Item 15 - Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Advisory Group UpdateDATE:
TO:
FROM:
CONTACT:
SUBJECT:
Summary:
AGENDA REPORT CityofPoway
CITY COUNCIL
April 20, 2021
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Co�cil
Eric Heidemann, Director of Public Works t{_ \ ,f Will Wiley, Assistant Director of Public Works for Maintenance Operation
(858) 668-4705 or wwiley@poway.org
Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Advisory Group Update
The Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Advisory Group (Advisory Group) is made up of property
owners within LMD 83-1 and LMD 86-1 and was appointed by the City Manager to serve in an advisory
role to provide recommendations on maintenance and landscape improvements within the LMDs.
Since the Fall of 2019, the Advisory Group has worked collaboratively with staff and the City's
landscape architect on the development of a landscape master plan (LMP), until its postponement in
April 2020, as a result of COVID-19. The purpose of this workshop is to provide the City Council with:
1)the status of the LMP, 2) the Hazardous Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) grant application, 3) the
Advisory Group's ongoing work to address landscape maintenance on private property along the
north side of Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Community Road, and 4) for the City
Council to provide direction on the Advisory Group's preferred option relative to landscape
maintenance on private property.
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council receive this report and provide direction on staff's
recommendation to advance the Advisory Group's preferred Options E and D to address maintenance
and rehabilitation relative to private property along the north side of Twin Peaks Road between
Pomerado Road and Community Road, pending the completion of costing of the LMP and the
hazardous tree removal plan.
Discussion:
The Advisory Group was formed in August 2018 to provide recommendations to staff and City Council
on landscape maintenance and improvements within Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs) 83-1
and 86-1. Staff and the Advisory Group last provided an update and presented maintenance
recommendations to the City Council on August 6, 2019. At this meeting, the City Council authorized
the development of a LMP to provide a concept and cost estimates for landscape rehabilitation at
neighborhood entrances and within the public rights-of-way along Twin Peaks and Espola Roads.
1 of 8 April 20, 2021, Item #15
Additionally, the LMP is to serve as a guide for the eventual re-balloting of LMDs 83-1 and 86-1. This
report provides the City Council with a status on the LMP, the Hazardous Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP) application, the Advisory Group's ongoing work to address landscape maintenance on private
property along the north side ofTwin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Community Road and
lastly requests the City Council to provide direction on the Advisory Group's preferred option relative
to landscape maintenance on private property.
Landscape Master Plan: After the City Council authorized the LMP, the City's landscape architect,
KTUA, began work on the conceptual landscape plan for the right-of-way areas along Twin Peaks Road,
between Community and Pomerado Roads and the right-of-way areas along Espola Road, between
Titan Way and Valle Verde Terrace. The LMP includes a site analysis, conceptual design alternatives
for each of the project areas, community outreach, and development of final landscape plans.
Working in conjunction with staff and the Advisory Group, KTUA made significant progress on the
LMP's deliverables, until COVID-19 led to the suspension of work in April 2020. While work on the LMP
remains suspended, KTUA has completed approximately 75 percent of the scope of work, with
outstanding work consisting of community outreach (surveys, workshops, etc.) and finalizing the
landscape concepts (based on input).
Staff and KTUA are reconvening in the near future to revise the LMP project schedule, review
remaining deliverables and assess community outreach opportunities during the current state of
COVID-19. Due to the delay in the LMP's completion, however, a re-ballot attempt in 2021 is unlikely.
Instead, re-balloting of the LMDs is being considered for 2022, when a re-engineering process can be
completed that incorporates the LMP's updated capital and maintenance costs. The LMP should
include the outcome of the tree risk assessment provided by the City's anticipated HMGP tree removal
project.
HMGP Update: At the end of 2020, the City was notified that its HMGP grant application for hazardous
tree removal was approved. In response to the award and consistent with the terms of the grant, staff
completed a scope of work for an updated tree inventory and tree risk assessment for approximately
13,800 trees in the previously mentioned right-of-way areas of LMD 83-1, LMD 86-1, and open space
areas in Green Valley Subdivision. The tree risk assessment and updated inventory begins this month
and will be completed by a certified arborist. Following the tree risk assessment, staff will work on
obtaining as-needed environmental approvals, complete a tree removal bid process and conduct
public outreach. Only after these processes are complete will the tree removal/trimming commence.
