors include I-91, I-95, and Routes 1, 5, 10, 15 and 34.

City of New Haven - The City of New Haven does not have citywide plan of conservation and development that proposes future land use plan and documents development potential. However, the City has several subarea plans for redevelopment of critical areas of concern. New Haven has a goal of revitalizing/redeveloping the Long Wharf area to be a community focal point and waterfront activity center, and has a future land use plan for the area, Reclaiming the Waterfront, Reconnecting New Haven to Its Harbor (New Haven City Plan Office, September, 1996). That document presents a future land use plan showing a Church Street South extension, depression of I-95, a festival/exposition pavilion pier, relocation of the Yale Boathouse, pedestrian connections from the vicinity of the Pirelli building to Union Station, and integration of trails in the area with a regional greenways system. These projects would make the area more pedestrian oriented, offer more cultural opportunities, and enhance the retail sector. Planning has been initiated for several of those site-specific projects and implementation of the Church Street South Extension has begun.

Other subarea development plans include the Downtown Municipal Development Program completed in January 1996, and the River Street Municipal Development Plan completed in September 2001. The downtown plan is intended to supplement development projects already in place or in process for the area and to support the downtown as New Haven’s office, art, and entertainment center with associated retail activity. The River Street plan is intended to stimulate the revitalization of the River Street section of the Fair Haven neighborhood. River Street is one of the City’s oldest industrial corridors. As much as 41% of these properties are available for redevelopment for light industrial and manufacturing uses.

There are two other economic development initiatives of note in New Haven. The City is a designated Enterprise Community. As such, economic development planning is ongoing for the vicinity of Howard Avenue and Long Wharf as part of the New Haven Enterprise Community Strategic Plan. This process brings seed money into the area for economic development projects. In addition, New Haven participates in the Regional Growth Partnership through the South Central Region Council of Governments

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-8 Existing Conditions Report (SCCOG). This program investigates ways to bring industry to local communities through enhancing the economic climate of the entire region. For New Haven, participation in this program focuses on projects to clean former industrial sites of hazardous materials (brownfields) so they may be more attractive for industrial or commercial re-use.

Milford – The plan of conservation and development for Milford dates back to 1972. It has been amended periodically, but not comprehensively updated. The most recent amendment was completed in 1993. Community goals expressed in that plan supplement include: • Enhance shoreline access and preservation • Maintain existing residential neighborhoods • Provide affordable housing opportunities, targeted to residential areas within existing commercial corridors • Infill of commercial and industrially zoned land in or adjacent to the Central Business District (CBD) • Open space preservation • Encourage clustered development and planned unit developments

Commercial corridors identified included Route 1, Naugatuck Avenue south of Route 1, and New Haven Avenue.

Orange - Plan of Conservation & Development 2000 – Future development potential in the Town of Orange was assessed in detail for this plan. It was estimated that there are approximately 1009 acres developable for residential use, 181 acres developable for commercial and industrial use and an additional 77 acres available for non-residential reuse. While the plan notes that it is unlikely that the market could absorb full build-out of all available retail, office, and industrial space, it estimates that there is a total potential for 1,2504,035,000 square feet of new office space, 1,250,000 square feet of new retail space, and 2,440,000 square feet of new industrial space. The available developable properties are concentrated in the southeast corner of the town between the Route 1 corridor and the Milford and West Haven town lines. This area encompasses I-95 through Orange. Available developable residentially zoned land is located primarily in central Orange and in scattered parcels west of Route 15. The town has designated an economic development area along Marsh Hill Road and an office park district adjacent to Route 15 near the Milford town line. Goals expressed for the community within the plan include: • Maintaining low density residential pattern (96% of existing housing units are single family units on large lots) • Open space preservation • Encouraging well planned development in the designated economic development area • Providing opportunities for clustered residential development.

West Haven – Plan of Development City of West Haven, Connecticut, June 1990 – At the time this plan was completed it was estimated that the City of West Haven had 667 acres of developable residential acreage. The plan also noted that over half the housing

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-9 Existing Conditions Report stock in 1990 was in various types of multi-family units. However, the growth in single- family units had been steady over time while the rate of multifamily unit development had fluctuated greatly. Considering this, the plan estimated that the available residential acreage would translate into a maximum growth potential of 4,000 additional dwelling units.

The plan also estimated that West Haven had approximately 460 acres of commercially and industrially zoned land available for development. The ultimate development potential of the City was estimated at 30% increase in population and 68% increase in commercial/industrial development. While the 1990 zoning would accommodate this level of growth, the City’s infrastructure, including roads, sewers, water supply, schools, etcetera, was expected to place some constraints of the pace of new development. The plan’s evaluation of the potential market for commercial and industrial development concluded that the demand for industrial space would remain strong, the demand for retail space would remain somewhat static, and the demand for office space would increase somewhat.

3.3 Identification of Major Trip Generators

3.3.1 South Western Region Major Trip Generators

The downtowns of Stamford and Norwalk are the two largest centers for employment and trip generation within the SWRPA region, and in fact throughout the entire study area. Development in Downtown Stamford has reached a point where it now provides a larger employment base than either of the two traditional urban core cities of Bridgeport and New Haven.

Although financial service firms, such as Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) and G.E. Capital, play a larger and larger role in the regional economic profile, several manufacturing firms, for example Pitney Bowes and U.S. Surgical corporations, remain major employers as well. Health care institutions and health services firms, such as Stamford Hospital, Oxford Health Plans and Silver Hill Hospital also draw large numbers of employees to the region. A full listing of major trip generator locations is provided in an appendix document.

The majority of the region’s major traffic generators are located south of the Merritt Parkway in the downtown and industrial areas of Greenwich, Stamford, Norwalk and Westport. Stamford Town Center is the region’s only enclosed regional shopping center. Additional retail activity is located in both downtown and strip shopping centers in the uptown area of Stamford and Norwalk, on Route 1 in Westport, and in the smaller suburban centers of the region, such as New Canaan and Darien.

3.3.2 Housatonic Valley Region Major Trip Generators

As noted in the preceding chapter, Downtown Danbury is the only regional urban center within the HVCEO region. Outside of the traditional urban core, corporate office and

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-10 Existing Conditions Report industrial parks are the typical location for the large employers and trip generators in the region, both within Danbury, as well as in the neighboring towns of Bethel and Ridgefield. Danbury Fair Mall is the region’s major retail center, with a total employment of over 20,000 full-time and part-time employees by the mall’s anchor stores. Other major employment centers include the Union Carbide campus, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Praxair adjacent to I-84 exit 2 in western Danbury, the Berkshire Industrial Park and Francis J. Clarke Industrial Park in Bethel, and the Boehringer Ingelheim headquarters in Ridgefield.

3.3.3 Greater Bridgeport Region Major Trip Generators

Major employment centers and travel destinations in the Greater Bridgeport Region are concentrated along the coastline, primarily in Bridgeport and Stratford. Employers are also concentrated all along Route 1, on Black Rock Turnpike, and Kings Highway in Fairfield, along Main Street in Stratford, and along Merritt Boulevard in Trumbull. Other major travel destinations in the Bridgeport Region include major hospitals in Bridgeport, Beardsley Zoo and other Bridgeport cultural attractions, Fairfield University, University of Bridgeport, Scared Heart University, Sikorsky Airport, and coastline beaches and state parks.

3.3.4 Valley Region Major Trip Generators

Major employers in the Valley Region are concentrated along Route 8 in Shelton, Ansonia and Derby. Other important employment centers are located:

ƒ Bridgeport Avenue and Commerce Drive in Shelton; ƒ Route 34/Main Street in Derby; ƒ Main Street in Ansonia; and ƒ Silvermine Road and Progress Lane in Seymour.

3.3.5 South Central Region Major Trip Generators

Major employers in this region are concentrated along the coastline in New Haven, East Haven, West Haven, and Milford. Large employers are also located in Meriden and Wallingford. Other substantial employment concentrations occur along major state routes and arterials roads including:

ƒ Route 5 and Research Parkway in Meriden ƒ Dixwell Avenue, Whitney Avenue, and New Road in Hamden ƒ Route 1 in Milford ƒ Corporate Drive, Washington Avenue, Bassett Road, Universal Drive, and McDermott Road in North Haven ƒ Route 1 in Orange ƒ Research Parkway in Wallingford ƒ Morgan Lane and Marsh Hill Road in West Haven.

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-11 Existing Conditions Report Other major travel destinations in the South Central Region include Southern Connecticut State University and Quinnipiac College in Hamden, Yale University, Yale/New Haven Hospital, Yale Bowl, Shubert Theater and other downtown New Haven cultural attractions, Long Wharf Theater in New Haven, Tweed/New Haven Airport, Union Station in New Haven, local and state beaches including Hammonasset State Park, and Connecticut Post Mall in Orange.

3.4 Identification of Development Potential Areas

3.4.1 South Western Region Development Potential Areas

Several projects are ongoing or planned in the South Western region. Greenwich expects to receive significant traffic impacts from a 3-million square-foot mixed-used development in Port Chester, NY. The Town of Greenwich expects that traffic on I-95 will use exit 2, in Greenwich, to access the site, as this is the most direct route, and has begun traffic calming efforts. In addition, the future development of two supermarkets on the border with Stamford is expected to create traffic impacts in eastern Greenwich.

The Reed-Putnam Redevelopment Project in downtown South Norwalk includes 74 acres bounded by I-95, the Norwalk River, Pine Street and West Avenue. The project is currently underway and is expected to be completed in 8 to 10 years. At completion, it will include 1,000,000 square feet of office space; 3,100 spaces of structured parking; 200 housing units; and possibly a hotel.

In the Merritt 7 area, a project is underway to construct three office buildings. The expected completion is in 2 to 3 years with a total of 750,000 square feet. Hewitt Associates will be sole occupant of one 250,000 square-foot building.

Avalon Properties will be constructing 300 apartments in downtown Norwalk to create a mixed-use neighborhood. The apartments will be co-located on the site of Norwalk Mall, the central hub for the Norwalk Transit District bus fleet.

3.4.2 Housatonic Valley Region

Danbury is in site plan review for the following projects:

ƒ A potential 400,000 square-foot shopping center that includes a 140,000 square-foot Home Depot as anchor is proposed for Federal Road, near the I-84 Exit 7 intersection with Federal Road and Route 7. Danbury has just received the application.

ƒ A proposed 235-unit housing development near the I-84 Exit 8 with Route 6.

3.4.3 Greater Bridgeport Region

The City of Bridgeport has several major ongoing revitalization efforts. Revitalization of older industrial sites as well as new business park development is also anticipated in

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-12 Existing Conditions Report Fairfield and Stratford. Anticipated new development in the Greater Bridgeport Planning Region include redevelopment in Downtown Bridgeport; rehabilitation and clean-up activity in the City’s industrial areas, such as the Seaview Avenue corridor, the Lake Success Executive Park development, the Housatonic Avenue corridor, and the West End corridor. In Fairfield, a major redevelopment project is planned for the Commerce Drive area adjacent to Black Rock Turnpike.

Recently completed development initiatives in the Greater Bridgeport Region include:

Harbor Yard Ballpark and Arena at Harbor Yard

The $19 million, 5,500 seat ballpark in downtown Bridgeport is home of the Bridgeport Bluefish baseball team. After it was identified through the EPA Assessment Grant as one of the City’s six sites with the greatest potential for redevelopment, the City of Bridgeport, through a combination of city bond funds and private investment, acquired the property, and built the new ball field. Considered Connecticut’s premier sports and entertainment venue, the neighboring arena is available for concerts, sporting events and trade shows will a capacity of 10,000 seats or 150 trade show booths.

Bryant Electric Company

The City of Bridgeport's most notable brownfield success story was the 12-acre Bryant Electric property in the City's West End neighborhood. In 1988, after Bryant Electric ceased operations in the century old 500,000 square foot facility, Westinghouse explored adaptive reuse scenarios for the factory buildings without success until 1992. Spurred by a demand for industrial land for new construction, a partnership was formed that allowed Westinghouse to dispose of the property while simplifying the company’s compliance with the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Connecticut Property Transfer Act.

Westinghouse remediated environmental conditions that existed within the Bryant Electric building structure, and the City, with funding from the State of Connecticut, commissioned the demolition of the structures, which allowed Westinghouse to undertake subsurface remediation measures. Westinghouse agreed to sell the cleared and cleaned property to the City for $1 with a pledge to complete the remediation to federal and state standards.

In the period of years that Bryant Electric sat idle, the adjacent city blocks suffered from divestment, attributable to the visible deterioration of the factory itself. In cooperation with the West End Community Development Corporation (WECDC), a nonprofit neighborhood development corporation, the city adopted a redevelopment plan for the neighborhood. The City of Bridgeport sought and received an additional $10 million from the State of Connecticut and $2 million from the U.S. Housing and Urban Development, which were used to: reclaim adjacent industrially zoned land for an industrial park; separate incompatible land uses that plagued both business and residents; stabilize an important business neighborhood; and construct a Police Precinct. Another $2

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-13 Existing Conditions Report million was secured from the State of Connecticut to clean additional brownfields in the neighborhood.

The West End Industrial Park — 12 acres centered on the former Bryant Electric site — has shown tremendous promise for private investment: the City has already dedicated 4 acres to a manufacturer that has committed to a $7 million capital investment and another manufacturing company has entered discussions with the City regarding the construction of a new 100,000 square foot facility with a total capital investment approaching $15 million. The partnership of private sector and neighborhood interests with local, state and federal governments has resulted in a dramatic reversal of fortunes in a business neighborhood once at risk.

RemGrit Site

The RemGrit site is one of the largest brownfields in the city with the greatest redevelopment potential. It was once a munition factory and now sits nearly idle, adding to the neighborhood’s blight, housing a small number of manufacturers. RemGrit, a 28 acre brownfield whose 1 million square feet of unusable building space spans the area between two of Bridgeport's main industrial and commercial corridors (Boston and Barnum Avenues), is suspected to be littered with asbestos, lead and contaminated soils. Liens on the property, including a $4 million dollar property tax bill, and an owner without resources to assess or clean up the site are the real hurdles to its return to productive use.

RemGrit is located in the middle of a neighborhood currently undergoing an extensive planning study from which specific Action Areas and a Master Development Plan will be created. The City of Bridgeport will continue to tackle these hurdles to make the RemGrit brownfield one of the next success stories.

3.4.4 Valley Planning Region

Future growth in the Valley Region is also expected to follow current trends. Growth in Seymour will be largely residential except for the Grey Hill Industrial Park. Shelton will continue to grow in terms of white-collar employment with more major corporations locating their offices on Bridgeport Avenue, which has very good access to Route 8. However, growth will occur primarily in existing developed areas in Shelton because there are no plans to extend the sewer system. Derby is expected to experience some revitalization, focused on the downtown. Yet, much of Derby does not have direct access to major roadway corridors and this is expected to inhibit the pace of growth.

3.4.5 South Central Region

Growth in the South Central region is expected to be slow. New residential growth has been concentrated in Madison and Woodbridge and these communities are expected to remain as bedroom communities with increasing housing construction and limited employment opportunities. New non-residential growth is expected to occur primarily in

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-14 Existing Conditions Report Branford, East Haven, and West Haven. The City of New Haven is also pursuing ongoing revitalization projects focusing on the downtown, Long Wharf area, and encouraging growth in biotechnology industry employment.

Some key growth areas for the South Central Region include:

ƒ Exit 56 in Branford ƒ West end of Guilford ƒ Development in Wallingford along Route 15 ƒ East Haven growth in light industrial business

Current projects in the SCRCOG Region (100+ employees/ 200+ parking spaces/ 100,000 square feet or more/dense, aggregate housing or mixed use) include:

ƒ Acorn Park – on Route 34 on West Haven/Orange town line – being privately developed and will be marketed as a high-tech or biotech office park ƒ Yale Medical Center expansion plans adjacent to downtown New Haven ƒ Bayer Pharmaceutical on Orange/West Haven town line in Marsh Hill area

Congestion Mitigation Study 3-15 Existing Conditions Report 4. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVENTORY

4.1 Factors Influencing Transportation System Demand

As far back as the 1950’s and 1960’s, research in the field of regional travel demand and transportation planning has documented the close connection between land use decisions (and the resulting patterns of residential and commercial development) and local traffic generation, choice of travel mode, overall traffic volume, and congestion. The form and intensity of land use, traffic access and circulation correlate with a wide range of travel characteristics, such as:

ƒ Trip purposes (home-work, home-school, home-shopping, recreational, etc.); ƒ Mix of vehicle types (the proportion of cars, buses and trucks in overall traffic volumes); ƒ Availability and use of non-vehicular travel modes (walking and bicycling); and ƒ Corridor/roadway-specific levels of traffic, transit, and transportation demand.

Transportation and land use planning should have coordinated end goals – making the most efficient use of limited resources in creating an environment in which residents and businesses can enjoy a quality of life that is both desirable and sustainable. However, transportation implications of land use decisions have not always been considered thoroughly. For example, encouragement of mixed land use developments blending residential, commercial, educational, and recreational uses may reduce or limit vehicular demand. Clustering of development may create an opportunity to implement transit service providing an alternative to the private automobile.

In areas of low-density and suburban development, there is more auto dependency, longer vehicle trips and generally more vehicle trip generation. This pattern encourages more vehicular use, and is less efficient because more auto travel is necessary to accomplish the same cumulative trip purposes. Conversely, a land use pattern where more trip purposes can be accomplished by walking, bicycling or transit, or where trips are shorter, encourages less vehicular use. It is therefore more efficient in its use of natural resources and fossil fuel and results in less environmental impact. A more concentrated mixed pattern of land complements the development of facilities and services for alternatives to the single-occupant automobile, such as walking, bicycle travel, transit travel, and ridesharing.

While land use can influence the potential to reduce vehicular use, communities and agencies must provide the transportation facilities, services, and programs to actually realize the trip reduction potential. For example, sidewalks and multi-use pathways are known to encourage more pedestrian trips, just as improved transit service encourages use of bus and rail modes.

