Attachment 2
CITY OF BURBANK
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
January 2023
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
2 CREDITS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
City of Burbank
✓ Jess Talamantes, Mayor
✓ Konstantine Anthony, Vice-Mayor
✓ Bob Frutos, City Council Member
✓ Nick Schultz, City Council Member
✓ Sharon Springer, City Council Member
✓ Justin Hess, City Manager
✓ Judie Wilke, Assistant City Manager
✓ Eric Garcia, Fire Chief
✓ Eric Baumgardner, Emergency Management Coordinator
✓ Channing Reyes, Intermediate Clerk
✓ Matthew Smyj, Emergency Management Intern
POINT OF CONTACT
To request information or provide comments regarding this mitigation plan, please contact:
MAPPING AND VISUAL PRODUCTS
The maps and other visual aids in this plan were provided by the City of Burbank, County of Los Angeles, State of California, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), other Federal Agencies, or were acquired from public domain sources. Care was taken in the creation of the maps contained in this plan ; however, they are provided "as is." The City of Burbank cannot accept any responsibility for errors, omissions, or positional inaccuracies; therefore, there are no warranties that accompany these products (maps, images, tables). Although information from land surveys may have been used in the creation of these products, in no way does this product represent or constitute a land survey. Users are cautioned to verify field information on visual products used in this document before making any decisions.
MANDATED CONTENT
In an effort to assist the readers and reviewers of this document, the jurisdiction has inserted “markers” emphasizing mandated content as identified in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law – 390). The following example is a sample marker:
*EXAMPLE*
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A1a
Q: Does the plan document the planning process, including how it was prepared (with a narrative description, meeting minutes, sign-in sheets, or another method)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1)) A:
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
3 Table of Contents
CREDITS ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 2 POINT OF CONTACT .................................................................................................................................. 2 MAPPING AND VISUAL PRODUCTS ........................................................................................................ 2 MANDATED CONTENT .............................................................................................................................. 2 TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 1 OFFICIAL RECORD OF ADOPTION ............................................................................................. 7
1.1 DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000 ................................................................................................ 8
1.2 ADOPTION BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION .............. 8 Section 2 COMMUNITY DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 9
2.1 HISTORY AND LOCATION ................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 ENVIRONMENT................................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 GOVERNMENT ................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 DEMOGRAPHICS ................................................................................................................................ 12
2.5 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ....................................................................................... 13 Section 3 PLANNING GUIDANCE ............................................................................................................... 16
3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 16
3.2 LEGAL FOUNDATION ......................................................................................................................... 17
3.3 PRIMARY and SECONDARY STAKEHOLDERS ................................................................................ 18
3.4 TERTIARY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT ..................................................................................... 19
3.5 PLANNING TEAM INVOLVEMENT ..................................................................................................... 19
3.6 PLANNING APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 20
3.7 PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS ............................................................................................................. 20
3.8 PLAN APPROVAL ............................................................................................................................... 21
3.9 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT – RESOURCES .................................................................................... 21
3.9.1 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT – RESOURCE TYPES ..............................................................................................21
3.10 USE OF EXISTING DATA ................................................................................................................. 27 Section 4 RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................... 29
4.1 OVERVIEW OF RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................. 29
4.2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING .................................................................................. 29
4.2.1 CRITICAL FACILITIES..................................................................................................................................................33
4.2.2 CHANGES IN DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................................................34
4.3 HAZARD PROFILES ............................................................................................................................ 34 Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
4 4.3.1 EARTHQUAKE ...............................................................................................................................................................34
4.3.1.1 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF EARTHQUAKES IN BURBANK ..............................................................35
4.3.1.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................................36
4.3.1.3 SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE ............................................................................................................................37
4.3.1.4 SIERRA MADRE FAULT ZONE ..........................................................................................................................38
4.3.1.5 NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD FAULT.......................................................................................................................39
4.3.1.6 OAK RIDGE FAULT ...............................................................................................................................................40
4.3.1.7 VERDUGO FAULT .................................................................................................................................................41
4.3.1.8 EARTHQUAKE-RELATED HAZARDS ...............................................................................................................42
4.3.1.8.1 GROUND SHAKING .......................................................................................................................................43
4.3.1.8.2 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED LANDSLIDES ...................................................................................................43
4.3.1.8.3 LIQUEFACTION ..............................................................................................................................................43
4.3.1.9 IMPACTS OF EARTHQUAKES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK ........................................................................45
