Jurupa Valley city staff and councilors pressed a developer on potential neighborhood impacts after reviewing a pre‑application for a 106,400‑square‑foot self‑storage building that would include contractor “business suites” at 5954 Etiwanda Avenue.

Associate Planner Oscar Estrada told council members the project is a three‑acre, two‑parcel site with three buildings: Building A, a 3,600‑square‑foot two‑story office/caretaker unit; Building B, a two‑story self‑storage building totaling about 106,400 square feet (roughly 53,000 square feet per floor); and Building C, a 7,200‑square‑foot, single‑story storage building. The applicant is listed in staff materials as Gossett Real Estate; the project was presented as a pre‑application only, meaning no formal entitlements have been submitted.

Estrada said the proposal would require a general plan amendment — changing the site from its current commercial‑office designation to commercial‑retail — a certificate of parcel merger for the two lots and a conditional use permit to allow the self‑storage use. He also flagged the site’s location in the city’s Equestrian Lifestyle Protection Overlay (ELPO), which is intended to protect equestrian uses and discourages industrial‑style developments. “The intent [of the ELPO] is to protect, preserve equestrian uses…and discourage industrial uses,” Estrada said, adding that the project’s preliminary elevations and program do not propose equestrian amenities.

The staff presentation also emphasized the project’s “hybrid” character: contractor storage garages within the self‑storage buildings that would allow independent contractors to keep equipment, vehicles and materials on site and to perform some on‑site work. Estrada told councilors that, unlike a conventional self‑storage facility, the contractor suites could generate longer visits, truck idling, equipment noise and increased parking demand, and could encourage heavy vehicle storage and unpermitted material staging. He recommended the council receive the presentation and identify areas of concern or request more information.

A company representative, who spoke as the project applicant, said the firm expects to invest roughly $15 million and described a related business‑suite product they operate in Eastvale. “We own a facility over in Eastvale…we built 15 of these spaces. They’re for entrepreneurs and small business owners,” the applicant said, adding that the company had mailed notices to nearby property owners and hosted a community outreach event on Aug. 6. The applicant said market metrics show a local shortfall in storage square feet per capita compared with the national average.

Council reaction was cautious to negative. Several members said the concept, as presented, would likely face community opposition. Concerns included the concentration of existing and proposed self‑storage facilities along the Etiwanda commercial corridor (staff mapped three other storage sites within a half‑mile), the project’s compatibility with the ELPO architecture standards and the potential for increased noise, long‑term contractor parking and heavy equipment storage. One councilor summarized the council’s view as: “not a winner…as designed.”

Next steps: staff and the developer were clear that this was a pre‑application study session. No formal entitlements were filed or voted on. If the developer proceeds, city staff said the next formal step would be an entitlement submittal and Planning Commission hearings, at which community comment and required environmental and land‑use analysis would be presented.

Why this matters: the proposal would change the site’s land‑use designation and introduce a contractor‑oriented storage product that staff and councilors say could alter traffic, parking and the character of the Etiwanda corridor if built and replicated.