East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study - Community Open House November 18, 2020 - City and County of Denver
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
November 18, 2020
East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
Community Open House
1
Welcome!
For Spanish interpretation click the interpretation button on Zoom’s bottom menu
Agenda:
o Project introduction
o Study areas (existing conditions and preferences)
o Draft alternative alignments
o Draft alternative cross-sections
o Discussion
Open House Communication and Expectations of Participants
• Respectful conversation
• At specific points during the presentation participants will be asked to provide feedback via polling activities and open
discussion.
2
Karen Good, AICP
Angela Jo Woolcott Leah Langerman
Project Manager City of Denver Department
GBSM David Evans and Associates
of Transportation and Infrastructure (DOTI)
Meeting Facilitator Polling Administrator
Matt Buster Will Wagenlander Victoria Mendoza
David Evans and Associates David Evans and Associates Hispanidad 3
Consultant Project Manager Planner Interpretation Services
Introducing the 52nd
Avenue Feasibility
Study
o Project goals and
outcomes
52nd Avenue
o Where are we in the
planning process?
o Existing conditions analysis
(building on previous
planning studies)
o Flyers and online survey
o Community Working
Group
o Engineering feasibility
4
Community Working Group Update
o Globeville-Elyria-Swansea Coalition
o City Council District 9
o Colorado Motor Carriers Association
o Denver Streets Partnership
o JK Concepts Cabinets & Woodworking
o 52nd and Vasquez Scale Company
5
East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
Focus Areas
6
Focus Area 1:
52nd Avenue from
Brighton Boulevard to
Colorado Boulevard
N Line Station
Existing Pedestrian Bridge
7
Focus Area 2:
Brighton/York
Underpass
N Line Station
Existing Pedestrian Bridge
8
Focus Area 3:
National Western
Center (NWC) N Line
Station Connectivity
N Line Station
Existing Pedestrian Bridge
9
East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
Community Input and Feedback
10October 2020 Community Survey Results
What we heard:
• Agreement with the need for improvements on 52nd and at the
Brighton/York underpass
• Confirmed the need for connectivity in all directions
• Local network is more important than regional connectivity
• Low volume streets are appreciated
11What transportation improvements are most important to you?
9% 9%
Lyft/Uber/Taxi Scooter
48% 48% 45%
42% 32%
Vehicular Bicycle Bicycle & 25%
Pedestrian Freight
Pedestrian Transit
9% 7%
Other Van
Carpo
ol
12Which gaps are the most important to fill?
46% 46% 43% 36% 33% 33% 30%
30% 23% 10%
Other
Connectivity to bike Direct connection from Connectivity south
facilities 52nd Ave to Brighton Blvd Connectivity to
across I-70
transit stops
Connectivity north along Connectivity west
Connectivity east of
Brighton Blvd under the Connectivity to NWC Connectivity east-west across river
Colorado Boulevard
freight railroad to York St Station on 52nd across the freight
railroad 13East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
52nd Avenue Focus Area
14Focus Area 1:
52nd Avenue from
Brighton Boulevard to
Colorado Boulevard
15Street Section Will be edited
& Right-of-Way Reserved publicly owned land for transportation purposes, such as a
Limitations highway, sidewalk, rail transport, and other infrastructure
• Tradeoffs between
impacts and elements
of the street width
• ROW and existing 5252ndndAvenue
Avenue
street section vary
along the corridor
• Some ROW available
on the east side
59’ – 60’ ROW
• Very limited ROW
available on the west 50’ ROW
side 21’ ROW
ROW = Right of Way 16Existing Street Section & Right-of-Way
ROW and existing street section vary along the corridor:
17East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
52nd Avenue Focus Area - Alignments
1852nd Avenue from Brighton Boulevard to Colorado Boulevard –
Alignments
o 1 (least impactful) – 3 (most impactful)
1st Alignment
• No vehicular crossing (bike and pedestrian only) of railroad tracks
with improvements to 52nd and adjacent local streets
2nd Alignment
• Over or under option
3rd Alignment
• Over or under option
o Each has differing types of new connections and impacts on neighboring
