RESOLUTION NO. 19-94

 

WHEREAS, CRS 31-12-101, et seq. requires that Municipal Annexation Plans be reviewed and updated annually, and

 

WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Municipal Annexation Plan and has approved past yearly updates by resolution, and

 

WHEREAS, the City Council finds the 1994 Municipal Annexation Plan meets standards and requirements set forth in CRS 31-12-101, et seq.

 

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Grand Junction:

 

That the 1994 Municipal Annexation Plan is hereby adopted and be forwarded to the County Commissioners of Mesa County.

 

 

Passed and Adopted this 16th day of March, 1994.

 

 

Attest:

 

 

 

/s/ Stephanie Nye /s/ Reford C. Theobold

City Clerk            President of the Council

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION

 

 MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION PLAN

 

  1994

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE      PURPOSE AND INTENT  Page 1

 

CHAPTER TWO      PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES  Page 3

 

CHAPTER THREE    TRANSPORTATION  Page 6

 

CHAPTER FOUR    PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES  Page 8

 

CHAPTER FIVE      LAND USE  Page 10

 

APPENDIX        

                               

 

 

 CHAPTER ONE

 

 PURPOSE AND INTENT

 

A.  As an urban center, Grand Junction cannot allow itself to stagnate. Many examples may be found across the country where suburbanization has constricted the urban core and sapped its economic and social health. The City believes that it is appropriate for urbanized and urbanizing areas to be within the corporate limits of a municipality. County governments are not designed to adequately deal with urban service demands and problems. Numerous higher density County subdivisions are experiencing severe problems with street maintenance, drainage, fire protection, water supply, and other urban services and facilities. Many subdivisions have streets that were never accepted for maintenance, while others have streets inadequate to allow the passage of fire appara­tus.

 

 The County Sheriff's office is inadequately staffed to provide urban law enforcement services. It does not provide services, such as traffic enforcement, that are customarily required in highly developed residential or commercial areas. The City's Police Department provides a full, urban law enforcement service.

 

 Mesa County has eliminated its Parks and Recreation Department. County park areas remain partially developed and receive minimal maintenance. The only public swimming facilities and golf courses are located in the urban area. There are a variety of neighborhood and community parks within the corporate limits, which are substantially developed and maintained at an above average level. In addition to open park areas within the City, there are other facilities such as a convention center, an auditorium, two softball complexes, an indoor year-round swimming pool, an outdoor swimming pool complex, and a stadium complex which provides for a variety of community events.

 

B.  Emphasis should also be placed on the annexation of undeveloped areas where urban development can be expected to occur. This will allow better planning for the provision of urban services, avoid inconsistent development standards, and reduce new layers of costly special service boundaries. By ensuring that new development addresses urban problems at the develop­ment approval stage, the costs to the taxpayers of remedying these problems later can be avoided.

 

C.  This plan contemplates potential annexations within boundaries defined in Appendix I. Any amendments of this plan that may, over time, expand the defined study area shall also amend other applicable chapters of this plan to include the expanded area.

 

D.  It is hereby intended that all areas shown in the Walker Field Airport Master Plan shall be included in, and be part of, the defined study area as shown in Appendix I. The Walker Field Airport Master Plan is hereby, by reference, made part of this plan.

 

 

E.  In accordance with CRS 31-12-101, et seq. the City will prepare an impact statement on all proposed annexations over ten acres. Such impact statement will address the provision of city services to the annexed area including the type of services provided, the timing of those services, and the cost/ benefit to the City in annexing the area.

 CHAPTER TWO

 

 PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES

 

 

A.  WATER

 

 Treated water service within the annexation study area is provided by the City of Grand Junction, the Clifton Water District, and the Ute Water Conservancy District. The area served by the City generally encompasses the central core of the City as it existed in the mid-1950s. Specifically, it includes an area bounded by 29 Road on the east, 25 1/2 Road on the west, Patterson Road on the north, and Orchard Mesa on the south. The City also serves additional areas within its corporate limits through purchases of water from the Ute Water Conservancy District. For historical and legal reasons, presently in some areas of the City, the City serves and bills for water service, but with water purchased from the Ute District. These areas include Orchard Mesa and North 12th Street in the Lakeside area. The City also serves areas that are outside of its corporate boun­daries, inside of the Ute District, but not served by the Ute District. These areas are west of 1st Street and north of Patterson Road in the F 1/2 and Galley Road area.

