DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Exactly, Cherry Creek works fine. The canals in Amsterdam don't go from 25cfs to 30,000 cfs when it rains. That sort of building wall that close to the creek isn't smart here, no matter how pretty our planner brains might find it.

This. Hydrology is a bitch.

[mhays]

Canals can be essentially lakes that are separate from normal water flow. It's not a terrible idea but it could be problematic on many fronts, from bugs and stagnation to potential environmental issues I'm not specifically aware of. Just taking land tends to be problematic (a street? developable area?).

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by mhays

Canals can be essentially lakes that are separate from normal water flow. It's not a terrible idea but it could be problematic on many fronts, from bugs and stagnation to potential environmental issues I'm not specifically aware of. Just taking land tends to be problematic (a street? developable area?).

This is true, and this is basically what the Amsterdam canals are. But that is a COMPLETELY different landscape and climate from Denver, and there would really be no functional purpose for that here other than to make a very expensive aesthetic piece. Also, when this is done, there is almost always a spillway upstream from the reservoir/canals in the event of flooding (Cherry Creek, as others have said, is known for HUGE flood potential)... and the creek is a flood control channel; there is no reason to create a separate spillway at enormous expense (if it's even feasible given our topography).

That said, the San Antonio Riverwalk is actually not a bad precedent for what could be done (though perhaps without the boats... our river descends too much to be that still without locks). This too was built as a flood control channel, and the restaurants and businesses along it all have insurance for when a flood happens. They are all still quite profitable, and it is in fact a national tourist destination.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

This. Hydrology is a bitch.

I may have to check into this Hydrology thing.

Originally Posted by mr1138

That said, the San Antonio Riverwalk is actually not a bad precedent for what could be done (though perhaps without the boats... our river descends too much to be that still without locks). This too was built as a flood control channel, and the restaurants and businesses along it all have insurance for when a flood happens. They are all still quite profitable, and it is in fact a national tourist destination.

Never been but the Riverwalk looks nice in photos. It's a focal point of their convention business also.

While a fabulous and fun concept I suspect the costs would be prohibitive, especially when you consider wong's hydrology thingy.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I may have to check into this Hydrology thing.



Never been but the Riverwalk looks nice in photos. It's a focal point of their convention business also.

While a fabulous and fun concept I suspect the costs would be prohibitive, especially when you consider wong's hydrology thingy.

Hydrology is super nerdy awesome! It's one of the things that is most regionally distinctive. Ours is not a question of storm surges, levees, and low-lying swamps (as is the case in Amsterdam); but rather of extreme differentials in topography and the ability to move (or control the movement of) water from its source up high in elevation, to where we want to use it in lower, drier areas.

At this point, I'd agree it doesn't make any sense to build or rebuild the ground floor of buildings way down by Cherry Creek San Antonio-style. But that's not to say that the pedestrian environment couldn't be fixed up, or that space couldn't be made for other kinds of vendors, like food trucks or carts. I do think there are ways this space could be better used while also embracing the hydrology just the way it is.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mr1138

Hydrology is super nerdy awesome! It's one of the things that is most regionally distinctive. Ours is not a question of storm surges, levees, and low-lying swamps (as is the case in Amsterdam); but rather of extreme differentials in topography and the ability to move (or control the movement of) water from its source up high in elevation, to where we want to use it in lower, drier areas.

At this point, I'd agree it doesn't make any sense to build or rebuild the ground floor of buildings way down by Cherry Creek San Antonio-style. But that's not to say that the pedestrian environment couldn't be fixed up, or that space couldn't be made for other kinds of vendors, like food trucks or carts. I do think there are ways this space could be better used while also embracing the hydrology just the way it is.

Awesome post. Thanks for the nice summary of hydrology that even a layman like me can understand (even if my comment was (only) partly tongue-in-cheek). Your 2nd part sounds nifty to me as well.

[Fritzdude]

Originally Posted by mr1138

Hydrology is super nerdy awesome! It's one of the things that is most regionally distinctive. Ours is not a question of storm surges, levees, and low-lying swamps (as is the case in Amsterdam); but rather of extreme differentials in topography and the ability to move (or control the movement of) water from its source up high in elevation, to where we want to use it in lower, drier areas.

