A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Murrieta planners find vacation of Lot A consistent with general plan

September 23, 2026 | Murrieta City, Riverside County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Murrieta planners find vacation of Lot A consistent with general plan
The Murrieta Planning Commission voted 3-0 on Sept. 23, 2026, to adopt a resolution determining that vacating Lot A of Parcel Map 28280 is consistent with the city's general plan. Commissioner Michael Leaglia moved the resolution and Commissioners John Rose and Michael Denna voted in favor.

Jeff Hitch, city engineer, told the commission the item concerns the right-of-way dedication for the Triangle development—a proposed regional shopping center of roughly 279,000 square feet on about 36.5 acres—and that the commission's role was limited to a consistency determination under the Government Code and the Streets and Highways Code. "My recommendation is that the planning commission adopt a resolution determining that vacating Lot A right-of-way easement bordered by Hot Springs Road and Interstate 15 and Interstate 215 of Parcel Map 28280 is consistent with the general plan," Hitch said.

Hitch described two statutory vacation paths: a summary vacation (a simpler process used when no utilities would be affected) and a general vacation (a longer process that requires additional council hearings). He said Southern California Edison has existing facilities within the Lot A easement and has requested a replacement easement, which elevates the matter to the general-vacation process; the city council will carry out the final vacation and any easement dedication. Hitch also said existing covenants, conditions and restrictions recorded with Parcel Map 28280 provide blanket access that prevents creating a landlocked lot if the easement is vacated.

The commission received one written comment on the item; staff said responses to that letter were provided prior to the meeting and that the presentation clarified the issues raised. No members of the public spoke during the public-comment period. The council will consider the actual vacation and the easement dedication administratively under the Streets and Highways Code at a future council hearing.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee