|
The Circulation Element discusses the following components of the circulation system.
- Functional Classification
- Level of Service
- Transit
- Non-vehicular Transportation
Functional Classification
The objective of functional classification is to group into connecting systems roads and streets having similar
functions, purposes and importance in the roadway network. In turn, the systems are distinguished by their more
general functions and levels of importance.
Careful long-range planning of the City's roadways is needed to meet Grass Valley's Circulation goals. This
includes the establishment of a comprehensive designation of all roadways throughout the City. A sound functional
classification is essential for:
Long-range planning and coordination
Determining right-of-way requirements and preserving right-of-way
Defining design standards and operations of facilities in each class
Developing budgets and funding programs according to priority
Determining acceptable levels of traffic volumes, especially on the local and collector street systems
Roadways have two functions, which are incompatible from a design standpoint: 1) to provide mobility and 2)
to provide land access. High and constant speeds are desirable for land access. A functional classification system
provides a functional specialization in meeting the access and mobility requirements of the roadways. Local streets
emphasize a high level of mobility for through movement, and collectors offer a more balanced service for both
functions.
The existing street network in the City of Grass Valley is a product of both roadways that have provided access
to the older portions of the City for decades, and roadways that were designed to serve the areas of new development.
As a result, in the older portions of the City, some roadways function as arterial or collector roadways, but they
have not previously been classified as such.
Freeways / Expressways. Freeways and Expressways are regionally important facilities which
link the community of Grass Valley with its Nevada County neighbors and with regional destinations. These facilities
are high speed, restricted access facilities providing little direct linkage to adjoining property but providing
access via interchanges or, in the interim, major signalized intersections. Freeways and Expressways are designed
to the standards of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and improvements to these facilities
are planned and implemented through a cooperative effort of Caltrans, the Nevada County Transportation Commission,
Nevada County, the City of Grass Valley and Nevada City. State Highways 20 and 49 are the Freeways and Expressways
serving Grass Valley.
Arterial Streets. The primary function of arterial roadways is to move large volumes of traffic
through the community to other sections of the City and beyond. In more recently developed areas the right-of-way
for arterials is either 84 or 100 feet, and while most arterials are two lanes, four lane arterials can be developed
in response to traffic demands. Some roadways function as arterials due to the current high traffic volumes and
their key linkages between one section of the City and another. For these roadways, current right-of-way widths
vary, but most contain only two traffic lanes.
Collector Streets. Collector streets generally link local residential streets and commercial
and office parking areas to the arterials. In new areas, these streets are generally designed with a 54 or 60 foot
right-of-way and contain two traffic lanes with bike lanes. In older portions of the community, a number of roadways
function as collector roadways due to moderate traffic volumes and their linkage to the arterial roadway system.
Right-of-way widths vary, with most containing two traffic lanes.
Local Streets. Local streets provide direct access to abutting land and access to the collector
street system. The right-of-way for local streets is normally 54 feet which provides for two traffic lanes and
a narrow parking lane that doubles as a Class II bikeway on both sides. Actual pavement widths for local streets
vary throughout the City.
The Circulation Plan (existing and planned arterial and collector roadway system) is depicted in Figure 4-1
and Table 4-1. All roadways not included as freeways, arterial, or collector roadways in Figure 4-1 and Table 4-1
are local streets. Conceptual alignments through planned annexations areas indicate potential ultimate connections
of existing and planned arterials. The exact location and need for each new roadway in the Special Development
Areas will be evaluated during the preparation of Specific Plans or similar detailed development plans.
New transportation facilities needs as shown on the Circulation Plan (Figure 4-1) are:
- Construction of a new interchange on Highway 20/49 at Dorsey Drive.
- Construction of a new intersection or interchange on Highway 49 in the area of Crestview Drive-Smith Road in
southern Grass Valley.
- Construction of a new arterial road through the North Star area linking the Brighton/McCourtney intersection
near Highway 20 with the new Crestview-Smith intersection or interchange on Highway 49. This new road would be
connected to a southward extension of Freeman Lane. It is the City's policy, however, that Freeman Lane not be
extended southward from its current termination north of Wolf Creek, until and unless the new Crestview-Smith arterial
road is constructed.
- Extension of Dorsey Drive easterly to Brunswick Road.
- Reconstruction of the McKnight Way Interchange on Highway 49 to create modern roundabout intersections.
- Reconstruction of the Highway 174/Highway 20/49 interchange as a modern roundabout.
- Construction of a new road network in the northeastern quadrant of the Planning Area, linking existing and
planned streets and roads.
- Closure of Idaho-Maryland road at the Brunswick Road intersection.
TABLE 4-1
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY'S ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADWAY
|
ARTERIALS
|
COLLECTORS
|
|
South Auburn Street
Brighton Street Extension
Brunswick Road
Crestview Extension
Empire Street
Idaho Maryland Road (part)
LaBarr Meadows Road
Main Street
Mill Street
Neal Street
Nevada City Highway
Sierra College Drive (part)
|
Allison Ranch Road
Alta Street
East Bennett
Brighton Street
Butler Street
Dorsey Drive
Empire Street
Freeman Lane
Hughes Road
Idaho Maryland Road (part)
McCourtney Road
McKnight Way
Mill Street
Richardson Street
Ridge Road
Sierra College Drive (part)
Sutton Way
Taylorville Road
Whispering Pines Lane
|
All roadways not listed here are designated as local streets.