 

 The Clifton Water District's service area is bounded by 30 Road on the west, 33 1/2 Road on the east, G Road on the north, and the Colorado River on the south. Additional area annexed into the Clifton District includes the Whitewater area south of the City of Grand Junction.

 

 The Ute Water Conservancy District currently provides water service to the balance of the annexation study area surrounding the areas served by the City and Clifton. There are the exceptions as previously noted and some neighborhoods on the Redlands which are served by private water company wells. Though such areas are not served by Ute distribution lines, they nevertheless pay the Ute mill levy for debt retirement. Urban water service will be available to all annexed areas.

 

 In most annexed areas potable water is and will continue to be provided by the Ute Water Conservancy District. In the future, some areas currently served by Ute Water may be converted to the City system in accordance with such policies and contracts as may be established.

 

B.  WASTEWATER SERVICES

 

 In 1984 the Persigo Wastewater Treatment Plant was put into service. Owned, in part, and operated entirely by the City of Grand Junction, the Persigo Plant has an average capacity of twelve and a half (12.5) million gallons per day with an ultimate capacity of twenty five (25) million gallons per day. Peak operations of short duration could handle up to twenty (20) million gallons per day. The plant currently operates with a load of seven and a half (7.5) million gallons per day. Plant sizing was determined from the "201 planning studies" which established the plant size based on projected develop­ment of the 201 area.

 The 201 planning area extends from 19 1/4 Road on the west to 33 Road on the east, and from the Interstate on the north to A 1/2 Road on the south. It also includes the airport and wastewater treatment plant which are north of the Interstate.

 

C.  SANITATION

 

 Trash collection services are provided by the City for residential and commercial customers. Residential customers within the city limits are provided this service automatically. Currently curbside recycling is available to all City customers who want the service. Commercial hauling within the city limits is on a competitive basis with the City competing with other haulers for the commercial business. Annexation would not affect this arrangement.

 

D.  ELECTRIC, GAS, TELEPHONE, AND CABLE TELEVISION

 

 Electric, gas, telephone, and cable television are provided by public utility companies and not the City of Grand Junction. Annexation will have no affect on the provision of these utilities. Irrigation and major drainage facilities are similarly the responsibility of special districts or private companies, and the provision of these services are unaffected by annexation. New developments in annexed areas are reviewed to ensure that adequate utilities, including irrigation and drainage, are provided and that the provision of these services does not adversely affect existing uses.

 

E.  POLICE SERVICES

 

 The Grand Junction Police Department is a full-service agency which is under the direction of the Chief of Police. The Department is responsible for the enforcement of all state and municipal laws and ordinances within the incorporated city limits of Grand Junction.

 

 The Police Department is staffed with 110.5 employees and is divided into two divisions. The Operations Division is commanded by a Captain and is responsible for the daily operations of the Uniform Patrol Section and Investigations Section. The Services Division is also headed by a Captain and is responsible for the support elements within the Department such as crime prevention, records, community relations, the School Resource Program, crime lab, court liaison, training and budgetary positions.

 

 The Police Department has a cooperative working relationship with other Mesa County agencies within the criminal justice system. There are programs of combined City/County personnel which are in effect and which endeavor to maximize the resources of the City in combatting crime.

 

 

 Should the City of Grand Junction annex additional areas, the Police Department would have to assess the potential impact on a case-by-case basis. Criteria to be applied would include the geographical dimensions of the annexed area and its population. Other factors would include the amount of resident population versus business population, actual calls for service, and road miles. The Department could then ascertain whether the area could receive police service delivery utilizing current resources. If expected service exceeds current resources, then additional personnel and equipment would be requested. Proposed annexations will be reviewed for their expected levels of activity and a schedule will be developed for providing full law enforcement services to the annexed area. Full services would be provided to any annexed area within a three year period.