In the future, information technology may reduce overall demand by allowing substitution of telecommuting or internet shopping for vehicular based person trips. Recent studies have shown that nearly 20 percent of work trips may be able to be

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-1 Existing Conditions Report satisfied at least in part by telecommuting. Most attention is placed on the movement of people especially during peak periods when congestion is at its greatest. This journey-to- work related travel that predominantly occurs during the peak period accounts for only 20 percent of total trips taken. Other trips noted above account for nearly 80 percent of all travel and offer great potential for trip reduction. It is therefore this area of use of passenger vehicles where reduction in auto-related impacts may be greatest.

4.2 Highway Characteristics

The regional highway network for the study area is shown in Figure 4.1. As can be seen in this figure, I-95, I-84, I-91, Route 15, and Route 8 can be classified as principal arterials (freeways) based on a high degree of mobility through the study area network and limited access from adjacent land development. Routes 7 and 25 exhibit mixed classification with a portion of these roadways falling under the principal arterial class while the remaining portions falling under the minor arterial class. Route 1 can be classified as a principal arterial based on its access and mobility characteristics. Route 34 also falls under the principal arterial classification.

4.2.1 Description of Facilities

I-95, a primarily six-lane interstate highway, running throughout the length of the study area (four lanes east of the Quinnipiac River Bridge in East Haven), is the primary east- west interstate route connecting New York City and New England, as well as a major route for commuter travel and both local and through truck traffic. As shown in Figure 4.2, the average daily traffic on this roadway in 2000 was approximately 133,500 vehicles per day at the Norwalk permanent count station.

Localized traffic counts indicate travel volume of up to 150,000 vehicles per day at major I-95 interchange points and traffic generators, such as downtown Stamford, the Route 8 interchange in Bridgeport and the I-91 interchange in New Haven.

The Merritt Parkway (Route 15) is a four-lane parkway running east-west approximately four to six miles north of the I-95 corridor. In 2000 the average daily traffic on this roadway recorded was 69,700 vehicles per day at the Trumbull permanent count station.

Route 8 is a four to six-lane freeway running north-south connecting the Bridgeport area with the Naugatuck Valley, Waterbury and Torrington. The average daily traffic on this roadway in 2000 was 76,000 vehicles per day at the Bridgeport permanent count station.

U.S. Route 1 is an arterial roadway running in an east-west direction along with I-95 and is used as an alternate roadway for short distance trips and commuter trips along the corridor. Most sections of Route 1 in the study area have four travel lanes, although there are some six-lane sections. Many businesses and homes have their primary access from Route 1. There is also on-street parking along many sections of Route 1 as it serves many of the downtown areas and shopping districts throughout the study area.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-2 Existing Conditions Report e r DEFTW I DEFVR Ƙ G@S e ôóIS WI U r DEF G@ e ôóV ôóIH FVR Ƙ DE r DEFVR G@T r ôóQR r e r ôóIU @S G ôóVH r DEFWI r r ôóIS G@I ôóQR ƘrÎ DEFWS ôóPS ôóV G@I r ôóSV e DEFWS G@U FTVR r DE ôóQQ r r wetroxorth2ƒt—tions €orts r ôóIS r Î r WS Ƙ emtr—k2ƒt—tions DEF Î e Ƙ ÷øIQU r r ƒ™heduled2ƒervi™e2eirports G@I r r e r r r e qener—l2evi—tion2eirports IS rr ‚—il2line ôó r Î r r ‡—ter r r e ‚o—ds Ƙr ixpressw—y2G2€—rkw—y rr r r Î FƒF2‚outes yther2erteri—l ixisting2„r—nsport—tion2xetwork gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2RFI The average daily traffic on this roadway in 2000 was 32,600 vehicles per day at the permanent count station located in Westport.

Route 34 is a primarily four-lane arterial roadway running in a northwesterly direction connecting New Haven to Danbury and surrounding areas. A one-mile section through New Haven is a limited access freeway spur, which transitions to an at-grade boulevard at York Street. West of Derby, it becomes a two-lane road as it crosses the Stevenson Dam between Oxford and Monroe. Major traffic generators along Route 34 include Yale-New Haven Hospital and St. Raphael’s Hospital in New Haven, as well as downtown Derby. The average daily traffic on this roadway in 2000 was 33,200 vehicles per day at the permanent count station in Orange.

4.2.2 Traffic Volumes

In order to understand travel and growth patterns in the study corridor, it is important to study historical trends on key roadways in the study area. ConnDOT’s 1998 Southwest Corridor Study Update observes that, “Increases in traffic on I-95, Route 15 and U.S. 1 above the levels for which they were planned and designed has placed strains on the transportation system of the corridor. This in turn has placed strains on the economic vitality of the corridor.” The Southwest Corridor Study Update also notes, “When I-95 opened in 1958, it carried less than 20,000 vehicles a day. By 1983, the facility was 25 years old and was carrying approximately 70,000 vehicles.” Since that time, the traffic crunch has only become more severe.

Figure 4.2 indicates the change in traffic volumes between 1986 and 2001.

Figure 4.2 Historical Traffic Volume Comparisons

140,000 I-95 120,000 (Norwalk)

100,000 Route 15 (Trumbull) 80,000 Route 8 60,000 (Bridgeport) Route 1 40,000 (Westport) Average Daily Traffic

20,000 Route 34 (Orange) 0

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-3 Existing Conditions Report I-95 - As shown in Figure 4.3, traffic growth on I-95 was relatively low (approximately 0.5 percent per year) during the recession of the early 1990’s. As the economy recovered, traffic increased at a rate approaching two percent per year. This growth can be associated with both increasing employment in the vicinity of the I-95 corridor as well as an increasing volume of through traffic generated by the development of two major casinos in Eastern Connecticut.

Figure 4.3 Historical Traffic Volumes on I-95 (Norwalk Station)

140,000

135,000

130,000 125,000

120,000

115,000

110,000 Average Daily Traffic 105,000

100,000

6 7 8 9 0 1 2 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 993 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year

As illustrated in Figure 4.4, on the following page, historically, hourly traffic volume on I-95 peaked steeply during the morning and evening commuter hours and receded during the off-peak hours. However, in 2000, the figure indicates a flattened flow pattern that represents a spreading of the peak hour as commuters try to avoid congestion by traveling earlier or later, thus spreading the peak hours to a longer period. As shown on the figure, ConnDOT calculates the capacity of I-95 at 5,750 vehicle per hour.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-4 Existing Conditions Report Figure 4.4 Hourly Traffic Volume Variations on I-95 (Norwalk Station) - Typical Weekday

10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 1992 5,000 Capacity = 5,750 1995 4,000 2000 3,000 2,000

Hourly Traffic Volume 1,000 0

M M A PM PM PM PM P 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 :0 :0 :0 2: 4 6 8 0 12:00 2:00 AM4:00 AM6:00 AM8:00 AM10:00 AM12:00 PM 1 Time of Day

Merritt Parkway (Route 15) - Figure 4.5, on the following page, indicates historical traffic volumes along Route 15 at the Trumbull permanent count station. As shown in the figure, Route 15 shows a steady growth pattern from 1987 to 1991 (approximately 2.5 percent per year) and then from 1994 to 2000 (approximately 3 percent per year). This steady growth can be attributed to increases in population in the surrounding areas, particularly the area east of Trumbull, as well as increases business and commercial development in Trumbull, Shelton, and Milford, and diversion of traffic volumes from I- 95. As traffic volumes increase further in future years, with limited capacity on I-95 and Route 15, a significant shift in traffic volumes can be anticipated to parallel arterial roadways.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-5 Existing Conditions Report Figure 4.5 Historical Traffic Volumes on Route 15 (Trumbull Station)

75,000

70,000

65,000

60,000 Average Daily Traffic 55,000

50,000

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year

Figure 4.6 shows hourly traffic volumes on Route 15 at the Trumbull permanent count station recorded on a typical weekday in April in 1990, 1995, and 2000. As shown in the figure, the morning peak period is between 7:00 and 8:00 A.M. and the evening peak period is between 5:00 and 6:00 P.M. In contrast to I-95, the peak hour spreading phenomenon is not as apparent in this case. As shown, the capacity of Route 15 is 3,200 vehicles. Figure 4.6 Hourly Traffic Volume on Route 15 (Trumbull Station)

8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 1990 4,000 1995 Capacity = 3,200 3,000 2000 2,000

Hourly Traffic Volume 1,000 0 2:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 2:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 12:00 PM 12:00 PM 10:00 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 10:00 Time of Day

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-6 Existing Conditions Report Route 8 - As shown in Figure 4.7, Route 8 traffic volumes increased from 1986 to 1988 at approximately 2.5 percent per year, following the completion of this expressway between Bridgeport and Waterbury in the mid-1980’s. An increase was also seen from 1992 to 1997 of approximately 1.5 percent per year. During the period from 1997 to 2000, traffic volumes along Route 8 showed no growth, possibly due to a slow-down in diversion from other routes. The decrease in traffic volume growth my also be attributed to declining employment in the Valley region.

Figure 4.7 Historical Traffic Volumes on Route 8 (Bridgeport Station)

78,000

76,000

74,000

72,000

70,000

68,000

Average Daily Traffic 66,000

64,000

62,000 ** 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 Ye ar

* Data for 1995 and 1996 was not available from ConnDOT and was interpolated using available data

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-7 Existing Conditions Report Route 1 - As shown in Figure 4.8, traffic volumes along Route 1 have been showing varying trends in growth from 1986 to 2000. Traffic volumes decreased along Route 1 from 1986 to 1992 (9 percent over a 6 year period), then increased from 1992 to 1994 (17 percent over a 2 year period), and decreased from 1996 to 2000 (7 percent over a 4 year period). Varying levels of traffic diversion to I-95 and the Merritt Parkway may account for some of this fluctuation, in particular due to construction activity in the vicinity of the Westport count station. Shifting levels of retail activity may also play a small part.

Figure 4.8 Historical Traffic Volumes on Route 1 (Westport Station)

36,000 35,000 34,000 33,000 32,000 31,000 30,000 29,000 Average Daily Traffic 28,000 27,000 26,000

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-8 Existing Conditions Report Route 34 - As shown in Figure 4.9, traffic volumes along Route 34 are relatively constant from 1986 to 1994, but show a sharp increase from 1995 to 2000 (an increase of 16 percent over a five year period). This increase in traffic volumes may be due to an increase in diverted traffic from other routes or an increase in retail development along Route 34.

Figure 4.9 Historical Traffic Volumes on Route 34 (Orange Station)

34,000

32,000

30,000

28,000

26,000

Average Daily Traffic 24,000

22,000

20,000 * 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Year

* Data for 1994 was not available from ConnDOT and was interpolated using available data

4.3 Accident Records

In order to get an accurate picture of the impact that congestion is having on safety conditions in the study area, accident records for the towns and roadways were investigated for the three year period from January 1998 to December 2000. The accident data was taken from the ConnDOT 1998 Traffic Accident Facts report and the ConnDOT Traffic Accident Viewing System (TAVS) program. The report and program include all accidents reported to the state of Connecticut, including all investigated accidents on state routes and injury and fatal accidents on local roads.

As shown in Table 4-1, Accidents by Regional Planning Agency, the number of accidents recorded is roughly proportional to route mileage, regional size and population. For comparison purposes, the population of each region has been included along with the percentage of the population for the state as a whole. There are several variances from

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-9 Existing Conditions Report this overall pattern. For example, within the South Central Region, a significantly greater percentage of accidents occur than the percentage of population. This is an indication of the effect congestion on the study area roadway system. The most accidents occurred in the larger cities within each region, including Bridgeport, Danbury, New Haven, Norwalk and Stamford.

Table 4.1 Accidents by Regional Planning Agency

Regional Planning Agency or Population % of state Total % of Fatal % of Council of Governments (2000) population Accidents State Accidents State South Western Connecticut (8) 353,556 10.4% 8,354 11.5% 24 7.8% Housatonic Valley (10) 212,248 6.2% 4,048 5.6% 15 4.9% Greater Bridgeport (6) 307,607 9.0% 6,661 9.2% 26 8.4% Valley Region (4) 84,500 2.5% 1,544 2.1% 7 2.3% South Central Region (15) 546,799 16.1% 14,005 19.3% 48 15.6% Study Area Total 1,504,710 44.2% 34,612 47.7% 120 39.0% State Total 3,405,565 72,571 308 (XX) = number of municipalities Source: Wilbur Smith Associates based on ConnDOT 1998 Traffic Accident Facts

Figure 4.10 and Figure 4.11 give detailed information about the accidents that occurred within the study area on I-95 over the most recent three-year period, January 1998 to December 2000. During this period, 16,172 accidents occurred on I-95 between the New York State Line and the Madison-Clinton Town Line. Of these accidents, less than one percent were fatal (44 fatalities), 4,535 were injury (28 percent of all accidents) and 11,593 were property damage only (72 percent of all accidents). As shown in Figure 4.10, I-95 Accidents by Time of Day, the number of accidents increases proportionately to peak-hour traffic volumes.

Figure 4.10 I-95 Accidents by Time of Day (January 1998 to December 2000)

1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600

of Number Accidents 400 200 0

M M M M M M M M M M A A PM PM 0 A 0 A 0 A 0 A 0 P 0 P 0 P 0 P 00 00 00 00 2:0 4:0 6:0 8:0 2:0 4:0 6:0 8:0 12: 10: 12: 10:

Figure 4.11 shows accidents by type. As is typical for congested expressway and arterial segments, the most frequent type of accident on I-95 was a rear-end collision (46

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-10 Existing Conditions Report percent), followed by sideswipe (22 percent) and fixed object (21 percent). Rear End accidents are predominant on most congested interstates with other accidents such as sideswipe, fixed object and moving object making up the majority of the rest.

Figure 4.11 I-95 Accidents by Accident Type (January 1998 to December 2000)

Moving Object Other 4% 4% Fixed Object Rear-End 21% 46% Turning 3% Sideswipe 22%

In addition to the type of accident and time of day, the percentages of accidents occurring under various light and pavement conditions were investigated. These percentages are similar to state-wide percentages. Most accidents occurred on dry pavement (77 percent) and during daylight (66 percent). Using the ConnDOT TAVS program, the accidents occurring on the major routes within the study area were summarized (Table 4-2 to Table 4-5) for the three-year period between January 1998 and December 2000. Routes are broken into segments by region and are separated by type of roadway for comparison to state-wide accident rates. The routes with accident rates higher than the state average for their category are shown in bold print.

Table 4-2 shows 6-lane limited access roadways (typically interstates) within the study area. Within this category, I-95 and Route 25 have accident rates higher than the state average. The greater accident frequency is most likely due to the severe congestion.

Table 4-2 Study Area 6-Lane Limited Access Road Accidents (January 1998 to December 2000)

Road Region Total Accidents Fatal Accidents Accident rate per million vehicle miles of travel (acc/mvm) I-95 SWRPA 7008 17 2.12 GBRPA 3756 12 2.22 SCRCOG 5408 12 1.53 I-91 SCRCOG 3019 14 1.53 Rte 25 GBRPA 718 1 2.10 State Average Urban 6-lane divided limited access 1.854 Note: Routes with accident rates higher than state average shown in bold type. Source: Wilbur Smith Associates based on ConnDOT Accident Records

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-11 Existing Conditions Report

Table 4-3 shows 4-lane limited access roadways (typically freeways) within the study area. Within this category, Route 8 and Route 15 have accident rates higher than the state average.

Table 4-3 Study Area 4-Lane Limited Access Road Accidents (January 1998 to December 2000)

Road Region Total Accidents Fatal Accidents Accident rate per million vehicle miles of travel (acc/mvm) Rte 8 GBRPA 846 5 1.79 Valley 1015 4 1.59 Rte 15 SWRPA 2399 9 1.70 GBRPA 1649 6 1.69 SCRCOG 2448 7 1.60 I-84 HVCEO 1809 8 1.11 State Average Urban 4-lane divided limited access 1.325 Note: Routes with accident rates higher than state average shown in bold type. Source: Wilbur Smith Associates based on ConnDOT Accident Records

Table 4-4 shows 4-lane unlimited access roadways (typically state highways) within the study area. Route 1 in SWRPA (11.69 acc/mvm) and GBRPA (12.66), Route 10 in SCRCOG (10.41) and Route 127 in GBRPA (11.27) have accident rates higher than 9.399, the state average for 4-lane urban unlimited access.

Table 4-4 Study Area 4-Lane Unlimited Access Road Accidents (January 1998 to December 2000)

Road Region Total Accidents Fatal Accidents Accident rate per million vehicle miles of travel (acc/mvm) Rte 1 SWRPA 6043 6 11.69 Rte 1 GBRPA 3383 6 12.66 Rte 1 SCRCOG 5083 5 8.15 Rte 6 HVCEO 759 1 4.19 Rte 7 SWRPA 1719 2 4.18 Rte 7 HVCEO 1924 9 2.75 Rte 10 SCRCOG 3210 4 10.41 Rte 34 SCRCOG 965 2 4.26 Rte 34 Valley 767 1 5.06 Rte 108 GBRPA 364 1 4.73 Rte 110 GBRPA 482 5 6.04 Rte 113 GBRPA 685 2 7.66 Rte 127 GBRPA 1019 3 11.27 Rte 137 SWRPA 1145 4 5.87 Rte 202 HVCEO 898 2 6.06 State Average Urban 4-lane undivided 9.399 Note: Routes with accident rates higher than state average shown in bold type.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-12 Existing Conditions Report Source: Wilbur Smith Associates based on ConnDOT Accident Records

Table 4-5 shows 2-lane state roadways within the study area. Within this category, Route 57, Route 80, Route 122, Route 136, and Route 162 have accident rates higher than the state average.