Another important component of the City's functional classification are truck routes. Currently the City has
no designated truck routes within the Grass Valley City limits, although trucks are prohibited on East Maryland
Drive.
Level of Service
For General Plan level analysis, the levels of service (LOS) on individual roadway segments is determined based
on general daily traffic volume thresholds which account for such factors as the level of access control, terrain,
traffic control, etc. The thresholds employed in the Nevada County General Plan and by the Nevada County Transportation
Commission (NCTC) in previous regional studies were used. These daily traffic volume standards are presented in
Table 4-2.
TABLE 4-2
DAILY PLANNING SERVICE VOLUME CRITERIA
| FUNCTIONAL CLASS |
LANES
|
LOS A
|
LOS B
|
LOS C
|
LOS D
|
LOS E
|
Interstate and
Freeway |
4
6
|
59,400
89,100
|
69,300
103,950
|
79,200
118,800
|
89,100
133,650
|
99,000
148,500
|
| Arterial |
2
4
6
|
9,300
18,600
27,900
|
10,850
21,700
32,550
|
12,400
24,800
37,200
|
13,950
27,900
41,850
|
15,500
31,000
46,500
|
| Collector |
2
|
6,600
|
7,700
|
8,800
|
9,900
|
11,000
|
Currently there are four roadway segments in the Planning Area which fail to deliver LOS "D" conditions.
As shown in Table 4-3, these are:
TABLE 4-3
EXISTING ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFICIENCIES
|
|
ROAD |
LOCATION |
NUMBER OF LANES
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
|
|
Sutton Way |
W of Brunswick Road |
2
|
13,661
|
E
|
|
|
Brunswick Road |
S of Idaho Maryland Road |
2
|
14,504
|
E
|
|
|
Brunswick Road |
NW of Loma Rica Drive |
2
|
14,056
|
E
|
|
|
Nevada City Highway |
Grass Valley City Limits |
2
|
14,355
|
E
|
The City intends to mitigate these roadway deficiencies through its Capital Improvement Program which is described
in the implementation section of this component.
Levels of Service are also determined for intersections using procedures outlined in the 1994 Highway Capacity
Manual. Table 4-4 indicates the characteristics of Levels of Service at intersections controlled by stop signs
and by traffic signals.
Levels of Service are estimated for future travel conditions to ensure that a roadway will provide acceptable
operations for its "design life", which is commonly 20 years. For the General Plan, the year 2020 will
be used for estimating traffic demand and determining Levels of Service on the roadway system. The City has established
Level of Service "D" as the goal for both the General Plan and for the development of Citywide and regional
traffic impact fees.
TABLE 4-4
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
|
LEVEL OF SERVICE
|
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
|
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
|
|
"A"
|
Uncongested operations, all queues clear in a single-signal cycle. Delay 5.0 sec |
Little or no delay.
Delay 5 sec/veh |
|
"B"
|
Uncongested operations, all queues clear in a single cycle.
Delay > 5.0 sec and 15.0 sec |
Short traffic delays.
Delay > 5 sec/veh and 10 sec/veh |
|
"C"
|
Light congestion, occasional backups on critical approaches.
Delay > 15.0 sec and 25.0 sec |
Average traffic delays.
Delay > 10 sec/veh and 20 sec/veh |
|
"D"
|
Significant congestions of critical approaches but intersection functional. Cars required to wait
through more than one cycle during short peaks. No long queues formed.
Delay > 25.0 sec and 40.0 sec |
Long traffic delays.
Delay > 20 sec/veh and 30 sec/veh |
|
"E"
|
Severe congestion with some long standing queues on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection
may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. Traffic queue may block nearby intersection(s)
upstream of critical approach(es).
Delay > 40.0 sec and 60.0 sec |
Very long traffic delays, failure, extreme congestion.
Delay > 30 sec/veh and 45 sec/veh |
|
"F"
|
Total breakdown, stop-and-go operation. Delay > 60.0 sec |
Intersection blocked by external causes. Delay > 45 sec/veh |
| Sources: 1994 Highway Capacity Manual |
Existing and Future Traffic Conditions
An analysis of the roadway improvements needed to maintain a Level of Service "D" standard in the
year 2020 has been conducted using land use growth assumptions and the NCTPA sub-regional travel demand model.
Year 2020 roadway improvement needs are shown in Table 4-5. Figure 4-2 is an index map showing numbered locations
of traffic counts shown in Table 4-5. Numbered locations correspond to road segments in the "Road" column.
Figure 4-3 shows road segments requiring four lanes by the Year 2020, based upon projected traffic volumes and
an assumed LOS "D" or better.
TABLE 4-5
ROADWAY DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES LEVELS OF SERVICE
SECTION 1 - FREEWAYS
|
|
ROAD |
LOCATION |
NO. OF LANES
|
EXISTING
|
2020
|
|
EXISTING
|
YEAR 2020
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
|
1.
|
State Route 49/20 |
S of N. Auburn St |
4
|
4
|
29,000
|
A
|
59,500
|
B
|
|
2.
|
State Route 49/20 |
S of Bennett St |
4
|
4
|
36,000
|
A
|
52,500
|
A
|
|
3.
|
State Route 49/20 |
S of Idaho-Maryland |
4
|
4
|
37,000
|
A
|
64,900
|
B
|
|
73.
|
State Route 49/20 |
S of Dorsey |
4
|
4
|
30,500
|
A
|
56,600
|
A
|
|
4.
