7. Special construction features shall be required in the design of structures where site investigations con-firmconfirm potential geologic hazards.
8. Development not on public sewers shall be permitted only after site specific investigations have been conducted that demonstrate the soils are suitable for on-site wastewater disposal and the disposal of wastewater will not degrade the subsurface water quality.
9. Due to the hazard associated with saturated soils in areas of steep slopesslopes, irrigation systems in critical areas that have the potential for failure in the judgement of the city engineerCity Engineer or designee shall be required to be equipped with potentiometers to make sure that the systems will not operate when there is sufficient moisture in the soil.
16.24.070 Hillside Development Guidelines.
The hillside development guidelines are intended to illustrate and amplify the appropriate development concepts for designated hillside areasHillside Areas. The guidelines are not intended to be an exhaustive list of standards, but rather policy statements, to encourage development that is sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside properties. The guidelines allow for flexibility and they encourage creativity, especially where a specific plan is prepared. HoweverHow-ever, the objective development standards provided in Section 16.24.060 shall be considered as a "benchmark" against which hillside development proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the purposes of this chapter.
The guideline's purpose is to allow for innovative or alternate methods of design in hillside areaHillside Areas. Innovation is encouraged as long as the end result is one that respects the natural character of the hillside and is consistent with the purposes of this chapter and the goals, objectives and policies of the City’s Ggeneral Pplan.
Conformance with the guidelines willshall be incorporated in the preparation and approval of subdivisions and individual site developments. During the application review process, the cityCity will evaluate the consistency of the proposal with the purposes of this chapter. Prior to the start of the design effort, it is recommended that the project design team members read the City’s Ggeneral Pplan and become familiar with its policies.
A. Site Design.
1. Design of building sites shouldshall be sensitive to the natural terrain. Structures shouldshall be located in a way that minimizes gradinggrading and preserves natural features (e.g., prominent knolls, ridgelines, etc.)
597
2. Preserve views of significant visual features. See Section 16.24.110 “Prominent Ridgelines Map.”,the hillside overlay zone map as seen from both within and outside a hillside development. When designing lots and plotting homes, the following provisions should be considered:
a. Dwellings should be oriented to allow view opportunities. even though views may be limited. Residential privacy should not be unreasonably sacrificed; and
b. A significant public vista, skyline, open space corridor, or vertical open space corridor as seen from an interstate, an arterial, or a secondary street should be a major design element in the site planning process.
3. Where possible, graded areas should be designed with manufactured slopes located on the uphill side of structures.
598
FIGURE 16.24-6
EXHIBIT 2 - BUILDING PLACEMENT AT A SITE
4. To the extent possible,. the width of a building, measured in the direction of the slope, shouldshall be minimized in order to limit the amount of cutting and tilling and to better "fit" the house to the natural terrain. The degree of slope will dictate how this is accomplished and shall be demonstrated on the project plans (See Figure 16.24-6 “Exhibit 3 - Building Placement at a Site.”
599
FIGURE 16.24-6
EXHIBIT 3 - BUILDING PLACEMENT AT A SITE
5. Clustering of development is encouraged. in hillside areas regardless of size. This is particularly important in environmentally sensitive areas in order to reduce the potential for tire hazard, erosion and excess runoff, and to preserve existing natural features and open space.
B. Driveways and Roadways.
1. Driveways that serve more than one parcel are encouraged as a method of reducing unnecessary gradinggrading, paving, and site disturbance. 600
FIGURE 16.24-7
ROADWAY PLACEMENT AT A SITE
C. Architecture.
601
1. The form, mass, and profile of the individual buildings and architectural features shallshould be designed to blend with the natural terrain and preserve the character and profile of the natural slope. Techniques that should be considered to accomplish this include:
a. Detaching the garage from the residence;:
b. Integrating retaining walls into garage walls on sloping lots to reduce gradinggrading and minimize visibility of walls;: and
c. Including architectural enrichments and variations in roof massing. Roofs should haveshall incorporate low profiles (for example 3:12 slope) to minimize their visual impact. On sloping land, the roof pitch shouldshall follow the slope of the hill-side, instead of being perpendicular to the hillside or opposing hillside slope. Care should be taken to avoid the use of gabled ends on downhill elevations.Gabled ends shall not be used on downhill elevations.
