Norco horse property.

Norco counts animal units, not horses per acre

And the bands are not linear — the jump from 35,000 to 40,000 square feet adds two units, not one. If you are comparing Norco lots on a per-acre basis you will price them wrong.

One horse is one animal unit. Offspring are not counted until six months (§ 18.13.06(D)(4)(i)). In the A-1 zone the table at § 18.13.06(D)(5) runs:

Lot size	Animal units
20,000 – under 25,000 sq. ft.	5
25,000 – under 30,000	6
30,000 – under 35,000	7
35,000 – under 40,000	8
40,000 – under 45,000	10
45,000 – under 50,000	12
50,000 – under 55,000	14
55,000 – under 60,000	16

Above that: one additional animal unit for each additional 4,000 square feet beyond 60,000.

Read the boundaries carefully — the code says “but less than,” not “to.” A lot of exactly 25,000 square feet is in the six-unit row, not the five.

You may see 75,000 quoted instead of 60,000. That figure is real but belongs to a different zone: § 18.12.06(D)(4)(i) applies it to A-E, which has a 40,000 sq. ft. minimum lot and its own table starting at 11 units. Someone confused the two zones. Check which zone your lot is in before using either number.

Lots under 20,000 square feet run a separate nonconforming-use table at § 18.13.06(D)(6), from four units down to one below 10,000 square feet — “except swine.” A lot of 10,000 to 12,500 square feet may add one animal by Planning Director permit, and that permit matters enormously for a buyer. See below.

The land test underneath the table

§ 18.13.06(D)(7): no animal unit is permitted unless the lot has at least 500 contiguous square feet that does not slope more than 15 degrees, per animal unit. Goats and sheep are exempt.

A related provision, § 18.13.20(C), requires a contiguous open animal-keeping area of 576 square feet per animal unit, with minimum dimensions scaling by lot size — 24 feet on any side under 20,000 sq. ft., rising to 65 feet at 55,000 and above. On lots of an acre or less it must be one single contiguous area.

These are not cumulative. Nothing in either section makes them additive, and since 576 is larger than 500, an area meeting the second already meets the first on square footage — they differ in what else qualifies the land. Anyone telling you a Norco horse needs roughly 1,076 square feet is adding two rules that the code does not add together. On a sloping lot the flat, usable area is still the binding constraint.

The provision that costs buyers the most

This is the single most important thing on this page, and we have not seen it published anywhere else.

Approvals to keep animals over the limit do not transfer with the property.

“Approval of an application would run with the property owner and not with the land.”

Norco Municipal Code § 18.13.08(R) — conditional use permits for animals exceeding the permitted number

And § 18.35.06 makes a Chapter 18.35 permit “personal to the permittee, and shall not be transferable in any manner.”

So if a seller is running twelve horses on a lot the table allows eight for, and shows you the approval that lets them — that approval dies at close of escrow. It is not an entitlement you are buying. The same is true of the Planning Director permit that adds one animal on a 10,000–12,500 sq. ft. lot.

Verify the count your lot supports by right, and treat anything above it as something you would have to apply for yourself, with no guarantee.

The 35-foot rule is not what people think

§ 18.13.06(D)(8): no animal unit shall be kept less than 35 feet from a dwelling located on an adjacent lot. Three things follow, and all three get misstated:

• It is measured from your neighbour's house — not a property line, and not your own house.
• It is waivable. Build “a solid fence not less than six feet high” on your lot, screening the animals from that dwelling, and it does not apply.
• Except swine. “Under no circumstances” closer than 35 feet, fence or no fence.

Barns, stables, tack rooms, pens and corrals over 864 square feet require a minor conditional use permit (§ 18.13.08(S)).

Rear yard depth is a trap on newer lots: § 18.13.16(C) sets 100 feet for lots not developed with a primary residence as of Ordinance 753, against 60 feet for older ones. That materially changes where a barn can go.

In the Hillside (HS) zone none of the A-1 table applies. § 18.26.20 apportions animal units by average natural slope — 4.0 units per 40,000 sq. ft. at 0–9.9% slope, falling to 0.5 at 40% and above — and § 18.26.12(4) requires the maximum animal-unit count to be recorded with the County Recorder. If you are looking at a Norco hillside listing, that recorded number is the answer, not the A-1 table. No roofed animal structure over 120 square feet may be built on a slope greater than 10%.

R-1 lots: two conditions, and both must be met

§ 18.15.06(12) allows animal keeping in R-1 using the A-1 table and setbacks, with lot standards listed as “(a) Minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet; (b) Adjacency to a street that contains a public horse trail.” It also expressly excludes commercial boarding operations, aviaries and apiaries.

The code prints no “and” between (a) and (b), and neither did the adopting ordinance — the ambiguity is original. But the staff report for that ordinance reads it conjunctively twice and mapped the intersection of the two criteria. Treat it as both, and if you are relying on it for a specific property, get it in writing from Planning.