|
State Route 49/20 |
S of Brunswick Rd |
4
|
4
|
30,500
|
A
|
41,100
|
A
|
|
74.
|
State Route 49/20 |
N of Brunswick Rd |
4
|
4
|
30,000
|
A
|
40,000
|
A
|
|
75.
|
State Route 49 |
S of Crestview/Smith Ext |
4
|
4
|
21,700
|
A
|
35,800
|
A
|
|
5.
|
State Route 49 |
N of Crestview/Smith Ext |
4
|
4
|
21,700
|
A
|
32,700
|
A
|
|
6.
|
State Route 49 |
S of SR 20 |
4
|
4
|
32,500
|
A
|
41,650
|
A
|
|
7.
|
State Route 20 |
W of Mill St |
4
|
4
|
14,200
|
A
|
25,170
|
A
|
|
8.
|
State Route 20 |
W of SR 49 |
4
|
4
|
15,000
|
A
|
27,500
|
A
|
|
76.
|
State Route 20 |
W of Brighton |
4
|
4
|
14,200
|
A
|
25,200
|
A
|
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
LOS = Level of Service
( ) = Planned Road
TABLE 4-5
ROADWAY DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES LEVELS OF SERVICE
SECTION 2 - ARTERIALS
|
|
ROAD |
LOCATION |
NO. OF LANES
|
EXISTING
|
2020
|
|
EXISTING
|
YEAR 2020
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
|
9.
|
State Route 174 |
E of SR 20 |
2
|
2
|
6,200
|
A
|
12,000
|
C
|
|
10.
|
State Route 174 |
E of Central St |
2
|
2
|
4,500
|
A
|
7,350
|
A
|
|
11.
|
State Route 174 |
E of Ophir St |
2
|
2
|
5,100
|
A
|
5,150
|
A
|
|
12.
|
State Route 174 |
S of Race St |
2
|
2
|
5,400
|
A
|
7,250
|
A
|
|
13.
|
State Route 174 |
E of Empire Mine |
2
|
2
|
5,600
|
A
|
9,000
|
A
|
|
79.
|
South Auburn St |
S of Main |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
5,700
|
A
|
|
14.
|
South Auburn St |
S of Mohawk St |
2
|
2
|
7,802
|
A
|
7,800
|
A
|
|
15.
|
South Auburn St |
N of School Alley |
2
|
2
|
6,852
|
A
|
6,950
|
A
|
|
16.
|
South Auburn St |
N of Whiting St |
2
|
2
|
7,139
|
A
|
10,400
|
B
|
|
17.
|
South Auburn St |
NW of E. McKnight Way |
2
|
4
|
8,228
|
A
|
14,300
|
A
|
|
90.
|
Bennett Road |
E of SR 49/20 |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
5,700
|
A
|
|
94.
|
Brighton Extension |
S of McCourtney |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
4,600
|
A
|
|
95.
|
Brighton Extension |
W of Allison Ranch Rd |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
5,600
|
A
|
|
18.
|
Brunswick Road |
On Overcrossing 49/20 |
4
|
4
|
26,172
|
D
|
17,100
|
A
|
|
72.
|
Brunswick Road |
N of Dorsey Drive |
2
|
4
|
12,235
|
C
|
14,600
|
A
|
|
19.
|
Brunswick Road |
S of Ranchview Ct |
2
|
4
|
12,235
|
C
|
14,600
|
A
|
|
20.
|
Brunswick Road |
N of Whispering Pines |
2
|
4
|
14,504
|
E
|
12,600
|
A
|
|
21.
|
Brunswick Road |
NW of Loma Rica Dr |
2
|
4
|
14,056
|
E
|
18,600
|
A
|
|
22.
|
Brunswick Road |
NW of E. Bennett |
2
|
2
|
10,686
|
B
|
11,200
|
C
|
|
69.
|
Centennial Drive |
S of Idaho Maryland |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
9,600
|
B
|
|
62.
|
Crestview/Smith Ext |
E of Allison Ranch Rd |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
6,050
|
A
|
|
102.
|
Crestview/Smith Ext |
E of Taylorville |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
3,100
|
A
|
|
40.
|
Dorsey Drive |
SE of Segsworth Way |
2
|
4
|
5,541
|
A
|
15,400
|
A
|
|
67.
|
Dorsey Drive |
W of Sutton Way |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
13,500
|
D
|
|
85.
|
Dorsey Drive |
E of Sutton |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
12,800
|
D
|
|
86.
|
Dorsey/Whispering Pines Loop |
N of Idaho Maryland |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
12,800
|
D
|
|
87.
|
Dorsey/Whispering Pines Loop |
S of Idaho Maryland |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
8,250
|
A
|
|
23.
|
Empire Street |
E of Le Duc St |
2
|
2
|
4,923
|
A
|
4,900
|
A
|
|
64.
|
Idaho Maryland Rd |
E of Railroad |
2
|
4
|
12,111
|
C
|
24,700
|
C
|
|
24.
|
La Barr Meadows |
SE of E. McKnight Way |
2
|
2
|
10,028
|
B
|
10,100
|
B
|
|
80.
|
La Barr Meadows |
N of Crestview/Smith Ext |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
7,950
|
A
|
|
82.
|
La Barr Meadows |
S of Crestview/Smith Ext |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
11,200
|
C
|
|
74.
|
Main Street |
S of Squirrel Creek |
2
|
2
|
5,763
|
A
|
10,200
|
B
|
|
63.
|
Main Street |
W of Auburn |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
9,450
|
B
|
|
71.
