Chapter 37.12
TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT

Sections:

37.12.010    Background.

37.12.020    Vehicular traffic – 2030 traffic modeling.

37.12.030    Transportation and access management plan.

37.12.040    Local streets.

37.12.050    Urban trails.

37.12.060    Public transportation (transit).

37.12.070    Capital improvements.

37.12.080    Goals.

37.12.090    Implementation strategies.

37.12.010 Background.

The rapidly developing Pear Park area is outgrowing its transportation infrastructure. Providing a well-balanced transportation and access management plan and meeting the needs of all users including pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles, and public transit is important for the overall mobility of the transportation system.

Public comments received at the March 30, 2004, open house reflected a concern that growth in the area is overwhelming the existing infrastructure. Concerns for adequate capacity were reflected in comments such as “not enough roads for peak hour traffic,” and requests for widening specific roads and intersections. The lack of sidewalks was noted, especially for school-age children walking and bicycling to and from school. The need for street lighting, speed limit signs and traffic enforcement was also voiced.

A windshield survey of the existing street network showed that intermittent improvements have been constructed with some of the development, while the bulk of the major street network is a rural, two-lane cross-section. Simply stated, the current transportation system is not adequate.

The adopted Grand Junction Circulation Plan, with its recent amendments, provides a basis for planning future streets in the Pear Park neighborhood. The Pear Park area circulation is constrained to the south by the Colorado River and to the north by the Union Pacific Railroad. D Road is the only direct connection coming from the west.

Until the 29 Road Colorado River Bridge is completed in 2006, there is no direct connection to the Pear Park neighborhood from the south. From the north, 30 Road provides the best connection into the area because the recently constructed railroad underpass allows uninterrupted traffic flow. The 31 1/2 Road at-grade railroad crossing is disrupted by trains throughout each day. Mesa County has suggested the possibility of constructing a grade-separated crossing of the railroad at 31 Road and closing the 31 1/2 Road crossing. From the east, all three (D Road, D 1/2 Road, and E Road) major east-west streets provide easy access to the area.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.020 Vehicular traffic – 2030 traffic modeling.

The Mesa County/Grand Junction Regional Transportation Planning Office operates a traffic model that incorporates future projections of population and employment to project traffic volumes on the street network. Results of the modeling for the year 2030 indicate the three major east-west streets in Pear Park will carry nearly equal volumes of traffic in the future. Volumes on E Road are projected to grow to 6,000 to 6,500 vehicles per day; volumes on D 1/2 Road will be from 6,000 to 8,500 vehicles per day; and D Road is expected to carry 6,500 to 9,000 vehicles per day.

Modeling for the north-south streets indicates that the highest volumes of traffic will occur on 29 Road, with traffic volumes ranging from 28,000 to 37,500 vehicles per day. 30 Road is projected to carry volumes ranging from 7,500 to 25,500 vehicles per day. 31 Road is anticipated to carry 2,000 vehicles per day without a connection to or overpass over I-70 B.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.030 Transportation and access management plan.

Major streets in the Grand Junction urbanized area are classified according to their function in the transportation network. The two components of function are to provide access to homes and businesses and to carry traffic from point to point. In order to preserve safety and capacity and enhance the quality of living, the relation of these two components should be inversely proportionate, with the busier streets having limited access and the quieter streets providing access to businesses and homes. The names of the classifications of these streets (moving from busiest to quietest) are principal arterials, minor arterials, major and minor collectors, and local streets. The components of the major street system have been identified on a functional classification map, known as the Grand Junction Circulation Plan, that has been adopted by the City of Grand Junction and accepted by Mesa County.

The Transportation Engineering Design Standards (TEDS) manual (GJMC Title 29) establishes requirements for the transportation system design within the City of Grand Junction. TEDS contains spacing requirements for access points and intersections, balancing traffic safety and circulation while allowing ample opportunity for access on existing street networks. The access point and intersection spacing should be managed for optimum spacing, greater than the TEDS minimum requirements.

Pear Park contains a mix of developed and rural areas. The area suffers from many instances of poorly planned/developed subdivisions with substandard connectivity and indiscriminate access to major thoroughfares. In order to provide for the safe and effective movement of people and vehicles, and to enhance the corridor for multiple modes of transportation, implementing careful and consistent access management is key to the Pear Park Transportation and Access Management Plan. High connectivity of the local street network and pedestrian-friendly block lengths are paramount.

The street classifications and proposed streets sections for the major corridors in the Pear Park area are listed below.

Street

Classification

Street Section

29 Road

Principal Arterial

5-lane street section

D Road

Minor Arterial

3-lane street section

D 1/4 Road (Proposed)

Major/Minor Collector Hybrid*

2-lane special street section

D 1/2 Road

Minor Arterial

3-lane street section

E Road

Major Collector

3-lane street section

31 Road

Minor Collector

2- or 3-lane street section

31 1/2 Road

Minor Collector

2- or 3-lane street section

* Major/Minor Collector Hybrid Section (see Street Cross Sections Map at the end of this chapter).

