Skip navigation

Golden Triangle Zoning and Design

 

Translate This Page

 

Latest News: Feedback on preliminary zoning framework

City planners received valuable community input on the proposed preliminary zoning framework though the online survey offered through the virtual open house, and from individual comments and continued coordination with the advisory committee. Data is available for review below along with a project overview. Additional opportunities for public input on a revised zoning framework will be available this fall. 

Online Survey Results 

Responses

Respondents were asked to select an answer from 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Successful”, 3 being “Somewhat Successful”, and 5 being “Very Successful”

  • 1 -  Not Successful - 18%
  • 2 - 8%
  • 3 - Somewhat Successful - 21%
  • 4 - 26%
  • 5 - Very Successful - 27%

Total Responses: 131

Chart showing survey results
 

Respondents were asked to select an answer from 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Successful”, 3 being “Somewhat Successful”, and 5 being “Very Successful”

  • 1 - Not Successful - 20%
  • 2 - 8%
  • 3 - Somewhat Successful - 23% 
  • 4 - 23%
  • 5 - Very Successful - 26%

Total Responses: 133

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

Respondents were asked to select an answer from 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Successful”, 3 being “Somewhat Successful”, and 5 being “Very Successful”

  • 1 -  Not Successful - 18%
  • 2 - 7%
  • 3 - Somewhat Successful - 19%
  • 4 - 24%
  • 5 - Very Successful - 33%

Total Responses: 131

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

Respondents were asked to select an answer from 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Successful”, 3 being “Somewhat Successful”, and 5 being “Very Successful”

  • 1 -  Not Successful - 14%
  • 2 - 6%
  • 3 - Somewhat Successful - 18%
  • 4 - 25%
  • 5 - Very Successful - 38%

Total Responses: 131

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

Respondents were asked to select an answer from 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Successful”, 3 being “Somewhat Successful”, and 5 being “Very Successful”

  • 1 -  Not Successful - 19%
  • 2 - 4%
  • 3 - Somewhat Successful - 29%
  • 4 - 23%
  • 5 - Very Successful - 25%

Total Responses: 121

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 67% - Yes, both should apply
  • 9% - Yes, but only higher street level standards
  • 7% - Yes, but only more slender
  • 18% - No, neither should apply

Total Responses: 135 

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 61% - Yes, I agree
  • 33% - No, I don’t agree
  • 6% - No opinion

Total Responses: 138

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 50% - Yes, across the entire street-facing side
  • 27% - Yes, only across part of the street-facing side
  • 16% - No, an upper story setback should not be required
  • 8% - No opinion

Total Responses: 128

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 55% - Yes, across the entire street-facing side
  • 24% - Yes, only across part of the street-facing side
  • 16% - No, non-residential uses should not be required
  • 5% - No opinion

Total Responses: 128

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 59% - Yes, open space should be provided
  • 31% - No, open space should not be required
  • 10% - No opinion

Total Responses: 127

Chart showing survey results
 

Responses

  • 57% - Yes, make it a really large bonus
  • 24% - Yes, but only make it a small bonus
  • 13% - No, a bonus should not be provided
  • 5% - No opinion

Total Responses: 128

Chart showing survey results
 
 

Read Zoning Framework and Alternatives Interim Report

City planners have completed the Zoning Framework and Alternatives Interim Report, which describes a range of zoning and design tools to address the objectives articulated in the Golden Triangle Neighborhood Plan. The report also presents a preliminary evaluation of these alternatives based on public feedback gathered thus far. A future Preferred Strategy Interim Report, to be released in early to mid-2020, will summarize the final approach to revise  zoning and design guidelines.


Advisory Committee

An advisory committee of 16 individuals representing a range of community interests will assist CPD in evaluating alternative zoning and design strategies. Additional community input will be incorporated through a series of open houses and other opportunities for comment.

Committee meetings are open to the public for viewing and listening, but public comments are not taken during the meetings. Meeting information will be posted here and materials will be added after the fact. 