|
Main Street |
E of Bennett St |
2
|
2
|
12,172
|
C
|
16,500
|
F
|
|
70.
|
Main Street |
N of Idaho Maryland |
2
|
4
|
NA
|
NA
|
21,900
|
C
|
|
73.
|
McCourtney Road |
W of 20 Ramps |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
9,900
|
B
|
|
50.
|
W. McKnight Way |
SW of Taylorville Rd |
2
|
4
|
8,882
|
A
|
16,800
|
A
|
|
25.
|
Mill Street |
S of Neal St |
2
|
2
|
5,786
|
A
|
12,100
|
C
|
|
26.
|
Mill Street |
NE of Rhode Island St |
2
|
2
|
5,750
|
A
|
8,600
|
A
|
|
92.
|
Mill Street |
N of McCourtney |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
12,100
|
C
|
|
27.
|
Neal Street |
E of Church St |
2
|
2
|
5,239
|
A
|
3,750
|
A
|
|
77.
|
Nevada City Hwy |
S of Sierra College |
2
|
4
|
NA
|
NA
|
15,400
|
A
|
|
28.
|
Nevada City Hwy |
Grass Valley City Limits |
2
|
4
|
14,355
|
E
|
15,000
|
A
|
|
83.
|
Nevada City Hwy |
E of Brunswick |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
11,800
|
C
|
|
78.
|
Ophir |
S of Bennett |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
9,050
|
A
|
|
57.
|
Sierra College Dr |
E of Main Street |
2
|
4
|
4,546
|
A
|
16,700
|
A
|
|
58.
|
Sutton Way |
E of Brunswick |
2
|
2
|
9,040
|
A
|
10,800
|
A
|
|
59.
|
Sutton Way |
W of Brunswick |
2
|
2
|
13,661
|
F
|
6,300
|
A
|
|
68.
|
Sutton Way |
N of Dorsey Dr |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
6,150
|
A
|
|
84.
|
Sutton Way |
S of Dorsey Dr |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
5,200
|
A
|
|
60.
|
Whispering Pines Ln |
W of Brunswick Rd |
2
|
2
|
1,494
|
A
|
8,250
|
A
|
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
LOS = Level of Service
NA = Not Available
TABLE 4-5
ROADWAY DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES LEVELS OF SERVICE
SECTION 3 - COLLECTORS
|
|
ROAD |
LOCATION |
NO. OF LANES
|
EXISTING
|
2020
|
|
EXISTING
|
YEAR 2020
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
ADT
|
LOS
|
|
29.
|
Allison Ranch Rd |
S of McCourtney |
2
|
2
|
720
|
A
|
600
|
A
|
|
30.
|
Allison Ranch Rd |
N of North Star Mine Rd |
2
|
2
|
665
|
A
|
600
|
A
|
|
98.
|
Allison Ranch Rd |
S of Crestview/Smith Ext |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
50
|
A
|
|
31.
|
Alta Street |
N of West Main St |
2
|
2
|
4,203
|
A
|
3,000
|
A
|
|
32.
|
Alta Street |
S of Alta Vista Dr (S) |
2
|
2
|
3,587
|
A
|
1,300
|
A
|
|
33.
|
Alta Street |
N of Alta Vista Dr (S) |
2
|
2
|
3,476
|
A
|
850
|
A
|
|
34.
|
Alta Street |
SE of Ridge Road |
2
|
2
|
3,380
|
A
|
1,100
|
A
|
|
96.
|
Old Auburn Rd |
S of McCourtney |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
1,450
|
A
|
|
81.
|
Old Auburn Rd |
S of North Star Connection |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
1,750
|
A
|
|
66.
|
E. Bennett Road |
E of Centennial |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
5,250
|
A
|
|
35.
|
E. Bennett Road |
E Grass Valley City Limit |
2
|
2
|
2,142
|
A
|
8,150
|
C
|
|
93.
|
Brighton Street |
N of McCourtney |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
6,750
|
B
|
|
36.
|
Brighton Street |
N of McCourtney |
2
|
2
|
3,830
|
A
|
6,750
|
B
|
|
37.
|
Brighton Street |
S of Chapel |
2
|
2
|
2,581
|
A
|
3,950
|
A
|
|
38.
|
Butler Street |
W of Minnie |
2
|
2
|
813
|
A
|
3,150
|
A
|
|
39.
|
Butler Street |
E of Packard Dr |
2
|
2
|
929
|
A
|
3,100
|
A
|
|
65.
|
Centennial Drive |
N of E. Bennett |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
7,350
|
B
|
|
91.
|
North Collector |
W of Allison Ranch |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
600
|
A
|
|
99.
|
South Collector |
E of Old Auburn |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
1,150
|
A
|
|
100.
|
South Collector |
E of North Star Loop Rd |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
1,400
|
A
|
|
97.
|
South Collector |
W of Allison Ranch |
(2)
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
1,950
|
A
|
|
41.
|
Empire Street |
E of Kate Hayes St |
2
|
2
|
4,278
|
A
|
3,900
|
A
|
|
42.
|
E. Empire Street |
E Grass Valley City |
2
|
2
|
4,178
|
A
|
3,900
|
A
|
|
43.
|
Freeman Lane |
N of McKnight Way |
2
|
2
|
8,142
|
C
|
12,200
|
F
|
|
44.
|
Freeman Lane |
SW of McKnight |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
4,800
|
A
|
|
61.
