Page - 1 -
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
OF THE JURUPA VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, December 1, 2022
Council Study Session: 5:30 p.m.
Regular Meeting: 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chamber
8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
1. 5:30 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR STUDY SESSION ● Chris Barajas, Mayor
● Leslie Altamirano, Mayor Pro Tem
● Lorena Barajas Bisbee, Council Member
● Brian Berkson, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
A. As a courtesy to those in attendance, we ask that cell phones be turned off or set to their silent mode and that you keep talking to a minimum so that all persons can hear the comments of the public and City Council.
B. A member of the public who wishes to speak under Public Comments must fill out a “Speaker Card” and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor calls for Public Comments on an agenda item. Each agenda item up will be open for public comments before taking action. Public comments on subjects that are not on the agenda can be made during the “Public Appearance/Comments” portion of the agenda.
C. If the Meeting is conducted via teleconferencing pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e), the public may submit comments to the City Council via email or via telephone prior to the Mayor calling the item. Email comment shall be sent to:
[email protected]. Telephone comments may be made by calling (951) 332- 6464, Ext. 140. Email and telephone comments are subject to the same rules as in-person comments.
D. Members of the public who wish to comment on the CONSENT CALENDAR may do so during the Public Comment portion of the Agenda prior to the adoption of the Consent Calendar.
E. As a courtesy to others and to assure that each person wishing to be heard has an opportunity to speak, please limit your comments to 3 minutes.
Page - 2 -
2. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
A. STUDY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE ALTERNATIVE (HYBRID) PUBLIC
SAFETY MODEL STUDY
Requested Action: That the City Council receive, discuss and file a Citygate Associates LLC presentation of the Alternative (Hybrid) Public Safety Model Study.
3. 7:00 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR REGULAR MEETING ● Chris Barajas, Mayor
● Leslie Altamirano, Mayor Pro Tem
● Lorena Barajas Bisbee, Council Member
● Brian Berkson, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
4. INVOCATION
5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
7. PRESENTATIONS
A. RECOGNITION TO LORENA BARAJAS BISBEE
B. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL SERVICES -
INTRODUCTION OF “PET OF THE MONTH”
C. PRESENTATION BY RUBIDOUX COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT D. UPDATE ON AGATE STREET TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES
8. PUBLIC APPEARANCE/COMMENTS
Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects other than those listed on the Agenda are requested to do so at this time. A member of the public who wishes to speak under Public Appearance/Comments OR the Consent Calendar must fill out a “Speaker Card” and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor calls for Public Comments on an agenda item. When addressing the City Council, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. While listing your nam e and address is not required, it helps us to provide follow -up information to you if needed. In order to conduct a timely meeting, we ask that you keep your comments to 3 minutes. Government Code Section 54954.2 prohibits the City Council from taking ac tion on a specific item until it appears on an agenda.
Page - 3 -
9. INTRODUCTIONS, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, COUNCIL COMMENTS AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS
10. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ORAL/WRITTEN REPORTS REGARDING
REGIONAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. MAYOR CHRIS BARAJAS
1. UPDATE ON THE INTERAGENCY COORDINA TING COUNCIL
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 18, 2022
B. COUNCIL MEMBER BRIAN BERKSON
1. UPDATE ON THE METROL INK / SOUTHERN CALIF ORNIA
REGIONAL RAIL AUTHOR ITY MEETING OF NOVEM BER 18,
2022
11. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
12. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. NOVEMBER 17, 2022 REGULAR MEETING
13. CONSENT CALENDAR (COMMENTS ON CONSENT AGENDA TAKEN HERE) (All matters on the Consent Calendar are to be approved in one motion unless a Councilmember requests a separate action on a specific item on the Consent Calendar. If an item is removed from the Consent Calendar, it will be discussed individually and acted upon separately.)
A. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF
THE TEXT OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS INCLUDED IN
THE AGENDA
Requested Action: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda.
B. CONSIDERATION OF CHECK REGISTER IN THE AMOUNT OF
$6,644,382.67
Requested Action: That the City Council ratify the check registers dated October 26 and November 2, 9 and 16, 2022 as well as the payroll registers, two dated October 28, 31 and November 11, 2022.
C. APPROVAL OF CITY HOLIDAY SCHEDULE
Requested Action: That the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 2022-111, entitled:
Page - 4 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING HOLIDAYS ON WHICH CITY
OFFICES SHALL BE CLOSED FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2023
D. ORDINANCE NO. 2022-21
Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2022-21, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONE OF
APPROXIMATELY 6.92-ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT
7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183 -030-014) FROM A-1 (LIGHT
AGRICULTURE) TO R -4 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) , AND MAKING
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CEQA
E. ISSUANCE OF PUBLIC REPORT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858(D) REGARDING INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE
NO. 2022 -02, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS RELATED TO URBAN
LOT SPLITS AND HOUSING UNITS BUILT IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SENATE BILL 9
Requested Action: That the City Council issue this report pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(d) regarding Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 202 2-02 establishing regulations related to SB 9.
F. RESOLUTION DENYING MASTER APPLICATION (MA) NO. 22051:
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (VTTM) NO. 38257 FOR 118
CONDOMINIUMS ON APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LIMONITE AVENUE AND BEACH
STREET; (APN:162 -230-012); CEQA DOES NOT APPLY TO
PROJECTS WHICH A PUBLIC AGENCY DISAPPROVES
Requested Action: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022 -113, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNI A, DENYING MASTER APPLICATION NO.
22051, A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38257 AND A
NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT A
SCHEDULE “A” SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES
OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
OF LIMONITE AVENUE AND BEACH STREET (APN:162-230-012)
14. CONSIDERATION OF ANY ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
Page - 5 -
15. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PUBLIC HEARING TO CO NSIDER AN AIRPORT ZO NE AT FLABOB AIRPORT, GENERAL PLA N AMENDMENT (GPA) 22 007, ZONING
CODE AMENDMENT (ZCA) NO.22013, CHANGE OF ZONE (CZ) 22008; LOCATION: 4130 MENNES AVE, JURUPA VALLEY APNS: 181-151-001, -002,-003 AND -005; 181-152-001, -002, -004, AND -005; 181-160-004; 181- 170-005,-006, -009 THROUGH -022, AND -026; 181,180-001, 181-190-001, -004, -007, -008, -009, -010, -015, -021, AND -022; 181-370-002, -005, -006, - 007, AND A PORTION O F -008; 181-400-001, -002, 003, -004 ,-008, AND - 009)
1. Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider any public testimony, and
2. That the City Council conduct a first reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-22 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY ,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL
CODE TO ESTABLISH A NEW AIRPORT ZONE
CLASSIFICATION, ESTABLISH PERMITTED LAND USES AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE AIRPORT ZONE, AND
MAKE OTHER CONFORMING CHANGES TO TITLE 9 OF THE
JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPA L CODE, AND FINDING AN
EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE
CEQA GUIDELINES; AND
3. That the City Council conduct a first reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-23, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CHANGING THE
ZONES OF APPROXIMATELY 138.86 COMBINED ACRES OF
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4130 MENNES AVENUE FROM
MANUFACTURING HEAVY (M -H), MANUFACTURING -
SERVICE COMMERCIAL (M -SC), GENERAL RESID ENTIAL (R-
3), AND PLANNED RESIDENTIAL (R -4) ZONES TO AIRPORT
(AIR) ZONE, AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA
UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES; AND
4. That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-112, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, MAKING A DETERMINATION
Page - 6 -
OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA G UIDELINES SECTION
15061(B)(3), AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
NO. 22007 TO AMEND THE 2017 GENERAL PLAN TO STATE
THAT THE AIRPORT (AIR) ZONE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
PUBLIC FACILITY \INSTITUTIONAL (PF) LAND USE
DESIGNATION AND AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP TO REDESIGNATE THE ENTIRETY OF THE FLABOB
AIRPORT SITE TO PUBLIC FACILITY/INSTITUTIONAL (PF)
B. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 22007 AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TITLE 9 (“PLANNING AND ZONING”) OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR AUTOMOBILE FUELING
STATIONS
1. Requested Action: That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider any public testimony, and
2. That the City Council conduct a first reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-24 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING AUTOMOBILE FUELING STATION US ES, AND
FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION
15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
16. COUNCIL BUSINESS
17. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
18. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
19. CONVENE TO CLOSED SESSION
A. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO CLOSED SESSION ITEM
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION. The City Council will meet in closed session with the City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) with respect to one matter of pending litigation: Four Star Midwest v. Jurupa Va lley, Riverside County Superior Court No. RIC 1904113.
20. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF A NY REPORTABLE ACTION S IN CLOSED
SESSION
Page - 7 -
21. ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the Regular Meeting of December 15, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chamber, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a meeting of the Jurupa Valley City Council or other services, please contact Jurupa Valley City Hall at (951) 332 -6464. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
Agendas of public meetings and any other writings distributed to all, or a majority of, Jurupa Valley City Council Members in connection with a matter subject to discussion or consideration at an open meeting of the City Council are public records. If such writing is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a public meeting, the writing will be made available for public inspection at the City of Jurupa Valley, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509, at the time the writing is distributed to all , or a majority of, Jurupa Valley City Council Members. The City Council may also post the writing on its Internet website at www.jurupavalley.org.
Agendas and Minutes are posted on the City’s website at www.jurupavalley.org. 120
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.A
STUDY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE ALTERNATIVE (HYBRID)
PUBLIC SAFETY MODEL STUDY
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive, discuss and file a Citygate Associates LLC presentation of the Alternative (Hybrid) Public Safety Model Study.
BACKGROUND
The City of Jurupa Valley has contracted with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (Sheriff) for police services since its incorporation in 2011. In 2017, the City, along with several other Riverside County cities that contract with the Sheriff, commissioned a study to assess the feasibility of establishing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) regional police department in lieu of utilizing the Sheriff. This effort culminated with a report authored by Citygate Associates, LLC (Citygate) in February of 2021 recommending against the JPA concept primarily due to cost.
Subsequent discussions by the Jurupa Valley City Council focused not on a multiple-city police agency , but rather a City -provided police department. In March 2021, the City Council reviewed and approved a staff proposal to retain Citygate to leverage the knowledge and data obtained in the pr evious JPA study into a City -specific feasibility study.
On November 4, 2021, Citygate Associates held a Study Session with the City Council to present a report on the feasibility of a City -provided police department. Citygate’s key findings were as follows:
The City’s current policing costs are low relative to surrounding jurisdictions. An analysis of the operational costs associated with a City -provided police department shows significant increased costs.
Alternative service delivery models and communit y policing models in other California communities that may provide viable options for Jurupa Valley.
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
Community satisfaction survey respondents were generally satisfied with law enforcement services provided by the Sheriff.
A City operated police department would lead to increased liability and workers’ compensation costs that are currently spread over a larger employee pool with the County Sheriff.
The study showed a dramatic increase in recurring and startup costs should the City wish to pursue a City provided police department. The City Council discussed and provided preliminary direction to staff regarding next steps to explore alternative service delivery models and the ir costs . Alternative public safety services delivery models have successfully improved service in other cities and has done so more cost effectively. For example, a model that relies upon regional police services for more serious crimes while utilizing local resources for quality of life type enforcement could meet Councils desire for increased responsiveness while maintaining cost efficiency.
ANALYSIS
Staff was again extremely pleased with the quality of the work from Citygate. This second study analyses alternative public safety models, includes several community policing models to address less-critical quality-of-life complaints that are currently being handled through the City’s law enforcement contract with the Riverside C ounty Sheriff’s Department. Additionally, Citygate was asked to look at mental health response models other than traditional police response with arme d, fully sworn peace officers (D eputy Sheriffs).
Citygate’s Key Findings are as follows:
Alternative/hybrid response models can be classified into public safety models and mental health models.
There are successful alternative response models operating in nearby jurisdictions.
The County of Riverside and the Riverside County Sheriff ’s Department have some viable alternative response components in operation. An analysis of alternative response models shows that the City can increase local control to address quality -of-life issues while maintaining a law enforcement contract with Riverside County Sheriff ’s Depa rtment to address primary law enforcement duties.
Two hybrid models are presented for discussion with unlimited variations for future implementation
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the comprehensive report and analysis conducted by Citygate Associates, and discuss and provide preliminary direction to staff regarding next steps. The analysis displays successful implementation of
Page | 3
alternative/hybrid response models in other municipalities that increase local control over issues related to public safety and quality of life complaints. Therefore, Staff recommends the City move forward to create a Public Safety Department with the mission of managing current public safety contracts as well as deploying an operational force of non -sworn Public Safety Officers that can handle quality-of-life complaints within the City.
If the City Council is interested in exploring a Public Safety Department, Staff will return to City Council with phase-one of a staffing plan and budget , with estimated ongoing annual costs as well as a cost estimate for one-time start-up expenses associated with a Public Safety Department.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact at this time.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the matter to receive additional information from Staff and to provide additional time for Council discussion and consideration.
************************** SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE **************************
C
I
T
Y
O
F
J
U
R
U
P
A
V
A
L
L
E
Y
,
C
A
N
O
V
E
M
B
E
R
1 0
,
2 0
2 2
6 0
0 C
O
O
L
I
D
G
E
D
R
.
,
S
T
E
.
1 5
0 F
O
L
S
O
M
,
C
A
9 5
6 3
0 P
H
O
N
E
:
(
9 1
6 )
4 5
8 -
5 1
0 0
F
A
X
:
(
9 1
6 )
9 8
3 -
2 0
9 0
W
W
W
.
C
I
T
Y
G
A
T
E
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
E
S
.
C
O
M
P
O
L
I
C
E
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
This page was intentionally left blank
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Table of Contents page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................1 Study History and Precedent ...................................................................................................................... 1 Citygate’s Key Findings ............................................................................................................................. 2 Citygate’s Key Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 4 Section 1—Study and Agency Background ................................................................................................................7
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 How This Analysis Was Performed............................................................................................... 7
1.3 Review of Current Contract Service Levels .................................................................................. 8
1.4 Benchmark Data ............................................................................................................................ 9
1.5 Crime Rate Comparison............................................................................................................... 10
1.5.1 Crime Reporting .............................................................................................................. 10
1.6 Calls for Service........................................................................................................................... 11
1.6.1 Public-Generated Calls for Service versus Officer-Initiated Activity ............................ 12
1.6.2 Jurupa Valley Calls for Service Trend ............................................................................ 12
1.6.3 Types of Calls for Service ............................................................................................... 13 Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models .................................................................................................15
2.1 Mental Health Response Models ................................................................................................. 15
2.1.1 Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) – San Diego County .......................... 15
2.1.2 Homeless Outreach & Mobile Engagement (HOME) – La Mesa, CA ........................... 16
2.2 Riverside County Mental Health Response Models .................................................................... 16
2.2.1 Community Behavioral Assessment Team (CBAT) – Riverside County Sheriff ........... 16
2.2.2 Mobile Crisis Management Team – Riverside County ................................................... 16
2.2.3 Mobile Crisis Response Team – Riverside County ........................................................ 17
2.3 Community Policing or Public Safety Department Models ........................................................ 17
2.3.1 Community Service Officers ........................................................................................... 17
2.3.2 City-Provided Community Service Officers ................................................................... 17
2.3.3 Department of Neighborhood Services – City of Palmdale ............................................ 18
2.3.4 Public Safety Department – City of Paramount .............................................................. 20
2.3.5 Public Safety Department – City of Norwalk ................................................................. 22
2.4 Riverside County Sheriff’s Department Community Service Officers ....................................... 25 Section 3—Traffic Safety Review ..............................................................................................................................27
3.1 Review of Traffic Safety Resources ............................................................................................ 27
3.2 Traffic Safety Analysis ................................................................................................................ 27
3.3 Local Road Safety Plan................................................................................................................ 32
3.3.1 Primary Traffic Injury Behaviors (Identified in the LRSP) ............................................ 33
3.3.2 Education Recommendations (Identified in the LRSP) .................................................. 33
3.3.3 Enforcement Recommendation (Identified in the LRSP) ............................................... 33
3.4 Office of Traffic Safety................................................................................................................ 33
3.5 SafeTREC Complete Streets Safety Assessment......................................................................... 35
3.6 Traffic Safety Findings and Recommendations........................................................................... 36
3.6.1 Traffic Safety Findings.................................................................................................... 36 City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Table of Contents page ii
3.6.2 Traffic Safety Recommendations .................................................................................... 36 Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley .......................................................................39
4.1 Narrative Summary of Citygate’s Key Findings ......................................................................... 39
4.2 Citygate’s Public Safety Model Recommendation ...................................................................... 39
4.3 Public Safety Department vs. Division – Two Scenarios ............................................................ 40
4.3.1 Jurupa Valley Public Safety Department – Standalone .................................................. 40
4.3.2 Jurupa Valley Public Safety Division ............................................................................. 45
4.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 47 Appendix
Appendix A—Contract Policing Cost-Saving Variables Presentation Table of Tables
Table 1—Proposed Public Safety Department – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs ............................................ 3 Table 2—Law Enforcement Services Contracts Spending by City – Benchmark by Population ................................. 9 Table 3—Law Enforcement Services Contracts Spending by City – Benchmark by Per Capita Spending ................ 10 Table 4—City of Norwalk Calls for Service – July 2022 ............................................................................................ 24 Table 5—Jurupa Valley Traffic Percentage of Total Calls for Service ....................................................................... 27 Table 6—Jurupa Valley Vehicle Crashes by Day of Week by Time of Day .............................................................. 32 Table 7—Jurupa Valley OTS Indicators and Rankings ............................................................................................... 34 Table 8—Public Safety Department – Net New FTEs ................................................................................................ 42 Table 9—Public Safety Department – Estimated Personnel Costs .............................................................................. 43 Table 10—Proposed Public Safety Department – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs ........................................ 43 Table 11—Per Capita Cost Comparison by City – Public Safety Department – FY 21/22......................................... 44 Table 12—Public Safety Division – Net New FTEs ................................................................................................... 46 Table 13—Public Safety Division – Estimated Personnel Costs ................................................................................. 46 Table 14—Proposed Public Safety Division – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs ............................................. 47 Table 15—Per Capita Cost Comparison by City – Public Safety Division – FY 21/22 .............................................. 47 Table of Figures
Figure 1—Conceptual Public Safety Department Staffing Model ................................................................................ 4 Figure 2—Violent Crime Rate – Jurupa Valley Versus State and National Averages ................................................ 11 Figure 3—Jurupa Valley Trends in Calls for Service – 2017–2021 ............................................................................ 12 Figure 4—Palmdale Department of Neighborhood Services Organizational Structure .............................................. 19 Figure 5—Paramount Public Safety Department Organizational Structure ................................................................ 20 Figure 6—Norwalk Public Safety Department Organizational Structure.................................................................... 22 Figure 7—Jurupa Valley Three-Year Injury Collision Location Map......................................................................... 29 Figure 8—Jurupa Valley Three-Year Vehicle Crash Severity .................................................................................... 30 Figure 9—Jurupa Valley Vehicle Crashes by PCF Violation ...................................................................................... 31 Figure 10—Jurupa Valley Public Safety Department Organizational Model ............................................................. 41 Figure 11—Jurupa Valley Public Safety Division Organizational Model................................................................... 45
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Executive Summary page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Jurupa Valley (City) retained Citygate Associates, LLC (Citygate) to study alternative—or hybrid—response models to address less-critical quality-of-life complaints that are currently being handled through the City’s law enfor cement contract with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (Sheriff’s Department). Specifically, Citygate was asked to look at models other than traditional police response with armed, fully sworn peace officers (deputy sheriffs).
Additionally, Citygate was asked to review mental health response models.
STUDY HISTORY AND PRECEDENT
This study follows three previous studies involving contracted law enforcement services in which the City participated, two of which were authored by Citygate. In the previous studies, the City was party to a consortium of Riverside County municipalities that sought to asse ss the feasibility of establishing a city-centric Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to provide law enforcement services.
Citygate authored one of the studies that recommended a JPA was not as cost -effective as the City’s current contract law enforcement structu re. Citygate further recommended that the cities work with the Sheriff’s Department to seek additional cost control measures, and with local, non- sworn services that could assist with quality-of-life issues.
Subsequent to that study, the City again retain ed Citygate to research the feasibility of forming a single City police agency in lieu of the contracted services being provided by the Sheriff’s Department. In addition, the City asked for recommended strategies to increase local control — once again for qu ality-of-life issues being voiced by the community to which the City felt the Sheriff’s Department was not being responsive. In this third study, Citygate found that forming a standalone, City -provided police department was not cost -effective when compared to the Sheriff’s Department law enforcement contract model, but that there were alternative /hybrid response models in effect in nearby municipalities that were worth researching further for efficacy in Jurupa Valley.
Additionally, based on the results of a community satisfaction survey administered during the previous study, Citygate was asked to review the status of traffic safety and enforcement within the City and provide related recommendations.
In summary, this study finds and recommends that along with keeping its partnerships with the Sheriff’s Department contract and other County provider agencies, the City should consider building capacity within the City’s workforce that assumes more responsibility for less -critical enforcement and public assistance needs along with local control for overall public safety. Doing so would leverage the best of a regional approach to serious crime, along with the familiarity of providing neighborhood quality-of-life services by the City.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Executive Summary page 2
The City can accomplish thi s by establishing a Public Safety Department of non -sworn Public Safety Officers that are focused on addressing quality-of-life complaints that do not need a sworn police response, thus relieving the Sheriff’s Department from handling these complaints.
Furthermore, the City should review the traffic safety assessment within this report and work with the Sheriff’s Department to address these recommendations.
CITYGATE’S KEY FINDINGS
Citygate’s key findings are as follows:
◆ Alternative/hybrid response models ca n be classified into mental health response models and public safety response models.
◆ There are successful alternative response models in existence in nearby jurisdictions.
◆ The County of Riverside and the Sheriff’s Department have viable alternative response models in operation.
◆ An analysis of alternative response models shows that the City can increase local control to address quality -of-life issues while maintaining a law enforcement contract with the Sheriff’s Department to address primary law enforcement duties.
The following cost model shows the estimated start-up and ongoing, annual costs for a fully staffed Public Safety Department. These costs would be in addition to current contract costs for the Sheriff’s Department.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Executive Summary page 3
Table 1—Proposed Public Safety Department – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs Ongoing Annual Costs Amount
Wages and Benefits 3,349,133
Maintenance and Operations 510,000
Indirect Administrative Overhead 68,000
Total Ongoing Annual Costs 3,927,1331
One-Time Start-Up Costs Amount
Vehicle Purchases 576,000
Facilities Lease 60,000
Uniforms/Personnel Equipment 51,000
Furniture 48,000
Total One-Time Start-up Costs 735,000
1 Proposed Public Safety Department annual costs would represent a 17 percent increase to FY 2022-23 public safety expenditures of $23,590,072.
This cost model is based on Citygate’s conceptual Public Safety Department staffing model, which is depicted in the following figure.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Executive Summary page 4
Figure 1—Conceptual Public Safety Department Staffing Model
CITYGATE’S KEY RECOMMENDATION
Based on (1) City Council’s desire to increase local control over issues related to public safety and quality-of-life complaints, and (2) the successful implementation of alternative/hybrid response models in other municipalities that also contract for police services with a sheriff’s department, Citygate recommends the City move to create a Public Safety Department with the mission of City Manager
Public Safety Department
Director (1)
Asst Director (1)
Community Engagement
Manager (1)
Community Relations
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
Homeless Outreach
Supervisor (2)
Public Safety Officer (2)
Maintenance (4)
Public Safety Operations
Manager (1)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
Code Compliance
Manager (1)
Code Enforcement Officer (6)
Emergency
Preparedness
Public Safety Contracts
Sheriff
CALFire
Animal Services
Management Analyst (1)
Office Assistant (1)
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Executive Summary page 5
managing current public safety contrac ts as well as deploying an operational force of non -sworn Public Safety Officers that can handle quality-of-life complaints within the City.
Additionally, the City should consider the traffic safety findings and recommendations within this report and work with the Sheriff’s Department to improve traffic safety as the City evolves.
This page was intentionally left blank
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 7
SECTION 1—STUDY AND AGENCY BACKGROUND
1.1 BACKGROUND
The City of Jurupa Valley (City) has contracted with the Riverside County (County) Sheriff’s Department (Sheriff’s Department) for police services since its incorporation in 2011. In 2017, the City, along with several other County cities that contract with the Sheriff’s Department , commissioned a study to assess the feasibility of establishing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) regional police department in lieu of utilizing the Sheriff’s Department. This effort culminated in a report authored by Citygate Associates, LLC (Citygate) in February of 2021 recommending against the JPA concept primarily due to cost.1
In March of 2021, at the direction of the Jurupa Valley City Council, the City independently retained Citygate to conduct a follow-on study focused not on a regional police agency but rather the feasibility of a City -provided police department. This study also culminated with a report recommending Jurupa Valley continue to contract for law enforcement services with the Sheriff’s Department while also considering alternative public safety options, such as alternatives to sworn law enforcement officer response models, as well as mental health response models.2 In February of 2022, again at the direction of City Council, the City commissioned Citygate to study up to f ive mental health response and alternative (or hybrid) public safety models.
Specifically, the Council asked Citygate to study alternative response methods for quality -of-life complaints and needs within the City. Further, in initial meetings with the Assistant City Manager, Citygate was asked to review the current state of traffic enforcement within the City.
1.2 HOW THIS ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED
Citygate identified five operational models, including two mental health response models and three alternative/hybrid response models, referred to in this report as public safety models. Citygate then met multiple times with City staff, Sheriff’s Department command and supervisory staff, representatives from model agencies, and other relevant sources of information to:
◆ Understand current deployment and special services related to police services provided via the Sheriff’s Department contract, as well as the Sheriff’s Department cost structure.
1 Reference: Police Services JPA Feasibility Assessment for the Cities of Canyon Lake, Jurupa Valley, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, San Jacinto, Temecula, and Wildomar; Citygate Associates, LLC, February 2, 2021. 2Reference: Feasibility Assessment to Establish a City -Provided Police Department for the City of Jurupa Valley; Citygate Associates, LLC, October 26, 2021.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 8
◆ Discuss the risks to be protected by the C ity and any necessary near -term modifications to policing to accommodate changes envisioned by the City. ◆ Gather benchmark data on per capita policing costs in the City and similar jurisdictions.
◆ Review alternative service delivery models and promising practices in public safety.
◆ Assess the current state of traffic enforcement within the City. ◆ Create a conceptual model or models applicable to Jurupa Valley. ◆ Gather estimated start-up and operating costs for the conceptual models described.
This report builds on data and analysis developed in the two previous studies performed by Citygate and should be read in conjunction with those reports.
1.3 REVIEW OF CURRENT CONTRACT SERVICE LEVELS
According to the City’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 21/22, the overall amount budgeted for the law enforcement contract with the Sheriff’s Department is $21,577,866 .3 As noted in previous Citygate reports, the City’s service contract includes a b aseline number of patrol hours per day in addition to a menu of add-on special services based on the needs of the community.
Currently, the City contracts for 180 hours of patrol 4 per day. This amounts to approximately 37 full-time deputy sheriff positions. The City pays for these services based on an hourly rate that includes support staff, both sworn and non-sworn. In addition to these costs, the City pays for the following dedicated special services:
◆ 7 deputies assigned to the Traffic Enforcement Team
◆ 2 Community Policing deputies
◆ 4 deputies assigned to the Special Enforcement Team (SET) ◆ 4 deputies assigned to the Problem Oriented Policing (POP) unit ◆ 5 (non-sworn) dedicated Community Service Officers (CSOs)
3 Budget figures for FY 2022-23 are as previously stated—$23,590,072, or 43 percent of the overall City budget. 4 For a complete breakdown of Sheriff’s Department contract costs see Feasibility Assessment to Establish a City - Provided Police Department for the City of Jurupa Valley; Citygate Associates, LLC, October 26, 2021.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 9
1.4 BENCHMARK DATA
As part of its research, Cit ygate leveraged data gather ed in previous studies in conjunction with new data to establish agency benchmarks for comparative analysis.
Table 2 and Table 3 list other cities in the County that also contract with the Sheriff’s Department, as well as three cities (discussed later in this study ) that contract with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, but also employ Public Safety Departments . Table 2 details each municipalities’ law enforcement services contract and the per capita policing costs of each city.
Table 2—Law Enforcement Services Contracts Spending by City – Benchmark by Population
City Population Law Enforcement
Budget1
Law Enforcement
Spending Per Capita
Paramount 52,477 9,450,150 180.08
San Jacinto 54,593 13,008,250 238.28
Lake Elsinore 71,615 16,966,030 236.91
Norwalk 101,645 17,351,121 170.70
Jurupa Valley 105,384 21,577,886 204.75
Temecula 109,925 37,715,317 343.10
Palmdale 167,398 30,475,900 182.06
Moreno Valley 209,426 50,871,138 242.91
Average 109,058 24,676,974 224.85
1 Budget figures are taken from FY 21/22 or the most recent budget available; population source: CA Department of Finance website As the table shows, Jurupa Valley’s population is very close to the median of the benchmark cities considered.
Table 3 depicts the same data, sorting by policing costs as measured per capita. What is noteworthy in this table is that Jurupa Valley has the lowest per capita policing costs when compared to other County municipalities (Moreno Valley, San Jacinto, Lake Elsinore, and Temecul a). The other three municipalities (Paramount, Norwalk, and Palmdale) all have lower policing costs —but as this report will detail, all invest additional resources in alternative/hybrid public safety resources.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 10
Table 3—Law Enforcement Services Contracts Spending by City – Benchmark by Per Capita Spending
City Population Law Enforcement
Budget1
Law Enforcement
Spending Per Capita
Norwalk 101,645 17,351,121 170.70
Paramount 52,477 9,450,150 180.08
Palmdale 167,398 30,475,900 182.06
Jurupa Valley 105,384 21,577,886 204.75
Lake Elsinore 71,615 16,966,030 236.91
San Jacinto 54,593 13,008,250 238.28
Moreno Valley 209,426 50,871,138 242.91
Temecula 109,925 37,715,317 343.10
Average 109,058 24,676,974 224.85
1 Budget figures are taken from FY 21/22 or the most recent budget available; population source: CA Department of Finance website
1.5 CRIME RATE COMPARISON
All police agencies in the United States are required to submit crime -related data. Crime data for the City is submitted by the Sheriff’s Department. For this analysis, Citygate collected crime rate information from the FBI Crime Data Explorer website.5
1.5.1 Crime Reporting
Under the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, crimes are classified as either Part I crimes or Part II offenses. There are eight classifications that make up the Part I crimes, and they are further divided into Part I Violent Crimes and Part I Property Crimes:
◆ Part I Violent Crimes
➢ Criminal Homicide
➢ Forcible Rape (not including statutory rape)
➢ Robbery
➢ Aggravated Assault
5 Reference: https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/home City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 11
◆ Part I Property Crimes
➢ Burglary
➢ Larceny
➢ Motor Vehicle Theft
➢ Arson
Part II offenses are all other crimes reported to the FBI. For this report, Citygate used only Part I Violent Crime data to illustrate the crime rate as it relates to police workload. This is not to imply that Part I Property Crimes do not add to police wo rkload. Rather, this is specifically shown to provide a basic representation of violent crime in Jurupa Valley.
The following figure shows that the Part 1 violent crime rate in Jurupa Valley is approximately 34 percent below the national average and 45 percent below the state average. Higher rates of crime (both Part 1 and Part 2) impact workload levels and should be monitored.
Figure 2—Violent Crime Rate – Jurupa Valley Versus State and National Averages
1.6 CALLS FOR SERVICE
The following information is extracted, in part, from Citygate’s previous Jurupa Valley feasibility study on a City-provided police department. In that study, Citygate identified that proactive 154.3
317.2
268.4 286.8
256.3
329.3
257.2
306.5 289.4
258.3
387.1 387.8 369.1 361.6 373.7
397.5 394.9 383.4 379.4 398.5411.2 423.5 402.6 396.4
428 444.8 453.3 447.5 441.2 442
0.0 50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
500.0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Violent Crime Rate
Part 1 Crimes per 100,000 Residents
Jurupa Valley US California
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 12
policing by County deputies is impacted by the volume of public -generated calls for service received at the Sheriff’s Communication Center.
1.6.1 Public-Generated Calls for Service versus Officer-Initiated Activity Public-generated requests for assistance, also known as calls for service, are received primarily as calls to the Sheriff’s Communications Center by way of the 9 -1-1 system or through the non- emergency line. These calls for service are dispatched to patrol deputies in the field for response.
The cumulative time patrol officers spend on calls for service relative to the number of patrol officers available determines how heavy the workload is.
Another activity requiring the time of patrol deputies is officer-initiated activity, which is when an officer initiates activity that is calculated in the CAD system. A good example of this is a traffic enforcement stop. Typically, the more time patrol officers spend on calls for service, the less time they have available to spend on officer-initiated activity, which is generally referred to as proactive policing.
The ideal percentage of time spent on each type of activity is determined by the policing philosophy of the police agency and the priorities and values of the community.
1.6.2 Jurupa Valley Calls for Service Trend
The following figure shows the calls for service and officer-initiated activity levels for the calendar years 2017 through 2021.
Figure 3—Jurupa Valley Trends in Calls for Service – 2017–2021
38,584
41,320
39,424 38,863
40,899
16,686 16,100
17,932
15,362
12,876
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Public-Generated Calls Officer-Initiated Calls
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 1—Study and Agency Background page 13
The figure illustrates that patrol officers spend significantly less time on proactive policing (officer-initiated activity) than on calls for service. This is most likely due to the fact that they are busy handling public-generated calls including lower-level, quality-of-life nuisance calls.
1.6.3 Types of Calls for Service
As with every community, t he types of calls for service generated by residents of the City vary widely. The se can range from life -threatening, crime-in-progress situations to minor nuisance situations such as a neighbor’s dog barking.
Having fully armed, sworn deputy sheriffs respond to all these various calls may not represent the most cost-efficient solution to crime and disorder. The purpose for researching alternative/hybrid models of response is to assess whether the City can provide such a response to some of these calls for service.
The next section of this report will outline alternat ive/hybrid response models currently being implemented in other jurisdictions, including Mental Health Response Models and Public Safety Department Models.
This page was intentionally left blank
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 15
SECTION 2—ALTERNATIVE (HYBRID) RESPONSE MODELS
Citygate acknowledges the desire of communities to consider whether sending a sworn peace officer (deputy sheriff) to every call for service is the most cost -effective use of resources. As discussed in Section 8 of Citygate’s previous Jurupa Valley study, there are several alternative response models in use in other jurisdictions, both in California and around the country. For the purposes of this report, Citygate has identified five alternative police response models including two mental health response models, as well as three community policing, or public safety department models.
2.1 MENTAL HEALTH RESPONSE MODELS
A growing percentage of calls for service received by law enforcement communications centers today (including the Sheriff’s Department) involve persons that are suffering some sort of mental health issue. Whether it is substance misuse, suicidal ideation, or situational stress, these types of calls do not always require the traditional response of a sworn peace officer. Mental health response units are increasingly being utilized across the country to address these types of calls without sending sworn officers.
Although there are numerous mental health models achieving varied levels of success across the country, for this study, Citygate will highlight two models utilized outside of the County, and then discuss the current Riverside County Sheriff’s Department model. Of the non -Riverside County programs, one program will highlight a co -law-enforcement response while the second program highlights a non-law-enforcement response.
◆ Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) in San Diego County ◆ Homeless Outreach & Mobile Engagement (HOME) in La Mesa ◆ Riverside County Mental Health Response Models
2.1.1 Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) – San Diego County The Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) 6 is a program of the Community Research Foundation (CRF) in partnership with the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA), San Diego County law enforcement, emergency medical services (EMS), and consumer advocacy organizations. Through on-scene assessments and referrals , PERT cont ributes to the wellbeing of persons living with mental illness by actively and compassionately assisting those in crisis who come to the attention of law enforcement and EMS to access appropriate services. PERT pairs a licensed mental health clinician with a law enforcement officer/deputy or EMS community
6 Information taken from PERT documentation
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 16
paramedic. The teams ride together in the field for their entire shift and are first responders to assist persons in behavioral health-related crises.
The California Office of Peace Officer Standards and T raining (POST) and the Police Executive Research Foundation (PERF) recognize PERT as a “best practice” model that epitomizes law enforcement, EMS , and mental health c linicians working together to provide the best service options for persons living with mental illness.
2.1.2 Homeless Outreach & Mobile Engagement (HOME) – La Mesa, CA The Homeless Outreach Mobile Engagement Program (HOME) is an initiative of the City of La Mesa and the La Mesa Police Depart ment (LMPD), located in San Diego County. The program was officially relaunched on November 1, 2021 and provides a housing-first and trauma-informed approach to addressing homelessness in La Mesa. HOME utilizes progressive engagement and harm reduction strategies to assist individuals who are unable to access services on their own.
The HOME program staff operate out of LMPD headquarters in downtown La Mesa and respond to non -emergency calls for service related to homelessness that are generated through pol ice dispatch. Each of these calls is first attended by a HOME outreach specialist . LMPD officers are only requested for rare cases involving legal or safety concerns. Currently, the HOME program is responding to 18 percent of LMPD total calls for service.
2.2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH RESPONSE MODELS
In addition to these mental health response models, Citygate reviewed the mental health response services already available and operating in the County, including those involving the Sheriff’s Department.
2.2.1 Community Behavioral Assessment Team (CBAT) – Riverside County Sheriff The Community Behavioral Assessment Team (CBAT) is a rapid response, mobile co -responder team model. The CBAT team is embedded into law enforcement stations and provides mobile response to mental health crisis calls for service that have come to the attention of law enforcement.
The team consist of a clinician and a deputy sheriff or police officer. The team works forty hours per week on a 4/10 schedule. Currently, there is one C BAT team assigned to the Jurupa Valley Sheriff’s Station. The Jurupa Valley CBAT team works Monday through Thursday.
