CC SR 20251202 02 - Arterial Street and Park Beautification
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 12/02/2025
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consider a report on potential future Citywide street and park beautification projects.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Receive and file a report on potential future Citywide street and park beautification
projects.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to receive this report. Under the discussion
section of this report, estimated costs and potential funding sources
are identified that could support Citywide beautification projects, if
desired by the City Council. VR
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Deanna Fraley, PE, Principal Engineer
REVIEWED BY: Ramzi Awwad, Director of Public Works
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Resolution No. 92-85 Ordering the Formation of a Citywide Landscaping and
Lighting Maintenance District (page A-1)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• Staff have received numerous requests for street beautification and park
improvement projects including Councilmember Ferraro.
• The cost for arterial street beautification projects is estimated to range from
approximately $2M to $3M per mile with a total need of approximately 10 miles;
and the cost for improving Lower Hesse Park is estimated to be approximately
$650K.
• There are significant budget gaps for core infrastructure projects such as repair of
facilities, storm sewers, and pavement; making beautification and park
improvement projects difficult to prioritize for funding.
1
BACKGROUND:
Over the years, Staff have received numerous requests for street beautification projects;
including for improvements along Western Avenue, Hawthorne Boulevard and Palos
Verdes Drive South (PVDS). Additionally, Staff have received requests for improvements
to the lower area of Fred Hesse Community Park adjacent to Locklenna Drive (Lower
Hesse Park). To support the discussion, Councilmember Ferraro, at the September 20,
2022 meeting, requested this item be added to a future agenda for the City Council’s
consideration.
At present, the City does not have a dedicated funding source to address these requests
and these projects are difficult to prioritize for funding considering funding gaps for core
infrastructure needs such as repair of building facilities, storm drains, and roadway
pavement. Therefore, current beautification efforts are limited to weed abatement and
routine maintenance of parks and arterial streets. However, if desired by the City Council,
this could be reprioritized to support new beautification projects if funding streams
become available or existing funds are reappropriated.
DISCUSSION:
The following discussion summarizes potential Citywide arterial street and park
beautification projects with an estimated cost in today’s dollars.
Arterial Streets
Staff reviewed the City’s arterial roadways and identified the following corridors as
candidates for enhanced beautification; which generally consists of new trees, shrubs,
ground cover, drip irrigation, street name signs, and lighting:
• Western Avenue from Summerland Street to Peninsula Verde Drive
(This project was approved for design in the CIP as Project 8840. The design is
now complete and the project is on hold awaiting funding for construction.)
• Hawthorne Boulevard from Crest Road to Ravenspur Drive
• Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS)/Palos Verdes Drive West (PVDW) from
Marguerite Drive to Sea Cove Drive
• Crest Road from Hawthorne Boulevard to Crenshaw Boulevard
Costs
Staff prepared estimates of the cost of implementing beautification projects on the
candidate arterial streets shown above. The cost estimates are at a concept level and
based on a general beautification scope similar to existing beautified arterial streets as
shown in Figure 1 on the following page.
Costs are presented in today’s dollars without accounting for inflation because the
timeline for potentially implementing beautification projects is unknown. The cost is highly
dependent on the specific beautification design and existing conditions. Therefore, the
2
estimated costs are presented as a range to give an idea of the magnitude of funding
needed. The estimated costs are summarized in Table 1 on the following page.
Figure 1: Sample Beautification Treatment Used for Cost Estimating
Table 1: Estimated Costs of Potential Street Beautification Projects
Corridor Length Cost Estimate (2025
Dollars)
Western Avenue
(Summerland St. to Peninsula Verde Dr.)
2 miles $4.75M
Hawthorne Boulevard
(Crest Rd. to Ravenspur Dr.)
2.5 miles $4M to $6M
PVDS and PVDW (Marguerite Dr. to Sea
Cove Dr.)
3.75 miles $9M to $12M
Crest Road
(Hawthorne Blvd. to Crenshaw Blvd.)
2 miles $2.75M to $4.5M
Total 10.25 miles $20.5M to $27.25M
Revenue
Existing Sources
Arterial street beautification projects may be funded from the General Fund, Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) Fund, Gas Tax, SB1, local return of Proposition C, local
return of Measure R, and/or Measure M.
Considering the gap in funding for the maintenance and repair of building facilities, storm
drains, and other core infrastructure; Staff do not recommend using the General Fund or
CIP Fund towards beautification projects. Additionally, considering the need to delay
pavement rehabilitation projects on arterial streets and pause pavement rehabilitation
projects on residential streets; Staff do not recommend using SB1, local return of
Proposition C, local return of Measure R, or Measure M funds towards beautification
projects.
3
External Grants
Another potential revenue source for street beautification projects is external grant
funding. Staff and the City’s grants consultants regularly search for grants applicable to
beautification projects.