Next meeting
3-5 p.m., Thursday, November 19
Virtual meeting via Zoom

How to join meeting online:

Meeting ID: 849 0244 1120
Passcode: 366920

How to join meeting by phone:

Dial 720-928-9299, enter meeting ID: 849 0244 1120

Name Affiliation
Kristy Bassuener Denver Art Museum
Chris Carvell Architect
Pete Dikeou Property owner
Charlie Hunt Resident
Scott Johnson

Lennar Multifamily Communities

Rhonda Knop Property owner
Anne Lindsey Property owner
Laura Liska Resident
Chris Hinds City Council Member, District 10
Chris Parezo Landscape architect/urban designer
Adam Perkins Downtown Denver Partnership
Cherry Rohe Artist, resident
Jeff Samet Commercial real estate, resident
Brent Snyder Property owner
Susan Stanton Denver Planning Board
Byron Zick Architect, property owner

Advisory Committee Meeting #1
3-5 p.m., Thursday, May 16
Webb Municipal Building, Room 4.I4
201 W. Colfax Ave., Denver 

Advisory Committee Meeting #2
3-5 p.m., Thursday, July 18
Webb Municipal Building, Room 4.F.6
201 W. Colfax Ave., Denver 

Advisory Committee Meeting #3
3-5 p.m., Thursday, September 12
Webb Municipal Building, Room 4.F.6
201 W. Colfax Ave., Denver 

Advisory Committee Meeting #4
3-5 p.m., November 21
Webb Municipal Building, Room 4.F6
201 W. Colfax Ave., Denver

Advisory Committee Meeting #5
3-5 p.m., Thursday, January 16, 2020
Webb Municipal Building, Room 4F6
201 W. Colfax Ave., Denver 

Advisory Committee Meeting #6
3-5 p.m., Thursday, March 19, 2020
Virtual meeting via Skype

Advisory Committee Meeting #7
3-5 p.m., Thursday, May 21, 2020
Virtual WebEx Event

Advisory Committee Meeting #8
3-5 p.m., Thursday, June 18, 2020
Virtual WebEx Event

Advisory Committee Meeting #9
3-5 p.m., Thursday, July 16
Virtual WebEx Event

Advisory Committee Meeting #10
3-5 p.m., Thursday, August 20
Virtual Zoom Event

Advisory Committee Meeting #11
3-5 p.m., Thursday, September 17
Virtual Zoom Event


Project Archive

Community Open House #1 
5-7 p.m., Wednesday, June 12
Denver Community Credit Union, 3rd floor

Community Open House #2
5-7 p.m., September 25, 2019
Denver Community Credit Union
1041 Acoma Street, 3rd Floor

Community Open House #3 
Virtual open house held over several weeks in March-April 2019

 


Past Survey Results

Kickoff Survey: To launch the Golden Triangle Zoning and Design project, we asked about new and existint buildings, street character, and neighborhood needs in the Golden Triangle. Below are what we heard from attendees at the first neighborhood workshop and respodents to our online survey.  

Question: "I feel like the neighborhood currently has . . ."
Rate from disagree to agree

Respondents: 131

Responses, shown in average value from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree):

  • Comfortably sized buildings: 3.4 
  • Active and engaging businesses: 3.4
  • High-quality design/architecture: 3.1
  • Places where community can gather: 3
  • Pleasant streets and sidewalks: 2.7
  • Range of housing options for everyone: 2.1

graphic showing survey results

Question: "I wish the neighborhood had more . . . "
Agree or disagree 

Respondents: 131

Responses, in percentage of respondents agreeing

  • Places to shop, eat and drink: 84 percent
  • Places to sit and gather: 78 percent
  • Places to live: 47 percent
  • Places to work: 39 percent
  • Places to park a car: 30 percent

graphic showing survey results 

Question: "If new tall buildings are built in the neighborhood, they should . . . "
Agree or disagree

Respondents: 131

Responses, in percentage of respondents agreeing

  • Provide benefits (e.g., housing, open space): 60 percent
  • Preserve an existing smaller building: 39 percent
  • I love tall buildings, no special requirements: 39 percent
  • Get smaller as they get taller: 26 percent
  • I don't really like tall buildings: 23 percent
  • Only be located in specific areas: 21 percent

graphic showing survey results

Question: Consider how new buildings should be used in the Golden Triangle. Which of these goals is most important to you?
Rate from Not Important to Very Important

Respondents: 131

Responses, shown in average value from 1 (Not Important) to 5 (Very Important):