2.2.2 Mobile Crisis Management Team – Riverside County
The Mobile Crisis Management Team is a community-driven team that receives referrals from the community but may also receive referrals from law enforcement as follow -ups from law enforcement calls for service. The team consist of a clinician, a peer support specialist, a Substance Abuse Disorder (SUD) specialist, and a case manager. The team works five days a week on a 9/80 schedule. The teams are available to respond to calls for service Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 17
to 5:00 PM. Jurupa Valley currently has one team and will be adding a s econd team as funding allows.
2.2.3 Mobile Crisis Response Team – Riverside County
The Mobile Crisis Response Team is a rapid response team that is not a co-responder team. Law enforcement is not part of the team , and the team receives referrals from the community. Each team consists of a clinician and a peer support specialist. There are a total of twelve teams in the County, available seven days a week, 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
2.3 COMMUNITY POLICING OR PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT MODELS In addition to the m ental health models previously discussed, Citygate recognizes that municipalities are constantly seeking better ways to deliver quality public safety for their communities in a cost-effective manner. Like the calls for service requests received at the Sheriff’s Communication Center for mental health -related problems, many calls for service requests received are for nuisance complaints and other non -emergency problems that do not necessarily require the response of a fully sworn deputy sheriff. These complaints or calls are often referred to as quality -of-life calls and include (but are not limited to) nuisance -type calls such as noise complaints, graffiti, parking violations, illegal dumping, abandoned vehicles, transient trespassing complaints, etc.
2.3.1 Community Service Officers
One cost-effective response to these types of service requests that many jurisdictions are now utilizing is the Community Service Officer (CSO). The specific duties and responsibilities of a CSO vary from community to community, but generally CSOs are specially trained and uniformed but unarmed public officers who respond to public -generated calls for service that do not involve an active suspect and typically have no threat (or a low threat) of violence. CSOs can do many of the same investigative functions as a police officer at a much lower cost.
CSOs are also ideal representatives of a police agency to engage with the community on issues such as crime prevention. They often coordinate neighborhood watch or business programs for the organization, as well as other critical police department functions.
2.3.2 City-Provided Community Service Officers
Some communities who contract for services with a sheriff’s department, like Jurupa Valley does, hire and train their own city -provided CSOs to augment the contracted policing provided by the sheriff’s department. Citygate studied three communities that utilize this community policing, or Public Safety Department, model:
◆ Department of Neighborhood Services – City of Palmdale, CA City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 18
◆ Public Safety Department – City of Paramount, CA
◆ Public Safety Department – City of Norwalk, CA
2.3.3 Department of Neighborhood Services – City of Palmdale The first community Citygate researched is the City of Palmdale, and its Department of Neighborhood Services. The following chart depicts the organizational structure of Palmdale’s Neighborhood Services Department.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 19
Figure 4—Palmdale Department of Neighborhood Services Organizational Structure
In Citygate’s assessment, the Palmdale co mmunity policing model may be relevant to Jurupa Valley as the two communities share similar circumstances. Both communities have populations over 100,000, similar demographics, and similar quality -of-life issues. Like Jurupa Valley, Palmdale contracts for policing services with the local sher iff’s department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD).
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 20
Palmdale’s neighborhood services organization is a full department of the City with a director who reports to the City Manager. The City of Palmdale Department of Neighborhood Services is a robust organization consisting of three divisions, over 46 employees, and a $43 million budget (which includes the Sheriff’s Department contract). 7 The three divisions include the Affordable Housing Division, the Community Compliance Division, and the Public Safety Division. All three divisions are organized with a view to community policing.
The Department of Neighborhood Services coordinates closely with the Sheriff Department’s Palmdale station to ensure and enhance public safety. The City employs its own CSOs, who work together with local sheriff’s deputies, taking low -level reports directly. The Department is very active, working with the Sheriff’s Department in homeless intervention, coordinating graffiti removal, and nuisance abatement efforts.
2.3.4 Public Safety Department – City of Paramount
The City of Paramount, also located in Los Angeles County, operates a Public Safety Department in conjunction with contracted police services, which are provided by the LASD. The following figure illustrates the Paramount Public Safety Department’s organizational structure.
Figure 5—Paramount Public Safety Department Organizational Structure
7 Reference: https://cityofpalmdale.org/188/Neighborhood-Services
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 21
The Public Safety Department is managed by a Director who reports to the City Man ager, thus making it a department-level entity. The following list outlines the staffing levels of Paramount’s Public Safety Department:
◆ 1 Director – Department Head
◆ 1 Assistant Director – Assistant Department Head
◆ 2 Management Analysts
◆ 1 Code Enforcement Senior Officer
◆ 1 Community Service Officer Supervisor
◆ 7 Community Service Officers
◆ 1 Parking Control Officer
One of the unique features of the Paramount Public Safety Department is that it operates a substation that serves the community similarly to a poli ce station. The LASD contract with Paramount is serviced from the Lakewood Sheriff’s Station; however, deputies assigned to the Paramount contract operate out the Paramount substation along with the City’s Public Safety staff.
The Paramount Public Safety Department manages the following public safety service contracts:
◆ Police contract with the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) ◆ Fire service contract with Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) ◆ Animal Services contract with Los Angeles County
In addition to these service contracts, the Public Safety Department is responsible for the following activities:
◆ Code enforcement
◆ Parking enforcement
◆ Emergency management.
Paramount’s Public Safety Department enhances public safety through the deployment of non-sworn CSOs patrolling the city and focusing on quality -of-life issues. They seek to handle less-critical calls that do not require the response of a fully sworn sheriff’s deputy. The goal is to free LASD patrols to handle priority calls for service.
Paramount CSOs drive City-provided vehicles that are outfitted with the same computer and radio equipment that sheriff’s deputies’ cars have.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 22
2.3.5 Public Safety Department – City of Norwalk
The final agency researched by is the City of Norwalk’s Public Safety Department. Norwalk is in Los Angeles County and contracts for police services with the LASD. Citygate considers Norwalk the most mature Public Safety Department model of the three that were studied, and an ideal model for Jurupa valley to consider. Norwalk’s Public Safety Department operates like a miniature police department in conjunction with the Sheriff’s Department patrol. However, instead of sworn deputies, they deploy a cadre of Public Safety Officers (PSOs) which have a job description equivalent to that of a CSO. They are uniformed, non -sworn city employees that patrol the city and enforce city ordinances and other quality-of-life violations.
As illustrated in the following figu re, Norwalk’s Public Safety Department has a robust organizational structure.
Figure 6—Norwalk Public Safety Department Organizational Structure
The department is managed by a Director who reports directly to the City Manager, making this a city department-level entity. There are five primary functions or divisions of the department:
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 23
◆ Code Enforcement
◆ Emergency Preparedness/Management (dispatch)
◆ Operations (non-sworn patrol)
◆ Community Relations
◆ Homeless Operation Prevention and Engagement (HOPE)
Operations
The Norwalk Operations Division consists primarily of PSOs that provide a uniformed, non-sworn patrol service to the community which proactively seeks to enforce minor violation of municipal codes and enhance Norwalk’s quality of life. The division is organized into four teams that provide patrol coverage 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. PSOs drive city -marked patrol vehicles that are equipped with LASD radios and Mobile Digital Computers (MDCs), which enhance communication and cooperation with the Sheriff’s patrol.
Code Enforcement
Norwalk’s code compliance division focuses on enforcement of property maintenance and zoning issues, as outlined in the city’s municipal code. 8 It is staffed primarily with Code Complia nce Inspectors that respond to quality -of-life complaints related to zoning, land use, and public nuisance issues. They work in conjunction with the non-sworn PSOs to proactively address these quality-of-life issues.
Emergency Preparedness
The Emergency Pr eparedness Division focuses on developing plans in preparation for natural disasters and other such emergencies. 9 The division also maintains the city’s Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program, which is designed to educate residents and businesses on disaster planning.
Homeless Outreach
The City of Norwalk has a robust approach to addressing issues associated with its homeless population. The Public Safety Department contributes to that effort with its Homeless Operation Prevention and Engagement (HOPE) teams. Norwalk’s two HOPE teams each consist of one sergeant, one PSO, and two maintenance workers, who can clean up small homeless encampments as they are vacated.
8 This information is taken from the City of Norwalk’s Adopted Budget for FY 21/22: https://www.norwalk.org/city- hall/departments/finance/budget
9 From Norwalk’s FY 21/22 Adopted Budget.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 24
Community Relations
The Public Safety Department’s Community Relations division is staffed by a supervising PSO and several PSOs that are assigned a specific quadrant of the city. Their focus is community engagement in such activities as neighborhood watch and business watch programs, as well as other crime prevention strategies.
Norwalk’s Public Safety Department is well known throughout the community. Residents of Norwalk call minor quality -of-life complaints into the Department’s dispatch center, which acts very similarly to a police dispatch/communication center. It is staffed with dispatchers who assign calls to PSOs in the field. The Department works closely with the Sheriff’s Dispatch Center to determine that calls for service are directed to the appropriate resource, whether non-sworn PSOs or, for more serious crimes, sheriff’s deputies. The following table depicts calls for service that the Norwalk Public Safety Department responded to during the month of July 2022.
Table 4—City of Norwalk Calls for Service – July 2022
Call Type July 2022
Transient 490
Illegal Parking 257
Abandoned Vehicle 42
Traffic Hazard 35
Illegal Vending 23
Illegal Dumping 17
Panhandler 17
Traffic Collision 15
Vandalism 11
Disturbance-Business 8
Dead or Stray Animal 5
Safety Hazard 5
Noise Disturbance 4
Scavenger 2
Trespassing 1
Total Calls 932
It is important to consider that many (if not all) of these calls would have to have been handled by the Sheriff’s Office if the Public Safety Department was not in operation.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 2—Alternative (Hybrid) Response Models page 25
2.4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS The previous three models focused on city-provided resources to address quality-of-life problems utilizing non-sworn and unarmed positions like CSOs. Citygate would be remiss if we did not report that the Sheriff’s Department employs CSOs and has identified this program as a potential cost-controlling measure for contract cities including Jurupa Valley.
According to a 2019 analysis conducted by the Sheriff’s Department Research and Development Team,10 CSOs were handling less than five percent of calls for service in the City but were capable of handling as much as 21 percent of calls. 11 In short, aside from the Public Safety Models described in this report, Jurupa Valley can add this capacity through its current contract to potentially handle as much as 15 percent of the calls for service that deputies are handling now.
10 The Sheriff’s Department’s Research and Development Team was formed by current Sheriff Chad Bianco shortly after taking office in 2019 , in part to address concerns contract cost expressed by several contract cities, including Jurupa Valley.
11 Reference: Contract Policing Cost-Saving Variables, PowerPoint presentation provided by the Sheriff’s Department to Citygate, attached as Appendix A.
This page was intentionally left blank
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 27
SECTION 3—TRAFFIC SAFETY REVIEW
3.1 REVIEW OF TRAFFIC SAFETY RESOURCES
As part of this study, Citygate was asked to review the Traffic Safety situation in Jurupa Valley.
Traffic safety is one of the most concerning issues among all local governments, and a significant challenge within Jurupa Valley. In a 2021 survey conducted by Citygate, Jurupa Valley residents reported the following:12
◆ 60 percent of respondents said traffic enforcement was inadequate. ◆ 46 percent of respondents said parking enforcement was inadequate.
Jurupa Valley currently contracts traffic enforcement resources through the Sheriff’s Department.
During Citygate’s review, the contract included full-time deputies assigned specifically to perform traffic-related enforcement and education services. The specific positions in the 2021–2022 budget included:
◆ 3 Motors budgeted; 2 additional Motors approved July 2022 ◆ 2 Accident Investigation / DUI Enforcement cars
◆ 2 Traffic CSOs handling non-injury collisions
◆ 1 Commercial Enforcement Officer
3.2 TRAFFIC SAFETY ANALYSIS
To further understand the impact on traffic safety a five-year analysis was conducted to include all calls for service (CFS) each year between 2017–2021. The portion of traffic-related CFS compared to total CFS ranged between 23 –29 percent each year, supporting the finding that public traffic concerns were consistent with the data.13
Table 5—Jurupa Valley Traffic Percentage of Total Calls for Service Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Total CFS 68,014 69,077 69,979 66,918 66,236
Traffic CFS 18,507 18,005 19,966 15,918 15,335
Traffic Percentage 27% 26% 29% 24% 23%
12 2021 Community Survey conducted as part of the previous Citygate study. 13 CAD Data provided by the Sheriff’s Department.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 28
As an example of types of traffic responses affecting safety, 2021 CAD incidents totaled 66,236 CFS; with 15,335 of CFS being traffic-related incidents specifically.14 This represents 23 percent of overall service calls within the City. While not a complete list of all call types, the following types provide context to the issue of traffic safety:
◆ 8 fatal collisions
◆ 349 injury accidents
◆ 925 non-injury accidents
◆ 750 DUI investigations
◆ 682 reckless driving incidents
◆ 500 hit-and-run incidents
The following figure shows a Jurupa Valley three-year injury collision location map as part of the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS).15 The California Highway Patrol (CHP) collects this data and makes information available through the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS).16
14 Jurupa Valley CAD data, 2021.
15 https://iswitrs.chp.ca.gov/Reports/jsp/index.jsp
16 https://tims.Berkeley.edu
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 29
Figure 7—Jurupa Valley Three-Year Injury Collision Location Map
The following figure identifies crash severity data over the three-year period. Severe and fatal injuries are a significant indicator of traffic safety, but this measure alone does not necessarily provide a full understanding of traffic safety in a community. Traffic safety must be evaluated to include roadway engineering, signal controls, weather conditions, vehicle issues, and driver behavior.17
17 https://tims.Berkeley.edu (Crashes by Severity)
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 30
Figure 8—Jurupa Valley Three-Year Vehicle Crash Severity
Collisions are categorized in general to better understand the primary cause of each collision.
While there are often many interrelated reasons an accident may occur, the Primary Collision Factor (PCR) provides a consistent metric to identify and address traffic -related collision causation. The following analysis over the same three-year period identified PCF as a percentage of overall collisions. Improper turning , unsafe speed , and right-of-way violations are the predominant factors noted in the data.18
18 https://tims.Berkeley.edu (Primary Collision Factors)
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 31
Figure 9—Jurupa Valley Vehicle Crashes by PCF Violation
To further understand collision factors and impacts on resources, the following analysis revealed when these collisions occurred. This helps to understand traffic conditions and patterns to better deploy resources as part of the City’s traffic safety efforts.19
19 https://tims.Berkeley.edu (Collision concentration per time)
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 32
Table 6—Jurupa Valley Vehicle Crashes by Day of Week by Time of Day
3.3 LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN
In Jurupa Valley, improvements to public safety on City streets is a priority that is outlined in the City’s 2017 General Plan.
The purpose of the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) is to increase transportation safety awareness among residents and visitors of the City and to build and maintain working relationships with stakeholders. This can assist in public outreach efforts regarding transportation safety while implementing engineering and behavioral safety improvements on the City’s mobility network.
To support the goals of fostering thriving residents, safe communities, a sustainable environment, and a robust economy, th e City authorized the Local Road Safety Plan Study, which identified goals and implementation strategies to improve transportation safety in the City.20 With collision data provided by the CHP and Riverside County Crossroads database incident reports detailing the period of 2016 to 2020, City engineering staff identified various factors that were a primary cause leading to roadway collisions. The City faces many challenges in improving road safety, with a combination of numerous older, narrow streets connecting its new, more dense suburban communities. In addition, many streets in the City were built to wider County standards that have promoted faster speeds and undesirable driving behavior. Behavioral driving habits tend to be a primary contributing factor for the majority of collisions in Jurupa Valley. Based on this collision data review, the following risk factors were identified.
20 https://www.jurupavalley.org/DocumentCenter/View/2248/LRSP-Report---Draft?bidId=
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 33
3.3.1 Primary Traffic Injury Behaviors (Identified in the LRSP) ◆ Improper Turning
◆ Unsafe Speed
◆ Right-of-Way Violation / Failure to Yield
◆ Driving Under the Influence / Distracted Driving
Other notes from the collision data on improper turning collisions include:
◆ Nearly 30 percent of all crashes from 2016–2020 were improper turning crashes. ◆ 63 percent of all crashes from 2016 –2020 occurred within 150 feet of an intersection.
3.3.2 Education Recommendations (Identified in the LRSP) ◆ Engagement with Sheriff, the Riverside University Health System, the Jurupa Unified School District, community groups, and Public Works to share materials and knowledge to increase public awareness of road safety. ◆ Target the distractions created by cellphone or electronic device use while operating a motor vehicle, and the likelihood of anyone being involved in a collision due to cellphone / electronic device usage.
◆ Encourage the public to report incidents of failing to stop at stop sign and traffic signals to collect statistical data on high-violation areas.
3.3.3 Enforcement Recommendation (Identified in the LRSP) ◆ Saturated patrols to areas susceptible to distracted driving or where collision or traffic report data indicates regular incidents of failure-to-yield collisions, including failing to stop for stop signs and signals.
3.4 OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY
In 2019, the City’s rankings with the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) indicate the need to focus resources on education, enforcement, and engineering efforts to reduce injuries and increase safety.
The following table outlines a variety of rankings by type of crash and compares Jurupa Valley to other, similar-sized cities in Californ ia. Out of 59 total comparable cities, Jurupa Valley ranks generally lower and , in some categories, at the lower end of safety indicators. 21 (As a point of
21 https://www.ots.ca.gov/media-and-research/crash-rankings/ City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 34
reference, a higher number in the following ratios reflects a better ranking for safety comparison purposes.)
Table 7—Jurupa Valley OTS Indicators and Rankings
The OTS embraces a Safe System approach, which focuses on both human mistakes and human vulnerability, and provides a framework to design a system to protect everyone. Safe roads, safe
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 35
speeds, safe vehicles, safe road users, and post-crash care all reinforce multiple layers of protection for everyone.22
A Safe System approach incorporates the following principles:
◆ Deaths and serious injuries are unacceptable – The Safe System approach prioritizes the elimination of crashes that result in death and serious injury. Vehicles are designed with systems and features that help to prevent crashes and minimize their impact when they do happen.
◆ Humans make mistakes – People will inevitably make mistakes and decisions that may lead to crashes, but road design should accommodate mistakes to make crashes less severe or deadly when they do happen. Examples of safe roads include physically separating people traveling at different speeds, dedicated times for people to move through a space, and alerting people to hazards and other road users. ◆ Humans are vulnerable – Human bodies have physical limits for tolerating crash forces. Reduc ing speeds helps reduce the severity of injury and risk of death.
Designing a system that accommodates these vulnerabilities —particularly for bicyclists and pedestrians —is critical, such as additional time for drivers to stop and improving visibility.
◆ Responsibility is shared – The safety of all road users, including those who walk, bike, ride transit, or travel by modes other than a vehicle, is paramount. All strategies and voices should be heard, including all levels of government, non-profit and advocacy groups, researchers, engineers, and the public. Everyone plays a role in preventing deaths and serious injuries on roads.
◆ Safety is proactive – Safety concerns should be identified and addressed before crashes happen.
◆ Redundancy is crucial – Reducing severe injury and deadly crashes requires all parts of the transportation system to be improved. If one part does not work, the other parts offer other layers of protection for people.
3.5 SAFETREC COMPLETE STREETS SAFETY ASSESSMENT
The City requested that SafeTREC at the University of California, Berkeley conduct a Complete Streets Safety Assessment (CSSA) for various locations within the City.23 The objective outcomes of the CSSA are to improve pedestrian and bicycle safe ty and to enhance walkability and
22 https://www.ots.ca.gov
23 https://www.jurupavalley.org/487/Complete-Streets-Safety-Assessment City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 36
accessibility for all pedestrians and bicyclists in Jurupa Valley . The report provided suggestions for where selected corridors, resources, and efforts may best be placed to meet local community, development, infrastructure, and safety goals and opportunities. The final report was published in November 2021.
3.6 TRAFFIC SAFETY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.6.1 Traffic Safety Findings
Given Citygate’s analysis of traffic safety in Jurupa Valley, we provide the following findings.
Finding #1: The City recognizes the importance of traffic safety and has dedicated significant resources to better understand traffic-related issues within the community.
Finding #2: In consultation with industry experts , and with input from the community, the City conducted several recent studies and has dedicated staff resources to address traffic safety.
Finding #3: A significant demand on resources is related to enforcement and education.
Finding #4: The Sheriff’s Department is working closely with City staff to determine the best deployment of resources as traffic enforcement is currently outsourced.
Finding #5: Additional staffing is necessary in police services to meet the traffic safety needs of the City.
Finding #6: It is important for City staff to actively understand and monitor traffic safety conditions, education campaigns, and enforcement measures to improve vehicle and pedestrian safety.
3.6.2 Traffic Safety Recommendations
Citygate’s traffic safety recommendations for the City are as follows:
Recommendation #1: Increase traffic safety education and enforcement to reduce traffic collisions.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 3—Traffic Safety Review page 37
Recommendation #2: Assess actual Traffic staff needs to accomplish the goals outlined in the March 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan
(LRSP).
Recommendation #3: Expand utilization of Traffic CSOs for peak -hour coverage seven days a week to alleviate workload
demand on sworn personnel.
Recommendation #4: Implement 2021 SafeTREK Traffic Study recommendations to reduce risks to bicyclists and
pedestrians.
Recommendation #5: Identify highest-risk intersections and review with Traffic Engineering to determine potent ial calming and
roadway/lighting safety design measures.
Recommendation #6: Create an internal stakeholder position within the City to be responsible and accountable for public safety
directives.
This page was intentionally left blank
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 39 SECTION 4—RECOMMENDED PUBLIC SAFETY MODEL FOR JURUPA
VALLEY
4.1 NARRATIVE SUMMARY OF CITYGATE’S KEY FINDINGS
The previous two Citygate studies commissioned by the City analyzed traditional law enforcement response models. For example, when someone calls 9-1-1 and requests assistance, usually a sworn officer (deputy sheriff) will be dispatched to respond to this request for service. In this study, Citygate has identified that a growing number of jurisdictions that contract for police services with their local sheriff’s department are adding additional resource capabilities to provide an alternative response to a certain percentage of these requests for assistance. This report highlights several alternative (hybrid) response models, but these should not be considered the only models available.
The City c urrently contracts for law enforcement services with the Sheriff’s Department , and Citygate recommends the City continue to enjoy the cost efficiencies this contracting model provides. However, Citygate suggests that not all calls for service that are currently being handled by the Sheriff’s Department require the response of an armed, fully sworn peace officer ( deputy sheriff). In a 2019 analysis of calls for services in its contract cities, the Sheriff’s Department estimated that as much as 20 percent of the current volume of calls for service could be diverted to Community Service Officers (CSOs) in the City . In the interest of transparency, it should be noted that Sheriff’s Department’s analysis assumed the use of its own CSOs for these diverted calls.
However, as Citygate has illustrated in this study, other jurisdictions are employing city-provided CSO positions to enhance public safety in addition to police service contracts with thei r local sheriff’s department. Citygate further assesses that at least some calls for service currently being handled by the Sheriff’s Department could be diverted to a City-provided public safety position.
4.2 CITYGATE’S PUBLIC SAFETY MODEL RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation #7: Jurupa Valley should consider building in-house capacity or City-provided public safety resources that can handle some less-critical quality-of-life complaints by residents, as has been requested by the Council.
This can be accomplishe d by creating a Public Safety
Department or Division within the City government
structure. Having a department -level manager who
reports directly to the City Manager will ensure that
matters of public safety are given priority.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 40
4.3 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT VS. DIVISION – TWO SCENARIOS The following two scenarios are provided to illustrate how a City -provided Public Safety Department or Division might be structured along with the associated costs and number of full - time employees (FTEs). These scenarios are not exhaustive and are provided as two potential courses of action which lie on the opposite end of the structure and cost spectrum. The City can also choose an intermediate course and/or decide to develop this capacity through its contract with the Sheriff’s Department.
4.3.1 Jurupa Valley Public Safety Department – Standalone In this scenario, Citygate envisions the creation of a Jurupa Valley Public Safety Department to its current City government structure. The department would be “standalone” in the sense that it does not fall within another City department, but rather, is a separate department. The following sample organizational chart has been created for this department.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 41 Figure 10—Jurupa Valley Public Safety Department Organizational Model
In this scenario, the Public Safety Department would be managed by a Director who would report directly to the City Manager and would ideally have a strong background in providing public safety services and/or law enforcement. The D irector would be assisted by an Assistant Director, who would ideally have a strong background in providing other public safety-type services such as code compliance. The primary divisions of the department would include the following:
City Manager
Public Safety Department
Director (1)
Asst Director (1)
Community Engagement
Manager (1)
Community Relations
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
Homeless Outreach
Supervisor (2)
Public Safety Officer (2)
Maintenance (4)
Public Safety Operations
Manager (1)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
PSO Patrol Shift
Supervisor (1)
Public Safety Officer (3)
Code Compliance
Manager (1)
Code Enforcement Officer (6)
Emergency
Preparedness
Public Safety Contracts
Sheriff
CALFire
Animal Services
Management Analyst (1)
Office Assistant (1)
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 42 ◆ Public Safety Contracts
◆ Emergency Preparedness
◆ Code Compliance
◆ Public Safety Operations (non-sworn patrol)
◆ Community Engagement
In assessing the employee needs for this department, Citygate assumed the merging of the current code enforcement positions (including the managemen t positions) to the structure of the new department. The following table illustrates the net new positions that would need to be added to City payroll to form this department in addition to positions already existing within City structure, which would be folded into the new department.
Table 8—Public Safety Department – Net New FTEs
Position Classification Proposed FTEs
Director of Public Safety 1.00
Assistant Director of Public Safety 1.00
Management Analyst 1.00
Office Assistant 1.00
Manager – Public Safety Officer III 2.00
Supervisor – Public Safety Officer II 7.00
Public Safety Officer – PSO I 17.00
Maintenance Worker 4.00
Total FTEs 34.00
The following table details the estimated salary costs associated with 34 net new FTEs. The salary amounts assume the average salaries of the model Public Safety Department cities used in this study (Palmdale, Paramount, and Norwalk). When no position was listed for the study city, a 20 percent variance between the position either below or above the found position in the study city closest to the proposed position assumption was used. Citygate also used the salary average from the first Jurupa Valley study24 conducted by Citygate if the position was identified. If Jurupa Valley already had a similar position, then that salary amount was used.
24 The Seven City JPA Study, which Citygate conducted for Jurupa Valley in February 2021, can be accessed at the following link: https://citygateassociates.com/jurupavalley2021 City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 43 Table 9—Public Safety Department – Estimated Personnel Costs Position
Classification
Total Salary and Benefits
of Position
Proposed
FTEs
Total Personnel Cost
for Proposed FTEs
Director of Public Safety 198,403 1.00 198,403
Assistant Director of Public Safety 168,192 1.00 168,192 Management Analyst 109,339 1.00 109,339
Office Assistant 71,907 1.00 71,907
Manager – Public Safety Officer III 130,413 2.00 260,826 Supervisor – Public Safety Officer II 106,091 7.00 742,639 Public Safety Officer – PSO I 86,312 17.00 1,467,300
Maintenance Worker 82,631 4.00 330,526
Total 953,289 34 3,349,133
The following table estimates ongoing annual costs as well as the estimated one-time start-up costs associated with a Public Safety Department. The start -up costs assume the City has no current inventory of suitable facilities and could be offset if it does.
Table 10—Proposed Public Safety Department – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs Ongoing Annual Costs Amount
Wages and Benefits 3,349,133
Maintenance and Operations 510,000
Indirect Administrative Overhead 68,000
Total Ongoing Annual Costs 3,927,1331
One-Time Start-Up Costs Amount
Vehicle Purchases 576,000
Facilities Lease 60,000
Uniforms/Personnel Equipment 51,000
Furniture 48,000
Total One-Time Start-up Costs 735,000
1 Proposed Public Safety Department annual costs would represent a 17 percent increase to FY 2022-23 public safety expenditures of $23,590,072.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 44 The following costing assumptions were used in this analysis:
◆ The base salary amounts used were based on averages from the cities of Palmdale, Paramount, Norwalk, and (where applicable) the previous Jurupa Valley study (Jurupa Valley amounts were used if a similar position existed) ◆ The current Jurupa Valley PARS pension rate was used
◆ Norwalk’s FY 22 Management and Operations budget due to s imilar department size as proposed (excluding code enforcement)
◆ Administrative overhead is an approximation
◆ 12 vehicles at $48,000 each
◆ Need for lease of facilities for new department personnel—10 120-square-foot (sq. ft.) offices and a general office area of 1,200 sq. ft. = 2,400 sq. ft. at $20 per sq. ft. ◆ Field personnel: 30 uniforms and radios, $1,700 per person ◆ Office equipment: 23 office setups (2 directors at $3,000 each; 21 general personnel at $2,000 each)
◆ The existing radio system used by the City would be used to support the needs of a new department
◆ Only General Fund cost estimates (excludes grants or other funds).
Assuming the City implemented a Public Safety Department as outlined, the following table depicts per capita costs associated with the new department compared to the other model cities studied.
Table 11—Per Capita Cost Comparison by City – Public Safety Department – FY 21/22 City
Law
Enforcement
Budget
Public Safety
Budget
Code
Compliance Total Spending Per Capita
Spending
Norwalk 17,351,121 5,684,968 1,182,674 24,218,763 238.27 Jurupa Valley 21,577,886 3,927,133 1,117,659 26,622,678 252.63 Palmdale 30,475,900 9,296,000 2,815,900 42,587,800 254.41 Paramount 9,450,150 3,242,700 846,750 13,539,600 258.01 Average 19,713,764 5,537,700 1,490,746 26,742,210 250.83 City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 45
4.3.2 Jurupa Valley Public Safety Division
Alternatively, the City can opt to form a Public Safety Division within a current City department.
This organizational structure would be much smaller, and could be considered a precursor to a larger, department-level expansion in the future. The following sample organizational chart depicts a Jurupa Valley Public Safety Division.
Figure 11—Jurupa Valley Public Safety Division Organizational Model
In this scenario, a much smaller Public Safety Division within an existing department would include only the non-sworn CSO-type positions. The following chart shows the breakdown of net new FTEs.
City Manager
Public Safety
Manager (1)
Public Safety Officers
Public Safety Officer II (4)
Public Safety Officer I (10)
Code Compliance
Building/Safety
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 46 Table 12—Public Safety Division – Net New FTEs
Position Classification Proposed FTEs
Supervisor – Public Safety Officer II 4.00
Public Safety Officer – PSO I 10.00
Total FTEs 14.00
The Public Safety Division would be capable of providing four non-sworn patrol teams that could provide coverage seven days a week during peak hours.
The following chart depicts the estimated personnel costs associated with a Jurupa Valley Public Safety D ivision. The same salary assumptions previously discussed under the full department option were used to develop this scaled-down option.
Table 13—Public Safety Division – Estimated Personnel Costs Position
Classification
Total Salary
and Benefits
of Position
Proposed
FTEs
Total Personnel Cost
for Proposed FTEs
Supervisor – Public Safety Officer II 106,091 4.00 424,365 Public Safety Officer – PSO I 86,312 10.00 863,118
Total 192,403 14 1,287,483
Using appropriately scaled-down versions of the assumptions previously discussed under the full department option, the following table estimates both the ongoing annual costs and one-time start- up costs associated with a Public Safety Division.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 47 Table 14—Proposed Public Safety Division – Estimated Ongoing and Start-Up Costs Ongoing Annual Costs Amount
Wages and Benefits 1,287,483
Maintenance and Operations 204,000
Indirect Administrative Overhead 27,200
Total Ongoing Annual Costs 1,518,683
One-time Start-Up Costs Amount
Vehicle Purchases 288,000
Facilities Lease –
Uniforms/Personnel Equipment 23,800
Furniture 28,000
Total One-time Start-up Costs 339,800
Assuming the City implemented the Public Safety Division as outlined above, the following table depicts per capita costs associated with the new division as compared to the other model cities studied.
Table 15—Per Capita Cost Comparison by City – Public Safety Division – FY 21/22 City Law Enforcement
Budget
Public Safety
Budget
Code
Compliance
Total
Spending
Per Capita
Spending
Jurupa Valley 21,577,886 1,518,683 1,117,659 24,214,228 229.77 Norwalk 17,351,121 5,684,968 1,182,674 24,218,763 238.27 Palmdale 30,475,900 9,296,000 2,815,900 42,587,800 254.41 Paramount 9,450,150 3,242,700 846,750 13,539,600 258.01 Average 19,713,764 4,935,588 1,490,746 26,140,098 245.12
4.4 CONCLUSION
Based on the guidance staffed received from City Council regarding the desire to address less-critical quality-of-life issues within the City, Citygate has provided several courses of action that the Council can consider —which range from addressing the iss ue through expanding the current Sheriff’s Department contract to creating a fully staffed Public Safety Department within the City government structure, as well as a mid -range course of action , which entails creating a Public Safety Division within an existing City department.
City of Jurupa Valley, CA
Alternative (Hybrid) Response Public Safety Model Study Section 4—Recommended Public Safety Model for Jurupa Valley page 48 Citygate recommends building capacity within the City to satisfy the Council’s desire to take ownership of some of the less-critical quality-of-life complaints generated within the City.
That said, it is also Citygate’s opinion that the community is best served when Public Safety is prioritized and resourced at the department level. Therefore, Citygate recommends that if the Council is determined to build capacity within the City structure, then establishing a standalone Public Safety Department is the best course of action.
