PART
3B:
ROUTE
7 SOUTH
POLICY
FOR REDDING,
RIDGEFIELD
AND DANBURY

INTRODUCTION
Route
7 from Danbury to Norwalk is classified as part of the highest
federal roadway functional level, the National Highway System.
From the state perspective, it is a principal arterial roadway
and is the Greater Danbury Region’s main link to the
south.
On
a grander scale it is also the primary north-south corridor
for the western edge of New England.
The basic alignment and cross section for Route 7
in much of our area dates from 1928. Over the years,
many spot improvements to the existing road have been
made. Widening from 2 to 4 lanes from Route 35 in
Ridgefield north to Miry Brook Road in Danbury will
be completed as of late 2011.
More significantly, a new Route 7 Expressway parallel
to the old road was advocated by CT DOT and HVCEO
for many years. Only short sections of that parallel
expressway in Danbury and Norwalk were ever completed.
In historical
perspective, the Connecticut General Assembly first authorized
expressway planning for the Route 7 Corridor in 1957. Then
CT DOT approved an expressway alignment in 1962.
Expressway studies continued into the mid-1970's, when a federal
environmental impact statement was issued. This was challenged,
causing years of delay, then indefinite postponement of expressway
construction.
A map
of the proposed Route 7 Expressway concept will be of
interest.
This
major new road would have entered Ridgefield from Wilton to
the west of the present Route 7. Route 102 runs generally
east-west here, and a full interchange with Route 102 was
planned.
Continuing northeast, the Expressway would have crossed the
existing Route 7, briefly entered Redding, then turned north
by northwest to follow the Ridgefield-Redding border, reenter
Ridgefield briefly and then entering Redding again.
Upon
passing into Danbury from Redding, another interchange was
to link the Expressway to existing Route 7 in Ridgefield.
The
new road was then to continue along the east side of existing
Route 7 to meet the existing stub end Route 7 Expressway cross
section at Wooster Heights Road in Danbury.
Due to
funding constraints, by 1992 completion of the proposed expressway
was under reconsideration by Conn DOT. There are at present
no plans at Conn DOT to revive the Route 7 Expressway construction
proposal. And HVCEO no longer favors the proposal.
HVCEO
ROUTE 7 EXPRESSWAY POLICY
HVCEO was for many years an advocate for Route 7 Expressway
construction. However, after a policy review in 1995,
the Council no longer supported construction of the
expressway in Danbury, Ridgefield and Redding. The
1995 position has remained in place since that year.
It was initially taken due to the repeated delays
in the construction of the proposed expressway and
the concurrent invalidation of the environmental impact
statement justifying the project, as well as the lack
of safety and capacity improvements on the existing
Route 7 roadway, which HVCEO wished to accelerate.
This
change in policy was intended to fully focus all available
funding on the immediate improvements required to address
safety and capacity constraints on existing Route 7. Since
under federal law Conn DOT cannot proceed without regional
approval, the HVCEO policy is more than advisory as far as
the expressway is concerned.
The 2001 HVCEO Transportation Plan then deepened
the opposition rationale by adding some broader policies.
These were given even more depth by the 2004 Plan
update and as of 2011 include:
1. Negative impact to the adjacent quality of life, both to
residential areas and to the natural environment.
2. Inducing sprawl development along the corridor
and to the north, which violates the "Smart Growth"
planning policies in the 2009 HVCEO
Regional Plan.
3. The
nearby South Western Planning Region is a high income area
(see
overview map) where affordable housing is in
very short supply. As a result, many persons with their employment
location in that area seek their housing location to the east
along I-95 or to the north up Route 7.
This mismatch intensifies the competition for scarce affordable
housing in the Greater Danbury Area.
Evidence
is past housing studies and a pattern of one sided commuting
patterns of much AM southbound commuting from Greater Danbury,
greatly exceeding AM northbound.
It is
therefore projected that faster access via a Route 7 Expressway
would reduce the supply of affordable housing in Greater Danbury
available to workers at Greater Danbury's employment sites.
4. The inability of coastal Interstate 95, already over capacity,
to absorb a newly concentrated and expanded AM peak period
traffic flow that would enter southbound from the new Route
7 Expressway. Absorption of our traffic onto I-95 may have
been possible 40 years ago, but is problematic today.
For some
detail on this key point, consider that the 1978 Route 7 Environmental
Impact Statement projected that, taking as a specific point
of reference the cross section of the proposed Expressway
just north of the intersection of Routes 7 and 35 in Ridgefield,
there would be about a 33% increase in total travel in the
corridor there if the expressway were built.
