Planning Commission backs urgency ordinance package to speed rebuilding after Eaton Fire; extends term to five years

Sierra Madre — The Planning Commission on March 20 voted unanimously to recommend approval of Resolution 25-04 and an accompanying uncodified urgency ordinance to speed and reduce the cost of rebuilding homes damaged or destroyed by the Eaton Fire.

The package presented by the city attorney and planning staff would, for properties damaged by the Eaton Fire: allow an uncodified urgency ordinance to take effect immediately upon City Council adoption; waive discretionary design review in R‑1, RC and Hillside Management zones for eligible rebuilds; provide a 10% variance in development standards or up to 250 square feet of additional floor area (whichever applies) so long as the variance does not cause an exceedance of code limits; permit accessory dwelling units (ADUs) to be built before a primary residence; allow temporary trailers on-site for up to three years under a city maintenance agreement; extend expiring entitlements by two years; suspend certain Low Impact Development (LID) requirements for impacted properties; and extend the life of building permits and certain entitlements on a case-by-case basis.

"This is going to be an urgency ordinance. Normally, ordinances require two separate readings and you have to wait 30 days before they take effect. This is going to take effect immediately," the city attorney said during the presentation. Staff also proposed a local "shelter crisis" declaration under state law to preserve authority to waive building-code provisions if related governor executive orders lapse before the ordinance expires.

Staff explained demolition and debris rules: property owners may opt in to the county/Army Corps of Engineers debris-removal program (right-of-entry deadline noted in staff materials); owners who opt out must obtain demolition permits and complete demolition work within the ordinance timelines or face nuisance-abatement proceedings. The staff presentation described an application timeline requiring demolition permits to be applied for within six months and exercised within six months after issuance for owners who opted out of the county removal process; commissioners asked staff to remove wording that suggested the provision covered "resulting debris flow," and staff agreed to strike that language.

The proposal would also allow the city to contract with Willdan Engineering for public-works plan review with a target 10 business-day turnaround, permit use of alternative materials approved by the fire-code official, and explore a historical-resource evaluation for impacted properties (staff said the city's consultant offered a 10–15% discount if the city did a single consolidated evaluation of multiple properties).

Public comment emphasized timing and practical hurdles. John Hutt, a resident and former planning commissioner who lost a house in the fire, thanked the commission but urged flexibility on the timeline, noting rebuilding requires insurance settlements, surveys and demolition and that "it's not a 3 year process that starts from day 1." He recommended giving homeowners additional time to reach the building-permit stage.

Commissioners debated the ordinance term and agreed to change the draft's three-year expiration to a five-year term and to allow the City Council to amend or extend the timeframe later if needed. The commission also supported staff edits described during deliberations, including striking the phrase referencing "resulting debris flow" from the demolition-permit section.

A motion to approve the resolution recommending the urgency ordinance and related actions carried unanimously. The recommendation now goes to the City Council for possible adoption; if Council adopts an urgency ordinance the staff said it would take effect immediately and staff will publish guidance for affected property owners.

The transcript and staff report show that several provisions hinge on the scope of state executive orders and a potential shelter-crisis declaration; staff noted some elements (for example, certain non-building-code provisions in the Government Code) would not be preserved by a shelter-crisis declaration if state-level authorities change. Commissioners asked staff to return with clarifications about soils/geotechnical-report requirements, utility-connection requirements for temporary trailers, and the proposed maintenance-agreement template for on-site trailers.