All street sections have detached sidewalks on both sides with the exception of E Road, 31 Road, and 31 1/2 Road which have attached walks on at least one side. Bike lanes will be provided on all of these streets (see Street Cross Sections Map at the end of this chapter). Different access controls and design standards apply to different street classifications. The purpose is to preserve or enhance safety and traffic flow.

Access management preserves the safety and efficiency of the transportation system. This is achieved through the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operation of driveways, median openings, street connection, and interchanges to a street. By responsibly managing access, public agencies extend the life of streets, increase public safety, reduce traffic congestion, and improve the appearance and quality of the constructed environment. Additionally, it helps preserve long-term property values and the economic viability of abutting properties and improved traffic flow translates into greater fuel efficiency and reduced vehicle emissions.

Most major corridors in the Pear Park Neighborhood are three-lane street sections. By implementing the access control measures shown on the Transportation and Access Management Plan Map, these street sections will serve the public needs for at least 30 years into the future.

The Pear Park Transportation and Access Management Plan (see the end of this chapter) shows access points for the street intersections using arrows and windows. The arrows indicate a single access point. The windows contain a “3” or “4” to indicate if the intersection will contain three or four legs (directions of access), and show the flexible location for the intersection. These locations will work with a local street network and are placed to maximize access to individual parcels. The intent is that access will only be allowed at these locations.

Strictly implemented, this plan will require many property owners to wait for others to develop before they can gain access for future development; however, a variety of tools may be used to implement the plan in phases. One tool is a temporary access, allowing a temporary street constructed on a platted lot until other access is constructed on adjacent parcels. The temporary street would then be removed and the platted lot sold for another house.

Major street crossings and primary school walking routes shall have pedestrian-friendly designs, incorporating principles of good design such as limited crossing distances, visual cues, pedestrian refuge islands, streetscape and traffic calming measures appropriate to the street’s operating characteristics.

The Pear Park Transportation and Access Management Plan Map, the Conceptual Local Street Network Plan Map and the Street Cross-Sections Map included in this Plan, amend the Grand Junction Circulation Plan. They supersede and become a part of the adopted Grand Junction Circulation Plan for the Pear Park area. (See Pear Park 2004 Transportation and Access Management Plan, Conceptual Local Street Network Plan and the Street Cross-Sections Maps.)

A hybrid collector section was also developed specifically for and as a part of this Plan. This street section is to be used when design volumes are near 3,000 ADT (average daily traffic) and when an enhanced pedestrian corridor is desirable, such as at or near schools, parks and neighborhood commercial areas. This street designation limits single-family residential access to 100 feet between driveways (measured from center of drive to center of drive) including shared drive access, but excepting loop lane access. Loop lanes, alleys and other “new urbanist” concepts are encouraged in general in the Pear Park neighborhood and strongly encouraged on this corridor. (See Street Cross-Sections Map at the end of this chapter.)

(Ord. 4690, 2-17-16; Res. 81-09, 10-19-09; Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.040 Local streets.

The local street network provides access to individual parcels and serves short length trips to and from collector and higher order streets. Trip lengths on local streets should be short with a lower volume of traffic along with slower speeds. Design of local streets occurs through the development process and will be in accordance with the adopted Transportation Engineering Design Standards (TEDS). It is important in the design process to provide connections to adjacent parcels and subdivisions for efficient vehicle travel and a safe network for pedestrians and bicyclists.

A Conceptual Local Street Network Plan is contained herein (see Conceptual Local Street Network Plan Map at the end of this chapter) to show how the local street network could be developed. It is not intended to be “cast in stone” but an example showing interconnectivity and logical design. It is also intended to be a working or living document, periodically updated to reflect change and an example of how the Transportation and Access Management Plan can work.

As parcels develop, serious contemplation and accommodation of the future development of adjacent and nearby properties must be given. Consideration of the parcel configuration and development pattern as well as implementation of the Transportation and Access Management Plan is required. Block length should be optimized at 600 feet or less.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.050 Urban trails.

The Grand Junction Circulation Plan is a planning document that shows the location of future bicycle facilities, trails and pedestrian paths. Implicit in the plan is the construction of sidewalks in accordance with the adopted street cross-sections. One of the major purposes of the City’s Urban Trails Committee is facilitating linkages from the riverfront trail system to the urban area. As development occurs, construction of trails, paths, bike lanes and pedestrian facilities in accordance with the adopted plan either occurs with the development or the City constructs the same with the collection of the Transportation Capacity Payment (TCP) as part of a more comprehensive capital improvement project. Changes to the Grand Junction Circulation Plan for the Pear Park neighborhood are included in this Plan to accommodate the projected growth and will be adopted as a part of the Grand Junction Circulation Plan (see Pear Park Urban Trails Plan Map at the end of this chapter). Also see Chapter 37.16 GJMC, Schools, Parks and Trails.