The 1978
Route 7 EIS recorded that "This increase will be due
to traffic that is diverted from existing streets in the corridor
because of the ease of travel and time savings due to the
new facility, and a rerouting of existing shopping, business
and other trips to alternate destinations due to a shift in
the relative ease of travel."
HVCEO also endorses the CT DOT Route 7 Expressway
assessment of 2007. Early in 2007
an update on Route 7 was prepared by Conn DOT for
the General Assembly's Transportation Committee. Excerpts
from that 2/16/2007 statement concerning the Route
7 Expressway are as follows:
“While
recognizing the need for an expressway based on traffic volumes,
the Department does not propose to extend the Route 7 expressway
north of its current terminus at Grist Mill Road in Norwalk.
The concept of extending the Route 7
Expressway in problematic for a number of reasons.
During the development of the various planning and
environmental studies, the Department has met on many
occasions with the public and local officials to obtain
input in the planning process for the future of the
Route 7 Corridor.
During this process, it became apparent
that there is much local opposition to build an expressway
in the towns of Wilton, Redding and Ridgefield.
While
the Department owns rights of way purchased for the Route
7 Corridor in Norwalk and Wilton, much of this land is now
being used for recreational purposes by local municipalities.
The Department does not own substantial right of way in the
Route 7 corridor north of Ridgefield.”
Continuing,
“The lapse of time since the 1978 EIS and the potential
of impacting what are now areas used for recreational purposes
would require the Department to undertake completely new planning
studies which would include numerous new alternatives. Completing
the planning studies, the NEPA/CEPA documentation and the
design of such a facility could take up to 10 years prior
to construction.
Other
factors which make studying a freeway on new location in the
Route 7 corridor problematic include; the difficulty of obtaining
the required federal and state environmental permits, potential
impact to the numerous residential areas in the corridor,
potential impact to sensitive cultural resources such as the
J. Alden Weir National Historic Site and potential impacts
to environmentally sensitive resources.
Regardless
of the alternative selected, the Department would still have
to, at the very least, purchase right of way acquisition north
of Ridgefield. Rights of way costs combined with construction
costs could approach $1 billion.”
For an opinion that contrasts with the HVCEO Route
7 perspective, visit the Committee
for the Extension of Route 7. Also of
interest is an independently produced history
of planning for and upgrading of Route 7.
ROUTE
7 POLICIES WITHIN MUNICIPAL PLANS
Danbury City Plan of 2002: There is no support for
the proposed Route 7 Expressway in the Danbury Plan. The Plan
constrains Route 7 changes to "support plans to widen
U.S. Route 7 south to Ridgefield and to undertake other planned
intersection and geometric improvements."
Redding Town Plan of 2008: This document states
that "The 2008 Town Plan strongly endorses major widening
and capacity improvements in existing Routes 7 and 25, the
principal arteries immediately west and east of Redding.
Maximizing the capacity of existing Route 7, in particular,
will benefit the redevelopment of the center at Georgetown
and alleviate traffic pressures on such secondary roads as
Routes 107, 57 and 53.
Permanent abandonment of once-proposed plans for a "Super
Seven" expressway is strongly endorsed by this Town Plan,
consistent with similar recommendations by the HVCEO.
The reasons why a Super Seven expressway would be ill-advised,
and plans for it should be permanently cancelled, are numerous
and compelling. These include:
1. The route through Redding would traverse a much longer
path across the Saugatuck River public water supply watershed
with consequent adverse impact on the quality of this vital
public water resource.
2. Projected traffic increase induced by an expressway, estimated
at 33% in existing environmental impact statements, would
intensify urban sprawl and decentralization of development
in southwestern Connecticut and to the north, contrary to
the "smart growth" principles which underlie both
State and Regional plans for the area.
3. The excess of jobs over available housing which exists
in the South Western Region will intensify housing pressures
on Redding and other towns remote from employment centers,
as an expressway promotes faster but longer commutation and
results in housing shortages in outlying areas. Greater fuel
consumption and loss of transportation efficiency are additional
undesirable impacts.
4. An expressway "solution" to corridor transportation
needs would not only be costly and environmentally destructive
but would undercut public investments in urgently needed public
transit facilities, such as an upgraded Danbury Branch rail
line. An expressway entering I - 95 would exacerbate the current
overflow of traffic on that highway."