Table 4-5 Study Area 2-Lane Road Accidents (January 1998 to December 2000)

Road Region Total Accidents Fatal Accidents Accident rate per million vehicle miles of travel (acc/mvm) Rte 25 HVCEO 333 2 2.36 Rte 33 SWRPA 600 1 4.44 Rte 33 HVCEO 38 0 2.29 Rte 34 HVCEO 96 0 1.47 Rte 34 GBRPA 53 1 4.23 Rte 57 SWRPA 263 0 2.64 Rte 57 HVCEO 19 0 13.76 Rte 58 HVCEO 83 1 1.93 Rte 58 GBRPA 282 1 2.53 Rte 59 GBRPA 295 1 2.53 Rte 80 SCRCOG 1158 3 5.38 Rte 106 SWRPA 478 0 3.97 Rte 108 Valley 235 1 4.66 Rte 110 Valley 512 4 4.87 Rte 114 SCRCOG 188 2 2.49 Rte 122 SCRCOG 490 0 9.73 Rte 123 SWRPA 605 0 5.02 Rte 124 SWRPA 367 0 4.52 Rte 136 SWRPA 728 1 5.85 Rte 136 GBRPA 90 0 2.40 Rte 162 SCRCOG 962 4 7.38 Rte 302 HVCEO 121 0 1.68 State Average Urban 2-lane bi-directional 5.118 Note: Routes with accident rates higher than state average shown in bold type. Source: Wilbur Smith Associates based on ConnDOT Accident Records

The reasons for the accidents occurring within the study area are numerous. Some of these accidents can be attributed to abnormal conditions such as roadway geometry, diversion from other routes, or a differing use from that which was originally intended when the roadway was constructed. In addition, many of these roadways have higher accident rates simply due to the severe congestion they face. When more vehicles travel on a roadway, more accidents occur, however as the number of vehicles increases the accident rates (accidents per million vehicle miles) typically decrease slightly until congestion occurs. Once congestion occurs, driving conditions become difficult and accident frequency increases at a rate greater than number of vehicles, thus increasing the accident rate. Greater accident frequency is one of many impacts that congestion has had on the region.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-13 Existing Conditions Report 4.4 Plans, Programs and Projects

While many transportation improvements are programmed over the 20-year study period, as Figures 4.12 – 4.16 illustrate, the intensive development of the study corridor limits the capability of ConnDOT to significantly increase travel capacity on the major interstate and arterial corridors. The most important projects planned for the study area include: Completion of the Route 8/I-95 interchange reconfiguration; Construction of the Bridgeport Intermodal Transportation Center; Reconstruction of Route 7 as limited access freeway; Reconstruction and widening of the Quinnipiac River (Q) Bridge; Widening of I-95 between New Haven and Branford; and Reconfiguration of the I-95/I- 91 interchange.

4.5 Rail Station/Rail Service Characteristics

As shown in Table 4-6, there are three main rail lines serving Southern Connecticut between Branford and the New York Border: the New Haven Mainline, between New Haven and the New York State line; the Shore Line, between New Haven and the Rhode Island state line; and the Springfield Line, between New Haven and the Massachusetts state line.

Passenger and limited freight railroad service is also provided on three branches of the New Haven Mainline: the New Canaan branch, between Stamford and New Canaan; the Waterbury branch, between Bridgeport and Waterbury; and the Danbury Branch, between South Norwalk and Danbury.

All of these rail lines, with the exception of the Shore Line, are owned by the State of Connecticut, with rail passenger and freight services provided by different operators under contract to the State’s Department of Transportation. The Shore Line is owned by Amtrak. Table 4-6 Study Area Rail Line Characteristics Daily Daily Total Length passenger Freight Daily Line (miles) trains2 trains Ridership New Haven Line 72.3 307 4 91,6283 Shore Line East 50.9 55 2 1,0964 Springfield Line 36.6 14 2 1,0005 New Canaan Branch 7.9 39 0 2,5922 Waterbury Branch 26.9 6 2 2262 Danbury Branch 23.6 20 2 1,1552 Maybrook Branch 27.7 0 3 N/A Total 441 15 133,460 Source: Metro North, Shore Line East, Amtrak, CSX, P&W

2 Daily passenger trains on Lines includes Amtrak and Metro-North trains. 3 Based on 1996 Metro-North counts. 4 Shore Line East counts for February 1996. 5 Approximate ridership, Amtrak data are not available at this time. Congestion Mitigation Study 4-14 Existing Conditions Report 35 Ridgefield R22 Trumbull 987 7 Yorktown 129 121 Easton 111 22 123 58 129 124 Wilton CONNECTICUT Bedford Lewisboro R21 137 Weston 134 987 684 111 33 H30 B6 172 y Pound Ridge w Mt.

134 k R20 y P w Kisco k 15 New Castle P

c ll i i 7 n M 22 NEW YORK o 123 58 c w B5 106 1 a a T S R2 Fairfield New Canaan H33 H29 95

H27 H28 Westport 9 Mt. 33 North Castle 137 R19 B6 Pleasant B2 R18 TR Stamford H26 123 15 H24 1 H25 Armonk R3 N B3 H31 120 B1 95 104 Norwalk Thornwood H23 P4 B4 H13 H14 117 I2 P1 R16 H32 R15 H19 H20

y H12 Upgrade / w k 124 H15 R14 Improvements P New l H11 il H22 R13 H18 H21 H9 M 22 15 R17 Highway H w Darien a R1 Norwalk S R11 Greenburgh H17 106 Harbor Transit-Rail R R10 H10 Transit-Bus B 987 9A 100 I1 R12 Greenwich R9 Transit-Airport A Harrison 137 H16 I4 H8 P3 Transit-Port W 87 H7 To New Haven 684 1 H6 Rye Brook H5 I 287 Westchester ITS H2 R8 County Airport H4 Pedestrian & Bike P P2 120 H3 Stamford W2 Hartsdale 15 y R5 R7 Harbor w H1 R6 k White P Port Chester k Plains R4 Source: “South Western Region Long Range o 127

o

r B 125 W1 Transportation Plan 2001-2025.” 100 Long in 22 287 a r 129 95 Island p 15 To New York Greenville Scarsdale Sound Current through December 12, 2001

SWRPA TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Congestion Mitigation Study FIGURE 4.12 Figure 4.12 SWRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend Page 1 of 2

Project ID Highway Description Highway Projects H1-H5 Route 1 at Valley Drive, Milbank/Maher/Maple, Indian Field Road and Orchard, Greenwich H6 Route 1 - West Main Street between Tresser Boulevard and the Greenwich town line, Stamford H7 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Median barrier and resurfacing project in Stamford H8 Route 1- East Main Street between Glenbrook Road and the Darien town line, Stamford H9 Route 1 at I-95 Exit 11, Nearwater Lane, Noroton and West Avenue - Darien H10 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Median barrier and resurfacing project in Darien H11 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Exit 15 to Exit 14 Improvement H12 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Exit 15 to Exit 14 Improvement H13 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Exit 16 Improvements H14 I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Median barrier and resurfacing Projects in Norwalk H15 Route 1 corridor improvement programs - Norwalk H16 Route 1 Corridor improvement programs - Darien H17 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Exit 28 - Round Hill Road, Greenwich H18 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Exit 31 - North Street, Greenwich - acceleration and deceleration lanes H19 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Exit 33 - Den Road, Stamford H20 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Exit 34 - Route 104 (Long Ridge Road), Stamford H21 Route 104 Improvements - Access Management Plan H22 Route 137 Improvements - Access Management Plan H23 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Exit 35 - Route 137 (High Ridge Road), Stamford H24 Route 1 corridor improvement programs - Westport H25 Route 1 Westport Signal System H26 Route 7 Improvements - Full interhcnage at Route 15 H27 Route 7 Improvements - Extend Route 7 Expressway from Gristmill Road, Norwalk to Danbury H28 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Route 7 to Route 33 resurfacing bridge, safety, and landscaping H29 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Resurfacing project - Route 33, Westport to Congress Street, Fairfield H30 Route 7 Improvement - Route 7 widening project in Wilton between Wolf Pit Road and Olmstead Hill Road H31 Route 7 Improvements - Traffic signal upgrade from Route 123 to Grumman Hill Road H32 Route 15 Improvement Programs - Greenwich/Stamford town line to Route 124, New Canaan H33 Route 7 Improvement - Route 7 between Gristmill Road and Route 33 Ranin, Norwalk I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - Truck stop an rest area improvments I-95 Interchange Improvement Programs - I-95 Weigh-In-Motion project in Greenwich Route 1 at Riverside - Greenwich Widen Route 1 and increase vertical clearance at the railroad and Myrtle Avenue Figure 4.12 SWRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend Page 2 of 2

Project ID Highway Description Railroad Projects R1 Enhance rail service on the New Haven Rail Line R2 Enhance rail service on the New Canaan Rail Line R3 Enhance rail service on the Danbury Rail Line R4-R18 Upgrade Metro-North New Haven Line Rail stations with regards to buildings/shelters, platforms, hours of service, and safety conditions R19 Provide pedestrian overpass and amenities at Merritt/Seven Danbury Rail Line Stations R20 Implement rail station enhancements at Wilton Rail Line station R21 Implement rail station enhancements at Cannondale Rail Line station R22 Implement rail station enhancements at other Danbury Rail Line stations Implement Danbury North Phase I, II, and III rail service improvements Explore additional direct service from Shore Line East (SLE) to Stamford and Greenwich Bus Projects B1 Provide service enhancements in CT Transit Stamford Division B2 Evaluate New Canaan to Norwalk local bus service B3 Evaluate New Canaan to Stamford local bus service B4 Provide service enhancements in CT Transit Norwalk Transit District B5 Initiate Danbury to South Wilton/Norwalk bus service as a supplement to the Danbury Rail Line Service B6 Provide service enhancements in CT Transit Westport Transit District Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Related Projects I1 Continue and enhance Incident Management programs along I-95 I2 Develop an Incident Management Program for the Route 15 Corridor Develop and Implement South Western Regional ITS Plan Pedestrian and Bike Related Projects P1 Norwalk River Valley Linear Trail P2 Stamford Harbor Bicycle Plan P3 Stamford Mill River Multi-Use Trail Southwest Regional Bicycle Plan Waterborne Transportation W1 High speed passenger service from Stamford to Lower Manhattan W2 Feasibility study - Passenger Ferry Commuter Service along Long Island Sound between Branford and Stamford Construct Stamford Ferry Terminal and parking facility N

202 New 7 Milford

R6 Sherman H22

67

H21 Bridgewater

39 New Fairfield H20

H19 Brookfield B1 202 25 39 37 H18 H16 R4 H14 H13 84 H10 H11 H12 H1 6 84 H17 Danbury I1 H15 Upgrade / R5 P1 B2 H9 Improvements New H23 H7 H8 34 I1 84 Highway H H6 Bethel 302 H4 H5 Transit-Rail R R1 Newtown Transit-Bus B 25 34 Transit-Airport A 7 R2 Transit-Port W H3 Monroe Ridgefield ITS I 58 Pedestrian & Bike P H2 35 Redding Shelton

R3 25 8 Source: “Housatonic Valley Regional Easton Transportation Plan (2001-2021)”

58 Trumbull Current through December 12, 2001 Weston HVCEO TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Congestion Mitigation Study FIGURE 4.13 Figure 4.13 HVCEO Transportation Plan Improvements Legend

Project ID Highway Description Highway Projects H1 I-84 Widening Project from New York State Line to Newtown H2 Route 25 Safety and Roadway Improvements - Monroe Town Line to Mile Hill Road

H3 Route 7 Travel Options Plan - Norwalk to New Milford H4 Widen Kenosia Avenue from 2 to 4 lanes from Backus Avenue to Lake Kenosia H5 Route 302 - Replace bridge over Old Hawleyville Road H6 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H7 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H8 Route 53 - Four lane cross section from Memorial Drive to Boughton Street H9 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H10 Route 37 Widening - Main Street in Danbury to Jeanette Street H11 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H12 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H13 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H14 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H15 Route 6 - Increase Capacity in the Hawleyville Area H16 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H17 I-84 Interchange Improvement Projects - Exit 2-11 H18 Route 202 - Widening from White Turkey Road to Route 133 H19 Route 202 and Silvermine Road - Signalization and intersection improvements H20 Route 7 Brookfield Bypass Alternative H21 Grove Street relocation project in New Milford H22 Route 202 - Rehabilitate bridge over the Housatonic River Railroad Projects R1 Increasing parking supply at the Bethel Station R2 Provide service enhancements to Danbury Branch Rail Service R3 Increasing parking supply at the Ridgefield Station. Improve pedestrian access at the following station - Ridgefield R4 Potential New Station - Danbury North R5 Improve pedestrian access at the following station - Danbury R6 Improve pedestrian access at the following station - New Milford Bus Projects B1 Housatonic Area Regional Transit - Implement fixed route service to New Fairfield B2 Housationic Area Regional Transit - Implement fixed route service to Newtown Develop more employer-based bus transit services Improve paratransit services in the region Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Related Projects I1 Design and Implement ITS in the Danbury Area N

Bethel Newton 58 Monroe H25 111 25 110

H2 H32

H23 H31 Shelton Redding 110 H30

H29 H28 108 58 H27 Trumbull 8 Easton P1

H26 H25

111 25 H24 H20 15 H17 H22 Upgrade / P2 H21 110 Improvements New Weston H18 H19 Stratford Highway H Bridgeport P4 15 Transit-Rail R H36 P3 H12 R4 Transit-Bus B H13 H16 I1 Transit-Airport A H11 1 H34 H14 Transit-Port W H35 H33 R3 H15 H9 ITS I H3 58 1 H5 95 H10 P Fairfield H8 Pedestrian & Bike H7 H4 W1 W2 15 H6 Sikorsky R2 Westport Airport Source: “Regional Transportation Plan for the H1 A1 Greater Bridgeport Planning Region (Update 2000)” 1 R1 Current through December 12, 2001 95

GBRPA TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Congestion Mitigation Study FIGURE 4.14 Figure 4.14 GBRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend Page 1 of 3

Project ID Highway Description Highway Projects H1 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Construct Frontage to serve Interchange 21 & 22, Fairfield H2 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from the end of the expressway at Route 111 to Purdy Hill Road, including realignment of Purdy Hill Road and Judd Road Intersection, Trumbull and Monroe H3 SR 732 (Black Rock Turnpike) - Reconstruction, realignment and minor widening from U.S. Route 1 to Route 58, Fairfield H4 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Lane continuity & structure replacement, Exits 25 to 29 H5 SR 700 (Fairfield Avenue) - Reconstruction from Route 130 to Lafayette Boulevard, Bridgeport and Route 130 - Reconstruction from Fairfield Avenue (SR 700) to Broad Street, Fairfield H6 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Modify Interchange 23 and 24, Fairfield H7 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Modify Interchange 23 and 24, Fairfield H8 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Reconstruct Interchange 24 & eliminate traffic circle at U.S. Route 1 H9 Seaview Avenue Corridor - Construct new arterial from Route 130 to Route 1 with four travel lanes and turn lanes at major intersections, Bridgeport Construct new railroad bridge over new arterial consisting of two spans, Bridgeport. Construct new arterial from U.S. Route 1 northward to provide access to Lake Success Business Park, Bridgeport H10 I-95 Interchange Improvement - Modify Interchange 31 and 32 in Stratford H11 U.S. Route 1 Improvement - Intersection and widening improvements, Stratford H12 U.S. Route 1 Improvement - Construct intersection improvement Bayview Plaza and Shoppers Fair, Bridgeport H13 U.S. Route 1 Improvement - Construct intersection improvement at Route 108, Route 113 West Broad Street, Stratford H14 I-95 Interchange Improvement - Modify Interchange 31 and 32 in Stratford H15 U.S. Route 1 Improvement - Reconstruct and eliminate traffic circle formed by U.S. Route 1 and Route 130, and realign U.S. Route 1 along the north segment of the circle, Fairfield H16 I-95 Interchange Improvement - Replace bridge over the Housatonic River and Naugatuck Avenue, Stratford-Milford H17 Route 108 - Major widening to four travel lanes between the Route 8 and Route 15 southbound ramps to SR 711 (Huntington Turnpike), Trumbull H18 Route 15 Improvement - Modify Interchange 46, Fairfield H19 SR 731 (Main Street) - Major widening of six lanes from Route 15 to Old Town Road, Trumbull H20 Route 15 Improvements - Replace Interchange 48 at Route 111 with single point interchange, Trumbull H21 Route 15 Improvement - Resurface and construct bridge and safety improvements, Fairfield and Trumbull H22 Route 8 Improvement - Widen NB mainline from split with Route 25 to Interchange 6, Trumbull H23 Route 111 Improvements - Major Widening to four travel lanes from Purdy Hill Road to Cross Hill Road, Monroe. Minor Widening to provide uniform 32-foot width from Cross Hill Road to Fan Hill Road, Monroe H24 Route 15 Improvements - Replace bridge over Housatonic River, Stratford-Milford H25 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from Purdy Hill Road to Mile High Road, Monroe and Newtown Figure 4.14 GBRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend Page 2 of 3

Project ID Highway Description H26 Route 25 Improvements - Resurface and construct bridge and safety improvements, Trumbull H27 Route 25 Improvements - Construct partial interchange between Route 25 and Whitney Avenue, providing southbound on and northbound off movements, Trumbull H28 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from the end of the expressway at Route 111 to Purdy Hill Road, including realignment of Purdy Hill Road and Judd Road Intersection, Trumbull and Monroe H29 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from the end of the expressway at Route 111 to Purdy Hill Road, including realignment of Purdy Hill Road and Judd Road Intersection, Trumbull and Monroe H30 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from the end of the expressway at Route 111 to Purdy Hill Road, including realignment of Purdy Hill Road and Judd Road Intersection, Trumbull and Monroe H31 Route 25 Improvements - Major widening to four travel lanes from the end of the expressway at Route 111 to Purdy Hill Road, including realignment of Purdy Hill Road and Judd Road Intersection, Trumbull and Monroe H32 Route 111 Improvements - Reconstruct & realign intersection at Route 110, Monroe