properties
19Alignment 1:
Bike and Pedestrian
Crossing
• Define and formalize parking
and street edge. i.e. add
curb, gutter, & sidewalks
• Includes bike and pedestrian
crossing but no vehicular
crossing of rail line
• No vehicular connectivity to
commuter rail, Platte River,
and NWC
• Limited impacts to adjacent
properties
• At-grade railroad crossing is
not possible
20Alignment 2: Over
or Under Rail Line
• Ped, bike and vehicular
improvements from Brighton
to Vasquez
• Creates a 4-way intersection
at Brighton Blvd / 52nd
• Proposed grade-separated
rail crossing
Underpass Option Overpass Option
• Local street network re-
alignment impacts
residences
• Improved connectivity to
Brighton, Platte River, and
NWC
• Property impacts on west
side
21Alignment 3: Over
or Under Rail Line
• Ped, bike and vehicular
improvements from Brighton
to Vasquez
• Creates a 3-way intersection
at Brighton/York Underpass Underpass Option Overpass Option
• Proposed grade-separated
rail crossing
• Improved connectivity to
Brighton, Platte River, and
NWC
• Property impacts north of
52nd
• Greater property impacts on
west side
22Overpass Example Underpass Example
Peoria Crossing at Smith Road in Aurora 15th Street Under Freight Rail Line in Downtown
• Visual barrier • Clearance needed • Possible environmental issues
• Easier and more economical (esp. related to railroad &) • More difficult to • Higher cost
drainage coordinate/construct • Impacts to surrounding street
• Impacts to adjacent properties • Line of sight to other side for network
• Impacts to the local street network multimodal users • Impacts to adjacent
• Drainage issues/pumping properties
23Poll
What appeals to you: Over or under the rail line?
1) Over
2) Under
3) Equal or no difference
4) No crossing
24Poll
Which of the alignment
options do you prefer?
1) Alignment 1
2) Alignment 2
3) Alignment 3 Alignment 1
4) None of the above
Please add additional ideas
Alignment 2 Alignment 3
253
2
1
Discussion
26East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
52nd Ave Corridor Characteristics
2752nd Avenue
Corridor
Characteristics
• West side
• Neighborhood
• Commercial
Example ideas to get your
perspectives and ideas
Preference polling and
discussion will follow
28Commercial
• Larger blocks
• Big parcels
• More truck and
vehicular movements
• Large curb cuts and
driveways for parcel
access
• Employment
• 60-foot ROW typical
• More regional
connection needs
29Commercial -
Cross Section 1
Commercially focused street
• Separated bike facility on
one side
• No on-street parking
• 10.5’ travel lanes
• Amenity zone (trees in
hardscape) with
opportunities for transit
stop enhancements and
to buffer pedestrians
from traffic
• Larger sidewalk /
multimodal path to
accommodate bikes on
side without the bike
lane
• Stays within the existing
60’ ROW Existing 60’ ROW 30Commercial -
Cross Section 2
Benefits and tradeoffs:
• 1 Bike lane
• On-street parking on
one side to buffer bike
lane
• 11’ travel lanes
• Amenity zone (trees in
hardscape) with
opportunities for transit
stop enhancements and
to buffer pedestrians
from traffic
• 6’ Sidewalks on each
side
• 62’ ROW vs. 60’ Existing
ROW
Existing 60’ ROW 31Poll
Which of these sections do you prefer for the commercial section?
o Section 1
o Section 2
Please enter new ideas/ questions you might have into the chat box
Section 1 Section 2
32Neighborhood
• Primarily residential
• Multiple intersections
• Swansea Neighborhood
Park
• Homes address 52nd at the
side of lots rather than
fronting the street
• More bicycle and
pedestrian needs
• ROW from 20 feet – 60 feet
• More local connection
needs
33Neighborhood -
Example Cross
Section 1
Benefits and tradeoffs: 65’ ROW
• Bike lanes on both
sides
• On-street parking on
one side to buffer bike
lane
• Amenity zone (Turf
and Trees) to buffer
bikes and pedestrian
from vehicles
• 6’ sidewalks
• 10’ travel lanes
• 60’ ROW
Existing 20’- 60’ ROW 34Neighborhood -
Example Cross
Section 2
Benefits and tradeoffs:
• Buffered bike lane on
one side buffered by
parking
• Amenity zone (Turf
and Trees)
• 6’ sidewalk on one
side
• 10’ Sidewalk /
Multiuse Path on
other side
• 10’ travel lanes
• Opportunities for
enhanced transit stops
• 60’ ROW
35
Existing 20’- 60’ ROWPoll
Which of these sections do you prefer for the neighborhood section?