Staff have rarely seen grants for beautification projects within the past five years, with
only a few exceptions. The California Clean California Local Grant Program is one
exception; however, the eligibility requirements state that projects should be fully or
partially located in an underserved community, demonstrate a direct benefit to an
underserved community, and at least 75% of the population surrounding the project site
must be underserved. Another exception is the US DOT Safe Streets and Roads for All
program; however, beautification can only be included when incorporated into a project
that is primarily a safety improvement, making beautification a minor component ancillary
to a safety project. At this time, external grants do not appear to be a feasible funding
source for beautification of the City’s arterial streets.
Citywide Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD)
Under California’s Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, LLMDs may levy assessments
to fund maintenance and operation of existing improvements and, under certain
conditions; the installation of new landscaping, lighting, or related public improvements.
New improvement may be funded when they provide a “special benefit” to the assessed
properties, beyond a general benefit to the public .
The City Council formed its LLMD on August 6, 1992 (Attachment A), p ursuant to the
Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, (Streets and Highways Code §22500 et seq.). The
City’s current LLMD authorizes the operation, maintenance and servicing of landscaping,
public lighting facilities (including traffic signals and appurtenant facilities), and park and
recreational improvements. The LLMD does not currently include authority for installation
of new landscaping.
The City has not collected LLMD revenue since May 16, 2017, when the City Council set
LLMD rate to zero. However, at its June 17, 2025 meeting, the City Council adopted a
resolution establishing the LLMD assessment rate at $23.50 for most parcels, the level in
place when Proposition 218 was enacted. The rate is now estimated to generate
approximately $385,000 in annual revenue; which will be incorporated into the FY 2025 -
26 budget during the midyear financial review. However, the City’s cost for maintaining
existing street landscaping, which is approximately $1,189,000, significantly exceeds the
annual review. Additionally, approximately $1,850,000 is in trails & open space, parks,
and other landscape maintenance as eligible for funding through the LLMD. Table 2 on
the following page summarizes the City’s eligible expenditures that may be funded
through the LLMD along with their current funding source.
4
Table 2: FY 2025-26 Budget Items Eligible Projects for LLMD Funding
Category Proposed FY 2025-26 Budget
General Fund
Trails & Open Space Maintenance $429,000
Parks Maintenance $1,174,000
Tree Trimming – View Restoration $175,000
Graffiti Abatement $72,000
Street Landscape Maintenance – Water & Irrigation $304,500
General Fund Sub Total $2,154,500
Gas Tax
Street Landscape Maintenance $837,000
Gas Tax Sub Total $837,000
Measure M
Street Landscape Maintenance $636,000
Measure M Sub Total $636,000
Waste Reduction Fund
Landscaping Materials $111,500
Sub Total $111,500
LLMD Assessment -$385,000
Total $3,354,000
The City Council may elect to amend Resolution No 92 -85 to include new landscaping
and may further elect to set rates higher than the existing LLMD rates, with the option to
adjust rates annually based on inflation. These actions would require voter approval
through the Proposition 218 process. Proposition 218 requires the City to provide written
notice of a proposed assessment along with a ballot, by mail, to the record owners of all
parcels proposed to be assessed. A duly noticed public hearing is also required where
the City must consider all protests and tabulate ballots. The proposed assessment cannot
be imposed if there is a majority protest.
Updating Street Signs
The City Council has previously considered a CIP project to update street signs on arterial
streets; however, the project was not prioritized for funding in multiple years and
eventually removed from the CIP in favor of more pressing core infrastructure needs.
Costs
Staff prepared a cost estimate for implementing a street sign update project independent
of a comprehensive arterial streets beautification project. At a concept level, the cost of
such a project is estimated to be $500,000. This estimate is in today’s dollars without
5
accounting for inflation because the timeline for potentially implementing such a project
is unknown.
Revenue
Existing Sources
A project to update street signs may be funded from the General Fund, Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) Fund, Gas Tax, SB1, local return of Proposition C, local
return of Measure R, and/or Measure M.
As described above, considering the gap in funding for the maintenance and repair of
building facilities, storm drains, and other core infrastructure; Staff do not recommend
using these sources towards a project to update street signs.
External Grants
Another potential revenue source for a project to update street signs is external grant
funding. Staff and the City’s grants consultants regularly search for such grants. In the
past five years, Staff have not seen grants for updating street signs; with the exception of
active transportation-based bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signs, typically for central
business districts. Staff and the City’s grants consultants will continue to proactively
search for grants applicable to a project to update street name signs.
Citywide Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD)
The City Council may elect to amend the City’s existing LLMD to include updating street
names signs and may further elect to set rates higher than the existing LLMD rates to
fund such work, with the option to adjust rates annually based on inflation.
