Your vision for Colorado Springs?

[iknowftbll]

Originally Posted by Maynerd

In 1970, Nevada was the main North-South corridor through town, as well as the center of commercial activity. People were skeptical that paving Academy Boulevard would lead to a change in the commercial/residential pattern in town. After all, where would these people come from?

In 1980, Powers was a two lane road that went from Platte to Barnes. There was nothing on it. The Northernmost part of town was pretty much Academy and Woodman. People were skeptical that expansion to the North (Briargate) and East (the entire Powers corridor) were economically viable. After all, where would these people come from?

Yes, it'd be great if we could lure some non-governmental jobs here first. But, skepticism about growing the population in Colorado Springs has never really proven to be accurate. Growth, like it or not, is what we do best.

Oh, I'm not at all skeptical of growth. But growth of 25% by 2020? I think that's a stretch. The city's growth slowed from 2000-2010 and still added nearly 60,000 people. That's a significant gain for a city this size, so even in a "slow" decade the city saw a lot of growth. And it continues to do so, adding nearly 24,000 people from 2010 to the most recent estimates. That brings Colorado Springs to around 440,000. That would've been significant growth for a 10 year run, but Colorado Springs did it in 3. So I'm well aware of the city's history of growth. But growth of 25% even off of the 2010 base estimate of 416,000 would put the city at 520,000 by 2020. I just don't see that happening. 2025 maybe.

I do think the patch of land we know as Banning Lewis will fill up eventually. It's almost inevitible. I am just not buying the estimates for how fast it will happen.

[CharlotteRJ]

I'd like to see some quality urban infill, but I'd also like to see newer neighborhoods built with the "walkability" factors in mind. Some developers are doing this, with alley access, and cottage homes, but almost everything they're building like this has tiny yards and isn't really reflective of what the desirable older neighborhoods are like. Look at Old North End. You have the houses close together, garages in the back, but they also have *yards* of various sizes. That's tricky, because having a garage in the back is good, but people want attached garages, and they don't want a driveway all the way across their back yard. But a smart builder/developer can do it.

With respect to public transportation being only for poor people... Maybe in a suburban sprawl town like this, but if you look at larger metros, riding public transportation is definitely not a sign of being poor. In many metro areas, a light rail or metro station is a focus for a hub of more dense development, higher property values, and high demand for space.

What do I think could work? I'd like to see a light rail corridor from downtown Springs up to Denver. I'd like that light rail corridor to have a few stations/hubs that could become centers for more "town center" type hubs. If it went in before Copper Ridge is fully planned or developed, or was concurrently developed, you'd put a small town center around that - "downtown" type development, with apartments above, that sort of thing.

Newer developments on the outside of town really need some commercial development mixed in, but then you have the NIMBY effect. There's a 7/11 going in right at Flying Horse, and the people there are peeved, even though it was planned before. But the sea of rooftops with no commercial at all is an outdated and unwieldy concept. People fuss about commercial, because technically speaking, it increases crime rates in that area. It doesn't actually increase crime rates for the houses, just for the business itself, but because we increasingly look at stats for certain zip codes or blocks, without considering what type of crime it is. You also have the NIMBY effect of multi family dwellings or town homes. People don't want them in the neighborhood. The income is usually a little lower - this in turn lowers the rankings of the schools, since those are very directly correlated to the average income of the residents in the areas, less so than to the quality of the school itself.

So, while people say they want walkability, that walkability affects crime rate maps and school rankings much more than it affects reality, but the maps and rankings are what people look at when they buy, so it brings down property values in many cases. But, at the same time, some older neighborhoods are highly desirable and have high property values. But, on the other other hand, if you look at Old North End, which has the highest values of any of the older neighborhoods, there are few commercial or multifamily units that are actually within the Steele school district area. So.... Complicated.

[iknowftbll]

I'm glad someone renewed this thread. I've been on the brink of starting a similar thread for Colorado's cities that do not have their own sub-forum, though I had a lot of thoughts on Colorado Springs in specific so it's nice to have a place to put them.

First, I think Colorado Springs is very much an unpolished gem. There is a lot of good about it, but there is so much potential left untapped it is almost painful to think about.

My vision for the city would involve bringing out this potential, specifically downtown. Some of my ideas may not be very popular or worse yet, practical even. The way I see it, vision does not have to be limited, though. Vision aims high, and when we lay forth an ambitious vision we have a high mark to aim for. Next comes filtering out and doing that which is practical and in doing so make the city a better place.