|
Freeman Lane |
E of Mill |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
9,250
|
D
|
|
45.
|
Hughes Road |
NW of E. Main St |
2
|
2
|
7,852
|
C
|
13,200
|
F
|
|
46.
|
Hughes Road |
S of Ridge Rd |
2
|
2
|
3,872
|
A
|
10,400
|
E
|
|
47.
|
Idaho Maryland Rd |
W of Brunswick |
2
|
2
|
3,570
|
A
|
3,850
|
A
|
|
48.
|
Idaho Maryland Rd |
E of Brunswick Rd |
2
|
2
|
1,918
|
A
|
3,050
|
A
|
|
49.
|
McCourtney Road |
W of Brighton St |
2
|
2
|
8,650
|
C
|
9,300
|
D
|
|
101.
|
McCourtney Road |
W of Old Auburn Rd |
2
|
2
|
5,676
|
A
|
10,100
|
E
|
|
51.
|
Mill Street |
N of Bank Street |
2
|
2
|
5,399
|
A
|
5,150
|
A
|
|
52.
|
Richardson Street |
E of Alta Street |
2
|
2
|
1,171
|
A
|
2,900
|
A
|
|
53.
|
Ridge Road |
W of Ridge Estates Rd |
2
|
2
|
5,059
|
A
|
8,000
|
C
|
|
54.
|
Ridge Road |
N of Hughes Rd |
2
|
2
|
7,815
|
C
|
10,900
|
E
|
|
55.
|
Ridge Road |
S of Hughes Rd |
2
|
2
|
7,625
|
B
|
10,400
|
E
|
|
88.
|
Ridge Road |
W of Alta |
2
|
2
|
5,339
|
A
|
7,600
|
B
|
|
89.
|
Ridge Road |
E of Rough & Ready Hwy |
2
|
2
|
4,263
|
A
|
11,600
|
F
|
|
56.
|
Sierra College Dr |
SE of Ridge Rd |
2
|
2
|
3,180
|
A
|
7,200
|
B
|
|
103.
|
Taylorville |
S of McKnight |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
0
|
A
|
|
104.
|
Taylorville |
S of Crestview/Smith Ext |
2
|
2
|
NA
|
NA
|
3,100
|
A
|
LOS = Level of Service
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
NA = Not Applicable
(2) = Planned Road
- The planned number of lanes for all new roadways in the annexation areas should be adequate to accommodate
projected year 2020 P.M. peak hour traffic flows and provide a Level of Service "D". In these areas,
feasible at-grade improvements were identified for all major intersections.
- As shown in Figure 4-3, a number of existing roadways in the infill areas of the City will require widening
to provide Level of Service "D" operating conditions in the year 2020. Some of these locations are already
deficient, while others will experience increased traffic as a result of future growth. Also, a number of existing
intersections will require improvements.
- A number of existing intersections will require improvements to provide Level of Service "D". As
shown in Table 4-6, implementation of the General Plan Circulation Element and construction of the improvement
projects included in the current General Plan, will result in satisfactory levels of Service at most locations.
TABLE 4-6
YEAR 2020
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
| INTERSECTION |
EXISTING
|
2020
|
|
LOS
|
DEL/
VEH
|
LOS
|
DEL/
VEH
|
V/C
|
|
#381
|
Colfax Hwy/SR 49 Frontage |
|
|
B
|
14.1
|
0.633
|
|
#383
|
Main/Idaho Maryland/SR 49 SB Ramps |
C
|
17.9
|
F
|
129.5
|
1.285
|
|
#384
|
Idaho Maryland/SR 49 EB Ramps |
A/C
|
2.4
|
C
|
17.4
|
0.747
|
|
#385
|
Brunswick/SR 49 NB Ramps |
|
|
B
|
11.5
|
.659
|
|
#386
|
Brunswick/SR 49 SB Ramps |
|
|
C
|
15.2
|
0.394
|
|
#397
|
Idaho Maryland/Centennial |
A/C
|
3.7
|
C
|
6.2
|
|
|
#398
|
Whispering Pines/Centennial |
|
|
C
|
20.3
|
0.512
|
|
#409
|
Bennett/Centennial |
|
|
F
|
9.6
|
|
|
#413
|
Freeman/McCourtney/Mill/Allison |
B
|
7.8
|
C
|
21.5
|
0.633
|
|
#414
|
Mill/SR 20 WB Ramps |
C
|
12.9
|
C
|
16.8
|
0.629
|
|
#415
|
McCourtney/SR 20 EB Ramps |
A/E
|
3.5
|
C
|
17.0
|
0.509
|
|
#454
|
Sierra College/Litton/Robert Ross Way |
F
|
53.2
|
D
|
23.1
|
1.451
|
|
#565
|
SR 49/Crestview |
|
|
C
|
23.5
|
0.930
|
|
#640
|
Main/Bennett/Washington |
|
|
C
|
21.5
|
0.760
|
|
#641
|
Colfax Hwy/Ophir |
|
|
C
|
19.5
|
0.594
|
|
#669
|
Main/Alta |
|
|
C
|
24.1
|
0.793
|
|
#675
|
McKnight/SR 49 SB Ramps |
C
|
22.6
|
C
|
21.0
|
0.773
|
|
#676
|
McKnight/SR 49 NB Ramps |
C
|
19.6
|
C
|
19.6
|
0.729
|
|
#677
|
Empire/SR 20 SB Ramps |
|
|
D
|
36.8
|
1.030
|
|
#678
|
Empire/SR 20 NB Ramps |
|
|
B
|
13.8
|
0.513
|
|
#750
|
Nevada City Hwy/Sierra College |
|
|
C
|
24.3
|
0.691
|
|
#751
|
Nevada City Hwy/Hughes |
|
|
C
|
19.3
|
0.760
|
|
#754
|
Ridge/Hughes1 |
B
|
7.1
|
B
|
9.5
|
0.750
|
|
#755
|
Sierra College/Morgan Ranch/Ridge1 |
B/F
|
5.5
|
C
|
19.2
|
0.511
|
|
#766
|
McCourtney/Brighton |
A/C
|
1.6
|
D
|
27.1
|
0.752
|
|
#770
|
Auburn/Empire |
B
|
9.1
|
F
|
79.6
|
1.061
|
|
#797
|
Brunswick/Nevada City Hwy |
|
|
C
|
15.1
|
0.350
|
|
#799
|
Auburn/Main |
B
|
12.9
|
C
|
15.5
|
0.554
|
|
#804
|
Mill/Neal |
B
|
8.7
|
F
|
66.1
|
1.027
|
|
#805
|
Bennett/Ophir |
|
|
C
|
19.9
|
0.675
|
|
#813
|
Auburn/Neal |
|
|
C
|
23.3
|
0.621
|
|
#817
|
Brunswick/Sutton |
|
|
D
|
26.3
|
0.822
|
|
#818
|
Dorsey/Sutton |
|
|
C
|
19.4
|
0.655
|
|
#819
|
Idaho Maryland/Sutton |
A
|
1.5
|
A
|
2.9
|
0.000
|
|
#831
|
Freeman/McKnight |
C
|
10.4
|
F
|
108
|
0.788
|
|
#1006
|
Auburn/SR 49 Frontage |