4.3.2 FLOODS ..........................................................................................................................................................................48
4.3.2.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) .....................................................................................48
4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION ..........................................................................................................................................49
4.3.2.3 REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES .....................................................................................................................51
4.3.2.4 LOCAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................................52
4.3.3 WINDSTORMS ..............................................................................................................................................................60
4.3.3.1 WINDSTORM IMPACTS .......................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.1.1 LIFE AND PROPERTY ..................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.1.2 UTILITIES .........................................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.1.3 INFRASTRUCTURE .......................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.1.4 FIRE THREAT .................................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.1.5 TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................................................61
4.3.3.2 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK ..........................................62
4.3.3.3 LOCAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................................63
4.3.3.4 IMPACT OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK .............................................................................64
4.3.4 EPIDEMIC/PANDEMIC/VECTOR-BORNE (EPV) DISEASE .................................................................................65
4.3.4.1 SEASONAL INFLUENZA ......................................................................................................................................65
4.3.4.2 PANDEMIC INFLUENZA ......................................................................................................................................65
4.3.4.3 H1N1 INFLUENZA .................................................................................................................................................65
4.3.4.4 COVID-19 ................................................................................................................................................................66
4.3.4.5 AVIAN INFLUENZA................................................................................................................................................66
4.3.4.6 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE ................................................................................................................................66
4.3.4.7 MOSQUITO-BORNE VIRUSES ...........................................................................................................................67 Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
5 4.3.4.8 VALLEY FEVER .....................................................................................................................................................67
4.3.4.9 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK.........................................68
4.3.4.10 LOCAL CONDITIONS .........................................................................................................................................68
4.3.4.11 IMPACT OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK .........................................................................70
4.3.5 DROUGHT ......................................................................................................................................................................71
4.3.5.1 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK .................................................72
4.3.5.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................................73
4.3.5.3 IMPACT OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK ....................................................................................74
4.3.6 WILDFIRE .......................................................................................................................................................................75
4.3.6.1 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK...................................................75
4.3.6.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................................76
4.3.6.3 IMPACT OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK......................................................................................78 Section 5 MITIGATION PLANNING PROCESS .......................................................................................... 80
5.1 GOALS ................................................................................................................................................. 80
5.1.1 PROTECT LIFE AND PROPERTY .............................................................................................................................80
5.1.2 PUBLIC AWARENESS .................................................................................................................................................80
5.1.3 PARTNERSHIP AND IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................81
5.1.4 EMERGENCY SERVICES ...........................................................................................................................................81
5.1.5 BENEFIT/COST RATINGS ..........................................................................................................................................81
5.1.6 PRIORITY RATING .......................................................................................................................................................82
5.2 MITIGATION ACTION ITEMS – 2011 PLAN ....................................................................................... 82
5.2.1 MITIGATION ACTION ITEM STATUS – 2011 PLAN ........................................................................ 83
5.2.2 INTERIM MITIGATION ACTIONS ..................................................................................................... 84
5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS ........................................................................................................ 85
5.3.1 MITIGATION ACTION PRIORITY CHANGES ..........................................................................................................88
5.4 HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM .......................................................................................... 89
5.4.1 FORMATION OF THE PLANNING TEAM .................................................................................................................90
5.4.2 PLANNING TEAM MEETINGS AND TASKS ............................................................................................................90
5.5 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 90
5.5.2 PUBLIC WORKSHOPS ................................................................................................................................................90
5.6 INCORPORATION OF EXISTING PLANS .......................................................................................... 91 Section 6 PLAN MAINTENANCE ................................................................................................................ 92
6.1 ADOPTION AND REVIEW PROCESS ................................................................................................ 92
6.2 MONITORING ...................................................................................................................................... 92
6.3 IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................................. 93
6.4 ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT .............................................................................................. 93 Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
