Being a glass-half-full type, I am pleased at the recent news that a deal is imminent for the redevelopment of downtown Denver’s Union Station. The inevitable compromises that occur when a big, complex project moves from vision to reality mean many of the principles and priorities of the 2003 Master Plan have been changed. However, the fact that development is occurring and isn’t dependent upon complex underground infrastructure may offer opportunity.
Perhaps the biggest change is the decision not to bury heavy rail, currently at grade behind the station. Doing so was an important principle of the Master Plan because opening 18th Street to the Platte Valley was key to realizing the connections to and access around the site. Based on safety concerns raised in a recent letter from the Federal Railroad Administration, developers, RTD and other public agencies quickly abandoned the strategy.
That this information came so late in the five-year planning process and was so readily accepted by the transit agency, the city and the developer raises questions. Is the decision irreversible, or simply a more convenient, much cheaper, easier to engineer option?
Who is the visionary, informed, empowered and thoroughly engaged advocate for the vital components of the development that aren’t transportation- based?
Denver city government has never been fully absorbed in the project. Early planning occurred at the end of Mayor Wellington Webb’s 12-year tenure after feisty planning director Jennifer Moulton became ill. The Hickenlooper administration has never dedicated an experienced full-time person to the project until very recently, when savvy planning director Peter Park got involved.
I hope the naivete about the so-called safety issues raised by the feds and the fact the city’s recent $550 million infrastructure bond didn’t include one dime for Union Station don’t reflect the project’s importance to the mayor’s agenda.
Other substantial changes to the master plan include moving the three light rail lines approximately three blocks west of the terminal to the Consolidated Main Line; adding two heavy rail tracks, for a total of eight, at a substantial cost increase; opening 16th Street from Wynkoop to Wewatta streets to vehicular traffic; and reducing on-site development from 1.5 million square feet to 1.35 million square feet.
Together these changes will have a substantial impact on another critical principle of the original vision: activating the historic train station. Truth is, the train room is too small to ever resemble New York’s lively Grand Central or Washington’s Union Station. On the other hand, there is not much reason for travelers to ever enter this train room since most access is to the north, south or west of the station.
The new plan offers scant definition of quality public space, no clear hierarchy of places for people to assemble. The site has become primarily about transportation and the flexibility for future expansion. Through train service (from south to north) can occur at the main line. Light rail can be added to meet future demand or system expansion.
And perhaps when the transportation hub becomes busier, the people energy envisioned in the early master plan will occur. Clearly activity, energy, density and urbanity are moving west to Denver’s historic center. The catalyst is the more buildable development program for Union Station.
There are too many unattended details about how the new plan will be implemented to honor human scale, physical connections, quality materials and construction details.
A knowledgeable advocate for the public realm, for quality and attention to detail must participate as a key to the process from design through construction. The city must make its approvals conditional on these principles.
Peter Park’s work has just begun.
Susan Barnes-Gelt (bs13@qwest.net) served eight years on the Denver City Council and was an aide to former Denver Mayor Federico Peña. Her column appears twice a month.