The separate Animal-Keeping Overlay (Chapter 18.16) applies only to R-1-10 and appears as a suffix — R-1-10 (AKO-1). It has its own smaller table and requires adjacency to “a horse trail,” which is a different and looser test than § 18.15.06(12)'s “street that contains a public horse trail.” Do not conflate them. § 18.16.50(6) bars any commercial animal-keeping operation, not merely boarding.

The AKO table has a genuine defect: it prints the “30,001 to 35,000 square feet” row twice, assigning both seven and eight units. That error is in the enacting ordinance itself, not the codification. The table also provides no row at all above 35,000 square feet, or for a lot of exactly 10,000. In practice the overlay covers only about ten lots near Corona Avenue and Seventh Street and has been largely superseded by the 2015 by-right route — but it was never repealed.

PAKA: the recorded rectangle nobody writes about

§ 18.13.11 requires every subdivision lot created or developed in A-1 to contain a Primary Animal Keeping Area. Note the scope: it does not reach older non-subdivision lots, and § 18.13.20 opens by addressing lots that do not have one. Do not expect a PAKA on an older parcel.

Where it applies:

• 2,728 sq. ft. minimum where the building pad is under 20,000 sq. ft.; 3,304 sq. ft. where it is over
• Rear yard, flat, slope no more than 4%, minimum width 30 feet, and rectangular
• Minimum 35-foot setback from a habitable structure on an adjacent lot
• No non-animal structure inside it; animal structures may not exceed 40% of it without City Council approval
• Recorded on each lot, and included in the project's CC&Rs if applicable
• A minimum 15-foot flat, clear, direct vehicular access, measured from the eave line, with overhead covers prohibited — though access gates of at least 12 feet wide are permitted to cross it

That access requirement is the practical one: fifteen feet of flat, clear, uncovered access means a truck and trailer can reach the animals. If a previous owner has built a shade structure, a raised planter or an RV pad across it, the lot is out of compliance and you inherit the problem. Ask for the recorded PAKA and walk it before you write.

Manure: the rules were rewritten in 2024, and they contradict themselves

Ordinance 1118 (2024) replaced Norco's earlier manure ordinances. Advice written before 2024 is out of date. Two things to know before you argue with anybody.

First, the rules were enacted twice. §§ 6.42.170–6.42.210 are near-verbatim duplicates of §§ 6.45.010–6.45.080, adopted by the same ordinance, and they differ in material detail. Any advice citing only Chapter 6.45 is citing half the law. One difference matters to a buyer: the Chapter 6.42 version contains a grandfather clause — installing a dwelling after a manure storage structure was built does not require that structure to be removed, altered or relocated — which the Chapter 6.45 version lacks.

The substance, under § 6.45.040:

• Removal from stalls, paddocks, arenas and corrals: “daily is best but at a minimum weekly is required” — and separately, removal from the property weekly
• Storage at least 35 feet from the nearest neighbouring dwelling unit, and not within 10 feet of a flood control channel or open storm drain
• Either City-approved containers with working lids, or a designated storage area built as a three-walled, fire-proof structure on a concrete base with a roof or tarp. It is one or the other — the three-walled structure is not universally required
• Manure spreading over arenas, pastures or corrals “as an alternative means of disposal” is prohibited

On composting, the code contradicts itself and the City contradicts the code. § 6.45.040(C)(2) says flatly that “manure composting is prohibited.” But § 6.42.270(E) expressly permits residential composting with manure, capped so that “the use of manure in composting must not exceed 20 percent of the composting area” — and the same flat prohibition also appears inside Chapter 6.42 itself, so this is an internal contradiction, not one chapter against another. Meanwhile the City's own composting page lists manure as an acceptable material. There is no supremacy clause and both provisions came from the same ordinance. Get written confirmation from Norco Public Works before you build a compost system.

Participation in the City manure collection programme is required. Holders of a valid self-haul permit may haul to an approved disposal facility instead; the permit expires each December 31 and “shall not be transferred to any subsequent occupant of the same property” — so a buyer must obtain their own. Self-haulers also owe an annual tonnage report. Note that the self-haul permit does not clearly waive the charge: § 6.45.060 bills every livestock keeper and Chapter 6.45 contains no exemption clause, in contrast to the trash provisions at § 6.42.140. Do not assume self-hauling removes the bill.

“Livestock” here includes rabbits and backyard chickens, and § 6.45.050 exposes violations to infraction fines or misdemeanor prosecution, with each day a separate offence.

The trail across your frontage is your job

Norco's trail network is the reason people move there. It also comes with a maintenance obligation most buyers do not price in.

§ 12.18.020(A): the private property owner is responsible for maintenance behind the back of curb or edge of street pavement, “including the parkway and trail between the street and the property line” — cleanliness, free of weeds and debris — plus maintaining and watering parkway trees and reporting hazards to the City. § 12.18.030 extends this to side and back yard trails, and where a trail adjoins two properties, each owner maintains one-half.

The City keeps exactly three things, each with a qualifier worth reading: trimming right-of-way trees on an as-needed basis; grading and excavation of decomposed granite within the trail area only; and repair or replacement of damaged City-owned trail fence.

