DOCSLIB.ORG

Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan City of Norwalk and Town of Wilton, CT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan City of Norwalk and Town of Wilton, CT Corridor Assessment and Concept Development Report Prepared for: South Western Regional Planning Agency Prepared by Urban Engineers, Inc. In Association with Fitzgerald and Halliday, Inc. July, 2012 Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan Executive Summary US Route 7 is an essential travel corridor that serves both local and regional travelers as well as many community needs. It provides connectivity among several urbanized areas as well as suburban communities and beyond. The segment of US Route 7 between Norwalk and Danbury has been studied for decades, with a variety of project planned to increase highway capacity and to improve commuter rail operations and mobility. Recently, two of those high profile projects (the completion of the Merritt Parkway/Route 7 Interchange and a widening project of Route 7 between Route 33 and Grist Mill Road) were put on an indefinite hold. As a result, many multimodal operational and safety needs in this corridor will go unaddressed and a need to examine alternative options was identified. The first phase of this study consisted of documenting the existing conditions and issues within the study area from both a corridor-wide perspective as well as individual locations. Additionally, as part of the first phase, concepts (both short and longer-term) were developed to address the identified existing needs. The study identified 14 focus areas in the corridor and developed multiple short-term and long-term concepts for each location focused on addressing historical/stakeholder identified issues, traffic operations, safety, bicycle and pedestrian, and land use. The top five short-term recommended projects for the entire corridor based on their anticipated benefits are as follows: • Modify the signing and striping in the westbound direction on Route 7 between SR 719 (Main Avenue)/DMV and Grist Mill Road to allow for better utilization of the dual left- turn lanes from US Route 7 (Grist Mill Road) to southbound US Route 7 Expressway. Simulation results show southbound travel times between Foxboro Drive to US Route 7 Expressway are reduced by approximately 40-50%. • Extend the northbound left-turn pocket on the US Route 7 Expressway at US Route 7 (Grist Mill Road) and create a more conventional striping setup for the left-turn pocket. Simulation results show a 20-40% reduction in northbound average delay, and approximately 20% reduction in northbound travel time between US Route 7 Expressway and the West Rocks Road intersection as the extended left-turn pockets mitigates the blocking of thru traffic by left-turning traffic. • Modify the striping between the northern Gateway Shopping Center driveway and the Kent Road intersection such that the current exclusive left-turn lane northbound is split between an exclusive left-turn lane northbound onto Kent Road and an exclusive left- turn lane southbound into the Gateway Shopping Center driveway. • Modify the striping on the eastbound approach at the Route 33 (Westport Road) and Route 7 (Danbury Road) intersection such that there are two lanes eastbound. This will create a reduced queue in the eastbound direction, and allow for signal timing to be reallocated from the eastbound direction to the heavier northbound approach; therefore, reducing the queue and delay on the northbound Route 7 (Danbury Road) approach. Simulation results show approximately 50% reduction in overall intersection delay during the PM peak hour. Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan • Evaluate modifications to the signal timing and phasing at Grumman Hill Road to improve traffic flow and reduce delay and congestion. Specifically, a southbound lead phase in the PM peak should be evaluated and considered in the same manner as the existing northbound lead phase in the AM peak. This will aid the heavy southbound left turn in the PM peak period destined the residential area along Grumman Hill Road. Subsequent phases of the study will investigate in more detail some of focus area concepts and longer- term options that have the potential to better address the major factors of the congestion and safety issues in the corridor. The overall goal of the study is to develop near, mid-term, and future long-term improvement opportunities along with phasing criteria and priorities and funding options to implement the various recommendations. Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 A. Project History ............................................................................................... 1 B. Corridor Characteristics ................................................................................. 2 C. Project Approach ........................................................................................... 4 II. Data Synthesis ........................................................................................................... 5 A. Data Review .................................................................................................. 5 B. Data Collection .............................................................................................. 5 III. Corridor Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 9 A. Historical/Locally Identified Issues ................................................................. 9 B. Traffic Analysis ............................................................................................ 10 C. Safety........................................................................................................... 17 D. Access ......................................................................................................... 20 E. Pedestrian/Bicycle ....................................................................................... 21 F. Transit .......................................................................................................... 23 G. Existing Land Use and Development Potential ............................................ 24 H. Environmental .............................................................................................. 26 IV. Evaluation Matrix ...................................................................................................... 27 V. Focus Areas ............................................................................................................. 30 VI. Corridor-Wide Concepts ......................................................................................... 124 A. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................... 124 B. Access ....................................................................................................... 125 C. Operations ................................................................................................. 126 D. Transit ........................................................................................................ 126 VII. Recommendations and Next Steps ................................................................... 128 A. Recommendations ..................................................................................... 128 B. Next Steps ................................................................................................. 130 Route 7 Corridor Assessment and Implementation Plan List of Tables Table 1: Previous Studies and Available Data....................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: City of Norwalk .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Table 3: Town of Wilton .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Table 4: AM Travel Time Comparison ................................................................................................................. 13 Table 5: PM Travel Time Comparison ................................................................................................................. 13 Table 6: AM Peak Hour Existing Calibrated SimTraffic Results .......................................................................... 14 Table 7: PM Peak Hour Existing Calibrated SimTraffic Results .......................................................................... 15 Table 8: Anticipated Benefit/Potential Impacts of Concepts for Focus Area 1 ..................................................... 40 Table 9: Anticipated Benefit/Potential Impacts of Concepts for Focus Area 2 ..................................................... 48 Table 10: Anticipated Benefit/Potential Impacts of Concepts for Focus Area 3 ................................................... 54 Table 11: Anticipated Benefit/Potential Impacts of Concepts for Focus Area 4 ................................................... 60 Table 12: SimTraffic Simulation Results for Concept B ........................................................................................ 69 Table 13: SimTraffic Simulation Results for Concept C ....................................................................................... 70 Table 14: SimTraffic Simulation Results for Concept D ......................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region

    Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region

    Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region MAY 30, 2014 DRAFT: June 2, 2014 - 13:33 SCI Implementation Plan Draft 20140602_final.indd 1 About the New York-Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium The New York – Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium is supported by a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities Regional Planning Grant. The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program is a key initiative of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a federal partnership joining the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation, and HUD with a shared mission to coordinate federal housing, transportation, water, and other infrastructure investments to make neighborhoods more prosperous, allow people to live closer to jobs, save households time and money, and reduce pollution . Partners in the NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium An Advisory Board was formed to monitor the progress of include cities, counties, metropolitan planning organizations, Consortium activities, provide recommendations, and review and non-profit organizations across Long Island, New York City, and comment on Consortium work programs. Advisory lower Hudson Valley, and coastal Connecticut: Board members include both governmental agencies and non- governmental organizations in the tri-state New York/New Regional Plan Association, partner and fiduciary agent Jersey/Connecticut
  • 2019 Greater Bridgeport Region Bridgeport Hospital and St. Vincent's Medical Center Collaborative Community Health Needs Asse

    2019 Greater Bridgeport Region Bridgeport Hospital and St. Vincent's Medical Center Collaborative Community Health Needs Asse

    2019 Greater Bridgeport Region Bridgeport Hospital and St. Vincent’s Medical Center Collaborative Community Health Needs Assessment and Implementation Plan By the Health Improvement Alliance This document is a special section of the Fairfield County Community Wellbeing Index 2019, a core program of DataHaven (ctdatahaven.org), in partnership with Fairfield County’s Community Foundation and a Community Health Needs Assessment for the towns served by all Fairfield County hospitals including Bridgeport Hospital and St. Vincent’s Medical Center 1 | Page ABOUT THIS REPORT This document is a special section of the Fairfield County Community Wellbeing Index 2019 (Appendix A), a comprehensive report about Fairfield County and the towns within it. The Community Index was produced by DataHaven in partnership with Fairfield County’s Community Foundation and many other regional partners, including the Health Improvement Alliance (HIA), a coalition serving towns in the Greater Bridgeport region. This document serves as the Community Health Needs Assessment for the six towns in the HIA area (Bridgeport, Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, Stratford, and Trumbull). The Community Health Needs Assessment documents the process that the HIA used to conduct the regional health assessment and health improvement activities. You may find the full Community Wellbeing Index attached to this section, or posted on the DataHaven, Fairfield County’s Community Foundation, Bridgeport Hospital, St. Vincent’s Medical Center, or any of the town health department websites. The Community Health Needs Assessment and Community Health Improvement Plan were approved by the Board of Trustees for St. Vincent’s Medical Center in June 13, 2019 and the Board of Trustees for Bridgeport Hospital in July 9, 2019.
  • First Taxing District City of Norwalk