  • Variety of uses (e.g. housing, offices, retail): 4
  • Varied housing options (for families, seniors, professionals): 3.7
  • Require less parking (lots of transit nearby): 3.2
  • Design some streets around a theme/activity (e.g. arts walk): 3.1

graphic showing survey results 

Question: Consider future buildings that might be built in the Golden Triangle. Which of these goals are most important to you?
Rate from Not Important to Very Important

Respondents: 131

Responses, shown in average value from 1 (Not Important) to 5 (Very Important):

  • Encourage a range of building shapes and sizes: 3.7
  • Try to protect/reuse buildings instead of building new: 3.4
  • Ensure new buildings respect surrounding scale: 3.3
  • Continue to allow taller buildings: 3.2

graphic showing survey results 

Question: Consider how streets should look and feel in the Golden Triangle. Which of these goals are most important to you?
Rate from Not Important to Very Important

Respondents: 101

Responses, shown in average value from 1 (Not Important) to 5 (Very Important):

  • Make sidewalks active and engaging: 4.8
  • Encourage small-scale public plazas and gathering spaces: 4
  • Make parking lots and parking structures less noticeable: 3.8
  • Ensure buildings feel comfortably sized next to pedestrians: 3.1

graphic showing survey results 


Question: Would you support this strategy: Use a range of building forms that are tailored to different conditions to encourage a mix of project types and sizes"

Answers: Chosen from a scale (% of respondents)

  • Strongly support - 47%
  • - 20%
  • - 12%
  • Neutral - 5% 
  • - 3%
  • - 2%
  • Strongly do not support - 11%

Respondents: 177

graphic showing survey results

Question: Which of the following strategies do you think will be the most effective in reducing the visual impacts of parking? Choose up to two

Answers:

  • Remove parking requirements - 53% of respondents
  • Set maximum parking limits - 49%
  • Hide parking areas - 44%
  • None of the above - 14%

Respondents: 173

graphic showing survey results 

Question: What characteristics of existing buildings are most important to you and should be protected in the future? Choose up to two

Answers:

  • Architectural style - 82% of respondents
  • Cultural history - 56%
  • Size/scale - 26%
  • Materials - 16%
  • Other - 2%
  • None of the above - 6%

Respondents: 170

graphic showing survey results 

Question: If an existing building is protected, how much change would you be comfortable with if it were renovated or improved?

Answers

  • Allow very few visible changes - 32%
  • Allow some visible changes (windows, canopies, etc.) - 60%
  • Allow major visible changes (large additions,etc.) - 52%
  • None of the above (protection not necessary) - 6%

Respondents: 164

graphic showing survey results 

Question: If large projects are required to support neighborhood priorities, which of these are most important to you? Choose up to three

Answers:

  • Active and engaging streets - 76% of respondents
  • Greater range of housing options - 44%
  • Cultural uses (arts, entertainment) - 43%
  • Protection of existing buildings - 38%
  • Public art - 31%
  • Small public gathering spaces - 28%
  • Other - 9%
  • None of the above 3%

Respondents: 163

graphic showing survey results 


Existing Conditions and Project Framework Interim Report

The Existing Conditions and Project Framework Interim Report documents the relevant policies, neighborhood guidance, and development trends that will provide a foundation for future decision-making in the rezoning and design guidelines project. It describes the existing neighborhood conditions and regulations under which development is currently constructed in the Golden Triangle and outlines the public process to clearly define the problem statement for proposed revisions.

 

Contact Us

Kristofer Johnson
Principal City Planner - Urban Design 
Kristofer.Johnson@denvergov.org

Abe Barge
Principal City Planner
abe.barge@denvergov.org

About the project

Community Planning and Development is working with area residents, business owners and neighborhood representatives to create new zoning and design standards for Denver’s Golden Triangle neighborhood. CPD will be evaluating all relevant zoning aspects including building form, height, uses, and street-level design characteristics to implement the recommendations of the Golden Triangle Neighborhood Plan.

The project will include updated design standards and guidelines to address more qualitative design aspects recommended by the plan, along with design review by the recently enabled Downtown Design Advisory Board.

The Golden Triangle (the Civic Center statistical area) is located on the southern end of downtown Denver, where it is home to the Civic Center Park, Denver Art Museum, the Denver Public Library’s Central Branch and several historic landmarks. The Golden Triangle offers a unique, culturally-rich mix of uses, history and character.

The Golden Triangle is bound by Speer Boulevard, Colfax Avenue and Lincoln Street.