Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Discusses Alameda Lane Repurposing on January 24, 2026

The Denver City Council Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a meeting on January 24, 2026, to discuss the proposed lane repurposing project on Alameda Avenue. The Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure (DOTI) presented an update on the project, including a shift from a full lane reduction to a partial lane reduction, citing concerns about traffic diversion onto side streets such as Virginia Avenue. Council members expressed strong opinions on safety, community engagement, transparency, and equity. No formal votes were taken, but the committee requested further data and a return presentation on February 18, 2026, with a preference for a demonstration of the full lane reduction.

Discussion Items

Project Background and Design Change

• DOTI staff (Molly and Amy) presented the project history, noting that the full lane repurposing design was originally developed in 2020–2021 but implementation was delayed due to funding and COVID-19. In 2024, after receiving a petition with 300 signatures opposing the project and a counter-petition with 175 signatures supporting it, DOTI reanalyzed data and found 58 crashes on Virginia Avenue, leading to concerns about side street diversion. This prompted a change to a partial lane reduction (two eastbound lanes, one westbound lane) to avoid pushing traffic onto Virginia, which has higher pedestrian and cyclist activity.
• Amy emphasized that pedestrian safety improvements (e.g., flashing beacons at Franklin, signal upgrades, ADA ramp upgrades at Emerson Street) are retained under both designs. The full reduction would have created a buffer for pedestrians but was not supported by documented crash reduction data; the partial design focuses on maintaining safety while mitigating diversion.
• Councilman Cashman questioned the timeline, noting that the decision to shift appeared to have been made in August 2024 before additional analysis, based on internal emails. Amy clarified that while initial analysis began in August, the final decision was made after further study through October 2024.

Council Member Concerns and Positions

• Councilman Alvidrez expressed support for the full lane reduction, emphasizing that crashes on Alameda are severe (255 severe crashes over five years) and that pedestrian safety should be prioritized. He noted that diversion of 5% traffic to Virginia could still increase risk, and he requested data comparing crash severity between Alameda and Virginia. He also criticized the length of time projects take and the lack of equity, noting that more dangerous sections of Alameda in his district (e.g., near Federal) have received less attention.
• Councilman Cashman strongly supported the full lane reduction, arguing that the stakeholder process had recommended it and that changing the design after a lobbyist (former DOTI employee) influenced the decision erodes public trust. He called for the full repurposing to be implemented first to test its effectiveness.
• Councilman Hines (in a wheelchair due to a bicycle crash) questioned how DOTI can achieve Vision Zero goals if pedestrian and cyclist improvements are scaled back. He noted that the decision to go with the partial design contradicts the stakeholder group's recommendation and undermines future engagement.
• Councilwoman Parady challenged the accuracy of DOTI's statements, pointing to an August 2024 email that indicated a clear decision before additional analysis. She also argued that DOTI's response to council letters mischaracterized community support: only 12% of the 300 petition signatures came from nearby neighborhoods, while the counter-petition of 1,100 signatures was 70% from the neighborhood. She rejected the framing of pedestrian safety as “good” for partial and “moderate” for full, stating that the serious risk on Alameda (255 severe crashes) outweighs potential minor increases on Virginia (58 crashes, mostly vehicular). She demanded evidence that a partial reduction provides comparable safety.
• Councilman Flynn recalled a previous road diet on Alameda in 2011–2012 that increased crashes, leading to its removal. He requested data on average daily traffic (ADT), which DOTI said dropped from over 20,000 to 15,000–17,000, and asked what differences make the current full reduction likely to succeed. He supported the demonstration project but preferred the full design first.
• Councilwoman Gilmore (District 11) expressed deep concern about trust, noting that a lobbyist who formerly worked for DOTI influenced the project. She stated that DOTI’s credibility is “nil” and urged the committee to continue questioning. She also highlighted equity issues, noting that most of the community engagement focused on Wash Park East while more dangerous areas (e.g., Montbello) lack resources.
• Councilwoman Morrah (Chair) asked why the focus was on driver concerns (congestion, diversion) rather than pedestrian safety, given Vision Zero goals. She also questioned the “engage vs. inform” slide, noting that DOTI did not clearly communicate to the community when they moved from engagement (co-creating designs) to informing (announcing decisions). She requested a timeline for the demonstration project and emphasized the need for a collective return to committee.

Demonstration Deployment

• DOTI announced plans to conduct a temporary demonstration deployment of one or both lane configurations over several months to gather real-world data on safety, congestion, and diversion. They will engage a community working group to design the demonstration metrics and expect to return to committee on February 18, 2026, with updates. The committee chair expressed a preference for demonstrating the full lane reduction first.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken; the meeting was informational and deliberative.
• DOTI committed to returning to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on February 18, 2026, with additional data requested by council members (crash severity comparison, ADT history, crash analysis from 2011–2012, and details of the demonstration project).
• DOTI will proceed with planning the demonstration deployment, engaging a community working group, and will report back on design and metrics.
• The committee chair stated a personal preference for demonstrating the full lane reduction, but no binding direction was given.
• Council members emphasized the need for transparency, accurate data, and restored public trust in DOTI’s processes.