RESOLUTION NO. 29-96
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 1996 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 1996 Municipal Annexation Plan is hereby adopted and be forwarded to the County Commissioners of Mesa County.
Passed and Adopted this 20th day of March, 1996.
Attest:
/s/ Theresa F. Martinez /s/ Ron Maupin
Deputy City Clerk President of the Council
CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION
MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION PLAN
1996
CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE PURPOSE AND INTENT Page 1
CHAPTER TWO PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES Page 3
CHAPTER THREE TRANSPORTATION Page 7
CHAPTER FOUR PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES Page 9
CHAPTER FIVE LAND USE Page 11
APPENDIX
MAPS
Municipal Annexation Plan - 1996
Three Mile Area
Sanitation Districts
Proposed Streets Classification
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 an urban level of 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 level of 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 on the Municipal Annexation Plan - 1996 map. The Municipal Annexation Plan Boundary is an area described within three miles of the current city limits (see 3 mile Area Map). 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 on the Municipal Annexation Plan - 1996 map.
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 and the timing of those services.
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, North First Street area, 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 City and the Ute District are currently discussing customer "trades" in a number of these areas.
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 contracts as may be established between the entities.
B. WASTEWATER SERVICES
In 1984 the Persigo Wastewater Treatment Plant was put into service. Owned and operated 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 1995 average influent flow was 7.398 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 generally extends from 19 1/2 Road on the west to 33 Road on the east, and from the Interstate on the north to A Road on the south. It also includes Paradise Hills, the airport area and wastewater treatment plant which are north of the Interstate.
There are three special sanitation district that contract for "Treatment Services" with the City of Grand Junction; Central Grand Valley Sanitation District, Orchard Mesa Sanitation District, and the Fruitvale Sanitation District.
Each of these districts provides its own collection system maintenance services, adding its own charges to those billed by the City for treatment. The City does contract for emergency call-out and lift station maintenance with Central Grand Valley on a case-by-case basis.
Each of these districts bills their own customers, except for Fruitvale customers within the City limits of Grand Junction. These are billed by the City.
Central Grand Valley's boundaries are generally from 28 Road on the west to 32 Road on the east. Orchard Mesa's service area is West Orchard Mesa and provides service from 27 Road on the west to 32 Road on the east. The Fruitvale District services a small area east of Grand Junction from 28 Road to 30 Road. (See attached Sanitation Districts map).
C. SOLID WASTE SERVICES
As a result of State legislation adopted in 1994, the city no longer collects refuse within areas annexed to the City after April 19, 1994. The City is allowed to establish a bid process where the City and other private haulers can bid for collection services within these post April 19, 1994 areas. In order to prevent confusion and keep the number of trash hauling trucks on City streets to a minimum, the City Council has determined that, until such time that newly annexed areas become large enough for a formal bid process, the City will not collect trash in newly annexed areas and residents may keep the present hauler they have.
The City provides recycling services and will be converting to automated trash collection services in August of 1996.
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 125 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. Local current and historical development patterns have shown that housing density is not affected by whether a residential development occurs in Mesa County or in the City of Grand Junction.
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. Walker Field Airport is the only public aviation field within the Municipal Plan area.
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. The City has no subways and does not intend to have any.
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.
E. STREETS
Proposed location, character, and extent of streets is shown on the attached "City of Grand Junction Proposed Streets Classification" map.
F. BRIDGES
All bridges with spans of 20 feet or greater in the City and County are posted when the bridge is structurally deficient and can not meet minimum loading requirements. The majority of bridges within the Municipal Annexation area have no load restrictions. Within the City limits, it is the City's practice to replace all insufficient bridges over time using State of Colorado Special Bridge Funds. When a bridge meets functional and structural qualifications for State funds, the City will then apply for funding to replace that bridge.
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 37,000 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) and the Darla Jean Park (1.25 acre) site on Darla Drive. The City's West Lake (9.5 acre) property located near First Street and Orchard Avenue is now designated as a park site. 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.
Area East of 29 Road: In addition to the Burkey Neighborhood Park site at 30 Road and F Road, the City has identified the need for one additional neighborhood park for that area bounded by I-70 on the North and I-70 Business Loop on the south, east of 29 Road (proposed as the Eastern "Wedge" annexation area). This second neighborhood park site location has not been determined.
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 continue 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.
The City of Grand Junction and Mesa County are in the process of developing a joint land use plan for the City of Grand Junction and the urbanizing area around the city. It is anticipated that the land use plan will be considered for adoption in April or May of 1996. In addition, the City is developing neighborhood and area plans for the South Downtown area and the 24 Road corridor area.
Absent an adopted Growth Plan or adopted neighborhood and area plans, projected future land use for the area has been based on previous planning efforts as listed below. The more specific land use plan for the defined annexable area is shown on the Municipal Annexation Plan - 1996 map. The Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan was adopted by the City and Mesa County jointly in 1995. The projected land use for the Orchard Mesa area is reflected on the Municipal Annexation Plan - 1996 map. For all other areas, in developing this plan the City has used the following land use plans and policies:
¨ 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. Once the City and County growth and land use plans are adopted, this municipal annexation plan will be amended accordingly.
1. INFILL DEVELOPMENT
Areas within the city limits generally have the full range of urban services and facilities available. Infill development generally allows 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.
2. NORTHWEST AREA
The northwest area is expected to be one of 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.
3. REDLANDS AREA
With the continuing of upgrading of sewer and water facilities, residential development in the Redlands can be expected to continue at a slow but steady pace. Pressures for neighborhood or convenience type 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. Due to the low densities and sprawl development, it has been difficult, if not impossible, to provide adequate facilities and services to the area in an economical manner.
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. 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 "ranchette" 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.
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.
(annxpl96)