The tree assessment and hazardous tree removal work is integral to the completion of LMP because
it will assist in the development of future costs for the LMDs. If warranted, staff may remove trees
within private property areas along Twin Peaks and Espola Roads with the property owner's consent.
While the hazardous tree removal project's objective is to reduce fire fuel loads, a positive outcome is
potential decreased tree maintenance for LMDs 83-1 and 86-1. A detailed report on the acceptance
of the HMGP award will be provided at a future City Council Meeting.
Private Property Areas: During the site analysis for LMD 83-1, it was discovered property lines extend
beyond the sound wall/fence to the toe of slope for many of the properties along the north side of
Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Community Road. Staff confirmed this finding in
March 2020 through a survey of the property. Since formation in the 1980s, the City/LMD has
maintained the private property areas between the sound walls/fence and public right-of-way under
the assumption the area was public property within the LMD. As a result of the City/LMD having
consistently maintained the trees and landscaping on these private property areas for over 30 years,
a prescriptive easement has likely been established. Under a prescriptive easement, the City/LMD
may, but is not obligated to, continue to maintain these private property areas. If the City/LMD
2 of 8 April 20, 2021, Item #15
continues maintenance, property owners must allow access. Additionally, if the City/LMD continues
to maintain these private property areas, it can only provide the same level of maintenance it has
been providing, e.g., no enhancements/improvements. Property owners may also maintain these
areas, including trimming or removing trees in accordance with City's tree removal permit process. If
the City ceases to maintain these areas for five continuous years, it loses its ability to maintain them
in the future. In the recent months, staff, the City Attorney, and the Advisory Group extensively
worked together (virtually) to understand the issues of providing (and/or not providing) maintenance
and rehabilitation of these private property areas. Options for future maintenance of these private
property areas were evaluated. The following are the Advisory Group's and staffs preferred approach.
Advisory Group Recommendation: The Advisory Group evaluated five options (See Attachment A) to
address future maintenance and rehabilitation on private property. In accordance with the Advisory
Group's goals, the options supported are to continue maintenance along the private property areas
(no improvements) through a prescriptive easement and obtain formal easements for private
property areas at neighborhood entrances (corner lots) to rehabilitate landscaping and provide for
ongoing maintenance at entrances. If this option demonstrates to be financially unfeasible as may be
presented by the LMP or a future engineer's report, the Advisory Group alternative (second
preference) is to discontinue maintenance in private property areas along roadways, but obtain
formal easements for those private property areas at neighborhood entrances (Option D). Staff
supports the Advisory Group's options (in order of preference) as the approach to address the future
maintenance in these private property areas. The preferred option (Option E) allows for continuity of
maintenance, continual use of the prescriptive easement, and uniformity along the north side ofTwin
Peaks Road. This preferred approach is desired while the LMP, subsequent engineer's report,
hazardous tree removal plan are completed and additional information on maintenance and
rehabilitation costs is obtained.
Consequently, staff requests City Council's direction on staff's recommendation to only advance the
Advisory Group's preferred Options E and D, to address maintenance and rehabilitation relative to
private property along the north side of Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Community
Road, pending the completion of costing of the LMP and the hazardous tree removal plan. Staff and
the Advisory Group anticipates returning to the City Council with a single preferred option at a future
date.
Environmental Review:
This action is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Fiscal Impact:
The direction requested has the potential to have a fiscal impact and that analysis will be brought
forward prior to City Council making a final determination.
Public Notification:
None.
3 of 8 April 20, 2021, Item #15
Attachments:
A. LMD Advisory Group Recommendation
Reviewed/Approved By:
Assistant City Manager
4of 8
Reviewed By:
Alan Fenstermacher
City Attorney
·~,,_._, .. ~e
City Manager
April 20, 2021, Item #15
Date: March 11, 2021
To: City of Poway City Council
From: Landscape Maintenance District Advisory Group (LMDAG)
Subject: LMDAG Recommendation Regarding City/LMD Maintenance of Private Property Areas
within the LMDs
LMDAG Recommendation
Purpose of this memo: To forward a recommendation to the City Council from the Landscape
Maintenance District Advisory Group (LMDAG) regarding future maintenance of private property areas that
have been historically maintained by LMD 83-1 and LMD 86-1.
