CONTEXT-SENSITIVE DESIGN CASE STUDY NO. *** 2
LOCATION:
Merritt Parkway – Greenwich, Connecticut
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY:
Much A
significant amount has been written and reported about the safety
improvements and landscape restoration of the Merritt Parkway which started in
the 1990s in Greenwich, Connecticut.[1] Theis
project will be undertaken in seven sections and this case study focuses on the
first phase, the gateway, for which design started in 1992 and construction was
completed in 1997. It is fitting to
include this project in a community-based study because the unique community of
Greenwich shaped the approach that was ultimately taken to improve this
roadway. The community’s influence started long before any formal design
process was undertaken, and in fact, and was
instrumental in motivating the context sensitive design approach (although not
called such at the time).
The history of the Merritt Parkway is long
and very significant to the conduct of this restoration project. In 1923, the plan to build a route parallel
to the very busy U.S. Route 1 along the north shore of Long Island Sound, in
Connecticut outside of New York City, was first conceived (See Figure 1). The 38 mile Merritt Parkway (US Route 15)
which runs from the New York State line to just west of New Haven, Connecticut
was completely opened in 1940. It was
one of the first parkways in the country and the first limited access highway
in Connecticut. The divided four-lane
facility is approximately 5 miles north of the Sound paralleling the
coast. The original conception was for
a somewhat open formal garden way that offered vistas of the adjacent and
mostly rural farm land. The roadway was designed to include extensive landscaping which
was reduced in the 1970s to save costs.
The most notable aesthetic features of the parkway are the bridges representing Art Moderne, Art Deco, Classical, Gothic and Renaissance architecture. These bridges are undoubtedly the most treasured aspect of the facility for the community and travelers alike (See Figure 2). Each bridge, both over and under the parkway, is unique and very few had been replaced or altered significantly for maintenance or repair. A less unique, but certainly charming, architectural element to the parkway is the frequent service areas which consist of miniature stone “old fashioned” gas stations (Figure 3).
Over time, the rural farm land surrounding the parkway was
transformed into more developed suburban land use. The parkway itself remained buffered from the development owing
to the very wide highway right of way.
The wide right of way was originally intended to contain a second
parallel roadway. Certainly in the
1980s, as traffic congestion on the parallel Interstate 95 on the shore of
Long Island Sound became very significant, there were those that
may have looked to expansion of the Merritt Parkway as a corridor traffic
management solution. The existence of
the large right of way made this possibility seem very real to many community
members who wished to preserve the parkway.
Over the years,
the gardens were transformed to rather dense and overgrown forests, that while
different from originally conceived, still provide a peaceful park-like setting
(See Figure 4). However, despite the
park-like setting, some members of the public indicated during this case study,
that they still feel somewhat unsafe on the narrow road that lacks
shoulders. Vehicles tend to drive
freeway level speeds on this road which lackscertainly does
not have interstate level geometric standards. When the redesign process for the parkway
began in 1992, the ADT was nearly 40,000 vehicles (no trucks or buses are
allowed on the parkway) and the 85% percentile speed was approaching 70 mph.[2]
Figure 3: Merritt Parkway Service
Center
This case study
focuses on the initial context sensitive design process which preceded the
first improvements to the highway and revitalization of the setting. This first section runs from the New York
State Line in the Town of Greenwich in the southwest corner of
Connecticut. The project runs for 2.5
miles. The general location is shown in Figure 1, while the first phase
section, known as the Gateway, is shown in Figure 5. The second phase of work is about to start in 2002 as of this
writing and the third phase is in design. These subsequent phases are proceeding based
on the documented guidelines and landscape plan that was developed during the
multi-year multi-group effort preceding the gateway project.
THE COMMUNITY OF GREENWICH
The community
of Greenwich, which might reasonably be termed a suburb of New York City, is
somewhat unusual in that the median household income in Greenwich is $99,10083,000
a year. This is more thanalmost double
the state medianaverage
of $532,9000
(US Census
2000, Profile of Selected EconomicCharacteristicsEconomic
Characteristics). Furthermore, the cohesive community has a history of
activism and community-based service especially in “green” issues. The powerful, active and well-informed
community was identified during interviews for this case study as part of the
impetus for handling this road improvement project “differently”.