Lower Hesse Park
As part of the FY 2025-26 CIP process, the Infrastructure Management Advisory
Committee (IMAC) identified an opportunity to partner with Staff to develop a concept
plan for landscaping improvements for Lower Hesse Park as a pilot program to assist
Staff with scoping non-technical project components.
The scope of work developed by IMAC, in conjunction with Staff, generally consists of
stabilizing the slope, repairing and expanding the existing irrigation system, removing
invasive plant species, and installing new drought-tolerant vegetation. The proposed
improvements seek to match the look and feel of nearby improvements completed in
2018. Figures 2 and 3 on the next page show the general concept plan.
6
Figure 2: Lower Hesse Park Proposed Area of Improvements
Figure 3: Concept of Lower Hesse Park Proposed Improvements
7
Costs
The cost of the work is estimated to be approximately $650,000 in today’s dollars without
accounting for inflation because the timeline for potentially implementing the
improvements is unknown.
Revenue
Existing Sources
Park improvement projects may be funded from the General Fund, CIP Fund, Measure A
Parks Maintenance/Improvement Fund, and/or Quimby Development Impact Fund.
Considering the gap in funding for the maintenance and repair of building facilities, storm
drains, and other core infrastructure; Staff do not recommend using the General Fund or
CIP Fund towards Lower Hesse Park improvements. Staff recommend that using
Measure A Park Maintenance/Improvement Fund or Quimby Development Impact Fund
be considered as part of the regular budget process in the context of competing priorities.
External Grants
Staff, in partnership with various parties including the P alos Verdes Peninsula Land
Conservancy (PVPLC) and South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), to
pursue potential grant funding and community volunteer opportunities. At this time, there
is no specific grant identified for which the proposed project is eligible.
Staff and the City’s grants consultants will continue to proactively search for grants
applicable to improvements to Lower Hesse Park.
Citywide Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD)
As described above, the City Council may elect to amend Resolution No 92-85 to include
park improvements through a duly noticed public hearing process and may further elect
to set rates higher than the existing LLMD rates, and with the option to adjust rates
annually based on inflation. These actions would require voter approval through the
Proposition 218 process.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommend that the City Council receive and file a report on Citywide street and
park beautification projects.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to Staff’s Recommendations, the following alternative actions are available for
the City Council’s consideration:
8
1. Direct Staff to return to a future meeting on information to pursue the Prop 218
process to include new landscaping as an eligible project for LLMD funding
and/or to consider increasing the rate to charge residents.
2. Identify potential beautification projects that should be prioritized for funding
and direct staff to return to a future meeting with more information for the City
Council’s consideration.
3. Direct Staff to return to a future meeting with information on how to generate
additional revenue to fund potential Citywide beautification projects.
4. Take other action as the City Council deems appropriate.
9
RESOLUTION NO. 92 -85
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ORDERING THE FORMATION
OF A CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF
SUCH DISTRICT WITH LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO, 1 AND LANDSCAPE AND
OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 AND
CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FOR THE
1992 -93 FISCAL YEAR IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH
CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 2
OF DIVISION 15 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND
HIGHWAYS CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council has previously formed
Landscape and Open Space Maintenance District No. 1 and Landscape
and Open Space Maintenance District No. 2.pursuant to the
provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being
Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code
the "Act ") . Landscape and Open Space Maintenance District No. 1
is comprised of the area within Tract Map No. 32673. Landscape
and Open Space Maintenance District No. 2 is comprised of the
area within Tract Map No. 31617.
Section 2.. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the
City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, by its
Resolution Nos. 92 -72 and 92 -74, initiated proceedings for and
declared its intention to order the formation of a Citywide
landscaping and lighting maintenance district designated as the
Citywide Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District" (the
District ") , to consolidate such District with Landscape and Open
Space Maintenance District No. 1 and Landscape and Open Space
Maintenance District No. 2, and to levy an assessment against
lots and parcels of property within such District for the f fiscal
year commencing July 1, 1992 and ending June 30, 1993. The City
Council, by its Resolution No. 92 - 72 ordered the Engineer to
prepare and file a written report in accordance with Article 4 of
Chapter 1 of the.Act and, by its Resolution No. 92 -73, approved
such Engineer's Report.
Section 3. Subsequent to the approval of the
Engineer's Report by the City Council, the Engineer has modified
the Engineer's Report. Such modifications have not changed the
total assessment for the estimated costs of the improvements or
the amounts of the individual assessments against lots and
parcels of land within the District, as shown on the assessment
roll on file in the office of the City Clerk.
