Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roundabout Monument topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council leans toward Concept 1 for Leggett Roundabout gateway; asks for phasing and cost details
Summary
During a study session on the Leggett Roundabout gateway, the council and Parks & Rec recommended Concept 1 (orthogonal banding with 18‑foot central monument) and directed staff to return with cost estimates, sight‑distance proofs and a phasing plan that preserves pedestrian and bicycle connections.
City designers presented three gateway monument and landscaping concepts for the Leggett Roundabout during a study session preceding the regular council meeting. The presentation illustrated three options: an orthogonal banding approach (Concept 1), a layered platform with a low curving wall (Concept 2) and a radial/curvilinear option that leaves medians unplanted (Concept 3).
Designer David described Concept 1 as an orthogonal layout with diagonal landscape banding that frames an 18‑foot central pilaster and smaller anchor pilasters, saying the banding “helps decrease or minimize the impact of the outbound lane” and creates a staged reveal for drivers approaching from I‑25 and Monarch Boulevard. He said the design repeats branding elements used elsewhere in the city and uses xeric plantings tolerant to street conditions.
Council members asked detailed follow‑ups about irrigation and utilities (designer: initial water‑truck irrigation followed by permanent service where available, and engineering “sleeving” under the roadway to bring power and water to medians), sight distance (designer: triangles and analyses on slides 46–48 to protect visibility), pedestrian and bicycle accommodations (designer: roundabouts are inherently challenging for bicycles; sidewalk or trail connections should be addressed in the trails master plan and future interchange design), and signage aesthetics (designer: CDOT/MUTCD standards limit alternatives to chevrons, but monument placement can mitigate visual conflicts).
Parks & Rec advisory chair Tiffany Veil reported the advisory board recommended Option 1 with some changes and favored a phased rollout. On council preference, multiple members said they favored Concept 1 for its consistent brand language and visibility from key approaches; some members expressed support for elements of Concept 2 and suggested a hybrid approach. Council asked staff to return with cost comparisons, a recommended phasing sequence (center monument first, then approach plantings), and final sight‑distance documentation before authorizing construction or contract work.
Next steps: staff will prepare cost estimates, phasing options, and sight‑distance engineering to return for council direction; the council emphasized that pedestrian and bicycle connections should be considered alongside final landscape plans and future interchange work.