Railroad Projects R1 Construct new Fairfield commuter rail station at the UPS property located off of Black Rock Turnpike R2 Construct new Fairfield commuter rail station at the UPS property located off of Black Rock Turnpike R3 Construct Bridgeport Intermodal Transportation Center, including pedestrian connections and walkways between center components R4 Construct Parking garage at the Stratford commuter railroad station, including new circulation patterns and pedestrian connections between the in-bound and out- bound platforms Construct various New Haven main line capital projects Bus Projects Implement various service and route service enhancements on the Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority System Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Related Projects I1 Operate and expand Incident Management System along I-95 corridor, Fairfield, Bridgeport and Stratford Figure 4.14 GBRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend Page 3 of 3

Project ID Highway Description Pedestrian and Bike Related Projects P1 Construct regional system of off-road multi-use trails - Construct the Housatonic Railway Rails-to-Trails project and the Berkshire Spur Trail in Bridgeport and Trumbull P2 Construct regional system of off-road multi-use trails - Construct a multi-use trail, including bridal path and separate pedestrian and bicycle paths, along and within the corridor of the Merritt Parkway P3 Construct regional system of off-road multi-use trails - Construct the Housatonic Railway Rails-to-Trails project and the Berkshire Spur Trail in Bridgeport and Trumbull P4 Construct regional system of off-road multi-use trails - construct Phase I and II of the Housatonic Riverbelt Greenway beginning at Short Beach and extending to the bicycle/pedestrian path on the new Route 15 Bridge over Housatonic River, Stratford Construct regional system of off-road multi-use trails - Develop an interconnected system of bicycle routes and construct minor improvements to safely accommodate bicycles on designated routes Airport Projects A1 Implement various improvements at the Sikorsky Memorial Airport Port Related Projects W1 Port of Bridgeport Improvement - Construct second berth at Water Street Dock for high speed ferry service, Bridgeport W2 Port of Bridgeport Improvement - Construct Roll-on/Roll-off dock and infrastructure improvements for feeder barge service, Bridgeport Prot of Bridgeport Improvement - Rehabilitate and expand Water Street Dock, Bridgeport

Congestion Management Projects H33 Congestion Management Intersection Improvement - Route 58 - Implement various intersection improvements and CMS actions from SR 732 to Samp Mortar Drive, Fairfield H34 Congestion Management Intersection Improvement - U.S. Route 1 - Implement various intersection improvements and CMS actions through the Town Center area, Fairfield H35 Traffic Signal Modernization Program - Barnum Avenue - Modernize, interconnect and place traffic signals under computer control - 12 intersections, Bridgeport

H36 Traffic Signal Modernization Program - Park Avenue - Modernize, interconnect and place traffic signals under computer control - 16 intersections, Bridgeport Traffic Signal Modernization Program - Region - Modernize, interconnect and place traffic signals under computer control, remaining locations and implement various traffic signal improvements and revisions Route 25 - Implement Access Management Program driveway modifications, Monroe N 67 8

Oxford H26 H23 67 H28 R3

H27 Seymour

H25 H24 Monroe 115 34 H22

8 Ansonia H21

H20 R2 H17 110 H19 H18 H13 H16 H14 Upgrade / H15 H12 Improvements New H11 R1 Highway H

Derby Transit-Rail R H8 Shelton H10 34 Transit-Bus B 108 H9 Transit-Airport A

Transit-Port W

ITS I H7 H6 I1 Pedestrian & Bike P H5 8

H4 Orange H3 15 Source: “Regional Transportation Plan – 110 Valley Regional Planning Agency, Trumbull Update 2000.” H2 121 Current through December 12, 2001 H1 Stratford Milford VRPA TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Congestion Mitigation Study FIGURE 4.15 Figure 4.15 VRPA Transportation Plan Improvements Legend

Project ID Highway Description Highway Projects H1 Route 8 Interchange - construct Southbound on-ramp at Interchange 11 and 14, Shelton H2 Huntington Street - Intersection Improvements between Church Street Bridgeport Avenue, Shelton H3 Huntington Street - Intersection Improvements between Church Street Bridgeport Avenue, Shelton H4 Bridgeport Avenue (Route 714) Improvements - Widening to four lanes, Access Management, Advanced Traffic Signal System H5 Waverly Road - Intersection improvements at Isinglass Road, Shelton H6 Waverly Road - Widen and replace bridge, Walnut Tree Hill Road and Waverly Ter., Shelton H7 Route 108 (Shelton Avenue) - Widen bridge H8 Perry Hill Road - Reconstruct between Howard Avenue and Sheehy Lane, Shelton H9 Route 8 Interchange - Construct Southbound on-ramp at Interchange 11 and 14, Shelton H10 Rehabilitate Route 34 Bridge over Derby Canal, Derby H11 Route 34 Improvements - Widening project along Main Street in Derby H12 Route 8 Interchanges - Reconstruct interchanges 16 and 17, Derby H13 Canal Street - Replace bridge over Derby Canal, Derby H14 Route 8 Interchange - Rehabilitate bridge over Hawkins Street, Derby H15 Route 853 (Division Street) bridge over Naugatuck River, Ansonia H16 Prindle Street - Reconstruct in Ansonia H17 Jewett Street - Replace bridge over Beaver Brook, Ansonia H18 Division Street - Widen and reconstruct between Clifton Avenue & Route 8, Ansonia/Derby H19 Route 8 Interchange - Reconstruct interchanges 16 and 17, Derby H20 Route 8 - Interchange - Construct new NB on-ramp at Exit 18, Ansonia-Derby H21 Replace Route 334 bridge over Naugatuck River and Railroad tracks, Ansonia H22 Route 8 Interchange - Realign Southbound lanes at Exits 19 and 21, Seymour H23 Route 67 Improvements - Bank Street - Route 67 Advanced Traffic Signal System H24 Route 34 Improvements - Intersection improvements with Route 188, Seymour H25 Derby Avenue/Cedar Street Intersection, Seymour H26 Route 8 Interchange - Reconstruction between Exits 22 and 23, Seymour H27 Route 8 Interchange - Realign Southbound lanes at Exits 19 and 21, Seymour H28 Route 67 Improvements - Rehabilitate bridge over Little River, Seymour Railroad Projects R1 Upgrade Derby and Ansonia stations R2 Upgrade Derby and Ansonia stations R3 Reconstruct Metro-North bridge and increase vertical clearance, Seymour Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Related Projects I1 Route 8 ITS Plan in VRPA Region Pedestrian and Bike Related Projects ConnDOT Regional Bicycle Plan Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan - Valley Region 63

67 69 91 Hamden North 17 Branford 63 15

8 10 Ansonia Woodbridge Madison P1 P H13 P2

H21 New Haven 80 H15 P5 Guilford Derby I1 1 H14 East H16 H24 P3 Haven Branford 34 P7 I2 95 N P6 R5 H18 H22 H17 H19 H23 B1

H12 15 H20 R7 Orange H11 H10 West 95 New Haven-Tweed Haven P4 Upgrade / 1 H9 Airport R6 Improvements New H4 121 H8 Highway H H7 Transit-Rail R H5 Transit-Bus B H6 A R4 Transit-Airport R3 W P1 R2 Transit-Port H3 Milford I R1 Long Island Sound ITS H1 P H2 Pedestrian & Bike

Source: “Transportation Improvement Program – South Central Connecticut, SCROG, 2001.” Current through December 12, 2001

SCRCOG TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Congestion Mitigation Study FIGURE 4.16 Figure 4.16 SCRCOG Transportation Plan Improvements Legend

Project ID Highway Description Highway Projects H1 I-95 Housatonic River Bridge H2 Route 1 Widening - Five Lane section in Milford and Orange H3 I-95 West Shore Project H4 Sikorsky Bridge Reconstruction Project H5 Milford Parkway Improvements H6 Old Gate Lane Improvements in Milford H7 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Old Gate Road in Milford H8 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Old Gate Road in Milford H9 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Marsh Hill Road in Orange H10 Route 1 Widening - Marsh Hill Road Intersection Improvements H11 Signal Retiming Project - Route 1, Orange and West Haven H12 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Saw Mill Road in West Haven H13 I-91 Interchange Improvements - Route 80 in New Haven H14 Route 34 Construction Project H15 Signal Retiming Project - Whalley Avenue, New Haven H16 Route 34 Bridge over Metro-North Railroad H17 Signal Retimining Project - Route 10, New Haven H18 Route 1 Widening Project - U.S. 1 Tomlinson Bridge Project H19 Church Street South, New Haven H20 Signal Retiming Project - Route 1, East Haven H21 Signal Retiming Project - Route 80, New Haven H22 I-95 East Shore Project H23 I-95 Interchange Improvements - Leetes Island Road in Branford H24 I-91 and I-95 Interchange Study

Railroad Projects R1 Milford Station - Upgrade railroad station and increase parking R2 Upgrade Metro North Bridge over Old Gate Lane, River Street and High Street R3 Upgrade Metro North Bridge over Old Gate Lane, River Street and High Street R4 Upgrade Metro North Bridge over Old Gate Lane, River Street and High Street R5 New Haven Station - Union Street Garage Project R6 New West Haven station R7 New Branford Shore Line East station Bus Projects B1 Route 1 Fixed Route Service between New Haven and Old Saybrook

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Related Projects I1 Extend Incident Management System on I-91 from I-95 to Route 80 I2 Extend Incident Management System on I-95 east to Clinton Town Line Pedestrian and Bike Related Projects P1 Lake Galliard Trail P2 Shore Line Trolley Trail P3 West River/Edgewood Park to West Rock Ridge State Park Trail P4 Savin Rock Bikeway P5 Farmington Canal Trail south to State Street P6 New Haven Harbor Trail P7 Farm River Trail

4.5.1 Description and Ridership

New Haven Mainline (New Haven to New York) - The principal user of the line is Metro-North Railroad which provides commuter/regional rail service on the line between New Haven and Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan. Amtrak also offers service on the line between New York City and New Haven as part of the Northeast Corridor route serving Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan. Northern terminals of the Amtrak service include Springfield and Boston. Table 4-7 provides more detail on the number and type of trains utilizing the New Haven Mainline, while Table 4-8 provides a summary of ridership by station.

Table 4-7 New Haven Mainline Number of trains passing Stamford on a typical weekday

Passenger Freight Metro- North Amtrak CSX P&W Total Westward 94 23 1 1 119 Eastward 93 24 1 1 119 Total 187 47 2 2 238 Source: Metro North, Amtrak, CSX, P&W

The line between New Haven and the New York border generally has four tracks, with a three-track segment east of Milford. The Connecticut stations are listed in Table 4-8 showing distance to GCT and 1996 daily ridership. Over the portion of the line in Connecticut, the average distance between stations is also 2.6 miles. ConnDOT is presently considering the construction of a new station between New Haven and Milford, to be located in either West Haven or Orange.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-15 Existing Conditions Report Table 4-8 New Haven Mainline Stations and 1996 ridership

Miles from Total Daily Metro- Station GCT North Boardings New Haven, CT* 72.3 2,194 Milford, CT 63.3 1,001 Stratford, CT 59 848 Bridgeport, CT* 55.4 1,468 Fairfield, CT 50.6 2,918 Southport, CT 48.9 247 Green’s Farms, CT 47.2 615 Westport, CT 44.2 2,599 East Norwalk, CT 42.1 660 South Norwalk, CT 41 1,868 Rowayton, CT 39.2 517 Darien, CT 37.7 1,615 Noroton Heights, CT 36.2 1,309 Stamford, CT* 33.1 7,199 Old Greenwich, CT 31.3 1,109 Riverside, CT 30.3 673 Cos Cob, CT 29.6 926 Greenwich, CT 28.1 3,413 Grand Central, NY 0 37,251 Total 91,628 Source: Metro North

Shoreline East (East of New Haven) – We have labeled the rail mainline east of New Haven running to Branford, New London, Providence and Boston as the Shoreline. In Connecticut the line east of New Haven belongs to Amtrak. The principal passenger providers on the line are Amtrak and the State of Connecticut. Connecticut’s Shore Line East commuter rail service operates along this route between New Haven and New London serving Old Saybrook, Westbrook, Clinton, Madison, Guilford, and Branford. Shore Line East Service currently terminates in the west in New Haven, where a cross platform connection is made with Metro-North and Amtrak services. In December 2001, one Shoreline East Train began running through to Stamford. Amtrak’s service East of New Haven runs to Providence and Boston. The Providence and Worcester Railroad operates freight service east of New Haven. Table 4-9 summarizes the number and type of trains operating daily on the Shoreline route.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-16 Existing Conditions Report Table 4-9 Shoreline Number of trains passing Branford on a typical weekday Shore Line P&W East6 Amtrak Freight Total Westward 9 16 1 26 Eastward 12 17 1 30 Total 21 33 2 56 Source: Shore Line East

The two-track segment of the North East Corridor has recently been electrified. Only a portion of the Amtrak service east of New Haven uses electric equipment, at this time. Within the next several years all Amtrak service between New Haven and Boston will be electrified. Connecticut has no plans at this time to use the catenary power source for the Shore Line East service and will continue to operate the line with diesel locomotives.

The maximum allowable speed between New London and New Haven is 90 mph for passenger trains and 30 m.p.h. for freight trains during the day, and 50 mph for freight trains between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. The signal system is specialized form of TCS cab signal customized to allow 150 m.p.h. operation further east on the route.

Stations- There are eight, soon to be nine, passenger stations between New London and New Haven, each with a different fare. The ninth station will be near State Street in New Haven. The average distance between the current Shore Line East stations is 7.3 miles. Table 4-10 summarizes the passenger stations on the Shoreline route and their respective daily passenger ridership. Table 4-10 Shore Line East Stations and Ridership Daily AM Inbound Station Milepost Boardings New London 123.4 29 Old Saybrook 105.1 63 Westbrook 101.2 33 Clinton 96.6 60 Madison 93.0 122 Guilford 88.9 128 Branford 81.1 113 New Haven 72.3 0 Total 548 Source: February 1996 daily counts from Shore Line East

6 As of October 1, 2001, the line began two westbound and four eastbound buses to fill holes in the train schedule as well.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-17 Existing Conditions Report Springfield Line – Amtrak’s Springfield Line runs north from New Haven to Hartford and Springfield. The line is part of the so-called Inland Route between Boston and New York via New Haven, Hartford, Springfield and Worcester. It is predominately single tracked. The line is property of Amtrak which operates 14 trains per day between Springfield and Washington DC. The line is not electrified. All Amtrak trains running to/from Springfield change locomotives in New Haven for operation further west to New York and Washington D.C. One Amtrak train operating early each morning carries no passengers since it is entirely dedicated to hauling mail along the North East Corridor from Springfield to Washington D.C.

Stations- There are currently five passenger stations on the Springfield line between Hartford and New Haven. The average distance between passenger stations on the line south of Hartford is 9.2 miles. Table 4-11 summarizes the number and type of trains operating on the Springfield line, while Table 4-12 indicates the passenger stations currently offering Amtrak service on the line.

Table 4-11 Springfield Line Number of Trains on the Line Daily

Guilford Amtrak Freight Total Eastbound 7 17 8 Westbound 7 1 8 Total 14 2 16 Source: Amtrak

Table 4-12 Springfield Line Stations and Fares

Station Milepost One-way Fare to New Haven Hartford 36.6 $22.00 Berlin 25.9 $19.00 Meriden 18.6 $18.00 Wallingford 12.6 $16.00 New Haven 0.0 $0.00 Source: Amtrak

Waterbury Branch – The single track Waterbury Branch runs 27 miles between Bridgeport and Waterbury. Owned by ConnDOT, this unsignaled line has 12 passenger trains per day. The line is not electrified. All Waterbury branch line trips terminate at Bridgeport where passengers must transfer to a New Haven Line train to continue travel. Table 4-13 summarizes the number and type of trains operating on the Waterbury Branch.

7 Often operates less than daily service on the Line. Congestion Mitigation Study 4-18 Existing Conditions Report Table 4-13 Waterbury Branch Number of Trains on the Line Daily

Metro-North P&W Total Eastbound 6 1 7 Westbound 6 1 7 Total 12 2 14 Source: Metro North, P&W

Stations- As shown in Table 4-14, there are six passenger stations on the Waterbury Branch. This branch is a single fare zone.

Table 4-14 Waterbury Branch Stations and Ridership Station Miles to GCT Boardings Waterbury 87.6 96 Naugatuck 82.5 41 Beacon Falls 78.5 11 Seymour 75.1 25 Ansonia 71.2 26 Derby/Shelton 69.6 4 Total 203 Source: Metro-North 1996 Ridership Data

Danbury Branch –The Danbury Branch passenger service runs 24 miles north to Danbury on right of way owned by ConnDOT and maintained by Metro-North. The line is single tracked with passing sidings at the two terminals and at the midpoint of the trip between Danbury and Norwalk. The line is used by 20 Metro-North passenger trains each weekday. Table 4-15 summarizes the number and type of trains operating daily on the Danbury Branch.

Table 4-15 Danbury Branch Number of Trains on the Line Daily Metro-North P&W Total Eastbound 10 1 11 Westbound 10 1 11 Total 20 2 22 Source: Metro North, P&W

Stations- As shown in Table 4-16, there are seven stations between South Norwalk and Danbury separated into two fare zones.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-19 Existing Conditions Report Table 4-16 Danbury Branch Stations and Ridership Typical Inbound Station Miles to GCT Boardings Danbury 64.9 175 Bethel 61.9 174 Redding 58.6 61 Branchville 54.0 212 Cannondale 50.2 139 Wilton 48.6 226 Merritt-7 45.0 107 Total 1,094 Source: Metro-North 1996 Ridership Data

New Canaan Branch- The 8 mile New Canaan Branch is served by 39 daily passenger trains to GCT or Stamford. As shown in Table 4-17, there are three stations between Stamford and New Canaan in one fare zone.

Table 4-17 New Canaan Line Stations and Ridership Station Miles to GCT Boardings Stamford 33.1 4,945 Glenbrook 35.3 507 Springdale 36.7 408 Talmadge Hill 38.8 428 New Canaan 41 1,239 Source: Metro North

4.5.2 Ridership Patterns, Trends and Forecasts

Over the last five years, Metro-North has estimated growth rates for traffic at each station for commuter and non-commuter traffic. During this period, there has been dramatic growth in commuter ridership from mainline stations east of Fairfield. Commuter traffic at Stamford and South Norwalk has also grown, while at the same time passenger traffic between most mainline stations between Bridgeport and Greenwich has declined. On the branches, the Waterbury Branch experienced some growth, while the other two branches have generally had a decline in ridership. The decline in ridership on the Danbury Branch may be attributed to a shift in ridership to the Harlem Branch.

