VALLEY HIGHWAY EIS (LOGAN TO 6TH AVENUE)
CITIZEN’S WORKING GROUP
URBAN DESIGN/AESTHETICS DRAFT

MEETING TYPE:         Urban Design/Aesthetics Citizen’s Working Group
MEETING DATE:        December 15, 2003
MEETING LOCATION: Washington Street Community Center (809 S. Washington St.)

ATTENDEES

Dean Bradley, FHU
Bob Dorroh, CCD

Cassie Gouger, FHU
Steve Harley, BNA

Wendy R. Hilgers, BNA
Andrew Hornbrook, Capitol Hill resident

Charles Howard, WUCA
Jim Jones, WWPNA

Allyson Mendenhall, DW
David Moneypenny

Greg Ochis, DW
Susie Smith, CDOT

Kotch Voraakhom, DW
Rick Willard, CDOT

PREPARER: Allyson Mendenhall, Design Workshop
SUBJECT: Urban Design/Aesthetics in the Valley Highway EIS Corridor

MEETING SUMMARY

On December 15, 2003, Design Workshop conducted the second of two public work sessions with the I-25 Valley Highway EIS Citizen Working Group (CWG) interested in creating aesthetic guidelines and improvements for this section of the highway corridor. The purpose of this meeting was to present to the group the work that Design Workshop had completed as a result of the feedback from the first meeting and to elicit input on the analysis and guidelines so that they can be refined and incorporated into the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). CWG members will have another opportunity to review this material in early 2004.

The presentation was divided into three sections: Analysis, System Alternatives and Community Preferences. Discussion of analysis focused on three diagrams created by Design Workshop that assessed the areas affected by the highway corridor: Land Use and Views; Transportation and Neighborhood Connections; and Emphasis of Nodes.

Discussion of System Alternatives focused on three diagrams indicating the distribution of improvements along the corridor and at the nodes where arterial roads cross the highway. Discussion of Community Preferences focused on the “Kit of Parts” and the draft images and text that will describe preferences in the EIS document.

The following comments are listed according to the three sections of the presentation.

Issues of Concern remaining from last meeting:

  • The community expressed concern that lighting of the highway will be visible to the residents in nearby neighborhoods, including from second-story windows.
  • What will flyovers look like from all points of view (vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists)?

Analysis:

    Land Use and Views:
    • Show Denver view planes on diagram.
    • Will lighting on the flyovers infringe on the view planes?
    • Make view arrows a different color so they are more visible.

    Transportation and Neighborhood Connections – Where there are concentrations of people (people-generators)? Where are they likely to collect?:

    • Add Bus Route #52 to diagram (from Baker down Cherokee to LRT).
    • Remove bike route crossing river at Bayaud from Baker Neighborhood.
    • 1500 feet (ft) is comfortable walking distance before someone would want to get in car or on bus.
    • The highway experience is linear, punctuated by crossing points (nodes) where there are opportunities to express neighborhood identity and character.

Emphasis of Nodes

    • Bob Dorroh: Broadway, Alameda and Federal should all be pedestrian emphasis (green). Jim Jones thought Broadway should have more of a pedestrian emphasis than Alameda and Federal because the Cherokee Gates development will change the character of the neighborhood and increase population and vehicle trips (TOD), but everyone agreed with Dorroh in the end.
    • Pedestrian and bike experience must be enhanced everywhere.
    • Bike traffic increases dramatically on Alameda and Mississippi in the summer.
    • Bike routes should be much better used and accessible when the highway redesign is complete (ex: Alameda/Cherokee is a difficult crossing).
    • In the future, the bike path should be as much of a destination/draw as the LRT.
    • Color Gates residential area yellow.

System Alternatives

    • Similar applications to different schemes.
    • Nodes offer opportunities for certain kinds of aesthetic improvements.
    • Check existing versus proposed bicycle routes.
    • Add wall treatments icon to all general red dashed line areas in addition to icon in the legend.
    • 6th Avenue/I-25:
      • Add monuments/gateways at or near this interchange to symbolize entry into the city (along stretch between Alameda and 6th?).
      • Add pedestrian/bike icons to bike trail under 6th Avenue interchange.
      • East- and west-bound 6th Avenue traffic needs some signal of the beginning and end of the highway where freeway transitions to city street.
      • Bayaud bike bridge over the river offers opportunities for monumentation (add star symbol to all three alternatives) and distinct bridge design.
    • Distinguish between open space and park space on the diagrams. FHU to share park map with DW.
    • Landscape feature at Broadway could be a park or sculptural feature.
    • Add bike/ped. symbols to pedestrian bridge.

COMMUNITY PREFERENCES

    Signage
    • Switch Image #1 gateway with Image #1 on Public Art sheet.
    • Intent, audience, scale should be considered.
    • Combine signage and public art categories and call it monumentation/signage.
    • Signage and monuments should be used to create a transition from the highway to local streets, reinforcing change of speed and scale.
    • Neighborhood signs should signal to driver exiting highway that they have entered a different zone.

    Highway Landscape

    • S. Smith: City has new stringent requirements for dealing with water quantity and quality for stormwater runoff from highways that may necessitate changes in MS4 permits. FHU has identified drainage areas and ponds.
    • B. Dorroh: Tree lawns should be added as a landscape feature at Broadway, Alameda, and Federal.

    Lighting

    • High-mast highway lighting is 65 ft tall, already implemented at Broadway and Santa Fe, as well as T-Rex.
    • City standard street light is 35 ft tall, spaced 100 ft, staggered.
    • Community concerned about seeing the light structures and light pollution.
    • Community concerned that Globe and Acorn light can cause light pollution. S. Smith says reflectors can be attached to acorns so they reflect down.
    • Public Service Company no longer exists—change to Xcel Energy.
    • The community expressed concern that lighting of the highway will it be visible to the residents in nearby neighborhoods, including from second-story windows.

    Bike and Pedestrian Bridges

    • Change icon (a bridge symbol to include bike graphic)?
    • Include image showing vehicular bridges with pedestrian passage.
    • What will flyovers look like from all points of view—vehicular and pedestrian?

    Vehicular Bridges

    • What will flyovers look like from all points of view—vehicular and pedestrian?

    Railings

    • Switch Image #1 and Image #4 to better illustrate main points.
    • Image #4 combined barrier should not be labeled as such because it would not withstand the speed and weight of a car.

    Wall Treatments

    • Idea of breaking down scale needs to be put in context of specific area or road (ex., under Alameda RR overpasses).
    • Design scale is dependent on and therefore must consider viewer (car side versus people side), context, speed.

CONCLUSION

    The community was asked to submit any additional comments to Allyson Mendenhall at Design Workshop (303-623-5186 phone, 303-623-2260 fax, amendenhall@designworkshop.com) by Monday, December 22, 2003 for inclusion in the DEIS. Comments made in the meeting and recorded above do not need to be resubmitted.