 

F.  FIRE PROTECTION

 

 The City Fire Department provides fire protection for the Grand Junction community. It also provides services to the Grand Junction Rural Fire District through a contract. Each entity pays its own capital costs. Other charges to the rural district, such as manpower, are based on a percentage of the total number of calls received in relation to the total operating budget. This total service area includes approximately 88 square miles.

 

 The Grand Junction Fire Department has a mutual aid agreement with the fire fighting units in Clifton, Fruita, Central Orchard Mesa, East Orchard Mesa, Palisade and Glade Park. This mutual aid agreement provides for each fire fighting unit to assist the other in cases of emergency.

 

 Within the operational area of the Department, there have been some problems identified. There are two primary concerns. The first is under-sized water mains which do not provide adequate fire protection and a lack of sufficient fire hydrants within areas served by the Ute Water District. The second concern is response distances that are too long which impede life support measures in a medical emergency and adequate fire protection for buildings. Residents of areas with inadequate water supplies are encouraged to form improvement districts to upgrade the area's fire fighting capabili­ties.

 

G.  SCHOOL DISTRICT

 

 School District 51 serves both incorporated and unincorporated areas in the Grand Valley. Annexation of any area in the Grand Valley will have no affect on the numbers or distribution of children attending School District 51 facilities.

 CHAPTER THREE

 

 TRANSPORTATION

 

 

A.  AIR TRANSPORTATION

 

 Air transportation into and out of the central Grand Valley is provided through the Walker Field Airport. This facility is controlled and operated by the Walker Field Airport Authority. Annexations have no effect upon air transportation services.

 

B.  RAIL TRANSPORTATION

 

 Rail transport is provided by the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad, the main line of which runs the length of the Grand Valley. Annexation would have no effect on rail transport.

 

C.  OTHER MASS TRANSIT

 

 Various bus and taxi companies are operating under PUC licenses in both incorporated and unincorporated areas. A service area is established for each company which is unaffected by annexation. Mesa County, through the federal Urban Mass Transit Program, provides elderly and handicapped transportation to both City and County residents. This program is also unaffected by annexation

 

D.  THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO)

 

 The Metropolitan Planning Organization is responsible for road, street, and highway planning within MPO's designated urban area. The MPO is responsible for a five year Transportation Improvement Program (updated yearly) as well as an annual Unified Planning Work Program. Through efforts such as accident reporting, traffic counting, demographic updates, area studies, and others, recommendations are made for improvements or modifications to the transportation system. These recommendations are adopted by both the City Council and County Commissioners as part of the Transpor­tation Improvement Program. Since this is a joint City/County effort, it would not be affected by annexation.

 

 In addition to the MPO process, the City also has its own capital improvements programming process for upgrades and preventative maintenance of the street system. A comprehensive pavement management system allows the City to test its streets and efficiently determine the type and timing of maintenance efforts. The annexation impact report will examine road and street needs in newly annexed areas.

 

 

 There are currently no changes proposed for the state and federal highways within the urban area.

 

 The yearly MPO Transportation Improvement Program and Unified Work Program are hereby, by reference, made part of this plan.

 

 CHAPTER FOUR

 

 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES

 

Parks facilities and recreation programs within the City are provided and managed by the Grand Junction Parks and Recreation Department. As well as providing services to the approximately 33,500 citizens of Grand Junction, programs and facilities are also available to residents of surrounding Mesa County. Since Mesa County abolished its Parks Department, the City is, and has been, the primary parks and recreation provider in the urban area. Program fees are slightly higher to non-city residents. Each area to be annexed will be evaluated for the availability of park and recreation facilities.

 

A.  PARK FACILITIES

 

 The City of Grand Junction currently has 149.53 acres of developed park land (excluding two golf courses, cemeteries and public buildings), one indoor and outdoor swimming pool, the Lincoln Park Auditorium, and the Two Rivers Plaza convention center. The Lincoln Park Stocker Stadium features a lighted football field, all-weather track, and baseball field, plus full team, press box, and fan facilities. The Lincoln Park Golf Course is a 9-hole facility located within the city limits, while Tiara Rado is an 18-hole course located adjacent to the Colorado National Monument. The City also manages two softball complexes featuring four lighted softball fields.

