South Broadway NEPA Process
Consensus Committee Meeting #14
March 15, 2007
Cameron Community Church
6:00 pm – 9:00 pm
Meeting Notes
Next Meeting
April 19th – Finalize agreement on a recommended preferred alternative. Also, the facilitators will help schedule and design a special debrief session to review the whole of the South Broadway NEPA process.
Discussion Highlights
Broadway / I-25 Interchange – The most promising alternative was the Broadway Widening with interchange option 3b. CC members discussed tweaks to options 3b and 4a to incorporate an east/west access with a collector distributor road, retaining two northbound I-25 entrances (the loop ramp and a ramp off the wedge), the need to depress Acoma in certain options, and the desire to separate bike/pedestrian path from vehicle traffic. The result of this conversation is the project team will look at adjusting option 3b. To see all the interchange options go to: http://www.denvergov.org/BroadwayNEPA/February2007Alternatives/tabid/425830/Default.aspx
Trigger Language – The revised language was sent to CC members prior to the meeting for review. Several people sent comments and only one person sent changes. The CC members discussed the language and suggested further refinement, such as: define “demonstrable”, add City Council to the list of people notified, spell out a more formal and detailed process to decide best the solution.
Recommended Preferred Alternative – Jason Longsdorf, City of Denver Public Works Department, reviewed all the elements of the current draft recommended preferred alternative, including interchange option 3b. The next steps are for CC members to review the elements with their constituents and give final necessary adjustment to the project team prior to the next meeting and be able to reach agreement at the next meeting. A final map, showing adjustments that were possible, will be reviewed and proposed as the recommended preferred alternative at the April CC meeting. To see the map presented at the meeting go to: http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/479/documents/Level3BProjectTeamPreliminaryPA.pdf
Meeting Summary
Broadway / I-25 Interchange
Screening
The screening resulted in four options (1, 2, 3b and 7) that performed fair to good. The rest of the interchange options did not perform very well or had major flaws.
The diverging diamond (option 8) screened well at first, but Federal Highway Administration reservations and alignment issues lowered the rating considerably. The alignment of the lanes needs to be such that it is very clear where a driver is supposed to go. To create the safest alignment (90 degree sight lines at intersections) the property takings would be significant on the West side of Broadway at the southern end of the intersection. The alignment required would also create awkward intersection geometry at Kentucky and Tennessee.
Discussion
Collector Distributor Road:
Question – Could the exit ramp in 3b onto Lincoln be moved east to give more room for the radius of the ramp?
Answer – This might be possible but, any significant move to the east may require more property acquisition on the NE corner of Ohio and Lincoln.
Question – Why a collector distributor (c/d) road from Lincoln/Ohio to the on ramp at Santa Fe?
Answer – The collector distributor road allows Santa Fe off ramp traffic and Broadway on ramp traffic to weave while separated from the I-25 mainline. As a side benefit the local traffic would be able to travel from Broadway and Santa Fe without entering the highway. A c/d road is not included in option 3B as the distance between the Broadway on ramp and the Santa Fe off ramp exceeds the FHWA minimum ramp spacing guidelines.
Comment – A collector distributor road would address the need for east/west connectivity, originally asked for early in this project. The collector distributor would also help the Alameda station Transit Oriented Development that expects to contribute additional traffic.
Suggestion - Option 4b with 3a’s loop ramp:
Question – West Washington Park prefers option 4b with option 3a’s loop ramp. This would eliminate left turns for northbound Broadway to northbound I-25 traffic. The success of this new development will hinge on how well the interchange works and the better the interchange the less cut through traffic. How would this alternative model?
Answer – 4b with 3a’s loop ramp would model similarly to 4b. This tweak would not address the safety issue of crossing traffic on the lower part of the wedge ramp – traffic accessing southbound I-25 crossing traffic accessing northbound I-25 traffic. This also doesn’t address the roughly 600 foot weave for Broadway traffic entering northbound highway traffic. 4b also would require building a huge structure for the lightest movement (southbound Broadway to northbound I-25). The 4b screening results acknowledge that two entrances onto I-25 does model better for traffic movement, but when bad driver expectancy, funding, safety criteria and impacts outside the study area are factored the net benefit is not better than other options.