Over the same five year period non-commuter8 traffic is up at most station along the mainline with the greatest growth estimated at South Norwalk, New Haven, Stamford, and Fordham. Non-commuter traffic is declining on the Danbury and Waterbury

8 Non-commuter traffic is defined by Metro-North as traffic that uses a one-way ticket or a ten trip ticket. Commuter traffic uses weekly or monthly passes, which discounted fares when used at high frequency. Congestion Mitigation Study 4-20 Existing Conditions Report Branches. Stations with significant improvement in ridership are typically those which have had improvements such as additional parking constructed. Figure 4.17 Commuter Growth Rates 1996-2000 30%

25% Growth Rate

20%

15%

10%

5%

0% Percent change

-5%

-10%

-15% Old Rye Wilton Bethel Darien Milford Pelham Green's Noroton Fairfield Ansonia Merritt-7 Redding Danbury Harrison Stratford Cos Cob Seymour Fordham Westport Stamford Riverside Southport Rowayton Waterbury Glenbrook Bridgeport Larchmont Greenwich Springdale Naugatuck Branchville New Haven Cannondale Port Chester New Canaan Mamaroneck Beacon Falls East Norwalk Talmadge Hill New Rochelle Mount Vernon Derby Shelton South Norwalk Stations

Figure 4.18 Non-Commuter Growth Rates 1996-2000 30.0% 25.0% Growth Rates 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% -5.0%

Percent Growth Percent -10.0% -15.0% -20.0% -25.0% Old Rye Wilton Bethel Darien Milford Pelham Green's Noroton Fairfield Ansonia Merritt-7 Redding Danbury Harrison Stratford Cos Cob Seymour Fordham Westport Stamford Riverside Southport Rowayton Waterbury Glenbrook Bridgeport Larchmont Greenwich Naugatuck Springdale Branchville New Haven Cannondale Port Chester New Canaan Mamaroneck Beacon Falls East Norwalk Talmadge Hill New Rochelle Mount Vernon Derby Shelton South Norwalk Stations

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-21 Existing Conditions Report Forecast Growth in Ridership - Metro-North Railroad Rolling Stock Plan publishes a ten year ridership projection for all of its lines as shown in Table 4-18.

Table 4-18 Metro-North’s Projected AM Peak Inbound Ridership 2000-2010

1990-2000 Average AM 2010 Projection Average Ridership to Average AM Cumulative Average Cumulative Annual Manhattan Peak Inbound Growth Annual Growth Growth Spring 2000 Ridership 2000-2010 Growth Inner New 9.4% 0.9% 13,055 14,055 7.7% 0.7% Haven (NY)9 Inner New 1.8% 0.2% 3,681 4,340 17.9% 1.7% Haven (CT) Outer New 13.3% 1.3% 11,706 13,669 16.8% 1.6% Haven New Canaan -5.9% -0.6% 2,034 2,389 17.4% 1.6% Branch Danbury -1.9% -0.2% 760 930 22.4% 2.0% Branch Waterbury 125.5% 8.5% 8 24 206.1% 11.6% Branch Total NH 27.4% 2.4% 31,245 35,407 13.3% 1.3% Line Source: Metro-North Railroad Rolling Stock Plan. 2001

To meet the projected ridership, Metro-North plans on adjusting their services slightly, and to increase the number of trains. Currently, Metro-North is planning on an eight percent increase in the total weekly number of trains run from 2001 to 2010 on the New Haven Line10. This will increase weekly service to 1,702 trains, up from the current 1,574. The largest percentage increase of service is planned for weekend service, with the addition of 38 trains to the schedule.

ConnDOT reports that 90 percent of Metro-North’s approximately 70,000 peak passenger trips on the New Haven Line services start or end at Grand Central Terminal. Only 10 percent of peak travel when congestion is heaviest on I-95 is oriented toward shorter “intermediate” trips between stations along the line. Off peak and reverse peak use of the New Haven line service is a growth market for Metro North.

Over the next decade, ConnDOT expects ridership for services to Manhattan to grow annually by 1.9 percent in the peak and 5.1 percent in the off peak. By contrast, intermediate ridership, with destinations outside Manhattan, is projected to increase annually by 7.6 percent in the peak and 3.3 percent in the off peak. 11

9 Inner New Haven (NY) includes all stations between Fordham and Port Chester. Inner New Haven (CT) includes all stations between Greenwich and Stamford. Outer New Haven includes all Main Line stations between Noroton Heights and New Haven. 10 This includes service on the New Haven Line Branches. 11 Connecticut Department of Transportation, Bureau of Public Transportation, Fleet Management Plan Connecticut Commuter Rail July 2001 Page 28. Congestion Mitigation Study 4-22 Existing Conditions Report 4.6 Bus Transit Operations

Seven agencies provide public transit services in the study area:

ƒ CT Transit, Stamford Division; ƒ Norwalk Transit District (NTD); ƒ Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority (GBTA); ƒ Valley Transit District (VTD); ƒ Milford Transit District (MTD); ƒ CT Transit, New Haven Division; and ƒ Housatonic Area Regional Transit (HART).

Service is provided by these operators to all towns along the I-95 corridor in the study area, as well as to the outlying areas and major corridors in the study region. Of the operators identified above six out of the seven (i.e. all except VTD) provide fixed route service as well as on-demand services required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). VTD provides only on-demand services.

4.6.1 Routes and Service Characteristics

CT Transit, Stamford Division – The CT Transit Stamford Division provides service on 11 fixed routes, primarily focused in the City of Stamford. Service is also provided to all or part of the towns of Darien, Greenwich, and Norwalk. CT Transit Stamford Division has a fleet of 42 buses that provide over 100,000 annual hours of service.

Norwalk Transit District (NTD) – Norwalk Transit District operates 13 fixed routes in the City of Norwalk, with more limited service provided to portions of Darien, New Canaan, Stamford, Westport, and Wilton. NTD maintains a fleet of 54 buses for service in these areas, and provides over 82,000 annual service hours. The NTD provides comprehensive fixed route services in the area, and maintains a complementary paratransit program as well as an expanded coordinated demand response service in the region. NTD connects with the GBTA to the east and with CT Transit Stamford Division to the west. In addition, NTD provides shuttle service at rail stations in Norwalk and Greenwich.

Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority (GBTA) – The Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority operates a 17-route transit system serving Bridgeport, Stratford, Trumbull, and Fairfield. GBTA also operates several shuttle services, including a circulator service in Downtown Bridgeport. Service is on a comprehensive schedule for weekday service, with most routes operated on a 30-minute headway throughout the day. Peak period headways are less than 10 minutes on GBTA’s busiest routes. GBTA operates 40 fixed route buses for service over 150,000 annual service hours. GBTA also provides complementary paratransit service within its service area. Connections are made with Milford Transit District service to the east and Norwalk Transit District service to the west.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-23 Existing Conditions Report Milford Transit District (MTD) – The Milford Transit District operates a four-route transit system within the City of Milford and also offers a connection to the GBTA system in Stratford. Service is provided until 7 PM on weekdays and on a reduced Saturday schedule. In addition, MTD provides a portion of the Coastal Link service. The MTD maintains a fleet of 6 fixed route vehicles for its service over approximately 17,000 fixed route service hours annually. MTD also operates a paratransit demand-responsive program.

CT Transit, New Haven Division – Fixed route transit service is focused on the City of New Haven and its immediate suburbs. The division’s 17 fixed routes extend west to Milford, northwest as far as Chesire and Waterbury, and east to Branford. The suburban towns of Hamden, West Haven, East Haven, North Haven, and Branford have fairly extensive coverage, while the division’s only express bus route is provided to serve the shoreline area east of Branford (i.e. Guilford and Madison). Two commuter connection shuttles connect Union Station with various locations in Downtown New Haven. ADA complementary paratransit is provided by contract with the Greater New Haven Transit District.

Service on the system is provided through a long service day on weekdays that ends well past midnight on the major routes. The express and Commuter Connection services are weekday service. Service is primarily focused on major generators in the service area, with downtown New Haven serving as the system hub.

Housatonic Area Regional Transit (HART) – The Housatonic Area Regional Transit operates a nine-route transit system throughout Danbury, Bethel, Brookfield and New Milford focused on Danbury’s central business district. One route also serves Brewster MTA MetroNorth Railroad Station in Putnam County, New York. Service is provided from 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM for most routes on weekdays and on a reduced Saturday schedule. Headways range from 30 minutes in the peak hours to 60 minutes in the off- peak. HART maintains a fleet of 21 fixed route vehicles for its service over approximately 41,000 fixed route service hours annually. HART also operates SweetHART, a paratransit demand-responsive program.

Coastal Link Service – Coastal Link service is an inter-jurisdictional fixed route service operating primarily along Route 1 between the towns of Milford and Norwalk. The service is operated through a coordinated effort between the Milford Transit District, the Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority, and the Norwalk Transit District. Although it is not a transit authority or district on its own, this service is operated under the purview of three operators, and as such, is mentioned separately.

4.6.2 Ridership

CT Transit, Stamford Division - CT Transit’s Stamford Division is the smallest of its three major divisions (Hartford, New Haven and Stamford) in terms of ridership and service area. The Stamford Division has an annual ridership of 3.9 million passengers and a total of approximately 10,600 weekday unlinked passenger trips. Route F

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-24 Existing Conditions Report connecting downtown Stamford with the Norwalk Wheels Hub area is the busiest route in the division, with over 1,900 weekday passenger trips. Two other routes, Route E (High Ridge) and Route K (Port Chester/Greenwich) have over 1,000 weekday passenger trips. Route H (South End), the Commuter Connection shuttles, and the I-Bus have the lowest ridership of all division routes.

Norwalk Transit District – All fixed route services provided by NTD, including the Norwalk Shuttles and the Greenwich Commuter Connection have a total of 1.2 million annual unlinked passenger trips and a total of 5,800 unlinked weekday passenger trips. Route 10 serving the South Norwalk neighborhood is the system’s busiest route with over 800 daily passenger trips.

GBTA – GBTA’s fixed route system has an annual ridership of 4.7 million passengers and a total of approximately 16,000 weekday unlinked passenger trips. Compared with other bus systems in the CMS study area, GBTA has a more balanced ridership between weekday and weekend trips, largely because it services a population of non-vehicle households who rely on GBTA buses for the majority of their travel.

Four routes (Routes 1, 2, 3 and 8) have a daily ridership of over 1,000 passengers. Route 2 is the busiest route in the system with approximately 2,250 daily passenger. The rest of the system’s routes range in ridership between 1,800 daily passenger for Route 8 down to 74 daily passengers for Route 14 (the system's only express route).

Milford Transit District - MTD’s fixed route system has an annual ridership of 158,000, with an average daily ridership of 500 unlinked weekday passenger trips. Route 1, with approximately 200 daily trips is the system’s busiest route.

CT Transit, New Haven Division – CT Transit’s New Haven Division is the state’s second largest transit operation. It serves just over 10.5 million unlinked annual passenger trips, with an average daily ridership of approximately 30,000 unlinked weekday passenger trips. The B-Whalley and D-Dixwell routes are the system’s two busiest, each with over 3,000 daily passengers.

Housatonic Area Regional Transit (HART) – HART’s fixed route service have a total of 700,000 annual unlinked passenger trips. Ridership on HART’s routes varies from almost 500 weekday passenger trips on Route 7 serving New Milford to 60 weekday passenger trips on the City Center Danbury Trolley. The Brewster Shuttle from Danbury to the Brewster MetroNorth train station is estimated to have about 80 weekday passenger trips.

Coastal Link Service – Coastal Link service had 640,000 unlinked passenger trips during the one-year period from December 2000 to November 2001.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-25 Existing Conditions Report 4.6.4 Operations and Management

The two CT Transit divisions are part of a quasi-public agency under the auspices of the ConnDOT. A management company has been contracted to oversee day-to-day operations. Funding is primarily provided through a combination of state and federal monies, as well as passenger fares and other revenue (i.e. advertising, private grants, etc). There is no local contribution.

The other four transit districts in the study area - MTD, GBTA, NTD, and HART - are run by an Executive Director or Administrator, who implements policy developed by a Board of Directors. These agencies are also funded by a mix of state and federal funds, as well as passenger fares and special revenue. The major difference between these agencies and the CT Transit agency is that local money is required for operations, as well. As required by federal ADA legislation, all of the transit systems provide complementary paratransit programs either directly or through contract.

4.7 Regional Airports

4.7.1 Sikorsky

Located in Stratford and owned by the City of Bridgeport, Sikorsky Airport has historically offered commuter air passenger service to other Northeast cities, such as Philadelphia, Washington, DC and Boston. However, recent trends in air travel have resulted in a concentration of scheduled airline service at regional hub airports, while smaller local facilities such as Sikorsky are viewed as uneconomical for scheduled service, particularly when jet service is limited or not available. Scheduled commercial passenger operation ended in September 1999. Prior to this, annual enplanements at Sikorsky had averaged approximately 100,000 passengers. Sikorsky’s current operation is focused on general aviation (non-scheduled, corporate, private and chartered services), as well as helicopter flights, flight training, military and public safety operations and maintenance services.

4.7.2 Tweed/New Haven

Tweed-New Haven Airport is located in East Haven and is operated by a regional New Haven Airport Authority. A moderate amount of scheduled service (8-10 daily flights) is currently provided between New Haven and Philadelphia and Washington, DC. This service is provided with turbo-prop aircraft with a passenger capacity of approximately 40 per flight. US Airways Express is the only scheduled carrier operating from the airport. Annual enplanements at the airport have varied between 65,000 and 100,000 passengers over the last five years. The airport is currently conducting a master planning study of future facilities and services. Initiation of jet service by regional jet aircraft is a key goal for the airport.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-26 Existing Conditions Report 4.7.3 Westchester County, New York, Airport

Because of extensive use by business travelers from the White Plains and Stamford areas, Westchester County Airport has been able to retain a greater number of scheduled airline services, including jet service, than either of the study area’s other two regional airports. Westchester Airport has significantly expanded parking in the last five years, but limitations on the type of aircraft and schedule of flights may moderate future passenger travel growth. Annual enplanements at Westchester Airport have been in the range of 500,000 passengers over the last few years.

4.8 Ferries

At the turn of the 20th century, luxury steamboats of the Fall River Line plied the waters of Long Island Sound offering passenger service between New York and Boston, with stops at many of the port cities in between. The only current commercial passenger ferry operation in the study area is located in Bridgeport. Service is provided to Port Jefferson on Long Island. From time to time proposals have been put forward for ferry operation between various cities and towns within the study area and other points on Long Island or the New York area airports. However, with the exception of brief experimental runs, none of these other operations has been able to maintain long-term commercial viability.

ConnDOT’s March 2001 Intrastate Passenger Commuter Ferry Study identifies proposed ferry services between the Admiral’s Wharf project area in Stamford harbor and LaGuardia Airport, with subsequent stops at Pier 34 and Pier 11 in Manhattan. One potential operator of this service intended to provide three morning peak period trips and three evening peak period trips with a monthly commuter pass expected to be in the range of $400 to $450. In July, 2001, the developers of Admiral’s Wharf announced that they anticipated service might begin in the late summer of 2002.

4.8.1 Bridgeport

For over 100 years, the Bridgeport & Port Jefferson Steamboat Company has operated a ferry service across Long Island Sound. In response to significant traffic growth in the last five years, a new vessel was purchased in 1999 for $14 million, in addition to two prior vessels dating from 1983 and 1986. Today, the three vessel-operation transports over 900,000 people and approximately 400,000 vehicles annually. In the summer months, they provide 16 daily round trips and in winter they provide 11 daily round trips. Substantial passenger and vehicle-carrying capacity remains available on this service, particularly outside the summer peak of operation.

4.9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

Within the study corridor, each of the five regional planning agencies has prepared bicycle and pedestrian plans. The Connecticut Department of Transportation has also prepared a statewide plan, which includes descriptive text on each RPA plan. The

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-27 Existing Conditions Report following text has been taken from the Connecticut Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan published in March 1999.

4.9.1 South Western Region (SWRPA)

Bicycle and pedestrian safety is clearly an issue in the South Western Region. In order to address the safety issue, and to promote walking and bicycling as an alternative mode of transportation, it will be necessary to:

1) Provide facilities necessary to effect safe and efficient bicycle and pedestrian travel ; 2) Educate pedestrians and bicyclists and motorists to safely co-exist ; and 3) Encourage increased enforcement for bicycle, pedestrian, and motor vehicle laws.

Clearly, the lack of sidewalks has created pedestrian / vehicle conflicts. This has forced potential pedestrians into automobiles for short trips and acts as a deterrent to rail commutation. ConnDOT's sidewalk policy is not conducive to the provision of sidewalks and collides with efforts to encourage use of public transportation. The policy should be revisited by the Department.

In order to achieve the goal of promoting energy efficient transportation within the region, the policy should be to promote bicycle and pedestrian modes as viable transportation options. In order to achieve this, the region intends to continue to work with towns, the State and interested parties to incorporate into the Region's Transportation Plan opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian facilities that will be for transportation purposes. In addition, they will evaluate all proposed projects regardless of type or scope for ability to include bicycle provisions, and where feasible, include bicycle provisions (road, highway, bridge, transit, construction, rehabilitation, replacement, resurfacing, etc.); coordinate bicycle-planning activities with the State Bicycle Coordinator; and have regional plans and projects incorporated into the State Transportation Plan.

Within the SWRPA region, recommended projects include: 1. Norwalk River Bikeway. 2. Route 7 Linear Park & Trail-Bikeway / Walking Trail. 3. Provide bicycle storage facilities at transportation hubs and at major public facilities. 4. Market Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Awareness Program at schools and in the Drivers manual. 5. Maintain existing bicycle paths. 6. Construct new shared roadway bike paths.