APPENDIX A
CONTRACT POLICING COST-SAVINGS
VARIABLES
This page was intentionally left blank
Contract PolicingCost-Saving VariablesSheriff’s Research and Development Team Cost-Saving Variables1.Staffing(Who and how many?)2.Number of calls for service(In-person vs. online vs. no response)3. Time spent on calls for service(Investigation and report writing time) Staffing –Who?•Staffing is the most significant variable for cost savings•Substantially underutilizing CSOs on patrol•Currently handle an average of 6% of calls•Capable of handling an average of 25% of calls
2013 ICMA study advocates staffing based on workload•Takeaways:•60% rule: •≥ 60% of a shift handling calls for service = 0time for proactive enforcement•This is known as the saturation point•48 minutes: •The average time it takes a deputy to handle a call (drive time + time on scene)•Proactive time:•Deputies need time for proactive enforcement / engagement•Administrative time•40% of a shift is needed for administrative tasks•Briefing, reporting writing, evidence submission, other paperwork Workload-Based Staffing Formula –How Many?Daily Minimum Staffing (DMS) = CFS x 48 ÷60 ÷365 ÷0.6 ÷12DMS = Number of annual public-generated calls for service (CFS)x 48 minutes (avg. time to handle each call)÷60 minutes (to show hours required per year)÷365 days (to show hours required per day) ÷0.6 (to show productive hours needed to handle the daily calls -saturation point)÷12 hours (to identify number of employees needed per day based on shift length) Workload-Based Staffing ModelDaily Minimum Staffing (DMS) = CFS x 48 ÷60 ÷365 ÷0.6 ÷12Jurupa Valley (FY 18/19):DMS = 51,808 x 48 ÷60 ÷365 ÷.6÷12 DMS= 16 deputies per day (or 192 hours per day)(JV currently contracts for 15 deputies per day –180 hours per day) Contracts at or Above the Saturation Point:•Jurupa Valley (63/0/37)•Lake Elsinore (60/0/40)•Moreno Valley (70/0/30)*•San Jacinto (71/0/29)Time handling calls (%)Proactive time (%)Administrative time (briefing, report writing, booking evidence, etc.) (%)*Contract staffing is at 50/10/40, but actual deployment is 70/0/30aaa Contracts Below the Saturation Point:Coachella (43/17/40) Perris (51/9/40)Eastvale (42/18/40) Rancho Mirage (30/30/40)La Quinta (30/30/40) Temecula (52/8/40)Norco (39/21/40) Wildomar (52/8/40)Palm Desert (40/20/40) Time handling calls (%)Proactive time (%)Administrative time (briefing, report writing, booking evidence, etc.) (%)aaa Workload-Based Staffing Formula Minimum StaffingThe following slides show cost savings based on:Redistribution of Deputies and CSOs (based on call types) Workload-Based Staffing FormulaLake ElsinoreActual DeploymentRedistributive Deployment36,175 calls by Deputies (96%)28,119 calls by Deputies (74%)1,594 calls by CSOs (4%) 9,777 calls by CSOs (26%)11deputies per day8.5deputies per day0.7CSO per day3.5CSOs per day(Total: 11.7positions per day)(Total: 12 positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $1,170,557 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaMoreno ValleyActual DeploymentRedistributive Deployment106,170 calls by Deputies (91%)96,821 calls by Deputies (83%)10,649 calls by CSOs (9%) 19,998 calls by CSOs (17%)38deputies per day*29.5deputies per day2.5CSO per day7CSOs per day(Total: 40.5positions per day)(Total: 36.5 positions per day)Ratios: (50/10/40)* Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $5,861,854 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaPalm DesertActual DeploymentRedistributive Deployment31,637 calls by Deputies (93%)27,668 calls by Deputies (81%)2,448 calls by CSOs (7%) 6,417 calls by CSOs (19%)14deputies per day8.5deputies per day1CSO per day2CSOs per day(Total: 15positions per day)(Total: 10.5positions per day)Ratios: (40/20/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $4,436,157 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaTemeculaActual DeploymentRedistributive Deployment48,938 calls by Deputies (90%)25,691 calls by Deputies (47%)5,723 calls by CSOs (10%) 28,970 calls by CSOs (53%)17deputies per day8deputies per day1CSO per day10CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 18positions per day)Ratios: (52/8/40) Ratios: (59/1/40)Annual Savings: $5,028,876 Workload-Based Staffing Formula Increased StaffingThe following slides show cost savings based on:Redistribution of Deputies and CSOs (based on call types)&Hybrid Deployment (mix of contractand dedicatedpositions) Workload-Based Staffing FormulaLake ElsinoreActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment 36,175 calls by Deputies (96%)28,119 calls by Deputies (74%)1,594 calls by CSOs (4%) 9,777 calls by CSOs (26%)11deputies per day8.5contractdeputies per day0.7CSO per day1.5dedicateddeputies “per day”3CSOs per day(Total: 11.7positions per day)(Total: 13positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (51/9/40)Annual Savings: $365,257 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaMoreno ValleyActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment 106,170 calls by Deputies (91%)96,821 calls by Deputies (83%)10,649 calls by CSOs (9%) 19,998 calls by CSOs (17%)38deputies per day30contractdeputies per day2.5CSO per day7dedicateddeputies “per day”7CSOs per day(Total: 40.5positions per day)(Total: 44positions per day)Ratios: (50/10/40) Ratios: (48/12/40)Annual Savings: $863,260 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaPalm DesertActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment 31,637 calls by Deputies (93%)27,668 calls by Deputies (81%)2,448 calls by CSOs (7%) 6,417 calls by CSOs (19%)14deputies per day8.5contractdeputies per day1CSO per day6dedicateddeputies “per day”2CSOs per day(Total: 15positions per day)(Total: 16.5positions per day)Ratios: (40/20/40) Ratios: (35/25/40)Annual Savings: $452,141 Workload-Based Staffing FormulaTemeculaActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment 48,938 calls by Deputies (90%)25,691 calls by Deputies (47%)5,723 calls by CSOs (10%) 28,970 calls by CSOs (53%)17deputies per day8contractdeputies per day1CSO per day7dedicateddeputies “per day”10CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 25positions per day)Ratios: (52/8/40) Ratios: (31/29/40)Annual Savings: $407,163 Variable 1: StaffingSummary•Use the Workload-Based Staffing Model to determine staffing needs•Reveals cities that are at or near the saturation point•Indicates the need to increase CSO staffing•Deploy a Hybrid Staffing Model (contract and dedicated deputies)•Increase staffing while saving money•Provide more time for proactive enforcement Variable 2: Reduce the Calls•Reduce number of calls for service to:•Increase proactive time, or•Decrease staffing expenditures Reduce the CallsNo ResponseAlternative Reporting
Reduce the Calls -No ResponseSelect Criteria for No Response:Alarms•Respond to video feed, glass-break sensor, or manual activation•No response to motion, window, or door sensor activationTraffic Collisions•Respond to DUI, hit and run, road blockage, conflict, demand•No response to property damage onlyReferrals•Refer to other agencies (e.g., barking dogs, fireworks, etc.) Reduce the Calls –Alternative ReportingAlternative reporting-Calls with no: -Conflict-Evidence-Suspect Info-Leads Reduce the Calls –Alternative ReportingTentative List•Non-Injury Collision•Theft w/ no suspect info•Vandalism•Vehicle Burglary•Non-Injury Collision•Lost Property•Civil•Barking Dog•Fireworks•Illegal Dumping w/ no suspect info Proposed Test List•Theft w/ no suspect info•Non-injury Collision•Dumping•Barking Dog (refer)•Fireworks (refer) Redistribution+ Reduce the CallsLake ElsinoreRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Calls28,119 calls by Deputies (74%)25,154 calls by Deputies (74%)9,777 calls by CSOs (26%)8,838 calls by CSOs (26%)8.5deputies per day7.7deputies per day3.5CSO per day2.7CSOs per day(Total: 12positions per day)(Total: 10.4positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $1,170,557Annual Savings: $1,896,389 Redistribution+ Reduce the CallsMoreno ValleyRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Calls96,821 calls by Deputies (83%)87,264 calls by Deputies (83%)19,998 calls by CSOs (17%)17,978 calls by CSOs (17%)29.5deputies per day26.5deputies per day7CSO per day5.5CSOs per day(Total: 36.5positions per day)(Total: 32positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: 60/0/40)Annual Savings: $5,861,854Annual Savings: $8,588,836 Redistribution+ Reduce the CallsPalm DesertRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Calls27,668 calls by Deputies (81%)24,848 calls by Deputies (81%)6,417 calls by CSOs (19%)5,829 calls by CSOs (19%)8.5deputies per day7.5deputies per day2CSO per day2CSOs per day(Total: 10.5positions per day)(Total: 9.5positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $4,436,157Annual Savings: $5,126,493 Redistribution+ Reduce the CallsTemeculaRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Calls25,691 calls by Deputies (47%)23,122 calls by Deputies (47%)28,970 calls by CSOs (53%)26,073 calls by CSOs (53%)8deputies per day7deputies per day10CSO per day8CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 15positions per day)Ratios: (59/1/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $5,028,876Annual Savings: $6,306,868 Variable 3: Reduce Time on CallsTime on Scene-Hybrid online reporting-Reporting party fills out forms online while waiting for a deputy to respondReport Writing Time-Auto-populating report forms -Reduces report writing time Reduce Time on Calls Petty Theft •Standard Reporting:•35 minutes with current technology(15 minutes on scene + 20 minutes report writing)•Hybrid online reporting:•18 minutes (8 minutes on scene + 10 minutes report writing) Redistribution+ Reduce Time on Calls Lake ElsinoreRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Time28,119 calls by Deputies (74%)28,119 calls by Deputies (74%)9,777 calls by CSOs (26%)9,777 calls by CSOs (26%)8.5deputies per day7.5deputies per day3.5CSOs per day3CSOs per day(Total: 12positions per day)(Total: 10.5positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (61/0/39)Annual Savings: $1,170,557Annual Savings: $1,858,910 Redistribution+ Reduce Time on Calls Moreno ValleyRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Time96,821 calls by Deputies (83%)96,821 calls by Deputies (83%)19.998 calls by CSOs (17%)19,998 calls by CSOs (17%)29.5deputies per day26.5deputies per day7CSOs per day5.5CSOs per day(Total: 36.5positions per day)(Total: 32positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $5,861,854Annual Savings: $8,619,460 Redistribution+ Reduce Time on Calls Palm DesertRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Time27,668 calls by Deputies (81%)27,668 calls by Deputies (81%)6,417 calls by CSOs (19%)6,417 calls by CSOs (19%)8.5deputies per day7.5deputies per day2CSOs per day2CSOs per day(Total: 10.5positions per day)(Total: 9.5positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $4,436,157Annual Savings: $5,113,470 Redistribution+ Reduce Time on Calls TemeculaRedistributive Deployment10% Reduction in Time25,691 calls by Deputies (47%)25,691 calls by Deputies (47%)6,417 calls by CSOs (53%)6,417 calls by CSOs (53%)8deputies per day7deputies per day10CSOs per day8CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 15positions per day)Ratios: (51/9/40) Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $5,028,876Annual Savings: $6,306,892 Redistribution+Reduce the Calls +Reduce Time on Calls Lake ElsinoreRedistribution and 10% Reduction in Calls&Time25,154calls by Deputies (74%)(Down from 28,119)8,838calls by CSOs (26%)(Down from 9,777)7deputies per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)3.5CSOs per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)(Total: 10.5positions per day)(Down from 12 positions per day)Ratios: (59/1/40)Annual Savings: $2,512,159 Redistribution+Reduce the Calls +Reduce Time on Calls Moreno ValleyRedistribution and 10% Reduction in Calls&Time87,264calls by Deputies (47%)(Down from 96,821)17,978calls by CSOs (19%)(Down from 19,998)24deputies per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)5.5CSOs per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)(Total: 29.5positions per day)(Down from 38.2 positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $10,725,058 Redistribution+Reduce the Calls +Reduce Time on Calls Palm DesertRedistribution and 10% Reduction in Calls&Time24,848calls by Deputies (81%)(Down from 27,668)5,829calls by CSOs (19%)(Down from 6,417)7deputies per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)2CSOs per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)(Total: 9positions per day)(Down from 14 positions per day)Ratios: (58/2/40)Annual Savings: $5,734,772 Redistribution+Reduce the Calls +Reduce Time on Calls TemeculaRedistribution and 10% Reduction in Calls&Time23,122calls by Deputies (47%)(Down from 25,691)26,073calls by CSOs (53%)(Down from 28,970)6.33deputies per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)7CSOs per day(Down from 48 minutes to 43.2minutes)(Total: 13.33positions per day)(Down from 18 positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40)Annual Savings: $7,126,945 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesUse both contract and dedicated deputies:•Set contract hours to the 60% saturation point•Add dedicated deputies to provide for proactive time Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesLake ElsinoreActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment336,175 calls by Deputies (96%)25,154 calls by Deputies (74%)1,594 calls by CSOs (4%) 8,838 calls by CSOs (26%)11deputies per day7contractdeputies per day0.7CSO per day3dedicateddeputies “per day”3.5CSOs per day(Total: 11.7positions per day)(Total: 13.5positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (41/19/40)Annual Savings: $464,054 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesLake ElsinoreActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment336,175 calls by Deputies (96%)25,154 calls by Deputies (74%)1,594 calls by CSOs (4%) 8,838 calls by CSOs (26%)11deputies per day7contractdeputies per day0.7CSO per day3.5dedicateddeputies “per day”3.5CSOs per day(Total: 11.7positions per day)(Total: 14positions per day)Ratios: (60/0/40) Ratios: (39/21/40)Annual Savings: $137,245 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesMoreno ValleyActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment3106,170 calls by Deputies (91%)87,264 calls by Deputies (83%)10,649 calls by CSOs (9%) 17,978 calls by CSOs (17%)38deputies per day24contractdeputies per day2.5CSO per day12dedicateddeputies “per day”5.5CSOs per day(Total: 40.5positions per day)(Total: 41.5positions per day)Ratios: (50/10/40)* Ratios: (40/20/40)Annual Savings: $2,566,252 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesMoreno ValleyActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment3106,170 calls by Deputies (91%)87,264 calls by Deputies (83%)10,649 calls by CSOs (9%) 17,978 calls by CSOs (17%)38deputies per day24contractdeputies per day2.5CSO per day15dedicateddeputies “per day”5.5CSOs per day(Total: 40.5positions per day)(Total: 44.5positions per day)Ratios: (50/10/40)* Ratios: (36/24/40)Annual Savings: $605,394 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesPalm DesertActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment331,637 calls by Deputies (93%)24,848 calls by Deputies (81%)2,448 calls by CSOs (7%) 5,829 calls by CSOs (19%)14deputies per day7contractdeputies per day1CSO per day5dedicateddeputies “per day”2CSOs per day(Total: 15positions per day)(Total: 14positions per day)Ratios: (40/20/40) Ratios: (40/20/40)Annual Savings: $2,312,012 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesPalm DesertActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment331,637 calls by Deputies (93%)24,848 calls by Deputies (81%)2,448 calls by CSOs (7%) 5,829 calls by CSOs (19%)14deputies per day7contractdeputies per day1CSO per day7dedicateddeputies “per day”2CSOs per day(Total: 15positions per day)(Total: 16positions per day)Ratios: (40/20/40) Ratios: (29/31/40)Annual Savings: $1,004,773 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesTemeculaActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment348,938 calls by Deputies (90%)23,122 calls by Deputies (47%)5,723 calls by CSOs (10%) 26,073 calls by CSOs (53%)17deputies per day6contractdeputies per day1CSO per day4dedicateddeputies “per day”10CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 20positions per day)Ratios: (52/8/40) Ratios: (40/20/40)Annual Savings: $3,976,357 Hybrid Model with All Three VariablesTemeculaActual DeploymentHybrid Deployment348,938 calls by Deputies (90%)23,122 calls by Deputies (47%)5,723 calls by CSOs (10%) 26,073 calls by CSOs (53%)17deputies per day6contractdeputies per day1CSO per day8dedicateddeputies “per day”10CSOs per day(Total: 18positions per day)(Total: 24positions per day)Ratios: (52/8/40) Ratios: (27/33/40)Annual Savings: $1,361,880 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.A
-1-
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE JURUPA VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
November 17, 2022
1. 7:00 PM - CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL FOR REGULAR MEETING ● Chris Barajas, Mayor
● Leslie Altamirano, Mayor Pro Tem
● Lorena Barajas Bisbee, Council Member
● Brian Berkson, Council Member
● Guillermo Silva, Council Member
Mayor Chris Barajas called the regular meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
2. INVOCATION was given by Pastor Jeremy Williams, Grace Fellowship Church.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Brian Berkson.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano, seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee, to approve the Agenda and to re-schedule Item 14.A to prior to the public hearing items.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. RECOGNITION TO KEITH CLARKE
The City Council commended Keith Clarke for his dedicated leadership while serving as the City’s Chief Building Official. On behalf the Council, Mayor Barajas presented him with a Proclamation thanking him for his eight years of service and for leading his “award winning” Building Department in an exemplary manner.
B. INTRODUCTION OF ADMINISTRATION/FINANCE STAFF
Connie Cardenas, Administrative Services Director introduced the following members of her staff in the order of seniority: Finance Staff: Rosie Corona, Abdon Padilla, Guadalupe Ramirez, Claribel Bautista, Christine Gutierrez, Maria Mora, and Leo Hernandez. IT and Support Staff: Michael Choy, Rebecca Abeyta, Martha Romero, Victoria Duran, and Gloria Gutierrez.
RETURN TO AGENDA
-2-
6. PUBLIC APPEARANCE/COMMENTS
Assembly Member Sabrina Cervantes congratulated the Council on the news that the new Inland Empire Technical Trade Center is being planned for construction in Jurupa Valley.
This new trade center will help create a more diversified workforce and a more robust economy. She congratulated the City Council on the award of $33 million for this center.
On behalf of the state Assembly and on behalf of the state of California, s he presented a symbolic check to Mayor Chris Barajas.
Donald Grant Price provided a historical perspective of his life in Jurupa Valley. He voiced a concern that his civil rights have been violated and he would like to be reunited with his current wife who is from the Philippines.
Marissa Herrera, representing Love Foundation, stated that she is a community ambassador for the City of Co rona. She is interested in cooperating with the City and other local jurisdictions to assist with homeless solutions.
George Ruiz requested that some attention be given to the roadway near 46 th Street and Riverview Drive as the pavement is in really bad condition.
7. INTRODUCTIONS, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, COUNCIL COMMENTS AND
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Chris Barajas conveyed a Happy Thanksgiving to all. He encouraged citizens to get involved with some of the City’s non -profit organizations that will be seeking volunteers this holiday season. Those interested may contact him at City Hall.
8. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ORAL/WRITTEN REPORTS REGARDING
REGIONAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. MAYOR CHRIS BARAJAS
1. Mayor Chris Barajas gave an u pdate on the Western Riverside Council of Governments – Administration & Finance Committee meeting of November 9, 2022.
B. MAYOR PRO TEM LESLIE ALTAMIRANO
1. Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano gave an update on the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority m eeting of November 7, 2022.
C. COUNCIL MEMBER BRIAN BERKSON
1. Council Member Brian Berkson gave an update on the Riverside County Transportation Commission meeting of November 9, 2022.
-3-
2. Council Member Brian Berkson gave an update on the Northwest Transportation Now Coalition meeting of November 10, 2022.
3. Council Member Brian Berkson gave an update on the Riverside Transit Agency Executive Committee meeting of November 17, 2022.
4. Council Member Brian Berkson announced that the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee meeting of November 17, 2022 was canceled.
D. COUNCIL MEMBER GUILLERMO SILVA
1. Council Member Guillermo Silva gave an update on the Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control meeting of November 17, 2022.
9. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano, City Manager Rod Butler asked Mr.
Keith Clarke to give an update on a prior noise complaint that was made by Vera Lara.
Mr. Clarke reported that the source of the noise was a pasta factory that has been issued a Notice of Violation. Mr. Clarke noted that the owner has also volunteered to build a sound attenuation structure which should remedy the situation.
City Manager Rod Butler polled the Council to determine if they would like to cancel the first meeting in January as it falls during the Christmas Holiday. The Council, by consensus, agreed to cancel the January 5, 2023 meeting.
Mr. Butler announced that the City recently received a $485,000 grant which will be used for additional homeless services focused on individuals who were recently relocated from the Santa Ana River bottom, which will be implemented through the Path of Life Ministries.
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. NOVEMBER 3, 2022 REGULAR MEETING
A motion was made by Council Member Guillermo Silva, seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee , to approve the Minutes of the November 3, 2022 regular meeting.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
-4-
11. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF
THE TEXT OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS INCLUDED IN
THE AGENDA
Requested Action: That the City Council waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda.
B. REAFFIRM FINDINGS AUTHORIZING CITY COUNCIL TO MEET IN
WHOLE OR IN PART BY TELECONFERENCING UNDER
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e) DURING THE COVID -19
STATE AND LOCAL EMERGENCY
Requested Action: That the City Council a dopt Resolution No. 2022 -106, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PUBLIC MEETINGS OF THE
CITY COUNCIL TO BE HELD WITH A TELECONFERENCE OPTION
FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC DUE TO
THE GOVERNOR’S DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY AND THE CITY
COUNCIL’S DECLARATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e), AND MAKING FINDINGS
AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE SAME
C. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING
JUNE 30, 2022 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021/2022 AND SEPTEMBER 30, 2022 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023
Requested Action: That the City Council receive and file the quarterly investment reports for Fiscal Year 2021/2022 quarter ending June 30, 2022 and Fiscal Year 2022/2023 quarter ending September 30, 2022.
D. REIMBURSEMENT TO CALPORTLAND COMPANY FOR GUARDRAIL
INSTALLATION ON RUBI DOUX BOULEVARD IN TH E CITY OF
JURUPA VALLEY
Requested Action: That the City Council approve reimbursement to CalPortland for the guardrail installation on Rubidoux Boulevard and authorize the City Manager to release payment for $40,000.00.
E. ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS OF DEDICATION AT THE HALL AVENUE
AND AGUA MANSA ROAD INTERSECTION (AGUA MANSA
COMMERCE PREDEV, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIAB ILITY
COMPANY)
-5-
1. Requested Action: That the City Council accept the offer of dedication of an easement for public road and drainage purposes including public utility and public services purposes over the area as shown on Exhibit B of DED22-003.
2. Authorize the Director of Public Works and City Clerk to sign the Acceptance of Dedication of DED22-003.
F. CZA22005 - INITIATE A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT PERTAINING
TO THE PROCESSING AND TERMS OF EXTENSION OF TIME (EOT)
APPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEP ARTMENT
APPROVALS
Requested Action: That the City Council, by motion, initiate a zoning text amendment pertaining to the processing and terms of extension of time (EOT) applications for Community Development Department approvals.
A motion was made by Council Member Guillermo Silva, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano, to approve the Consent Calendar.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
12. CONSIDERATION OF ANY ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
The following item was taken out of order:
14. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. APPOINTMENTS TO FILL TWO UNEXPIRED VACANCIES ON THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Staff Report presented by Victoria Wasko, City Clerk. Ms. Wasko reported that Benito Valenzuela and Eve lyn Hedrick resigned from the Community Development Advisory Committee earlier this year, which triggered the current vacancies for their positions. Since Benito Valenzuela’s appointment runs concurrently with Mayor Chris Barajas and Evelyn Hedrick’s appo intment runs concurrently with Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano, they will need to appoint one member each to serve on the Community Development Advisory Committee for the unexpired portion of the terms, which shall expire on March 21, 2023. Ms.
Wasko reported that she received two letters of interest . Both of the applicants were invited to be present at tonight’ s meeting, however, one of the applicants, David McEachern had a last minute emergency and was unable to attend.
-6-
Jessica Miller introduced herself and shared why she would like to serve on the Community Development Advisory Committee.
A motion was made by Mayor Chris Barajas , seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee, to nominate Jessica Miller to serve on the Community Development Advisory Committee for a term which shall expire on March 21, 2023.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee , to nominate David McEachern to serve on the Community Development Advisory Committee for a term which shall expire on March 21, 2023.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER M ASTER APPLICATION (MA) NO. 22051: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (VTTM) NO. 38257 FOR 118 CONDOMINIUMS ON APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LIMONITE AVENUE AND BEACH
STREET; (APN: 162 -230-012); AND APPROVING A PREVIOUS
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION FINDING THAT NO FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (APPLICANT: CENTURY
COMMUNITIES OF CALIFORNIA, LLC)
Staff Report presented by Kumail Raza, Senior Planner. Mr. Raza provided a brief background of the project, noting that in April 2016, the Council approved the Paradise Knolls Specific Plan and adopted the original Environmental Impact Report for the project. Simultaneously the Council also approved Planning Area 1, also known as the Bridle Path. In March 2022, the applicant submitted a n application for Planning Area 2. In September 2022, the Planning Commission approved the Tentative Tract Map and Neighborhood Design Plan for Planning Area 2. That action was subsequently appealed to the City Council. Planning Area 2 consists of two separate lots, Lot No. 7 and Lot No. 9.
Mr. Raza provided a description of the project, which consists of 118 condominium units, all two -stories in height. The applicant is proposing a lower density or 81 fewer units than allowed pursuant to the Specific Pl an. Mr. Raza described the reduced density and how it will impact the City’s goals in meeting the state’s
-7-
housing element law due to the current housing crisis. In this instance, because of the reduced density, the project will create a deficit for low-income housing. As a result, the City would need to redesignate two acres to high -density residential within 6 months of this project’s potential approval.
Mayor Chris Barajas opened the public hearing and called for any public comments.
Brian Taylor, Century Communities (applicant) spoke in favor of the project and offered to answer any questions.
An email from Jacqui Lee was submitted regarding a lack of adequate parking spaces for the project. Her letter was made part of the public record.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Council Member Brian Berkson explained why he appealed this project as he had a concern with the scenario of reducing previously allocated housing sites for high- density housing and the need to re -allocate sites when a deficit is created for low - income housing. He stated that due to the reduced density of this project other areas in the city would need to be designated for high -density units in order to be in compliance with state law.
Further discussion followed.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Council Member Brian Berkson , seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano, to deny the project as proposed and bring back a Resolution of Denial.
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
B. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW
CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES AND THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
Staff Report presented by Keith Clarke, Building Department Official. At the request of Council Member Brian Berkson, Mr. Clarke described how it will impact development projects when the new code takes effect on January 1, 2023. Mr.
Clarke explained that the Building Department has been very proactive in notifying developers about the new Building Code and if their applications are in plan check before December 31st they lock in the current 2019 code requirements.
Further discussion followed.
Mayor Chris Barajas opened the public hearing and called for any public comments.
-8-
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Council Member Brian Berkson, seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee, to adopt Resolution No. 2022-108, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, MAKING EXPRESS FINDINGS AND
DETERMINATIONS THAT MODIFICATIONS T O THE 2022
CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY ARE REASON ABLY NECESSARY BECAUSE OF LOCAL
CLIMATIC, GEOLOGICAL OR TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
A motion was made by Council Member Brian Berkson, seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee, adopt Ordinance No. 2022-18, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.05, ADOPTION OF CONSTRUCTION CODES,
TO TITLE 8 OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE AND
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE (1) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, (2) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE, (3) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE, (4) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, (5) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA
PLUMBING CODE, (6) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, (7) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, (8) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, (9) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA
REFERENCE STANDARDS CODE, (10) THE 2022 CALIFORNIA
RESIDENTIAL CODE, (11) THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODE, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS
AND DELETIONS TO SUCH CODES AND AMENDING CHAPTER 8.10,
ADOPTION OF FIRE CODES, TO TITLE 8 OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2022
EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, TOGETHER WITH
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS AND DELETIONS TO SUCH CODE
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
C. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER MASTER APPLICATION (MA) NO. 21143: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) NO. 21003; CHANGE OF ZONE (CZ) NO. 21004; WAIVER OF MINIMUM NINE -ACRE AREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARD; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) NO.
-9-
38151 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (SDP) NO. 22089; PROJECT:
“MADONE COLLECTION” PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
- SUBDIVIDE 6.92 ACRES OF LAND INTO 35 LOTS FOR SINGLE - FAMILY DETACHED HOMES; LOCATION: 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN:
183-030-014); (APPLICANT: TK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC) Staff Report presented by Thomas Gorham, Principal Planner. Mr. Gorham described the proposed project and the required entitlements.
Octavio Duran, Assistant Engineer, provided additional information and responded to Council’s questions.
Mayor Chris Barajas opened the public hearing and called for any public comments.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Council Member Brian Berkson asked if the height of the wall along the property line could be raised to eight feet to reduce the noise from the school.
Mayor Chris Barajas spoke in support of the project, noting that the Council with the help of the Planning Commission and staff created the traditional neighborhood overlay to help accommodate this type of housing that has reduced den sity and single-family homes with the majority being single -story. It will also include the inclusionary housing requirement.
Further discussion followed
Council Member Brian Berkson suggested working with the developer to see if they would agree to increase the height of the wall that is located on the south side of the project.
Following discussion, the following amended conditions were added: 1) the applicant shall be in compliance with the 20 -foot rear yard setback requirement; and 2) the fencin g shall be installed subject to the approval of the Community Development Department.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano , seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee , to adopt Resolution No. 2022 -109, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATI ON MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM, AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.
21003, WAIVER OF MINIMUM NINE -ACRE AREA DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 22089, AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38151 TO PERMIT A SCHEDULE “A”
-10-
SUBDIVISION OF APPROXI MATELY 6.92 ACRES OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183 -030-014) INTO THIRTY -FIVE (35) SINGLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS,
COMMON AREAS, PRIVATE STREETS, AND A RETENTION BASIN
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
A motion was made by Council Member Guillermo Silva, seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee, to introduce Ordinance No. 2022-21, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONE OF
APPROXIMATELY 6.92-ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT
7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183 -030-014) FROM A-1 (LIGHT
AGRICULTURE) TO R -4 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) , AND MAKING
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CEQA
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
D. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER MASTER APPLICATION (MA) NO. 21334: REVISED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, REVISED SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY,
VARIANCE, ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY APROVED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AND COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENT TO MODIFY A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 231,000
SQUARE-FOOT SHOPPING CENTER, ADD ALCOHOL SALES FOR ON-
& OF F-SITE CONSUMPTION, AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT
CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ON MISSION BOULEVARD AND
PYRITE STREET (APNS: 171-020-001, -002, -025); (APPLICANT: PYRITE
INVESTMENTS, LLC)
Staff Report presented by Kumail Raza, Senior Planner. Mr. Raza provided the background of the approval process. He reported that the applicant is requesting a revised tentative parcel map, revised site development permit, revised conditional use permit, revised PCN, revised variance and a cooperative agreement as part of the project. He reported that the main revisions to the project include a new national big box department store, drive-through restaurant in lieu of the office building and the addition of four retail buildings.
-11-
Following discussion, Council Member Brian Berks on questioned why the traffic signal is not located on Tyrolite Street.
Further discussion followed.
Mr. Wes Fifield, Panorama Development, (applicant) spoke in support of the project. He responded to Council Member Brian Berkson’s comments, stating that he agrees with his concerns. He stated that he will work together with the proposed developer to the east to create an entrance with full access at Tyrolite.
Octavio Duran, Assistant City Engineer, provided information on the engineering study for the project.
Further discussion followed.
Mayor Chris Barajas opened the public hearing and called for any public comments.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
Following discussion, the Council included the following two conditions of approval: 1) That the applicant will work with the property owner to the east and coordinate on a future shared driveway at the intersection of Mission and Tyrolite; and 2) Fencing along the east property line will be designed subject to the approval of the Community Development Department.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano , seconded by Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee , to adopt Resolution No. 2022 -110, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUP A VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MASTER APP LICATION NO.
21334 CONSISTING OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37890, REVISED PERMIT NO. 1 TO SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 20018,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 22002, DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 22003, AND VARIANCE NO. 22003, TO PERMIT THE CONSTR UCTION OF AN APPROXI MATE 147,000
SQUARE FOOT DEPARTME NT STORE WITH ALCOHO L SALES FOR
OFF-SITE CONSUMPTION , AND ALCOHOL SALES FOR ON -
PREMISES CONSUMPTION AT A FUTURE RESTAUR ANT, AND
OTHER SITE MODIFICATIONS ON APPROXIMATELY 31.7 ACRES OF
REAL PROPERTY LOCATE D ON THE NORTHEAST C ORNER OF
MISSION BOULEVARD AN D PYRITE STREET, APP ROVING AN
ADDENDUM TO THE CERT IFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT AND APPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREE MENT WITH
THE DEVELOPER REGARD ING THE DES IGN AND CONSTRUCTION
OF OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS (APNS: 171-020-001, -002, -025)
-12-
Ayes: L. Altamirano, C. Barajas, L. Barajas Bisbee, B. Berkson, G. Silva Noes: None
Absent: None
15. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
City Attorney Peter Thorson had no report.
16. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
Council Member Guillermo Silva complimented City staff for their holiday decorating efforts. He conveyed a safe and happy Thanksgiving to all.
Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Altamirano thanked all those involved for a very successful and enjoyable Veterans Parade.
Council Member Lorena Barajas Bisbee conveyed a Happy Thanksgiving to all.
Council Member Brian Berkson requested that the proposed traffic calming measures on Agate Street be brought back to Council for an update.
17. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Chris Barajas adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m.
The next meeting of the Jurupa Valley City Council will be held December 1, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chamber, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
Page | 1
120
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 01, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: CONNIE CARDENAS, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.B
CHECK REGISTERS
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council ratify the check registers dated October 26 and November 2, 9 and 16, 2022 as well as the payroll register s, two dated October 28, 31 and November 11, 2022.
The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley authorizes expenditures through the annual budget process. The FY 2022-23 Budget was adopted on June 16, 2022. Expenditures not included in the annual budget process are approved by resolution throughout the fiscal year.
ANALYSIS
All expenditures on the attached check registers have been approved by the City Council and are in conformance with the authority provided by Section 37208 of the Government Code. The check register dated November 9, 2022 includes a $14,701.85 payment to Chase Card Services. The Statement, with purchase details, is attached herewith.
OTHER INFORMATION
None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Check registers:
10/26/22 $ 104,522.21
11/02/22 $ 2,155,463.49
11/09/22 $ 733,603.51
11/16/22 $ 3,073,794.25
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.C
APPROVAL OF CITY HOLIDAY SCHEDULE
RECOMMENDATION
1) That the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 2022-111, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING HOLIDAYS ON WHICH CITY
OFFICES SHALL BE CLOSED FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2023
BACKGROUND
The California Government Code designates days that are state holidays. The code further provides that city offices shall be closed on state designated holidays unless otherwise provided for by the city. The proposed action by the City Council will meet the intent of the code sections.
ANALYSIS
The City needs to identify the days on which city offices will be closed. The City has the authority to designate what holidays or days the city offices will be closed. In general, the state designated holidays are the norm but there is no particular restriction or other days city offices may be closed.
The resolution includes the following holidays on which city offices will be closed for the 2023 Calendar Year:
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
January 1, 2023 New Year’s Day
January 16, 2023 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
February 20, 2023 Presidents’ Day
May 29, 2023 Memorial Day
July 4, 2023 Independence Day
September 4, 2023 Labor Day
November 11, 2023 Veteran’s Day
November 23, 2023 Thanksgiving Day
November 24, 2023 Day after Thanksgiving
December 24, 2023 Christmas Eve
December 25, 2023 Christmas Day
The City Council may add or delete from the proposed holidays.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None
ALTERNATIVES
Modify the holiday schedule.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
__________________________
Rod B. Butler
City Manager
__________________________
Michael Flad
Assistant City Manager
Reviewed by:
__________________________
Connie Cardenas
Administrative Services Director
Attachment:
1. Resolution No. 2022-111
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-111
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING
HOLIDAYS ON WHICH CITY OFFICES SHALL BE
CLOSED FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2023
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Section 6700 of the California Government Code designates days that are holidays in the state; and
WHEREAS, Section 6702 of the California Government Code provides that City offices shall be closed on designated state holidays unless otherwise provided by the City; and WHERAS, the Jurupa Valley City Council desires and deems it in the best public interest to designate those holidays on which City offices will be closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the C ity Council of the City of Jurupa Valley as follows:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true.
Section 2. That the public offices of the City shall be closed on the following dates in observance of indicated holidays:
January 1, 2023 New Year’s Day
January 16, 2023 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
February 20, 2023 Presidents’ Day
May 29, 2023 Memorial Day
July 4, 2023 Independence Day
September 4, 2023 Labor Day
November 11, 2023 Veteran’s Day
November 23, 2023 Thanksgiving Day
November 24, 2023 Day after Thanksgiving
December 24, 2023 Christmas Eve
December 25, 2023 Christmas Day
Section 3. That all City holidays shall be observed as follows: If a holiday falls upon a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be deemed to be the holiday. If a holiday falls upon a Sunday, the following Monday shall be deemed to be the holiday.
Section 4. If Christmas Eve falls on a Sunday and Christmas Day falls on a Monday, the following Monday and Tuesday shall be deemed to be the Christmas Eve and Christmas Day holidays.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. -2-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 1st day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-3-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022-111 was duly passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 1st day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.D
-1-
12774-0007\2740881v1.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-21
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLE Y,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY OFFICIAL ZONI NG MAP CHANGING THE
ZONE OF APPROXIMATEL Y 6.92 -ACRES OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7586 JURUPA ROAD (APN: 183-
030-014) FROM A -1 (LIGHT AGR ICULTURE) TO R -4
(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ), AND M AKING FINDINGS
PURSUANT TO CEQA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project Procedural Findings . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) TK Management Services, LLC (the “Applicant”) has applied for Gener al Plan Amendment No. 21003, Waiver of Minimum Nine -Acre Area Development Standard, Change of Zone No. 21004, Site Development Permit No. 22089, and Tentative Tract Map No. 38151 (collectively, Master Application No. 21143 or MA No. 21143) to permit a Sche dule “A” subdivision of approximately 6.92 acres into thirty -five (35) single -family lots, common areas, private streets, and a retention basin, collectively all on real property located at 7586 Jurupa Road (APN: 183-030-014) (the “Project”).
(b) On October 12, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance, at which time all persons interested in the proposed Zoning Code Amendment had the opportunity and did add ress the Planning Commission on these matters . F ollowing t he receipt of public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimon y, the Planning C ommission adopted Resolution No. 2022-10-12-01 recommending that the City Council approve MA No. 21143 which includes the proposed Zoning Code Amendment. (c) On November 17, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters.
Following the receipt of public testimony the City Council closed the public h earing and duly considered the written and oral testimony received.
(d) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act Findings . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley makes the following e nvironmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Project:
(a) Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Cal. Pub.
Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State Guidelines (the “Guidelines” ) (14 Cal. Code Regs. §
RETURN TO AGENDA
-2-
12774-0007\2740881v1.doc
15000 et seq.), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Project as described in the Initial Study. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that, with the incorporatio n of mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) was prepared by the City in full compliance with CEQA.
(b) Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the MND as required by law. The public comment period commenced on September 9, 2022, and expired on September 28, 2022. Copies of the documents have been available for public revi ew and inspection at City Hall, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, California 92509. The City did not receive any comments during the public review period. (c) The City Council has reviewed the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”), attached as Exhibit “B” to Resolution No. 2022-109, and all comments received regarding the MND and, based on the whole record before it, finds that:
1) The MND was prepared in compliance with CEQA;
2) With the incorporation of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and 3) The MND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.
(d) In connection with the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-109, the City Council adopted the MND and MMRP for this Project.
Section 3. Project Findings. The City Council hereby finds, as required by the Jurupa Valley Ordinances and applicable state law , that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment should be adopted because the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that:
(a) The proposed Change of Zone No. 21004 will be consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan with the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 21003 and the waiver of the Planned Residential (R-4) Zone minimum nine-acre area development standard. The proposed Planned Residential (R -4) Zone is consistent with the proposed Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) General Plan land use designation. Additionally, the proposed C hange of Zone No. 21004 is consistent with the Housing Element of the 2017 Jurupa Valley General Plan because it promotes the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) inventory.
Section 4. Amendment to Zoning Map . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby declares that the City’s Official Zoning Map is hereby amended to change the zone of approximately 6.92 acres of real property located at 7586 Jurupa Road (APN: 183-030-014) from A-1 ( Light Agriculture ) to R-4 ( Planned Development ) as depicted on t he map attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.
-3-
12774-0007\2740881v1.doc
Section 5. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Or dinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
Section 6. Effect of Ordinance . This Ordinance is intended to supersede any ordinance or resolution of the County of Riverside adopted by reference by the City of Jurupa Valley in conflict with the terms of this Ordinance.
Section 7. Certification. The City Clerk of the City o f Jurupa Valley shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.
Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 1st day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-4-
12774-0007\2740881v1.doc
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-21 was duly introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 17th day of November, 2022, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 1st day of December, 2022, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 1st day of December, 2022. ________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
A-1
12774-0007\2740881v1.doc
Exhibit A
Change of Zone Exhibit
Page | 1
120
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.E
ISSUANCE OF PUBLIC REPORT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 65858(D) REGARDING INTERIM URGENCY
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02 ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS RELATED
TO URBAN LOT SPLITS AND HOUSING UNITS BUILT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SENATE BILL 9
______________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council issue this report pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(d) regarding Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-02 establishing regulations related to SB
9. BACKGROUND
Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) was signed by Governor Newsom on September 16, 2021 and became effective January 1, 2022. It requires that a local jurisdiction allow ministerial approval (i.e., no discretionary review) of two (2) units on parcels zoned for single-family dwellings per lot and/or the subdivision of a single-family zoned parcel into two (2) equal sized parcels (a 40 to 60 percent split of lot size is allowed). This type of subdivision (“urban lot split”) may result in each lot containing a duplex or two (2) detached residential uses.
Since SB 9 could result in negative impacts to existing single-family neighborhoods and decrease the adequate provision of utilities and services, the City Council adopted an interim urgency ordinance that established limited development standards until a permanent ordinance could be established.
On January 20, 2022, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858, the Jurupa Valley City Council enacted Interim Urgency Ordinance (IUO) No. 2022 -02 to impose a moratorium on the approval of applications for housing development projects and urban lot splits permitted by Senate Bill 9, that do not meet the regulations and standards set forth in the ordinance. Absent any additional action by the City Council, the Interim Urgency Ordinance would have expired after 45 days on March 6, 2022. However, State
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
law allows an additional 10 month and 15 day extension from th e initial 45-day period.
