Denver Transportation Committee Discusses Alameda Lane Repurposing on January 21, 2026
Denver Transportation Committee Discusses Alameda Lane Repurposing on January 21, 2026
The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of Denver City Council met on January 21, 2026, to discuss the Alameda Lane Repurposing project. The primary focus was a proposed shift from a full lane reduction (one lane in each direction) to a partial lane reduction (two eastbound lanes, one westbound), driven by updated traffic analysis and community feedback. DOTI staff presented the project history, engagement efforts, and a plan for a demonstration deployment to test the designs.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Councilmember Alvidrez expressed strong support for the original full lane reduction, citing safety concerns for pedestrians and cyclists. She noted that 300 signatures on an opposition petition were not representative of the neighborhood and that a 1,100-signature petition in favor came overwhelmingly from the area. She emphasized that diversion concerns were overstated and that the city must prioritize safety over driver convenience.
- Councilmember Cashman supported the full lane reduction, stating it was crafted with ample community input. He questioned the timing of the change, noting that DOTI’s internal email from August 14, 2025, indicated a decision before additional analysis was complete. He called for transparency and urged DOTI to deploy the full lane design as a demonstration to rebuild trust.
- Councilmember Hines, who uses a wheelchair after being hit by a car while biking, questioned how DOTI can achieve Vision Zero goals while scaling back pedestrian and cyclist improvements. He also noted that a stakeholder process had recommended the full lane reduction and argued that DOTI’s subsequent analysis undermined that collaborative effort.
- Councilmember Parady criticized DOTI for inaccuracies in communications, including misrepresenting petition demographics and claiming no decision was made before August 14. He demanded that safety analysis, not political compromise, drive outcomes. He asked for evidence that a partial lane reduction would provide similar safety benefits as a full reduction.
- Councilmember Gilmore (Chair) raised equity concerns, noting that the most dangerous parts of Alameda are in her district, where families face highways daily. She feared that prioritizing the Wash Park segment over more hazardous areas sets a precedent of wealthy interests influencing decisions. She also questioned the focus on car diversion over pedestrian safety, given Vision Zero commitments.
- Councilmember Flint pointed out that a previous full lane repurposing on Alameda in 2011-2012 actually increased crashes. He requested hard data comparing that design to the current proposal and supported the idea of a demonstration but urged that it test the full lane reduction first.
Discussion Items
- Project History and Rationale for Change: Molly (DOTI) explained that the original full lane repurposing was designed to reduce crashes—primarily left-turn and sideswipe collisions—on Alameda. However, modeling showed that the full reduction could increase congestion and divert traffic to side streets, especially Virginia Avenue, which already has 58 crashes (including pedestrian and cyclist incidents) over four years. The partial lane repurposing retains two eastbound lanes and signal improvements to mitigate diversion while maintaining most pedestrian safety features (flashing beacons, ADA upgrades) on Alameda.
- Community Engagement: DOTI acknowledged a gap between initial engagement (2021 virtual open house, 2024 public meeting) and implementation. A petition with 300 signatures opposing the project and a counter-petition with 175 signatures in favor prompted a relook at data. DOTI stated that the decision to move to a partial reduction was made after internal analysis in August-October 2025, though an August 14 email from project staff indicated “clear direction” on a partial lane path. DOTI asserted that final approval came later, after additional crash analysis on Virginia.
- Trust and Transparency Concerns: Multiple council members criticized DOTI for eroding public trust, citing inaccurate statements, late communication of design changes, and the influence of a former DOTI employee turned lobbyist. They emphasized that safety data must be objective and not swayed by political pressure.
- Proposed Demonstration Deployment: Amy (DOTI) outlined plans to conduct a temporary demonstration of lane configurations (full or partial) over several months in 2026. The demonstration would collect real-world data on diversion, congestion, crashes, and pedestrian comfort. DOTI committed to engaging a community working group in designing the demo and to reporting results to the committee.