A-1
Section 4. Following notice duly given b publication
and mail, the City ouncil has
Y p • Y
its
held a full and fair publichearingregardingitsResolutionNo. 92 -74 the Engineer'sReport, as modified, the formation of the District the
consolidation of the District with Landscape and Open SpacepppeMaintenanceDistrictNo, 1 and Landscape and Open Space
Maintenance District No. 2 and the levy and collectionon of the .
proposed assessment within the District for fiscal year 1992 -93
expenses
to pay for the costs and ex
Y
p s of the improvements describedinSection8below, pursuant to the terms and r ' p ovisions of theAct. All interested persons were afforded the opportunityhearandbeheardregarding .
pp Y to
g g protests and objections to theformationofthe-District, the consolidation of the ' District withLandscapeandOpenSpaceMaintenanceDistrictNo. 1 and LandscapeandOpenSpaceMaintenanceDistrictNo. 2 and the levytheproposed
andcollectionofppdassessmentagainstlotsorparcels of
property within the District. The City Council considered alloralandwrittenstatements ' , protests and communications made orfiledbyinterestedpersons. Written protests have beenn filedandnotwithdrawnrepresentingntingpropertyownersowninglessthanfiftypercentoftheareaofassessablelandwithintheproposedDistrict. All oral and written protests and objections
the C' ]
tionsareherebyoverruledbyCityCouncil.
Section 5. Based upon its review of the Engineer'sReport, as modified, a co of which
g
copy ch has been presented to theCityCouncilandwhichhasbeenfiledwiththeCitylerkotherreportsandinformationY , and
the City Council hereby finds anddeterminesthat (i) the district of land within t • be benefitted by het
he District will
improvements described in Section 8 below, ii) the District includes all of the lands so ben ' of fitted, andiii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within theDistrictforthe1992 -93 fiscal ear in accordanceante with theEngineer's Report, described above is apportioned
and method which fairly
p ned by a formula
rly distributes the net amount among allassessablelotsorparcelsinproportiontotheestimatedbenefitstobereceivedbyeachsuchlotorparcelfromtheimprovements.
Section 6, The City Council hereby orders theformationoftheCitywideLandscapingandLightingMaintenanceDistrict,
Section 7, The City Council hereby orders theconsolidationofLandscapeandOpenSpaceMaintenance '
a
p ance DistrictNo. 1 and Landscape and Open Space Maintenance District No. 2withtheCitywideLandscapingandLightingMaintenance ' The resulting single
g. • Hance District®
g g assessment district is designated "Cit wideLandscapingandsightingMaintenanceDistrict"
Y
rict and Landscape andOpenSpaceMaintenanceDistrictNo. 1 and Landscape and OpenSpaceMaintenanceDistrictNo. 2 no longer exist as separatedistricts.
2
Resol. No. 92 -85A-2
Section 8. The City Council hereby orders the proposed
improvements to be made as described in the Engineer's Report, as
modified, which improvements are briefly described as follows:
the operation, maintenance and servicing of landscaping,
including trees, shrubs, grass and other ornamental vegetation,
and appurtenant facilities, including irrigation systems and
drainage devices; the operation, maintenance and servicing of,
public lighting facilities, including traffic signals, and
appurtenant facilities; and the operation, maintenance and
servicing of park and recreational improvements, including
lights, athletic fields, playgrounds, playground equipment,
public restrooms, park furniture, site amenities and appurtenant
facilities.
Section 9, The Engineer's Report, as modified, and now
on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby approved. The
City Council hereby confirms the diagram and assessment set forth
in such Engineer's Report.
Section 10. The assessment is in compliance with the
provisions of the Act.
Section 11. The assessment is levied without regard to
property valuation.
Section 12. Public property owned by any public agency
and in use in the performance of a public function which is
included within the boundaries of the District shall not be
subject to assessment to be made under these proceedings to pay
for any of the costs and expenses of the improvements.
Section 13. The assessment is levied for the purpose
of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in
Section 8 above for fiscal year 1992 -93.
Section 14. The improvements described in Section 8
above shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor
of Los Angeles County shall enter on the County Assessment Roll
opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of the assessment
and such assessments shall then be collected at the same time and
in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After
collection. by the County, the net amount of the assessments shall
be paid to the City Treasurer. N
Section 15, The City Treasurer shall deposit all
moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the
credit of a special fund known as Improvement Fund, Citywide
Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District.
Section 16,
constitutes the levy of
parcels of land in the
July 1, 1992 and ending
The adoption of this Resolution
an assessment against the lots and
District for the fiscal year commencing
June 30, 19934D
3 Resol. No. 92 -85
A-3
Section 17. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to file the diagram and assessment, or a certified copy
of the diagram and assessment, with the County Auditor, together
with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption.
Section 18. A certified copy of the assessment and
diagram shall be filed in the Department of Public Works, with a
duplicate copy on file in the office of the City Clerk and open
for public inspection.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 4th day of August,
1992.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
State of California
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 92 -85
was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City
Council at a regular meeting thereof held on August 4, 1992.0
City€ Clerk, City of
Rancho Pal
4 Resol. No. 92 -85
A-4