As such, a second extension of the Ordinance was approved at a City Council public hearing on February 17, 2022. The action extended the expiration da te of the IUO to January 20, 2023.
Another extension is allowed per state law for an additional 10 month and 15 day period.
To process the next extension, Government Code Section 65858(d) requires that “ten days prior to the expiration or extension of a ny interim zoning ordinance, the legislative body [City Council] must issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the ordinance.” In compliance with Government Code Section 65858(d), the Cit y Council hereby issues this report for Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-02.
To date, the City has only received one (1) application for an SB 9 urban lot split . The applicant is proposing to subdivide 1.7 acres at 8940 Mission Boulevard (APN: 169-150- 019) zoned R -1 into two (2) similarly sized parcels at 0.82 acres, and 0.90 acres. It is anticipated that the application will be approved and two homes will be constructed on each lot.
Measures taken to alleviate the conditions that led to the ad option of Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-02:
Since the Interim Urgency Ordinance was adopted, City Staff has continued its research on how best to implement SB 9 on a permanent basis in order to ensure that the City’s semi-rural residential character is maintained while complying with the provisions of SB
9. While considering zoning and subdivision provisions, the City will also continue to evaluate potential issues identified with the implementation of SB 9, including the following:
Research and analyze the standards adopted by other jurisdictions; Assess the compatibility of proposed structures and subdivisions with existing neighborhoods;
Identify the potential for applying objective development standards created to address the new construction of duplexes;
Determine the adequacy of City infrastructure to provide services including but not limited to the following: water; gas, electrical and cable utilities; sanitation; trash disposal; school capacity; and police and fire services; and
Evaluate the affordability of housing units that are constructed as a result of SB 9 in Jurupa Valley.
At this time, a preliminary project schedule has been prepared that may include study sessions with the Planning Commission and public hearings with the Planning Commission and City Council. The further evaluation of potential unexpected increases in residential density will be essential to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the community as well as to ensure the efficient and adequate delivery of government al services.
Page | 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.F
RESOLUTION DENYING MASTER APPLICATION (MA) NO. 22051:
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (VTTM) NO. 38257 FOR 118
CONDOMINIUMS ON APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LIMONITE AVENUE AND BEACH
STREET; (APN:162 -230-012); CEQA DOES NOT APPLY TO
PROJECTS WHICH A PUBLIC AGENCY DISAPPROVES
RECOMMENDATION
1) That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-113, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DE NYING MASTER APPLICATION NO. 22051, A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38257 AND A NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT A SCHEDULE “A” SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LIMONITE AVENUE AND BEACH S TREET
(APN:162-230-012)
BACKGROUND
Century Communities of California, LLC has applied for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 38257 and a Neighborhood Development Plan (collectively, Master Application No. 22051 or MA No. 22051) to allow for the subdivision of approximately 7.94 acres into 17 lots for attached condominiums (townhomes), private streets, private courts, and open space on real property located at the southwest corner of Limonite Avenue and Beach Street (APN:
162-230-012) in the Paradise Knolls Specific Plan Zone and designated Highest Density Residential (HHDR) (the “Project”). The Project is located in Lot 7 of Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 1402 (Paradise Knolls) adopted by the City Council on April 21, 2016 pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-15.
RETURN TO AGENDA
-1-
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-113
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MASTER
APPLICATION NO. 2205 1, A VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 38257 AND A NEIGHBORHOOD
DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PERMIT A SCHEDULE “ A”
SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 7.94 ACRES OF
REAL PROPERTY LOCATE D AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF LIMONITE A VENUE AND BEACH STRE ET
(MA 22051; APN: 162-230-012)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project. Century Communities of California, LLC (the “Applicant”) has applied for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 38257 and a Neighborhood Development Plan (collectively, Master Application No. 22051 or MA No. 22051) to allow the subdivision of approximately 7.94 acres into 17 lots for attached condominiums (townhomes), private streets, private courts, and open space on real property located at the southwest corner of Limonite Avenue and Beach Street (APN: 162-230-012) in the Paradise Knolls Specific Plan Zone and designated Highest Density Residential (HHDR) (the “Project”). The Project is located in Lot 7 of Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 1402 (Paradise Knolls) that was adopted by the City Council on April 21, 2016 pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-15.
Section 2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
(a) The Applicant is seeking approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 38257, a Schedule “A” subdivision of approximately 7.94 acres into 17 lots for attached condominiums (townhomes), private streets, private courts, and open space on real property located at the southwest corner of Limonite Avenue and Beach Street (APN: 162-230-012). (b) Section 7.15.090.B of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that whenever a vesting tentative map is filed, it shall be processed in the same manner as a tentati ve map unless modified by S ection 7.15.090, and shall have printed consp icuously on its face the words “Vesting Tentative Map.”
(c) Section 7.05.020.A of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the Jurupa Valley Planning Commission is designated as the “Advisory Agency” charged with the duty of making investigations and reports on the design and improvement of all proposed vesting tentative Schedule “A” maps. Further, Section 7.05.020.A of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the Planning Commission is authorized to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove all such tentative map land divisions and report the action directly to the City Council and the land divider.
(d) Consistent with Section 7.15.130.A of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code , the Planning Commission held a duly notice d public hearing on September 28, 20 22 on the -2-
proposed map. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-09-28-01 approving the Project.
(e) Section 7.15.180 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code requires denial of a vesting tentative tract map if it does not meet all of the requirements of Title 7 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, or if any of the following findings are made:
1) That the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
2) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
3) That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the type of development.
4) That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the proposed density of the development.
5) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
6) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems. 7) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. 8) Notwithstanding subsection 5) above, a vesting tentative map may be approved if an environmental impact report was prepared with respect to the project and a finding was made, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
Section 3. Neighborhood Development Plan.
(a) The Applicant is seeking approval of a Neighborhood Development Plan for the Project.
(b) Section 9.235.030.B of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that any use permitted within a specific plan shall be subject to the permit requirements specified in the plan.
-3-
(c) Section III of the Paradise Knolls Specific Plan provides that the Planning Commission will review and approve, deny, or modify a Neighborhood Development Plan.
Section 4. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) The application for MA No. 22051 was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice, in the time and manner p rescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Municipal Code.
(b) On September 28, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on MA No. 22051, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission regarding the Project.
Following the receipt of public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2022-09-28-01 approving MA No. 22051. (c) Pursuant to Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 9.05.100.B “An appeal may be filed by an individual Council Member or by the City Council, provided, however, that any such appeal shall be solely on the basis that the issues related to the application are important to the city and should be decided by the entire City Council, and, provided further, that an appeal by an individual Council Member or the Council shall not mean, nor shall it be construed to mean, that the individual Council Member or the City Council is expressing a view in fav or of or in opposition to the application. ”
(d) Council Member Berkson filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of Master Application No. 22051 on October 6, 2022 pursuant to Section
9.05.100.B.
(e) On November 17, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on MA No. 22051, at which time all person interested in the Project had the opportunity to and did address the City Council regarding the Project. (f) At the conclusion of the public hearing on Novem ber 17, 2022, the City Council directed Staff to prepare a resolution denying MA No. 22051. (g) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 5. California En vironmental Quality Act Not Applicable. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs § 15270) CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
Section 6. Denial of Vesting Tentative Tract Map. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby deny Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 38257 based on the following findings:
(a) The proposed Vesting Tentative Map No. 38257 is not consistent with applicable requirements of the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan and Specific Plan No. 1402 based on the following findings:
-4-
1) Table II-1 of Specific Plan No. 1402 , page II -5, requires that the target density of Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 1402 is 20 or more dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and target dwelling units of 300 dwelling units. As part of the approval of the Housi ng Element of the General Plan, Planning Area 2, including Lot 7 was included in the tabulation at an expected 300 units which is 28 dwelling units per acre. 2) Paragraph 13, Section II.A of Specific Plan No. 1402 provides:
“13. Final development densities for each planning area shall be determined through the appropriate development
application up to the maximum dwelling units identified in the Specific Plan, based upon, but not limited to, the following:
a) Adequate availability of services;
b) Adequate access and circulation;
c) Innovation in building types and design;
d) Sensitivity to landforms;
e) Sensitivity to neighborhood design through lot
and street layouts; and,
f) The density range permitted by the designation.
Anything over the range will require a Spec ific Plan
Amendment.”
3) The proposed Vesting Tentative Map No. 38257 fails to comply with the density requirements of Specific Plan No. 1402 because the proposed density is 14.9 dwelling units per acre rather than the minimum target density of 20 or more dwelling units per acre as required by Specific Plan No. 1402. Additionally the 118 dwelling units proposed by Vesting Tentative Map No. 38257 fails to comply with the 226 target dwelling units required by Specific Plan No. 1402 for Lot 7.
4) Paragraph 13, Section II.A of Specific Plan No. 1402 provides that final development densities for each planning area shall be determined through the appropriate development application up to the maximum dwelling units identified in the Specific Plan No. 1402 b ased on certain factors designated in Paragraph 13. With respect to Vesting Tentative Map No. 38257, however, no evidence was presented nor does any evidence exis t, that building to the target density would impact adequate availability of services , adequate access and circulation , innovation in building types and design ; sensitivity to landforms , or sensitivity to neighborhood design through lot and street layouts . Applicant is therefore able to construct sufficient dwelling units to meet the density requirements of Specific Plan No. 1402.
5) The proposed Vesting Tentative Map No. 38257 fails to comply with the City’s Housing Element.
-5-
a) The City of Jurupa Valley’s 2021-2029 Housing Element was approved by the City Council on December 2, 2021 by Resolution No. 2021 -99 (“Housing Element”).
b) The State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) certified Jurupa Valley’s 6 th Cycle (2021-2029) Housing Element on April 22, 2022.
c) As part of the Housing Element certification process, the City Council was required to tabulate anticipated densities from incoming projects, and select vacant sites to be re -designated to achieve the densities needed to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ( “RHNA”) goal of 4,4 97 new dwelling units to be built over the next eight years. As outlined in the Housing Element, the City Council has already identified 19 sites, totaling 69.2 acres, for re -designation to the City’s highest density, HHDR ( 20-25 du/ac) and rezoning to accommodate those densities . Planning Area 2 was included in the tabulation at an expected 300 units (28 dwelling units per acre) pursuant to the provisions of Specific Plan No. 1402. As a result of the decreased density proposed by Applicant, the City would have a deficit for Lot 7 of 24 units for the “Low Income” category in the RHNA. The buffer in the Low Income category in the RHNA is 55 units but the proposed density of Lot 7 would cause a loss of 79 Low Income units, resulting in the deficit of 24 Low I ncome units . Under Section 65863 of the California Government Code, t he City would have been required to re -designate an additional acreage of vacant, undeveloped land at HHDR – 25 dwelling units per acre for its Housing Element within 180 days of an approval of the Project in order to accom modate the Applicants reduction of the required densities for Planning Area 2.
6) There is no assurance that the City Council will be able to change the General Plan land use designations and zoning on additional acreage outside of the Project area to HHDR - 25 dwelling units in order to accommodate the reduction in densities that would occur if the Project is approved. As such, approval of the Project would mean that the City would be out of compliance with its obligations under the Housing Element and Gover nment Code Section 65863.In denying the Project, the City Council’s intent is to increase, and not decrease, the number of housing units to be built on Lot 7.
Section 7. Denial of Neighborhood Development Plan . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does h ereby deny the Neighborhood Development Plan based on the following findings set forth in Section 6 of this Resolution.
Section 8. Denial of Master Application No. 22051. Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby denies Master Application No. 22051 (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 38257 and the Neighborhood Development Plan).
-6-
Section 9. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 1st day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-7-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022-113 was duly passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 1st day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
Page | 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AIRPORT ZONE AT FLABOB
AIRPORT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) 22007, ZONING
CODE AMENDMENT (ZCA) NO.22013, CHANGE OF ZONE (CZ) 22008; LOCATION: 4130 MENNES AVE, JURUPA VALLEY APNS: 181-151- 001, -002,-003 and -005; 181-152-001, -002, -004, and -005; 181-160- 004; 181-170-005,-006, -009 through -022, and -026; 181,180-001, 181- 190-001, -004, -007, -008, -009, -010, -015, -021, and -022; 181-370-002, -005, -006, -007, and a portion of -008; 181-400-001, -002, 003, -004 ,- 008, and -009)
RECOMMENDATION
1) That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider any public testimony, and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-22, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY , CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A
NEW AIRPORT ZONE CLASSIFICATION, ESTABLISH PERMITTED LAND
USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE AIRPORT ZONE, AND MAKE OTHER CONFORMING CHANGES TO TITLE 9 OF THE JURUPA
VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE, AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES;
2) That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider any public testimony, and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-23, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONES OF APPROXIMATELY 138.86 COMBINED ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4130
MENNES AVENUE FROM MANUFACTURING HEAVY (M -H),
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
MANUFACTURING-SERVICE COMMERCIAL (M -SC), GENERAL
RESIDENTIAL (R -3), AND PLANNED RESID ENTIAL (R -4) ZONES TO
AIRPORT (AIR) ZONE, AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES; and
3) That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-112, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
MAKING A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3), and APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 22007 TO AMEND THE 2017 GENERAL PLAN TO STATE THAT THE
AIRPORT (AIR) ZONE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC
FACILITY\INSTITUTIONAL (PF) LAND USE DESIGNATION AND AMEND
THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP TO REDESIGNATE THE ENTIRETY
OF THE FLABOB AIRPORT SITE TO PUBLIC FACILITY/INSTITUTIONAL (PF)
BACKGROUND
Flabob Airport is the seventh oldest
surviving airport in California. Flabob was
founded in 1925 by Flavio Madariaga and
Bob Bogan as the area's first civil airport.
The name Flabob was created by co mbing
the founders' first names. Flabob is the first
Chapter of the Experimental Aircraft
Association and hosts community-wide
events such as the annual Veterans Day
celebration. Flabob is an icon of the City
known for its 40s and 50s historic charm and
its youth programs.
City Council Initiation
Due to concerns with the existing zoning
allowance of industrial and other uses that
are not compatible with the airport, the City
Council on January 21, 2021, initiated a
General Plan and Municipal Code amendment to establish a new Airport Zone that would replace a mixture of five existing zones that are not compatible with Flabob Airport or the neighboring residential properties. See Figure 1 above for the Project Location and Figure 2 below for the zoning map.
Community Workshop
On September 13, 2022, a community workshop was held at the airport to obtain feedback on the proposed Airport Zone for Flabob Airport. A total of 25 residents, who live near the airport, attended the presentation and provided comments.
Figure 1 Flabob Airport Location Map
Page | 3
At the workshop, residents expressed their full support of the current airport operations and desire not to have significant changes made to Flabob Airport since they believe the airport and its current operation are excellent. Residents stated th at the community supports Flabob Airport and wants it to stay viable as an aviation, educational and historical asset. The residents’ questions and comments were primarily related to gaining clarity on the proposal and ensuring that any new zone would not result in drastic changes to Flabob Airport. Most people in attendance support the proposal to create a new airport zone so long as it is respectful of the airport's historical character (see Attachment 5 Workshop summary).
Planning Commission Review
On November 9 , 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the proposed Project. The Planning Commission deliberated and discussed the importance of Flabob Airport to the community.
After the discussion, the Planning Commission a dopted Resolution No. 2022-11-09-03, on a 3 -0 vote, recommending that the City Council approve the project. Resolution No. 2022-11-09-03 is provided as Attachment 4.
ALUC Review
On November 10, 2022, the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed the proposed Airport Zone Ordinance and determined that the proposed Ordinance is consistent with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Appendix 4 of the General Plan) . The purpose of the Airport Compatibility Plan and ALUC review is to promote compatibility between airports and the land uses that surround them (See Attachment 6 ALUC Approval Letter).
Figure 2 Existing Zoning Map
ANALYSIS
The City General Plan recognizes Flabob Airport as a historical fixture in the community, its role in providing residents aviation services, education, and community events, and the importance of minimizing land use conflicts with adjacent uses. Flabob Air port's
Page | 4
boundary includes five zoning designations (Manufacturing Heavy (M-H), Manufacturing Service Commercial (M-SC), General Residential (R -3), Planned Residential (R -4), and Light Agriculture (A-1)).
This mix of zoning designations contains land uses that are inconsistent with the General Plan, goals and operations of the airport, and the community’s goals and concerns. To consolidate the zones into one aviation-oriented Airport Zone, the project will require the following actions:
1. General Plan Amendment (GPA 22007):
a. Create consistency between Public Facilities/Institutional land use and the proposed Airport Zone
b. Redesignate the airport to Public Facilities/Institutional land use;
2. Change of Zone (CZ 22008): Rezone Flabob Airport to Airport Zone; and
3. Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 22013): Establish a new customized Airport Zone Proposed General Plan Amendment
A General Plan Amendment is required to amend Table 2.5 "Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts" to show that Public Facilities/Institutional land use designation is consistent with the proposed Airport Zone (See Attachment 1, Exhibit A). Second, the General Plan Amendment is required to amend the land use map to extend the Public Facilities/Institutional land use boundary over the ent ire Flabob Airport site to match the boundary of the proposed Airport Zone. The Public Facilities/Institutional land use will replace the existing General Plan land uses of Business Park (BP), Residential Rural (R- R), and Open Space Recreational (OS-R). See the existing General Plan Land Use map and the proposed General Plan Land Use map Figures 3 and 4.
Figure 2 Existing General Plan Land Use Map
Page | 5
Proposed Zoning Code Amendment
A recommended Airport Zone (Airport) has been prepared based on City Council direction, input from Flabob Airport staff, and the community who attended the community workshop. A summary of the Airport Zone is described below. See Attachment 2 Airport Zone Ordinance.
Section 9.232.010 Intent
The intent is to promote and attract aviation -related businesses and industry, allow improvements to the airport, and maintain the airport as a historical and recreational hub of the City. While also conf orming to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and protecting public safety.
Section 9.232.020 Uses permitted
The proposed uses that would replace the existing zoning are tailored to support the General Plan vision and goals for Flabob Airport and are consistent with the Airport Land Use and Compatibility Plan. The Airport Zone includes proposed uses that are approved administratively, require a Site Development Permit, or require a Conditional Use Permit.
Figure 4 Proposed General Plan Land Use Map
Page | 6
Uses that can be approved administratively include those directly related to airport operations. Examples include terminal buildings, runway and landing areas, hangers, and aircraft maintenance.
Uses requiring a site development permit include airport-supporting uses such as aircraft fueling, avi ation manufacturing, rental cars, restaurants, and aviation museums.
Uses proposed to be allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit include hotels, student housing, recreational facilities, and technical schools.
Some of the currently allowed uses that are not included in the recommended Ordinance are as follows:
Heavy manufacturing: Examples include sawmills, chemical plants, and petroleum manufacturing.
Livestock and residential uses.
These uses are not compatible with the operations of the airport and are not compatible with the adjacent residential uses. It is important to note, consistent with the existing Zoning code, if the Airport Zone is adopted by the City Council all legally established uses that become nonconforming due to the proposed Ordinance may continue for 40 years after the effective date of the amendment. It also allows legal nonconforming uses up to a 25% expansion. Any uses that were not legally established and cannot meet the new requirements would need to close or relocate.
Section 9.232.030 Development Standards
The proposed development standards require new development in the Airport Zone to meet the purpose and intent, be consistent with the Airport Compatibility Plan, and meet the develo pment standards summarized in the table below. These standards are consistent with the development standards in other industrial park standards in the City.
Title Requirement
Lot size, width, and
depth.
Minimum lot size is 7,000 ft. with a minimum lot width of 65 ft.
Setbacks
25 ft. from residential and when street-facing
No setback when not adjacent to residential
Portions of the setback that require landscaping shall only be used for driveways parking and landscaping
Maximum Height 35 ft. at the setback line
50 ft. or up to 75 ft. with approval per Sec 9.240.370
Structures (not buildings) 50 ft. up to 105 ft. per Sec. 9.240.370
Page | 7
Title Requirement
Masonry wall 6 ft. solid wall or combination of berm and landscape when property adjoins residential
Landscape 10% of project site shall be landscaped and irrigated 10 ft. wide landscape strip along the streets
20 ft. wide landscape strip adjacent to residential
Trash areas Shall be screened with landscape or structures Outside Storage Screened from residential properties
Utilities Underground
Mechanical
equipment
Screened from view
Lighting Lighting directed downward to prevent glare of spillage on adjoining property
Proposed Change of Zone
Flabob Airport's boundary contains five different zoning designations (Manufacturing Heavy (M -H), Manufacturing Service Commercial (M -SC), General Residential (R -3), Planned Residential (R -4), and Light Agriculture (A -1)). As explained above, these different zone classifications are internally inconsistent with one another and contain allowable land uses that are inconsistent with the airport's goals. The proposed Airport Zone, specially tailored to allow aviation -related uses, would replace the five exis ting zones. See Figure 2, the current zoning map, Figure 5 Proposed Zoning Map and Attachment 3 Ordinance amending the Zoning Map to add the Airport Zone.
Page | 8
Figure 5 Proposed Airport Zone
General Plan Consistency
The proposed Code Amendment and Change of Zone are consistent with the General Plan because the proposed Airport Zone is consistent with airport operations, supports the continued operation of Flabob as an airport, requires consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, prohibits bird attracting uses and heavy industrial uses that can impact the ongoing safe operation of the airport.
General Plan Amendment Findings
The proposed General Plan Amendment includes the proposed Airpor t Zone as a compatible use with Public Facilities/Institutional and extends the Public Facilities/Institutional land use over the Flabob Airport site . T he amendment is consistent with the General Plan because the Flabob Airport provides public services to the community. Further, the General Plan states that Flabob Airport may be included in the Public Facilities/Institutional designation as a privately owned facility providing public services. Further, the land use change helps protect Flabob Airport f rom the encroachment of incompatible uses currently allowed under the existing General Plan land uses.
-1-
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-112
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF JURUPA VALLEY , CALIFORNIA, MAKING A
DETERMINATION OF EXE MPTION UNDER CEQA
GUIDELINES SE CTION 15061(B)(3) , AND APPROVING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDME NT NO. 22007 TO AMEND
THE 2017 GENERAL PLAN TO STATE THAT THE
AIRPORT (AIR) ZONE IS CONSISTENT W ITH THE
PUBLIC FACILITY \ INSTITUTIONAL (PF ) LAND USE
DESIGNATION AND AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND
USE MAP TO REDESIGNATE THE E NTIRETY OF THE
FLABOB AIRPORT SITE TO PUB LIC FACILITY /
INSTITUTIONAL (PF)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project. At the January 21, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the City Council initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008 , to (a) establish a new Airport Zone classification, (b) establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code , (c) reclassify the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone , (d) amend the 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport Zone is consistent with the Public Facility \Institutional (PF) l and use designation, and (e) amend the General Plan land use map to redesignate the entirety of the Flabob Airport site to Public Facility/Institutional (PF) (the “Project”). General Plan Amendment No. 22007 is the subject of this Resolution.
Section 2. General Plan Amendment and General Plan Land Use Map Amendments.
(a) The City has initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007 to:
1) Amend Table 2.5 (“General Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport (AIR) Zone is consistent with the Public Facility \Institutional (PF) land use designation as shown in Exhibit “A,” and
2) Change the General Plan land use designations of approximately 58 combined acres (APNs: 181-151-001, -002, -003, -005; 181-160-004; 181-170-005, -006, -010 through -022, -026; 181-180-001; 181-190-009, -015, -021, -022; 181-370-002, -004, -005, -006, -007; 181-400-001, -002, -004, a portion of -008, -009) as follows and as shown in Exhibit “B”:
a) 14.91 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-180-001; 181-160-004; 181-170-005, -006, -010 through -022, -026; 181-180-001; 181-190-001, 007) from Business Park (BP) to Public Facility/Institutional (PF); ATTACHMENT 1
-2-
b) 6.70 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-190-015, a portion of 181-400-008) from Open Space Recreational (OS-R) to Public Facility/Institutional (PF); and
c) 36.09 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-190-021, -022; 181-400-001, -002, -004, a portion of -008, -009, -023; 181-370-002, -004, -005, -006, -007, a portion of -008) from Residential Rural (R -R) to Public Facility/Institutional (PF).
(b) Section 9.30.010.A. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that any amendment to any part of the Jurupa Valley General Plan, shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section 65300 et seq. of the Government Code, as now written or hereafter amended, and Chapter 9.30 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code.
(c) Section 9.30.010.B. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the initiation of proceedings for the amendment of any part of the Jurupa Valley General Plan shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9.30 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. (d) Section 9.30.040.D. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the owner of real property, or a person authorized by the owner, seeking to change the land use designation on that real property, shall have the right to apply for a General P lan amendment without having to request that the City Council adopt an order initiating proceeding s for an amendment as detailed in Section 9.30.040. Instead, the owner of real property, or a person authorized by the owner, seeking to change the land use designation on that real property may apply for a General Plan amendment through the Planning Department and pay the required fee.
Upon submittal of an application, the amendment shall be processed, heard and decided in accordance with Sections 9.30.010 and 9.30.100 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. (e) Section 9.30.100.(1) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that proposals to amend any part of the Jurupa Valley General Plan shall be heard by the Planning Commission during a public hearing on the matter. Further, Government Code Section 65353 provides that when a city has a planning commission authorized by local ordinance or resolution to review and recommend action on a proposed general plan, the commission shall hold at least one public hearing before approving a recommendation on the adoption of a general plan. (f) Section 9.30.100.(2) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that after closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation for approval or disapproval within a reasonable time, by resolution, including therein its findings, and transmit it to the City Council with a copy mailed to the applicant. A recommendation for approval shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total m embership of the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission cannot reach a decision within a reasonable time after closing the hearing, that fact shall be reported to the City Council and shall be deemed a recommendation to deny the proposal. Further, Government Code Section 65354 provides that the planning commission shall make a written recommendation on the adoption of a general plan, that a recommendation for approval shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the commission, and that the planning commission shall send its recommendation to the legislative body.
-3-
(g) Section 9.30.100.(3) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that upon receipt of a recommendation of the Planning Commission on an a mendment of the General Plan, the City Clerk must set the matter for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest convenient day and give notice of public hearing in the same manner as notice was given of the hearing before the Planning Commission.
(h) Section 9.30.100.(4) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that after closing the public hearing, the City Council must render its decision within a reasonable time.
A decision to amend the General Plan, or any part or element thereof, must be made by resolution, which resolution must be adopted by the affirmative vote of not less than the majority of the total membership of the City Council. The City Council may approve, modify or disapprove the recommendation of the Planning Commission; pr ovided, however, that any substantial modification of the Planning Commission’ s recommendation not previously considered by the Commission shall first be referred to the Commission for its recommendation. (i) Section 9.30.100.(5) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that a proposal to amend any part or element of the General Plan may not be approved by the City Council until all procedures required by the Jurupa Valley CEQA implementing procedures to approve a matter have been completed.
Section 3. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) GPA No. 22007 was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Ordinances. (b) On November 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. Following a discussion of the Project the Planning Commission voted 3-0-2 (Hakan recused; 1 vacancy) to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 , and Change of Zone No. 22008 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-11-09-03, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley Recommending that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley Approve General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, Redesignating the Land Use Designations Parcels within the Flabob Airport to P ublic Facility/Institutional, Establishing an Airport Zone Classification and Permitted Uses and Applicable Development Standards, Amending the General Plan to Make the Airport Zone Consistent with the Public Facility/Institutional Land Use Designation, and Reclassifying the Zoning of Parcels within the Flabob Airport as Airport Zone, and Make a Determination of Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). (c) On December 1, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity -4-
and did address the City Council on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the City Council closed the public hearing.
(d) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 4. California Environmental Quality Act Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby make the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Project:
(a) The proposed General Plan Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed General Plan Amendment , as described in Section 2 of this Resolution, will have a significant effect on the environment. The propo sed General Plan Amendment is administrative processes of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed General Plan Amendment and the proposed CEQA determination, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the General Plan Amendment is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 5. Findings for Approval of General Plan Amendment. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find and determine that General Plan Amendment No. 22007 should be adopted because:
(a) The proposed amendment to Table 2.5 (“Gene ral Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan is consistent with Section LUE 4 -Public Facility/Institutional of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that privately owned facilities providing public services, such as Flabob Airport, may be included in the Public Facility/Institutional (PF) land use designation.
The Flabob A irport provides essential support services to City residents and therefore is compatible with the Public Facility/Institutional (PF) land use designation. (b) The proposed amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map are consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that the updated Public Facilities/Institutional (PF) l and use is an improvement over the mixture of General Plan land use designations that currently exist within the boundary of the Flabob Airport. The replacement the current mixture of land use designations with one land use designation that is consistent with the General Plan vision for Flabob Airport to provide aviation services, education, and community events , and minimize land use conflicts.
Section 6. Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 22007. Based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley approves General Plan Amendment No. 22007, as shown in Exhibits “A” and “B.” The City Council’s approval of General Plan Amendment No. 22007 shall not be effective until the effective date of the ordinance adopting Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 and Change of Zone No. 22008, whichever occurs latest. -5-
Section 7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 1st day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-6-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022-112 was duly passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 1st day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
EXHIBIT A
Table 2.5 (“General Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan
EXHIBIT B
General Plan Amendment, Public Facilities/Institutional
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-22
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLE Y,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A NEW AIRP ORT
ZONE CLASSIFICAT ION, ESTABLISH PERMI TTED
LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
AIRPORT ZONE, AND MA KE OTHER CONFORMING
CHANGES TO TITLE 9 O F THE JURUPA VALLEY
MUNICIPAL CODE , AND FINDING AN EXE MPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA
GUIDELINES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project and Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) At the January 21, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the City Coun cil initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 (the “Zoning Code Amendment”), and Change of Zone No. 22008, to (a) establish a new Airport Zone classification, (b) establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, (c) reclassify the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone, (d) amend the 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport Zone is consistent with the Public Facility\Institutional (PF) land use designation, and (e) amend the General Plan land use map to redesignate the entirety of the Flabob Airport site to Public Facility/Institutional (PF) (the “Project”), and requested that the Planning Commission study and report on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, as set forth in this Ordinance. The Zoning Code Amendment is the subject of this Ordinance. (b) The Zoning Code Amendment was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Ordinances. (c) On November 9 , 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance, at which time all persons interested in the proposed Zoning Code Amendment had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. Following a discussion of the Project the Planning Commission voted 3 -0-2 (Hakan abs tained; 1 vacancy) to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008 by adoptin g Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022 -11-09-03, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley Recommending that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley Approve General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, Redesignating the Land Use Designations Parcels within the Flabob Airport to Public Facility/Institutional, Establishing an Airport Zone Classification and Permitted Uses and Applicable Development Standards, Amending the General ATTACHMENT 2
-2-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
Plan to Make the Airport Zone Consistent with the Public Facility/Institutional Land Use Designation, and Reclassifying the Zoning of Parcels within the Flabob Airport as Airport Zone, and Make a Determination of Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). (d) On December 1, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the City Council closed the public hearing.
(e) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act Findings . The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen w ith certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, establishing a new Airport Zone classification, establishing permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone, and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code , will have a significant effect on the environment.
The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect phys ical changes in the environment . The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Zoning Code Amendment and the proposed CEQA determinations, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance is not subject t o, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 3. Project Findings. The City Council hereby finds, as required by the Jurupa Valley Ordinances and appli cable state law, that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment should be adopted because the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan , as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 22007, in that the proposed Airpo rt Zone is consistent with airport operations at Flabob Airport, supports the continued operation of Flabob Airport as an airport, requires consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and prohibits bird attracting uses and heavy industrial that can impact the ongoing operation of Flabob Airport.
Section 4. Amendment to Section 9.35.010 . Section 9.35.010, Zones, of Chapter
9.35, Zone Classifications, of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following zone classification: “AIR - Airport”.
Section 5. Amendment to Title 9. A new Chapter 9.232 is hereby added to Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“CHAPTER 9.232. – AIR ZONE (AIRPORT)
Sec. 9.232.010. - Intent.
-3-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
It is the intent of this chapter is to promote and attract aviation-related businesses and industry, allow improvements to the Flabob Airport, and maintain the Flabob Airport as a historical, cultural and recreational hub of the city, while also conforming to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and protecting public safety.
Sec. 9.232.020. - Uses permitted.
A. The following uses are permitted in the AIR Zone:
(1) Airport operation and related uses: Air terminal buildings, air traffic control and navigational facilities, administrative buildings and offices, indoor storage, baggage and cargo services, hangars, airport and aircraft maintenance and operational facilities, runways and landing areas, taxiways and taxi lanes, tie - downs for aircraft.
(2) Public safety an d services facilities (police, fire, EMT, etc.) . (3) Government public safety agencies .
(4) Meteorological installations .
(5) Natural area, non -bird attracting agricultural uses, open space, and buffer areas .
B. The following uses are permitted upon approval of a sit e development permit pursuant to Section 9.240.330:
(1) Aircraft fueling.
(2) Aviation manufacturing.
(3) Aviation light industrial.
(4) Airport equipment repair, paint, and support services. (5) Automotive services related to airport operations. (6) Aviation experimental facilities and laboratories.
(7) Aviation related information services.
(8) Aviation museums and displays.
(9) Ground transportation.
(10) Rental cars.
(11) Helicopter operations.
(12) Clubs and organizations.
-4-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
(13) Restaurants, cafes, and snake bars.
(14) Retail stores.
(15) Warehouse ten thousand (10,000) square feet or less, no outdoor storage.
C. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(1) Hotels, motels.
(2) Student housing.
(3) Recreational facilities that are non-bird attracting. (4) Technical schools and other educational uses.
(5) Farmers markets consistent with Section 9.240.520.
D. Uses not listed. Any use that is not specifically listed in subsections A., B., and C. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subs ections. Such a use is subject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls.
Sec. 9.232.030. - Development standards.
The following development standards shall apply in the AIR Zone:
(1) Lot area. The minimum lot size shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet, unless a sewer connection is available, in which case the minimum lot size shall be seven thousand (7,000) square feet.
(2) Lot width. The minimum lot width shall be seventy-five (75) feet , unless a sewer connection is available, in which case the minimum lot width shall be sixty-five (65) feet.
(3) Yards. A minimum twenty-five (25) foot setback shall be required on any boundary that abuts a residential property and that is street-facing. No minimum setback shall be required on boundaries that do not abut residential property. Portions of a setback that require landscaping shall only be used for driveways parking and landscaping. (4) Structure height. The maximum height for all structures, including buildings, shall be thirty-five (35) feet at the yard setback line. All buildings and structures shall not exceed fifty (50) feet in height, unless a height up to seventy -five (75) feet for buildings, or one hundred and five (105) feet for other structures is specifically permitted under the provisions of Section 9.240.370.
(5) Parking areas. Parking areas shall be provided as required per Section 9.240.120. -5-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
(6) Masonry wall. A minimum six (6) foot high solid wall or combination landscaped earthen berm and masonry wall shall be constructed on each property line that adjoins any parcel zoned for residential use.
(7) Landscaping.
(a) A minimum ten (10) percent of the site proposed for development shall be landscaped and irrigated.
(b) A minimum ten (10) foot wide landscape strip adjacent to street right-of-way lines shall be landscaped and maintained.
(c) A minimum twenty (20) foot wide landscape strip adjacent to lots zoned residential shall be landscaped and maintained.
(8) Trash areas. Trash areas shall be screened with landscaping or structures. (9) Outside storage . Outside storage, as described in Section 9.10.050, shall be completely screened from public view by abutting residential properties. (10) Utilities. Utilities shall be installed underground. (11) Mechanical equipment. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. (12) Lighting. All lighting fixtures shall be focused, directed, and arranged to prevent glare or direct illumination on streets or adjoining property.” Section 6. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
Section 7. Effect of Ordinance . This Ordinance is intended to supersede any ordinance or resolution of the Co unty of Riverside adopted by reference by the City of Jurupa Valley in conflict with the terms of this Ordinance.
Section 8. Certification. The City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.
Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
PASSED, APPROVED , AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 15th day of December, 2022.
-6-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-7-
12774-0001\2738624v3.doc
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-22 was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of December, 2022, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the officia l seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 15th day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLE Y, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDME NT TO THE CITY OF JURUPA V ALLEY
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CHANGING THE ZONE S OF
APPROXIMATELY 138.86 COMBINED ACRES OF REAL PROPER TY
LOCATED AT 4130 MENNES AVENU E FROM MANUFACTURING
HEAVY (M -H), MANUFACTURING-SERVICE COMMERCIAL (M -SC), GENERAL RESIDENTIAL (R-3), AND PLANNED RESIDENTIAL (R-4)
ZONES TO AIRPORT (AIR) ZONE , AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER SECT ION 15061(B)(3) OF T HE CEQA
GUIDELINES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project. At the January 21, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the City Council initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, to (a) establish a new Airport Zone classification, (b) establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, (c) reclassify the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone, (d) amend the 2017 General Plan to state that t he Airport Zone is consistent with the Public Facility \Institutional (PF) land use designation, and (e) amend the General Plan land use map to redesignate the entirety of the Flabob Airport site to Public Facility/Institutional (PF) (the “Project”). Change of Zone No. 22008 is the subject of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Change of Zone.
