Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hillside Ordinance Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission forwards revised Hillside Ordinance updates to council after debate over exemptions
Summary
After extended discussion and public testimony, the Planning Commission voted 3-1 to forward staff's revised Hillside Development Code amendments (DCA 2021-2396) to city council, while noting commissioner concerns about thresholds for small homeowners and potential exemptions.
The Murrieta Planning Commission voted to recommend that city council authorize an environmental determination and consider the proposed development-code amendments to the Hillside Ordinance (DCA 2021-2396), moving the document forward after months of drafting and public workshops.
Senior Planner Chris Tracy introduced the reintroduction, saying the update aims to remove ambiguity, automate average-slope calculations with GIS and add clearer, objective thresholds for when a discretionary hillside development plan is required. "We've had manual, error-prone calculations in the past, ambiguous definitions, and this led to confusion for customers and staff," Tracy told the commission.
Commissioners focused on the numeric thresholds that would trigger a discretionary development-plan review. Staff's baseline examples used a 50-cubic-yard trigger for minor disturbances (roughly the size of a bedroom) but commissioners and public commenters asked whether raising that threshold to 200 or 400 cubic yards would better protect small homeowners from onerous discretionary review. Commissioner LaPaglia suggested increasing the threshold to 200 cubic yards for certain small projects, saying that 50 cubic yards "can happen quite quickly," while Commissioner DeSenna pushed for exemptions for parcels under 5 acres where most of the lot is already disturbed.
Principal Engineer Rick Alsaga advised the commission that grading-permit triggers (for drainage, safety and water-quality concerns) remain separate from the development-plan threshold and that even if a project avoids discretionary review, engineering will still require grading plans when the disturbance or drainage risk warrants them. "A grading permit is required unless the work qualifies for an exemption as determined by the city," Alsaga said, stressing the engineering review is necessary for safety and drainage.
Two members of the public testified. Dan Long urged more flexibility for homeowners and supported a higher cubic-yard threshold and clearer exemptions; another commenter, Mr. Klein, recommended a line-of-sight exemption so parcels not visible from major corridors would be exempted from hillside controls. Staff and the city attorney said those broader exemptions would require a more substantial rewrite and additional analysis to avoid reintroducing ambiguity.
After extended deliberation, the commission voted to forward staff's recommended amendments to city council. The recorded vote was 3-1; commissioners said they were sending the clarifications to council for final consideration and noted areas (thresholds and exemptions) they want staff and council to monitor and possibly refine.