- Timeline and Next Steps: DOTI will develop the demonstration plan within a month, with the goal of presenting an update at the committee’s February 18, 2026, meeting. Permanent safety improvements on Alameda (flashing beacons, signal upgrades) will proceed concurrently.
Key Outcomes
- No formal vote was taken; the discussion was informational.
- DOTI agreed to return to committee on February 18, 2026, with a detailed plan for the demonstration deployment and to provide requested data, including crash comparisons between the 2011-2012 road diet and the current proposal.
- DOTI will engage a community work group to refine the demonstration’s scope, metrics, and implementation timeline.
- Councilmembers expressed a strong preference (though not binding) that the demonstration test the full lane reduction first to evaluate its effectiveness before considering compromises.
Meeting Transcript
Hey Denver, it's time for this bi-weekly meeting of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of Denver City Council. Join us for the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee starting now. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It was to maintain the safety and access for drivers, to reduce crashes along the corridor, to enhance safety and comfort for pedestrians and cyclists, to support transit services, and to support business access and activity. So this is a messy roll plot graphic of the partial lane repurposing, which is the design we have right now. And then below is the full lane repurposing. And I have a slide after this that kind of goes into more details. But just so you know, from a higher level, the partial lane repurposing has two lanes in the eastbound direction. This just shows one intersection and then one lane going westbound. And it also provides middle turnpockets. And why we decided to kind of change it to the two lanes and the eastbound while one lane keeping the reduction westbound is because our data showed that that was where the problem was. That was where the crashes were, mostly left turn crashes, side swipes, things like that. So the full lane repurposing was the original design. and you can see it's one lane in each direction with the middle having turned pockets. So what does that all mean? Here's more details into the project elements, what we're talking about, and where there's changes. So I want to highlight that a lot of the pedestrian safety improvements have been kept, no matter if we're talking about the partial lane repurposing or the full lane repurposing here. And that's important because we certainly don't want to, we want to, one of our goals is that pedestrian safety, certainly. Where you can see the difference, again, is that we would have to do some signal upgrades because of the, just the way the partial has the signals overhanging. And then those signal upgrades would cause reconstruction and ADA ramp upgrades at Emerson Street specifically. And then the partial lane repurposing also pulled out signal timing and protected left turns on Virginia and Downing to mitigate side street diversion. And let me explain kind of why that is. So the full repurposing, the original design that was published in March 2024, 2025, I'll get to our timeline, was really looking at Alameda specifically. And with Alameda, we felt that the full lane repurposing was the way to go to, again, address the crash picture, the turn crashes, and the side swipes. But then when the partial repurposing really dives into looking at the neighborhood from a more holistic point of view, because that full lane repurposing causes congestion along Alameda. And now that may not seem like an issue. And honestly, it's not until we look at what that causes. So the congestion causes side street diversion. And most of our side streets throughout the city can handle diversion, right? I think in this situation, when we're looking at Alameda, First Ave can handle it. We're not worried about Cedar was brought up, not worried about that. When we look and dive in, and we'll go into this, about where we are worried about the problem, it's specifically along Virginia Avenue. And that's the street that butts up against Wash Park, where we already have a lot of cyclists, a lot of pedestrians. We have some crashes that involve pedestrians and cyclists already there. And we really think the partial lane repurposing would not push cars onto Virginia, therefore not exacerbate, basically create another problem on a side street and would be better for the neighborhood as a whole. All right. I'm going to go into community engagement now because I think this has been a process that has forced us to evaluate how we do engagement. And I just want to explain, you know, in a perfect world how we see this happening. Often our world is not perfect, and I'll kind of use Alameda to talk through this. So, you know, at first we ask people to identify the problem. not the solution. And I think I've talked to all the council members I work with normally hear me say this because we want to know what the problem is and get at the root of that. There are things, not everyone clearly is an engineer, and so sometimes there's things in our toolbox that
openpublica.com