6 6.5 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF MITIGATION PROJECTS ....................................................................... 94
6.5.1 FEMA BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS GUIDELINES ............................................................................ 94
6.6 EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................................... 95
6.7 UPDATE PROCESS ............................................................................................................................ 95
6.8 EXTENDED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................. 96 APPENDICIES .............................................................................................................................................. 98 APPENDIX A: 2022 Burbank Mitigation Action Items and Status ........................................................ 98 APPENDIX B: Place Holder For City of Burbank Adoption Resolution ............................................. 107 APPENDIX C: Place Holder For FEMA Approval Letter ...................................................................... 109 APPENDIX D: Hazard Mitigation Public Survey .................................................................................. 110 APPENDIX E: California Building Codes 9-1-2-G102.2 & 9-1-2-G103.10 ........................................... 120
TABLES
Table 1 Burbank Population Data* ................................................................................................................................................10 Table 2 Burbank Population Demographics* ...............................................................................................................................13 Table 3 Capability Assessment – City Resources 1 ..................................................................................................................23 Table 4 Capability Assessment – City Resources 2 ..................................................................................................................24 Table 5 Capability Assessment – LA County Resources ..........................................................................................................25 Table 6 Capability Assessment – State, Regional, Federal Resources ..................................................................................26 Table 7 Capability Assessment – Private Resources ................................................................................................................26 Table 8 Calculated Priority Risk Index* .........................................................................................................................................30 Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank ....................................................................32 Table 10 Hazards: Standardized Measurement Scales ............................................................................................................33 Table 11 Impact Summary Comparison for Earthquake Scenarios .........................................................................................46 Table 12 Beaufort Wind Scale* .....................................................................................................................................................60 Table 13 2011 Burbank Mitigation Action Items .........................................................................................................................83 Table 14 Interim Burbank Mitigation Action Items ......................................................................................................................84
FIGURES
Figure 1 Burbank Location Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2 Burbank Zoning Map (Simplified) ..................................................................................................................................14 Figure 3 Shake Intensity Map – San Andreas Fault M7.8* .......................................................................................................37 Figure 4 Shake Intensity Map – Sierra Madre Fault M7.2* .......................................................................................................38 Figure 5 Shake Intensity Map – Newport-Inglewood Fault M7.2* ............................................................................................39 Figure 6 Shake Intensity Map – Oak Ridge Fault M7.2* ...........................................................................................................40 Figure 7 Shake Intensity Map – Verdugo Fault M6.9* ...............................................................................................................42 Figure 8 Burbank Liquefaction Potential Area* ...........................................................................................................................44 Figure 9 Burbank Critical Infrastructure* ......................................................................................................................................47 Figure 10 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1328* .............................................................................................................50 Figure 11 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1329* .............................................................................................................50 Figure 12 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1337* .............................................................................................................51 Figure 13 Reservoir 4 East Side Failure Inundation Map ..........................................................................................................55 Figure 14 Reservoir 4 South Side Failure Inundation Map .......................................................................................................56 Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
7 Figure 15 Reservoir 5 East Side Failure Inundation Map ..........................................................................................................57 Figure 16 Reservoir 5 South Side Failure Inundation Map .......................................................................................................58 Figure 17 Reservoir 5 West Side Failure Inundation Map.........................................................................................................59 Figure 18 Santa Ana Wind Direction and Impact Area ..............................................................................................................62 Figure 19 Adjusted COVID-19 Case Rate by City Within LA County* ....................................................................................69 Figure 20 Cumulative Cases and Deaths Due to COVID-19 for LA County* .........................................................................69 Figure 21 U.S. Drought Monitor Classification Scheme* ...........................................................................................................72 Figure 22 LA County Drought Conditions 2021* .........................................................................................................................74 Figure 23 Burbank Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone* .......................................................................................................77
Section 1 OFFICIAL RECORD OF ADOPTION
This section provides an overview of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000; Public Law 106 -390), the adoption of this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) by the local governing body and supporting documentation for the adoption.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
8 1.1 DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000
The DMA 2000 was passed by Congress to emphasize the need for mitigation planning to reduce vulnerability to natural and human -caused hazards. The DMA 2000 amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 United States Code 5121 et seq.) by repealing the Act’s previous Mitigation Planning section (409) and replacing it with a new Mitigation Planning section (322).
