Alternative 2, with trail through more aesthetic ditch, favored by most Camp Creek meeting attendeesDocumented feedback at the Feb. 25 Camp Creek public meeting showed Alternative 2 as the clear favorite, according to information released by a study team of City Engineering and its consultants March 10.
It was one of three design possibilities presented at the meeting. The study is intended to lead to a major flood-control project. See meeting story.
Still, City Engineering plans to unveil a “recommended plan” at the next public meeting April 29, according to the Camp Creek Drainage Improvement Project newsletter, which was produced by the study team. “I think we got good guidance Feb. 25,” said Susan Watkins, a communications specialist in the effort. The plan to be recommended will involve “fine-tuning to what people said would increase or decrease their support.”
To consider the alternatives at the meeting, the study team gave a presentation on them, then allowed the roughly 130 attendees to break out into 29 small groups in all, Watkins said. Each group used a form the city had provided to help focus in on each alternative's issues.
The newsletter summarizes the meeting feedback and also provides citizens' cumulative “Degree of Support Rating” for each alternative. (The four-page newsletter is posted on the city website at springsgov.com/campcreek.) The verbatim written comments from the groups will also be posted there, Watkins said.
The alternatives are listed below, in order of their support:
Alternative 2 -- Degree of Support Rating was 6.6 average/7.0 median out of a possible 10. Its greenway trail along the side of the ditch (instead of the current bike lanes on either side) appeared to help its popularity, but there were concerns about upstream detention and a wider ditch forcing 31st Street closer to the homes alongside it.
Alternative 3 -- Degree of Support Rating was 4.8 average/median 5.0 out of 10. This plan suggested covering Camp Creek -- running the water through an underground box culvert -- and having a linear park above it with a trail through it. While some liked the park idea, concerns included long-term maintenance, upstream detention and what would happen if the culvert wasn't big enough.
Alternative 1 -- Degree of Support Rating of 3.3 average/3.0 median out of a possible 10. This would be a slightly wider version of the ditch there now. It escaped the Garden of the Gods-impact concern because it was not proposed with upstream detention; however, there seemed to be a lack of enthusiasm for a design similar to what's been there for about 50 years. “Do not like the concrete - it will erode and look terrible like it does now,” one commenter wrote.
Westside Pioneer article