The existing bikeway system includes:

DARIEN - West Avenue, Noroton Avenue to Middlesex Road, Rings End Road to Peartree Point Road to Long Neck Point Road. Length: 13.9 miles.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-28 Existing Conditions Report

GREENWICH - Various roads connecting Grass Island Area with Greenwich Point. Length: 7.5 miles.

The Town of Greenwich has recently completed a town-wide Bicycle Master Plan that prioritizes a series of mostly on-street routes for bicycle usage. It will help the town to begin implementing bicycle facility projects as funds become available.

WESTPORT - South Compo Road from Route 1 past I-95 to Compo Beach and Sound- view Drive to Compo Beach. Length: 3.5 miles.

WILTON - (Off Road Facility) From High School Road south to Post Office Square in Wilton Center-0.7 miles of compacted gravel surface through wooded area; continuing south 2.6 miles on River Road to Horseshoe Road and Wolfpit Road.

4.9.2 Housatonic Valley Region (HVCEO)

The goal of the Housatonic Valley Region's Bicycle Plan is to develop a safe, convenient, comfortable, and secure riding environment that recognizes bicycles as an important mode for personal transportation with benefits including energy conservation, pollution reduction, and enhanced physical fitness. The objective of the Bicycle Plan is to plan and implement a comprehensive and coordinated bicycle route system for transportation and recreational use providing safe and convenient access to major activity centers, parks, schools, and community facilities.

Regional Bicycle Proposals in HVCEO include:

Bethel Train Station Access - In Bethel, a proposed two block long connection between Wooster Street and Durant Avenue along Hickock Avenue Extension would serve to tie in the new train station with the existing downtown area to the south, and would also enhance pedestrian accessibility to the facility.

Still River Greenway - This greenway is one of several advanced for the region. The proposed alignment begins at Commerce Park and extends to the Pathmark Center on Newtown Road. During the workweek, this link would be an additional entry to an area of significant employment concentration and it would also provide a pleasant focus for lunchtime recreation. On weekends, a dedicated right-of-way could allow limited off- hours use of the extensive green space associated with the project. Further expansion of the Still River Greenway along the watercourse will depend on acquisition of the right- of-way or of easements for public use.

Berkshire Corporate Park - Another opportunity to integrate bicycle paths with on- going commercial and residential development is at the Berkshire Corporate Park, where a multi-use trail has been proposed that would link the complex which sits on the Danbury-Bethel - Brookfield border to the shopping area approximately a half mile away on Route 6 in Bethel, and Newton Road in Danbury.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-29 Existing Conditions Report

Bicycle Sundays on the Route 7 Expressway - This proposal has been advanced by several individuals. It would involve closure to vehicular traffic of one or possibly both directions of the Route 7 Expressway between Danbury and Brookfield during the morning and midday periods on selected spring and fall Sundays. This wide, limited access route could then be used by bicyclists, pedestrians, joggers, rollerbladers, etc. This concept is similar to existing bicycle use programs on the Bronx River Parkway in Westchester County, NY and in Washington, D.C.'s Rock Creek Park. However, careful planning is needed to insure that usage of such a program would be sufficient in the Housatonic Region to justify the costs associated with periodic closure.

Regional Bicycle Routes - The facilities selected for this category include routes to and through every jurisdiction within the HVCEO region with three exceptions, Sherman, Bridgewater, and Redding. These localities are served by recreation, tourism, and secondary routes, which is most appropriate considering the low-density of traffic and attractive scenic qualities found in these areas.

1. White Street / Federal Road between downtown Danbury and the Route 7 terminus in Brookfield. 2. Route 6 easterly via White Street and Newtown Road to Route 6 through Bethel to a terminus with Route 25 at the flagpole in Newtown. 3. Route 7 (non-expressway section) between the Expressway terminus in Brookfield northerly to Bridge Street (Route 67) in New Milford. One other option within this corridor is the "Bicycle Sundays on the Route 7 Expressway" proposal. 4. Mill Plain Road (Route 6) / Lake Avenue / West Street between downtown Danbury and Putnam County NY. 5. Route 202 from the junction with Route 67 in New Milford northeasterly to the regional border. 6. Route 53 in downtown Danbury from White Street northerly to the intersection with Route 37. 7. Route 37 between the junction with Route 53 in Danbury, and Brush Hill Road (Route 39) in New Fairfield, and between the junction with Route 39 in Sherman and the junction with Route 7 in New Milford. This route also forms a portion of the scenic loop around Candlewood Lake shown on the Connecticut State Bicycle Map. 8. Route 53 / 302 between downtown Danbury and Main Street, Newtown. 9. Route 25 (Main Street / Newtown Turnpike) between Route 6 in Newtown Center and Monroe. 10. Route 35 (Danbury Road) between Rte. 102 in Ridgefield Center and the junction with Rte. 7. 11. Route 7 from its intersection with Route 35 in Ridgefield southerly through Redding and back into Ridgefield, continuing to the Wilton town line. 12. Church Hill Road / Glen Road (SR 816) between Route 25 in Newtown easterly to the Housatonic River at the Southbury town line.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-30 Existing Conditions Report Recreational, Tourism, and Secondary Bicycle Travel Routes - The recreational and tourism routes are a network of preliminary State and Town roads that have been nominated for inclusion on this system. In general, these routes are included by reason of a unique riding experience in the Housatonic Valley Region, interregional links, or complementary extensions of regional bicycle travel routes.

1. Route 7 between Kent Road, New Milford and the Kent town line. 2. Route 39 between New Fairfield and Sherman. 3. Route 67 in New Milford, from Route 7 easterly through Bridgewater to the Roxbury town line. 4. Route 133 from the junction with Route 67 in Bridgewater southerly via Route 25 to the junction with Route 7 in Brookfield at the Crafts Center. 5. Route 25 from Brookfield center to Route 6. 6. Route 53 and 58 in Redding and Bethel. 7. Routes 33, 102 and 116 and town roads from Ridgefield to Danbury. 8. Candlewood Lake Road between Brookfield and Route 7 in New Milford.

One other option for long-term investigation is a grade separated multi-use path along the abandoned Ridgefield Branch railroad right-of-way through Ridgefield.

4.9.3 Greater Bridgeport Region (GBRPA)

The Regional Bicycle Plan considers the needs of bicyclists and incorporates bicycle transportation facilities within the overall intermodal transportation system of the region. The two general goals of the Bicycle Plan are:

1. Accommodate current bicycle use on the highway system. 2. Encourage the increased use of bicycling as a mode of transportation while enhancing safety.

The Regional Bicycle Plan envisions an interconnected bicycle route and trail system designated by route and trail markers and complemented by a set of user-friendly amenities. The principle objectives of the Plan are:

• To promote bicycling as alternative mode of transportation; • To work towards designating existing roads as bicycle routes and improving selected roads as necessary to accommodate bicycle use and promote safety; • To promote the construction of selected off-road, multi-use paths or trails located along a separate right-of-way; and • To enlist the aid of the State and area municipalities in supporting, enhancing and maintaining bicycle facilities in their respective towns as well as to work toward developing interlocal agreements for the mutual or joint operation and maintenance of off-road trails that extend beyond municipal boundaries.

The GBRPA identified a number of roadways that could accommodate bicycle travel based on performance criteria such as accessibility, directness, continuity, route

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-31 Existing Conditions Report attractiveness, level of conflict, cost and ease of implementation. Route selection was sensitive to traffic volume, road width, and road grade, and attempted to create an interconnected system of routes designed to facilitate intra and inter regional travel and to connect the Region's activity centers.

The implementation of the recommended routes will require a variety of roadway improvements. Where necessary, designated bicycle route streets will be widened to provide the minimum shoulder or bicycle lane width. Bicycle route signs will be installed at reasonable intervals to direct bicyclists along the routes. Auxiliary signs will also be installed to provide information to users.

1. Route 59 and Route 136 Trail: Begins intersection of Route 25 and Route 59 in Monroe and ends at the Fairfield-Westport town line. App. 9.62 miles. 2. Northern Monroe to Downtown Bridgeport Trail: Begins at the Monroe Newtown town line through Monroe and Trumbull to downtown Bridgeport. Connects with the Bridgeport Transportation Center. App. 18.54 miles. 3. Westport to Lordship Trail: Begins at Fairfield-Westport town line and runs through Fairfield and Bridgeport to the Lordship section in Stratford. App. 18.86 miles. 4. Reservoir Trail: Begins at Easton-Redding town line and runs along Route 58, ending with a connection to Trail #3. App. 7.57 miles. 5. Cross Monroe Trail: Begins at the intersection of Judd Road and Hattertown Road near the Monroe- Newtown town line and runs east-west through Monroe along Judd Road and Purdy Hill Road to Moose Hill Road. App. 7.29 miles. 6. Madison Avenue Trail: Extends from Trail #5 at Judd Road in Monroe, through Trumbull to Old Town Road in Bridgeport principally along Madison Avenue. App. 6 miles. 7. Aspetuck Reservoir to Easton Reservoir Trail: Begins at Route 58 near the Aspetuck Reservoir and extends through Easton and around the Easton Reservoir. Ends at Madison Avenue in Trumbull. App. 5.27 miles. 8. Southport Trail: Begins at the intersection of Cross Highway (Trail #3) and Sturges Highway and runs north south along the Fairfield-Westport town line. Ends at the center of Southport. Connects with the outhport rail station. App. 3.63 miles. 9. Route 58 Trail: From the Easton-Redding town line it runs primarily along Route 58 to Samp Mortar Drive. Ends at Hulls Highway and Trail #8. App. 7.70 miles. 10. Fairfield Center Trail: Begins at the intersection of Burr Street and Congress Street and runs to Fairfield Center, then east west along the beach area to Southport. Connects with Fairfield rail station. App. 7.42 miles. 11. University Trail: Begins at Fairfield University at the intersection of Barlow Road and Round Hill Road and ends at Sacred Heart University. App. 6.4 miles. 12. Park Avenue-Seaside Avenue Trail: Begins at the intersection of Park Avenue and Old Town Road and runs along Park Avenue and Seaside Park. App. 5.11 miles.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-32 Existing Conditions Report 13. North Stratford Trail: Begins at the intersection of Route 127 and Unity Road (Trail # 2) and runs through Trumbull to the Paradise Green area in Stratford. Spur trail runs north along Route 108 to Shelton. App. 7.07 miles. 14. Route 111 Trail: Begins at Old Mine Road in Trumbull and extends along Route 111 to Route 34 in Monroe. Spur Trail extends along Route 110 into Shelton. App. 9.28 miles.

The routes identified above will be designated along existing roads and be either shared lane or shoulder facilities. For sections that use the shoulder, it is recommended that the shoulder lane be improved to a minimum of four feet. In higher speed and volume areas, the minimum should be increased to six feet. In some cases, it is recommended that bicycle lanes be developed instead of simple bicycle routes. The bicycle lane treatment would be limited to areas where traffic volumes are highest and the need to separate bicyclists and motorists is greatest. Suggested bicycle lane segments include portions of Routes 58, 59, 110, 111, and 136.

Selected Separate Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths:

1. Housatonic Railway Rails-to-Trails Conservation Project: Construct a multi- use trail within the corridor of the abandoned Housatonic Railway. 2. Merritt Parkway Greenway Trail: Construct a multi-use trail within the corridor of the Merritt Parkway. 3. Housatonic Riverbelt Greenway: Begins in the southern end of Stratford and runs north along Route 113 and Route 110 to Shelton. Comprised of a combination of on-road and off-road segments. App. 8.81 miles. 4. Seaview Avenue Bikeway Project: The Highway System Plan recommends the reconstruction of Seaview Avenue south of I-95 and the construction of a new arterial north of I-95. As part of that project, bicycle lanes or paths should be developed extending between Remmington Woods industrial area and Pleasure Beach. Connections would be constructed to Route 127 and Broadbridge Avenue in Stratford.

4.9.4 Valley Region (VRPA)

A beginning point for assessing the suitability of the Valley's road network for bicycling is one's knowledge of the existing road conditions. Part of the road conditions for bicyclists is the extent and prevalence of high speed, high volume, and/or high truck volume on a number of the Valley's State arterials.

Such conditions will continue to constrain the use of these facilities to traffic-tolerant bicyclists. In addition, there are a number of State highway locations where the existence of curbside parking, narrow travel lanes, and the proximity of guiderails and retaining walls further constrain the number of bicyclists.

In examining the suitability of each of the Valley community road systems for bicycling, examination of the bicycling environment is essential. Roadways where bicyclists ride

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-33 Existing Conditions Report and do not ride, need to be examined. Hazards, barriers, narrow lanes, deficiencies, impediments access to mass transit facilities, and the bicycle parking situation need to be identified and considered for their effect on bicycling.

In reviewing the routes indicated on the Connecticut Bicycle Map within the Valley Region, it was noticed that, with few exceptions, the Valley Region bicycle routes tend to have an east-west orientation (perhaps towards New Haven). North-south routes tend to be few and limited in scope. In order to correct this imbalance, a series of generally north-south routes have been proposed by the Valley Region.

Proposed Additions, Deletions, Substitutions, and Alternative On-Road Bike Routes:

1. Westside Derby / Ansonia Connection: Elizabeth Street at Route 34 (Main St.) to Seymour Avenue, Clifton Avenue, Pershing Drive, Bridge Street to Route 115 (Main St.). 2. Eastside Ansonia / Seymour Connection: Route 115 north from Route 334, Ansonia to Route 67, Seymour via North Main Street, Ansonia, and South Main Street and Main Street, Seymour. 3. Westside Ansonia / Seymour Connection: Derby Avenue from Route 334 in Ansonia north to interchange 20 east of Route 8, then along suggested new bike path to be constructed east of Route 8 on top of new sewer connector located to the east of Route 8. Bike path would end at the southerly terminus of Derby Avenue. Bike Route would proceed northerly along Derby Avenue to Route 313 (Broad St.) to Derby Avenue. 4. Trumbull / Shelton Connection: Shelton Road (Trumbull town line), SR 714 (Bridgeport Ave.) north to Route 110. 5. Additional Trumbull / Shelton Connection: Route 108 (Trumbull town line) north to Route 108 in Huntington Center. 6. Shelton Northern Connection: Route 110 north from Route 108 to SR 454 (Indian Well Road); SR 454 north to second Indian Well State Park road. 7. A proposed deletion is the segment of Platt Street in Ansonia between Route 243 and Route 115. A portion of this street was eliminated during redevelopment and is now a staircase. In its place, it is proposed that Route 243 extend along Elm Street to Route 115. 8. A bike route between Pulaski Highway (Rte. 243) northwesterly to Bridge and Main Streets (Rte. 115) in downtown Ansonia was included. The route would follow Prindle Avenue to Hill Street, Root Avenue, Jewett Street, Central Street, East Main Street, Bridge Street to Route 115. 9. Three routes were considered and dropped from inclusion due to a variety of reasons: Marshall Lane in Derby-narrow width; Route 34 between Route 115 and Orange -high speed and heavy commercial traffic; and Platt Street-Hodge Avenue-Jewett Street-Central Street Connector (superseded by Prindle Avenue connector above in item # 8).

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-34 Existing Conditions Report In each of the Valley towns, there are steep costs involved in replacing a town's deteriorating transportation infrastructure as well as keeping it up-to-date, and this includes pedestrian facilities. The James Street Pedestrian Bridge in Seymour was a case in point. Similarly, Derby has expressed interest in implementing a pedestrian facility and landscaping plan along Caroline Street-Water street-Factory Street-Main Street to the Derby Train Station.

Ansonia has drawn up an estimate for pedestrian facilities and landscaping plans. In each Valley community, existing intersection/signalization projects will involve construction of pedestrian ramps at the intersections where required. Once town priorities are indicated and made manifest, the intention will be to include pedestrian plans, including associated costs, within the Region's Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, as part of the Region's Regional Transportation Plan. From a regional perspective, it is noted that many suburban shopping centers and commercial strips have been developed without benefit of sidewalks to connect the properties. It will be a regional priority to work with the towns to encourage them to provide sidewalks at existing facilities and require them at new facilities.

4.9.5 South Central Region (SCRCOG)

Plans for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the region revolve around a core and regional trail system. In reference to the core of the trail system, a central trail system can extend the "Savin Rock Bikeway" around New Haven Harbor and west toward the Milford shore via an exclusive right-of-way and short curbside bicycle lanes; look toward a northwesterly harbor-to-West Rock Park link; and complete the "Farmington Canal Rail-to-Trail" system. Key elements for the core trail system include: • West River / Edgewood Park to West Rock Ridge State Park: largely separate right-of-way. • Farmington Canal Rail-to-Trail south to Prospect Street (New Haven): separate right-of-way. • Farmington Canal Path: largely via city streets. • Inner Harbor Trail via Long Wharf / Veterans Memorial Park: largely separate right-of-way. • Inner Harbor Trail via Tomlinson Bridge. • Inner Harbor Trail to Light House Point: largely separate right-of-way. • Inner Harbor Trail via city streets. • Savin Rock Bikeway (largely existing): separate right-of-way. • Waterfront Trail: toward Milford via city streets.

In order to extend the trail system to the region as a whole, central area elements can combine along the shoreline and extend toward well-defined northerly opportunities in Meriden. Key elements for the region trail system include those in the core, as well as: • Waterfront Trail thru Silver Sands State Park: separate right-of-way. • Waterfront Trail toward McKinny Wildlife Refuge: largely via city streets. • Quinnipiac Gorge Trail: separate right-of-way.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-35 Existing Conditions Report 4.10 Ridesharing/Transportation Demand Management

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) has seen many incarnations. At one time the strategies we now identify as TDM were used to address a fuel shortage. In the 1970’s when travelers had to queue in line and were limited to days of the week when they could fill their gas tanks, many employers introduced, sponsored and maintained vanpools for their workers. Ridesharing also became popular at this time.

