Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Sunnyside Ranch appeal, allows up to 35 animal units with conditions
Summary
The City of Norco council approved an appeal allowing Sunnyside Ranch to keep up to 35 animal units at 3745 Sierra Avenue, adding a condition requiring permitting of unpermitted structures and ongoing inspections after debate about setbacks, manure management and evacuation planning.
The City Council approved Conditional Use Permit 2025‑04 for Sunnyside Ranch, voting to overturn a split Planning Commission decision and authorize up to 35 animal units at 3745 Sierra Avenue with an added condition requiring permitting of previously unpermitted structures and compliance monitoring.
Anthony Sund, the property owner, appealed the Planning Commission's 2–2 denial and told the council he had revised site plans and mitigation measures. "My name is Anthony Sund, and I am the owner of Sunnyside Ranch here in Norco," he said, urging the council to approve the permit so his breeding, boarding and training operations could expand. Sund said Animal Services supported the requested number and that he had arranged an evacuation and mutual‑aid plan with local facilities if needed: "Animal Services is in support of the number and even stated that my property could possibly allow for more."
Council members spent prolonged time questioning site layout, staffing and manure-management practices. Public commenters raised concerns about on‑site supervision and spacing: Bill Naylor said, "If you've got 30 some horses, you really want somebody around that's going to know what they're doing," and Bunny Slager urged adherence to local spacing standards, noting Norco's existing 24x24 guidance for horses.
Some council members argued the lot‑area math supported approval with enforceable conditions. Council Member Robin said staff reports and code calculations did not, in his view, support denial and urged that operational conditions and inspections address concerns. Others, including the mayor, said they remained worried about operational details such as gate access for manure pickup and the adequacy of paddock versus stall plans.
After discussion the council approved the permit with an added condition (no. 16) directing the applicant to obtain proper permits for nonconforming structures and to comply with the operation conditions listed in the planning report (annual inspections, manure service standards, and animal‑control requirements). The clerk announced the motion carried with Council Member Sullivan voting no and Council Member Kevin Bash abstaining.
The council directed the applicant to coordinate with planning and animal services on implementation and enforcement steps; staff said routine inspections and the permit's revocation language will be used to ensure ongoing compliance.