Question – What caused option 4b to rate poorly?
Answer – The primary problems with 4b are that it kept the Lincoln and Ohio intersection configuration which FHWA and CDOT want to be standardized or removed. It creates merging problems for traffic entering the highway from Broadway and traffic exiting onto Santa Fe; entering traffic has roughly 600 feet to merge onto the highway. And, because of gradient requirements Acoma would need to be depressed 6-10 feet.
Acoma:
Comment – Depressing Acoma would create a less bike/pedestrian friendly experience.
Question – Would it be possible, on Acoma, to have at grade bike/pedestrian lanes while the traffic is depressed?
Answer – There may be enough clearance for an at grade bike/pedestrian path, however roads are built with a sidewalk for people to use in case of a breakdown or accident.
Question – What about a fly over, to not require a depressed Acoma?
Answer – The grade limitations have already been reached.
Comment – Baker Neighborhood prefers to have a separation between the roadway and the bike/pedestrian path to create a real multi-use trail with greenway details.
Question – How did VHEIS deal with the weave at Santa Fe?
Answer – VHEIS moves I-25 over and Santa Fe enters on the right.
Phasing a Project:
Suggestion – Create a second phase to 3b that includes additions from 4b. Establishing a second phase would influence the design to be flexible to allow for the additions.
Comment – There is more oversight on phased projects than ever before, so it would not be possible to phase. The second phase would require and expanded list of stakeholders to address and discuss the impacts outside the current project area. It may be possible to draw the design to not preclude a collector distributor road without it being any sort of planned second phase.
Public Comment
Jay McGee – There seems to be a disconnect between the development and NEPA process. The development process focused on transit, light rail, etc. The NEPA process is focused on moving more cars quickly.
Question - How will people move from West Washington Park to the light rail stations?
Answer – there are sidewalks in all the alternatives.
Question – The NEPA process is not supposed to be limited by dollars. If this is true, why is there a funding criteria?
Answer – Options are generated without considering costs, but at the end of the process you need to prove there are funds available. The funding criteria is used to compare the options to each other; “compared to the others could this option be funded?”
Question – Is there a priority for residents or commercial in decisions about property takings?
Answer – Right of way impacts are assessed on a per parcel basis and don’t differentiate between residential or commercial.
Max Cohen – The Denver Design Center, Broadway Marketplace and The Collection are opposed to the extension and realignment of Exposition west of Broadway onto their private property. The extension will impeded a contractual parking agreement with current tenants, jeopardizing their occupancy and the future marketability of the property. There were preliminary discussions with the NEPA project team about a land swap to replace the contiguous parking and creating access to Alameda, but nothing was brought to the table. This decision was based on the economics of losing convenient parking for a tenant that employs 500 people 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Charlie Busch – Residential streets are used already to cut through to access northbound I-25. Leaving the Ohio access to northbound I-25 as in the interchange option 3b would increase the number of people cutting through the neighborhood. 3b should rate poor or very poor on criteria c - “minimizing regional cut-through traffic”. Charlie admitted that she came into the process jaded, but have been shown that individual representatives care about the citizen’s concerns.
Trigger Language
Jason Longsdorf had received a couple comments before the meeting - several said the language was fine and one presented some changes. Jason will work with people individually before the next meeting to address some of the suggested changes.
Discussion
- Better define how public comment will be utilized
- Add City Council (district and at-large) to the list of who will be notified
- Add more detail on process - looking for a more formal process like public hearings; the interest is to ensure that there is a political component and it is not purely about numbers
- Define “demonstrable” - seems a bit vague and an easy place for a legal battle
- Add language that requires a demonstrable connection that taking away the parking will solve the problem; might require a new screening using the same eight criteria used this time
Next Step
Jason will talk with people individually who sent comments and will send a revised version and finalize the language prior to the next meeting.
Recommended Preferred Alternative
It is understood that, if this process results in an acceptable EA (Environmental Asssessment) document and FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact), the Broadway NEPA process interchange preferred alternative will replace the Valley Highway interchange alternatives.