Upper stories shouldshall not be cantilevered out of the opposite direction of the hillside slope.
2. The design of the structure shouldshall give consideration to the lot's size and configuration in order to avoid the appearance of overbuildingbuilding scale and to minimize the blocking of views as demonstrated on the project plans. For example, within a development, the majority of the units should not be designed with minimum setback to minimum setback. See additional criteria as provided under Section 16.08.030 “Single-family Residential Design Standards and Design Features” and Section 16.08.040 “Multi-family Residential Design Standards”.
3. Large expanses of a single material on walls, roofs, or paving areas should be avoided.
Create interesting, small scale patterns by breaking up building mass, varying building materials, and through design and placement of windows and doors. Building plans and elevations should be varied throughout a development to avoid a monotonous "cookie-cutter" look.
D. Walls and Fences.
1. Walls and fences can be used to define a sense of place and create an attractive appearance. However, walls should not dominate a view, and their height should be limited adjacent to a street or trail or within a rear yard. Extensive landscaping should be used to 602
reduce the visual impact of walls. In addition, street front walls should incorporate varying design and natural materials. The use of open view fencing is encouraged, so long as adequate public safety and residential privacy are maintained.
1. In Hillside Areas with slopes greater than 25 percent and in order to maximize view opportunities, fencing on sloped areas shall incorporate the use wrought-iron, tubular steel, plexi-glass (for noise attenuation or aesthetics), or similar materials consistent with the maximum height criteria as provided under Section 16.22 “Fences, Hedges, and Walls.” Masonry walls may be provided at locations that contain refuse and recycling enclosures, playgrounds, or similar.
2. When possible, walls and fences shouldshall be designed as an integral part of the building in order to minimize the visual impact on surrounding areas.
3. Visually obtrusive solid fencing should be avoided in highly visible areas (unless required for sound attenuation), with the preference being for open (wrought iron) fencing.
E. Landscaping.
1. Street trees shouldshall be provided in select areas to enhance the natural character of the areas and to create a more rural appearance. Street tree species selection, and spacing of trees, shouldshall be sensitive to the context in which they are planted. Species selection shall be considered to minimize potential impacts to infastructureshould also be respectful of potential impact on infra-structure improvements (i.e. root damage to streets, sidewalks, etc.).
2. SlopesSlopes shouldshall be designed with informal clusters of trees and shrubs to soften and vary the slope planes, consistent with landformlandform gradinggrading concepts.
603
FIGURE 16.24-8
BUILDING ENVELOPE ON SLOPE
F. Grading.
There are three distinct types of gradinggrading proposed in these guidelines, each with a unique quality, and each with an individual and appropriate application as determined by the City Engineer or designee. Larger sites will most likely incorporate all three concepts in various parts of the plan.
1. Minimal Grading. This is typically used for large lot single family homes, custom homes with variable foundations that conform to the existing slopesslopes, and other uses that utilize 604
the least amount of gradinggrading in order to get the facility and structures built. This technique embraces the following concepts:
a. GradingGrading shouldshall be limited to individual flat graded pad areas for residential building sites. GradingGrading shouldshall be limited to only the required building areas and adjacent outdoor amenities in steep hillside areashillside areas;
b. Foundation systems that require little or no gradinggrading are encouraged, forcing the architecture to con-formconform to the land rather than the land to conform to the dwelling:
c. Roadways, driveways, and individual building pads should be designed to conform with the contours and to attempt to daylight in the center of the road or building pad to ensure a minimum cut and fill situation; and
c. Cut and fill lines delineating the grading activity whereby cut areas adjoin next to fill areas shall be situated outside of areas where differential settlement is not desirable (e.g., roadways, building pads, driveways, etc.).
d. The balancing of gradinggrading is the concept to minimizes the amountvolume of cubic yards of earth excavated and filled.