 

B.  RECREATION PROGRAMS

 

 The Recreation Department sponsors many individual recreation programs such as volleyball, softball, tennis, fitness programs, learn-to-swim classes, tournament and open golf, gymnastics, arts and crafts, basketball, wrestling, and Senior Citizen Center activities. The softball program is the largest on the Western Slope with over 125 teams participating in 18 leagues. A total of 15 tournaments are hosted each season with over 375 teams involved.

 

 Four School District #51 athletic varsity teams as well as the N.C.A.A. Division II Mesa State College Mavericks utilize Stocker Stadium. This facility has also been host to the National Junior College World Series since 1959.

 

C.  COLORADO RIVERFRONT PROJECT

 

 The Colorado Riverfront Project concept is a linear greenway along the Colorado River consisting of various activity nodes connected by the Colorado River Trail. The project will ultimately extend the entire length of the river in Mesa County with the primary focus on the urban areas. Concepts include maintaining or restoring native riparian habitat with special considerations given to environmentally sensitive areas. Activity nodes will include facilities for fishing, picnicking, interpretive trails, boating access, and potential state park facilities.

 

 

D.  FUTURE NEEDS

 

 Emphasis needs to be placed on developing the parks that have been added to the system most recently. Several properties have been identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan for potential development. In addition to the various properties associated with the Riverfront Project, City owned sites include: a sports complex site (103 acres at 24 and G Roads), a neighborhood park site (12 acres at 731 27 Road), a community park site (30 acres at 26 1/2 and H Roads) and the Burkey neighborhood site (14 acres at 30 and F Roads). Development is also planned on School District #51 property at the Orchard Mesa Middle School (9.5 acres north of the Orchard Mesa Middle School). A Mesa County owned neighborhood site has also been identified (8.75 acres at B 3/4 Road and Arlington). Future development is anticipated at Burkey O.M. (10 acres at 28 1/2 Road and Highway 50) and Berry (78 acres at 24 and H Roads). Land for a driving range and an additional nine holes of golf has been purchased adjacent to the Tiara Rado Golf Course. This area has been targeted for development within the next few years. The City will continue to examine county properties and private properties to determine their suitability for parks and open space purposes. When suitable properties are annexed, the City may request a transfer of ownership to put their management under City supervision.

 

 CHAPTER FIVE

 

 LAND USE

 

Planning and Development in the Grand Valley has been typical of rural areas in the west which have experienced sudden large scale growth. Development of any kind and in any location was viewed as being good for the area with little or no consideration for the future public costs of uncontrolled development.

 

Although municipalities are typically the most efficient unit of government for the provision of urban services, the majority of the recent urban growth has taken place in unincorporated areas. As a result of this sprawl development pattern, municipalities have essentially been preempted as efficient service providers while the County government, special service entities, and the community at large are facing a rapidly increasing economic burden.

 

Uncontrolled and scattered growth in the unincorporated areas surrounding Grand Junction has also impacted City services and facilities while providing only minimal funding to mitigate these impacts. It is critical to the future well being of the City and the urban area that the City play a stronger role in development activity occurring in the surrounding area.

 

Infill development is also important in establishing efficiency in service delivery. Efforts to encourage infill development in the City have, in the past, been hampered by the subsidization of sprawl development in scattered rural areas. Recognition of the negative effects of this pattern may assist future infill potential within the present urban area.

 

FUTURE TRENDS

 

The near future outlook for growth in the Grand Valley appears to be at low to moderate levels ranging from 1% to 3% annually. This is a very manageable growth level that should allow the area to recover from the effects of the latest oil shale boom/bust cycle and allow time for proper planning to avoid similar occurrences in the future.

 

A Future Land Use Plan, though flexible to meet changing needs, must also be specific enough to accomplish the desired results of a balanced and cost effective development pattern.

