Item 15 Additional Material posted 4-20-211 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15M EM ORAN DLJ M City of Poway ADDITIONAL MATERIALS (Agenda Related Writings/Documents provided to City Council or Staff after distribution of the Agenda Packet for the April 20, 2021 Council Meeting) DATE: TO: FROM: CONTACT: SUBJECT: April 20, 2021 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Vaida Pavolas, City Clerk W (858) 668-4535 or vpavolas@poway.org Item 15 -Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Advisory Group Update Attached please find correspondence received after the agenda posting deadline. Reviewed/Approved By: Assistant City Manager Reviewed By: Alan Fenstermacher City Attorney
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS2 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15From: To: Joanna Ortega ~ Subject: Comments regarding April 20, 2021 City Council Hearing; Item 15 (LMD) Monday, April 19, 2021 8:40:05 PM Date: Attachments: City of Poway LMD Comment.docx To: Mayor and City Council From: Joanna Ziegenhohn (12797 Treeridge Terrace) Re: Landscape Maintenance District Advisory Group Update -Item 15 on April 20, 2021 Docket Date: April 19 ,2021 Please accept and consider the following comments regarding the LMD. I have read the available posted materials and will briefly state my concerns here as they relate to the Twin Peaks component: • First, the LMD, nor the City have directly sought input from the 50 +/-residents who are directly affected by this issue. There should have been meetings and mailers and invitations to discuss the issues, constraints, legalities, and possible solutions with the affected parties and not through an advisory group that may or may not be directly affected and may or may not accurately represent the residents. • My house directly abuts Twin Peaks Road. I walk along Twin Peaks with frequency, so was aware when survey stakes popped up and then noticed the shiny tree tags on the trees within the staked areas. There had been no mailed notice to us that this was happening and we could only surmise that this was a pre-emptive attempt to shift landscape and tree management for this gateway into the City of Poway onto the few residents that abut Twin Peaks. In fact, until then we were not aware that our property extended beyond the sound wall and berm. • Regarding the sound wall and berm -even the City did not know it and lands facing Twin Peaks Road were not owned by the City until they performed the site analysis for LMD-83-1 when" 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." (Page 2 of the Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Advisory Group Update (Update); April 20, 2021) By virtue of the City maintaining these areas, they have managed the lands and the eucalyptus trees in question. They have monitored, trimmed, watered, and allow to grow hundreds of saplings that later became large trees. The City has cut trees when they felt appropriate and left other volunteers to grow. Behind our portion of the wall are tree stumps from when the City cut trees within the last two or so years. Certainly, within the time frame that they have been investigating this. • As we understand the two LMD recommendations: o the preferred option is to continue maintenance along the private property areas (no improvements) through a prescriptive easement
3 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15and obtain formal easements for private property areas at neighborhood entrances ( corner lots) to rehabilitate landscaping and provide for ongoing maintenance at entrances. o If "financially unfeasible" then the second option would be to discontinue maintenance in private property areas along roadways but obtain formal easements for those private property areas at neighborhood entrances. o First, we would ask the City to reconsider the value of these areas as an introduction to the City to the many drivers who enter along this major throughfare. State Route 56 (Ted Williams Highway) end at Twin Peaks Road, directing many into and through the City through this road. Poway is known for, among other things, its great School District. Twin Peaks passes by two schools and an adult education center. Please consider the negative effect that varying states of maintenance will have on perception of Poway and property values. Twin Peaks is a City resource and not just a Rancho Arbolitos or LMD resource. Twin Peaks is considered to be a Major Arterial Road, just like Community and Poway Roads for which we all pay for maintenance on. There should be no LMD associated with Twin Peaks Road. o Second, please consider that I have counted 11 tagged eucalyptus trees within that City-managed area. I am currently unsure about my legal responsibility of those City-managed planted and supported trees, but if I am forced to cut down the trees by heavily insured contractors, then I would likely have to spend upwards of $2,000 per tree (not counting the City permitting fees that are hinted at). I have 2 kids in college and I certainly cannot afford a $22,000 hit. Could you? • Request -as you deliberate, I ask that you consider and stick with option E. If you can't, then I hope that you give serious thought to providing the affected residents a one-time offer for the City to cut down the trees within their new un-usable property adjacent to Twin Peaks Road. This would only be fair to your city constituency. • I have heard that the City maintains that residents are not able to do anything with the berm and wall. I reviewed the Tract Map (No. 4191-IR) and it states that we have a sewer easement on our property and there are two notes: o Existing easement public highway per file No. 80-363497recorded October 30, 1980 in favor of County of San Diego now vests in the City of Poway, and, o Access rights from lots 88 thru 94 in and to Twin Peaks Road relinquished and waived herein. o There does not appear to be a wall or berm easement noted. Either the wall and berm are ours or the City is responsible for the area outside the wall. Respectfully, I would like to better understand the legal support for the City stance on this issue. • Finally, could you please provide clarity on why the proposed actions would not require CEQA review? Is it because there is no action taking place yet because you are only exploring an Advisory Group's recommendations, or would the project not require CEQA review on its own merit? There appear to be potential aesthetics, forestry resources (urban forest), air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions ( carbon sequestration release), hydrology and water quality, and noise (what effect will reduced tree density cause?). Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
4 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15Joanna Ziegenhohn 12797 Treeridge Terrace
5 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15From: To: Subject: Date: Travis Curry ~ Agenda item 15 Tuesday, April 20, 2021 9:27:52 AM Hello I live at 12641 peachwood court. I prefer the city to continue maintaining the area on the other side of the wall. The trees would be too expensive for me to handle. I would prefer they would be all removed since they continually drop leaves into my backyard. They might have been nice years ago but now they're too tall, expensive, and dangerous for us homeowners to manage. Thanks, Travis curry
6 of 6April 20, 2021, Item #15From: To: Subject: Date: ~ ~ City Counsel Mtg. Agenda Item #15, 4.20.21 Monday, April 19, 2021 7:46: 11 PM Dear City Council Members, We live at 12631 Peachwood Ct in Rancho Arbolitos. Our property is adjacent to the north side of Twin Peaks Rd. We have owned our home since September 1991. There is a wall that separates the accessible portion of our backyard from land which slopes significantly downhill to the sidewalk. Evidently most of this inaccessible land is our property and the rest is the city's. The entire area has been maintained by the city since day one. Now we have learned that the City Council will hear a recommendation which potentially could result in maintenance responsibilities being shifted to the home owners. This is Agenda Item 15 for the April 20th council meeting. This change will be prohibitively expensive for us homeowners. We are now retired, living on a fixed income, and facing many health problems. Moreover, we evidently cannot even access the land in question. If this land and the tall eucalyptus trees situated there are not maintained properly, there will be a serious environmental and public safety issue created. We would probably be willing to absorb a nominal increase in LMD fees in exchange for continuation of the existing city maintenance approach. We feel this is the only fair approach to our city's long time, honest residents such as ourselves. Thank you, Audrey and Howard Koble 858 4860889 Audrey79@cox.net Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone