YourCT.com header image 2
← Norwalk: Mayor Tweaks Planning Commission Recommended Budget Norwalk: Property Taxes, Still Needs Reform →

Norwalk: Merritt Route 7 Interchange Updates


by turfgrrl


March 17th, 2008 · 15 Comments

Looks like tomorrow we to see the revised, and apparently agreed upon, cloverleaf interchange that will connect the route 7 connector to the Merritt. From the Advocate:

The state and the Merritt Parkway Conservancy have reached an agreement in their long-running dispute over how to redesign a busy interchange in Norwalk.

The state Department of Transportation has settled on a “cloverleaf” design for the interchange of Route 7 and the Merritt Parkway, the plan favored by the conservancy.

The conservancy, in turn, has accepted state proposals to replace the historic bridge over Main Avenue near the interchange, as long as its character is maintained.

Those are the elements of one proposal that will be aired at a public hearing at 7:30 p.m. tomorrow at Norwalk City Hall, preceded by a one-hour open house.

Five proposals for rebuilding the interchange will be offered. The DOT will present the cloverleaf design as the preferred option but will get public input before deciding, said Thomas Harley, manager of consultant design with DOT.

It has been about two years since a federal judge blocked the DOT’s plans after a lawsuit by the conservancy. Since then, the two sides have been meeting, with Gov. M. Jodi Rell urging them to reach an agreement.

“This really is a collaborative effort,” Harley said. “Both sides have conceded issues in this process. We are going to this meeting with an alternative that both parties can feel comfortable with.”

More than 10 years ago, the state proposed reconfiguring the congestion-prone interchange. The DOT is trying to finish the interchange so it’s accessible to traffic from all directions, Harley said. The redesign will let Route 7 traffic travel north on the Merritt Parkway, and drivers heading south on the Merritt will be able to exit at Route 7.

The state also wants to replace the Main Avenue Bridge to expand Main Avenue from two lanes to six lanes. The conservancy agreed to that because of assurances from state officials that they will replicate the bridge’s stone construction and historic character.

source: Advocate, Route 7 dispute settled, By Chris Gosier, March 17 2008

Tags: Norwalk · Transportation

15 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Merritt Route 7 Interchange Updates”



  • 1 Why no lights? // Mar 17, 2008 at 8:06 pm

    I get the new plan, and support it out of pure frustration, but why no lights on the ramps?
    That’s just dangerous.

    They can easily select no-glare lights that don’t allow light to spill off the road. They use them on the west coast and in Europe, places that don’t want light pollution but are not so stupid as to sacrifice the public’s safety. The lights just shine directly down on to the roadway and you hardly see them from elsewhere.

    Unlit ramps are scary and are the cause of fatal accidents. THAT”S WHY THEY LIGHT RAMPS!

    This is just stupid.

    If they go with the unlit ramps there will be blood on the MPC’s hands. Will they attend the funerals of the people killed on the ramps and explain to the surviving loved ones that it was so much PRETTIER without the lights?

    Sorry to be so harsh, but if there ever was a place to use state of the art engineering and technology for the public’s safety, this is it.

    And don’t even get me started on how crazy cloverleafs are to negotiate. Try going onto the Merritt southbound off 7 northbound at 7:30 in the morning where traffic entering from the cloverleaf layout onto 7 northbound from the Merritt northbound is merging left while you are merging right to get onto the exit ramp. It is as confusing to drive as it is to read. It is a DEATHTRAP.

    When the statement is made that everyone’s favorite new plan will handle all future traffic loads, who do they think they are kidding? This plan will be obsolete before it is even started.

    But I do get it. It’s prettier and cheaper than the other one. That’s why I support it!

    Besides, what’s a few fatalaties and a few hundred injuries every year matter when the ramps are so much less visible.

    Just wait till the traffic jams from the almost daily accidents at the cloverleaf cause backups to Bridgeport in the morning rush. But who cares, the members of the MPC are not using the road then!
    Most of them live in Greenwich and Stamford.

    But I support the new plan because it is prettier!

  • 2 Scott Piotrowski // Mar 18, 2008 at 9:16 am

    “Sorry to be so harsh, but if there ever was a place to use state of the art engineering and technology for the public’s safety, this is it.”

    Have you ever heard of history? Do you know what preservation is? Have you ever heard of Route 66 by any chance? Would you want it blown away in place of technology?

    There’s a reason why there is conservancy to protect the historical nature of the Merritt Parkway. It’s because it needs protection from obsolete DOT’s and an uninformed general public.

  • 3 anonymous // Mar 18, 2008 at 9:28 am

    Ever heard of paying attention to your driving and adjusting your speed and technique to the road conditions? Ever heard of the lower accident rate for roundabouts precisely because they force people to pay attention to what they are doing? Where is it gauranteed that all highways will be designed for the sleep-driver?

