A section of Alameda Avenue slated for a controversial may span only 10 blocks, but its impact has stretched across Denver — and all the way to Mayor Mike Johnston’s desk.
The plan started as a straightforward lane-reduction project and an attempt to improve safety along the corridor. In recent months, it has turned into a broader debate about Johnston’s priorities, the influence of wealth in city politics, and how to make all of Denver’s streets safer and less congested for drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.
Neighbors of Alameda, a major thoroughfare that’s one of the most dangerous roads in Denver, have been lobbying the city for years to make changes along the section from Pearl to Franklin streets. They say crashes are frequent, cars have plowed into front yards and pedestrians are often put in dangerous situations.
The developed an initial plan that would have eliminated one of the street’s four lanes, leaving one travel lane in each direction and one for turns in the middle. The redesigned three-lane road would have had more space for pedestrians and reduced the number of cars spanning the road at one time. But months after DOTI sent a notice announcing construction would begin in 2025, city officials .
Instead of reducing the lanes, they would keep all four but convert some spans into “turn pockets” for drivers turning left. Supporters of that plan said it would result in less congestion for cars while still making the road safer. Opponents said the new design appeared less safe for pedestrians than the original version.
When it came to light that the changes were happening in part because of complaints originating with Jill Anschutz, the daughter-in-law of , the revelation triggered a maelstrom of , the resignation of a member of the and, late last month, a formal .
“Folks in this community want the street to be safer,” said Allen Cowgill, a member of the city’s who opposes the new design. “Folks outside the community feel like they’re starting to see a pattern of lifting certain voices over others.”
While DOTI makes decisions around infrastructure projects, bike and pedestrian advocates like Cowgill have criticized Johnston himself — suggesting the outcome is proof he operates the city unfairly.
In an interview Friday with The Denver Post, Johnston said the idea that wealthy residents influenced this process was a “totally false narrative.” The decision came from the experts at DOTI, he said.
“I think folks that are upset about it, they’re trying to create a conspiracy that never existed,” he said. “(The Anschutz name) carries no more weight than Smith or the Jones name or any other constituent we have.”
How the project planning has unfolded
DOTI began working to improve safety on Alameda in 2018. After tweaking one intersection along the road — at Corona Street — the department’s engineers studied the resulting data and created the initial lane-reduction design.
In 2024, officials unveiled the initial design to a group of about 50 neighbors of the corridor, said Molly Lanphier
“I was in attendance, and the result was very mixed. Some people were very much in favor of the full reduction and some people were not,” she said.
Then, in April 2025, the department sent out flyers to residents along the affected section of Alameda, notifying them that construction would begin in the summer.
By June, a group led by Jill Anschutz had contacted the city with complaints. Her home is just off Alameda, a few blocks outside the project zone.
Her group, called , was concerned that the full lane reduction would cause worse traffic congestion on Alameda and push cars onto side streets, like Virginia Avenue. The group hired Jason Gallardo, who used to be the deputy chief of staff for DOTI, as a lobbyist.
In July, Act for Alameda submitted a petition with about 300 people signed on to oppose the project. In August, another group, called , submitted a petition supporting the project, with about 175 signatures, according to city officials. Hundreds more have registered in both opposition and support in the months since, including in December, when the submitted another petition of support for the original design from 1,030 people.
Asked how he evaluates warring factions like these, Johnston said it was the nature of government work.
“Some folks want fewer cars on Alameda, some folks want more,” he said. “Thatap a valuable debate to have, but it doesn’t make either answer wrong. They’re just competing values we have to manage.”
He added that his administration generally considers the views of both those who are most vocal about projects as well as those who may not have spoken out.
“If you are someone that lives in East Denver and works in West Denver and you commute on Alameda,” he said, “you also have a say in what happens on that street.”
In November, DOTI sent out a , which called for repurposing only one of the westbound lanes, rather than eliminating any lane entirely.
The city now has to conduct a full redesign to incorporate those elements. The new expected construction timeline is from this coming November to September 2027.
The new design will cost an extra $100,000, said DOTI spokeswoman Nancy Kuhn.
The city says the new plan will still reduce the potential for crashes and improve pedestrian safety, and it won’t cause as much congestion or side-street diversion as the original design.
Some pedestrian improvements from the original design, like flashing light crosswalks at Franklin Street, are still set to be installed early this year.
The big picture: latest flashpoint
The story of Alameda Avenue is just the latest chapter in a series of high-profile transportation decisions that transit advocates have scrutinized.
The city’s cancellation of part of and its removal of in Lower Downtown also caused headaches for Johnston, with the city’s bike advocates criticizing the decisions.
There was never a plan for Alameda to have a bike lane, but some of the same advocates have pointed to it as an example of deprioritizing safety.
Cowgill, the transportation advisory board member, says he thinks the focus on Alameda is due to “pent-up anger” from people who believe the mayor “just doesn’t really care about street safety.”
Johnston says transportation safety is a “huge priority” for his administration, adding that residents have strong, opposing opinions on how to accomplish that.
Cowgill said the other reason the situation had gotten so much attention was that the involvement of the Anschutz family made it seem as if the city’s community engagement process wasn’t as meaningful as residents thought.
“I think itap also resonating with folks because it sincerely does — despite the statements from the administration to the contrary — it does feel like they listened to the richest family in the state,” he said. “I think the Anschutz name absolutely plays a really big part into it. I think thatap why itap gotten so much notoriety around the city.”
Jaime Lewis, who was formerly on the advisory board, resigned over the project change.
“I was recognizing a trend by DOTI to change plans at the last minute, though there had been an exhaustive community outreach and the plans were at the 12th hour,” he said.
Johnston said that even with all the critical media coverage, he saw the situation as mostly isolated to the Washington Park neighborhoods. He said the project hadn’t come up in other community meetings or constituent conversations.
The city is moving forward on the partial lane reduction despite ongoing protests from surrounding neighborhood organizations. The East Washington Park Registered Neighborhood Organization also wrote a letter to the mayor’s office and DOTI opposing the changes. The West Washington Park RNO is now asking the city to conduct an additional safety assessment on the new design.
Christina Noto, the president of the West Washington Park RNO, says her group is frustrated with the process, but at this point it just wants whatever is safest.
“I think the pay-to-play in politics is a problem,” she said. “But moving forward, what we all want is just the safest outcome for Alameda.”
Eight members of the City Council Dec. 30 that asked the mayor’s office to restore the original design.
“During a time of eroding faith in government, it is important that representatives of the city be impeccable with their word and transparent in their dealings,” they wrote.
City officials say they do plan to conduct more safety analyses, but they’re moving forward with the new design. DOTI officials are set to give a presentation on the Alameda project to a council committee Wednesday.
“We’re still exploring what approach we are going to take in terms of additional safety analysis,” Kuhn said.
Johnston says he plans to stay out of DOTI’s process.
“I think thatap the way these decisions are meant to be made,” he said. “These should not be political decisions. They should be planning decisions, and so I support them — but I trust the experts on the ground.”
Cowgill said he thought there was still time to reverse course.
“Even if they’re saying itap final now, it doesn’t mean itap final. They have the ability to go back and change it,” he said. “At the end of the day, nothing is really final until shovels are in the ground.”
