Proposed City Park Esplanade Setback Modification Denver Rec Center
Proposed Rec Center with retail adjacent to Sullivan Entrance at East High Picture contains link to pdf explaining project
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 the Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (DPRAB) will hold a public hearing and invite general comments on a proposed amendment to Parkway Building Line Restriction Policy.
The proposed Parkway Building Line Restrictions Policy modifies the building line setbacks for City Park Esplanade to read as follows:
Street Name
City Park Esplanade.
Designated Section
Colfax Ave. (1500) to 17th Ave. (1700)
Building Line Setbacks
35’ east side,
25’ west Side
Click to access Esplanade_Setback-25ft_35ft-2.pdf
A copy of the Amendment to Parkways Building Line Restrictions, is on file with the Executive Director of Parks and Recreation. The public hearing will take place November 12, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. in the Wellington Webb Municipal Building located at 201 W Colfax Ave., 4th floor, room 4.F.6. Members of the general public are invited to speak during the hearing. Interested parties must arrive prior to the start of the meeting to sign-up to speak
Parkways Building Line Restrictions Page 7.5
This modification would amend City Park Esplanade parkway setback from 35’ to 25’ on the west side from Colfax to E. 16th Ave.
http://www.congressparkneighbors.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/City-Park-Esplanade_Parkway-Setback-Mods_PRAB-1082015.pdf
City-Park-Esplanade-Setback-Modification-Questions-and-Answers
Why amend the parkway setback?
- Per Zoning requirements, CDRC was required to provide ground floor activation on Colfax.
- Real Estate Dept. determined a 3,000 sq. ft. retail site was required for retail viability
- Because of rules related to the use of bond funds, the retail could not be located on the southwest corner
- Southeast corner is the only location that accommodates all requirements
Revised 10/21/2015
Click to access City-Park-Esplanade-Parkway-Setback-Mods-1.pdf
Click to access City-Park-Esplanade_Parkway-Setback-Mods_PRAB-1082015.pdf
As an architect who works around setbacks with a fair amount of regularity, I have to question the justifications presented. Why can’t the 35′ be kept and the retail grow deeper (to the north)? This would bring that space closer to the assumed parking field that will serve it. I don’t believe that the additional 10′ will detour vandalism any better than the currently required 35′ distance. The viability of this retail is already challenged in its presented location.