In the early
1980s modern interchanges were built at three locations along the parkway and
this precipitated community movement for preserving the parkway and its
character. In 1991, the Parkway was listed in the National Historic Register
and shortly after it was named both a national and state Scenic By-way. These designations were community driven and
further motivated the need for a balanced and well thought out design. Due to the nature of the community, the DOT
would not even have considered tackling this
project without a design process that included all stakeholders. Interviewees for this case study indicated
that the DOT was aware of the “power” of thelevel of community interest and therefore
never considered moving without community input.
DOT ACTION
By 1992,
traffic volumes and speeds along the Merritt Parkway had continued to increase
and the safety concerns required attention.
In response the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of
Transportation established the Merritt Parkway Working Group. This internal group was faced with balancing
the safe transport of heavy traffic volumes, with not only the compromised
geometric standards of the road, but also while ensuring the character and
beauty of the roadway was maintained (or even enhanced to its original
level). The commitment of the highest
DOT management to the context sensitive design process (although not called such at
the time) was essential to starting this process and ultimately responsible for
its success. In the fall of 1993 the
working group presented its findings to the public and in
mid 1994 the “Merritt Parkway Guidelines for General Maintenance and
Transportation Improvements” and the “Landscape Master Plan for the Merritt
Parkway” were finalized. The group
prepared the guidelines while the landscape plan was contracted to a group of
consulting firms with various types of expertise. The landscape master plan was completed with the entire 38
mile38-mile length of the route in mind. This effort was the first time the DOT had
employed landscape architects in a design process. The experience was a positive one with groups including the DOT
realizing that important different knowledge
is held by different peopledifferent people hold important different knowledge.
When it came
time to present the guidelines to the public, the DOT wisely sought the
assistancet
of local groups and leaders to help set up meetings and to contact local
stakeholders. Construction did not
begin until the fall of 1996 as the interim years were used for public
consultation as well as for specific design and research including
the testing of features such as special design guardrails.
OTHER GROUP INVOLVEMENT
Several groups in addition to individual community members were involved in the project from the beginning stages including the following:
Town of Greenwich
County of Fairfield
District Department of Highway Offices
Elected state and federal representatives
Greenwich Green
and Clean
Connecticut
Chapter of American Society of Landscape Architects
Connecticut Trust
for Historic Preservation
National Park
Service
Metro Pool
{Jerry – I want to add to this list}
Merritt Parkway
Trail Alliance
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
The
community and neighbors of the Merritt Parkway had varying concerns thatwhich
in the early 1990s brought them to the
forefront of the discussion on the future of the parkway. People with property abutting the parkway
were concerned that plans to clear the forest of vines and invasive species
would leave them more exposed to noise and the visual impacts of the
transportation facility. Furthermore,
they were concerned that the access needed for construction would unnecessarily
result in the removal of some of the forest.
Community members were also concerned that if roadway capacity was
increased, traffic volumes would also increase, resulting in the
same level of a return to traffic congestion within a
few years. The community did not
necessarily wish to house on the parkway significant amounts of traffic
that was passing through from other towns.
The vast majority of community members were concerned to preserve the
scenic beauty and history of the roadway.
The commitment of the community is evident still today as the Merritt
Parkway Conservatory was recently formed.
This group was created in recognition that with DOT budgets shrinking
local money needed to be raised for landscaping. These community concerns stretch beyond simply the parkway as
another local group, Greenwich Green and Clean, has undertaken an interchange
beautification projects on I-95. They have claimed great success not only for the landscaping but
also for the project’s impact on litter reduction.
CONTEXT-SENSITIVE FACTORS
Scenery and Aesthetics
Concerns
related to scenery and aesthetics were of interest to all stakeholders. Of particular interest in this case was the
development of a rigid barrier system that fit with the scenery of the parkway
but also provided protection to drivers along the median and shoulders of the
road. The very small median and the
presence of trees in the median waswere of
concern. Along the shoulder and clear
zone, both rocks and trees were of concern.
After reviewing existing systems, the DOT designed and tested its own
steel- back
timber barrier system (Figure 67). Several iterations were needed with crash
testing before a final acceptable design was selected.
