Murrieta council narrows focus on retaining‑wall design, landscaping while weighing citywide vs. hillside standards

Murrieta — City staff on Nov. 18 asked the Murrieta City Council to narrow the draft hillside ordinance to concrete design questions for retaining walls and landscaping while leaving larger questions about the ordinance boundary for later discussion. Senior planner Chris Tracy framed four policy questions: whether to prefer geogrid or concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls, whether to require certain finished materials, what color and finish flexibility is acceptable, and whether the standards should apply citywide or only to the hillside overlay.

The discussion followed staff’s earlier technical work confirming the proposed hillside overlay would apply to parcels with an average slope of 25% or greater and would be cross‑referenced with specific‑plan areas. Tracy described three common wall systems with pictured examples — CMU (concrete masonry unit) walls, geogrid‑reinforced systems and keystone/crib walls — and summarized tradeoffs including excavation needs, height capacity and opportunities for integrated landscaping.

Why it matters: council members said the visual impact of large, monolithic walls is a community concern but stressed the code should not unduly burden property owners. Council members pressed staff for objective standards that can be administered consistently and for rules that recognize the difference between tract, urban lots and rural, pre‑developed parcels.

Council direction and technical details - Thresholds and mapping: staff reiterated the 25% slope threshold for the hillside overlay and described a GIS layer that will identify developed versus undeveloped parcels. - Landscaping and timing: staff confirmed the city’s typical landscape monitoring is a 3–5 year bonding period; they offered to raise recommended starter plant sizes from 1‑gallon to 3–5 gallon or even 15 gallon for large walls to speed maturity and screening. - Irrigation and maintenance: presenters said planted or living‑wall treatments generally require irrigation (drip lines at the top or pockets at the base) and ongoing maintenance obligations. - Terracing and stepbacks: staff reviewed existing hillside limits (6‑foot wall + 6‑foot stepback, with front‑yard walls typically limited to 3 feet) and posed policy options including a 6‑foot horizontal stepback at 12‑foot wall heights and allowing more than two terraced walls where landscaping is provided.

Public comment and legal constraints Members of the public urged clearer exemptions for already developed parcels and asked whether council could conclude that the General Plan’s land‑use goal has been satisfied for some areas. City attorney advised that making findings to change how the General Plan applies would require a general‑plan amendment and is not accomplished solely through the hillside ordinance process.

Next steps Council generally signaled support for: (1) objective, written standards that distinguish rural and tract contexts; (2) citywide design options for materials and colors while preserving hillside‑specific rules where needed for scenic impact; and (3) staff returning with concrete regulatory language addressing plant sizes, irrigation and timing, terracing stepbacks, and how developed parcels will be handled. No ordinance vote occurred; staff will return with revised language and maps.

Representative quotes “Sometimes the conversation was very meandering…so starting last meeting we shifted our approach to really start to take a little more of a bite‑sized approach,” City Manager Clifton said, explaining the phased workshop plan. Public speaker Alan Long cautioned, “I think you’re putting a band aid on a broken arm here,” when urging clearer treatment for developed parcels. Senior Planner Chris Tracy summarized technical limits: “hillside areas shall be limited to those areas shown on the proposed hillside area overlay map that are 25% or greater.”

Meeting outcome and next steps Council provided direction to staff to refine standards on materials, colors, terrace/stepback dimensions, minimum starter plant sizes, irrigation/maintenance expectations and the map treatment for specific plans and developed parcels. Staff will return with specific code language and options; the city attorney noted any change to General Plan findings would require a separate general‑plan amendment process.