Although the LMDAG has had to put a number of activities on hold during the COVID health crisis, we have
continued to work with City staff to evaluate and strategize on how best to address the future of
maintenance on the private property areas that the LMDs have been maintaining since inception more than
30 years ago. This issue is most pronounced in LMD 83-1 (Twin Peaks Road) where private property
extends up to 22 feet beyond the sound wall shielding backyards from the roadway.
LMDAG Goals: At its inception in Fall 2018, the LMDAG established several key goals that provided the
framework for our consideration and recommendation on this private property issue:
• rehabilitate the landscaping within the LMDs, particularly at the entrances to neighborhoods
• address fire and life safety issues presented by the large number and size of eucalyptus trees within
the LMDs
• reduce/stabilize ongoing costs to maintain the LMD landscaping
• establish a funding and revenue plan that is fair to both the property owners and City
• ensure success of a second ballot to generate the assessment revenues necessary to preserve the
landscaping and sustain the LMDs into the future.
LMDAG Recommendation: The LMDAG developed five options to address future maintenance and
rehabilitation on private property the LMDs have historically been maintaining (these options are described
below). The options generally distinguish between private property along the roadways (Twin Peaks Road
and Espola Road) and private property at neighborhood entrances from these two roadways. Based on the
LMDAG goals identified above, and meetings with and information provided by City staff, including the City
Attorney, the LMDAG has identified a first and second preference (tailback) recommendation. Future
completion of the Landscape Master Plan and Engineer's Report, as well as the FEMA grant tree removal
plan, will provide information on rehabilitation and maintenance costs that will allow the LMDAG to
eventually recommend a single preferred option. Meanwhile, adoption of the first and second preferred
options and elimination of the remaining options from further consideration will help focus the direction of
the LMDAG's and City's ongoing work on this issue.
These first and second preference options include the use of both Prescriptive Easements and Formal
Easements to allow for ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation of the private property areas in question.
Further discussion of these easement types is included toward the end of this memo.
ATTACHMENT A
5 of8 April 20, 2021, Item #15
The LMDAG's preferred option is as follows:
• Option E: Prescriptive Easements for Roadway Areas/Formal Easements for Entrances -LMD
landscape maintenance would continue to occur as it has in the past along the roadway private
property areas (the areas between the sound walls and the public rights-of-way) through activities
permitted under existing and ongoing prescriptive easements. In accordance with restrictions
inherent in prescriptive easements, no landscape rehabilitation or installation of improvements
would occur on private property roadway areas. The City would obtain Formal Easements only for
those private property areas at the neighborhood entrances to allow the City/LMD to rehabilitate
landscaping and provide ongoing maintenance at neighborhood entrances.
The LMDAG prefers this option because it:
• Would allow for rehabilitation, as well as ongoing maintenance, of neighborhood entrances
• Allows for the City/LMDs to continue the 5-year cycle of tree maintenance in the roadway private
property areas to help address the fire and life safety issue (and also allows homeowners to trim
and/or remove trees on their properties with a permit from'the City)
• Promotes a consistent level of maintenance between adjacent public and private areas along
roadways
• Does not require any new City action to continue to maintain roadway areas on private property
{past practice allows LMD/City maintenance to continue through existing prescriptive easements)
• Minimizes the burden of maintenance for property owners on inaccessible and public-facing
portions of their properties
• Greatly reduces the need for formal easements by focusing these on entrance areas only
Should future cost information provided by the final LMD Landscape Master Plan {currently on hold) and
LMD revenue/assessment needs obtained through the future Engineers' Report indicate that continuing to
maintain the private property along the roadways is financially infeasible, the LMDAG would consider a
second preference {fallback) option as follows:
• Option D: No Maintenance for Roadway Areas/Formal Easements for Entrances -The LMD would
cease to maintain private property areas along the roadways (between the public rights-of-way and
the sound walls) to reduce costs. {The public rights-of-way from the roadway curb to the private
property lines, generally 20 feet, would continue to be maintained by the City/LMDs.} The City
would obtain formal easements for those private property areas at the neighborhood entrances to
allow the City/LMD to rehabilitate landscaping and provide ongoing maintenance at neighborhood
entrances.