Careful consideration was given to which rocks and trees could be removed in order to balance safety improvements with scenic objectives. This involved review of crash histories and also careful engineering evaluation.
Guidelines for
signage were also established for the Merritt Parkway. There was a concern to provide safe
functional signs but also to minimize signage and establish a distinctive style
that fit with the scenery.
Figure 6: Merritt Parkway Steel Back Timber Barrier
Historic
This project is somewhat unique in highway design and construction work in that the historic assets were not along the property to be obtained, but consisted of the roadway and bridges themselves. This created challenges for the working groups, particularly for those that sought to improve safety. Ultimately, compromises had to be made to preserve the historic character. A contrasting case study might be made by considering the parkway on the other side of the Connecticut - New York border to the west. In this case, the curves and geometric standards were addressed in the traditional way through widening and curve lengthening. However, the atmosphere and character of the roadway have been completely compromised.
The guidelines for the Merritt Parkway
also include provisions that ensure restoration of the mostly concrete bridges
will proceed in a manner that protects their unique character. This includes the eventuality where a
complete bridge might need replacing.
In that event, the original design will be replicated. Any new bridge over the Merritt Parkway must
also be in line with the prevailing character and not of the plain
concrete style of the newer interchange bridges.
Environmental Concerns
The environmental concerns along the Merritt Parkway might be considered minor compared to projects involving wetlands or water, however the proper course of action was not necessarily easy to define. Forest management, invasive species removal in particular, was undertaken as opposed to continuing to let the area overgrow naturally.
Multimodalism
Some
members of the community have requested pedestrian access, perhaps along a
shared- use
trail, within the large park-like forest along-
side the parkway. This
issue has not been resolved due to safety concerns and a failure to reach
consensus on how access could be provided.
Safety
In addition
to the guard railsguardrails
and removal of rocks and trees already discussed, several other efforts to
improve safety were undertaken. Due to the lack
of shoulders, gGrassed pull off
areas are to be maintained and provided where possible. Park curbing was to be utilized in order to
provide adequate drainage especially during heavy rain events. Consensus was reached to provide standard
pavement markings and roadside delineators.
Other Community Needs
The management of the construction in the
forest-like residential environmental was challenging. Obtaining access to the areas where work
such as rock removal werework such as rock removal was required was
difficult. In some cases prior
agreements had to be broken in order to practically accomplish the work with
the machinery involved. There was a constant need to inform and explain the
nature of the construction tasks to the public but especially the neighbors.
Public Education and Involvement
The
community- lead
nature of this project resulted in excellent attendance at public meetings and
information sessions both during the development of the master plans and during
later planning. The project involved
one of the first uses of computer rendered images in Connecticut and this tool
was deemed very useful and important for facilitating the communication and
exchange of ideas. The DOT central
office personnel often traveled the distance to Greenwich to hold meetings but
also to have one-on-one meetings with neighbors. However, it should be noted,
that the well-informed and active community made the effort to obtain public
input on this project easier than might be the case in other areas or for other
projects.
PROJECT OUTCOME AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The final project can be considered a successful compromise. The parkway remains a beautiful roadway with
spectacular bridges. However, traffic
congestion in the overall southwest corridor of Connecticut is still
significant. Although guard rails and
other improvements should show success in improving crash or fatality rates on
the Merritt Parkway, speeds remain high and the facility lacks what might be
considered standard less than the highest levels of safe
engineering design. The wood guard
railguardrail has been hailed as a great
success. Groups are working together to
improve plantings and landscaping further.
The lessons learned on this project include
the need to involve maintenance personnel in early design discussions. Maintenance has been challenging in some
areas requiring more manual labor thant is
ideal. The need for better
communication during the construction phase was also identified. Another missing piece was the provision of
turn arounds for emergency vehicles.
Finally, although the preparation of formal written documents is an
excellent tool, especially given the number of years it will take to construct
improvements along the entire length of this parkway, some problems with
consistency between the “master plan” and the “guidelines” were
encountered. One single document may
have served the groups better.
Overall this project can
be considered an excellent example of how a road represents so much more to a
community than simply a transportation conduit. The future of this roadway was community driven and while the DOT
provided the leadership and expertise to accomplish the improvements, their use
of other professionals, such as landscape architects and historians, improved
the final result.