Properties in a landscape maintenance district are treated differently rather than let off — the chapter is disapplied to maintenance of the public right-of-way within an LMD where provisions have already been made, and LMD parcels pay an annual assessment for that service. It is billed collectively, not free.

And the trail is not yours. Chapter 18.28, the P-E zone, permits public pedestrian, equestrian and human-propelled bicycle traffic on it and bars any above-grade structure other than fencing. § 18.28.16(A) prohibits impervious driveway surfacing across the trail on A-zoned lots without an encroachment permit — a common and expensive inspection item on Norco properties where a previous owner concreted the crossing.

On mileage, the City currently publishes several different figures. Its 2018 Comprehensive Trail Master Plan says “nearly 104 miles of trails, as of 2018”; the draft 2050 General Plan says “nearly 100-mile”; the City's history page says 140. Take roughly 100 miles and treat any more precise number with suspicion.

Two things that are genuinely unusual about Norco

CC&Rs cannot be recorded to ban your animals. § 18.35.12: “No restrictive covenant shall be recorded against any property prohibiting the maintaining or raising of animals as permitted by local ordinance,” with CC&Rs subject to City Attorney and City Council review. Note the verb is recorded — prospective. A zoning ordinance does not by itself extinguish a covenant already on title, so this is not quite “HOAs can never restrict horses in Norco.”

The zoning sits behind a supermajority. Norco's voters adopted Charter § 3 in 2003, requiring a 4/5 Council vote to change, amend or repeal five titles — including Title 18 in full, plus Title 3, Title 8, § 10.08.030, and five Title 17 sections. A separate 2005 amendment (effective March 7, 2006) requires a 4/5 vote for any zone change to or from A-E, A-1, A-2, R-1, R-3, HS, PD Overlay or Specific Plan, “to protect and preserve the animal keeping lifestyle in residential areas.”

Two honest qualifiers, because this gets oversold. Charter § 3 freezes those codes “as in effect as of the effective date of this Charter” — December 10, 2003 — so later additions are arguably outside it, and Chapter 18.16 dates from 2006. And Charter § 6 allows a simple majority of voters at a general election to amend or repeal the charter, with § 7 preserving initiative and referendum rights. Four of five councilmembers, or 50%+1 of voters once, undoes the lock. It is a strong protection. It is not permanent, and the 2005 zone-change amendment is the cleaner one to rely on because it carries no date freeze.

While we are here: Norco does not ban sidewalks

You will hear this constantly. It is not true as a matter of law. There is no ordinance prohibiting sidewalks — and the code prohibits expressly when it means to, as § 12.04.055 does with speed bumps. Title 12 is literally titled “Streets and Sidewalks.” § 17.12.020(h)(1) affirmatively contemplates land dividers improving pedestrian trails with “concrete sidewalks.” And the M-1 zone standards at § 18.24.10(A)(2) require internal sidewalks at least five feet wide — though M-1 is heavy commercial and light manufacturing, not residential horse property.

What actually happens is quieter. Chapter 12.04, titled “Curbs, Gutters and Street Paving,” simply does not mention sidewalks, while § 17.12.030(h)(3) makes equestrian trails mandatory in blocks over 1,200 feet. The code acknowledges the result descriptively at § 10.12.010, where speed limits are set “in consideration of the rural type development, large lot design, lack of sidewalks, and equestrian orientation of the community.”

It is a planning practice with a charter and a trail ordinance behind it, not a prohibition. The distinction matters if someone tells you a neighbouring development “can't” put sidewalks in.

One more thing worth knowing before you buy

§ 18.35.10(8): a neighbour complaint can trigger a Planning Commission hearing which “may order immediate termination” of an animal-keeping use, with the Council's decision on appeal final. Norco is an animal-keeping town and this is rarely exercised — but it exists, and it is a reason to care whether your setbacks and manure handling are actually compliant rather than merely traditional.

What Sharon does with all of this

Checks the zone before the table, because A-1, A-E, R-1, AKO and Hillside all count differently. Checks whether the seller's animal count rests on a permit that dies at closing. Walks the PAKA access. Looks at the trail crossing for concrete that should not be there. Reads the recorded animal-unit figure on a hillside lot rather than the one in the listing.

If a property does not work for the horses you actually own, she will say so before you write the offer.

Looking for horse property in Norco?

Equestrian properties in Norco are a small market, and a good number of them change hands before they ever reach the public portals. Sharon hears about those first — through the barns, the trainers and the neighbours, which is a network you cannot subscribe to.

• Tell her what you need — acreage, stalls, arena, ride-out access, turnout, water.
• She will send you what is on the market now that actually fits, not everything with a fence.
• And she will tell you about the ones that are not listed yet.

Tell Sharon what you're looking for (714) 606-7136

Selling in Norco

The buyer who will pay the most for your Norco property is an equestrian, and equestrians do not find properties the way ordinary buyers do. They hear about them at the barn, in the horse press, and from their trainer. That is the audience Sharon markets to.