    First Taxing District City of Norwalk

    First Taxing District City of Norwalk Proposed Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Operating Budget April 8, 2020 Proposed FY 2020 Operating Budget Commissioners Elsa Peterson Obuchowski, Chairman Thomas J. Cullen, Esq. Jalin T. Sead Treasurer Rosa M. Murray General Manager Dominick M. Di Gangi, P.E. Public Hearings May 13, 2020 Approval by the Board of Commissioners May 13, 2020 Electors Approval May 13, 2020 Electors Ratification May 27, 2020 Approval by the Board of Commissioners User Rates and Charges June 10, 2020 Description of the First Taxing District A. INTRODUCTION The central section of Norwalk is an urbanized area in roughly the geographic center of the city, north of South Norwalk and the Connecticut Turnpike. This portion of Norwalk was the Borough of Norwalk from 1836 until incorporation as the first City of Norwalk in 1893. In 1913 the separate cities of Norwalk, South Norwalk, as well as the unincorporated portions of the Town of Norwalk consolidated to form the City of Norwalk that exists to this day. Central Norwalk is now the First Taxing District of the City of Norwalk. The newly created Charter authorized the District to use the water of any stream, lake or pond within the limits of the Towns of Norwalk, Weston, New Canaan, Wilton and Ridgefield to hold, convey and distribute water by means of any necessary reservoirs, pipes, aqueducts, pumps and other suitable works, to take and hold any lands, property or privileges, and to exercise any powers that may be necessary in order that a satisfactory supply of water may be obtained, stored and distributed.
  • Little Red Schoolhouse Guidebook Glossary

    Little Red Schoolhouse Guidebook Glossary

    Norwalk Historical Society The Little Red Schoolhouse Program Pre-Visit Guidebook Dear Visitor Before you, your class, your troop, or your family visit Mill Hill Historic Park and take part in the Little Red Schoolhouse Program, read through this resource book and complete some of the Pre-Visit activities to give you a better understanding of the history of Norwalk during the Colonial & Revolutionary War period. The words in bold are defined at the end in the glossary section. To continue your historical learning off site, there are also Post-Visit activities included. Have fun stepping back into the past! NORWALK HISTORICAL SOCIETY Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1640 Norwalk, CT 06852 Mill Hill Historic Park Address: 2 East Wall Street Norwalk, CT 06851 203-846-0525 [email protected] www.norwalkhistoricalsociety.org Index 4 The Native Americans’ Way of Life ~ 1500s 6 Europeans Arrive in America ~ 1600s 7 The Purchase of Norwalk ~ 1640 10 Norwalk Becomes a Town ~ 1640 – 1651 The Colonial Era ~ 1651 – 1775 12 Governor Thomas Fitch IV ~ The Colonial Governor from Norwalk 14 Governor Fitch’s Law Office and a Look at Life in the Colonial Days ~ 1740s The Revolutionary Era 17 The Road to Revolution ~ 1763 – 1775 17 The Revolutionary War ~ 1775 – 1783 18 The Battle and Burning of Norwalk ~ 1779 20 Norwalk Rebuilds & The Firelands ~ 1779 - 1809 21 The Little Red Schoolhouse (The Down Town District School) ~ 1826 23 Book a Tour 24 Glossary 26 Reading Questions Answer Key 28 Image Credits 30 Bibliography 31 Norwalk Historical Society Contact Info 32 Guidebook Credits The Native Americans’ Way of Life - 1500s Native Americans were the first people to live in Connecticut and had been living in the Norwalk area for thousands of years.
  • 2019 Community Wellbeing Index