  • 4 anonymous // Mar 18, 2008 at 9:38 am

    Like the Merritt Parkway Conservancy did a great job at the Long Ridge Road exit - 2000 trees cut down and a clear view of all the buildings at the end of the new long and straight exit ramp. Isn’t it great they put safety first in Stamford?
    So much for preserving the “historic integrity” of the parkway…

  • 5 why no lights? // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    #2,
    Then let’s go back to dirt roads and horses and buggies. What the hell are you talking about?
    Traffic is increasing every year, not decreasing. I suppose you take the train everywhere and walk. Otherwise you would realize we are in a traffic gridlock in southwest CT that is not going to get any better, but worse.

    #3,
    The statistics speak for themselves. Higher fatality rate on unlit highway ramps. Many older drivers lose their night vision capacity. This decline starts in your 40’s and progresses as you get older. Maybe we should just take away licences of everyone over 50? But you think accident victims deserve what they get.
    That’s sweet.

    #4, the lawsuit to stop the Norwalk interchange was STRONGLY supported by the mayor of Stamford (that’s STAMFORD, not Norwalk, even though the interchange was wholly in Norwalk and would not effect Stamford at all), and the former chairman of the MPC (a real estate mogul from Greenwich who owns and leases tons of space in Stamford), who both had a lot to lose with an efficient and safe interchange in norwalk, since Norwalk was and still is siphoning off businesses from Stamford. And they cleverly used the preservation community to fight their dirty battle. Norwalk got screwed and left with a bottleneck for at least another decade, while Stamford got its shiny new offramp with nary a peep from the MPC. Curious.

    .

  • 6 turfgrrl // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    anonymous 3: I guess that’s why they light up runways, because of those sleepy pilots … And then there’s the lighthouse, the harbor lights, and all those other instances where light is used to ward off sleep.

  • 7 anonymous // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    They should widen both I-95 and Merritt Parkway to 5 or 6 lanes a piece and finish the Super 7. This would dramatically reduce traffic congestion throughout Fairfield County and save thousands of manhours every week sitting in traffic.

  • 8 Anonymous // Mar 18, 2008 at 9:21 pm

    Read all about how obsolete the deathtrap cloverleafs are, and how they are being phased out all over the world, except of course in Norwalk CT which is the only place in the world planning to build a new one. A monument to stupidity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverleaf_interchange

  • 9 tiredoflivinginct // Mar 19, 2008 at 1:16 pm

    I can not believe how backward the highways in ct are! I think the fact that the route 7/merritt interchange was not constructed as a complete north/south/east/west one in the first place. I only plan on living in southwest ct for another 3 years so I’ll never see any changes. P.S. - My house is for sale (It’ll take 3 years to sell it)

  • 10 anon // Mar 22, 2008 at 6:57 am

    good letter in the hour today against the cloverleaf. it takes courage to speak up against the majority, but this letter is spot on. this cloverleaf is a deathtrap and should be rejected by the adults in the DOT and in our community.

  • 11 Anonymous // Mar 22, 2008 at 8:02 am

    I hope the idiots who stopped Super 7 thirty years ago fester for hours in their SUVs.

  • 12 anon // Mar 22, 2008 at 8:43 am

    When will the anti-7 Rep. Boucher (pronounced BooShay like the pretentious Hyancinth BooKay but really Bucket on keeping Up Appearances) retire and let the adults take control of SW Connecticuts transportation?
    She has been useless to the frustrated residents of this state. oh but she serves the spoiled rich back country hoo-hahs in wilton just fine.

    Duff is right on to get the conversation started about super 7 again.

  • 13 David Olson // Apr 13, 2008 at 8:40 am

    There is so much research against the safety of the cloverleaf design. In addition to being unsafe, the proposed cloverleaf design will have a negative impact on the woodlands and wetlands of the Silvermine community. I am concerned that the Merritt Parkway Conservancy has had so much influence on the design of the project. The needs of all must to be taken into consideration.

    I hope all will attend the May 14 meeting with Larry Cafero - 7:30 pm at Silvermine Elementary School.

  • 14 Driver // Apr 13, 2008 at 9:56 am

    I’ve looked for the research on cloverleafs and find it ambiguous and not as clear cut as other posters say. Could someone please cite the sources you have with the statistics on cloverleaf intersections so that I can see for myself?

  • 15 Anon // Apr 13, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    I’m that guy that doesn’t let anyone in Wilton or Ridgefield in or out while on Route 7. I’m also the guy DRIVING LIKE CRAZY past School Rd in Wilton. Just to get back at you FOOLS who do not want a Super 7. Ever hear the people in Brookfield or New Milford complain about the current extension of Route 7 in those towns? No, because they’re not self-absorbed, self-centered snobs. SHAME ON BOB DUFF AND JODI RELL for not having the guts to take on those idiots who think they can prevent progress.

Leave a Reply