2. Contour Grading. This concept results in post-development landforms that exhibit many of the characteristics present within natural landforms. ContourContour gradinggrading is typically used in situations where conventional, terraced, gradinggrading with benches and slopesslopes might be used but a "softened" gradinggrading look is desired. This would be desirable for areas that are limited in public view (i.e. concealed rear yards). Typically, contourcontour gradinggrading can reduce required cutcut and fillfill volumes as compared with traditional, terraced, gradinggrading. The design elements associated with this type of gradinggrading include: (See Figure 3-916.24-9 “Contour Grading”)
a. The use of horizontal and vertical curve variations for slope banks creating a curvilinear pattern;
b. Post-development landforms that exhibit natural terrain characteristics (without the heavy modeling effects of landformlandform gradinggrading);
c. A general rounding of slopesslopes at slope intersections and transition zones with natural grade;
d. PadPad configurations that are curvilinear; and
e. SlopesSlopes that are designed with contourcontour gradinggrading techniques (e.g., the location of slopesslopes behind structure (not in side yards), slopesslopes in hidden locations, or slopesslopes less than ten feet in height).
FIGURE 3-9
CONTOUR GRADING
605
FIGURE 16.24-9
CONTOUR GRADING
606
FIGURE 3-10
LANDFORM GRADING
FIGURE 16.24-10
LANDFORM GRADING
3. Landform Grading. Graded slopesslopes in this category will replicate the irregular shapes of natural slopesslopes. LandformLandform gradinggrading techniques shouldshall be used whenever slopesslopes are created that will be open to public view. This is particularly true for slopes that exceed ten feet in height.
The intent of these gradinggrading guidelines, is to incorporate the basic principles of the landformlandform gradinggrading concept as the preferred method in the design and construction of hillside development projects. so that they w ill be in harmony with the natural 607
topography and reflect natural plant distribution patterns. (See Figure 3-1016.24-10 (Landform Grading))
LandformLandform gradinggrading techniques embraceshall incorporate the following conceptsfeatures:
a. Land plans shouldshall flow with the natural topography rather than against it. This means that street pat-ternspatterns and building padpad configurations shall follow the underlying topographic features rather than cutting across them:;
b. Landform graded slopesslopes are characterized by a continuous series of concave and convex forms interspersed with mounds that blend into profiles with varying slope gradients and with significant transition zones between man-mademan-made and natural slopesslopes;
c. Pad configurations are irregular. Slope down-draindrainage devices shall either be placed to follow the natural topographic lines of the slopesslopes, or shall be are tucked awaylocated in special Sswale and berm combinations in order to conceal the drains from view.
Exposed segments in visible areas, as determined by the City Engineer, shall beare treated with natural rock for a more aesthetically pleasing appearance;
d. TheThis technique shouldshall be used wherever possible to provide for a variety of both slope percentage, slope direction, and topographical detailing in a three-dimensional, undulating. pattern similar to existing terrain:; and
e. Manufactured cutcut and fillfill slopesslopes exceedingin excess of ten feet in height that will be either exposed to permanent public view, or are adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas, shouldshall be designed with features characteristic ofof natural slopesslopes., This design shall be implemented,where physically feasible as determined by the City Engineer, so that theirthe ultimate appearance will resemble a natural slope. This will includeis applicable to, but not limited to, slopesslopes along streets, and highways, adjacent to parks, schools, open spaces,. other public facilities, and other prominent and visible slopesslopes.
4. The following basic gradinggrading guidelines and techniques serve to implement preferred landformlandform gradinggrading techniques and to help avoid unnecessaryeliminate or minimize cutcut and fillfill:
a. CutsCuts. When convex shaped natural features. (e.g., protruding minor landforms) are cutcut, the residual landform shouldshall be in a form to maintain positive and resemble the original slope. not be a flat slope face, but rather should be restored to resemble the original.
This will require more than just rounding at the edges but, in effect, reconfiguring it so the final result will give the appearance of a protruding ridgeline.
b. Use of variable slope ratiosslope ratios. Because Landform grading designs require the use of variable slope ratios at greater than 2:1 and may create valleys or concave indentations on building pad areas, they may result in loss of usable area. In addition, engineering and construction costs may increase. Be-cause of this, segments of a cut or fill slopes may be designed with variable slope ratios less than 2:1, but not less than 1.5: I within the following guidelines and subject to third party review at the applicant's expense: Because landform grading designs require the use of variable slope ratios, this may result in loss of usable area near building pads. Therefore, only cut slopes may be steeper than 2:1, but not steeper than 1.5:1 and shall meet the following guidelines:
608
1) A geotechnical engineer shall certify that slopesslopes will meet standard stability requirements;
2) A licensed landscape architect shall certify the plantability of the slopes, with an emphasis on the slopes steeper than 2:1; and
32) The overall ratio from top to toe will be 2:1 or flatter; and 43) Ratios flatter than 2:1 will also be used in the slope design.
