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)
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)
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
|
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.
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)
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)
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)
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)