o Section 1
o Section 2
Please enter new ideas/ questions you might have into the chat box
Section 1 Section 2
36West Side
• Large, super blocks
• Big parcels
• More truck and vehicular
movements
• Large curb cuts and
driveways for parcel access
• Employment
• 0 feet to 20 feet ROW
• More regional connection
needs
37West Side -
Cross Section 1
Benefits and tradeoffs:
• Bike lanes on both
sides buffered by on-
street parking
• Amenity zone
(hardscape with trees)
• 6.5’ sidewalks on both
sides
• 11’ travel lanes
• Opportunities for
enhanced transit stops
• 75’ ROW
38
No existing ROWWest Side -
Cross Section 2
Benefits and tradeoffs:
• Buffered bike lanes
on both sides
• Onn-street parking
on both sides to
further buffer
• Amenity zone
(hardscape with
trees)
• 6’ sidewalks on both
sides
• 12’ travel lanes
• Opportunities for
enhanced transit
stops
• 80’ ROW
39
No existing ROWPoll
Which of these sections do you prefer for the west side?
o Section 1
o Section 2
Please enter new ideas/ questions you might have into the chat box
Section 1 Section 2
40Discussion
41East 52 nd Avenue Feasibility Study
Brighton/York Underpass Focus Area
42Focus Area 2:
Brighton/York
Underpass
43Brighton/York
Underpass
• Flooding and drainage issues
• No pedestrian or bicycle facilities
• Poor sight distance for drivers
• Low clearance
• Environmental issues
• Aesthetics
44Brighton/York
Underpass
Improvements
• Ped, bike and vehicular
improvements
• Realignment of Brighton to
provide site distance and
safety improvements
• Aesthetic improvements to a
“City Gateway”
• Coordination with BNSF and
RTD critical
45Poll
How important are bicycle and
pedestrian improvements beneath
the Brighton/York Underpass to you?
1) Extremely
2) Somewhat
3) Not Important
46Discussion
East 52 nd Avenue Feasibility Study
National Western Center Station Focus Area
48Focus Area 3:
National Western
Center N Line Station
Connectivity
N Line Station
Existing Pedestrian Bridge
4947th Avenue New Mobility Elements
47th pedestrian/bike bridge 47th bike lanes
50Focus Area 3
• New pedestrian and
bicycle bridge
• Bike lanes added to
47th Avenue
• Connection to
Brighton Blvd Transit
Station
• 48th Avenue sidewalk
improvements
5148th Avenue Sidewalks Project
Project Highlights
• Adding 1,400 feet of sidewalk
along the south side of 48th
• Landscaping along new sidewalk,
including 25 new trees
• Improved storm drainage
• Repaving from Brighton to Claude
48th Avenue
Project Schedule (Tentative)
• 12/2020 - Construction advertisement
• 5/2021 - Start Construction
• 12/2021 - Construction complete
52Poll
What are your biggest
priorities for connections to
the NWC N- Line Station?
1) Better pedestrian connections
2) Better bike facilities
3) Better crossings
4) Better vehicular drop-off facilities
5) All the above
6) Connections to the station are not
important to me
53Poll
Which improvement is most important
to you?
Please select your top priority
1) Brighton/York Underpass
2) 52nd Avenue overpass/underpass
(across the rail line)
3) Improvements to existing 52nd
Avenue
4) Connections to the NWC N Line
Station
This will help assist in prioritizing future
projects based on your input.
54Discussion
55East 52nd Avenue Feasibility Study
Next Steps
56What’s next?
o Refinement and Identification of Priorities and Alternatives, including:
High-level engineering analysis
Consideration of costs
Identification of possible impacts and benefits
o Next Meetings and Opportunities for Feedback:
Community Working Group: early 2021, after alternatives analysis
Public: early 2021, after the Community Working Group meeting
57 For More Info or to Submit a Comment:
o Visit project web page: www.bit.ly/52ndAveStudy
o Call Karen Good, Project Manager: 720-865-3162
o Email Karen: karen.good@denvergov.org
58You can also read