(a) The City has initiated Change of Zone No. 22008 to rezone approximately 138.86 combined acres of real property (APNs:181-151-001, -002,-003 and -005; 181-152-001, - 002, -004, and -005; 181-160-004; 181-170-005,-006, -009 through -022, and -026; 181,180-001, 181-190-001, -004, -007, -008, -009, -010, -015, -021, and -022; 181-370-002, -005, -006, -007, and a portion of -008; 181-400-001, -002, -003, -004 ,-008, and 009) as follows and as shown in Exhibit “A”:
1) 50.38 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
181-190-001, a portion of 181-190-010) from Manufacturing Heavy (M-H) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
2) 71.48 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
181-190-004, -007, -008, a portion of 181-190-010, -015, -021, -022; 181-180-001; 181-170-005, -006, -010 through -022, a portion of -026; 181-160-004; 181-152-001, -002, -004, -005; 181-140- 001, -003, -004, -005, -008; 181-370-002, -005, -006, -007, and a portion of -008; 181-400-001, - 002, -003, -004, -008, and -009) from Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
ATTACHMENT 3
-2-
3) 2.89 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
181-190-009; 181-151-001, -002, -003, -005) from General Residential (R -3) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
4) 12.69 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
181-370-006, and -007; a portion of 181-370-002, 005 and -008, , a portion of 181-140-001, -002, -003 and -004; a portion of 181 -190-014; a portion of 181-137-005, -006, -007, and -008) from Planned Residential (R-4) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone; and 5) 1.42 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
a portion of 181-170-026) from Light Agriculture (A-1) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone. (b) Section 9.285.010. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that amendments to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code must be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Government Code Section 65800 et seq. , as now enacted or hereafter amended, and with the requirements of Title 9. Government Code Section 65853 provides that an amendment to a zoning ordinance, which amendment changes any property from one zone to another, shall be adopted in the manner set forth in Sections 65854 to 65857, inclusive. (c) Government Code Section 65854 provides that the planning commission must hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment to a zoning ordinance , with notice of the hearing given pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and, if the proposed amendment to a zoning ordinance affects the permitted uses of real property, also given pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. Additionally, Sections 9.285.040.(1) and (2) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provide that the Planning Commission shall hold a noticed public hearing on a proposed amendment to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code that proposes to change property from one zone to another.
(d) Government Code Section 65855 provides that after the hearing , the planning commission must render its decision in the form of a written recommendation to the legislative body, which must include the reasons for the recommendation, the relationship of the proposed amendment to applicable general and specific plans, and must transmit the recommendation to the legislative body in such form and manner as may be specified by the legislative body. Additionally, Section 9.285.040.(3) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that, after closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission must render its decision within a reasonable time and transmit it to the City Council in the form of a written recommendation, which shall contain the reasons for the recommendation and the relationship of the proposed amendment to 2017 General Plan. A copy of the recommendation shall be mailed to the applicant and proof thereof shall be shown on the original transmitted to the City Council. (e) Government Code Section 65856(a) provides that upon receipt of the recommendation of the planning commission, the legislative body must hold a public hearing.
Additionally, Section 9.285.040.(4)(a) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that upon receipt of a recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission, the City Clerk shall set the matter for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest convenient day, and give notice of the time and place of the hearing in the same manner as notice was given of the hearing before the Planning Commission.
-3-
(f) Government Code Section 65857 provides that the legislative body may approve, modify, or disapprove the recommendation of the planning commission; provided that any modification of the proposed ordinance or amendment by the legislative body not pr eviously considered by the planning commission during its hearing, must first be referred to the planning commission for report and recommendation, but the planning commission shall not be required to hold a public hearing thereon. Additionally, Section 9.285.040.(5) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that after closing the public hearing the City Council must render its decision within a reasonable time and may approve, modify , or disapprove the recommendation of the Planning Commission; provided, however, that any proposed modification of the Planning Commission ’s recommendation not previously considered by the Planning Commission must first be referred back to the Planning Commission for a report and recommendation.
Section 3. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine, and declare that:
(a) Change of Zone No. 22008 was processed including, but not limited to , a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Ordinances. (b) On November 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. Following a discussion of the Project the Planning Commission voted 3-0-2 (Hakan abstained; 1 vacancy) to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 , and Change of Zone No. 22008 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-11-09-03, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley Recommending that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley Approve General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, Redesignating the Land Use Designations Parcels within the Flabob Airport to Publi c Facility/Institutional, Establishing an Airport Zone Classification and Permitted Uses and Applicable Development Standards, Amending the General Plan to Make the Airport Zone Consistent with the Public Facility/Institutional Land Use Designation, and Reclassifying the Zoning of Parcels within the Flabob Airport as Airport Zone, and Make a Determination of Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). (c) On December 1, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the City Council closed the public hearing.
(d) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
Section 4. California Environmental Quality Act Findings. The proposed Change of Zone is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Change of Zone , -4-
reclassifying the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Change of Zone is an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect phys ical changes in the environment . The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Change of Zone and the proposed CEQA determination, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the Change of Zone set forth in this Ordinance is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 1. Findings for Approval of Change of Zone . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby finds and determines that Change of Zone No. 22008 should be adopted because the proposed Change of Zone No. 22008 will be consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 22007, in that the General Plan Land Use Element Flabob and Riverside Airport Overlay requires consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and ongoing safe operations of Flabob Airport. The proposed Airport Zone is consistent with the General Plan goals because the proposed Airport Zone provisions support airport operations at Flabob Airport, support the continued operation of Flabob Airport as an airport, require consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and prohibits bird-attracting uses and heavy industrial that can impact the ongoing operation of Flabob Airport.
Approval of Change of Zone. Based on the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley hereby adopts Change of Zone No. 22008, and rezones app roximately 140 combined acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-151-001, -002,-003 and -005; 181-152-001, -002, -004, and -005; 181-160-004; 181-170-005,-006, -009 through -022, and - 026; 181,180-001, 181-190-001, -004, -007, -008, -009, -010, -015, -021, and -022; 181-370-002, -005, -006, -007, and a portion of -008; 181-400-001, -002, 003, -004 ,-008, and -009) from Manufacturing Heavy (M-H), Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC), General Residential (R- 3), and Planned Residential (R-4) Zones to Airport (AIR) Zone as described in Section 2 of this Ordinance and depicted in Exhibit “A” attached hereto, and directs the City Manager to revise the official City of Jurupa Valley Zoning Map to designate the properties as being in the new Airport (AIR) Zone.
Section 5. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
Section 6. Effect of Ordinance. This Ordinance is intended to supersede any ordinance or resolution of the County of Riverside incorporated by the City of Jurupa Valley that may in conflict with the terms of this Ordinance.
Section 7. Certification. The City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.
-5-
Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
PASSED, APPROVED , AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 15th day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-6-
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-23 was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of December, 2022, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 15th day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
EXHIBIT A
Change of Zone to Airport Zone (AIR)
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-11-09-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA
VALLEY APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.
22007, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 220 13, AND
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 22008 , REDESIGNATING THE
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS PARCELS WITHIN THE
FLABOB AIRPORT TO PUBLIC
FACILITY/INSTITUTIONAL, ESTABLISHING AN
AIRPORT ZON E CLASSIFICATION AND PERMITTED
USES AND APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ,
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN TO MAKE THE
AIRPORT ZONE CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC
FACILITY/INSTITUTIONAL LAND USE DESIGNATION,
AND RECLASSIFYING THE ZONING OF PARCELS
WITHIN THE FLABOB AIRPORT AS AIRPORT ZONE ,
AND MAKE A DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION
UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project. At the January 21, 2021 regular City Council meeting, t he City Council initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 , and Change of Zone No. 22008, to (a) establish a n ew Airport Zone classification, (b) establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code , (c) reclassify the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone, (d) amend the 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport Zone is consistent with the Public Facility \Institutional (PF) land use designation, and (e) amend the General Plan land use map to redesignate the entirety of the Flabob Airport site to Public Facility/Institutional (PF) (the “Project”).
Section 2. General Plan Amendment and General Plan Land Use Map Amendments.
(a) The City has initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007 to:
1) Amend Table 2.5 (“General Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport (APRT) Zone is consistent with the Public Facility\Institutional (PF) land use designation as shown in Exhibit “A,” and
ATTACHMENT 4
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
2) Change the General Plan land use designation s of approximately 58 combined acres as follows and as shown in Exhibit “B”:
a) 14.91 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes
Avenue (APNs: 181-180-001, 181-160-004, 181-170-005, 006, 010 - 022, & 026 from Business Park (BP) to Public Facility/Institutional (PF);
b) 6.70 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-190-015, a portion of 181-400-008) from Open Space Recreational (OS-R) to Public Facility/Institutional (PF); and
c) 36.03 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes
Avenue (APNs: 181-190-021 & 22, 181-400-001, 002, 004, a portion of 008, 009 & 023, 181- 370-002, 004 – 007, a portion of 008 ) from Residential Rural (R -R) to Public Facility/ Institutional (PF).
(b) Section 9.30.0 10.A. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that any amendment to any part of the Jurupa Valley General Plan, shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Section 65300 et seq. of the Government Code, as now written or hereafter amended, and Chapter 9.30 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. (c) Section 9.30.010.B. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the initiation of proceedings for the amendment of any part of the Jur upa Valley General Plan shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9.30 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code.
(d) Section 9.30.040.D. of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the owner of real property, or a person authorized by th e owner, seeking to change the land use designation on that real property, shall have the right to apply for a General Plan Amendment without having to request that the City Council adopt an order initiating proceedings for an amendment as detailed in Sect ion 9.30.040. Instead, the owner of real property, or a person authorized by the owner, seeking to change the land use designation on that real property may apply for a General Plan amendment through the Planning Department and pay the required fee.
Upon submittal of an application, the amendment shall be processed, heard and decided in accordance with Sections 9.30.010 and 9.30.100 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. (e) Section 9.30.100.(1) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that proposals to amen d any part of the Jurupa Valley General Plan shall be heard by the Planning Commission during a public hearing on the matter. Further, Government Code Section 65353 provides that when a city has a planning commission authorized by local ordinance or resol ution to review and recommend action on a proposed general plan, the commission shall hold at least one public hearing before approving a recommendation on the adoption of a general plan. (f) Section 9.30.100.(2) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that after closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation for approval or disapproval within a reasonable time, by resolution, including therein its findings , and transmit it to the City Council with a copy mailed to the applicant. A recommendation for approval shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
membership of the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission cann ot reach a decision within a reasonable time after closing the hearing, that fact shall be reported to the City Council and shall be deemed a recommendation to deny the proposal. Further, Government Code Section 65354 provides that the planning commission shall make a written recommendation on the adoption of a general plan, that a recommendation for approval shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the commission, and that the planning commission shall send its recommendation to the legislative body. (g) Section 9.30.100.(3) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that upon receipt of a recommendation of the Planning Commission on an amendment of the General Plan, the City Clerk must set the matter for p ublic hearing before the City Council at the earliest convenient day and give notice of public hearing in the same manner as notice was given of the hearing before the Planning Commission.
Section 3. Zoning Code Amendment.
(a) The City has initiated Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 to establish a new Airport Zone classification, establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone, and mak e other conforming changes to Title 9 (“Planning and Zoning”) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, as described in Exhibit “C.” (b) Section 9.285.010 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that amendments to Title 9 may be initiated by either the Planning Commission or the City Council. (c) Section 9.285.010 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that amendments to Title 9 shall be made in accordance with the procedure set forth in Government Code Section 65800 et seq. , as now enacted and hereafter amended, and the requirements of Chapter 9.285.
(d) Section 9.285.030 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that amendments to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code that propose to r egulate the use of buildings, structures , and land as between industry, business, residents, open space , and other purposes, and that propose to regulate the use of lots, yards, cou rts, and other open spaces , shall be adopted in the manner set forth in Section 9.285.040. Further, Government Code Section 65853 provides that an amendment to a zoning ordinance, which amendment proposes to impose any regulations listed in Government Code Section 65850 not theretofore imposed, must be adopted in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65854 to 65857, inclusive. (e) Section 9.285.040 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the Planning Commission must hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission must render its decision within a reasonable time and transmit it to the City Council in the form of a written recommendation, which must contain the reasons for the recommendation. If the Planning Commission does not reach a decision due to a tie vote, that fact must be reported to the City Council and the failure to reach a decision shall be deemed a recommendation against the proposed amendment. (f) Government Code Section 65853 provides that when the legislative body has requested the planning commission to study and report upon an amendment to the zoning
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
ordinance and the planning commission fails to act upon such request within a reasonable time, the legislative body may, by written notice, require the planning commission to render its report within 40 days. Upon receipt of the written notice, the planning commission, if it has not done so, shall conduct the public hearing as required by Section 65854. Fail ure to so report to the legislative body within the above time period shall be deemed to be approval of the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance.
(g) Government Code Section 65854 provides that the planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the p roposed amendment to a zoning ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be given pursuant to Government Code Section 65090. (h) Government Code Section 65855 provides that after the hearing, the planning commission shall render its decision in the form of a writ ten recommendation to the legislative body. Such recommendation shall include the reasons for the recommendation, the relationship of the proposed amendment to the general plan, and shall be transmitted to the legislative body in such form and manner as may be specified by the legislative body.
Change of Zone.
(i) The City has initiated Change of Zone No. 22008 to rezone approximately 140 combined acres of real property as follows and as shown in Exhibit “D”:
1) 50.38 acres of real property located at 4130 Menn es Avenue (APNs: portion of 181 -190-010, 181 -190-001) from Manufacturing Heavy (M -H) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
2) 71.48 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: a portion of 181 -190-010, 008, 007, 004, 015, 021 & 022, 181-180-001,181-170-005, 006, 010 through 022, a portion of 181 -170-026, 181-160-004, 181-152-001, 002, 004 & 005 , 181-140-001, 003, 004, 005, & 008, 181 -137-00212, 181-400-001, 002, 004, 008, 009, & 023, 181-370-002, 004 - 008) from Manufacturing -Service Commercial (M -SC) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
3) 2.89 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
181-190-009, 181 -151-001, 00 2, 003 & 00 5 from General Residential (R -3) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone;
4) 12.69 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs: 181-370- portion of 005, 006, 007, a portion of 008, a portion of 181 -190-004 ) from Planned Residential (R-4) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone; and 5) 1.42 acres of real property located at 4130 Mennes Avenue (APNs:
a portion of 181-170-026) from Light Agriculture (A-1) Zone to Airport (AIR) Zone. (j) Section 9.285.040.(1) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance that propose to change property from one zone to another.
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
(k) Section 9.285.040.(3) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that after closing the public hearing the Planning Commission shall render its decision within a reasonable time and transmit it to the City Council in the form of a written recommendation, which shall contain the reasons for the recommendation and, if the recommendation is to change a zone classification on property, the relationship of the proposed amendment to applicable general and specific plans. A copy of the recommendation shall be mailed to the applicant and proof thereof shall be shown on the original transmitted to the City Council. If the Planning Commission does not reach a decision due to a tie vo te, that fact shall be reported to the City Council and the failure to reach a decision shall be deemed a recommendation against the proposed amendment.
(l) Section 9.285.040.(4)(a) of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code provides that upon receipt of a recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission, the City Clerk shall set the matter for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest convenient day, and give notice of the time and place of the hearing in the same manner as notice was given of the hearing before the Planning Commission.
Section 4. Procedural Findings . The Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008 were processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State law and Jurupa Valley Ordinances. (b) On November 9, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013, and Change of Zone No. 22008, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters . F ollowing the receipt of public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. (c) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 5. California Environmental Quality Ac t Findings . The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley make the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Project:
(a) The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoni ng Code Amendment , and Change of Zone are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that ther e is no possibility that the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment , and Change of Zone , as described in Sections 2 through 4 of this Resolution , will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zonin g Code Amendment , and Change of Zone are administrative processes of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed General Plan Amen dment, Zoning Code Amendment , and Change of Zone and the
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
proposed CEQA determinations, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the General Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment , and Change of Zone are not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 6. Findings for Recommendation of Approval of General Plan Amendments. The Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley find and determine that General Plan Amendment No. 22007 should be adopted because:
(a) The proposed amendment to Table 2.5 (“General Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Distr icts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that the General Plan Land Use Element under LUE - 4 PublicFacilities/ Institutional that privately owned facilities providing public services, such as Flabob Airport, may also be included in the Public Facility/ Institutional designation. The airport is a public facility and therefore is compatible with the Public Facility/Institutional designation. (b) The proposed am endments to the General Plan Land Use Map are consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that the updated Public Facilities/Institutional Land Use is an improvement over the mixture of General Plan Land Uses that currently exists within the boundary of the airport and replace it with one land use that is consistent with the General Plan vision for Flabob Airport to provide aviation services, education, and community events and minimize land use conflicts.
Section 7. Findings for Recommendation of Approval of Zoning Code Amendment. The Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley find and determine that Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 should be adopted because the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that the proposed Airport Zone is consistent with airport operations at Flabob Airport, supports the continued operation of Flabob Airport as an airp ort, requires consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and prohibits bird attracting uses and heavy industrial that can impact the ongoing operation of Flabob Airport.
Section 8. Findings for Recommendation of Approval of Change of Zones . The Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley find and determine that Change of Zone No. 22008 should be adopted because the proposed Change of Zone No. 22008 will be consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 22007, in that 3.
Section 9. Recommendation of Approval General Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, and Change of Zones . Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that:
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
I, Joe Perez, Community Development Director of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby cert ify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022-11-09- 03 was duly adopted and passed at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 9th day of November, 2022, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COMMISSION MEMBERS:
NOES: COMMISSION MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSION MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSION MEMBERS:
___________________________
JOE PEREZ
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Chair Pro Tem Shultz, Commissioners Newman and Pruitt
Chair Jackson
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
EXHIBIT A
Table 2.5 (“General Plan Land Use Designations and Consistent Zone Districts”) of the Land Use Element of the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
EXHIBIT B
General Plan Amendment, Public Facilities/Institutional Land Use3
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
EXHIBIT C
DRAFT AIRPORT ZONE ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE
TO ESTABLISH A NEW AIRPORT ZONE
CLASSIFICATION, ESTABLISH PERMITTED LAND USES
AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE AIRPORT
ZONE, AND MAKE OTHER CONFORMING CHANGES TO
TITLE 9 OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE ,
AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER
SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project Procedural Findings . The C ity Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) At the January 21, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the City Council initiated General Plan Amendment No. 22007, Zoning Code Amendment No. 22013 (the “Zoning Code Amen dment”), and Change of Zone No. 22008 , to (a) establish a new Airport Zone classification, (b) establish permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, (c) reclassify the entirety of the Flabob Airport site as Airport Zone , (d) amend the 2017 General Plan to state that the Airport Zone is consistent with the Public Facility\Institutional (PF) land use designation, and (e) amend the General Plan land use map to redesignate the entirety of the Flabob Airport site to Public Facility/Institutional (PF), and requested that the Planning Commission study and report on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, as set forth in this Ordinance. (b) On November 9 , 2022, the Pl anning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance, at which time all persons interested in the proposed Zoning Code Amendment had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters . F ollowing t he receipt of public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimon y, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-11-09-03 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed Zoning Code Amendment.
(c) On ________ __, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters.
-2-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
Following the receipt of public testimony the City Council closed the public hearing and duly considered the written and oral testimony received.
(d) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act Findings . The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, establishing a new Airport Zone classification, estab lishing permitted land uses and development standards for the Airport Zone, and make other conforming changes to Title 9 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code , will have a significant effect on the environment.
The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect phys ical changes in the environment . The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Zoning Code Amendment and the proposed CEQA determinations, and b ased on its own independent judgment, finds that the Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 3. Project Findings. The City Council hereby finds, as required by the Jurupa Valley Ordinances and applicable state law , that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment should be adopted because the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan , as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 22007, in that the proposed Airport Zone is consistent with airport operations at Flabob Airport , supports the continued operation of Flabob Airport as an airp ort, requires consistency with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and prohibits bird attracting uses and heavy industrial that can impact the ongoing operation of Flabob Airport.
Section 4. Amendment to S ection 9 .35.010. Section 9.35.010, Zones, of Chapter
9.35, Zone Classifications, of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following zone classification: “AIR - Airport”.
Section 5. Amendment to Title 9. A new Chapter 9.232 is hereby added to Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“CHAPTER 9.232. – AIR ZONE (AIRPORT)
Sec. 9.232.010. - Intent.
It is the intent of this chapter is to promote and attract aviation-related businesses and industry, allow improvements to the Flabob Airport, and maintain the Flabob Airport as a historical, cultural and recreational hub of the city, while also conforming to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and protecting public safety.
Sec. 9.232.020. - Uses permitted.
A. The following uses are permitted in the AIR Zone:
-3-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
(1) Airport operation and related uses: Air terminal buildings, air traffic control and navigational facilities, administrative buildings and offices, indoor storage, baggage and cargo services, hangars, airport and aircraft maintenance and operational facilities, runways and landing areas, taxiways and taxi lanes, tie - downs for aircraft.
(2) Public safety and services facilities (police, fire, EMT, etc.). (3) Government public safety age ncies.
(4) Meteorological installations .
(5) Natural area, non -bird attracting agricultural uses, open space, and buffer areas .
B. The following uses are permitted upon approval of a site development permit pursuant to Section 9.240.330:
(1) Aircraft fueling.
(2) Aviation manufacturing.
(3) Aviation light industrial.
(4) Airport equipment repair, paint, and support services. (5) Automotive services related to airport operations. (6) Aviation experimental facilities and laboratories.
(7) Aviation related information services.
(8) Aviation museums and displays.
(9) Ground transportation.
(10) Rental cars.
(11) Helicopter operations.
(12) Clubs and organizations.
(13) Restaurants, cafes, and snake bars.
(14) Retail stores.
(15) Warehouse ten thousand (10,000) square feet or less, no outdoor storage.
C. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
-4-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
(1) Hotels, motels.
(2) Student housing.
(3) Recreational facilities that are non-bird attracting. (4) Technical schools and other educational uses.
(5) Farmers markets consistent with Section 9.240.520.
D. Uses not listed. Any use that is not specifical ly listed in subsections A., B., and C. may be considered a permitted or conditionally permitted use provided that the Community Development Director finds that the proposed use is substantially the same in character and intensity as those listed in the designated subsections. Such a use is su bject to the permit process which governs the category in which it falls.
Sec. 9.232.030. - Development standards.
The following development standards shall apply in the AIR Zone:
(1) Lot area. The minimum lot size shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet, unless a sewer connection is available, in which case the minimum lot size shall be seven thousand (7,000) square feet.
(2) Lot width. The minimum lot width shall be seventy-five (75) feet , unless a sewer connection is available, in which case the minimum lot width shall be sixty-five (65) feet.
(3) Yards. A minimum twenty-five (25) foot setback shall be required on any boundary that abuts a residential property and that is street-facing. No minimum setback shall be required on boundaries that do not abut residential property. Portions of a setback that require landscaping shall only be used for driveways parking and landscaping. (4) Structure height. The maximum height for all structures, including buildings, shall be thirty-five (35) feet at the yard setback line. All buildings and structures shall not exceed fifty (50) feet in height, unless a height up to seventy -five (75) feet for buildings, or one hundred and five (105) feet for other structures is specifically permitted under the provisions of Section 9.240.370.
(5) Parking areas. Parking areas shall be provided as required per Section 9.240.120. (6) Masonry wall. A minimum six (6) foot high solid wall or combination landscaped earthen berm and masonry wall shall be constructed on each property line that adjoins any parcel zoned for residential use.
(7) Landscaping.
-5-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
(a) A minimum ten (10) percent of the site proposed for development shall be landscaped and irrigated.
(b) A minimum ten (10) foot wide landscape stripe adjacent to street right-of-way lines shall be landscaped and maintained.
(c) A minimum twenty (20) foot wide landscape strip adjacent to lots zoned residential shall be landscaped and maintained.
(8) Trash areas. Trash areas shall be screened with landscaping or structures. (9) Outside storage . Outside storage, as described in Section 9.10.050, shall be completely screened from public view by abutting residential properties. (10) Utilities. Utilities shall be installed underground. (11) Mechanical equipment. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. (12) Lighting. All lighting fixtures shall be focused, directed, and arranged to prevent glare or direct illumination on streets or adjoining property.” Section 6. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
Section 7. Effect of Ordinance . This Ordinance is intended to supersede any ordinance or resolution of the County of Riverside adopted by reference by the City of Jurupa Valley in conflict with the terms of this Ordinance.
Section 8. Certification. The City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley shall cert ify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.
Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
PASSED, APPROVED , AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this ___ day of _______, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
-6-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-7-
12774-0001\2738624v2.doc
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-__ was duly introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the ____ day of __________, 2022, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the ____ day of __________, 2022, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this ____ day of __________, 2022. ________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
PC Reso. No. 2022-11-09-0_
EXHIBIT D
Change of Zone to AIR Zone (Airport)
Flabob Airport Workshop Summary
September 13, 2022
Twenty-five people attended the September 13, 2022 community workshop regarding the proposed Flabob Airport Zone. Most attendees were residents from the surrounding area. Several others in attendance were associated with Flabob Airport.
There were two overarching themes expressed at the workshop. The first is that those in the area do not want to see significant changes to Flabob, since they believe it is great the way it is. The second is that the community supports Flabob, wants it to stay viable, and desires to see it continue as an educational and historical asset. The questions and comments brought up during the Q&A portion of the meeting were primarily related to gaining clarity on the proposal and ensuring any new zone will not result in drastic changes to Flabob. Provided below is a summary of the questions and comments communicated by those who attended the meeting:
• Since Flabob Airport was established prior to the surrounding residential uses, they are concerned about uses being taken away from Flabob Airport • Request for clarification on the purpose of the removal of M-H and M-SC zones • Concern that existing businesses will be taken away; area will turn into a huge tourist attraction; and airport will not be quaint anymore
• What heavy manufacturing business exists currently? Are any of them being taken away?
• Preserving the quality of the airport is important
• Are any roads being taken away due to the rezone?
• How does the rezone of the airport affect the land outside of the airport boundaries? • How does the rezone affect the high school?
• The City is now requiring all businesses to require permits • Inquiry regarding the possibility of keeping the airport as a heritage site • Does this change the operating hours of the airport? I agree with the removal of heavy manufacturing and expressed appreciation.
• Concerned with potential traffic in the area as uses in the airport expand • Concerned with the potential for a much higher number of flights from the airport • Concerned with how the development standards would impact the residential uses specifically off Mennes Ave. – they live on Mennes Ave. • General concerns with crime and code violations in the area • Concerned about how a hotel might impact the area
During the Q&A session, it was explained that the purpose of the proposed zone change is to remove the current zoning (Manufacturing – High and Manufacturing Service- Commercial) that allows heavy industrial uses incompatible with Flabob Airport’s goals and the surrounding residential uses. Also, it was communicated that the new proposed Airport Zone is intended to allow airport-related uses that
ATTACHMENT 5
support and enhance Flabob Airport’s mission as a historical, cultural, and recreational hub for Jurupa Valley. By the end of the workshop, those in attendance expressed overall support for the concept of a new Airport Zone.
CHAIR
Steve Manos
Lake Elsinore
VICE CHAIR
Russell Betts
Desert Hot Springs
COMMISSIONERS
John Lyon
Riverside
Russell Betts
Desert Hot Springs
Richard Stewart
Moreno Valley
Michael Geller
Riverside
Vernon Poole
Murrieta
STAFF
Director
Paul Rull
Simon A. Housman
Jackie Vega
Barbara Santos
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon St.,14th Floor.
Riverside, CA 92501
(951) 955-5132
www.rcaluc.org
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
N
ovember 10, 2022
J
im Pechous, Project Planner
City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department
8930 Limonite Avenue
CA 92509
RE:
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION (ALUC) DEVELOPMENT REVIE W
F
ile No.: ZAP1039FL22
Related File Nos.: G PA22007 (General Plan Amendment), CZ22008 (Change of Zone), ZCA22013 (Zoning Code Amendment)
Compatibility Zones: Zones A, B1, B2, D
APNs: Multiple
Dea
r Mr. Pechous:
On
November 10, 2022, the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) found City of Jurupa Valley Cas e Nos. GPA22007 ( General Plan Amendment), CZ22008 (Change of Zone), ZCA22013 ( Zoning Code Amendment) , a City-initiated proposal establishing a new Airport Zone for the Flabob Airport that would remove the ex isting mixture of incompatible zoning and would allow aviation and airport supportive land uses at the airport, generally located westerly of Crestmore Road, northerly of Mission Rock Way, southerly of Capary Road, and easterly of 46 th Street, in order to implement the new Airport Zone, the City proposes : 1) a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan Land Use map designations of the project site from Business Park, Residential Rural, Open Space-Rural, and Public Facilities to Public Faculties/Institutional, to be consistent with the new Airport Zone; 2) a Change of Zone of the project site from Manufacturing High (M-H), Manufacturing Service Commercial (M-SC), General Residential (R-3), Planned Residential (R-4), and Light Agriculture (A-1) to Airport Zone (AIR); and 3) a Zoning Code Amendment to add the new Airport Zone to the City’s Municipal Code (no physical development is proposed at this time ), CONSISTENT with the 2004 Flabob Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
S
upporting documentation was provided to the Airport Land Use Commission and is available online at www.rcaluc.org, click Agendas 11-10-22 Agenda, Bookmark Agenda Item No. 3.5.
If y
ou have any questions, please contact me at (951) 955-6893.
S
incerely,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
_________
_____________________________
Paul Rull, ALUC Director
c
c: Beth LaRock, Manager, Flabob Airport
ALUC Case File
X:\A
IRPORT CASE FILES\Flabob\ZAP1039FL22\ZAP1039FL22.ltr.doc ATTACHMENT 6
Page | 1
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROD BUTLER, CITY MANAGER
BY: JOE PEREZ, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.B
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO.
22007 AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TITLE 9 (“PLANNING
AND ZONING ”) OF THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ADD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR AUTOMOBILE FUELING
STATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
1) That the City Council conduct a public hearing, receive any public testimony, and conduct a first reading and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-24, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY , CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE REG ARDING
AUTOMOBILE FUELING STATION USES, AND FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
BACKGROUND
On August 5, 2021, the City Council initiated a zoning code amendment to establish appropriate development standards and processing requirements for automobile fueling station s and adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2021 -18, imposing a moratorium on approval of building permits or other entitlements for automobile fueling stations for a period of 45 days to September 19, 2021. On September 2, 2021, the City Council extended th e moratorium to August 3, 2022. On August 3, 2022, the City Council adopted an Urgency Ordinance extending the moratorium for one additional year to August 4, 2023.
There are 31 active automobile fueling station s in the City with an additional five approved and three pending approvals. Of the City’s 31 existing service stations, 28 are combined with a convenience store. In addition, the Community Development
RETURN TO AGENDA
Page | 2
Department has received multiple inquiries in recent months regarding potential new automobile fueling station s throughout the City. Based on these inquiries , six additional locations were identified where there is a high probability for new automobile fueling station requests. The distribution of the City ’s service stations is concentrated along State Route (SR) 60 and Mission Boulevard in the north and along Limonite Avenue in the so uth. (See Attachment No. 5, Automobile fueling stations Sites Map). In addition, there is an overconcentration of automobile fueling stations within the City compared to other cities in the Inland Empire. (See Attachment No. 6 for per square mile and per capita data).
Summary of issues and concerns : Below is a summary of the issues and concerns related to automobile service stations in the City:
Proliferation and overconcentration of automobile fueling station uses Impacts on adjacent residential and other sensitive uses (e.g., schools, parks, etc.)
Inconsistency with community character and future development pattern of City
Limit or prevent more preferable/desirable uses at key locations Lost opportunity for neighborhood scale commercial development Potential to become brownfield sites due to contaminated soils Environmental Justice concerns due to unequal distribution and overconcentration
Negative impacts: noise; air quality; litter; crime; trash; traffic; lighting Ancillary use impacts: car wash; conv enience store/alcohol sales; repair service; fast food establishments
Limited and inconsistent discretionary action required for approval – allowed “by-right”, site development permit, or conditional use permit depending on the zone
No development or performance standards in zoning code Objectives: The following objectives have been identified in order to address the issues and concerns outlined above and to form the basis for proposed ordinance:
Limit location of new service stations by zone (remove use from some zones) Limit concentration of services stations with separation, adjacency, and distance requirements
Prohibit or limit use adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses Limit by minimum lot size and frontage standards
Prohibit or limit use as part of shopping center development Page | 3
Develop physical development standards (setbacks, buffering, screening, landscaping, walls, trash enclosures and receptacles, signage, driveway number and location, ingress/egress locations, parking, queuing, loading, etc.) Develop design standards (streetscape, building architecture, pedestrian access) Develop operation and performance standards (e.g., hours of operation, noise, lighting, restrooms, air and water services, propane tank sales, outdoor display, etc.)
Develop use regulations and standards for typical ancillary uses (e.g., car wash, repair services, convenience store, fast food establishments, etc.) Require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for all zones permitting the use Require alternative fueling services
Develop specific CUP findings to address potential impacts and potential compatibility issues
Create new definitions
Planning Commission Review:
On March 23 , 202 2, a Planning Commission Study Session was held to consider proposed development standards and processing requirements for gasoline service stations. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed development , operational, locational, and processing standards for gasoline service station uses. The Commission supported the proposed conceptual standards and provided feedback.
At the July 27, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, a comprehensive overview of a draft gasoline service station ordinance was presented to the Planning Commission. The recommended ordinance would add a new Section 9.240.560 – “Automobile Fueling Stations” to Zoning Code Chapter 9.240 – General Provisions, as well as make various amendments to other zoning code sections to be consistent with proposed new Section
9.240.560 - Automobile Fueling Stations. (See Attachment 3, July 27, 2022 Planning Commission minutes)
On August 10, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance. After deliberations, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-08-10-02, by a vote of 5 -0, recommending that the City Council approve the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance (see Attachment 4, August 10, 2022 Planning Commission minutes, and Attachment 2, Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-08-10-22).
ANALYSIS
Based on the objectives and recommendations from the Planning Commission, the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance (see Attachment 1) would add Section
9.240.560. – “Automobile Fueling Stations” to Zoning Code Chapter 9.240. – General Provisions with related code amendments. The proposed section would provide for the following: permit process, definitions, location and separation requirements, and Page | 4
development and operational standards. The propo sed Section is summarized below:
New Zoning Code Section: 9.240.560. – “Automobile Fueling Stations”
9.240.560 A. Definitions
Five definitions for Automobile Fueling Stations , Car Wash, Convenience Store, Fast Food Establishment, and Vehicle Service Shops are included in the Ordinance that define an automobile fueling station use as well as the various ancillary uses and services that may be associated with use. The Automobile Fueling Station definition is also added to Chapter 9.10 – “Definitions” of the Zoning Code and is added to the various zoning district chapters where the use is allowed for internal consistency. The five new definitions included in the draft Ordinance are recommended to read as follows:
1. Automobile Fueling Station: A retail business engaged primarily in selling gasoline or other motor vehicle fuels, which may also provide services which are ancillary to fuel services. These ancillary services may include vehicle service shops, car wash facilities, convenience stores, and fast food establishments.
2. Car Wash: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for permanent, self - service and/or attended car washing establishments, including fully mechanized facilities. May include detailing services.
3. Convenience Store: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for any retail sales of food, beverages and small convenience items primarily for off -premises consumption.
4. Fast Food Establishment: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for a retail food service establishmen t in which all, or a portion of, the food service is provided through a drive -through window or counter inside the fast -food establishment as opposed to a sit-down table service restaurant.
5. Vehicle Service Shops: – Any accessory use to an automobile fuel ing station for service and repair of vehicles conducted wholly within a building.
9.240.560 B. Purpose and Intent
This s ection outlines the purpose and intent of the O rdinance, which is to present locational criteria, development standards , and operational standards to be used by the City to regulate automobile fueling stations and ancillary uses under Conditional Use Permit procedures.
9.240.560 C. Permit Requirement
The purpose of this Section is to require a Conditional Use Permit for a new automobile fueling station, or the reconfiguration or enlargement of an established automobile fueling station In addition, this section provides the following specific findings that the Planning Commission must make in order to approve an automobile fueling station use:
Page | 5
1. The overall development of the project site shall be designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; to conform to the logical development of the land and to be compatible with the present and future logica l development of the surrounding property.
2. The proposed use will not substantially increase vehicular traffic on any public rights- of-way in the immediate vicinity, especially those serving residential uses.
3. The proposed use will not create increased traffic hazards to pedestrians, cyclists, or equestrian users.
4. The proposed use will not adversely affect adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located.
9.240.560 D. Location and Separation Requirements
In order to limit the overconcentration of automobile fueling stations, this section requires the following:
Automobile fueling stations to be separated from other automobile fueling stations by a minimum of one-thousand, (1,000) feet, with an allowance for a maximum of two (2) automobile fueling stations permitted at any single intersection . This requirement will limit clusters of automobile fueling stations and allow for more preferable/desirable uses at key locations.
New automobile fueling station s are prohibited if there are three (3 ) or more existing automobile fueling stations located within a one (1) mile radius of the proposed automobile fueling station site, unless the Planning Commission can make a finding that the proposed au tomobile fueling station is necessary for the public convenience and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare as outlined in the findings section above . This requirement addresses the concerns of overconcentration.
Requires automobile fueling stations located in shopping centers to be located at the periphery in order to minimize internal traffic and pedestrian conflicts.
9.240.560 E. Development Standards
Automobile fueling stations and any ancillary car wash, conv enience store, fast food establishment, or vehicle repair shop must meet all the development standards summarized in the table below and be consistent with the purpose and intent under Section 9.240.560 B.
Page | 6
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Minimum Site Area 40,000 square feet for new
automobile fueling stations.
Large lot size will limit
potential locations and
provide for more efficient
site layout to minimize
potential negative impacts.
Minimum Frontage 175 feet on each street. Large lot frontage will limit potential locations and
provide for more efficient
site layout to minimize
potential negative impacts.
Deviations to this
requirement can be
considered by City as part
of CUP review process.
Maximum Lot
Coverage
40% percent of the total lot
size. No more than 20%
percent of total lot area shall
be covered by a canopy.
This will limit large-scale
automobile fueling
stations as well as
multiple ancillary uses
such as car washes,
convenience stores, fast
food, vehicle repair shop.
Minimum Street
Setbacks
Minimum street setback shall
be 25 feet, however, to
encourage a more pedestrian
streetscape, primary building
with direct access from street
may be located a minimum of
15 feet from right-of-way.
Setbacks will allow for
increased landscaping
along the street frontage.
Minimum Side and
Rear Setbacks
Adjacent to Sensitive
Uses
All structures shall be set back
a minimum of 50 feet from side
and rear property lines where
adjoining parcels are used,
zoned, or designated by
General Plan for residential
uses, schools, parks, or places
of religious worship.