 

The following are summaries of projected future land use for the area. The more specific land use plan for the defined annexable area is shown in Appendix I. In developing this plan the City has used the following adopted land use plans and policies:

 

 ¨  Colorado West Development Park: A Land Use and Transportation Study

 ¨  Walker Field Master Plan of Development

 ¨  Grand Junction/Mesa County Parks & Recreation Master Plan

 ¨  Mesa County Land Use and Development Policies

 ¨  Colorado River State Recreation Area Concept Plan

 

Some minor adjustments have been made to these plans to allow for consistent ranges of density and use. In areas not covered by the above plans, the land use shown has been developed by generaliza­tions of existing zoning. It is the intent that future updates of this plan will refine and more thoroughly study the future land use of these areas.

 

1.  INFILL DEVELOPMENT

 

 The first criterion to be applied to new development is whether it should be in undeveloped or underdeveloped areas within the city limits. This should not, however, preclude new annexation. Areas within the city limits generally have the full range of urban services and facilities available. Infill development would allow more efficient use of these services on a cost-benefit basis while also adding to the overall tax base.

 

 The infill development must, however, respect the uses and integrity of existing neighborhoods and the desire to attract infill uses should not overrule the basic concepts of planning and land use relationships. The Future Land Use Plan for the existing city limits should basically be an expansion and enhancement of most of the present major use areas.

 

2.  NORTHWEST AREA

 

 The northwest area is expected to be the valley's primary growth area for the next 10 to 20 years. The area has good accessibility, is close to presently developed areas, and has large parcels of land available for development. Mesa Mall and adjacent uses already provide the area with a commercial focus, while surrounding zoning is available for a wide variety of residential, commercial, and industrial development in a planned context.

 

3.  REDLANDS AREA

 

 With the opening of the Redlands Parkway and the upgrading of sewer and water facilities, residential development in the Redlands can be expected to continue at a slow but steady pace. Pressures for business development will increase with the population base, but average residential densities will likely continue in the low to medium range (2-8 units/acre or less). No significant change in the character of land use is expected for a number of years. Due to the low densities and sprawl development, it has been difficult, if not impossible, to provide adequate facilities and services to the area.

4.  NORTHEAST AREA

 

 The northeast area received the majority of the growth in the Grand Junction area during the oil shale boom and bust. Development is typical of the sprawl pattern in the valley with much of the development being single family detached housing at four units/acre. A commercial strip exists along I-70 Business Loop and North Avenue with a retail/commercial node at 30 Road and I-70 Business Loop. A larger commercial area occurs at 32 Road and I-70 Business Loop extending east into the Clifton "Downtown" area. Some high density apartment complexes exist east of 29 Road between Patterson Road and North Avenue.

 

5.  ORCHARD MESA

 

 Development on Orchard Mesa has proceeded very slowly, even through the oil shale boom, compared with other areas around Grand Junction. Although many services and facilities are available, the area has not generally experienced much development. The Highway 50 corridor is a mixed retail/commercial strip that is currently under-utilized. The area is also characterized by many non-conforming commercial uses intruding into residential zones. Residential development is a mix of lower density single family units and higher density apartment or townhouse units. The higher density uses are generally the newer structures built during the oil shale boom of the early 1980s.

 

6.  SOUTHEAST (PEAR PARK/CHATFIELD)

 

 Although some development has occurred in the Pear Park area, it is scattered and diverse. The area from the present city limits (15th Street) to 28 Road has developed with small industrial uses, while areas further to the east have developed with various densities of single family detached, mobile homes and some multi-family housing. Numerous parcels also remain in agricultural uses. Existing zoning and uses point to a potential for increased industrial in the 28 Road area. Industrial uses are also anticipated south of the D & RGW railroad in the area of 31 and 32 Roads.

 

7.  NORTH AREA

 

 The area north of Grand Junction has developed as a low density residential/small agricultural area with generally large, expensive homes. Horizon Drive from G Road to the airport has developed primarily with highway/tourist oriented businesses such as motels and restaurants. Professional office complexes are dominant along intersecting streets north of Interstate 70.

 

 The City must continue to push for high quality development in the northwest area and actively pursue annexation prior to development design and approval.

 

 

8.  FLOODPLAIN

 

 The floodplain of the Colorado River is included in parts of all development areas. A strong stance needs to be contin­ued against developing in the floodplain to avoid future costs of flood control and recovery. Once development occurs, the property owners will expect the City or County to protect them in high water situations.