At this point, I'd agree it doesn't make any sense to build or rebuild the ground floor of buildings way down by Cherry Creek San Antonio-style. But that's not to say that the pedestrian environment couldn't be fixed up, or that space couldn't be made for other kinds of vendors, like food trucks or carts. I do think there are ways this space could be better used while also embracing the hydrology just the way it is.

I appreciate your input. Since we're talking about Denver, the "extreme differentials in topography" is pretty much nullified since the water comes from the reservoirs in released amounts, which is controlled to minimize flooding. So, in effect; it's more like a domesticated creek.

I still think that if Chicago can totally reverse the direction of its river to suite their purposes and San Antonio can create a huge tourist attraction out of their waterway; one would assume that some of our brilliant engineers could make our little creek more friendly for development.

[mr1138]

^ I admit "extreme" may be a bit of hyperbole, especially when talking about Cherry Creek. I grew up in Boulder, so I'm thinking more of the water systems we use to get our drinking water from the high country to our taps in the city. A "canal" here in Colorado is more like a Roman aqueduct, and nothing like the kind of canal you would ship goods along. Kind of like how "river" means something very different here too.

If we're getting serious, it would of course be possible to install locks and dams (there already are some, but they could be beefed up) to slow the water and allow boats to sail both directions. But the river really does loose quite a bit of elevation. The San Antonio river looses around 20' as it flows through downtown; by contrast, CC looses around 100' from the Country Club to Confluence Park - a pretty big difference over a similar distance. I'd assume we're talking about a significant number of locks to make it work. And flooding really is a concern here. Topography already dictates that this is the best path for water to flow from southeast of Parker toward the Platte River, so there's nowhere for a spillway to go. And a flood of the magnitude that the creek has seen before would completely overtop any locks and dams installed along the creek. I'm just not sure it's worth it, or even necessary to enhance the space, but that's just my opinion.

Something like a simple farmers market, or even those art or book stands like you see along rivers in some European cities could work down there as well with very little upfront investment or construction.

[Cirrus]

Anything is doable, including this. It's just a question of whether the benefit to the city would be worth the costs. And it only would be if the creekfront became the anchor for a lot of high-density development.

Also reminder that Glendale is sort of planning to do this already on its stretch of Cherry Creek:


HOK architects

[ddvmke]

In addition to the hydrology concerns, I don't understand this argument for a livable canal/creek unless you're speaking specifically about the 3-4 block frontage on one side NE of the creek between Wynkoop and Larimer. Outside of that area, you have either existing city streets or the equivalent of five lanes of 40mph traffic that is Speer Blvd. running along the creek all the way to Country Club. As much as I'd love to see a water focused pedestrian corridor as a possibility, fighting the commuting public and development turning its back to the creek along Speer seems pretty insurmountable at the moment.

[comoneymaker]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Anything is doable, including this. It's just a question of whether the benefit to the city would be worth the costs. And it only would be if the creekfront became the anchor for a lot of high-density development.

Also reminder that Glendale is sort of planning to do this already on its stretch of Cherry Creek:


HOK architects

Consider this dead. It is as the stage now where it was a proposed skyscraper but a Burger King is going in the lot now instead. The hotel wanted a vast majority of the $175 mill. Fudge they offered that carpet crap whole $9mill. Developers and funder's both pulled the plug. They never had enough money in the first place. The most they will be able to do is something like what was built across the street with another hotel and a few bars and restaurants but much more toned down,and connect it to the area across the creek.

Plus if it actually got to near construction phase you would have tons of NIMBYS out there because that park is actually pretty packed in the summer. Hell probably the most packed per sq ft of any other park in the state.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by ddvmke

In addition to the hydrology concerns, I don't understand this argument for a livable canal/creek unless you're speaking specifically about the 3-4 block frontage on one side NE of the creek between Wynkoop and Larimer. Outside of that area, you have either existing city streets or the equivalent of five lanes of 40mph traffic that is Speer Blvd. running along the creek all the way to Country Club. As much as I'd love to see a water focused pedestrian corridor as a possibility, fighting the commuting public and development turning its back to the creek along Speer seems pretty insurmountable at the moment.