    2019 Community Wellbeing Index

    E F I L F Y O T Y I T U I Q L E A L S U IA C QQUALITY OFC LIFE I A PHHICS RRACIAL EQUITRA OG M Y DDEMOGRAE OM ON EECONOMYC FAIRFIELD COUNTY ATIIOON EEDUCATDUC Community LIIFEFE E XPPECTECTANCY HHEALTHEA LTH OOUTCOMES UTCO Wellbeing MES RRISKIS FACTORS CCOMMUNI K F O AC M TO M RS Index 2019 UN I PPARTICI T Y TRUST A T R R T U PPU I S U C T B IP LLI A I T C IIONO R N E A L M and a Community Health Indicators of social progress, economic opportunity, and population well-being for the towns served by Bridgeport Hospital, Danbury Hospital, in Fairfield County neighborhoodsIn partnership with Fairfield County’s Community Foundation, Needs Assessment Greenwich Hospital, Norwalk Hospital, St. Vincent’s Medical Center, and Stamford Hospital A CORE PROGRAM OF Thank you to our Major Funders 2018 DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey Funders The Fairfield County Community Wellbeing Index makes extensive use of the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey, which completed live, in-depth interviews with 16,043 randomly-selected adults in Connecticut last year. In addition to the major funders listed above, supporters of the interviews in Fairfield County included local public health departments serving the towns and cities of Stamford, Danbury, Norwalk, Bridgeport, Fairfield, Stratford, Trumbull, Monroe, Easton, Newtown, Bethel, and New Fairfield, as well as the Valley Community Foundation (serving Shelton) and Newtown-Sandy Hook Community Foundation (serving Newtown). Lead Authors Mark Abraham, Executive Director, DataHaven Camille Seaberry, Senior Research Associate, DataHaven Co-Authors Josephine Ankrah, Alexandra Bourdillon, Kelly Davila, Emily Finn, Shaun McGann, Aparna Nathan, DataHaven Jessica Clavette, Volunteer, and Brian Slattery, Consultant Other Contributors Adhlere Coffy and Karen R.

  • Room to Grow – Norwalk, CT DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH

    Room to Grow – Norwalk, CT DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH Jonathan Delgado MPA ‘19 Joshua Singleton ‘18 Community Based Participatory Research Initiative FAIRFIELD UNIVERSITY | 1073 N BENSON RD, FAIRFIELD, CT 06824 Community Based Participatory Research Initiative and Catholic Charities of Fairfield County Table of Contents I. Mission/Executive Summary ............................................................................... 1 II. Maps .................................................................................................................. 2 III. SES Indicator ................................................................................................... 14 IV. Statistics ......................................................................................................... 17 V. Correlations ..................................................................................................... 18 VI. Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 18 VII. References ..................................................................................................... 19 I. Mission/Executive Summary The purpose of this research was to visually display the population distribution of, as well as linkages between our variables; with the hopes that our maps would legibly illustrate correlations and patterns between specific demographic identifiers. Thus, in doing so, the maps would highlight areas of acute need that are perhaps being unmet, and, further, prompt one
  • The Following Scope of Work Has Been Prepared to Reflect the Request For

    The Following Scope of Work Has Been Prepared to Reflect the Request For

    TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN FOR SOUTH NORWALK RAILROAD STATION NEIGHBORHOOD EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT Prepared for: The City of Norwalk Prepared by: The Cecil Group, Inc. TR Advisors Milone & MacBroom December 22, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Cecil Group – TR Advisors – Milone & MacBroom – Language Link Consortium Existing Conditions Evaluation Report i The Cecil Group – TR Advisors – Milone & MacBroom – Language Link Consortium Existing Conditions Evaluation Report ii SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview The Existing Conditions Evaluation Report is a multidisciplinary review of the current elements that comprise the area surrounding the South Norwalk Railroad Station. This document has been assembled as part of the Transit Oriented Development Master Plan for South Norwalk Railroad Station Neighborhood Study Area for the purpose of accurately informing subsequent analyses and decisions related to constructing a Transit Oriented Master Plan for the South Norwalk Railroad Station Neighborhood. The purpose of the Transit Oriented Development Master Plan for South Norwalk Railroad Station Neighborhood Study Area is to provide The City of Norwalk with planning recommendations that can guide and manage future change in the area of the South Norwalk Railroad Station. The aim of the planning recommendations will be to capitalize on this area’s development potential, while providing benefits that will appropriately enhance the area neighborhoods and their component places. Project Goals and Objectives have been collaboratively prepared with members of the public, community stakeholders and City staff, to guide the planning recommendations associated with this project. The project Goals and Objectives are included as Appendix A of this Existing Conditions Evaluation Report. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) generally refers to land use and activities that are advantaged by proximity to and pedestrian access to public transit.
  • Westport-North- Main Corridor Study and Plan