Setback requirement is
consistent with setback
requirements for multi-
family residential uses
next to commercial
properties and along with
additional landscaping
requirements will help
mitigate potential impacts
to sensitive uses.
Page | 7
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Minimum Side and
Rear Setbacks
Adjacent to
Nonresidential Districts
The minimum interior or rear
setback shall be 15 feet.
Will provide adequate
space for increased
perimeter landscaping.
Vehicular Access
Points
No more than two driveways or
means of access shall be
provided to any one street or
highway. No more than 35%
percent of street frontage shall
be devoted to curb cuts.
Limits potential traffic
conflicts and allows for
more street frontage
landscaping.
Location of Driveways Driveways shall not be located
closer than 25 feet to the end
of a curb corner or closer than
25 feet to a common property
line when adjacent to a
residential zoning district.
Limits potential traffic
conflicts at corners and
provides separation buffer
from residential uses.
Driveway Design
Driveways shall be designed
and located to ensure safe and
efficient movement of traffic on
and off the site, to and from the
lane of traffic nearest the curb.
All driveways shall be located
and constructed according to
City standards. Driveways for
automotive fueling stations
which are developed as part of
or in conjunction with adjacent
uses shall be located as part of
the total circulation facilities of
such adjacent uses.
Decorative paving shall be
provided at all driveway
entrances.
Ensures driveways are
designed to City standards
to provide efficient
movement of vehicular
traffic to and from the site.
Also, provides for paving
enhancement
requirements.
Internal Circulation Internal circulation system
shall allow for vehicle stacking
without blocking ingress and
egress on and off the site.
Pump island shall be situated
to provide stacking space for
minimum of two vehicles
behind the vehicle parked at
Ensures that vehicles do
not block ingress and
egress or internal
circulation through the site.
Deviations can be granted
as warranted.
Page | 8
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
pump closest to any entrance
and/or exit driveway.
Pedestrian Access to
Convenience
Store/Fast Food
Establishment
A minimum of one continuous
4-foot-wide internal
pedestrian decorative paved
walkway shall be provided
from perimeter public
sidewalk of each abutting
street to nearest entrance to
convenience market and/or
fast-food establishment.
Provides pedestrian
connectivity from the
adjacent sidewall.
Parking Stand-alone automobile
fueling stations (no
ancillary uses): 4 spaces
Automobile fueling station
with a Convenience
Store: Five (5) spaces per
1,000 square feet of
gross floor area of the
convenience store. Up to
fifty (50%) percent of
pump islands may be
counted as parking
spaces at minimum ratio
of one space for each
pump island.
Automobile fueling
station with a Fast-Food
Establishment and/or
Car Wash: Parking
requirements for all uses
on site shall be
determined by a parking
demand study prepared
by an independent
State-licensed traffic
engineer.
Provides requirements
for loading.
Specific parking
requirements to address
the various configurations
of automobile fueling
stations with and without
ancillary uses.
Page | 9
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Building and Canopy
Design
Building and/or canopy,
and any ancillary use
building shall be designed
for architectural
compatibility and in
compliance with any
applicable design
guidelines. Scale,
massing, and detailing
should be complementary
to surrounding uses,
building form, and
relationship to
streetscapes.
Building elevations shall
incorporate architectural
features that are visually
interesting with
pronounced massing.
Blank walls are prohibited.
Architectural detailing and
materials shall be of high
and durable quality.
Maximum height of 25
feet for building and 16
feet for canopy.
Provides specific
building design
standards to ensure
quality, integrated,
visually interesting and
compatible building
design.
Pump Islands Requires pump islands to
setback 60 feet from sensitive
use and 25 feet from all other
uses.
At least one pump station shall
be accessible to oversized
vehicles, including recreational
vehicles.
Protects separation of
pump islands from
sensitive uses to reduce
potential impacts.
Ancillary Devices Device providing air service,
water service, recharging for
electric vehicles, and similar
services shall be not be
located in any required
building setback area.
Reduces potential visual,
noise and impacts from
ancillary devises from
adjacent uses and the
public right-of –way.
Page | 10
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Cashier Location &
Visibility of the Fueling
Area
Requires cashier location to
have direct full visual access to
pump islands and vehicles
parked adjacent to islands.
This is a safety and
security measure.
Freestanding Signs Freestanding signs 20
feet maximum height
Monument signs 8 feet
maximum height
One freestanding or
monument sign per
street frontage
Sign bases shall have
architecturally integrated
bases. No exposed
single- or twin-pole
mounts
Freeway oriented signs
45 foot maximum height
and as allowed in the
Zoning Code sign
section
Specific standards unique
to automobile fueling
stations to ensure quality
sign design and minimize
signage while providing for
adequate business and
services identification.
Wall Signs
One per building
elevation. Not permitted
on elevations facing
residential uses
20 square feet per
building elevation
Individual channel
letters, halo or internally
illuminated
Window signage 10% of
window area
Temporary Signage
allowed with temporary
sign permit
Lighter Box Sign –sign
above the fuel pumps
Specific standards unique
to automobile fueling
stations to ensure quality
sign design and minimize
signage while providing for
adequate business and
services identification.
Page | 11
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Wall Signs (Cont.) Canopy Sign – one per
street frontage and 20
square feet maximum
Car Wash Sign -one
above entrance and one
price sign
Type of Service Sign -to
identify full or self
service
Special Service Sign- for
ancillary devices (air,
water, charging)
Directions Signs – for
entrance and exit to site
and ancillary uses
Pump-Top Video Display
Terminal – to regulate
video screens at pumps
dispenser
On-site Landscaping Minimum of eighteen
(18%) percent of site
shall be landscaped
15-foot street frontage
landscape setback and
10-foot interior property
line setback with solid
row of screen tress
abutting sensitive uses
Minimum 400 square
feet landscape area
required at street
corners
36-inch box sized trees
required
Extensive landscaping
requirements provide for
beautification of the
street, visual
enhancement of site, and
screening and buffer to
adjacent sensitive uses.
Perimeter Walls 8-foot-high solid decorative
masonry wall along property
lines adjacent to sensitive
uses.
Along with landscape
screening walls will provide
buffer from potential noise
and visual impact to
sensitive use.
Page | 12
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Title Standard Intent
Exterior Lighting Requires onsite lighting to be
recessed and shielded and
directed away from adjoining
streets and properties.
Eliminates negative
impacts of spillover
lighting.
Alternative Fuel
Stations
At least four (4) alternative fuel
stations shall be included at an
automobile fueling station. At a
minimum, (2) two of (4) four
alternative fuel stations shall
be electric charging stations.
Provide fueling stations for
alternative fuel vehicles.
9.240.560 F. Automobile Fueling Station Operational Standards Automobile fueling stations with any ancillary uses must meet all operational standards summarized in the table below and be consistent with the purpose and intent of this Section.
RECOMMENDED OPERATIONAL STANDARDS
Title Standard Notes
Location of
Activities
Requires all activities and operations
to be conducted in enclosed structures
with the exception of fuel dispensing,
vehicle charging, air water services,
and emergency services.
Minimize outdoor activities
to reduce impacts on
adjacent properties
Site
Maintenance
The site, including all structures,
landscaping, walls/fences, and signs,
shall be maintained in good repair, in a
clean, neat and orderly condition.
Requires driveways and service areas
to be keep clean of petroleum products
and oil as well as litter.
Ensures cleanliness of the
site
Trash
Enclosure
Requires a trash enclosure to be
designed with a 6-foot-high solid
decorative masonry wall, self-closing
gates, perimeter landscaping, and an
overhead trellis structure.
Ensures aesthetically
functional and screened
trash enclosure
Public Service
Facilities
Provides requirements for customer
restrooms and for air, water services.
Standard requirements for
automobile fueling stations
Page | 13
Noise Require the submittal of a
professional noise analysis to
quantify outdoor noise sources
Limits the hours of speakers, pump
station video/audio noise sources
and sound signals to be turned off
daily for 10 pm to 7 am.
Automobile fueling station noise
(e.g., bells, loudspeakers, tools,
etc.) shall not be audible from
residentially zoned or occupied
parcels between the hours of 7:00
p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays
and Saturdays, and before 10:00
a.m. and after 7:00 p.m. on
Sundays and nationally recognized
holidays.
Limits noise sources during
evening and early morning
hours and adjacent to
residential uses
Trash
Receptacles
Requires trash receptacle at pump
islands and building entrances and daily
removal of trash from the receptacles.
Standard trash
requirements to ensure
cleanliness of site and
provide customers with
adequate trash disposal
methods.
Pollution
Prevention
Requires plans to implement best
management practices to eliminate
discharge into storm drains in
compliance with the city’s NPDES
criteria.
Standard Requirement
Hazardous
Materials
All necessary permits for the storage
and use of hazardous materials shall
be obtained. All automobile fluids shall
be recycled or removed according to
applicable state and federal
standards.
Standard Requirement
Propane Tank
Sales
Propane tank sale displays shall be
located outside of any required
setback area and shall be stored in a
secure display. The City may require
landscaping or other type of
screening to conceal the propane
tanks from public view.
Ensures screening and
proper storage of propane
tanks
Page | 14
9.240.560 G. Ancillary Uses
Provides standards for ancillary convenience store, car wash, fast food establishments, and vehicle repair shops uses as flows:
Convenience Store: requires compliance with Section 9.2.240.490 – Alcoholic Beverage Sales
Gasoline
Tanker Trucks
Requires tanker trucks not to
obstruct the public right-of-way
during delivery and standard fuel
loading requirements.
Standard Requirement
Mechanical
Equipment
All hydraulic hoists and pits, all
equipment for lubrication,
greasing, automobile washing
and permitted repairs shall be
enclosed entirely within a
building.
All rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be screened
from view of adjacent
properties and public rights-of-
way.
All ground mounted vapor
venting pipes and equipment
shall be located behind a six
(6) foot high decorative solid
screen wall and landscaping
and shall not be located in any
required setback area.
Eliminates visual impacts
of mechanical equipment
Payment Areas Points of cash or other payment
shall be designed so as to provide a
safe and adequate customer
queuing area. Outdoor walk-up
service facilities shall be located
and designed so as to prevent
adverse impacts on adjacent
properties.
Ensures security and
reduces impact to sensitive
uses.
Prohibited Uses No sale or rental of automobiles,
boats, trucks, trailers, motor bikes,
or other vehicles shall be permitted
on an automobile fueling station
site.
Eliminates nuisance uses
Page | 15
Car Wash: requires a queuing study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California and a noise study prepared by an independent acoustical engineer licensed by the State of California. Fast Food Establishment: requires a queuing study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California.
Vehicle Repair Shop:
o Requires opening of service bays to minimize visual intrusion onto adjoining properties and street.
o Requires that service bay doors shall not directly face an existing residential development or residential zone.
o Limited to battery and ignition services, tire repair and sales, and other accessory sales and serv ices for automobiles; but shall exclude major automobile repairs, tire recapping, steam cleaning, painting, body and fender work, engine overhaul, or other work of a similar nature.
9.240.560 H. Discontinuation of an Automobile Fueling Station Use or Structure Prohibits re -establishment of an automobile fueling station if the use has been discontinued for a continuous 12-month period.
9.240.560 I. Legal Nonconforming
Legally established nonconforming automobile fueling stations and ancillary uses on said automobile fueling station sites shall be handled pursuant to Section 9.240.080. – Nonconforming structures and uses. If conformity with standards adopted pursuant to this Section causes hardship due to existing configuration of on -site buildings or structures, a Variance may be applied for pursuant to Section 9.240.270. –Variances. A new automobile fueling station may only be established on a former automobile fueling station site in compliance with the provision of Section 9.240.560 -Automobile Fueling Stations.
9.240.560 I. Modifications to Existing Automobile Fueling Stations Use Automobile fueling station uses and structures related thereto shall not be enlarged, extended, reconstructed or moved to a different portion of the lot or parcel of land occupied by such use unless in compliance with the provision of Section 9.240.560 - Automobile Fueling Stations including the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit.
The following exceptions apply:
Modifications to Improve Soil, Ground Water and Storm Water Qua lity.
Automobile fueling station uses may be modified to conform to current storm water quality control regulations or remediate contamination of the soil or ground water. Modifications to Improve Traffic Safety . As determined by the City Engineer, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation features (e.g., curbing, sidewalks, and traffic control devices) of an automobile fueling station use may be modified to improve public safety.
Page | 16
Modifications to Enable Zero Emiss ion Vehicles (Battery Charging Station).
Automobile fueling station uses may be modified to accommodate battery charging station(s) for zero emission vehicles.
Modifications to Enable Zero Emission Vehicles (Hydrogen Fuel Cell Station). Automobile fueling station uses may be altered to include facilities for the storage, conveyance and dispensing of hydrogen to zero emission vehicles.
Amendments to Other Zoning Code Sections
It is recommended that the following Zoning Code amendments be made to be consistent with proposed new Section 9.240.560 -Automobile Fueling Stations:
Add a definition to automobile fueling station in Chapter 9.10 – Definitions. Add a provision to Section 9.240.120 – Off -Street Vehicle Parking to refers to the automobile fueling station parking requirements in the proposed Section 9.240.560 -Automobile Fueling Stations.
Remove automobile fueling station use(s) from the following residential zones: R- R (Rural Residential) and R-3A (Visitor Tourist Residential). Require a Conditional Use Permit for automobile fueling station uses in the following commercial and industrial zones:
o B-P Zone Business Park
o C-1/C-P General Commercial
o C-T Zone Tourist Commercial
o C-P-S Zone Scenic Highway Commercial
o C-R Zone Rural Commercial
o C-N Zone Commercial Neighborhood
o R-VC Zone Rubidoux Village Commercial
o I-P Zone Industrial Park
o M-SC Zone Manufacturing-Service Commercial
o M-M Zone Manufacturing-Medium
o M-H Zone Manufacturing-Heavy
Add a 40 -year amortization period for automobile fueling stations in Section
9.240.080 ( Nonconforming structures an d uses) of Chapter 9.240 (General Provisions).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from CEQA because the Zoning Code Amendment is covered by the common -sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. In this
ATTACHMENT 1
(Proposed Ordinance)
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-24
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLE Y,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE JURUPA VALLEY
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING AUTOMOBILE
FUELING STATION USES , AND FINDING AN
EXEMPTION FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 15061( B)(3)
OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Project Procedural Findings . The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) At the August 5, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the City Co uncil initiated a zoning code amendment to establish appropriate development standards and processing requirements for automobile fueling station s (the “ Zoning Code Amendment ”). At that same meeting, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2021 -18, imposing a moratorium o n approval of building permits or other entitlements for automobile fueling stations for a period of 45 days. On September 2, 2021, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2021-20 extending the moratorium up through and including August 3, 2022. On August 3, 2022, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2022-16 extending the moratorium up through and including August 3, 2023.
(b) On July 27, 2022 and August 10, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Jurupa Valley held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance, at which time all persons interested in the proposed Zoning Code Amendment had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. Following the receipt of public testimony, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimon y, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-08-10-02 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed Zoning Code Amendment.
(c) On December 1, 2022, the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning Code Amendment, at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters.
Following the receipt of public testimony the City Council closed the public hearing and duly considered the written and oral testimony received.
(d) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
Section 2. Findings.
(a) The Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has classified automobile fueling stations and fuel storage locations as uses that may result in a brownfield site. Brownfield sites are properties, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse o f which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. -2-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(b) Common contaminants found at automobile fueling station sites include gasoline, diesel, and petroleum oil, volatile organic compounds and solvents, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and lead. Exposure to the types of contaminants present, or potentially present, at automobile fueling stations threatens the public health, safety or welfare of neighboring communities.
(c) There are 3 1 active aut omobile fueling stations in the City with an additional five approved and three pending approvals. Of the City’s 3 1 existing service stations, 28 are combined with a convenience store. In addition, Community Development Department has received multiple inquiries in recent months regarding potential new automobile fueling stations throughout the City. Based on these inquiries, six additional locations were identified where there is a high probability for new automobile fueling station requests. Comparatively, the number of automobile fueling service stations in the City is greater than in the surrounding cities of Fontana, Ontario and Upland, which have 21, 20, and 17 automobile fueling service stations, respectively.
Per capita, the City has 1 automobile fueling station per 3,516 residents. This is a much higher per capita rate than Fontana that has 1 automobile fueling station per 9,923 residents, Ontario that has 1 automobile fueling station per 9,050 residents, and Upland that has 1 automobile fueling station per 4,537 residents. F urthermore, many of the existing automobile fueling stations are located near sensitive receptors. The close proximity of automobile fueling stations to these areas increases the risk of contaminant exposure to vulnerable popu lations. This problem is exace rbated in situations where the automobile fueling service station may become a brownfield site. (d) The existing automobile service stations are primarily concentrated along SR 60 and Mission Blvd in the north and along Limonite Avenue in the south of the City . The proliferation of automobile fueling service stations in particular areas inequitably increases health risks for the residents of these areas due to the potential contaminants present at automobile fueling service stations. As a matter of environmental justice, the City must carefully consider how such uses are treated under the City’s General Plan designations and policies, zoning measures or development standards in order to avoid an undue concentration of automobile fueling service stations in any one part of the City.
(e) Nationally the amount of automobil e fueling stations are on a decline.
According to the American Petroleum Institute, there are currently over 145,000 automobile fueling stations across the country. Th is is a decline of over 2 7%, down from the over 200,000 that existed in 1994. Fuel economy, an increase of electric vehicles and big-box discount retailers that offer lower prices are some of the reasons cited for the decreasing numbers of automobile fueling stations nationwide. Vacated automobile fueling service stations sites potentially present public health safety and welfare concerns f or the neighboring community. With the national decline in the number of automobile fueling service stations, the likelihood of some of the City’s existing inventory of service stations failing may be increasing. (f) Of the City’s thirty-one (31) existing operational automobile fueling stations, twenty-eight (28) are combined with a convenience store. Automobile fueling stations combined with convenience stores can have greater impacts on the surrounding area than automobile fueling stations alone, including impacts related to air quality due to increased idling of vehicles, increase trash, noise, and potential crime, parti cularly when open twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week.
-3-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(g) The City Council is concerned that automobile fueling station uses might cause a disproportionate public health, safety and welfare impact to the City of Jurupa Valley community and to its residents without compensating benefits to the community. As noted above, there is an overconcentration of automobile fueling stations in a City as a whole with the overconcentration being focused in particular areas of the community. In an effor t to ensure that new automobile fueling stations are not located in areas that are already overserved or sufficiently served, the ordinance includes separation requirements whereby new automobile fueling stations cannot be located within 1,000 feet of anot her automobile fueling station and no more two automobile fueling stations are permitted at any single intersection, with a maximum of three automobile fueling stations allowed within a one mile radius. The ordinance also requires that automobile fueling stations be set back at least 50 feet from certain sensitive uses. These separation requirements will ensure that automobile fueling stations do not continue to just be located in certain areas of the City and will help to minimize negative impacts that au tomobile fueling stations may have on certain communities.
Section 3. California Environmental Quality Act Findings . The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Gu idelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment that limits where gas stations will be permitted to operate will have a significant effect on the environment. The City has an overconcentration of automobile fueling stations which is why it is limiting the zones where additional automobile fueling stations can be constructed and requiring that any new gas stations obtain a conditional use perm it. Any new automobile fueling station that seeks to operate in the City will need to undergo CEQA review prior to obtaining a conditional use permit. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed Zoning Code Amendment and the proposed CEQA determinations, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that the Zoning Code Amendment set forth in this Ordinance is not subject to, or exempt from, the requirements of the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
Section 4. Project Findings. The City Council hereby finds, as required by the Jurupa Valley Ordinances and applicable state law , that the proposed Zoning Code Amendment should be adopted because the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the City of Jurupa Valley 2017 General Plan in that:
(a) LUE 3.5 Residential Compatibility. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordina nce ensure compatibility of automobile fue ling stations with abutting residential properties and protect residential use s from the impacts of noise, vibration, light, fumes, odors, vehicular traffic, parking, and safety hazards. (b) LUE 8.2 High Quality Development. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance require that automobile fueling stations and any ancillary uses be of high quality and enhance the positive characteristics and unique features of the project site, neighboring properties and the surrounding community. -4-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(c) LUE 8.3 Protect Existin g Legal Uses. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance retain and enhance the integrity of legal, existing residential, commercial, agricultural, and open space areas by protecting them from encroachment of automobile fueling sta tions and any ancillary use that would result in significant, adverse impacts from noise, vibration, noxious fumes, glare, shading, and traffic. (d) LUE 11.8 Signage. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance r equire automobile fueling station projects to use high quality, well -designed signage that is architecturally integrated with and complementary to the proposed building(s) and adjacent development.
(e) LUE 11.9 Commercial Vehicle Access. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance require safe and convenient vehicular access and reciprocal access between adjacent commercial uses and properties. (f) LUE 11.10 Residential Compatibility. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance require automobile fueling stations and any ancillary uses to be designed so that site and building entries, driveways, parking and loading areas, trash and recycling areas, drive -through uses, and storage bays are located and designed to minimize conflicts with adjace nt residential neighborhoods due to traffic, noise, vibration , odor, lighting, and other impacts on surrounding properties.
(g) NE 3.1 Noise Analysis. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance require that a noise analysis be conduct ed by an acoustical specialist for all proposed automobile fueling stations and any ancillary uses that have the potential to generate significant noise near a noise-sensitive land use, or on or near land designated for noise -sensitive land uses, and ensure that recommended mitigation measures are implemented. (h) NE 3.7 Automobile -Oriented Uses. The standards set forth in the Automobile Fueling Station Ordinance require drive -through restaurants, automobile repair, fueling stations, mini -marts, car washes, and similar automobile -oriented uses be sited and designed to minimize potential noise impacts on adjacent land uses.
Section 5. A new Section 9.10.115 (Automobile fueling station.) is hereby added to Chapter 9.10 (Definitions) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Ju rupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“Sec. 9.10.115 Automobile fueling station.
A retail business engaged primarily in selling gasoline or other motor vehicle fuels, which may also provide services which are ancillary to fuel services. These a ncillary services may include vehicle service shops, car wash facilities, convenience stores, and fast food establishments.”
Section 6. Subsection D of Section 9.45.010 ( Uses permitted.) of Chapter 9.45 (R -R Zone (Rural Residential) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.45.010 remaining unchanged:
-5-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
“D. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted:
(1) Airport or landing field.
(2) Auto wrecking yards.
(3) Any mining operation which is exempt from the provisions of the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (Pub. Resources Cod e Section 2710 et seq.) and Chapter
5.65. (4) Cemetery, pet or human.
(5) Commercial fairgrounds.
(6) Commercial stables and riding academies.
(7) Antique shops.
(8) Automobile service stations and repair garages with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption.
(89) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (910) Barber shops and beauty shops.
(1011) Bars and cocktail lounges pursuant to Section 9.240.490. (1112) Billiard and pool halls pursuant to Section 9.240.490. (1213) Cleaning and dyeing shop.
(1314) Retail pharmacies.
(1415) Equipment rental services, including rototillers, power mowers, sanders, power saws, cement and plaster mixers not exceeding ten (10) cubic f eet in capacity, and other similar equipment.
(1516) Food, meat, poultry and produce markets.
(1617) Frozen food lockers.
(1718) Hardware stores.
(1819) Laundries and laundromats.
(20) Liquid petroleum service stations, with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490, provided, that if storage tanks are above- ground, the total capacity of all tanks shall not exceed ten thousand (10,000) gallons. Storage tanks shall be painted a neutral color and shall not have any advertising painted or placed on their surface. (1921) Liquor stores, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490. (2022) Parking lots and parking buildings, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.120. (2123) Professional offices.
(2224) Refreshment stands.
(2325) Restaurants and other eating establishments.
(2426) Shoe stores and repair shops.
(2527) Stations, bus, railroad and taxi.
(2628) Tire sales and service.
(2729) Tourist information centers.
(2830) Underground bulk fuel storage.
(2931) Auction houses and yards.
(3032) Dune buggy parks.
(3133) Fruit and vegetable packing plants and similar uses. (3234) Hog ranches, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.50. (3335) Hunting clubs.
(3436) Lumber production of a commercial nature, including commercial logging or commercial development of timber and lumber mills.
-6-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(3537) Machine shops.
(3638) The manufacture of:
(a) Brick, tile or terra-cotta;
(b) Cement and cement products;
(c) Gypsum;
(d) Lime or lime products.
(3739) Menageries.
(3840) Migrant agricultural workers mobilehome parks.
(3941) Pen fed cattle operations, livestock saleyard, livestock auction yards, and dairy farms. (4042) Race tracks, including, but not limited to, contests betwee n automobiles, horses, go-carts, and motorcycles, but not including contests between human beings only. (4143) Recreational vehicle parks.
(4244) Rifle, pistol, skeet, or trapshooting ranges.
(4345) Rodeo arenas.
(4446) Trail bike parks.
(4547) Trailer and boat storage.
(4648) Disposal service operations.
(4749) Meat cutting and packaging plants, provided there is no slaughtering of animals or rendering of meat.
(4850) Outdoor film studios.
(4951) Water well drilling, operations and service.
(5052) Mobilehome parks, developed pursuant to Section 9.260.030. (5153) Community auction and sales yards.
(5254) Farm labor camp.
(5355) Feed stores.
(5456) Packaged dry fertilizer storage, not including processing. (5557) Oil production, not including refining or processing. (5658) Mink farms.
(5759) Both large and small animal hospitals.
(5860) Commercial breeding operations.
(5961) Alcoholic beverage sales for on-premises consumption in conjunction with a) wineries and appurtenant and incidental uses with established on-site vineyards, b) golf courses with standard length fairways, c) golf, tennis, polo, and archery country clubs, d) airports or landing fields, e) commercial fairgrounds, f) guest ranches, and g) fraternal lodges, including grange halls. (62) Alcoholic beverage sales for off -premises consumption in conjunction with automobile service stations pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.”
Section 7. Subsection D of Section 9.85.020 (Uses Permitted.) of Chapter 9.85 (R-3A Zone (Village Tourist Residential) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with deletions shown in strikethrough text with all other provisions of Section 9.85.020 remaining unchanged:
“D. The following uses are permitted, provided a conditional use permit has been granted:
(1) Ambulance services.
(2) Apartments.
(3) Automobile and truck repair and service stations, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (4) Bungalow courts.
-7-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(5) Country clubs.
(6) Golf courses with standard length fairways.
(7) Hotels, resort hotels, and motels.
(8) Mobilehome parks developed pursuant to Section 9.260.010. (9) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural and engineering.
(10) Parking lot.
(11) Recreational vehicle parks.
(12) Alcoholic beverage sales for on -premises consumption in conjunction with golf courses with standard length fairways and country clubs, sports and recreational facilities (not including video arcades, motor drive n vehicles and riding academies; but including, golf driving ranges, skating rinks, hotels and resort hotels) pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.”
Section 8. Subsections C and D of Section 9. 112.020 (Uses Permitted.) of Chapter
9.112 (B-P Zone (Business Park)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.112.020 remaining unchanged:
“B. The following uses are permitted provided approval of a site development permit shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section [9.240.330]:
(1) Ambulance, taxi, and/or limousine dispatch facility. (2) Antennas and telecommunications facilities.
(3) Automobile service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off - premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (34) Commercial recreation facility—Indoor.
(45) Conference facilities.
(56) Convenience market.
(67) Equipment sales and rental.
(78) Fitness/health facility.
(89) Maintenance services.
(910) Medical services—Clinic, urgent care.
(1011) Office-supporting retail.
(1112) Parking lots and structures.
(1213) Personal services—Nails, beauty salon, barber.
(1314) Repair services—Electronic equipment, large appliances, etc. (1415) Warehouse stores—Forty-five thousand (45,000) square feet or less gross floor area. (1516) Work/live units.
(1718) Vehicle services—Repair and maintenance.
(1819) Studio—Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.
C. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section [9.240.280]:
(1) Auto, truck, motorcycle, boat and RV sales, rental and repair. (2) Automobile Fueling Stations not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off - premises consumption, and excluding truck stops/travel centers. (23) Bar/tavern pursuant to Section 9.240.490.
(34) Furniture and fixtures manufacturing, cabinet shop. -8-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(45) Hotel, motel, extended stay hotel.
(56) Heliports.
(67) Hospital.
(78) Mortuary, funeral home.
(89) Public safety facilities (police, fire, EMT, etc.) (910) Warehouse stores—Greater than forty-five thousand (45,000) square feet gross floor area. (1011) Alcoholic beverage sales for off -premise consumption with convenience stores and automobile service fueling stations, and restaurants, hotels, extended stay hotels, and conference facilities with alcohol beverage sales for on-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490. (1112) Microbrewery, brew pub, craft brewery pursuant to Section 9.240.490.”
Section 9. Subsections A and C of Section 9. 115.020 (Uses Permitted.) of Chapter
9.115 (C-1 Zone/C-P Zone (General Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9. 115.020 remaining unchanged:
“A. The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings with not more than two hundred (200) square feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use, provided a site development permit shall have been approved pursuant to provisions of Section 9.240.330:
(1) Ambulance services.
(2) Antique shops.
(3) Appliance stores, household.
(4) Art supply shops and studios.
(5) Auction houses.
(6) Auditoriums and conference rooms.
(7) Automobile repair garages, not including body and fender shops or spray painting. (8) Automobile parts and supply stores.
(9) Bakery goods distributors.
(10) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (11) Banks and financial institutions.
(12) Barber and beauty shops.
(13) Billiard and pool halls.
(14) Blueprint and duplicating services.
(15) Book stores and binders.
(16) Bowling alleys.
(17) Catering services.
(18) Cleaning and dyeing shops.
(19) Clothing stores.
(20) Confectionery or candy stores.
(21) Costume design studios.
(22) Dance halls.
(23) Delicatessens.
(24) Department stores.
(25) Drug stores.
(26) Dry goods stores.
-9-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(27) Employment agencies.
(28) Escort bureaus.
(29) Feed and grain sales.
(30) Florists shops.
(31) Food markets and frozen food lockers.
(32)Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
(32 33) Gift shops.
(33 34) Hotels, resort hotels and motels.
(34 35) Household goods sales, including, but not limited to, new a nd used appliances, furniture, carpets, draperies, lamps, radios, and television sets, including repair thereof. (35 36) Hobby shops.
(36 37) Ice cream shops.
(37 38) Ice sales, not including ice plants.
(38 39) Interior decorating shops.
(39 40) Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs.
(40 41) Labor temples.
(41 42) Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing. (42 43) Laundries and laundromats.
(43 44) Leather goods stores.
(44 45) Locksmith shops.
(45 46) Mail order businesses.
(46 47) Manufacturer's agent.
(47 48) Market, food, wholesale or jobber.
(48 49) Massage parlors, Turkish baths, health centers and similar personal service establishments. (49 50) Meat markets, not including slaughtering.
(50 51) Mimeographing and addressograph services.
(51 52) Mortuaries.
(52 53) Music stores.
(53 54) News stores.
(54 55) Notions or novelty stores.
(55 56) Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning, real estate.
(56 57) One (1) on-site operator's residence, which may be located in a commercial building. (57 58) Paint and wallpaper stores, not including paint contractors. (58 59) Pawn shops.
(59 60) Pet shops and pet supply shops.
(60 61) Photography shops and studios and photo engraving. (61 62) Plumbing shops, not including plumbing contractors. (62 63) Poultry markets, not including slaughtering or live sales. (63 64) Printers or publishers.
(64 65) Produce markets.
(65 66) Radio and television broadcasting studios.
(66 67) Recording studios.
(67 68) Refreshment stands.
(68 69) Restaurants and other eating establishments.
-10-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(69 70) Schools, business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, music and swimming.
(70 71) Shoe stores and repair shops.
(71 72) Shoeshine stands.
(72 73) Signs, on-site advertising.
(73 74) Sporting goods stores.
(74 75) Stained glass assembly.
(75 76) Stationer stores.
(76 77) Stations, bus, railroad and taxi.
(77 78) Taxidermist.
(78 79) Tailor shops.
(79 80) Telephone exchanges.
(80 81) Theaters, not including drive-ins.
(81 82) Tire sales and service, not including recapping. (82 83) Tobacco shops.
(83 84) Tourist information centers.
(84 85) Toy shops.
(85 86) Travel agencies.
(86 87) Typewriter sales and rental, including incidental repairs. (87 88) Watch repair shops.
(88 89) Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage. (89 90) Car washes.
(90 91) Fortune telling, spiritualism, or similar activity. (91 92) Recycling collection facilities.
(92 93) Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. (93 94) Day care centers
C. The following uses are permitted, provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.280:
(1) Sale, rental, repair, or demonstration of motorcycles, scooters, and motorbikes. (2) Drive-in theaters.
(3) Heliports.
(4) Tire recapping.
(5) Animal hospitals.
(6) Body and fender shops and spray painting.
(7) Swap meets.
(8) All uses permitted in subsection (A) of this section t hat have more than two hundred (200) square feet of outside storage or display of materials. (9) Mini-warehouse structures.
(10) Lumber yards, including only incidental mill work. (11) Building materials sales yards.
(12) Underground bulk fuel storage.
(13) Congregate care residential facilities.
(14) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel pursuant to Section 9.240.490. -11-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(15) Gasoline Automobile fueling service stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
(16) Liquid petroleum service stations with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off -premises consumption, provided the total capacity of all tanks shall not exceed ten thousand (10,000) gallons, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
(16 17) Liquor stores pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales). (17 18) Automobile sales and rental agencies.
(18 19) Alcoholic beverage sales for on-premises or off-premises consumption in conjunction with billiard and pool halls, bowling alleys, dance halls, hotels, resort hotels, markets, convenience stores, restaurants, theaters (not drive -ins, liquid petroleum service stations, and sports and recreational facilities; including motor driven vehicles, archery ranges, sports arenas, skating rinks, and stadiums) pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.”
Section 10. Subsections A and C of Section 9.120 .010 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.120 (C-T Zone (Tourist Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.120.010 remaining unchanged:
“A. The following uses are permitted, provided approval of a site development permit shall first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330:
(1)Automobile service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off- premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (1 2)Automobile sales, truck sales, new and used.
(2 3)Restaurants, drive-in restaurants, bars.
(3 4)Curio shops, gift shops.
(4 5)Sign, on-site advertising.
(5 6)Hotels, motels.
(6 7)Dwelling, bed and breakfast.
(7 8)Churches, temples and other places of religious worship. (8 9)Child day care center.
C. The following uses are permitted, provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.280:
(1) Motor sports raceways and motor sports raceways with the sale of alcoholic beverages pursuant to Section 9.240.490.
(2) Alcoholic beverage sales with automobile service fueling stations, truck service stations, restaurants, bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, hotels, resort hotels, and extended stay hotels pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.”
(3) Automobile fueling stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
Section 11. Subsections A and B of Section 9.130 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.130 (C -R Zone (Rural Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follo ws, with additions shown in underlined text -12-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.130.020 remaining unchanged:
“A. The following uses are permitted, provided a site development permit has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330:
(1) Automobile service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
(1 2) Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. (2 3) Barber and beauty shops.
(3 4) Confectionary and candy stores.
(4 5) Churches, temples and other places of religious worship. (5 6) Clothing, shoe, shoe repair and leather goods stores. (6 7) Delicatessens.
(7 8) Drug stores.
(8 9) Dwelling, bed and breakfast.
(9 10) Feed and grain sales, including outside storage. (10 11) Florist shops.
(11 12) Gift, antique, curio, and art supply shops.
(12 13) Grocery, dry goods, health food, and variety stores. (13 14) Hardware stores.
(14 15) Hotels and motels, with no more than twenty-five (25) guest rooms. (15 16) Ice cream shops.
(16 17) Laundries, laundromats and dry cleaning shops.
(17 18) Libraries.
(18 19) Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. (19 20) Meat and poultry markets, not including slaughtering or live sales. (20 21) Meeting, fraternal lodge, and community halls.
(21 22) Museums.
(22 23) Nurseries and garden supply stores, including outside storage. (23 24) Pet and pet supply shops.
(24 25) Post offices.
(25 26) Produce markets.
(26 27) Professional offices.
(27 28) Real estate offices.
(28 29) Restaurants, drive-in restaurants and refreshment stands. (29 30) Signs, on-site advertising only.
(30 31) Sporting equipment, gun, bait and tackle, and equestrian shops. (31 32) Taxidermist.
(32 33) Tourist information centers.
(33 34) One on-site operator's residence, which may be located in a commercial building. (34 35) Mobilehomes, provided they are kept mobile and licensed pursuant to state law for use for:
(a) Construction offices and caretaker's quarters on construction sites for the duration of a valid building permit, provided they are inconspicuously located; (b) Agricultural worker employment offices for a maximum of ninety (90) days in any calendar year; or
-13-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(c) Caretakers or watchmen and their families, provided no rent is paid, where a permitted and existing commercial use is established. No more than one (1) mobilehome shall be allowed for a parcel of land.
(35 36) Recycling collection facilities.
(36 37) Child day care center.
B. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been approved pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(1) Animal hospitals.
(2) Automobile and truck repair garages, not including body and fender shops or spray painting shops.
(3) Building supply stores and equipment rental, including outside storage. (4) Liquid petroleum service stations, with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine, provided the total capacity of all tanks shall not exceed ten thousand (10,000) gallons pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (54) Automobile service fueling stations, with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (6) Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel. (5 7) Liquor stores pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales). (6 8) Automobile service stations, gGrocery stores, convenience stores, and restaurants with the sale of alcoholic beverages for off -premise consumption and bars, cocktail lounges, restaurants and hotels with alcoholic beverage sales for on -premises consumption pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.”
Section 12. Section 9.130.040 (Development standards.) of Chapter 9.130 (C -R Zone (Rural Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.130.040 remaining unchanged:
“The following shall be the standards of development in the C-R Zone:
(1) The minimum lot area shall be twenty thousand (20,000) square feet, unless a different minimum is specifically required in a particular area.