As the geography of economic growth moved from urban areas and highway systems into suburban areas, TDM strategies became popular as a tool for managing congestion on the roadways. During the introduction of the Clean Air Act Amendment of 1990 and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (ISTEA) emphasis was on applying TDM strategies, also referred to as Transportation Control Measures (TCM) to air quality as well as congestion management. Acknowledgment of TDM as an integral part of a comprehensive transportation program is still seen in the latest Intermodal Surface Transportation Act (TEA 21). On both the national and local level, the thrust of legislative activity has been away from build out solutions to optimizing the transportation infrastructure and maintenance.

Across the nation, transportation management organizations were formed to assist localities and employers with identifying TDM measures and their applications. One key reason for the emergence of these organizations was recognition of the link between transportation and economic growth. If goods and people cannot move around a region, it becomes difficult to attract personnel to jobs, have access to resources, and ship goods. At one time, Connecticut had three such organizations, The Stamford Mayor’s Transportation Roundtable (1988-1991), the Norwalk TMA (1991) and Greenwich TMA (1991). Today, TMA activity is coordinated through the three ridesharing organizations in the State, Rideworks (New Haven), Rideshare Company (Hartford), and MetroPool (Stamford). These three organizations work with the Connecticut Department of Transportation, employers, and commuters in the State to support, assist, and deliver TDM products.

4.10.1 MetroPool

MetroPool is a non-profit transportation management agency headquartered in Stamford, and servicing the South Western, Housatonic Valley, and Bridgeport regions, as well as Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Dutchess counties in New York. Satellite offices have been opened in Danbury, Bridgeport and White Plains. The agency has approximately 17 full-time and part-time employees, and offers a wide range of services including workshops, transportation and commuter support services, information-sharing services, ridematching, maintaining an informational web site, as well as informational videos, and periodic surveys and focus groups.

MetroPool was originally formed as an outgrowth of the Southwest Area Commerce and Industry Association (SACIA), and was initially intended to be employer-funded. However, over the years most of the funding has come from federal and state government

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-36 Existing Conditions Report sources. Today, Metropool pursues a broad market-oriented approach to outreach to commuters, residents, the business community, and goods movement managers. Over the years, it has found that its most effective campaigns have been directed to reach people through their employers. The size of participating employers runs the gamut, but trends toward larger employers who have the resources to provide complementary services and promotional assistance on a continuing basis. Employer outreach is especially significant for firms undergoing corporate relocation or reviewing their personnel needs and policies. Metropool focuses its efforts on implementation, rather than just providing information to employers. Recent outreach to corporate clients has identified a strong concern for transportation access and mobility as a quality-of-life issue, as well as a business cost and “bottom line” issue.

Recent surveys sponsored by Metropool have identified a number of issues that affect the utilization of alternative modes of travel. In particular, the agency has found that carpools and vanpools experience significant turnover as individual employees experience shift changes, job changes, and other variations in the commuting pattern. The availability of transportation information through web sites and e-mail updates is helpful to recruit new participants for these services, as well as to solicit corporate participation in tax incentive programs such as Deduct-a-Ride and Guaranteed Ride Home programs.

4.10.2 Rideworks

Rideworks is the transportation management agency serving the Greater New Haven area, including Milford to the west and the Shoreline area to the east of New Haven. Rideworks also serves a critical role in the development and implementation of a marketing program for the Shore Line East commuter rail service under contract with ConnDOT. Like Metropool, its day-to-day outreach activities include working with employers through focus groups, surveys and videos, as well as identifying a customer- oriented approach to building ridership for alternative travel modes.

To accomplish these objectives, Rideworks has found that it is helpful to identify opportunities for recognition for its corporate participants and to provide peer recognition of companies that have successfully implemented travel demand management programs. Often corporate participants will approach Rideworks when they face specific transportation issues related to parking capacity and location, corporate relocation, and employee retention. Rideworks has also sponsored or facilitated regional TDM initiatives, such as the Guaranteed Ride Home program for Shore Line East rail commuters and the Coastal Link bus service.

4.10.3 Other Public Programs

Intelligent Transportation Systems - Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) involve application of management strategies and technologies to increase efficiency and safety of the national, regional and local surface transportation systems. Rather than solving transportation challenges solely by building additional infrastructure capacity, ITS

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-37 Existing Conditions Report strategies strive to use existing facilities more efficiently by applying technology and management strategies to collect, transfer, process and share historical and real-time transportation information.

The information is valuable to transportation agencies responsible for operating and managing the systems, and also to the traveling public who must make decisions about which mode to use, which route to take, or what time of day to travel. These systems can help reduce congestion, improve safety, and improve mobility. ITS systems are not new; ITS strategies have been used for over two decades to manage traffic signals on arterial roads. But ITS systems are increasingly being used for other transportation management purposes such as traffic management, transit operations management, incident management, and travel information management.

A major thrust of the Federal ITS Program reflected in the TEA-21 legislation, which governs the federal aid transportation program, is to encourage integration of ITS strategies to capitalize on synergies between ITS functions. Federal regulations require development of a regional ITS architecture to identify system integration opportunities and interfaces between systems where standards should be used. The regional architecture must be in place by 2005. ITS projects identified for implementation must conform to the regional ITS architecture. Until the regional ITS architecture is in place, all major ITS projects must have a project level architecture to ensure proper consideration of regional integration. ConnDOT has prepared an Intelligent Transportation Systems Implementation Plan to serve as the Regional ITS Architecture for the State of Connecticut. The five planning regions are in various stages of developing regional ITS plans.

ITS activities in the study area are a cooperative effort between ConnDOT, the five regional planning agencies and local communities. The key ITS program areas are: 1. Traffic Monitoring and Management; 2. Traveler Information Systems; 3. Incident Management; and, 4. Transit Operations and Electronic Fare Payment.

Electronic Toll Collection, which is a component of ITS systems in many areas, is not applicable in Connecticut.

Traffic Monitoring and Management

Traffic monitoring and surveillance in Southwestern Connecticut occurs at ConnDOT’s Bridgeport Operations Center (BOC). This facility is co-located with State Police Troop G in order to facilitate communications and coordinated responses to incidents. The BOC is responsible for traffic surveillance along 56 miles of I-95 from the New York State Line to Interchange 56 in Branford, along Route 7 from I-95 to Interchange 2, along Route 8 from I-95 to Interchange 2, and along I-91 from I-95 to Interchange 4. In addition to these limits for the highway surveillance system, the area encompassed by the BOC includes all of ConnDOT’s Maintenance District #3 (which covers approximately

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-38 Existing Conditions Report the same area as the five planning regions in this study) and includes sections of other limited access highways including Route 15, Route 7, Routes 8 and 25, and Interstate 91.

Traffic monitoring on limited access highways is accomplished with three components: ƒ Traffic Flow Detectors; ƒ Video Surveillance System; and, ƒ Service Patrols.

Traffic Flow Detectors and Video Surveillance

Microwave detectors, located approximately every half mile along I-95, provide speed data. These detectors constantly monitor vehicle speeds in all lanes of the roadway. This speed information is sent back to the BOC where it is processed and graphically presented to the system operators. Incident detection algorithms included in the system software declare a “potential” incident when the speed at a specific detector station falls below a user-defined threshold. The BOC system has also deployed over 90 video cameras at surveillance sites to provide coverage of highway and highway-arterial interchange locations within the system area. These cameras are spaced approximately every half-mile along I-95 within the limits of the surveillance system.

Service Patrols

Four service patrols are operated as part of the BOC system. These patrols are each assigned to a specific coverage area and are on duty from 5:30 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. They are responsible for clearing the traveled portion of the highway of debris and vehicles when necessary. Service patrol personnel provide free assistance to motorists involved in minor accidents or with disabled vehicles, including changing tires, providing “jump starts,” and refueling.

Arterial Traffic Management

The BOC is also responsible for monitoring and coordinating traffic signal systems on arterial roads in Southwestern Connecticut. There are 43 signal systems in this area, containing approximately 375 intersections. Both closed-loop and time-based signals have been deployed.

The various signal systems in use by ConnDOT are operated in conjunction with the State’s other traffic management systems. While there is no automated interface between the traffic signal systems and other traffic management systems, system operators utilize all of the systems together to improve traffic flow throughout the State. Personnel in the BOC are responsible for the operation of ConnDOT’s traffic management systems and, thus, are able to adjust the operation of traffic signal systems if a diversion of traffic from freeways to the surface streets is necessary. The best examples of this are along the I-95, I-91, and I-84 corridors, where special timing plans have been developed for signal systems along roadways that act as diversion routes for Interstate traffic.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-39 Existing Conditions Report Traveler Information Systems

There are two general types of traveler information ITS applications. Pre-trip traveler information systems enable travelers to change plans prior to embarking on a trip (getting in their car, walking to the bus stop, etc.). This is beneficial to travelers and to the transportation system not only during congested periods, but also when there are non- recurring delays (incidents, special events, maintenance activities). The ability to let travelers know where to (and not to) go prior to entering the transportation system improves the efficiency of the transportation network. En-route traveler information systems provide travelers already on the transportation network with information on unexpected incidents or congestion. The information can range from a simple alert to route diversion information. This results in lower levels of congestion and faster clearance times for incidents. It also reduces the levels of “unpredictability” regarding traffic operations and contributes to a reduction in secondary accidents. Traveler information systems can include multimodal (e.g., transit, airport) information as well as information on traveler services (e.g., tourism, lodging, recreation).

Information applications currently operated by the BOC include:

ƒ Variable Message Signs; ƒ Highway Advisory Radio; and, ƒ Media and Website Access.

Variable Message Signs

Variable message signs (VMS) are generally deployed on highways and are typically located prior to an important motorist decision point. The information provided by the signs depends on specific conditions or situations on the surrounding network, and is used as part of an overall approach to congestion and incident management. The BOC system utilizes 47 VMS signs deployed throughout the area.

Highway Advisory Radio

Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) stations are used to provide specific information at key locations on a more immediate basis than is possible using VMS. Ten-watt transmitters are used, with an anticipated broadcast radius of five miles. Four HAR stations are installed along I-95 with a fifth transmitter deployed at the Route 8 and 15 interchange.

Media and Website Access

ConnDOT has added real-time information capabilities to its website (www.dot.state.ct.us) that includes a scrolling list of active traffic incidents, video camera images from the Newington and Bridgeport Operations Centers and average travel speed information for the Hartford area freeways. Newly deployed systems will provide even more extensive pre-trip and en-route information to Connecticut travelers. In addition to these video images, a fax broadcast service has been developed to share traffic condition

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-40 Existing Conditions Report reports with various agencies and media outlets. Currently, information is faxed from the BOC to Metro Networks, Shadow Traffic, STAR 99.9, WEBE, Channels 8 and 12, Metropool and Rideworks.

Regional Transportation Groups

ConnDOT is a member of both TRANSCOM and the I-95 Corridor Coalition, two regional transportation consortia. TRANSCOM is comprised of various transportation operating agencies in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. The I-95 Corridor Coalition includes public/private transportation agencies from Virginia to Maine. As a member of these groups, ConnDOT shares traffic information with other member agencies. ConnDOT has developed policies concerning notification of TRANSCOM about incidents along Connecticut highways. This notification is typically based on the judgment of BOC personnel that an incident will have an impact on travelers coming into Connecticut from New York.

The I-95 Corridor Coalition has developed an Incident Exchange Network (IEN) for sharing traffic information among agencies. The IEN is a network of computers located at different operations centers throughout the I-95 corridor, including the BOC, information regarding incident occurrences is input into the IEN for dissemination to other agencies.

Incident Management

Incident management is defined as the systematic use of resources to reduce the duration and impact of incidents, and improve the safety of motorists by reducing the time to detect and verify an incident occurrence; implementing the appropriate response; and clearing the incident. In addition to improving reliability, this contributes to reduction of secondary accidents. Incident management programs have been found to reduce delay associated with congestion caused by incidents by 10 to 45 percent.

Connecticut Highway Assistance Motorist Patrol (CHAMP) operates along the I-95 Corridor from the New York State Line in Greenwich through Branford. CHAMP began along the I-95 Corridor in 1996 and the Hartford area in September of 1999. The service is provided each weekday between 5:30 A.M. and 7:00 P.M., and on selected holidays and Sundays. It provides motorist assistance such as changing flat tires, jump starting, pushing vehicles to shoulders, providing fuel and offering shelter. In addition, the service patrols react to accidents and notify Highway Operations Centers in Newington and Bridgeport of the need for State Police, medical, fire and/or other emergency responses. The drivers remove highway debris and dead animals; report damaged guardrail, illumination and drainage problems, and provide travel assistance to motorists on the highway. Areas of coverage are as follows: I-95 from New York State Line to Exit 54 in Branford, I-91 from I-95 interchange in New Haven to Exit 8 (Route 80/Middletown Avenue), Route 7 in Norwalk from I-95 to Route 123, Route 8 in Bridgeport from I-95 to Exit 6, Route 34 in New Haven from I-95 to York Street.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-41 Existing Conditions Report Regional Incident Management Steering Committees are in operation in SWRPA, VRPA and SCRCOG. These committees, comprised of fire chiefs, police chiefs, State Police, DEP, towing and recovery, EMS and ConnDOT, are similar to committees previously established in other locations and are dedicated to overcoming institutional issues and to developing coordinated policies and procedures for managing incidents and highway closures.

An important aspect of Incident Management is development of traffic diversion plans that allow motorists to bypass sections of expressways when incidents occur. Traffic diversion plans have been worked out for the I-95 Corridor and plans for other corridors are in preparation. The diversion routes have been worked out with the assistance and cooperation of regional planning agencies, local traffic engineering and public works departments and police. Procedures have been established for consultation and cooperation when incidents occur.

Transit Operations and Electronic Fare Payment

The BOC is mainly concerned with traffic activities and is not directly involved with transit activities. However, two current transit-related ITS activities are currently taking place in the study area – the SWRPA Regional Transit Card Study and the Bridgeport ITS System Plan. SWRPA has completed a study to determine the feasibility of a regional transit card and to develop an implementation plan for a regional transit card for rail and bus transit in the area of Connecticut served by Metro North Commuter Railroad. This study explored implementation requirements for an integrated farecard for use by all transit and paratransit operators in the region. A regional farecard accepted on all of the region’s services will simplify the use of public transportation in general and improve mobility throughout the region, thus making transit more attractive as an alternative to driving. The use of a common farecard will also provide more data on how riders use the various services, thereby helping the individual agencies plan improvements to their services. Thus, implementation of a regional farecard program would provide significant benefits to the region and its residents.

Congestion Pricing - Congestion pricing and road pricing are often spoken about interchangeably, but they are not identical. The two concepts are quite similar, and to varying degrees would achieve the same outcomes. As described in more detail below, the principal differences between the two concepts lie in the method and scope of application and the primary motivation for implementation. Congestion pricing, in the classical sense, is aimed explicitly at demand management that typically involves relatively high levels of toll charges in more concentrated, congested areas. Road pricing typically represents a more broadly applied user fee system in which both demand management and revenue generation are key objectives. Both congestion pricing and road pricing are typically applied in environments where tolled facilities already exist. The strategies refer to varying the tolls to achieve certain objectives.

The rationale for congestion pricing derives from the relationship between road capacity, level of traffic and congestion. Overall, transportation systems in most metropolitan

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-42 Existing Conditions Report areas represent impressive and ample resources. Yet these road systems are not performing as well as they might. Typically, particular road segments are clogged during morning and evening peak periods on weekdays. Except in a few situations, the problem is not shortage of road capacity in the aggregate. Furthermore, plenty of auto capacity is available in terms of seats. The problem is, only a little over one of these seats per vehicle is utilized. Thus, if some peak period users of congested facilities were persuaded to shift to off-peak times, to higher occupancy modes, or to less congested roads, everyone could be better off. Also, since the relationship between the level of traffic and congestion is nonlinear, relatively small reductions in vehicular flow can produce much more improvement in speed and congestion delays. Shifts by relatively few solo drivers can produce large benefits for others.

Congestion pricing aims to reduce or eliminate these subsidies enjoyed by the peak period road user through surcharges for the use of congested facilities during congested conditions (peak periods).

The Merritt and Wilbur Cross Parkways were built in the 1930’s and 1940’s and the Connecticut Turnpike (now Interstate Route 95) was built in the 1950’s. Both facilities were tolled, but the purpose of the tolls was to amortize the construction costs rather than to alter driver behavior. Road pricing and congestion pricing were not practiced.

Tolls were removed from these facilities by State legislation in 1985/86. This action followed the retirement of the original Connecticut Turnpike construction bonds and frequent expressions of concern about equitable access to transportation facilities across the State. There are no tolled roads or bridges in the study area at present. Congestion pricing and road pricing schemes are not in effect, nor are there any current plans for such strategies by ConnDOT or any of the five participating regional planning agency areas.

4.11 Employer Strategy Programs

TransitCheck/Deduct-a-Ride Programs - These programs have been established by federal legislation allowing employers to provide the employees with vouchers for the purchase of transit passes or tickets with pre-tax dollars. Employers buy bundles of vouchers in denominations of $15, $30, or $35, and distribute them to employees according to their own policy. As long as an employee receives no more than $100 per month in vouchers, the total amount of the vouchers are considered tax-free income by the IRS. Similar programs offering transit, and in some cases vanpool, discounts are in place in many metropolitan areas. The Deduct–a-Ride program permits employees to choose a payroll deduction to pay for transportation costs. Both employers and employees benefit from the payroll deduction approach.

Parking Cash Out - In parking cash out programs, an employer who provides free parking offers employees the option of receiving the market value of the parking space, up to $175 monthly, in lieu of the parking space. Employees can receive a transit pass or vanpooling subsidy (up to $100 per month tax free) or take the benefit in cash, the entire

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-43 Existing Conditions Report amount of which is subject to income taxes. Both employers and employees benefit from implementing parking cash-out, because employees get more income and employers reduce their cost to provide parking. Parking cash out could have wide application for employers in densely developed areas where parking is at a premium and parking charges are common, such as downtown areas. The strategy has less application in suburban areas and other locations where commuter parking is free.