c. GradingGrading operations should be plannedshall occur to avoid the rainy season, October fifteenth (15th) to April fifteenth (15thI 5th). GradingGrading permits shall only be issued when a plan for erosionerosion control and silt retentionsediment control has been approved by the cityCity without regard to time of year. Additionally, those projects also requiring a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall obtain approval of the SWPPP prior to any grading permit issuance.
d. A rRounded and smooth transitions should be madeshall occur where when the planes of man-mademan-made and natural slopesslopes intersect. Where cutcut or fillfill conditions are created, slopesslopes shouldshall be varied. rather than left at a constant angle or create an unnatural, rigid, `'engineered" appearance.The angle of a graded slopeslope shouldshall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain.
e. Manufactured slopesslopes adjacent to roadways shall be consistent with the landformlandform gradinggrading and revegetation techniques. where physically feasible to create visually interesting and pleasing streetscapes. The higher the slope becomes, the more important the modeling effect of landform grading becomes.
f. Top of slope berms shall be used to eliminate the possibility of drainage sheet flow over the slope that would potentially cause an unstable condition. Tops of slopes should be rounded in conformance with landform grading techniques, or increased in size to reduce the visual impact of the back of a home.
f. Slopes shall implement drainage measures as detailed within Sub-article 11 of the City of Murrieta Grading Manual.
G.G. Drainage.
1. Natural drainage courses shallshould be preserved and enhanced to the extent possiblemaximum extent practicable. Rather than filling them in, drainage features should be incorporated as an integral part of the project design in order to enhance the overall quality and aesthetics of a site, to provide attractive open space vistas, and to preserve the natural character of the site. Encourage the use of natural drainage courses as natural boundaries between neighborhoods.Rather than eliminate existing natural drainage features and courses, preservation of existing natural drainage features and courses is encouraged. Moreover, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit requires this of all projects, to the maximum extent practicable.
2. Storm drainage runoff resulting from project development should be minimized. Where possible, flood control plans for storm water should encourage the detention of water for percolation in to the ground-water to conserve it for future uses and to mitigate downstream flooding.The NPDES Permit also requires project’s stormwater runoff to be retained onsite via infiltration to the maximum extent practicable under California law. Runoff not retained onsite 609
shall be conveyed offsite per general standards and practices, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
16.24.080 Exceptions.
A. No Grading Permit Required. A grading permit is not required if the project meets the criteria as provided under Section 15.52.040 (Permit Exceptions). Additionally, flatwork, pools, or spas, which results in the disturbance of 50 cubic yards or less, does not require a grading permit. For the purpose of this section, flatwork is hardscaping (such as concrete or pavers) for patios, walkways, etc. All other activities resulting in the disturbance of 50 cubic yards or less (excluding those areas that are identified within Section 16.24.060(G) (Grading)), shall require the applicant to provide a statement to that effect, which shall be filed with the City Engineer including the following information: parcel boundaries, pad elevations, on or off-site existing grade elevations, vehicular access to and from the project site with both private and public roadways, existing utilities, and, if applicable, septic system location(s). The plan may be prepared on a topographic map drawn at a scale as large as one (1) inch to one-hundred (100) feet subject to the satisfaction of City Engineer.
B. Residential Accessory Structures and Accessory Dwelling Units. This Chapter shall not apply to development of residential accessory structures and accessory dwelling units on parcels with existing development approvals when the new construction:
1. Requires the removal of no more than 50 cubic yards of soil;
2. Does not require the use of a retaining wall;
3. Meets the criteria as described within Section 16.44.150 (Residential Accessory Uses and Structures) and Section 16.44.160 (Accessory Dwelling Units); and, 4 . Satisfies the criteria as identified within Section 16.24.060(G).
610
16.24.090 (Reserved).
Reserved for future updates
611
16.24.100 Hillside Overlay Map.
A. Refer to the City’s online Geographic Information System (GIS) as an additional mapping resource for project review.
612
16.24.110 Prominent Ridgelines Map.
A. Refer to the City’s online Geographic Information System (GIS) as an additional mapping resource for project review.”
613
Section 16.28.080 (Landscaping Standards) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
“16.28.080 Landscape Standards.