So in no particular order, here are some thoughts:

Growth and Population:

A few days ago I mentioned being skeptical of 25% growth by 2020. But when you sit down and actually do the math, Colorado Springs is on pace to come pretty close. Given its current pace of growth, the city could conceivably reach 500,000 by the 2020 census. My vision is a city of 560,000-600,000 people with a metro area of about 1,000,000. This is not significantly larger than the current version of the city, so implied in my vision is a leveling off of growth. Realistically if Colorado Springs filled up its undeveloped land it probably would surpass the 600,000 mark.

Downtown:

I would like to see the city focus more of its energy on revitalizing downtown. The city has a nice area downtown, but it is small and underserved. I shared an idea to piggy-back off of the C4C initiative which called for a museum district downtown. I believe this would bring a lot of 2nd order commerce to that area of the city, with restaurants and coffee shops as well as retailers vying for space. It would be vital to introduce a healthy amount of residential units into the area as well, so mixed-use facilities with retail on the ground floor and residential on the 2nd floors and higher.

In addition to the museum district, I think the city should build an outdoor mall. The model is Union Square in San Francisco. A large Macy's or Nordstrom would anchor it, with smaller stores and restaurants supplementing. The key is making it outdoor and integrated with the city streets (ie: NOT a Horton Plaza in San Diego). This enhances businesses outside the "mall" while still providing the convenience of centralized location.

Along with the C4C initiative is the proposal for a mixed-use stadium. I think this is an important development and the city should actively woo the Sky Sox to reconsider moving downtown. Much debate has gone into this in other threads, so I'll leave it at that for now.

To the immediate south of downtown is a blighted and partially blighted area of land I would develop into a theme park. If the land available was not extensive enough this may be limited to a water park, but the basic idea of a theme park remains unchanged.

Downtown needs more than tourism and retail, though. I would like to see the city actively woo corporations and small businesses to relocate to the city from other cities or other parts of town, even. This would require greater facilities to accommodate office spaces. With a limited number of city blocks available, this implies building upward. I am not suggesting a bunch of 50+ story towers, but half a dozen or so towers ranging from 25-30 stories of commercial space and maybe some residential towers of 18-22 stories as well.

Transportation:

Extending light rail from Denver is job #1. Downtown would be the southernmost station for the time being, with future plans as ambitious as a line running from Pueblo to Fort Collins. Light rail from downtown to the Colorado Springs airport is another project I'd like to see become a priority. (Demand for this is probably pretty low right now, but under a revitalized downtown with more commerce and residential units, it may not be such a far-fetched idea in the future.)

I would greatly enhance the highway system, with a spur off of I-25 splitting off in the Fountain/Security-Widefield area, veering NE, and eventually running parallel to I-25. This would rejoin I-25 north of the Air Force Academy and form a "loop" around the city. An additional spur would upgrade Highway 24 to interstate standards from this hypothetical loop to I-70 in/around Limon. Lastly one additional spur would continue north and parallel to I-25 until connecting with E-470 in the SE Denver area. Between light rail and, two N/S corridors, and an upgraded route to the state's major E/W corridor, traffic issues in the central Front Range would be greatly alleviated, even under higher population numbers.

An E/W expressway through the center of the city would be nice, too.

Recruiting airlines and offering competitive gate fees is another vital piece of my vision. The Colorado Springs airport is an easy "in and out" and has a lot of potential. It can easily be expanded if the demand arose, but for now the facility is underused. The city can change this by making downtown a more viable location for commerce and tying it to the airport via light rail. The pieces all have to work together, though. You create demand for a busier airport by making the whole community a more viable place for airlines to serve.

So those are some thoughts for now. It sounds so easy when its vision, but if it were easy in reality, every city would be doing it.

[otowi]

I have my doubts that there is enough water to sustainably support that kind of growth. If it were only COS, then sure, but when we're growing, so is every one else around us, usually, and water is limited. Las Vegas and Phoenix only can do it because they take their water from somewhere else, but that isn't guaranteed to last for ever either and they could bust at any time as a result.

I think growth isn't necessarily a good thing, especially just for its own sake, and especially while it leads to blight. Most of these ideas have been batted around for years and I think some of them will eventually happen. I do think bringing quality jobs is of course a good idea, but I think we have enough sprawl - if we're going to grow, I want revitalization of what already exists instead, personally. I want whatever growing we do to be able to be sustainable for 100's or 1000's of years environmentally with as much independence as we can get - so we're not just eating up everything now and leaving hard solutions for future generations.