|
|
B
|
10.9
|
0.352
|
|
#1841
|
Brunswick/Whispering Pines |
|
|
F
|
ovrfl
|
|
|
#2007
|
Brunswick/Dorsey |
|
|
F
|
ovrfl
|
|
V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio
LOS = Level of Service
Delay presented in seconds per vehicle
A/F = Average Intersection Delay/Worst Case Delay
1 = AM Peak Hour
- In some locations the feasibility of widening existing roads to four lanes is problematic. Although forecast
traffic volumes suggest the need to widen a portion of Main Street to a four lane section, the City of Grass Valley
recognizes that this level of improvement will likely prove to be impractical in the segment of Main from Alta
Street east to Idaho-Maryland Road. While the resulting traffic conditions on this road may exceed the LOS "D"
standard, the City is committed to maintaining adequate traffic flow in this area by increasing intersection capacity,
developing parallel routes, improving pedestrian linkages, promoting alternative transportation modes.
Similarly, widening to four lanes may also be deemed impractical on some collector streets. Ideally, the City
will continue to strive to provide at least a Level of Service (LOS) "D" at all locations. However, there
may be locations where the City may decide that the impacts and/or costs of the required improvements exceed the
benefits of having LOS "D" for all hours of the day. Allowing some flexibility enables the City to identify
circumstances in which major improvements are not desirable. While this could lead to some intersections operating
at worse than LOS "D" conditions for a limited amount of time per day, it would still maintain an overall
high Level of Service standard for the City's roadway system.
Public Transit
Public transportation will be of increasing importance during the planing period. Several trends contribute
to the need for a responsive transit system: a growing elderly population, already over 30-percent of the City
population; demand for tourist-oriented public transportation linking Downtown and places of interest; commutation
on Highway 49 south and, to a lesser extent, on Highways 20 and 174; clustering of business and commercial activity
(as called for by this General Plan) so as to facilitate public transportation routing and scheduling.
The Grass Valley area is currently served by three public transportation services:
- Gold Country Stage. A fixed route system serving populated centers in western Nevada County plus Colfax.
- Dial-a-Ride. Demand-based para-transit service operated by a private, non-profit organization.
- Gold Country Telecare. Private, non-profit system for handicapped and elderly patrons, using vans and similar
vehicles to transport passengers to shopping and medical appointments.
Express bus commuter service is planned for a route serving Nevada City/Grass Valley/Sacramento.
The future outlook for transit depends upon some key factors and substantial commitment by the City of Grass
Valley:
- A sound plan for transit, based on realistic demand and financial projections.
- A commitment to sustained dependable service, and an understanding of the level of subsidy necessary to support
such service.
- Coordination and cooperation among service providers.
- Limiting the number of public transportation providers, so as to discourage proliferation of small, ineffectual
entities.
Trails-Sidewalks Network (including Bikeways)
In the past 25 years, numerous bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian trails have been planned in Grass Valley.
Few have materialized. The only formal trails in Grass Valley are the Empire Mine State Park and the Litton Trail.
The 1996 Nevada County Master Bicycle Plan identifies bike lanes within the City of Grass Valley. The City has
not yet adopted this plan. Currently, the only designated bike facilities with the City and immediate vicinity
are on Ridge Road from Hughes Road to the Nevada Union High School and on East Main from Hughes to the Nevada City
Highway.
Both from the standpoints of transportation and recreation, demand for non-vehicular routes is large and growing.
In addition, safety concerns make pedestrian ways imperative, particularly along busy, high speed streets. The
General Plan Land Use Plan establishes a future land use pattern conducive to non-vehicular circulation, if a non-vehicular
infrastructure network can be provided. Aspects of the Land Use Plan "friendly" to non-vehicular plans
are: locations of traffic generating uses close enough to residential areas to facilitate walking and bicycling;
support for infill and higher density residential areas "close in"; and measures to minimize sprawl.