Landscape areas and materials shall be designed, installed, and maintained in compliance with the following:
A. General Design Standards. The following features shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed landscape and shown on required landscape plans:
1. Landscaping shall be planned as an integral part of the overall project design and not simply located in excess space after parking areas and structures have been planned;
2. Pedestrian access to sidewalks and structures shall be considered in the design of all landscaped areas;
3. Landscape planting shall be provided for all adjacent public rights-of-way, in compliance with Chapter 16.108 (Improvements);
4. With the exception of single-family residential units, landscape adjacent to driveways and parking areas shall be protected from vehicle damage through the provision of minimum six (6) inch high concrete curbs or other types of barriers as approved by the director;
5. Landscaped areas shall not be less than five (5) feet in width, except where determined by the director;
6. Concrete strips, a minimum of four (4) inches in width, shall be provided to separate all turf areas from other landscaped areas, except for single-family residential landscape projects;
7. Permeable surfaces shall be used wherever permissible in place of impervious paving, to encourage on-site water infiltration and support water conservation measures. Permeable surfaces shall be identified on plans; and
8. Protective tree grates shall be provided for trees planted in pedestrian areas, except for single-family residential landscape projects and as determined by the director.
B. Plant Materials. Plant materials shall be selected and installed to comply with the following requirements:
1. A mix of plant materials shall be provided in compliance with the following table (Table 3- 516.28-2). Calculations documenting the required mix shall be shown on the landscape plan;
Table 3-5TABLE 16.28-2
MINIMUM REQUIRED MIX OF PLANT MATERIALS
Plant Material Minimum Required Percentage
Trees
Twenty-four (24) inch box 35%*
Fifteen- (15)-gallon 65%
Shrubs
614
Five- (5-) gallon 70%
One- (1-) gallon (herbaceous only) with city
approval
30%
Groundcover
Coverage within two (2) years 100%
A greater percentage of specimen trees may be utilized with a corresponding reduction in the number of fifteen- (15-) gallon trees subject to the review of the director.
2. Trees for shade shall be provided for buildings/structures, as well as for parking lots and open space areas. These trees can be deciduous or evergreen and are to be incorporated to provide natural cooling opportunities for the purpose of energy and water conservation;
3. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures, at an equivalent of at least one (1) tree per thirty (30) linear feet of structure. Other areas shall provide trees at a ratio of one (1) tree for each three hundred (300) square feet of landscaped area. The clustering of trees is encouraged;
4. Mature specimen trees in thirty-six (36) inch and forty-eight (48) inch boxes shall be provided for large projects in sufficient quantity subject to the approval of the Director, to provide variety and emphasis at main focal areas;
5. All trees shall be staked or guyed (on a case-by-case basis) subject to the review of the director and in compliance with city standards;
6. Trees and shrubs shall be planted so that at maturity they do not interfere with service lines and traffic safety sight areas;
7. Trees and shrubs shall be planted and maintained in a manner that protects the basic rights of adjacent property owners, particularly the right to solar access;
8. Trees planted near public sidewalks or curbs shall be of a species and installed in a manner that prevents physical damage to sidewalks, curbs, gutters and other public improvements; and
9. Groundcover shall be of live plant material. Limited quantities of gravel, colored rock, bark, and similar materials may be used in combination with a living groundcover.”
615
1 Tracy, Christopher
From: Tracy, Christopher
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 4:11 PM
To: McDonald, Cristal; Ramirez, Kimberly; Garcia, Sylvia Cc: Chantarangsu, David; Stiehl, Carl
Subject: FW: Hillside Ord - Please Distribute for Council Workshop Attachments: Ltr to Council Hillside Grading Ord.pdf
Hi Cristal,
Please ensure that this is distributed to the Council for the workshop:
Thank you,
Chris Tracy, AICP
SENIOR PLANNER
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CITY OF MURRIETA
O: (951) 461-6046
[email protected]
1 Town Square | Murrieta, CA 92562
www.MurrietaCA.gov | Connect with us
From: A Long <[email protected]>
Date: August 15, 2023 at 8:29:00 AM PDT
To: "Warren, Cindy" <[email protected]>
Subject: Hillside Ord
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Please see my attached letter regarding the workshop on the Hillside Grading Ordinance.