Jason Longsdorf reviewed a draft preferred alternative that includes all the elements that the CC had agreed to in October, some tweaks to improve the agreement, and the most promising Broadway / I-25 interchange option (3b). The City and CDOT have been negotiating over the interchange and 3b seems to be the best one. There are still opportunities to tweak the alternative before the next and final meeting. The expectation is that CC members will bring the map/details back to their constituents, send back as many comments as possible before the next meeting and on April 19th finalize an agreement on a recommended preferred alternative.
Jason reviewed each element of the alternative as if one were driving south from the north end of the project area and then turned around and drove north. The following is a list of the elements mentioned:
Exposition (west side) – Jason will spend time considering how to address the removed parking necessary for the adjacent businesses and will talk with RTD about possible designated spaces in the parking garage.
Exposition (between Broadway and Lincoln) – to add a necessary turn lane parking will be removed on the south side of the street; parking will be provided for the houses on the street with no off street parking
Broadway (north of I-25) – side walks will be expanded on the west side; there will be property impacts closest to I-25 where southbound Broadway meets the southbound entrance ramp. The project team will look at moving the road alignment to lessen those impacts
Wedge Ramp – two lanes will go under I-25 and then merge into one before merging with highway traffic
Medians – will includes trees and non-mowable plants
Second Left Turn Lanes – the second turn lanes will be striped areas (to be able to address the 2030 year vehicle projections it was not possible to narrow the road to remove the striped area; to address the projected volume it would require four through lanes which is dangerous to cross without a left turn signal and queuing for the signal has less impacts with double turn lanes).
At Tennessee, the project team is still working on trying to remove second left for the future conditions.
Turning left onto Mississippi east bound, the second left will be striped out. There was discussion about more of a median, but because of the width of the street, the median would be too small to be a pedestrian safe haven and would cause drainage and street maintenance issues.
Between Mississippi and Arizona - No parking on the west side
Lanes – there are three through lanes to Arizona, the west most lane becomes a west bound turn lane only at Arizona.
*North on Broadway starting at Arizona*
Lanes - Two lanes to Mississippi with two left turns onto westbound Mississippi – this is a large movement and requires two lanes to move through the signal efficiently. Three lanes northbound after Mississippi.
Bulb out on Northeast Corner of Broadway and Mississippi – This bulb out will remain even if there are four lanes of through traffic between Mississippi and Tennessee (there is no operational reason to remove it, but it might be redesigned depending on the development or the need to direct drivers).
Parking – there will be parking on the east side of Broadway from Mississippi to I-25
Double lefts on Broadway onto southbound I-25 (via the wedge ramp)
Acoma connection will be tied to what happens with exposition
Bike/Pedestrian paths – 13.5” sidewalks and bike tails are included where possible. These improvements are marked in green on the graphic.
Mississippi (west side) – will hold the existing right of way and rebuild north retaining wall
Mississippi (east side)
– Permanent parking on the south side from Broadway to Logan
– Two eastbound lanes (to manage significant traffic)
– One lane westbound through lane
– Parking on the north side, until triggered to change to a through lane
– Median across Lincoln
– Center turn lane will remain between Sherman and Logan
Arizona – No stop sign at Arizona and Lincoln (Comment – these are necessary to manage the traffic coming from the proposed ten-story building that will have to turn there to get to Broadway)
Question – Did you look at stop signs on Mississippi? The concern is about how pedestrians will cross Mississippi.
Answer – Yes, we brought it up to the traffic engineers. They said that Mississippi is an arterial and the City doesn’t put stop signs on arterials. There is a possibility of a signal at Sherman if traffic numbers or pedestrian needs reaches a threshold. The concern is if there is a signal at Sherman it will prioritize that street as a traffic way.
Next Steps
- April 12th – final tweaks are due to the City and project team, the sooner the better so that a revised map can be generated and tweaks analyzed before the next meeting.
- April 19th – CC meeting to finalize agreement *
- Additional meeting, May 17th – it was agreed an additional meeting to allow folks enough time to tweak the alternative, review it, and then have constituents review the tweaked version.
*NOTE: Following the meeting it was assessed that April would be the final substantive meeting and the May meeting would be focused on drafting feedback on larger issues and the process for decision makers.