This General Plan includes a Trails-Sidewalks Plan (see Recreation Element for description and map). The system
is intended to provide for multi-purpose use of off-road trails and, where trails are impractical, sidewalks for
pedestrian use. Trails and sidewalks link together to form a viable network plan.
The Trails-Sidewalks Plan contemplates bicycle paths within trail easements to the extent possible. Bike lanes
along roadways are considered less desirable, but inevitable if no other alternative exists. Selected existing
streets and roads (not served by bike paths within the trail system) should be retrofitted with bicycle lanes.
Bicycle lanes should be provided on all new streets and roads, other than freeways and expressways.
Circulation Goals and Objectives
1-CG Provide a circulation system that utilizes a variety of transportation modes, including alternative means
of transportation.
1-CO Development of a viable pedestrian and bicycle transportation network (sidewalks, paths, lanes and trails)
providing alternatives to motorized vehicular transportation.
2-CO Ongoing examination of transit opportunities and funding mechanisms.
3-CO Inclusion of alternative transportation in local and regional transportation plans, as appropriate.
2-CG Ensure that street and roadway improvements complement and support land use goals, objectives, policies
and plans.
4-CO Placement of public transportation access at convenient locations.
5-CO Convenient, safe and functional facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrians.
6-CO Flexible standards that respect existing neighborhoods.
7-CO Use of City standards throughout the Planning Area.
3-CG Provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods in a manner that respects existing neighborhoods
and the natural environment.
8-CO Routing of through-traffic around neighborhoods to collector streets.
9-CO Use of traffic calming techniques to protect neighborhoods and residents from adverse traffic impacts.
10-CO Protection of stream courses, riparian areas and other natural features.
11-CO Development and implementation of a comprehensive traffic safety program, including improvement of facilities
serving pedestrian needs.
4-CG Maintain, improve and expand the existing circulation and transportation system to provide reasonable ingress,
egress and internal movement.
12-CO Establishment of and adherence to a functional hierarchy of streets and highways, both within the city
and throughout the Planning Area.
13-CO Improvement of the transportation system to facilitate commerce and economic development.
5-CG Maintain Adequate Emergency Access
12-CO Improvement and maintenance of adequate emergency access throughout the city.
Circulation Policies
1-CP Coordinate bikeway and trail system planning with Nevada County, linking the city network with similar
facilities in unincorporated areas.
2-CP Plan for multi-purpose transportation/recreation bicycle and pedestrian facilities to optimize facility
usage and enhance potential funding.
3-CP Improve public transportation to better link existing and future residential areas with high traffic generating
commercial/industrial nodes.
4-CP Develop plans for free or low-fare transit serving the downtown area, Empire Mine and other areas of particular
interest.
5-CP Develop plans, in conjunction with existing transit agencies, for a shuttle bus service to accommodate
inter-modal transfers and to make transit facilities more convenient.
6-CP Locate transit stops and park and ride facilities near freeway interchanges and in conjunction with higher
density residential and mixed-use developments.
7-CP Provide park and ride facilities to encourage car pooling and discourage excess automobile usage.
8-CP Incorporate separated, non-motorized paths in street cross-section designs whenever feasible.
9-CP Adopt appropriate designs, techniques and standards to calm traffic through residential neighborhoods.
10-CP Encourage Nevada County to utilize City roadway, access and circulation standards within the Planning
Area.
11-CP Design selected streets and intersections employing modern roundabouts and other traffic calming techniques.
12-CP Adhere to high safety standards where pedestrians and bicyclists are exposed to motorized vehicles.
13-CP Assure the continuity of sidewalks by instituting a city-wide sidewalk planning/construction programs.
14-CP Provide street lighting in existing neighborhoods as necessary.
15-CP Avoid environmentally sensitive areas, to the extent feasible, when expanding the roadway network.
16-CP Eliminate curb cuts and other vehicular encroachments along arterial and collector streets where feasible
and practical, to promote both efficient traffic flow and traffic safety.
17-CP Redesign and reconstruct freeway access and connector streets, to include a new interchange at Dorsey
Drive and Highway 20/49.
18-CP Study bypass routes designed and located to avert undesirable through-traffic in residential and non-residential
neighborhoods.
19-CP Add vehicular parking in the downtown area.
20-CP Re-design intersections on collector streets to improve and "smooth" traffic flow.
21-CP Defer to preservation of community character, including historical and architectural features, when planning
and implementing transportation improvements.
22-CP Remove impediments to emergency access from public streets and rights-of-way.
23-CP Establish and periodically review emergency access standards in appropriate city development codes and
ordinances.
24-CP Coordinate circulation and development plans with public safety agencies, fire departments/districts and
emergency service providers.
25-CP Defer the extension of Freeman Lane southward across Wolf Creek until such time as the Crestview-Smith
extension is constructed between North Star and Highway 49.
26-CP Develop design standards to ensure that road segments being improved to four lanes incorporated aesthetic
treatments, including landscaping, landscaped medians, setbacks for sidewalks, street lights, street furniture,
signage restrictions, and other design elements.
Circulation Implementation Actions and Strategies
1-CI Adopt the roadway classification system outlined in the Circulation Element. The City shall plan, design
and regulate roadways in accordance with the functional classification system reflected in Figure 4-1 and Table
4-1.