In 2005 the Town of Redding was
presented with a
prestigious National Award for Smart Growth Achievement
in the Small Communities category by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency for the above Georgetown Redevelopment Project,
which will make use of both Route 7 and the Danbury Branch
Rail Line.
Ridgefield
Town Plan of 2010: According
to page 13-4 of the 2010 Ridgefield Plan of Conservation and
Development “New roads are not proposed in this Plan,
aside from new subdivisions and possibly some improved connections
or road extensions in Ridgefield Center.
The Planning and Zoning Commission, the town administration,
and other town agencies have consistently reached consensus
that the formerly proposed Super 7 Highway is not appropriate
for Ridgefield. As indicated in Chapter 7 the future use for
that corridor should be a greenway."
ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE EXISTING ROUTE 7
As of 2011 Route 7 from Route 35 in Ridgefield
to the Route 7 Expressway segment in Danbury is being
widened from two to four lanes and the alignment improved.
Additional widening, south of the intersection with
Route 35 to the Wilton Line, is not supported by HVCEO.
This policy is backed up by the technical analysis
within the 2011 Route
7 Transportation and Land Use Study.

Leaders
kick off the widening of Route 7 between Danbury and Ridgefield
on
August 15, 2005. From left are Ridgefield First Selectman
Rudy Marconi, Ridgefield
State Representative John Frey, Governor Jodi Rell, Danbury
Mayor Mark Boughton,
and Conn DOT Commissioner Stephen Korta. Photo courtesy of
the News Times.
It should
also be noted that HVCEO completed a driveway and curb cut
management plan for Route 7 in Danbury, Redding and Ridgefield
in 1996. The Redding and Ridgefield portions of the plan were
thereafter incorporated as site plan standards into the zoning
regulations of those communities.
All three curb plans are now being updated by a consultant
to HVCEO and will be completed in 2011.
As
for HVCEO's Route 7 improvement policies, the following will
be pursued:
---
In cooperation with SWRPA and Conn DOT, conduct a needs assessment
of the Route 7 corridor between Olmstead Hill Road in Wilton
and Route 35 in Ridgefield to establish an implementation
program for operational, intersection, safety, access management,
multimodal and streetscaping enhancements, all within a framework
of sensitive design.
Visit the web site for this important transportation study
at www.route7study.org.
Ridgefield recommendations
from the 2011 report include 1) new signal and reconstruction
at Route 7 with Old Town Road, 2) additional turn
lanes and signal modifications at Route 7 and Route
102, 3) at the intersection of Route 7 with Route
35 geometric modifications to scale down the intersection,
improve safety and better accommodate pedestrians,
and 4) new signal and reconstruction at Route 7 intersection
with the driveway to Ridgefield Crossing. Lane.

--- Support the construction of a multi - modal transportation
center in the Georgetown village area, as part of
the redevelopment of that area which is immediately
adjacent to Route 7. The multi - modal center will
be located on the Wilton - Redding Town Line and include
pedestrian and bicycle access, bus and rail transit
services, and parking. ---
Support the construction
of a multi - modal transportation center in the Branchville
village area, as part of the future growth of that
area which is bisected by Route 7.
---
Assess the Branchville Station area for potential for transit
oriented development and provide a concept plan (below).

---
Update Route 7 curb cut management plans in Danbury, Ridgefield
and Redding.
--- Part of the right of
way owned by Conn DOT for a future Route 7 Expressway
should be made available for an open space corridor
to be known as the Sugar Hollow Greenway which shall
also contain the Norwalk River Valley Trail.
--- Both the Ives Trail and the the Norwalk
River Watershed Trails System crossing of Route 7
are pedestrian movements to be taken into consideration
in future Route 7 planning.
Contents | 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5. | 6. | 7. | 8.
|