Also, I appreciate staff's effort on retaining walls, but this is a good example of "throwing the baby out with the bath water." While there are examples of tall retaining walls that are an eyesore. There are more examples of tall retaining walls that work well, but you can't see. This is my point. What difference does it make if a retaining wall is 5' or 50' if you can't see it??? I can think of several commercial site that would not be able to build unless the built a very tall retaining wall that can't bee seen. Also, if fire codes keep widening road standard, there may be many rural residential homeowners needing to widen their driveways with retaining if they propose to build accessory structures like a bar,
616
2 Please keep in mind, this ordinance and direction being sought is not mandated by the region, state, or federal agencies. It is one of the few items you can exercise local control over. Please consider those residents you are placing this map upon.
Respectfully,
Alan
617
Honorable Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, and Council members, I am writing you out of grave concern, due to the damage that the proposed Hillside grading ordinance will cause my family, business, and neighbors. The current Hillside Ordinance is to be applied citywide as written and originally adopted in 1998. Admittedly, the city has not been consistent when and where they enforce this ordinance. Development has been approved within and outside of the proposed Hillside Overlay Map (HOM), Prominent Ridgeline Map (PRM) and current unofficial map the city periodically uses to enforce the Hillside Ordinance. Also, it’s worthy to mention, the city claims it was not the intent for the policy to be enforced citywide, yet it is written as such. While I cannot opine on what everyone’s past intent was/is, I can tell you the General Plans (GP) mentions viewshed and views from the major freeways of the “NATURAL SETTING.” While I agree with staff, the GP lacks detail and is vague. However, it clearly places value on the “views from major freeways” for “people passing through the area” on major freeways. The GP also mentions “the Valley Floor” to be a protected viewshed, but that’s another confusing topic. In either case, the views from the I15 & 1215 freeways have changed since 1998. Frankly, you only get peekaboo view of our hills due to all the development that has occured. The better question is to be asking is, with all the development along the I15 and I215, does this section GP and Hillside ordinance still make since? The vagueness and ambiguity of this topic should not be a surprise, but the recommendations being made should be. In July 2019, I had several conversations and emails with the Murrieta Planning Director regarding the wording in the Conservation section of our GP and Hillside Grading Ordinance. Specifically, I informed staff that the vagueness and wording would cause confusion for future staff and governing bodies. I suggested that, since the GP was being opened, this language be cleared up. After staff reviewed the language, I was assured that development could occur on my property and the current CUP and past Tentative Tract Map (TTM) approval set the precedence. Well, here we are fighting again. BACKGROUND: On January 6, 2005, an application was filed by DFC Family Limited Partnership for a tentative tract map, for property located west of the intersection of Los Alamos and Mason Roads on the southernmost hill of what is known as the Hogbacks, to allow for a fifteen (lot) residential subdivision of 37.86 acres (38 acres). Several workshops and discussions were scheduled regarding the Hillside Grading Ordinance and potential development. On July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission met in a study session workshop to consider the DFC Family Limited Partnership for a tentative tract map and one other property owner proposing to develop on the Hogbacks in the Los Alamos District. Neighboring residents near the project overwhelmingly spoke in favor of the project. Feedback was requested from the Commissioners at the workshop on “the feasibility” of the project. It was the Commission’s consensus that “a subdivision on the 618
Hogbacks in the Los Alamos District will be possible. The project and CEQA documents were later approved. Since this time, I purchased the above-mentioned property and applied for a CUP. Again, the CEQA documents and CUP were approved. We have made significant investment in time and funding to get through the CUP process on properties that have been significantly developed and are NOT in their natural setting. This can be said about my adjacent neighbors at the bottom of slope (42 Lots). In fact, the property I own had a slope analysis done for the approved TTM. Most of my property is less than 25%, yet is identified in both the HOM and PRM. The areas that are greater than 25% has been placed into conservation through the CUP process. Also, I do not support using the “Technology” available to the city to determine whether a parcel should be in a definitive map. This “Technology” has already proven not to be reliable as there are several lots identified on the HOM that are completely flat. As you know, the same areas identified in the HOM and PRM are within the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan, another layer of conservation requirments. The MSHCP has been the primary vehicle used