(2) The front, side and rear yard setbacks shall be twenty -five (25) feet. The front setback shall be measured from the existing adjacent street line or the street line as shown on an adopted highway specific plan. The rear setback shall be measured from the rear lot line or any recorded alley or easement. Each side setback shall be measured from the side lot line or from any existing adjacent street line or the street line as shown on an adopted highway specific plan. (3) No buildings or structures shall exceed forty (40) feet in height. (4) Total building coverage on a single parcel shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of the net lot size.
(5) Automobile parking areas and landscaping shall be in accordance with Section
9.240.120.
(6) Trash areas shall be visually screened with a six (6) foot high fence or wall and shall have a gate and be inaccessible to wildlife.
-14-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(7) No outside storage shall be permitted unless specifically allowed in Section 9.130.020.
Any such storage shall be in the rear of the structure and shall be enclosed with a visually screening fence.
(8) The following uses shall be required to install an acceptable security system:
(a) Automobile service fueling stations.
(b) Bars and cocktail lounges.
(c)Liquor and convenience stores.”
Section 13. Subsections B and C of Section 9.132 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.132 (C-N Zone ( Commercial-Neighborhood)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all o ther provisions of Section 9.132 .020 remaining unchanged:
“B. The following uses are permitted provided approval of a site development permit shal l first have been obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section [9.240.330]:
(1) Automobile service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
(1 2) Car wash, self-service (no automated or drive thru). (2 3) Caretaker's residence.
(3 4) Farm supply and feed store.
(4 5) Fitness/health facility.
(5 6) General retail —More than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet gross floor area.
(6 7) Grocery and/or specialty foods retail —Three thousand (3,000) square feet to five thousand (5,000) square feet of gross floor area.
(7 8) Library, branch facility.
(8 9) Medical services—Clinic, urgent care.
(9 10) Religious facility—Church, temple, stake, etc.
(10 11) Repair services— Home electronic equipment, small appliances. (11 12) Work/live units.
(12 13) Automobile services—Repair and maintenance.
(13 14) Veterinary clinic/hospital/boarding (indoor), small animals. (14 15) Studio—Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.
C. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section [9.240.280]:
(1) Bar/tavern pursuant to Section 9.240.490.
(2) Club, lodge, private meeting hall.
(3) Grocery, l iquor and specialty foods retail —Five thousand (5,000) square feet to twenty thousand (20,000) square feet gross floor area.
(4) Public assembly facility.
(5) Public safety facilities (police, fire, EMT, etc.). (6) Schools—Private, religious, specialty.
(7) Social service or charitable organization.
-15-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(8) Theatre, museum or cultural center.
(9) Clubs, lodges, private meeting halls and restaurants with on -premises consumption, and convenience stores with alcoholic beverages sales with off -premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490.
(10) Automobile fueling stations, with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off - premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers.”
Section 14. Subsections A, B and C of Section 9.140.020 (Uses Permitted.) of Chapter
9.140 (R-VC Zone (Rubidoux-Village Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all o ther provisions of Section 9.140 .020 remaining unchanged:
“A. Uses with limited outside storage. The following uses are permitted, only in enclosed buildings with not more than two hundred (200) square feet of outside storage or display of materials appurtenant to such use, on any site within the R-VC subject to a site development permit approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330. Some of the uses may be permitted with more than two hundred (200) square feet of outside storage with a conditional use permit as described in subsection (C) of this section.
USES PERMITTED WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE LIMITED TO 200 SQUARE FEET
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X 1 Ambulance services.
X X X 2 Antique shops.
X X X 3 Appliance stores, household.
X X X 4 Art galleries, libraries, reading rooms, museums.
X X X 5 Art supply shops and studios.
X X 6 Auction houses used in conjunction with the primary use(s).
X X X 7 Auditoriums and conference facilities.
X X X 8 Automobile parts and supply stores.
X X 9 Automobile repair shops.
X X X 10 Bakery goods distributors.
X X X 11 Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises.
X X X 12 Banks and financial institutions.
X X X 13 Barber and beauty shops.
X X X 14 Bicycle sales and rentals with incidental repair. -16-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X X 15 Billiard and pool halls.
X X X 16 Blueprint and duplication services.
X X X 17 Book stores and binders.
X X 18 Catering services.
X X 19 Car washes.
X X X 20
Ceramic sales and manufacturing for on -site sales,
provided the total volume of kiln space does not exceed 16 cubic feet.
X X X 21 Churches, temples and other places of religious worship.
X X X 22 Cleaning and dyeing shops.
X X X 23 Clothing stores.
X X X 24 Confectionery or candy stores.
X X X 25 Convenience stores, not including the sale of motor vehicle fuel.
X X X 26 Costume design studios.
X X 27 Dance halls.
X X X 28 Day care centers.
X X X 29 Delicatessens.
X X X 30 Department stores.
X X X 31 Drug stores.
X X X 32 Dry goods stores.
X X X 33 Employment agencies.
X X X 34 Escort bureaus.
X X X 35 Feed and grain sales.
X X X 36 Florist shops.
X X X 37 Food stores and frozen food lockers.
X X X 38 Fortune telling, spiritualism.
X X 39
Gasoline service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off -premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
X X X 40
39 Gift shops.
-17-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X X 41
40 Golf cart sales and service.
X X X 42
41 Hardware stores.
X X X 43
42 Household goods sales, including, but not limited to, new and used appliances, furniture, carp ets, draperies, lamps, radios, and televisions sets, including repair thereof.
X X X 44
43 Hobby shops.
X X X 45
44 Ice cream shops.
X X X 46
45 Ice sales, not including ice manufacturing plants.
X X X 47
46 Interior decorating shops.
X X X 48
47 Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs.
X X X 49
48 Union halls.
X X X 50
49 Laboratories: film, dental, medical, research or testing.
X X X 51
50 Laundries and laundromats.
X X X 52
51 Leather goods stores.
X X X 53
52 Locksmith shops.
X X X 54
53 Mail order businesses.
X X X 55
54 Manufacturer's agent.
X X X 56
55 Market, food: wholesale or jobber.
X X X 57
56 Massage parlors, Turkish baths, health centers and similar personal service establishments.
-18-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X X 58
57 Meat markets, not including slaughtering.
X X X 59
58 Mortuaries.
X X X 60
59 Music stores.
X X X 61
60 News stores.
X X X 62
61 Notion or novelty stores.
X X X 63
62 Nurseries or garden supply stores.
X X X 64
63 Offices, including business, law, medical, dental,
chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community
planning, and real estate.
X X X 65
64 One on-site operator's residence, which may be located in a commercial building.
X X X 66
65 Paint and wallpaper stores.
X X X 67
66 Parking lots and parking structures.
X X X 68
67 Pawn shops.
X X X 69
68 Pet shops and pet supply shops.
X X X 70
69 Photography shops and studios and photo engraving.
X X 71
70 Plumbing shops, not including plumbing contractors.
X X X 72
71 Poultry markets, not including slaughtering or live sales.
X X X 73
72 Printers or publishers using offset or electrostatic technology.
X X X 74
73 Produce markets.
-19-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X X 75
74 Radio and television broadcasting studios.
X X X 76
75 Recording studios.
X X 77
76 Recycling collection facilities.
X X X 78
77 Refreshment stands.
X X X 79
78 Restaurants and other eating establishments.
X X X 80
79 Schools: business and professional, including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama, music and swimming.
X X X 81
80 Shoe stores and repair shops.
X X X 82
81 Shoe-shine stands.
X X X 83
82 Signs, on-site advertising.
X X X 84
83 Sporting goods stores.
X X X 85
84 Stained glass assembly.
X X 86
85 Stationery stores.
X X 87
86 Stations: bus, railroad and taxi.
X X X 88
87 Taxidermist.
X X X 89
88 Tailor shops.
X X X 90
89 Telephone exchanges.
X X 91
90 Theaters, not including drive-ins.
X X 92
91 Tire sales and service, not including recapping.
-20-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X X 93
92 Tobacco shops.
X X X 9493 Tourist information centers.
X X X 95
94 Toy shops.
X X X 96
95 Travel agencies.
X X X 97
96 Typewriter sales and rental, including incidental repairs.
X X X 9897 Watch repair shops.
X X X 99
98 Wholesale businesses with samples on the premises but not including storage.
B. Uses permitted with unlimited outside storage in the West Village or East Village. The following uses are permitted within either the West Village or East Village, together with unlimited outside storage and display of materials appurtenant to such uses, provided a site development permit has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330.
USES PERMITTED WITH UNLIMITED OUTSIDE STORAGE AND EXCLUDED FROM THE VILLAGE CENTER West Village Village
Center
East Village No. Uses Permitted
X X 2 Boat and other marine sales.
X X 3 Ceramic sales and
manufacturing for on -site
sales, provided that the total
volume of kiln space does not
exceed 16 cubic feet.
X X 4 Electrical substations.
X X X 5 Equipment rental services,
including rototiller, power
mowers, sanders, power
saws, cement and plaster
mixers not exceeding ten feet
in capacity and other similar
equipment.
X X 6 Golf cart sales and service.
X X 7 Hardware stores, including
not more than 1,000 square
feet of outside storage of
lumber.
-21-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
X X 8 Liquid petroleum service
stations, not includin g the
concurrent sale of beer and
wine, provided the total
capacity for all tanks shall not
exceed 10,000 gallons,
excluding truck stops/travel
centers.
X X 9 8 Mobilehomes, provided they
are kept mobile and licensed
pursuant to state law, used
for:
a. Sales offices in conjunction
with travel trailers or
recreational vehicle sales lots.
b. Construction offices and
caretaker's quarters on
construction sites for the
duration of a valid building
permit, provided that they
are inconspicuously located.
c. Caretakers or watchmen
and their families, provided
that no rent is paid, where a
permitted and existing
commercial use is
established.
Not more than one (1)
mobilehome shall be allowed
for a parcel of land or
shopping center complex.
X X 10 9 Nurseries and garden supply
stores.
X X 11 10 Parking lots and parking
structures.
X X 12 11 Sports and recreation
facilities, not including motor
driven vehicles and riding
academies, but including
archery ranges, athletic
playgrounds, sports arena s,
skating rinks, stadiums, and
commercial swimming pools.
-22-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
X X 13 12 Travel trailers and
recreational vehicles sales
and service.
C. Use permitted by conditional use permit. The following uses are permitted provided that a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.280:
USES PERMITTED WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X 1 All uses in subsection A. of this section that have more than 200 square feet of outside storage or display of materials.
X X X 2 Animal hospitals.
X X 3
Automobile fueling stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
X X 34 Body and fender shops and spray painting.
X X 45 Building materials sales yards.
X X X 56 Clinics, including, but not limited to, medical, dental and chiropractic.
X X 67 Convenience stores, including the sale of motor vehicle fuel, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
X X 7
Gasoline service stations with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off -premises consumption pursuant to Section
9.240.490truck stops/travel centers.
X X X 8 Heliports.
X X 9
Liquid petroleum service stations with the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off -premises consumption, provided the total capacity of all tanks shall not exceed 10,000 gallons pursuant to Section 9.240.490, excluding truck stops/travel centers.
X X X 10 9 Liquor stores pursuant to Section 9.240.490 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales).
X X 11
10 Lumber yards, including only incidental millwork.
X X 12
11 Mini-warehouse structures.
-23-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
West
Village
Village
Center
East
Village No. Uses Permitted
X X 13
12 Sale, rental, repair or demonstration of motorcy cles, scooters, and motorbikes.
X X 14
13 Tire recapping.
X X 1514 Automobile sales and rental agencies.
X X X 16
15 Billiard and pool halls, bars and cocktail lounges, dance halls, union halls, sports arenas, archery ranges, stadiums, skating rinks and restaurants with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption pursuant to Section
9.240.490.
X X X 17
16 Alcoholic beverage sales for off -premises consumption pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.490.
Section 15. Subsections A and B of Section 9.145 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.145 (I-P Zone (Industrial Park)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.145.020 remaining unchanged:
“A. The following uses are permitted, provided a site development permit has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330:
(1) The following industrial and manufacturing uses:
(a) Food, lumber, wood, and paper products:
(i) Grain and bakery products.
(ii) Sugar and confectionary products.
(iii) Nonalcoholic beverages.
(iv) Ice.
(v) Manufacture of furniture and fixtures including cabinets, partitions, and similar items.
(vi) Printing and publishing or newspapers, periodicals, books, forms, cards, and similar items.
(vii) Binding of books and other publications.
(b) Textile and leather products:
(i) Wearing apparel and accessory products.
(ii) Manufacture of handbags, luggage, footwear, and other personal leather goods. (c) Chemical and glass products:
(i) Pharmaceutical research and manufacture.
(ii) Glassblowing, pressing, cutting, and other glassware products. (d) Metal, machinery, and electrical products:
(i) Jewelry manufacture and repair.
-24-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(ii) Manufacture, assembly, testing and repair of components, devices, equipment and systems of an electrical, electronic, or electro-mechanical nature, such as, but not limited to:
a. Television and radio equipment and systems.
b. Phonographs and audio units.
c. Metering instruments, equipment and systems.
d. Radar, infrared and ultraviolet equipment and systems. e. Coils, tubes, semiconductors and similar components. f. Scientific and mechanical instruments.
g. Data processing equipment and systems.
h. Communication, navigation control, transmission and reception equipment, control transmission and reception equipment, control equipment and systems, guidance equipment and systems.
i. Musical and recording equipment.
(iii) Office and computing machine manufacture, repair, and sales. (iv) Control devices and gauges.
(v) Equipment sales, rental and storage, excluding heavy vehicles and equipment specially designed for executing construction tasks. Examples of heavy equipment include, but are not limited to, cranes, boom lifts, earth moving, dozers, loaders, excavators, scraper, grader and other similar equipment. (vi) Appliance manufacture, and repair.
(vii) Manufacture of lighting fixtures, and supplies.
(e) Research and development.
(f) Engineering and scientific instruments: Manufacture and repair of engineering, scientific, and medical instrumentation, including, but not limited to (i) Measuring devices, watches, clocks, and related items. (ii) Optical goods.
(iii) Medical, and dental instruments.
(iv) Engineering, survey, and drafting instruments.
(v) Photographic equipment.
(g) Industrial uses:
(i) Public utility substations and storage buildings.
(ii) Communications and microwave installations.
(iii) Telephone exchanges and switching equipment.
(iv) Post offices.
(v) Fire and police stations.
(vi) Water and gas company service facilities.
(vii) Parcel delivery services.
(viii) Mini warehouses (self-storage facility) provided they satisfy the provisions of Section 9.240.470.
(2) The following service and commercial uses:
(a) Banks and financial institutions.
(b) Blueprint and duplicating services.
(c) Laboratories, film, medical, research, or testing centers. (d) Office equipment sales and service.
-25-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(e) Offices, professional sales and service, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural and engineering.
(f) Parking lots and parking structures.
(g) Restaurants and other eating establishments.
(h) Barber and beauty shops.
(i) Day care centers.
(j) Health and exercise centers.
(k) Mobilehomes, provided they are kept mobile and licensed pursuant to state law, when used for construction offices and caretaker's quarters on construction sites for the duration of a valid building permit.
(l) One (1) family dwellings on the same parcel as the industrial or commercial use provided such dwellings are occupied exclusively by the proprietor or caretaker of the use and their immediate families.
(m) Signs, on-site advertising.
(n) Automobile service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (o n) Motels.
(p o) Churches, temples, or other structures used primarily for religious worship.
B. The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has b een granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(1) Airports.
(2) Heliports.
(3) Lumber yards.
(4) Towing and impoundment of vehicles that are stored entirely within an enclosed building, with no outdoor storage allowed.
(5) Trailer, recreational vehicle, and boat storage entirely within an enclosed building (no outdoor storage).
(6) Warehousing and distribution only within an approved general plan warehouse and distribution center overlay, including the Mira Loma or Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Overlays. (7) Reserved.
(8) Reserved.
(9) Recycling collection facilities.
(10) Recycling processing facilities.
(11) Automobile service fueling stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption and airports with the sal e of alcoholic beverages for on -premises and off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490. (12) Vehicle storage entirely within an enclosed building (no outdoor storage). (13) Contractor storage yards, equipment sales and storage, salvage yard s, cold storage, and warehouses (storage only, not distrib ution warehouses) provided they also meet all of the following criteria:
(a) A project site of one (1) acre or less;
(b) A total building area of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet or less; and (c) Located a minimum of five hundred (500) feet from resi dentially zoned property and sensitive uses, such as churches or schools.”
-26-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
Section 16. Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 9.148 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.148 (M-SC Zone (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all o ther provisions of Section
9.148.020 remaining unchanged:
“The following uses shall be permitted in the M-SC Zone:
(2) The following uses are permitted provided a site development permit is approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330.
(a) The following industrial and manufacturing uses:
(i) Food products:
a. Meat and poultry products, not including meat packing or slaughtering. b. Dairy products, not including dairies.
c. Canning and preserving fruits and vegetables.
d. Grain and bakery products.
e. Sugar and confectionery products.
f. Nonalcoholic beverages.
g. Ice.
(ii) Textile products:
a. Cotton, wood, and synthetic weaving and finishing mills. b. Wearing apparel and accessory products.
c. Knitting mills.
d. Floor covering mills.
e. Yarn and thread mills.
(iii) Lumber and wood products:
a. Saw and planing mills.
b. Manufacture of containers and crates.
c. Fabrication of wood buildings and structures.
d. Manufacture of furniture and fixtures including cabinets, partitions and similar items.
(iv) Paper products:
a. Paper and paperboard mills.
b. Manufacture of containers and boxes.
c. Paper shredding.
d. Printing and publishing of newspapers, periodicals, books, forms, cards, and similar items.
e. Binding of books and other publications.
(v) Chemicals and related products:
a. Manufacture of organic and inorganic compounds, not including those of a hazardous nature.
b. Manufacture of drugs and pharmaceuticals.
c. Soaps, cleaners, and toiletries.
d. Manufacture of agricultural chemicals, not including pesticides and fertilizers.
(vi) Leather products:
-27-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
a. Tanning and finishing of leather.
b. Manufacture of handbags, luggage, footwear, and other personal leather goods.
(vii) Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products:
a. Stone cutting and related activities.
b. Pottery and similar items.
c. Glass blowing, pressing and cutting.
d. Glassware products.
e. Manufacture of concrete, gypsum, plaster and mineral products. (viii) Metal products:
a. Manufacture of cans and containers.
b. Cutlery, tableware, hand tools, and hardware.
c. Plumbing and heating items.
d. Wrought iron fabrication.
e. Manufacture and assembly of fencing.
f. Machine, welding, and blacksmith shops.
g. Metal stamps and forged metal products.
h. Manufacture of ordnance and firearms, not including explosives. i. Jewelry.
(ix) Machinery:
a. Engines, turbines, and parts.
b. Farm, garden construction, and industrial machinery. c. Office and computing machines.
d. Refrigeration and heating equipment.
e. Equipment sales, rental, and storage.
(x) Electrical equipment:
a. Electrical and electronic apparatus and components.
b. Appliances.
c. Lighting and wiring.
d. Radio, television, and communications equipment.
e. Musical and recording equipment.
(xi) Transportation and related industries:
a. Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts manufacture.
(xii) Engineering and scientific instruments:
a. Measuring devices, watches, clocks, and related items. b. Optical goods, medical instruments, supplies, and equipment and photography equipment.
(xiii) Industrial uses:
a. Cotton ginning.
b. Public utility substations and storage yards.
c. Heliports.
d. Communications and microwave installations.
e. Mini warehouses (self -storage facility) provided they satisfy the provisions of Section 9.240.470.
(xiv) Research and development.
-28-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(b) The following service and commercial uses:
(i) Banks and financial institutions.
(ii) Blueprint and duplicating services.
(iii) Gasoline and diesel service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (iii iv) Laboratories, film, medical, research, or testing centers. (iv v) Office equipment sales and service.
(v vi) Offices, professional sales and service, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, and engineering.
(vi vii) Parking lots and parking structures.
(vii viii) Restaurants and other eating establishments. (viii ix) Vehicle and motorcycle repair shops.
(ix x) Barber and beauty shops.
(x xi) Body and fender shops, and spray painting.
(xi xii) Building materials sales yard.
(xii xiii) Day care centers.
(xiii xiv) Health and exercise centers.
(xiv xv) Hardware and home improvement center.
(xv xvi) Mobilehomes, provided they are kept mobile and licensed pursuant to state law, when used for: construction offices and caretaker's quarters on construction sites for the duration of a valid building permit; agricultural worker employment offices for a maximum of ninety (90) days in any calendar year; caretaker's quarters and office, in lieu of any other one (1) family dwelling located on the sam e parcel as a permitted industrial use.
(xvi xvii) One (1) family dwellings on the same parcel as the industrial or commercial use provided such dwellings are occupied exclusively by the proprietor or caretaker of the use and their immediate family.
(xvii xviii) Nurseries and garden supply stores.
(xviii xix) Car washes.
(xix xx) Signs, on-site advertising.
(xx xxi) Feed and grain sales.
(xxi xxii) Fortune telling, spiritualism, or similar activity. (xxii xxiii) Churches, temples, or other structures used primarily for religious worship.
(3) The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(a) Meat packing plants, not including slaughtering or rendering of animals. (b) Cemeteries, crematories, and mausoleums.
(c) Brewery, distillery, or winery with alcoholic beverage sales for on -premises and off- premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490.
(d) Acid and abrasives manufacturing.
(e) Fertilizer production, organic or inorganic.
(f) Paints and varnishes manufacturing and incidental storage. (g) Airports.
(h) Poultry and egg processing.
-29-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(i) Drive-in theaters.
(j) Lumber yards.
(k) Fabrication of manufactured housing and mobilehomes. (l) Fabrication of metal buildings.
(m) Vehicles, aircraft, boats and parts manufacture.
(n) Railroad equipment.
(o) Travel trailers and recreational vehicles manufacture. (p) Towing and impoundment of vehicles that are stored entirely within an enclosed building, with no outdoor storage allowed.
(q) Trailer and boat storage.
(r) Railroad yards and stations.
(s) Building movers storage yard.
(t) Reserved.
(u) Warehousing and distribution, only within an approved General Plan Warehouse and Distribution Overlay, including the Mira Loma or Agua M ansa Warehouse and Distribution
Overlays.
(v) Reserved.
(w) Reserved.
(x) Truck and trailer sales and rental.
(y) Mobilehome sales lots.
(z) Recycling collection facilities.
(aa) Paper storage and recycling, not within a building. (bb) Concrete batch plants and asphalt plants.
(cc) Recycling processing facilities.
(dd) Recycling of wood, metal and construction wastes.
(ee) Disposal service operations, not including transfer stations. (ff) Reserved.
(gg) Natural gas storage, above-ground.
(hh) Petroleum and bulk fuel storage, above-ground, pursuant to Chapter 5.65. (ii) Any mining operation that is subject to the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (Pub. Resources Code Section 2710 et seq.) provided a valid surface minin g permit has been granted pursuant to Chapter 5.65.
(jj) Gasoline and diesel service Automobile fueling stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, restaurants with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, and airports with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises and off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.240.490. (kk) Vehicle storage entirely within an enclosed building, with no outdoor storage allowed. (ll) For the foll owing list of truck trip generation uses with a project site one (1) acre or less, the total building area is thirty thousand (30,000) square feet or less and when located five hundred (500) feet or more from residentially zoned property or other sensitive uses such as churches and schools:
(i) Contractor storage yards.
(ii) Equipment sales and storage.
(iii) Salvage yards.
(iv) Cold storage.
-30-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(v) Warehouse (storage only not distribution warehouses).”
Section 17. Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 9.150 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.150 (M-M Zone (Manufacturing-Medium)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.150.020 remaining unchanged:
“The following uses shall be permitted:
(2) The following uses are permitted provided a site development permit is approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330.
(a) The following industrial and manufacturing areas:
(i) Food products:
a. Meat and poultry products, including meat packing but not including slaughtering.
b. Dairy products, not including dairies.
c. Canning and preserving fruits and vegetables.
d. Grain and bakery products.
e. Sugar and confectionery products.
f. Beverages.
g. Ice.
h. Wineries, distilleries and breweries.
(ii) Textile products:
a. Cotton, wool, and synthetic weaving and finishing mills. b. Wearing apparel and accessory products.
c. Knitting mills.
d. Floor covering mills.
e. Yarn and thread mills.
(iii) Lumber and wood products:
a. Saw and planing mills.
b. Manufacture of containers and crates.
c. Fabricated wood buildings and structures.
d. Manufacture of furniture and fixtures including cabinets, partitions and similar items.
e. Paper shredding.
(iv) Paper products:
a. Paper and paperboard mills.
b. Manufacture of containers and boxes.
c. Paper shredding.
d. Printing and publishing of newspapers, periodicals, books, forms, cards, and similar items.
e. Binding of books and other publications.
(v) Chemicals and related products:
a. Manufacture of organic and inorganic compounds, not including those of a hazardous nature.
b. Manufacture of drugs and pharmaceuticals.
c. Soaps, cleaners, and toiletries.
-31-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
d. Manufacture of agricultural chemicals, not including pesticides and fertilizers. (vi) Rubber, plastic and synthetic products:
a. Manufacture of tires and tubes.
b. Fabrication of rubber, plastic, and synthetic products. (vii) Leather products:
a. Tanning and finishing of leather.
b. Manufacture of handbags, luggage, footwear, and other personal leather goods. (viii) Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products:
a. Stone cutting and related activities.
b. Pottery and similar items.
c. Glass blowing, pressing and cutting.
d. Glassware products.
e. Manufacture of concrete, gypsum, plaster and mineral products. (ix) Metal products, fabricated:
a. Manufacture of cans and containers.
b. Cutlery, tableware, hand tools, and hardware.
c. Plumbing and heating items.
d. Wrought iron fabrication.
e. Manufacture and assembly of fencing.
f. Machine, welding, and blacksmith shops.
g. Metal stamps and forged metal products.
h. Manufacture of ordnance and firearms, not including explosives. i. Jewelry.
(x) Machinery:
a. Engines, turbines, and parts.
b. Farm, garden, construction, and industrial machinery. c. Office and computing machines.
d. Refrigeration and heating equipment.
e. Equipment sales, rental, and storage, excluding heavy vehicles and equipment specially designed for executing construction tasks. Examples of heavy equipment include, but are not limited to, cranes, boom lifts, earth moving, dozers, loaders, excavators, scraper, grader and other similar equipment. (xi) Electrical equipment:
a. Electrical and electronic apparatus and components.
b. Appliances.
c. Lighting and wiring.
d. Radio, television, and communications equipment.
e. Musical and recording equipment.
(xii) Transportation and related industries: Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts manufacture. (xiii) Engineering and scientific instruments:
a. Measuring device, watches, clocks, and related items. b. Optical goods.
c. Medical instruments, supplies, and equipment and photography equipment. (xiv) Industrial uses:
a. Laboratories and research centers.
b. Cotton ginning.
-32-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
c. Public utility substations and storage yards.
d. Heliports.
e. Animal training.
f. Communications and microwave installations.
g. Breweries, distilleries, and wineries.
h. Mini warehouses (self-storage facility) provided they satisfy the provisions of Section 9.240.470.
(b) The following service and commercial uses:
(i) Banks and financial institutions.
(ii) Blueprint and duplicating services.
(iii) Gasoline and diesel service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (iviii) Laboratories, film, medical, research, or testing. (viv) Office equipment sales and service.
(viv) Offices, professional sales and service, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, and engineering.
(viivi) Parking lots and parking structures.
(viiivii) Restaurants and other eating establishments.
(ixviii) Vehicle and motorcycle repair shops.
(xix) Barber and beauty shops.
(xix) Body and fender shops, and spray painting.
(xiixi) Building materials sales yard.
(xiiixii) Day care centers.
(xivxiii) Health and exercise centers.
(xvxiv) Hardware and home improvement centers.
(xvixv) Mobilehomes, provided they are kept mobile and licensed pursuant to state law, when used for: construction offices and caretaker's quarters on construction sites for the duration of a valid building permit; agricultural worker employment offices for a maximum of ninety (90) days in any calendar year; caretaker's quarters and office, in lieu of any other one (1) family dwelling, located on the same parcel as a permitted industrial use. (xviixvi) One (1) family dwellings on the same parcel as the industrial or commercial use provided such dwellings are occupied exclusively by the proprietor or caretaker of the use and their immediate family.
(xviiixvii) Nurseries and garden supply.
(xixxviii) Car washes.
(xxxix) Feed and grain sales.
(xxixx) Signs, on-site advertising.
(xxiixxi) Churches, temples and other places of religious worship.
(3) The following uses are permitted, provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(a) Abattoirs.
(b) Cemeteries, crematories and mausoleums.
(c) Cotton ginning.
(d) Acid and abrasives manufacturing.
-33-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(e) Fertilizer production, and processing organic or inorganic. (f) Paints and varnishes manufacturing and incidental storage. (g) Drive-in theaters.
(h) Airports.
(i) Sand blasting.
(j) Gas, steam, and oil drilling operations.
(k) Swap meets.
(l) Smelting metal and foundries.
(m) Lumber yards.
(n) Fabrication of manufactured housing and mobilehomes. (o) Fabrication of metal buildings.
(p) Vehicles, aircraft, boats and parts manufacture.
(q) Railroad equipment.
(r) Travel trailers and recreational vehicles manufacture. (s) Reserved.
(t) Railroad yards and stations.
(u) Towing and impoundment of vehicles that are stored entirely within an enclosed building, with no outdoor storage allowed.
(v) Trailer and boat storage.
(w) Building movers storage yard.
(x) Reserved.
(y) Warehousing and distribution only within an approved General Plan Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay, including the Mira Loma or Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Overlays.
(z) Reserved.
(aa) Reserved.
(bb) Truck and trailer sales and rental.
(cc) Mobilehome sales lots.
(dd) Recycling collection facilities.
(ee) Reserved.
(ff) Paper storage and recycling, not within a building. (gg) Concrete batch plants and asphalt plants.
(hh) Recycling processing facilities.
(ii) Recycling of wood, metal and construction wastes.
(jj) Disposal service operations.
(kk) Sewerage treatment plants.
(ll) Dump sites.
(mm) Natural gas, above-ground storage.
(nn) Petroleum and bulk fuel storage, above-ground, pursuant to Chapter 5.65. (oo) Any mining operation that is subject to the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (California Public Resources Code Section 2710 et seq.) provided a valid surface mining permit has been granted pursuant to Chapter 5.65.
(pp) Vehicle storage entirely within an enclosed building (no outdoor storage). (qq) Gasoline and diesel service stations Automobile fueling stations with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off -premise consumption, res taurants with alcoholic -34-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
beverages sales for on-premises consumption and airports with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises or off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.20.490. (rr) For the following list of truck trip generation uses with a project site one (1) acre or less, the total building area is thirty thousand (30,000) square feet or less and when located five hundred (500) feet or more from residentially zoned property or other sensitive uses such as churches and schools:
(i) Contractor storage yards.
(ii) Equipment sales and storage.
(iii) Salvage yards.
(iv) Cold storage.
(v) Warehouses (storage only not distribution warehouses).”
Section 18. Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 9.155 .020 (Uses P ermitted.) of Chapter
9.155 (M-H Zone (Manufacturing-Heavy)) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.155.020 remaining unchanged:
“The following uses shall be permitted:
(2) The following uses are permitted provided a site development permit is approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330:
(a) The following industrial and manufacturing uses:
(i) Food products:
a. Meat and poultry products, including meat packing but not including slaughtering.
b. Dairy products, not including dairies.
c. Canning and preserving fruits and vegetables.
d. Grain and bakery products.
e. Sugar and confectionery products.
f. Beverages, including alcoholic beverages.
g. Wineries, distilleries, and breweries.
h. Ice.
(ii) Textile products:
a. Cotton, wool, and synthetic weaving and finishing mills. b. Wearing apparel and accessory products.
c. Knitting mills.
d. Floor coverings mills.
e. Yarn and thread mills.
(iii) Lumber and wood products:
a. Saw and planing mills.
b. Manufacture of containers and creates.
c. Fabrication of wood buildings and structures.
d. Manufacture of furniture and fixtures including cabinets, partitions, and similar items.
(iv) Paper products:
a. Paper and paperboard mills.
-35-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
b. Manufacture of containers and boxes.
c. Paper shredding.
d. Printing and publishing of newspaper, periodicals, books, forms cards and similar items.
e. Binding of books and other publications.
(v) Chemicals and related products:
a. Manufacture of organic and inorganic compounds, not including those of a hazardous nature.
b. Manufacture of drugs and pharmaceuticals.
c. Soaps, cleaners, and toiletries.
d. Manufacture of agricultural chemicals, not including pesticides and fertilizers.
e. Paints and varnishes.
(vi) Rubber and plastic and synthetic products:
a. Manufacture of tires and tubes.
b. Fabrication of rubber, plastics, and synthetic products. (vii) Leather products:
a. Tanning and finishing of leather.
b. Manufacture of handbags, luggage, footwear, and other personal leather goods.
(viii) Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products:
a. Stone cutting and related activities.
b. Pottery and similar items.
c. Glass blowing, pressing and cutting.
d. Glassware products.
e. Manufacture of concrete, gypsum, plaster and mineral products. (ix) Metal products:
a. Manufacture of cans and containers.
b. Cutlery, tableware, hand tools, and hardware.
c. Plumbing and heating items.
d. Wrought iron fabrication.
e. Manufacture and assembly of fencing.
f. Machine, welding, and blacksmith shops.
g. Metal stamps and forged metal products.
h. Manufacture of ordnance and firearms, not including explosives. i. Jewelry.
(x) Primary metal industries:
a. Foundries.
b. Rolling and drawing metals.
c. Casting metals.
d. Blast furnaces.
e. Smelting of metals.
(xi) Machinery:
a. Engines, turbines, and parts.
b. Farm, garden construction, and industrial machinery. c. Office and computing machines.
-36-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
d. Refrigeration and heating equipment.
e. Equipment sales, rental, and storage.
(xii) Electrical equipment:
a. Electrical and electronic apparatus and components.
b. Appliances.
c. Lighting and wiring.
d. Radio, television, and communications equipment.
e. Musical and recording equipment.
(xiii) Transportation and related industries: Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts. (xiv) Engineering and scientific instruments:
a. Measuring devices, watches, clocks, and related items. b. Optical goods, medical instruments, supplies, and equipment, and photography equipment.
(xv) Industrial uses:
a. Laboratories and research centers.
b. Cotton ginning.
c. Public utility substations and storage yards.
d. Heliports.
e. Communications and microwave installations.
f. Sand blasting.
g. Airports.
h. Mini warehouses (self-storage facility) subject to the provisions of Section 9.240.470.
(b) The following service and commercial uses:
(i) Banks and financial institutions.
(ii) Blueprint and duplicating services.
(iii) Gasoline and diesel service stations, not including the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, excluding truck stops/travel centers. (iviii) Laboratories, film, medical, research, or testing. (viv) Office equipment sales and service.
(viv) Offices, professional sales and service, including business, law, medical dental, chiropractic, architectural, and engineering.
(viivi) Parking lots and parking structures.
(viiivii) Restaurants and other eating establishments.
(ixviii) Vehicle and motorcycle repair.
(xix) Barber and beauty shops.
(xix) Body and fender shops, and spray painting.
(xiixi) Building materials sales yard.
(xiiixii) Day care centers.
(xivxiii) Health and exercise centers.
(xvxiv) Hardware and home improvement centers.
(xvixv) Mobilehomes, provided they are kept mobile and licensed pursuant to state law, when used for: construction offices and caretaker's quarters on construction sites for the duration of a valid building permit, agricultural worker employment offices for a maximum of ninety (90) days in any calendar year; -37-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
caretaker's quarters and office, in lieu of any other one (1) family dwelling, located on the same parcel as a permitted industrial use. (xviixvi) One (1) family dwellings on the same parcel as the industrial or commercial use provided such dwellings are occupied exclusively by the proprietor or caretaker of the use and their immediate family. (xviiixvii) Nurseries and garden supply.
(xixxviii) Signs, on-site advertising.
(xxxix) Feed and grain sales.
(xxixx) Churches, temples and other places of religious worship.
(3) The following uses are permitted provided a conditional use permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.280:
(a) Abattoirs.
(b) Petroleum refineries.
(c) Cotton ginning.
(d) Acid and abrasives manufacturing.
(e) Fertilizer production, and processing organic or inorganic. (f) Drive-in theaters.
(g) Explosives manufacturing and testing.
(h) Gas, steam, and oil drilling operations.
(i) Swap meets.
(j) Processing and rendering of fats and oils.
(k) Lumber yards.
(l) Fabrication of metal buildings.
(m) Vehicles, aircraft, boats and parts manufacture.
(n) Railroad equipment.
(o) Travel trailers and recreational vehicles manufacture. (p) Draying, freighting, and trucking operations.
(q) Railroad yards and stations.
(r) Vehicle storage and impoundment entirely within an enclosed building with no outdoor storage allowed.
(s) Trailer and boat storage entirely within an enclosed building with no outdoor storage allowed.
(t) Building movers storage yard.
(u) Mini storage facilities for the general public.
(v) Warehousing and distribution within an approved General Plan Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay, including Mira Loma and Agua Mansa. (w) Cold storage plant.
(x) Recycling collection facilities.
(y) Recycling of wood, metal and construction wastes.
(z) Contractor storage yards.
(aa) Trailer and truck sales and rentals.
(bb) Mobilehome sales lots.
(cc) Storage and fabrication of modular buildings.
(dd) Auto wrecking and junk yards.
(ee) Concrete batch plants and asphalt plants.
-38-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(ff) Disposal service operations.
(gg) Dump sites.
(hh) Sewerage treatment plants.
(ii) Recycling processing facilities.
(jj) Natural gas, above-ground storage.
(kk) Petroleum and bulk fuel storage, above-ground, pursuant to Chapter 5.65. (ll) Any mining operation that is subject to the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (Pub. Resources Code Section 2710 et seq.) provided a valid surface mining permit has been granted pursuant to Chapter 5.65. (mm) A hazardous waste facility is permitted, provided a hazardous waste facility siting permit has been granted pursuant to Section 9.240.450.