I can't speak for everyone else, but I certainly envision it as being just the stretch of the creek from Confluence Park to Bell Park. It would be great if Bell Park could be enlarged and fixed up as we saw in the Bell Tower/pre-recession Auraria Master Plan renderings. A markets success or failure would determine if it could expand further upstream, but I agree that the fundamental character changes once the creek ends up in the Speer Blvd median. Better for any pedestrian activity to be up on the street/sidewalk along the edge of the GT, if you ask me.

One last point about the hydrology thing; I don't think it makes much of a difference exactly how the water functions. Human users of the water itself (i.e. people riding a boat or gondola) are always a negligible part of what makes a good pedestrian canal work. The water is really more about ambiance than functionality, and all the real activity comes from people on foot. Simply making the creek better for tubing might add just as much ambiance and activity as some expensive scheme to have San Antonio-style boat rides. And I don't think there necessarily needs to be any more real estate development potential than there already is in order to put in something like a farmers or book market.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by bcp

What's a book?

Lol. Fair point. Books might not exactly scream "we're a modern city!" Though little free libraries seem to be becoming increasingly popular with the local hipsters.

For those who like visuals, this is what I'm talking about. Just some simple wood boxes that the vendors can lock up and come and go from as they please.



Amsterdam also has its floating flower market.


I also happen to love European market-culture, with its entrepreneurial culture of independent vendors who come and go. Which I get is something that Americans have a harder time with.

[comoneymaker]

For those of you with good camera's and drone's, I found a great place to take some shots. The grass field off Alameda and Havana. Maybe you can ask the fire station to let you out their back door to get on the other side of the fence.

Amazing view with the mountain behind downtown. Really probably the best spot in Denver especially around sunset. You can get some amazing shots.

Downtown stands out a lot more than this though.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7079308,...JKY4_v8QGgAj15roxkJeA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

This. Hydrology is a bitch.

To an extent. Bringing up Amsterdam's canals (or the image I had in my mind, the Chicago River) is a bit of a double-edged sword here because they are hydrologically very different from a runoff stream.

That does not mean there aren't ways to mitigate hydrological effects. For example, if flooding is seasonal and reasonably predictable, then it follows that you can essentially treat your creekbed as a 25 cfs stream with bioswale capacity that brings it up to the 30k cfs it hits in peak flood season. Plus, well-designed bioswales are quite pretty -- and isn't the creek in Speer Boulevard's median for much of its course already anyway?

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by comoneymaker

For those of you with good camera's and drone's, I found a great place to take some shots. The grass field off Alameda and Havana.

Cool location! I live somewhat close to there and have flown this. Super hard to see Denver with the drone (unless you have a fancy one with a zoom lens). I have been meaning to take my SLR out there though, it is a neat vantage point!

Also... GLASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!

GLASS GLASS GLASS GLASS!!! GGLLAASSSS!!!!!!!!!!

...and paneling and screening...



1144 Fifteenth

[LAM]

Originally Posted by comoneymaker

For those of you with good camera's and drone's, I found a great place to take some shots. The grass field off Alameda and Havana. Maybe you can ask the fire station to let you out their back door to get on the other side of the fence.

Amazing view with the mountain behind downtown. Really probably the best spot in Denver especially around sunset. You can get some amazing shots.

Downtown stands out a lot more than this though.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7079308,...JKY4_v8QGgAj15roxkJeA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Maybe the fire station will let you climb the hose drying tower.

[RyanD]

Well, I have a flying machine that can finally do this! Pumped.

[Agent Orange]

^ Great pic. Downtown really looks expansive when viewed from the southeast.

Side note, but I for one am going to sorely miss the soft, candle-like glow of sodium lamps once they've all been replaced by the harsh, alien LED bulbs. Your pic really highlights the contrast between the two.

[RyanD]

^

Yeah the LED's definitely have a different feel to them. Gone to a city that has mostly LED's now, I would say it looks cleaner but you don't have as much of a cozy feel.

It was a wonderful day today!


10-15-16 Capitol Hill by Ryan Dravitz, on Flickr


10-15-16 Golden Triangle by Ryan Dravitz, on Flickr