[Jalhop]

Originally Posted by otowi

I want whatever growing we do to be able to be sustainable for 100's or 1000's of years environmentally with as much independence as we can get - so we're not just eating up everything now and leaving hard solutions for future generations.

If only people like you got voted into office!

I support negative population growth. Much of the the world could be a paradise if we could drop the world population down (slowly, by attrition) by a few billion people and then stay there. Not going to happen until nature forces the issue!

If the city must significantly grow in population then it should become more dense. Otherwise house prices shoot up, sprawl runs amok, and commute times and traffic gets worse, bad in the long run. Density improves walkability, and comes easiest by subdividing lots. Ideally the zoning would allow on the new lots only townhomes, for good density while retaining some yard space. There should be a sunset clauses put on existing houses (like how national parks add land), so they can eventually be bought by the city and replaced with townhomes.

Instead of light rail I'd want ski-area type gondolas crisscrossing the city, heated/cooled and poles put in people's yards (leased space, like for windmills). Such system could be put up faster, with many more lines, and get people between points faster. Won't happen though, due to ugliness I guess.

No matter how population growth is handled, a city that is already big usually becomes worse overall, not better. The typical way that growth is handled, with 50-year build outs of light rail focused on the center of the city, limited increase of density, and widening of freeways, is a disaster.

[Mike from back east]

Iknowftbll wrote: "....I think Colorado Springs is very much an unpolished gem...."

Sir, you are being very kind to my city; the short definition of "unpolished gem" is tird, or is it turd....

The disaster that Jalhop refers to is here to stay, there won't be money to fix things, there won't be money to add mass transit or rebuild our city's mobility infrastructure - not unless we massively tax the people and that isn't going to happen.

What we can do is take some measures to ease the existing problems. To me that means a commercial node within a mile or so of each neighborhood, like a supermarket, drugstore, coffee shop / eateries, etc, ... essentials ... nearby ... no need to get on I-25. It means sufficient density to make these hubs commercially viable.

It means NOT building high-rise office towers in downtown Colorado Springs that create burdensome hub and spoke commuting patterns. Working from home will help a lot but even our high speed internet lines are failing to keep up with some nations that have more advanced connectivity infrastructure in place.

I've spoke to hub/spoke issues before and think our city's linear layout along I-25 allows us a chance to avoid the worst of the hub/spoke scheme that is such a disaster in most large cities.

Look along Voyager Blvd on the north side of town, from Research Pkwy up to North Gate Blvd. There are large office buildings along various stretches of that road, and immediately east of them are affordable homes that are a short walk, bicycle ride or car commute, distances of a few hundred yards to 1-2 miles. This is vastly different from the 20-40 mile oneway commutes most of us dealt with in major cities we fled.

To minimize future disasters our city should infill with residential properties and put large commercial structures OUTSIDE of the city core, along Voyager, I-25, Powers Blvd where there is nearby housing which allows people to live where they work and not suck up our money building ever more lanes on I-25 or trying to build a subway here.

Given constraints of money and political will, I foresee future development as dense compact housing areas with a centrally focused commercial nodes to limit driving for essentials. On top of that, there can be buses running via major roads to connect commercial nodes along the roadways and to the commercial employment centers.

[iknowftbll]

Mike, you always raise good points. Keep in mind, the vision I have is exactly that: Vision. It is little more than me imagining what I would do (within reason, ie: notice I didn't say something like "bring in an NFL team...") if I had the power to design the Colorado Springs of 10 years from now.

Also, I am far removed from Colorado Springs and you're still there. I think "turd" is a bit brutal, but I've not been there is a few years. Maybe the place has nose-dived. I don't think that is an accurate assessment, but others may disagree.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

Mike, you always raise good points. Keep in mind, the vision I have is exactly that: Vision. It is little more than me imagining what I would do (within reason, ie: notice I didn't say something like "bring in an NFL team...") if I had the power to design the Colorado Springs of 10 years from now.

Also, I am far removed from Colorado Springs and you're still there. I think "turd" is a bit brutal, but I've not been there is a few years. Maybe the place has nose-dived. I don't think that is an accurate assessment, but others may disagree.

Thank you. There's a bit of hype and frustration in my remarks, the hopelessness of our political situation that dooms us all.

[iknowftbll]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

Thank you. There's a bit of hype and frustration in my remarks, the hopelessness of our political situation that dooms us all.

Don't look now but it doesn't get any better at the state or federal level.