Ontario Municipal Code Art. 18 Interstate Trucks, Terminal Designation, and Terminal Access

For the purposes of this article, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning attributed. Other words and phrases used in this article shall have the same meanings as they have when used in the California Vehicle Code.

(a) “Terminal” means a facility at which freight is consolidated to be shipped, or where full load consignments may be loaded or off-loaded, or at which the vehicles are regularly maintained, stored, or manufactured, and to which interstate trucks have approved access.

(b) “Interstate trucks” means vehicle combinations specified in Cal. Veh. Code § 35401.5(a).

(c) “City Traffic Engineer” means the Traffic Engineer of the City of Ontario or his authorized representative.

(d) “Caltrans” means the State of California Department of Transportation, or its successor agency.

(e) “Applicant” means an authorized representative of an existing or proposed terminal.

(f) “Route” means access route for interstate trucks to a terminal.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

The purpose of this article is to establish procedures for terminal designation and truck route designation to terminals for interstate trucks operating on a federally designated highway system.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

(a) An applicant who desires designation of a route for access to a terminal may submit an application on a form provided by the City. Such application shall be accompanied by such other information as may be required by the City Traffic Engineer. The application must be filed with the Engineering Department, and all applicable fees must be paid at the time of filing.

(b) Upon receipt of an application, the City Traffic Engineer will determine whether the proposed terminal is located in a zone which permits such use, and whether such use could otherwise be lawfully conducted at the proposed location.

(c) If the terminal may lawfully be located where it is proposed, then the City Traffic Engineer will determine the capability of the route requested, and alternative routes, whether requested or not. Determination of route capability will include, without limitation, a review of adequate turning radius and lane widths of ramps, intersections and highways, and general traffic conditions, such as site distance, speed, and traffic volumes.

(d) At the completion of his investigation, the City Traffic Engineer shall notify the applicant, and Caltrans, as to which routes, if any, are satisfactory, which routes, if any, are unsatisfactory, and which routes, if any, are unsatisfactory, but could be made satisfactory through retrofitting.

(e) No route shall be approved unless it is also approved by Caltrans.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

(a) If all feasible routes to a requested terminal are found unsatisfactory by the City Traffic Engineer, the applicant may request retrofitting the deficiencies. All costs of engineering, construction, and inspection will be the responsibility of the applicant. Except when retrofitting of deficiencies is within the jurisdiction of Caltrans, the actual construction will be done by the City or by a contractor acceptable to it, at the City's election.

(b) When the work is done by the City, the applicant will deposit with the City of Ontario the estimated cost of retrofitting. The adjustments between the estimated and actual cost shall be made after completion of the work, and any difference between the actual and the estimated cost shall be billed or refunded to the applicant, as the case may be. When the work is done by the applicant, the applicant may file with the City Traffic Engineer, on a form satisfactory to the City Traffic Engineer, a statement detailing the actual cost of the retrofitting.

(c) If, at any time within five (5) years from the date of completion of the retrofitting by the applicant, should any applicant seek terminal approval which would use the route upon which such retrofitting was accomplished, any such applicant's fee may include that applicant's proportionate share of the retrofitting, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer, which proportionate share, if collected, shall be disbursed by the City of Ontario to the applicant who paid for the retrofitting, as well as any applicant who contributed to the cost of retrofitting under this subsection. Nothing herein shall require the payment of a proportionate share if the applicant doing the work failed to file the report with the City Traffic Engineer required by subsection (b) above.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

(a) The City Traffic Engineer may revoke any approved terminal or route designation if the terminal or route becomes unsatisfactory for interstate truck traffic, or as established by a resolution of the City Council. An unsatisfactory route includes the inability of interstate trucks to negotiate the route or said vehicles causing undesirable driving conditions for other vehicular traffic or pedestrians.

(b) The City Traffic Engineer may revoke any approved terminal or route designation if any billing to an applicant, for fees, charges or other sums due the City under this article, or any resolution adopted pursuant to this article, is not paid within sixty (60) days. This subsection shall not affect the City's right to recover the sums represented by any such billing by an action of law or otherwise.

(c) The City Traffic Engineer shall give written notice of his decision to revoke any approved terminal or route to each affected applicant. The action of the City Traffic Engineer shall be effective when the time to appeal the same has expired, if no appeal is taken. If the decision of the City Traffic Engineer is appealed in a timely manner, the action of the City Traffic Engineer shall be effective upon the date of any City Council action upholding that decision.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

(a) If the City's Traffic Engineer denies terminal designation, route feasibility, or revokes a previously approved terminal or route designation, any affected applicant, within ten (10) calendar days following the date of receipt of the decision of the City Traffic Engineer, may appeal said decision to the City Council in writing. The applicant shall pay a nonrefundable fee as established by the City by resolution, sufficient to pay the cost of the review of the appeal. An appeal shall be made on a form prescribed by the Engineering Department, and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically wherein there was an error or abuse of discretion by the City Traffic Engineer. Within ten (10) days of the filing of an appeal, the City Traffic Engineer shall submit to the City Clerk the terminal application, the sketches of the revoked route, and all other data filed therein, the report of the City Traffic Engineer, and his decision on the application.

(b) The appeal shall be heard within forty five (45) days after the notice of appeal is filed. The City Clerk shall make copies of the data provided by the City Traffic Engineer available to the appellant, and may give notice to any party who requested notice of the time when the appeal will be considered by the City Council.

(c) Within ten (10) days after the hearing, the City Council shall render its decision on the appeal.

(d) If Caltrans, and not the City Traffic Engineer, denies or revokes terminal access from federally designated highways, no appeal may be made to the City Council, but must be made to Caltrans, as may be permitted by Caltrans.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

Should a requested route pass through the City to a terminal located in another jurisdiction, the applicant shall also comply with that other jurisdiction's application process. Coordination of the approval of the route through the City will be the responsibility of the jurisdiction which controls the terminal's land use.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

Trailblazer signs will be required at every decision point within the City en route to the terminal. Upon completion of installation of the signs, the actual cost shall be computed, and any difference between the actual and the estimated cost shall be billed or refunded to the applicant, whichever the case may be. No terminal or route may be used until such signs as may be required are in place. Costs of trailblazer signs may be apportioned in accordance with the procedures in § 4-6.1604(c).

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)

(a) The applicant shall pay a nonrefundable application fee as established by the City by resolution, sufficient to pay the cost of the review of the terminal designation and the review of the proposed route and alternate routes.

(b) Upon approval of the terminal designation and route by the City, and by Caltrans, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Ontario sufficient funds as estimated by the City Traffic Engineer to pay for the purchase and installation of terminal trailblazer signs.

(§ 1, Ord. 2305, eff. June 6, 1985)