    Westport-North- Main Corridor Study and Plan

    Westport-North- Main Corridor Study and Plan Prepared for the City of Norwalk, Connecticut Prepared by: Phillips Preiss Shapiro Associates, Inc. Planning & Real Estate Consultants and Vollmer Associates December 2006 II City of Norwalk Westport-North-Main Corridor Study and Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Description of Policy Recommendations 1 Findings and Conclusions 2 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Description of the Study Area 3 1.2 Description of the Study Process and This Report 4 2 Land Use Recommendations 9 2.1 Northern Main Avenue (Segment 1) 9 2.2 Central Main Street/Main Avenue (Segments 2 and 3) 10 2.3 Lower Main Street/North Avenue (Segment 4) 10 2.4 Stew Leonard’s Vicinity (Segment 5) 11 2.5 Eastern Westport Avenue (Segment 6) 11 2.6 Willard, Lois, Brookfield and Surrounding Streets (Segment 6) 11 3 Urban Design Recommendations 13 3.1 Build-to Line 13 3.2 Pedestrian-oriented building design 15 3.3 Regulation of Parking lots and Curb Cuts 15 3.4 Continuous street trees and street lamps 17 3.5 Utility undergrounding 19 4 Land Development Procedure Recommendations 21 4.1 Village District Zoning 21 4.2 Site Plan Review 22 5 Transportation Recommendations 23 5.1 Introduction 23 5.2 Description OF Improvements 23 5.3 Context-Sensitive Design 26 5.4 Accidents 26 City of Norwalk III Westport-North-Main Corridor Study and Plan 6 Economic Development Initiatives 27 6.1 Creation of a Special Services District 27 6.2 Redevelopment of Muller Avenue industrial property 28 6.3 Redevelopment of Other underutilized properties
  • West Avenue Corridor Redevelopment Plan

    West Avenue Corridor Redevelopment Plan

    Approved by the Norwalk Common Council Resolution dated June 13, 2006 as amended June 27, 2006 WEST AVENUE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN NORWALK, CT SPRING 2006 Norwalk Redevelopment Agency Norwalk, CT WEST AVENUE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION P. 3 PROJECT VISION INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROJECT GOALS I: DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA P. 9 SITE BOUNDARY PREVAILING TYPES AND USES OF STRUCTURES PREVAILING CONDITIONS PLAN AREA A PLAN AREA B PLAN AREA C II: LAND USE P.13 LOCATION AND EXTENT OF LAND USES LOCATION AND EXTENT OF LAND USES PROPOSED MIX OF USES LAND DISPOSITION AGREEMENT HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN STANDARDS III: STREETS & UTLITIES P.21 EXISTING STREETS, TRAFFIC & PARKING PROPOSED STREET, TRAFFIC & PARKING PUBLIC UTILITIES IV: RELOCATION P.27 RELOCATION PLAN V: ZONING P.29 EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING VI: FINANCIAL PLAN P.32 VII: NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PLAN: PLAN P.33 AREA C VIII: APPENDICES IX; ERRATA 2 PROJECT VISION The place of the West Avenue corridor within the Norwalk community should be an economic and social destination that links the neighborhoods to the south with the neighborhoods to the north creating an activity center for shopping, dining, strolling and casually meeting with friends. In addition, the project seeks to provide a significant stimulus to private investment in adjacent neighborhoods. INTRODUCTION The West Avenue Corridor has always been a central core of the City of Norwalk. From colonial time until the early part of the twentieth century, West Avenue was an elite residential neighborhood, home to Norwalk’s prominent families and the site chosen for LeGrand Lockwood’s country estate.
  • Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study Regional Report

    Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study Regional Report

    Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study Regional Report SEPTEMBER 2012 PREPARED FOR: Norwalk River Valley Trail Steering Committee PREPARED BY: Alta Planning + Design IN ASSOCIATION WITH: Stantec Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study Acknowledgements Norwalk River Valley Trail Committee Members Mike Cunningham, Danbury Holt McChord, Wilton Kathy Miville, Danbury Donna Pratt, Wilton Rob Gutman, Ridgefield Patricia Sesto, Wilton Richard Kent, Ridgefield Jim Snedeker, Wilton Ben Oko, Ridgefield Jim Carter, Norwalk Victor DeMasi, Redding Dan Landau, Norwalk Pam Elkow, Redding Deborah Lewis, Norwalk Stuart Green, Redding David Park, Norwalk David Pattee, Redding Alex Karman, SWRPA Susan Robinson, Redding Will Palmquist, SWRPA Lisa Bogan, Wilton Greg Waters, NPS Patrice Gillespie, Wilton Linda Cook, NPS Mike Lindberg, Wilton Study Team Jeff Olson, Principal, Alta Planning + Design Phil Goff, Project Manager and Planner, Alta Planning + Design Shannon Simms, Project Designer, Alta Planning + Design Gary T. Sorge, Principal, Stantec John Eberle, Project Engineer, Stantec Marcy Miller, Public Outreach Planner, Fitzgerald & Halliday The development of the Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study was made possible through a Recreational Trail Program Grant from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP). The NRVT Committee thanks CTDEEP for its support. Regional Report| i Norwalk River Valley Trail Routing Study Table of Contents Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................................................................................
  • City of Norwalk Plan of Conservation & Development Plan of Conservation & Development City of Norwalk

    City of Norwalk Plan of Conservation & Development Plan of Conservation & Development City of Norwalk

    City of Norwalk Plan of Conservation & Development Plan of Conservation & Development City of Norwalk Mayor Richard A. Moccia Common Council, Fred A. Bondi, President Rev. Phyllis Y. Bolden Richard Bonenfant Amanda Brown Andrew T. Conroy Michael K. Geake Douglas E. Hempstead Carvin J. Hilliard William M. Krummel Nicholas D. Kydes Laurel E. Lindstrom Richard A. McQuaid Steven Serasis Kelly L. Straniti Douglas W. Stutton Norwalk Planning Commission Torgny U. Astrom, Chairman Frances DiMeglio, Vice Chairman Walter S. McLaughlin, Secretary Walter O. Briggs III* A. Leigh Grant Lee H. Levey Donald O. Nelson Steven Ferguson David E. Turner** Planning & Zoning Staff Michael B. Greene, Director Michael E. Wrinn, Assistant Director Alexis Cherichetti, Senior Environmental Officer Dorothy S. Wilson, Senior Planner Frank J. Strauch, Site Planner Aline J. Rochefort, Zoning Inspector Erin L. Mannix, Deputy Zoning Inspector** Vladimir J. Mariano, Deputy Zoning Inspector Pamela D. Ballard, Drafter Adam G. Carsen, Compliance Inspector Lindsay McCurran, Compliance Assistant Marion F. Hood, Administrative Secretary Chan Krieger Sieniewicz Alan Mountjoy, AIA Kim Jones, AICP *Former Chairman of Planning Commission **Former Commission or staff member Contents INTRODUCTION 4 a vision for the future • planning process A. BALANCED ECONOMIC GROWTH 8 housing • office • retail • industrial • redevelopment B. ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE 14 coastal & inland waterways • aquifers • sanitary sewers • solid waste • hazardous materials • sustainability • air quality •
  • Commercial and Residential Market Analysis for the City of Norwalk, Connecticut March 2006

    Commercial and Residential Market Analysis for the City of Norwalk, Connecticut March 2006

    COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL MARKET ANALYSIS FOR THE CITY OF NORWALK, CONNECTICUT MARCH 2006 Prepared for: City of Norwalk Redevelopment Authority 125 East Avenue Norwalk, Connecticut Prepared by: RKG Associates, Inc. Economic, Planning and Real Estate Consultants 277 Mast Road Durham, New Hampshire 03824 Tel: 603-868-5513 FAX: 603-868-6463 And 300 Montgomery Street, Suite 203 Alexandria, Virginia 22314 Tel: 703-739-0965 FAX: 703-739-0979 Economic Planning Web: www.rkg1.com and Real Estate Consultants Norwalk, Connecticut - Retail and Residential Market Analysis March 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive summary ..................................................................................1 A. Key Findings ............................................................................................................ 1 1. Demographics........................................................................................................................... 2 2. Retail Market............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Office Market .......................................................................................................................... 2 4. Residential Market .................................................................................................................. 3 B. Conclusions.............................................................................................................. 3 1. Retail Development Potential...............................................................................................