Reclaiming The Upper Montclair Watershed
We Must Jump In With Both Feet
Looking at the Lower Montclair Watershed still reminds me of the enormous gulf between “what could have been,” and “what is.”
From the ashes of the city’s so-called “process” for the Lower Watershed I’ll try to seize an opportunity to do far better in protecting and enhancing the Upper Montclair Watershed.
First, let me compliment staff from Denver Public Works and city Councilwoman Mary Beth Susman for their hard work at a recent series of public meetings for the Upper Montclair Watershed. I believe that the meetings on Feb. 23, March 1 and March 2 gave us the opportunity to be the shapers of the future of our watershed. A community-led effort can simultaneously lend support to and apply pressure on city staff and city council to fundamentally change Denver’s approach to managing its watersheds.
For those of us living in the Upper Montclair watershed, here are three specific objectives to consider:
Objective 1: We will treat our watershed much better.
Objective 2: We will take as much of the control of bettering the Upper Montclair Watershed as possible into our own hands, having learned from the experience on the Lower Watershed.
Objective 3: We will work with the city to create a new and far more participatory and collaborative template for the active and meaningful involvement of residents, businesses, workers, and visitors to each one of Denver’s watersheds, in the present and in the future, to improve those watersheds.
From April 1 forward – as city staff and consultants continue their watershed work – we the long-term “keepers” of the Upper Montclair Watershed must take a much more direct and active role in the master planning process. The following, I believe, is what we must do:
1. Divide the Upper Watershed into ”subwatersheds.” See accompanying maps of two such subwatersheds for examples.
2. For each subwatershed, a leadership team comprised of 3 – 5 residents would be responsible for completing, with city staff, consultants, and other interested citizens, the following:
• An inventory of current conditions
• An analysis of challenges and opportunities
• Three alternatives for meeting the challenges and taking advantage of the opportunities in their subwatershed,
• A consolidated single “mini-master-plan” for the subwatershed
• Specific recommendations for enhancing the condition of and functioning of the area in and around 17th and Colfax Avenues and Colorado Boulevard.
3. Another leadership team of 3 – 5 residents would combine the unified “mini-master plans,” and complete a unified Restoration Master Plan for the Upper Montclair Watershed, working with city staff, consultants, and other interested citizens.
The following are a few observations made and questions raised while I walked some of the subwatersheds last month. It was my way of test-driving my suggested methodology:
From the intersection 6th Avenue and Niagara Street extending along 6th Avenue from Magnolia to Oneida, to the intersection of 12th Avenue and Leyden Street (extending from Locust to Krameria):
• There are possibilities for mitigating flood risk within the 6th Avenue Parkway median.
• There are some serious questions and some opportunities along the southbound lanes of Monaco Street Parkway between 8th Avenue and 12th Avenue.
• In the 1100 block of two parallel streets (Locust and Leyden), the alley is lower than the back yards of houses along the Locust side, and the back yards of houses along the Leyden side are lower than the alley; that situation calls for serious cooperation, even though each lot is separately owned.
From the intersection of 12th Avenue and Leyden Street from Locust to Krameria, to the intersection of Colfax Avenue and Glencoe Street (along Glencoe Street halfway toward 16th Avenue):
• The electrical equipment at the former Xcel Energy substation at 14th Avenue and Kearney was recently removed. My inner voice screamed, “Don’t ever let this property serve any function other than parkland or open space!”
• The intersection of Jersey Street and Colfax Avenue, where floodwaters first enter Colfax, is an important landmark, calling for artistic/architectural recognition.
• The 1400 blocks of Krameria, Kearney, Jasmine, Jersey, and Ivy Streets are all significantly affected by potential flooding.
I see great opportunities for very positive changes, but only if we are willing to do the necessary hard work. Being an engineer, a planner, and a 36-year resident of the Montclair Watershed, I am of three minds. Each of those minds relies, in part on “magic” to respond to the flood risk in our watershed:
The engineer in me wants a “magic” pipe big enough to convey a 1 percent (100-year) flow through the watershed, but small enough to fit easily in our streets and alleys.
The planner in me wants all of the contiguous open space needed for a daylighted creek channel and adjacent greenway corridor, throughout the watershed, to “magically” create itself.
The 36-year resident in me wants to preserve all that I dearly love about this Park Hill/Montclair Creek community, while a “magic” and mostly invisible hazard mitigation system to safely convey 1 percent flood flows through the watershed shows up painlessly.
This seeming need for “magic” is one big reason why we all need to jump in with both feet to address our flood hazards. What needs to be done will be neither easy nor simple. The second big reason why we all need to jump in is to make sure that the city never treats any other watershed, including the Upper Montclair Watershed, like it is treating the Lower Montclair Watershed.
It truly is in our hands.
Brian Hyde is an expert in floodplain management and stream restoration. He wants your feedback at westerly_connect_brian@comcast.net or 720-939-6039. Past columns can be read at greaterparkhill.org.