to gain most conservation land in Murrieta. Most of the land identified in the PRM has already been placed into conservation and the remaining land already developed. In essence, the MSHCP accomplished more than what was identified in the conservation section of the GP. The developed parcels identified on the newly proposed HOM and PRM should not be singled, preventing them the use their property like the rest of the city. To summarize, most of my property is not more than 25% slope, the areas that are greater than 25% has already been conserved, the previous staff and governing body aproned TTM, there is a current CUP for commercial business, and land has been every portion of land that remains has been disturbed by way of grading, imported dirt and/or structures and is NOT in its “natural setting.” For these reasons, and many others, I am asking to be removed from the Hillside Overlay map and Prominent Ridgeline Map. The following picture is my property. We have 9 lots, an underlying tract map of 15 lots, 6 SFD units, multiple accessory structures, water tanks, and an active commercial business. Every square foot of the parcels on top of this hill has been developed by grading, trenching, importing fill dirt, and/or built upon. Additionally, many of the adjacent parcels (42 lots) can say the same, some having little to no slope. See picture below with yellow stars indicating homes mid-slope. 619
Also, the growth around the city has blocked the viewshed of these areas and now only offers a “peekaboo” view from few areas. Many of these areas have approved development projects that will continue to block the view. See following pictures:
620
621
622
623
Yellow stars indicate homes
Yellow stars indicate homes
624
625
The following pictures are some of the development and homes that cannot be seen from most viewsheds
626
627
628
Again, every square foot or our property has been graded, trenched, built on and/or had imported fill dirt. Clearly, our properties are NOT in the natural ridgeline state. Placing us in these HOM and/or PRM, restricting our use of land that has already been developed will cause us hardship and will significantly impact our business and family that has been here for 5 generations. There are several ridgelines that are still in their natural state. However, as development continues the viewshed will continue to dwindle. Nevertheless, if the city council continues to support a PRM. I suggest preserving undeveloped ridgelines that are in their natural state as stated in the General Plan. See below picture: The Center Hogback is the tallest and largest Hogback and the ridgeline is in its natural state. This Ordinance is not being mandated from the region, state, and/or federal government. On the contrary, it is a local decision, one of the few you get to make these days. We ask that you reconsider our property and remove it from the HOM, PRM or any other map that would cause us restrictions the rest of the city is free from, and instead focus on preserving undeveloped ridgelines that are in their natural state, such as the below picture:
629
Respectfully. Alan Long Resident Heritage Hill, Owner
630
CITY OF MURRIETA
City Council Meeting Agenda
Report
2/3/2026
Agenda Item No. 11.
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Cristal McDonald, City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Kimberly Ramirez, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT:
Chronic Nuisance Abatement Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION
Following up on Council Member DeForest’sDecember 2, 2025, request, City staff will provide status and request the item is withdrawn.
CITY OF MURRIETA Printed on 1/29/2026Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
631
CITY OF MURRIETA
City Council Meeting Agenda
Report
2/3/2026
Agenda Item No. 12.
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Cristal McDonald, City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Kimberly Ramirez, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT:
Prohibiting the Sale, Distribution and Possession of Kratom
RECOMMENDATION
Following up on Council Member DeForest’sDecember 16, 2025, request, and the City Attorney review of the letter sent by the California Department of Public Health, provided at the January 20, 2026 City Council meeting, staff will provide an update and seek direction from the City Council on whether this future agenda item should be brought back for further consideration.
CITY OF MURRIETA Printed on 1/29/2026Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
632
CITY OF MURRIETA
City Council Meeting Agenda
Report
2/3/2026
Agenda Item No. CS1.
Subject:
Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation
The City Council will conduct a close session, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d) (2), because there is a significant exposure to litigation in two (2) cases.
CITY OF MURRIETA Printed on 1/29/2026Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
633
CITY OF MURRIETA
City Council Meeting Agenda
Report
2/3/2026
Agenda Item No. CS2.
Subject:
Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation
The City Council will conduct a closed session, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9 (d)(4), because the City is considering whether to initiate litigation in one (1) case.
CITY OF MURRIETA Printed on 1/29/2026Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
634