The LMDAG would defer to Option Das a second choice solely because it would reduce ongoing LMD
maintenance costs by ceasing to maintain roadway private property areas, helping bring LMD costs in
line with available revenues {including any anticipated increases in LMD assessment revenues through a
future ballot). Option D would also:
• Still allow for rehabilitation and maintenance of neighborhood entrances
• Allow homeowners to maintain and/or remove trees on their properties {with a permit from the
City)
6of8 April 20, 2021, Item #15
According to the Poway City Attorney, under either Option E or Option D, homeowners would not be
permitted to relocate or alter the sound wall without a Specific Plan Amendment, a Development
Review, and a supporting Noise Study for a boundary adjustment. Property owners also cannot deny
City access to these private property areas outside the sound walls.
Note: While the LMDAG is unanimous in its preference for Option E, the committee agreed to advance
Option Das a fallback second preference option with one member dissenting.
Short-Term Action: In both the preferred and secondary options, the LMDAG recommends that the City
initiate activities to obtain formal easements from private property owners whose properties encompass
the neighborhood entrance areas. This action could begin prior to final resolution of how to address the
roadway private property areas. At this time, the LMDAG also recommends that the City/LMD continue
regular maintenance on the private property areas along the roadways to retain the prescriptive easement
option until the financial feasibility of continuing to maintain these areas can be determined.
Background Information
Easement Options: There are basically two options for addressing maintenance on private property in the
future: 1) Discontinue City/LMD maintenance of private areas, and 2) Continue City/LMD maintenance
within the context of easements on private property. According to advice provided by the City Attorney,
there are two kinds of possible easements:
• Prescriptive Easements under which the City/LMD can only continue to do what has been done in
the past (landscape maintenance); no new activities, including landscape rehabilitation, would be
permitted. Based on past LMD/City maintenance activities, the City Attorney has advised that
prescriptive easements currently exist on the roadway and entrance private property areas.
• Formal Easements formal easements spell out what the City/LMD and property owner can, must,
and cannot do, and could indicate that the City/LMD are responsible for maintenance and would be
permitted to rehabilitate private property areas.
Private Property Maintenance Options: The LMDAG considered and evaluated five options for the private
property areas:
• Option A: Prescriptive Easements (Status Quo) -Continue City/LMD maintenance of roadway and
entrance private property areas through existing/ongoing prescriptive easements. No landscape
rehabilitation could occur anywhere on private property areas within the LMDs.
o The LMDAG does not recommend this option primarily because it does not allow for
rehabilitation of the neighborhood entrance areas, which is a specific goal of the LMDAG.
• Option B: Formal Easements -Obtain Formal Easements to rehabilitate and maintain all existing
roadway and entrance areas on private property
7 of8
o The LMDAG does not recommend this option because; 1) it requires the City to acquire
formal easements from a large number of property owners along both the roadways and at
neighborhood entrances, 2) if some property owners decline to grant an easement, it could
April 20, 2021, Item #15
result in inconsistent landscaping and maintenance, and 3) it requires the highest level of
funding from LMD to rehabilitate and maintain all public and private areas.
• Option C: No Easements -Cease City/LMD maintenance of all roadway and entrance areas on
private property
o The LMDAG does not recommend this option primarily because it eliminates the ability to
rehabilitate neighborhood entrances
• Option D: Formal Easements at Entrances/No Easements on Roadways -Obtain Formal Easements
at entrances for landscape rehabilitation and ongoing maintenance. Cease City/LMD maintenance
of roadway private property areas (the City/LMDs would continue to maintain, and could
rehabilitate, the public rights-of-way along the roadways).
o This option is the LMDAG's second preference recommendation in the event that future
information on the costs and necessary revenues required to continue to maintain the
roadway private property areas makes doing so financially infeasible. However, once a
prescriptive easement is abandoned for five years, there is the potential that private
property owners could add fencing or other uses (sheds, gardens) on their properties
beyond the sound wall, an outcome that might not be acceptable to the City.
• Option E: Prescriptive Easement on Roadways/Formal Easements at Entrances -Continue
City/LMD maintenance of roadway private property (and public rights-of-way) areas. Obtain
Formal Easements for rehabilitation and ongoing maintenance of entrances.
8of8
o This option is the LMDAG's preferred recommendation because it provides for
rehabilitation and maintenance of neighborhood entrances, as well as consistent
maintenance (including fire and life safety tree management) on the roadways in both
private and public areas between the sound walls and roadways. It also minimizes the
burden of maintenance from property owners on inaccessible and public-facing portions of
their properties.
April 20, 2021, Item #15