Sidewalks are lacking throughout the Pear Park neighborhood. Recent development has constructed sidewalk on the local street network but the connections to destinations such as schools, public spaces, shopping and the riverfront trail system are, for the most part, nonexistent or below standard.

The intersection of I-70 B and 31 1/2 Road presents a challenge to pedestrians and cyclists and it is along one of the most heavily used routes of travel into and out of Pear Park. Both Central High School and Grand Mesa Middle School are located north of this intersection and attract many pedestrians and bicyclists from the Pear Park neighborhood. Field observations indicate numerous crossing violations by the pedestrians and cyclists. This problem is exacerbated by the marked crosswalk and pushbutton being located on the east side of the intersection when both schools are located on the west side.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.060 Public transportation (transit).

Grand Valley Transit serves the eastern portion of Pear Park today. The current bus routes traverse the area from 30 to 32 Road and D to E Road in a rectangular figure-eight pattern, allowing passengers to connect to the system at the transfer point at Coronado Center at I-70 B and 32 Road. Future transit needs will likely expand to the west along D Road. Grand Valley Transit has indicated that bus pullouts along their routes will be needed. New development such as residential and commercial subdivisions, shopping centers, office buildings, etc., will be required to provide for transit access.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.070 Capital improvements.

(a)    The City of Grand Junction is expanding its boundaries into the Pear Park area as development occurs. Most of the area today is still in unincorporated Mesa County and the majority of the street network is under Mesa County’s jurisdiction. Mesa County’s Six-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) has several projects programmed either in Pear Park and areas just outside of Pear Park or could be used for improvements in the neighborhood.

(1)    31 1/2 and E Road improvements: $2,500,000.

(2)    North-South Corridor (29 Road): $36,050,000.

(3)    E Road improvements from 31 to 33 Road (drainage and pedestrian path): $2,250,000.

(4)    E 1/2 – Central High School entrance: $500,000.

(5)    Concrete repair and maintenance Countywide: $450,000.

(6)    Bike and pedestrian paths Countywide: $425,000.

(b)    The City’s CIP does not include specific projects for the Pear Park neighborhood, with the exception of the eastern portion of the Riverside Parkway along D Road to 29 Road, and the City’s share of the 29 Road improvements from D Road north; however, as part of this Pear Park Neighborhood Plan, the priority list of future capital improvements for Pear Park include the following:

(1)    D 1/2 Road (from 29 to 32). This corridor is clearly the highest priority. The completion of 29 Road and the Riverside Parkway will generate volumes and speeds on this corridor that will make the current two-lane County road unsafe (especially for bikes and pedestrians).

(2)    D Road (from 29 to 32). The completion of 29 Road and the Riverside Parkway will generate traffic volumes and speeds on this corridor that will make the current two-lane County road unsafe (especially for bikes and pedestrians).

(3)    31 Road (from D to E 1/2). This will be especially important to upgrade when/if the I-70 B/31 Road overpass is built.

(4)    D 1/4 Road (from 29 to 29 1/2). This corridor is important to access the school that may be constructed in the area. If the school is not built in this area, this corridor can be built by development.

(5)    E Road (from 30 to 32). The primary need for this corridor is and will be bike and pedestrian improvements.

(6)    C 1/2 Road (from 28 to 29). This corridor will very likely need some traffic calming improvements to restrict truck traffic that will try to travel between 29 Road and the industrial area at the west end of D Road.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.080 Goals.

(a)    Provide a well-balanced transportation and access management plan meeting the needs of all users including pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles and transit.

(b)    Provide good access to schools, shopping, recreation and residential areas.

(c)    Provide efficient circulation for emergency vehicles.

(d)    Plan for future street cross-sections, sidewalks, bike lanes and trails.

(e)    Recommend capital improvement projects that will help implement this plan.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

37.12.090 Implementation strategies.

(a)    Adoption of this Pear Park Neighborhood Plan amends the Grand Junction Circulation Plan to include the Pear Park Neighborhood Transportation and Access Management Plan Map, Conceptual Local Street Network Plan Map and the Pear Park 2004 Street Cross Sections Map.

(b)    Adoption of this Pear Park Neighborhood Plan amends the Grand Junction Circulation Plan to include changes in the Pear Park area as adopted in this Plan as shown on the Pear Park 2004 Urban Trails Plan Map.

(c)    Amend the Grand Junction Circulation Plan as needed when school and park sites are identified and developed.

(d)    Implement the priority list of CIP projects for Pear Park.

(Res. 13-05, 1-5-05)

Transportation Access (PDF)

Conceptual Local Street Network (PDF)

Street Cross Sections (PDF)

Urban Trails (PDF)