(nn) Pallet yards (storage, sales, repairing, refurbishing, manufacturing), provided they satisfy the provisions of Section 9.240.530.
(oo) Gasolines and diesel service stations Automobile fueling stations, with or without the concurrent sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption, restaurants with alcoholic beverage sales for on-premises consumption and, wineries, distilleries, and breweries, with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises and off-premises consumption pursuant to Section 9.20.490.
Section 19. A new Section 9.240.560 (Automobile Fueling Stations) is hereby added to Chapter 9.240 (General Provisions) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code to read as follows:
“Sec. 9.240.560. – Automobile Fueling Stations
A. Definitions. The following terms shall have the following meanings for the purposes of this section:
1) Ancillary devices: Devices providing air service, water service, recharging for electric vehicles, and similar services.
2) Automobile Fueling Station : A retail business engaged primarily in selling gasoline or other motor vehicle fuels, which may also provide services which are ancillary to fuel services. These ancillary services may include vehicle service shops, car wash facilities, convenience stores, and fast food establishments. 3) Car Wash: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for permanent, self- service and/or attended car washing establishments, including fully mechanized facilities. May include detailing services.
4) Convenience Store: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for any retail sales of food, beverages and small convenience items primarily for off - premises consumption.
5) Fast Food Establishment: An ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for a retail food service establishment in which all, or a portion of, the food s ervice is -39-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
provided through a drive -through window or counter inside the fast food establishment as opposed to a sit-down table service restaurant. 6) Vehicle Service Shops: Any ancillary use to an automobile fueling station for service and repair of vehicles conducted wholly within a building.
B. Purpose and intent . The purpose of this Section is to present locational criteria, developmental standards, and operational standards to be used by the City to regulate automobile fueling stations and ancillary uses in order to:
1) Limit the concentration of automobile fueling stations with separation, distance, and adjacency to sensitive uses requirements.
2) Promote and preserve the public health, safety, convenience, general welfare and general prosperity of the commu nity. It is the intent of this Section that automobile fueling stations shall not create increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic hazards and shall not be detrimental to the ordinary maintenance, development and redevelopment of the surrounding area as r eflected by the General Plan, Zoning Regulations or specific plans approved by the City. 3) Regulate automobile fueling station development to ensure that the design and operation of such uses effectively mitigate associated problems with traffic, congestion, excessive pavement, lighting, litter, hazardous materials, and noise. 4) Supplement the standards in the underlying zoning district for automobile fueling station uses. In the event of conflict between these standards and the underlying zoning district standards, the provisions of this section shall apply. Automobile fueling station uses shall also comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations regarding site design, pricing signs, containment, maintenance, and operations.
C. Permit Requirement. The establishment of a new automobile fueling station; or the reconfiguration or enlargement of an established automobile fueling station may be approved only through the granting of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9. 240.280 - Conditional use permits. Automobile fueling stations are conditionally permitted in designated zoning districts as described in Chapter 9.40. – Zoning Districts. In addition to all other application materials required for the conditional use per mit, the applicant shall also provide a photo simulation showing the new or remodeled automobile fueling station facilities in place on the project site, together with its relationship to existing surrounding land uses. To approve a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings in addition to the findings required by Section 9.240.280. – Conditional use permits:
1) The overall development of the project site shall be designed for the protection of the public health, safety a nd general welfare; to conform to the logical development of the land and to be compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property.
-40-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
2) The proposed use will not substantially increase vehicular traffic on any public rights- of-way in the immediate vicinity, especially those serving residential uses. 3) The proposed use will not create increased traffic hazards to pedestrians, cyclists, or equestrian users.
4) The proposed use will not adversely affect adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located.
D. Location and Separation Requirements.
1) Automobile fueling stations, including any ancillary uses, shall be separated from other automobile fueling stations by a minimum of one-thousand, (1,000) feet. A maximum of two (2) automobile fueling stations are permitted at any single intersection. Separation distance shall be measured in a straight line from the property line of said automobile fueling stations , or the boundaries of an automobile fueling station located on a multi-use commercial property. 2) The establishment of a new automobile fueling station shall be prohibited if there are three (3) or more existing automobile fueling stations located within a one (1) mile radius of the proposed automobile fueling station site , unless the Planning Commission makes a finding that the proposed automobile fueling station is necessary for the public convenience and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare.
3) Where two (2) automobile fueling stations are located at a single intersection, the automobile fueling stations shall be sited in such a manner as to serve different flows of traffic. The City may consider deviations from this requirement for locations affected by roadway widening or other infrastructure improvements. 4) When automobile fueling stations are located in multi -use commercial centers, , the stations shall be located at the periphery in order to minimize internal traffic and pedestrian conflicts. The City may consider deviations from this requirement if it can be demonstrated that an alternative location does not create traffic and/or pedestrian conflicts.
E. Development Standards. New and reconstructed automobile fueling stations shall comply with the following development standards:
1) Minimum Site Area. The minimum site area shall be forty-thousand (40 ,000) square feet for new automobile fueling stations.
2) Minimum Frontage. The minimum frontage shall be one hundred seventy -five (175) feet on each street. The City may consider deviations from this requirement due to demonstrated site constraints subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards.
-41-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
3) Maximum Lot Coverage . Maximum lot coverage for a n automobile fueling station (including ca nopy) is forty (40%) percent of the total lot size. No more than twenty (20%) percent of the total lot area shall be covered by a canopy. 4) Minimum Street Setbacks. The minimum street setback shall be twenty-five (25) feet; however, to encourage a more pedes trian streetscape, a primary building with direct access from the street may be located a minimum of fifteen (15 ) feet from the right-of-way. This setback also applies to ancillary devices. 5) Minimum Setbacks Adjacent to Sensitive Uses. All structures shall be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the side and rear property lines where adjoining parcels are used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses, schools, parks, or religious facility. This setback also applies to ancillary devices. 6) Minimum Setbacks Adjacent to Nonresidential Districts. The minimum interior setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. This setback also applies to ancillary devices. 7) Vehicular Access Points. No more than two driveways or means of access shall be provided to any one street or highway. No more than thirty-five (35%) percent of the street frontage shall be devoted to curb cuts. Within integrated developments, shared access driveways are required.
8) Location of Driveways. Driveways shall not be located closer than twenty-five (25) feet to the end of a curb corner; closer than twenty-five (25) feet to a common property line when adjacent to a residential zoning district; and at a location approved by the City when the adjoining property is located in a non-residential zoning district. The City may consider deviations from this requirement due to demonstrated site constraints subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards.
9) Driveway Design. Driveways shall be designed and located to ensure a safe and efficient movement of traffic on and off the site, to and from the lane of traffic nearest the curb. All driveways shall be located and constructed according to the standards of the City. Driveways for automo bile fueling stations , which are developed as part of or in conjunction with a multi-use commercial property, shall be located as part of the total circulation facilities of the multi-use commercial property. Decorative paving shall be provided at all driveway entrances. 10) Internal Circulation. The internal circulation system shall allow for vehicle stacking without blocking ingress and egress on and off the site. The pump island shall be situated to provide stacking space for a minimum of two (2) vehicles behind the vehicle parked at the pump cl osest to the any entrance and/or exit driveway.. The City may consider deviations from this requirement due to demonstrated site constraints subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards.
11) Pedestrian Access to Convenience Store/Fast Food Establishment. A minimum of one (1) continuous four (4) foot -wide internal pedestrian walkway shall be -42-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
provided from the perimeter public sidewalk of each abutting street to the nearest entrance to the convenience market and/or fast -food establishment . Internal pedestrian walkways shall be distinguished from driving surfaces through the use of raised sidewalks, special pavers, bricks, or scored/stamped concrete. 12) Parking. Minimum on-site parking shall be provided as follows:
a. Stand-alone automobile fueli ng station (no ancillary uses) : Four (4) spaces. Spaces at the pump island does not satisfy this parking standard. b. Automobile fueling station with a Convenience Store: Five (5) spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of the convenience store. Up to fifty (50%) percent of the pump islands may be counted as parking spaces at a minimum ratio of one space for each pump island.
c. Automobile fueling station with Vehicle Service Bays: One (1) space for each service bay.
d. Automobile fueling station w ith a F ast Food Establishment and/or Car Wash: The parking requirements for all uses on the automobile fueling station site shall be determined by a parking demand study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California. The study shall be provided by the applicant, at its sole expense, to the City at the time of application for such use.
e. A minimum of one (1) loading space and delivery vehicle stacking area shall be located and designed so as to avoid undue interference with the public use of streets and alleys , drive aisles, automobile parking spaces, or pedestrian pathways . The required loading space shall be paved with six (6) inches of concrete over a suitable base and shall not be less than ten (10) feet wide, thirty-five (35) feet long and fourteen (14) feet high. f. The automobile fueling station and any ancillary use shall comply with all applicable standards of Section 9.240.120. - Off-street vehicle parking.
Where conflict arises between sections, the requirements of this subsection shall take precedent.
13) Building and Canopy Design. Automobile fueling stations shall comply with the following design standards.
a. The automobile fueling station building and/or canopy, and any ancillary use building shall be designed for architectural c ompatibility and in compliance with any applicable design guidelines. Scale, massing, and detailing should be complementary to the surrounding uses, building form, and relationship to streetscapes.
b. Building elevations shall incorporate architectural feat ures that are visually interesting with pronounced massing. Blank walls are prohibited. -43-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
Architectural features shall include: changes in wall plane and materials; roof overhangs; cornice lines; prominent entrance areas; varied building volume or accent ele ments; and varied yet complementary building materials.
c. Architectural detailing and materials shall be of a high and durable quality. Exterior building materials and cladding shall achieve a high standard of life -cycle, visual, and aesthetic quality. These may include glazing, curtain wall, brick or stone masonry, high quality metal or pre - cast paneling ; and smooth stucco. Changes of material should re flect articulation of building form or wall plane.
d. The maximum height for all automobile fueling station buildings shall be twenty-five (25) feet. In order to reduce the visual impact of the canopy structure and corresponding lighting, the maximum height of the canopy clearance shall be sixteen (16) feet and the maximum width of the canopy fascia shall be thirty (30) inches. Canopy fascia shall match the color and texture of the primary building.
14) Pump Islands. Pump islands shall be set back a minimum of sixty (60) feet from any adjoining parcels which are used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses, schools, parks, or religious facility to the nearest edge of the pump island. A canopy or roof structure over a pump island may encroach up to fifty (50) feet within this distance. Pump islands shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from any nonresidential property line to the nearest edge of the pump island. A canopy or roof structure over a pump island may encroach up to fifteen ( 15) feet within this distance. At least one pump station shall be accessible to oversized vehicles, including recreational vehicles 15) Ancillary Devices. Ancillary devices shall be not be located in any required building setback area.
16) Cashier Location & Visibility of the Fueling Area . The cashier location shall provide direct full visual access to the pump islands and the vehicles parked adjacent to the islands or, alternatively, shall provide CCTV cameras viewable by the cashier that show direct full visual access to the pump islands and the vehicles parked adjacent to the island .
17) On-Site Advertising Stru ctures or Signs. The signs allowed for automobile fueling stations are set forth below: Such signs shall be decorative and coordinated with a common design theme that matches the building (s). A sign program or plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division and be approved by the Director of Community Development consistent with this section prior to the installation of any sign. All necessary permits shall be obtained prior to the installation of any sign.
a. Freestanding Sign:
-44-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
i. Maximum Number of Signs.
a. One (1) freestanding sign or one (1) monument sign is allowed on each street frontage. Maximum of three (3)
freestanding or monument signs per site.
b. The maximum height of a freestanding sign shall not
exceed twenty (20) feet and the maximum height of a
monument sign shall not exceed eight (8) feet.
ii. Sign structure, including the single- or twin-pole mounts, shall be architecturally designed and complementary with the associated buildings on site. Exposed single - or twin -pole mounts are prohibited.
iii. For purpo ses of this subsection: “freestanding sign” means any sign which is supported by one (1) or more decorative and architectural integrated columns or uprights imbedded in the ground and which is not attached to any building or structure; “monument sign" means a freestanding sign erected to rest on the ground or to rest on a monument base designed as a decorative architectural unit with the sign.
b. Freeway Oriented Sign: Subject to Section 9.25.040 (1) (a) – Freestanding Signs – Freeways.
c. Wall Sign: One (1) per building elevation. A wall sign is not permitted on an elevation which is facing an adjoining parcel that is used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses. Maximum wall size area is twenty (20) square feet per applicable building elevation. All wall signs shall be individual channel letters and either halo or internally illuminated.
d. Window Signage: Window signs shall not exceed 10% of the area of each window. Individual window signs shall not exceed four (4) inches in height and fo ur (4) square feet in area. W indow signs shall not be illuminated.
e. Temporary Signage: Subject to Section 9.248.030. – Temporary signs.
Inflatables, pennants, banners, or flags are prohibited unless a Temporary Sign Permit is approved for a Grand Opening event.
f. Lighter Box Sign: A sign designed to be an integral part of the architecture of an automobile fueling station, and intended to be placed above the fuel pumps of an automobile fueling station for purposes of providing light for the working area and com mercial identification. Lighter box signs shall not exceed a height of four (4) feet above the fuel pumps , and shall not exceed the length of the fuel pump area. The signs may be either one- or -45-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
two-faced, internally lighted shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total area of each face of the sign.
g. Canopy Sign: One (1) per street frontage. Maximum area is twenty (20) square feet, but not to exceed 70% of the vertical face on which the sign is located. All canopy signs shall be individual channel letters and either halo or internally illuminated.
h. Car Wash Sign: One (1) wall sign above the entrance to the car wash.
Maximum area is eight (8) square feet. In addition, one (1) wall sign with a maximum area of eight (8) square feet, or one freestanding sign with a maximum height of four (4) feet and maximum area of eight (8) square feet to identify prices for services.
i. Type of Service Sign: One (1) sign at each end of each row of pumps, identifying whether service is self-service or full service. Maximum area is four (4) square feet.
j. Special Services Sign: One (1) attached to each device providing air service, water service, recharging for electric vehicles, and similar services. Maximum area is four (4) square feet. Sign shall not be illuminated.
k. Directional Signs: One (1) designating entrance to automobile fueling station, one (1) designating exit from automobile fueling station, one (1) designating entrance to car wash or fast food establishment drive -thru lane, one (1) designating exit from car wash or fast food establishment drive-thru lane. Maximum area is two (2) square feet per sign. l. Pump-Top Video Display Terminal:
i. One (1) pump-top video display terminal per pump
dispenser.
ii. The pump-top video display terminal must be integrated into the overall design of the pump.
iii. Sound emanating from the pump-top video display terminal shall not be audible to a person of normal hearing acuity at any point on the property line or at a distance in excess of fifteen (15) feet from the pump -top video display terminal equipment, whichever is less.
iv. Sound emanating from the pump-top video display terminal shall only be activated when a customer is standing in front of a fuel pump and shall automatically turn off when a
customer is not standing in front of a fuel pump.
-46-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
m. The automobile fueling station and any ancillary use shall comply with all applicable standards of Sec. 9.245.040. - On-site advertising structures and signs. Where conflict arises between sections, the requirements of this subsection shall take precedent.
18) On-site Landscaping.
a) A minimum of eighteen (18%) percent of the site shall be landscaped and irrigated.
b) Street frontage landscaping shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet in width and bermed to no less than two (2) feet in height. Minimum ten (10) foot - wide landscape planter areas shall be provided adjacent to all interior property lines. Planter areas shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs, and ground cover. A solid row of evergreen screening trees, a minimum of thirty- six (36) inch box in size, shall be pr ovided in any required interior property line landscape planter adjacent to parcels that are used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses, schools, parks, or religious facility. c) Not less than four hundred ( 400) square feet of planti ng areas shall be installed and maintained at the intersection of two property lines at street or highway corners.
d) Trees along all street frontages shall be fast -growing evergreen species, a minimum of thirty-six (36) inch box in size, planted no farther apart on center than the mature diameter of the proposed species.
e) Shrubs planted along all street frontages shall be a minimum five (5) gallon size and shall be designed and maintained to screen vehicles from view from adjacent roadways to a minimum contin uous overall height of thirty (30) inches, measured from the finished grade of on -site pavement abutting the planter.
f) Each planter area shall be surrounded with a six-inch raised concrete curbing or planning department-approved equivalent. An automatic irrigation system shall be installed and permanently maintained in working order in each separate planter area . All such landscaped areas shall be planted and maintained in a clean and workmanlike manner.
19) Perimeter Walls . Automobile fueling station sites shal l be separated from adjacent parcels that are used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses, schools, parks, or religious facility by a n eight (8) foot high decorative masonry wall using materials similar in color, module and texture to those utilized i n the building. Such walls shall be reduced to three (3) feet in height within adjacent street setback areas. Such walls need not be installed when a building or other wall already exist on such property lines, and provides an equivalent level of buffering as determined by the City. Perimeter walls shall be -47-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
maintained at all times. Where an automobile fueling station adjoins property in a non-residential zoning district, the provision of perimeter walls shall be determined through the conditional use permit approval. The City may consider deviations from this requirement due to demonstrated site constraints subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards. 20) Exterior Lighting. All exterior light sources, including canop y, flood, and perimeter shall be energy efficient, stationary, and shielded or recessed within the roof canopy to ensure that all light is directed away from adjoining public rights- of-way and properties.
21) Alternative Fuel Stations . At least four (4) altern ative fuel stations shall be included at an automobile fueling station. At a minimum, (2) two of the (4) four alternative fuel stations shall be electric charging stations.
F. Operational Standards. All automobile fueling stations shall comply with the following development standards:
1) Location of Activities. All activities and operations shall be conducted entirely within the enclosed automobile fueling station and ancillary structure(s), except as follows:
a) The dispensing of fuel products from pump islands, vehicle charging, and air and water services.
b) Minor emergency repairs including, but not limited to, replacement of headlights, turn indicator bulbs or windshield wipers.
2) Site Maintenance. The site including all structures, landscaping, walls/fences, and signs shall be maintained in good repair, in a clean, neat and orderly condition.
Driveways, parking, landscape, and service areas shall be maintained and kept free of grease, oil, and other petroleum products in addition to litter. These areas shall be periodically cleaned with equipment that dissolves spilled grease, oil, and other petroleum products without washing them into the drainage, gutter, or sewer systems.
3) Trash Enclosure. A trash enclosure, completely enclosed with a decorative masonry wall not less than six (6) feet high with a solid metal self-closing gated opening, and large enough to accommodate standard-sized commercial trash bins, shall be located on the rear portion of the property in a manner which is accessible to refuse collection ve hicles. No storage shall be permitted above the height of the surrounding walls. Landscaping, including clinging wall vines plant material. shall be provided around the trash enclosure. An architecturally integrated trellis structure shall be provided above the trash enclosure.
4) Public Service Facilities. All automobile fueling stations shall:
-48-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
a) Provide restrooms on -site, at no charge, for customer use during normal business hours. The restrooms shall be continuously maintained in in a clean and sanitary manner. Entrances to restroom facilities shall be located within a building obscured from view from surrounding areas.
b) Provide and maintain in usable and good working order, an air pump and radiator water hose for public use.
5) Noise. All outdoor noise generato rs associated with the business shall be identified by the applicant during conditional use permit review and may require the submittal of a professional noise analysis to quantify noise sources. All outdoor speakers and video/audio pump stations and sound signals associated with the automobile fueling stations shall be turned off daily between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Automobile fueling station and ancillary use noise (e.g., bells, loudspeakers, tools, etc.) shall not be audible from residentially zoned or residentially occupied parcels between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, and before 10:00 a.m. and after 7:00 p.m. on Sundays and nationally recognized holidays. All ope rations shall also comply with all other applicable noise requirements of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. 6) Trash Receptacles. Trash receptacles shall be located at the building entrance and at each pump island. The premises shall be kept free of the accumulation of litter or waste. Removal of wast e or litter from the trash receptacles shall occur at a minimum of once each day the business is open.
7) Pollution Prevention. Permit applications for new or modified automobile fueling stations shall include plans to implement best management practices to eliminate discharge into storm drains in compliance with the city’s NPDES criteria. 8) Hazardous Materials. All necessary permits for the storage and use of hazardous materials shall be obtained. All automobile fluids shall be recycled or removed according to applicable state and federal standards.
9) Propane Tank Sales. Propane tank sale displays shall be located outside of any required setback area and shall be stored in a secure display. The City may require landscaping or other type of screening to conceal th e propane tanks from public view.
10) Gasoline Tanker Trucks.
a) Fuel tanker trucks shall not obstruct the public right-of way during delivery. b) No fuel shall be loaded into any storage tank from any tank truck or tank trailer except through a permanent submerge d fill pipe, unless the tank is equipped with a vapor loss control device or is a pressure tank. 11) Mechanical Equipment.
-49-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
a) All hydraulic hoists and pits, all equipment for lubrication, greasing, automobile washing and permitted repairs shall be enclosed entirely within a building.
b) All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and public rights-of-way.
c) All ground mounted gasoline vapor recovery units and venting pipes shall be partially enclosed with a six (6) foot high deco rative solid screen wall and landscaping and shall not be located in any required setback area. The City may consider deviations from this requirement due to demonstrated site constraints subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards.
12) Payment Areas. Points of cash or other payment shall be designed so as to provide a safe and adequate customer queuing area. Outdoor walk -up service facilities shall be located and designed so as to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent properties that are used, zoned, or designated by the General Plan for residential uses, schools, parks, or religious facility.
13) Prohibited Uses. No sale or rental of automobiles, boats, trucks, trailers, motor bikes, or other vehicles shall be permitted on an automobile fueling station site.
G. Ancillary Uses. All automobile fueling stations with ancillary use(s) shall comply with the following standards and requirements for the applicable ancillary use(s):
1) Convenience Store.
a) The concurrent sale of alcoholic beverages in co njunction with a n automobile fueling station with a convenience store shall be subject to the provision of Section 9.240.490 – Alcoholic Beverage sales. b) Outdoor display of merchandise shall be prohibited unless a temporary event permit is obtained pursuant Section 9.250.050. - Allowed temporary events.
2) Car Wash.
a) Provide a queuing study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California . The study shall be provided by the applicant, at its sole expense, to the City at the time of application for such use.
b) Provide a noise study prepared by an independent acoustical engineer licensed by the State of California . The study shall be provided by the applicant, at its sole expense, to the City at the time of application for such use.
-50-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
3) Fast Food Establishment. A queuing study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California . The study shall be provided by the applicant, at its sole expense, to the City at the time of application for such use.
4) Vehicle Repair Shop.
a) Openings of service bays shall be designed to minimize the visual intrusion onto adjoining public rights-of-way and properties.
b) Service bay doors shall not directly face an existing residential development or residential zone.
c) Vehicle repair shop s shall be limited to battery and ignition services, tire repair and sales, and other accessory sales and services for automobiles; but shall exclude major automobile repairs, tire recapping, steam cleaning, painting, body and fender work, engine overhaul, or other work of a similar nature.
d) Outside storage of motor vehicles is prohibited. For the purpose of this section, outside storage shall mean the parking of a motor vehicle in an unenclosed area associated with an ancillary vehicle repair shop for longe r than 24 hours, unless the vehicle is in the process of being serviced, in which case it may be parked for a maximum period of 72 hours. The storage or repair of wrecked or abandoned vehicles, vehicle painting, body or fender work, or the rental of vehicle storage or parking spaces is prohibited.
H. Discontinuation of a n Automobile Fueling Station Use or Structure. An automobile fueling station use shall not be re -established if such use has been discontinued for a continuous period of twelve (12) months or more . If the use has discontinued for reasons of construction under a valid building permit, the Director of Community Development may extend the twelve (12) month time frame when presented with documentation demonstrating construction has been pursued diligently and timely. An new automobile fueling station may only be established on a former automobile fueling station site in compliance with the provision of Section 9.240.560 - Automobile Fueling Stations.
I. Legal Nonconforming. Any automobile fueling station that is lawfully operating in the City and does not conform to the provisions of this chapter shall be considered a legal nonconforming use. Except as provided below, legally established n onconforming automobile fueling stations and ancillary uses on said automobile fueling station sites shall be subject to Section 9.240.080. – Nonconforming structures and uses.
1) Modifications to Existing Automobile Fueling Stations Use . Except as provided below, automobile fueling station uses and structures r elated thereto shall not be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or moved to a different portion of the lot or parcel of land occupied by such use unless in compliance with the provision of Section
9.240.560 -Automobile Fueling Stations. If conformity with s tandards adopted pursuant to Section 9.240.560 -Automobile Fueling Stations, causes hardship due to -51-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
existing configuration of on -site buildings or structures, a Variance may be applied for pursuant to Section 9.240.270. –Variances .
a) Modifications to I mprove Soil, Ground Water and Storm Water Quality .
Automobile fueling station uses may be modified to conform to current storm water quality control regulations or remediate contamination of the soil or ground water.
b) Modifications to Improve Traffic Safe ty. As determined by the City Engineer, the pedestrian and vehicular circulation features (e.g., curbing, sidewalks, and traffic control devices) of an automobile fueling station use may be modified to improve public safety.
c) Modifications to Enable Zero Emission Vehicles (Battery Charging Station). Automobile fueling station uses may be modified to accommodate battery charging station(s) for zero emission vehicles.
d) Modifications to Enable Zero Emission Vehicles (Hydrogen Fuel Cell Station). Automobile fueling station uses may be altered to include facilities for the storage, conveyance and dispensing of hydrogen to zero emission vehicles.
2) Amoritization of Nonconforming Automobile Fueling Station Use. A nonconforming automobile fueling station use or st ructure may be maintained for forty (40) years. An extension of the amortization period shall be subject to Section Sec. 9.240.080 (4) Extension of amortization period.
Section 20. Subsection (3) of Section 9.240.080 ( Nonconforming structures and uses) of Chapter 9. 240 (General Provisions) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.240.080 remaining unchanged:
(3) A nonconforming structure or use may be maintained for the following periods of time:
(a) Where the property is unimproved: One (1) year.
(b) Where the only improvements are structures, the replacement of which would not require a building permit three (3) years.
(c) Outdoor advertising: Five (5) years.
(d) General commercial uses, such as those primarily permitted in C Zones: One (1) year, with the exception of Automobile Fueling Station Use: Forty (40) years. (e) General manufacturing uses, such as those primarily permitted in M Zones: Forty (40) years.
(f) Kennels and catteries: Twenty (20) years; provided, however, that the nonconforming right shall be lost upon a transfer of ownership which occurs five (5) years or mo re after the building or use becomes nonconforming.
(g) Commercial agricultural operations:
-52-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
(i) Dairy farms: Thirty (30) years.
(ii) Goat, sheep and other small animal farms: Ten (10) years. (iii) Hog ranches: Ten (10) years.
(iv) Horse ranches: Twenty (20) years.
(v) Menageries: Five (5) years.
(vi) Pen fed cattle operations: Thirty (30) years.
(vii) Poultry: Twenty (20) years.
(viii) Rabbits: Ten (10) years.
(h) Noncommercial agricultural operations:
(i) Goats, sheep and other small animals: Three (3) years. (ii) Hogs: Three (3) years.
(iii) Horses and cattle: Three (3) years.
(iv) Menageries: Three (3) years.
(v) Poultry: Three (3) years.
(vi) Rabbits: Three (3) years.
(vii) Crowing fowl: Eighteen (18) months.
Section 21. The “General Commercial/Retail Uses” table under Subsection B of Section
9.240.120 (Off-street vehicle parking.) of Chapter 9.240 (General Provisions) of Title 9, Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code is hereby amend ed to read as follows, with additions shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strikethrough text, with all other provisions of Section 9.240.120 remaining unchanged:
“B. Off-street vehicle parking shall be provided in accordance with this section when the associated building or structure is constructed or the use is established. Additional off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with this section when an existing building is altered or dwelling units, apartments or guest rooms are added, or a use is intensified by the addition of floor space or seating capacity, or there is a change of use. (1) Parking design standards.
(a) Approval of off -street parking plan. A site development permit, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.240.330, sha ll be filed for approval of all off -street parking facilities, except for one (1) and two (2) family residences, unless the off-street parking facilities are approved as a part of a site development permit, conditional use permit or public use permit approval.
(b) Number of required parking spaces.
(i) In the case of mixed land uses, the total number of parking spaces shall be the sum of the requirements for the various uses computed separately unless shared parking is approved as provided in this chapter.
(ii) The following tables are designed to allow calculation of parking spaces required for the uses shown, with any fractions rounded up to the nearest whole number:
General Commercial/
Retail Uses
Per Square
Foot or Unit
Per Employee
or Student
Other
Criteria
For Vehicle
Stacking
-53-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
Auditoriums, exhibition
halls, theaters, movie
theaters and similar places
with fixed seats
1 space/3 seats
Auditoriums, exhibition
halls, theaters, movie
theaters, and similar
places without fixed seats
1 space/30 sq .
ft. of net
assembly area
Automobile repair and
service shops
1 space/150
sq. ft. gross
floor area
Automobile service
fueling stations
4 spaces See
Section
9.240.560. –
Automobile
fueling
stations
4 spaces/service
bay See
Section
9.240.560. –
Automobile
fueling
stations
Automobile washing and
cleaning establishments
except self-serve
1 space/3
employees of
largest shift
2 spaces/stall
Automobile washing and
cleaning
establishments—Self-
serve
2 spaces/stall
Banks, savings and loa ns,
and other financial
institutions
1 space/250
sq. ft. gross
floor area
Stacking for 6
vehicles prior
to the drive-up
window
Barber and beauty shops
and similar uses
1 space/150
sq. ft. gross
floor area
Bingo game operations 1 space/½ sq.
ft. of bingo
floor area
Ord. No. 558
Clubs, discos, ballrooms,
cabarets, cocktail lounges,
dance halls, lodges and
incidental dancing areas,
and similar facilities
where dancing is the
principal use
1 space/30 sq.
ft. of dance
floor area
General r etail; including,
but not limited to,
freestanding convenience
1 space/200
sq. ft. of gross
floor area
-54-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
markets, liquor stores and
supermarkets
General retail; including
but not limited to,
neighborhood,
community and regional
shopping centers,
including those with
restaurants
5½
spaces/1,000
sq. ft. of net
leasable floor
area
Furniture, drapery,
plumbing, floor covering,
and appliance stores
1 space/750
sq. ft. of sale
or display area
Laundries, self-serve 1 space/250
sq. ft. of gross
floor area
Mini-warehouses, self -
storage
2 spaces/3
employees
Professional business
office
1 space/200
sq. ft. of net
leasable floor
area
Restaurants, drive -thrus,
walk-ups, cafes, lounges,
bars and other
establishments for the sale
and consu mption on the
premises of food and
beverages
1 space/45 sq.
ft. of serving
area
1 space/2
employees
Stacking for 6
vehicles prior
to the menu
board
Uncovered sales area,
including areas for new or
used automobiles, boat or
trailer sales, lumber or
building materials yards,
plant nurseries or similar
uses
1 space/1,000
sq. ft. of
uncovered
sales area to a
maximum of
20 spaces
1 space/employee
Video arcades 1 space/250
sq. ft. of gross
floor area
NOTES: The columns, working left to right, are generally additive unless otherwise indicated.
Unless otherwise specified, all parking must be within three hundred (300) feet of the use served, on the same parcel as the use, or on an adjoining appropriately zoned parcel. -55-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
All vehicle storage (stacking) spaces shall be located off-street. A driveway for stacking leading to a drive-up window shall be designed so as not to interfere with the free or orderly circulation of the parking area.”
Section 22. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
Section 23. Effect of Ordinance . This Ordinance is intended to supersede any ordinance or resolution of the County of Riverside adopted by reference by the City of Jurupa Valley in conflict with the terms of this Ordinance.
Section 24. Certification. The City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same t o be published or posted in the manner required by law.
Section 25. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the date provided in Government Code Section 36937.
Section 26. Moratorium. Urgency Ordinance No. 2021 -18, Urgency Ordinance No. 2021-20 and Urgen cy Ordinance No. 2022 -16, imposing a moratorium on approval of building permits or other entitlements for automobile fueling stations are hereby repealed as of the effective date of this Ordinance.
PASSED, APPROVED , AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 15th day of December, 2022.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk
-56-
12774-0001\2699907v1.doc
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )
I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2022-24 was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on the 1st day of December, 2022, and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of December, 2022, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the officia l seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 15th day of December, 2022.
________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
ATTACHMENT 2
(Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2022-08-10-02)
ATTACHMENT 3
July 27, 2022 Planning
Commission Minutes)
ATTACHMENT 4
(August 10, 2022, Planning
Commission Minutes)
ATTACHMENT 5
(Existing, Proposed and Potential Automobile
Fueling Station Location Map)
/gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00011/gid00048/gid00045/gid00048/gid00043/gid00028/gid00001/gid00023/gid00028/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00052/gid00001/gid00194/gid00001/gid00006/gid00051/gid00036/gid00046/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00007/gid00048/gid00047/gid00048/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00008/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00020/gid00047/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00020/gid00036/gid00047/gid00032/gid00046 /gid00134/gid00132/gid00163/gid00001/gid00135/gid00137/gid00139/gid00136/gid00001/gid00017/gid00036/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00006/gid00041/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00046/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00024/gid00028/gid00052 /gid00134/gid00133/gid00163/gid00001/gid00023/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00003/gid00048/gid00045/gid00032/gid00041/gid00001/gid00003/gid00039/gid00049/gid00031/gid00001/gid00129/gid00001/gid00019/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00039/gid00032/gid00001/gid00020/gid00047/gid00163 /gid00134/gid00134/gid00163/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00039/gid00032/gid00052/gid00001/gid00019/gid00031/gid00163/gid00001/gid00129/gid00001/gid00003/gid00032/gid00041/gid00001/gid00015/gid00032/gid00049/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00003/gid00039/gid00049/gid00031/gid00163 /gid00134/gid00135/gid00163/gid00001/gid00020/gid00035/gid00042/gid00043/gid00046/gid00001/gid00197/gid00001/gid00011/gid00048/gid00045/gid00048/gid00043/gid00028/gid00001/gid00023/gid00028/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00052 /gid00134/gid00136/gid00163/gid00001/gid00132/gid00139/gid00140/gid00131/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038/gid00032/gid00047/gid00001/gid00020/gid00047/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00134/gid00137/gid00163/gid00001/gid00017/gid00028/gid00045/gid00028/gid00031/gid00036/gid00046/gid00032/gid00001/gid00012/gid00041/gid00042/gid00039/gid00039/gid00046/gid00001/gid00020/gid00017 /gid00134/gid00138/gid00163/gid00001/gid00007/gid00045/gid00032/gid00032/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00032/gid00045/gid00030/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045 /gid00134/gid00139/gid00163/gid00001/gid00014/gid00036/gid00046/gid00046/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00003/gid00039/gid00049/gid00031/gid00163/gid00001/gid00129/gid00001/gid00003/gid00052/gid00045/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00019/gid00031/gid00163 /gid00134/gid00140/gid00163/gid00001/gid00013/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00042/gid00001/gid00003/gid00048/gid00046/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00001/gid00017/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038 /gid00135/gid00131/gid00163/gid00001/gid00023/gid00032/gid00045/gid00041/gid00042/gid00039/gid00028/gid00001/gid00019/gid00028/gid00041/gid00030/gid00035 /gid00135/gid00132/gid00163/gid00001/gid00024/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00049/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038/gid00032/gid00047/gid00043/gid00039/gid00028/gid00030/gid00032 /gid00135/gid00133/gid00163/gid00001/gid00140/gid00133/gid00136/gid00134/gid00001/gid00014/gid00036/gid00046/gid00046/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00003/gid00039/gid00049/gid00031/gid00163 /gid00135/gid00134/gid00163/gid00001/gid00140/gid00132/gid00138/gid00131/gid00001/gid00014/gid00036/gid00046/gid00046/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00003/gid00039/gid00049/gid00031/gid00163 /gid00135/gid00135/gid00163/gid00001/gid00005/gid00036/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00030/gid00047/gid00001/gid00197/gid00001/gid00019/gid00048/gid00029/gid00036/gid00031/gid00042/gid00048/gid00051/gid00001/gid00008/gid00017/gid00002 /gid00187/gid00134/gid00131/gid00188 /gid00187/gid00136/gid00188 /gid00132
/gid00133/gid00134
/gid00135/gid00136
/gid00137
/gid00138
/gid00139
/gid00140
/gid00132/gid00131
/gid00132/gid00132
/gid00132/gid00133
/gid00132/gid00134
/gid00132/gid00135/gid00132/gid00136
/gid00132/gid00137/gid00132/gid00138/gid00132/gid00139/gid00132/gid00140/gid00133/gid00131 /gid00133/gid00132
/gid00133/gid00133/gid00133/gid00134
/gid00133/gid00135/gid00133/gid00136
/gid00133/gid00137
/gid00133/gid00138
/gid00133/gid00139
/gid00133/gid00140
/gid00134/gid00131
Limonite Ave
/gid00134/gid00132 /gid00134/gid00133
/gid00134/gid00134
/gid00134/gid00135
/gid00134/gid00137
/gid00134/gid00138
/gid00134/gid00136
/gid00134/gid00139
/gid00134/gid00140
/gid00135/gid00131
/gid00135/gid00132
/gid00135/gid00133
/gid00135/gid00134
/gid00135/gid00135
/gid00187/gid00134/gid00188 /gid00187/gid00137/gid00188 ATTACHMENT 6
(Automobile Fueling Station Per Capita and
Per Square Mile Data)
Automobile Fueling Station Per Capita
and Per Square Mile Data
City Population Square
Miles
Number of
Gas Stations
Gas Stations
per Capita
Gas Stations
per Square
Mile
Jurupa Valley 105,503 43.68
30 plus 8
approved
or proposed
38 total
1 per 3,516
1 per 2,776
0.69 0.86
Fontana 208,393 43.07 21 1 per 9,923 0.49
Ontario 181,000 50.00 20 1 per 9,050 0.40
Upland 77,140 15.62 17 1 per 4,537 1.09