2-CI Regularly update Development Impact Fees.
3-CI Ensure that proposed specific plans are consistent with the provisions of the functional classification
component. This shall include incorporation of consistent design standards for roadways, associated bikeways and
trails, and landscape areas. Require that large development proposals and specific plans include comprehensive
financing plans for streets and highways.
4-CI Work with neighboring jurisdictions and regional planning agencies to coordinate the classification of
roadways that cross the City's boundaries. Strive to have compatible functional classifications for gateway roadways.
5-CI Continue to refine and improve the design standards for the roadway system. The design standards shall
reflect functional classification and include the following elements:
- Right-of-way requirements
- Roadway cross-sections including landscaping and bikeways
- Signalization and access control
- Land use compatibility, orientation and design standards
- Vehicle and pedestrian safety
- Variable local street widths based on traffic demands
Exceptions to the standards may be necessary but should be kept to a minimum and should be evaluated on a case
by case basis.
6-CI Monitor truck traffic. As conditions warrant, develop, enforce, evaluate and update a truck route system
to ensure safe and efficient routes through the City.
7-CI Continue to update the Capital Improvement Program to implement policy which strives to maintain LOS "D"
at all locations during the weekday P.M. peak hour. Define "normally accepted maximum" improvements that
are consistent with the character and terrain of Grass Valley. If forecast traffic volumes cannot maintain LOS
"D", the City Council may consider additional "extraordinary" improvements. The City Council
may determine, on a case by case basis, that "extraordinary" improvements are not feasible or desirable
and may relax the LOS "D" standard for a particular intersection or roadway segment. In considering exceptions
to the LOS "D" standard, the City shall consider the following factors:
- The number of hours per day that the intersection or roadway segment would operate at conditions worse the
LOS "D".
- The ability of the improvement to reduce peak hour delay and improve traffic operations.
- The impact on accessibility to surrounding properties.
- The right-of-way needs and the physical impact on surrounding properties.
- The visual aesthetics of the required improvements and its impact on community identity and character.
- Environmental impacts including air quality and noise impacts.
- Construction and right-of-way acquisition costs.
- Impacts on pedestrian and bicycle accessibility and safety.
- The impacts of the required construction phasing and traffic maintenance.
In no case should the City plan for worse then LOS "E" at any intersection or roadway segment during
the afternoon peak hour.
8-CI Base the Capital Improvement Program on a 20 year horizon and update the Program regularly. Update concurrently
with the approval of any significant modification to the land use allocation assumed by the Citywide travel model.
9-CI Regularly monitor traffic volumes on City streets and prepare an annual report documenting recent trends
and current Levels of Service.
10-CI Require that Specific Plans contain transportation improvements consistent with the standards of the Circulation
Element, and that Specific Plans demonstrate what measures will be required to maintain the City's Level of Service
standard and how these measures will be funded. Utilize development agreements to secure improvement, sequencing
and funding provisions.
11-CI Prepare a Long-Range Transit Master Plan consistent with the provisions of the Circulation Element. Explore
potential benefits of improved transit service on the City's Level of Service standard through the Long-Range Transit
Master Plan.
12-CI Evaluate the feasibility of enacting a Transportation Systems Management Ordinance. If a TSM ordinance
is enacted, the City shall assess the effectiveness of a TSM Ordinance in reducing vehicle trips, or in making
street, parking facilities, public transit and bikeways more effective. Evaluate the TSM Ordinance's overall performance
annually. If, after two to three years the trip reduction goals are not being achieved, revise the TSM Ordinance
to include measures to achieve stated goals.
13-CI Prepare a Bikeways Master Plan consistent with the Trails-Sidewalks Plan in this General Plan. Adopt the
1996 Nevada County Master Bicycle Plan and Trails Master Plan. The intent is to ensure the coordinated implementation
of non-automotive circulation systems.
14-CI Coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions to provide acceptable and compatible levels of service on roadways
connecting the City. Work with the Nevada County Transportation Commission to implement applicable Level of Service
standards. Work with appropriate air pollution control agencies to implement transportation improvements and measures
that help meet the established air goals and standards.
15-CI Ensure adequate funding to meet established Level of Service policies. Continue to implement and update
traffic impact fees on new development and to obtain gas tax and other revenues to fund the Capital Improvement
Program. Explore funding for transit and for non-motorized circulation improvements, to be identified in the Trails-Sidewalks-Bikeways
Master Plan. Consider alternative funding sources, such as establishment of assessment district(s). Work with regional
planning agencies to explore funding opportunities for all components of its transportation system that are required
to meet Level of Service standards.
16-CI Monitor the status of regional planning efforts and Caltrans design work in order to be cognizant of future
right of way requirements and local responsibilities. Maintain a current record of Caltrans and Nevada County Transportation
Commission activity for major facilities so future right of way needs can be addressed when reviewing development
proposals. Consider future Caltrans right of way needs when evaluating development proposals and shall incorporate
measures to preserve rights of way into development agreements and conditions of approval.
17-CI Identify appropriate environmental traffic volume thresholds for residential streets and shall consider
those thresholds in development review. Use traffic calming measures to ensure that these thresholds are maintained
on existing streets and provided on local streets in new development.
18-CI Develop a plan for parking that identifies park and ride lots. Consider the need for park and ride facilities
and for facilities serving alternative transportation modes when evaluating development proposals. Require construction
of these facilities concurrent with development, or fair-share developer contributions in lieu of actual construction.
|