Staggered Work Hours - Staggered work-hours help to reduce the volume of vehicles arriving at a worksite by spreading arrival and departures time across or outside a peak period. This approach can reduce congestion caused by vehicles arriving within a constrained time period. Staggering work-hours does not aim to reduce the number of vehicles arriving or departing from a work site. It can be combined with promotion of mass transit or ridesharing.

Companies with multiple departments might choose to reduce the number of employees arriving at work by assigning different start times. For instance, manufacturing may arrive at 7:30 AM; administration at 8:00 AM; customer service at 8:30 etc. The effect is to spread out peak hour volume.

Flextime - Flextime allows individuals to select their arrival and departure times within a structured time frame. The employer establishes core hours in which all employees are expected to be present. Flexing may occur for arrival, departure, and lunch periods. Similar to staggered work hours, this strategy may be instrumental in managing congestion at the work site by spreading arrival and departure times. Employees may choose to travel when traffic is lighter. It is also possible that flextime could make it easier to car/vanpool or even match transit schedule.

Compressed Work Schedules - This strategy allows an employee to work more hours in fewer days. Examples of compressed work weeks include:

ƒ 4/40 schedule - employees work four 10-hour days - All employees work Monday - Thursday, Friday is a "no work" day - The schedule may have some employees work Monday - Thursday, while the remaining employees work Tuesday - Friday. - Employees may choose which day they would like as a "no work" day

ƒ 3/36 schedule - employees work three 12-hour days

ƒ 9/80 schedule - employees work nine days over a two-week period; eight 9 hour days, one 8 hour day, one day off.

This type of program is simple, cost effective and can result in a 10 - 20 percent reduction in vehicle trips to the worksite. This strategy helps to manage congestion and meet clean air requirements. In terms of productivity for an employer, compressed work schedules can help to reduce absenteeism and tardiness. Compressed work schedules can provide for staffing where customer service needs and communications between time zones are

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-44 Existing Conditions Report necessary. Employees can benefit by reduced commuter costs and child care costs. Many employers currently offer compressed work schedules.

Telecommuting/Technical Work Centers - Telecommuting is in use at many employment sites and employee demand is likely to lead to continued growth. Greater education and policy development are needed to facilitate successful programs.

One local example of a telecommuting strategy is the Telecommute Connecticut Program funded by ConnDOT and administered by Rideworks. Free assistance is available on needs analysis, policy development, training, methodology design, and resolution of technical problems. Nine consultants are available with expertise in human resources, program development, training, and technology. The program currently has 14 employers in different stages of implementation.

4.12 Goods Movement

Even with the economic shifts to an office-based service sector economy in many portions of the study area, the flow of goods within the study area is a critical piece of its transportation puzzle. The movement of freight, both to corridor businesses and as a through movement between out-of-state origins and destinations, as illustrated in Figure 4.19, has dramatic implications for the health of the regional economy and its role in a broader Northeast economic network. Existing and projected future traffic congestion will impede economic growth if alternatives are not identified for the movement of goods.

In 1999 and 2000, ConnDOT undertook a Commodity Flow Study to investigate the potential of diverting the movement of goods away from the I-95 corridor. The study found that goods meeting certain criteria were eligible for diversion from truck shipping; however these movements typically originated outside the state and were destined outside the state. Therefore, the recommendation was to coordinate with key freight movement operators and other government agencies to promote intermodal transportation options.

The criteria for diversion from highway to alternative modes included distance, commodity groups, geographic trading partners and other considerations. It was found that truck movements of less than 500 miles are not good candidates for potential diversion, due to the extra cost of transfer from one mode to another. At shipping distances greater than 1,000 miles (for example for trips to and from points west of Chicago), the balance between lower initial freight handling costs by truck and line-haul cost efficiency for intermodal begins to shift. The commodities with the greatest diversion potential include those that have a low value to weight ratio and do not require special handling. Table 4-19 shows the twenty largest commodity flows in the southwest corridor. Of the commodity flows, the top ten types of commodities that would be eligible for diversion are highlighted. However, it is important to note that only a portion of the commodities in the highlighted category would be eligible for diversion.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-45 Existing Conditions Report G@PHP

DFETWI

G@U DFEWI

óôIH DFEVR G@T óôV óôQR ÷øQHP

óôVH DFEWI

@U PS G ôó óôQR WS óôSV ÷øIHV óôV DFE

óôSW DFEWS

óôQQ IS G@I ÷øIPQ óô ÷øIHT ÷øIQU

DFEWS óôIS h—ily2„ru™k2†olume I2E2RWW2tru™ks G@I SHH2E2IIWW IPHH2E2WWWW IHHHH2E2PHHHH ƒtudy2ere—2ever—ge2h—ily2„ru™k2†olumes gongestion2witig—tion2ƒtudy pigure2RFIW Table 4-19 20 Largest Commodity Flows in the Southwest Corridor

Commodity Number of Trucks Tons Food or Kindred Products 288,311 4,468,824 Pulp, Paper or Allied Products 266,423 4,129,557 Chemicals or Allied Products 231,850 3,593,676 Secondary Traffic 226,371 3,508,750 Primary Metal Products 105,825 1,640,286 Fabricated Metal Products 73,091 1,132,916 Petroleum or Coal Products 67,235 1,042,148 Rubber or Miscellaneous Plastics 64,007 992,112 Lumber or Wood Products 63,409 982,844 Farm Products 61,262 949,557 Clay, Concrete, Glass or Stone 60,456 937,075 Machinery 56,345 873,345 Electrical Equipment 56,274 872,242 Textile Mill Products 38,647 599,035 Printed Matter 25,587 396,600 Furniture or Fixtures 21,567 334,282 Transportation Equipment 18,963 293,923 Miscellaneous Manufacturing Products 16,007 248,101 Apparel or Related Products 13,360 207,085 Instruments, Photo Equipment, Optical Equipment 9,450 146,467 Total 1,764,440 27,348,825 Source: ConnDOT, Southwest Corridor Commodity Flow Study

The provision of geographic trading partners to provide for a balanced intermodal load is important for the service to be profitable. In addition, other issues effect the diversion of goods, such as just-in-time delivery, minimum time delivery, and the existence of trucking fleets that would become obsolete.

4.12.1 Truck

According to ConnDOT, over 74 percent Figure 4.20 of the volumes of commodities that Percentage of Commodity Volume by Mode travel into, out of or through Connecticut travel by truck. Of the remaining Rail Air commodities, 19 percent (primarily 6% 1% Water pretroleum products and stone) travel by 19% water, 6 percent by rail and 1 percent by air, as shown in Figure 4.20. Truck goods movement makes up the majority Truck of goods movement in the state and is 74% controversial due to the impact trucks have on the interstate and arterial roadway systems.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-46 Existing Conditions Report Table 4-20 shows the truck volumes by vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and truck percentage for the year 2000 on the major roadways in the study area.

Table 4-20 Study Area Truck Volumes Road Region 2000 Average Truck % Trucks Volume I-95 SWRPA 18,463 13.7% GBRPA 17,409 13.7% SCRCOG 13,297 13.2% I-91 SCRCOG 11,966 13.9% I-84 HVCEO 11,400 14.2% Rte 8 GBRPA 2,014 3.4% Valley 1,602 3.4% Rte 25 GBRPA 1,083 4.0% Rte 1 SWRPA 504 2.4% GBRPA 993 5.1% SCRCOG 843 5.2% Rte 6 HVCEO 355 2.4% Rte 7 SWRPA 1,179 3.9% HVCEO 874 4.2% Rte 10 SCRCOG 1,028 5.1% Rte 25 HVCEO 403 3.3% Rte 33 SWRPA 330 2.9% HVCEO 162 2.3% Rte 34 HVCEO 456 4.4% GBRPA 463 5.1% Valley 1,006 5.2% SCRCOG 1,539 5.0% Rte 57 SWRPA 364 3.5% HVCEO 278 4.0% Rte 58 GBRPA 473 5.2% HVCEO 263 5.0% Rte 59 GBRPA 237 2.7% Rte 80 SCRCOG 669 5.2% Rte 106 SWRPA 132 1.6% Rte 108 GBRPA 237 1.8% Valley 145 1.8% Rte 110 GBRPA 384 3.2% Valley 174 1.8% Rte 113 GBRPA 290 2.9% Rte 114 SCRCOG 242 2.8% Rte 122 SCRCOG 219 1.7% Rte 123 SWRPA 301 2.3% Rte 124 SWRPA 128 1.6% Rte 127 GBRPA 219 1.8% Rte 136 SWRPA 209 2.5% GBRPA 230 4.0% Rte 137 SWRPA 286 1.5% Rte 162 SCRCOG 230 2.0% Rte 202 HVCEO 473 3.5% Rte 302 HVCEO 262 3.2% Source: ConnDOT Congestion Management System Report, 2001

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-47 Existing Conditions Report 4.12.2 Rest Area/Parking

Federal regulations limit the number of hours that a truck can travel before the driver must take a break to sleep. In addition, many trucks arrive before their delivery is due and need a place to park before delivery can occur, especially in residential areas where truck hours are restricted. Therefore, rest areas and parking are needed to allow truckers a place to rest or wait while traveling through or delivering to Connecticut.

In a 1996 study, the Federal Highway Administration found that Connecticut public rest areas had a shortage of more than 1,000 spaces. ConnDOT found that the number of available parking spaces was even less than FHWA counted and expects the number of required spaces to grow. It is estimated that by the year 2020, the number of additional parking spaces needed will increase to 1,600 on a statewide basis.

ConnDOT developed preliminary plans for the possible expansion of the existing rest areas in Connecticut to create more truck parking spaces. Table 4-21 shows the number of existing and possible truck parking spaces at public rest areas within the study area. As shown on the table, with the expansion of these lots, the number of parking spaces for trucks could theoretically increase from 227 to 764 in the study area.

Table 4-21 Existing and Possible Truck Parking Spaces at Public Rest Areas in Study Area

Area Existing Possible Spaces Spaces I-95 NB Darien 18 63 I-95 SB Darien 19 102 I-95 NB Fairfield 17 28 I-95 SB Fairfield 21 56 I-95 NB Milford 25 78 I-95 SB Milford 24 117 I-95 NB Branford 14 50 I-95 SB Branford 9 17 I-95 NB Madison 10 57 I-95 SB Madison 23 107 I-84 EB Danbury 26 26 I-84 EB Southington 21 63 Total 227 764

In addition to providing additional spots at existing lots in Connecticut, ConnDOT is exploring the possibility of constructing new public rest areas in locations around the state to make up the rest of the needed number of truck parking spots. Within the study area, several sites have been identified as possible new rest stop locations.

At the time of the study, the former Norden factory site was a currently unoccupied manufacturing plant located adjacent to I-95 north in Norwalk. Although this site could be configured to accommodate approximately 200 trucks, the town indicated that other possible development was being considered for the site. The Truck Weigh and

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-48 Existing Conditions Report Inspection Facility at I-95 north in Greenwich (east of Interchange 2) and Sherwood Island State Park on I-95 in Westport (Interchange 18) are also being considered for use as truck parking facilities.

4.12.3 Rail Freight

Much of the study area’s remaining rail freight service is associated with the shipment of construction stone between quarries in central Connecticut and receivers in Connecticut and New York State. Other significant commodity movements include railroad equipment, industrial chemicals, and scrap metal.

New Haven Mainline/Shore Line - Local freight service on the New Haven Main Line is offered by CSX Corporation between Oak Point Yard in the Bronx and New Haven. The Providence and Worcester (P&W) Railroad has limited freight rights on the line between New Haven and New Rochelle. P&W has rights to haul construction stone to Long Island via the line from a quarry in Branford. P&W also has haulage rights over the line from New Haven to Long Island, wherein CSX hauls P&W (non-stone) traffic between Long Island and New Haven for a flat per-car fee. At this time there is no through freight on the line between New Haven and New York.

Freight trains are generally restricted to 40 m.p.h. Speed restrictions for non-passenger trains respond to a variety of interactions between the train, the track and the signal system. Track geometry (e.g. curves) tends to restrict freight train speeds since the dynamics of a long train composed of a heterogeneous collection cars hauled by locomotives at the head end, make it more likely to derail than a shorter train of homogenous coaches, especially one composed on self-propelled vehicles. Longer, heavier trains also take longer to brake to a stop.

Springfield Line - Freight rights on the line belong to the Guilford Rail System (GRS) of Billerica, Massachusetts. Guilford operates fewer than ten freight trains per week into New Haven from its yards in East Deerfield and Springfield Massachusetts.

Waterbury Branch - Freight service north to Derby is provided by P&W. At Derby, the freight carrier shifts to the Guilford Rail System (Springfield Terminal). GRS serves its portion of the line via connections with through lines in Springfield and East Deerfield MA.

Danbury Branch - Freight operations between Danbury and South Norwalk are provided by the P&W. The only through freight on this portion of the line is run by P&W from a quarry in Branford to Danbury and then west on the Maybrook Branch to deliver crushed stone to the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) and Metro-North. The maximum allowable freight speed is 40 miles per hour on this unsignaled rail line.

Maybrook Line - This freight only branch connects the Waterbury Branch at Derby Junction with the Danbury Branch. The line belongs to the Housatonic Railroad and they provide one freight train to serve their clients on the line. The Providence & Worcester Railroad operates over the line via trackage rights for stone.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-49 Existing Conditions Report 4.12.4 Water Ports

Connecticut’s ports have a maritime heritage dating back to Colonial times. Two of State’s three commercial deepwater ports – Bridgeport and New Haven – are located within the CMS study area. In addition, more limited commercial marine facilities, such as marinas, transfer stations, and barge docks are located in the harbors of Stamford, Norwalk and Branford. Although none of the State’s ports currently receives service of from scheduled ocean-going container ship service, port operators in both Bridgeport and New Haven have carved out market niches that they can productively and economically serve, specifically petroleum, lumber, metal, and for Bridgeport, tropical fruit. Previous studies indicate that these commodities are principally oriented to consumers or shippers within the State, with a more limited market in central Massachusetts.

A recent ConnDOT report, Container Barge Feeder Service Study, based on earlier regional studies conducted in Bridgeport, New Haven and New London, documents the opportunities for a container barge service to be operated in conjunction with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey between the major container shipping terminals in northern New Jersey (Port Elizabeth and Port Newark) and the Connecticut ports. This report notes, “The use of barges to transport goods could reduce the amount of traffic on I-95. A barge service is projected to initially reduce the amount of trucks on I-95 by approximately 385 per week.” While the market opportunities appear to be positive, as of November 2001, no operator has been contracted for this service. The capital cost of initiating this type of service has been identified at between $4.5 million and $18 million. Operating costs of $800 to $1,300 per container have been estimated. This cost level places the service at a competitive disadvantage with truck movement.

Port of Bridgeport – The terminal facilities in the Port of Bridgeport consist of two dry (non-petroleum) cargo berths with a 33-foot to 35-foot draft, approximately 20 acres of outside storage and staging area, 130,000 square feet of dry, indoor storage, and 85,000 square feet of temperature controlled warehouse space. The port’s operations are handled by Logistec Connecticut, Inc. under a management contract with Cilco Terminal. Cargo handled at the port includes bananas and other fruit, lumber, seafood, sand, stone, and petroleum products. In addition to the public facilities managed by Logistec, several petroleum terminals are operated by private oil distribution firms. A total of eight berths are available for petroleum shipments. The 50-acre Cartec site adjacent to the existing harbor area has been planned as a shipbuilding facility. The Bridgeport Region has identified Roll-On/Roll-Off (RO/RO), where the truck chassis is carried on the barge, as the preferred operation for a container barge facility in this area.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-50 Existing Conditions Report Port of New Haven – Logistec Connecticut, Inc. also manages the operation of the Port of New Haven. Terminal facilities at the Port of New Haven consist of four dry cargo berths with a 36-foot draft, rail sidings operated by the Providence & Worcester Railroad, approximately 400,000 square feet of inside storage, and approximately 50 acres of outside storage and staging area. Logistec handles approximately 180 ships a year at its facilities.

Overall, petroleum products are the leading commodity moving through the port, with a total of eighteen petroleum berths available. Other major commodity movements are metal products (such as wire and other specialty metals), scrap metal, paper, and wood pulp.

The Gateway Terminal is a separate operation consisting of six tugs and nine barges. These vessels are used for both oceangoing and coastal shipments and are used to distribute road salt, woodchips, sand and gravel to facilities throughout Long Island Sound. Adjacent to the New Haven harbor area, in Branford, Buchanan Marine operates a barge service for the movement of stone aggregate from the Tilcon dock in Stony Creek to construction sites in the New York City area. Buchanan also provides barge service to the New Haven port area for the movement of scrap metal. As in Bridgeport, several oil distribution companies maintain their own facilities in the port, which also is connected to an oil distribution pipeline serving customers in the Hartford and Springfield areas. The port’s focus on shipment of scrap metal causes it to experience significant fluctuation in activity related to market prices for export of scrap and the domestic market for imported metal products.

The Port of New Haven has also been considered as a desirable location for a container barge feeder service, with Lift-On/Lift-Off (LI/LO) operation identified as the delivery mode for this area. In this mode, the container is lifted onto the barge by crane, with a new tractor and chassis provided at the destination port.

4.12.5 Intermodal

Extensive development of intermodal truck-rail, truck-water and water-rail facilities in adjacent regions, such as the New York/New Jersey port complex, the Port of Boston, and the Springfield, MA area (for truck-rail intermodal movements) has limited the market for the development of similar competitive facilities within the State of Connecticut.

In addition to the potential for container barge services noted above, several small truck- rail transfer facilities have been developed within or just outside the study area to supply local demand. These include the Providence & Worcester Railroad’s public siding (team track) in the New Haven harbor area; the Shepaug transfer facility in Newtown, operated by the Housatonic Railroad; and a private transfer facility in New Haven operated by Anastasio trucking company. In terms of carload activity, the several hundred annual carloads moved these facilities represent a very low volume of freight movement compared with the hundreds of intermodal carloads shipped daily through major rail terminals in New Jersey, New York State (Selkirk), and Springfield, MA.

Congestion Mitigation Study 4-51 Existing Conditions Report