Jurupa Valley planning commission asks staff to redraw home-occupation rules, returns draft to Nov. 12

The Jurupa Valley Planning Commission reviewed a proposed zoning code amendment to Title 9 that would create a formal ‘‘home occupation permit’’ and new development and operational standards for businesses operated from residences, and commissioners voted to continue the item to the commission meeting on Nov. 12 so staff can revise the draft.

Principal Planner Tamara Campbell presented the draft, saying the changes respond to pandemic-era shifts in telecommuting and aim to clarify an out-of-date county-derived code. "Home occupation means that it's a business use that's customarily conducted in a residence, provided that the use is incidental and secondary to the principal use of the dwelling as a residence," Campbell said. She described a new HOP (home occupation permit) application, an annual review requirement and an accompanying business-registration certificate.

The draft would require applicants to submit a floor plan showing the area used for the home occupation, a notarized affidavit confirming compliance with the permit conditions and, where the operator is a renter, written owner approval. Campbell told commissioners the community development director would approve or deny HOPs, denials must be documented in writing, and denials or suspensions would be appealable to the planning commission and then the city council. She also said staff had concluded the amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under State CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).

Commissioners voiced concerns about how the draft would treat businesses that use equipment or vehicles that are ordinarily stored outside a residence. "I think it's kind of restrictive and focuses on a specific type of businesses that could only be done within the dwelling," Commissioner Uriel said, urging the commission to consider gardeners, plumbers, electricians and equestrian businesses common in parts of Jurupa Valley.

Commissioner Newman and others said the draft should be clarified so it does not unintentionally forbid long-standing family-run operations that use a garage, yard or an accessory structure for limited storage. Commissioners asked staff to consider allowing noncommercial vehicle storage beyond a single vehicle in some cases, to permit residents and household members to assist with operations, and to identify zones or minimum lot sizes where limited exterior storage should be allowed.

Key provisions in the staff draft, as described in the meeting: - A HOP would be required and reviewed annually; permits would be nontransferable and limited to the named operator and approved location. - The operator must reside in the dwelling; the draft limited the operation to interior permitted areas and prohibited outdoor storage of materials or equipment related to the home occupation unless revised. - The draft limited business-related automobiles to one vehicle and said they should not resemble commercial vehicles; signage would be allowed but limited to 2 square feet, unlighted. - Visitors, clients and deliveries would be allowed only in amounts consistent with normal residential activity. - No hazardous materials beyond those permitted for residential use by the fire code; no interns, volunteers or outside employees were allowed under the draft. - Inspections would not be routine but could occur with advance notice, limited to the designated operating area and to one inspection per year unless a complaint prompted additional inspections; enforcement could include a 10-day correction period and suspension or revocation of the HOP, which the permittee could appeal.

Several commissioners emphasized the need for clearer definitions distinguishing a "home occupation" (work primarily tied to the dwelling or office functions done in the home) from a business that operates outside the home and requires commercial zoning or conditional use approvals. Commissioner Cristobal suggested allowing household members to assist on a HOP without counting as outside employees; staff said they would evaluate that approach but warned about potential legal questions around family definitions.

Tamara Campbell and staff agreed the draft required more work. The commission asked staff to return with a revised ordinance that: clarifies the definitions of home occupation versus business; outlines, by zone, what types of activities and storage would be allowed; provides examples of permitted uses; and considers amendments to the interior-only restriction, vehicle limits, employee rules and signage. Campbell said fees for the HOP would be set later through the city's fee schedule and that staff would prepare a chart showing zone-by-zone guidance.

Action taken: Commissioners voted to continue the public hearing and return with revised language and supporting materials at the Nov. 12 Planning Commission meeting. The motion to continue passed on a voice vote.

The commission also approved the consent calendar earlier in the meeting; that motion passed with one absence. The HOP item will return to the commission for further deliberation and possible recommendation to the city council after staff revisions.

What happens next: Staff will revise the draft ordinance, prepare a zone-by-zone chart with examples, and bring a revised item back to the Planning Commission on Nov. 12. Commissioners asked colleagues to solicit input from neighborhood residents, small-business owners and those who keep animals on larger lots before the next hearing.