To implement the DMA 2000 planning requirements, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published an Interim Final Rule in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002 (FEMA 2002a). This rule (44 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 201) established the mitigation planning requirements for states, tribes, and local communities. The planning requirements are described in detail in Section 2 and identified in their appropriate sections throughout the Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan (the Plan).
1.2 ADOPTION BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION The requirements for the adoption of an LHMP by the local governing body, as stipulated in the DMA 2000 and its implementing regulations, are described below.
DMA 2000 REQUIREMENTS: PREREQUISITES
Adoption by the Local Governing Body
Requirement §201.6(c)(5): [The local hazard mitigation plan shall include] documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan (e.g., C ity Council, County Commissioner, Tribal Council).
Element
● Has the local governing body adopted the plan?
● Is supporting documentation, such as a resolution, included? Source: FEMA, March 2004.
The City of Burbank (the City) LHMP meets the requirements of Section 409 of the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act and Section 322 of the DMA 2000. This LHMP has been prepared by the City’s Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (Planning Team), made available for review to the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prior to being presented for review and adoption by the City Council via resolution. This resolution is available below in Appendix B.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
9 Section 2 COMMUNITY DESCRIPTION
This section describes the history, location, and environment of the City as well as its government, demographic information, and current land use and development trends.
Q&A | ELEMENT B3: JURISDICTION SUMMARY
Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s impact on the community as well as an overall summary of the community’s vulnerability for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(b)(3)) A: See 2.1 HISTORY AND LOCATION, and 2.2 ENVIRONMENT below.
2.1 HISTORY AND LOCATION
The City of Burbank is located in the eastern part of the San Fernando Valley, in Los Angeles County, approximately 12 miles from downtown Los Angeles. It is bordered by the cities of Glendale to the east, North Hollywood and Toluca Lake on the west, and Griffith Park to the sout h. The Verdugo Hills (AKA, Verdugo Mountains or simply “the Verdugos”) form the northern border. The location of Burbank is illustrated in the Figure 1 below.
Incorporated in 1911, the City occupies an area of about 17.4 square miles, of which about one -fourth is in the Verdugo Hills. The latest U.S. Census population estimate for Burbank (2019) is 102,511, an increase of about 2.0% since the 2010 census. The official City website notes that Burbank’s history is built on people, pride, and progress. These ingredients turned a sleepy, rural town into the thriving community it is today.
Originally part of two Spanish and Mexican -era colonial land grants, Rancho San Rafael and Rancho Providencia, the area that would become Burbank was settled across the 1870s and 1880s. Important steps Figure 1 Burbank Location Data
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
10 in the development of Burbank occurred in 1874 with the arrival of the Southern Pacific Railroad and in 1887 with establishment of a water system. Even with these arrivals, the town remained small at about 500 residents by the time it was incorporated. In 1920, the town had grown to 3,000 people and expanded rapidly through the 1950s as shown by the U.S. Census data in Table 1.
* U.S. Census Data. For reporting purposes, the Burbank Water and Power Department uses California Department of Finance population data, which may differ from Census data.
While growth from the 1920s to the 1950s was fueled by rapid expansion of the motion picture an d aviation industries, the City’s population declined in the 1960s and 1970s. Population and economic growth rebounded in the 1980s and since then Burbank has had a thriving economy with strong redevelopment and revitalization of the City’s economic base. Today, it is a prominent media and entertainment hub, which prides itself on a high quality of life, combining 21 st century technology and innovation while retaining a small -town ambiance.
Burbank is indeed, a city of “people, pride, and progress.” The City has two distinct geographic areas. Much of the land is in the San Fernando Valley, with generally flat topography and elevations around 500-feet. The northeastern part of Burbank extends from an alluvial fan into the foothills of the Verdugo Hills with elevations reaching about 2,600-feet.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1a Q: Does the plan include a general description of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 2.2 ENVIRONMENT below.
2.2 ENVIRONMENT
Some natural hazards, such as earthquakes, flooding, and drought, pose a hazard to the entire city of Burbank, with the level of risk varying with location soil type and construction . Other hazards, such as high winds, landslides, mudslides and wildland/urban interface fires pose a much greater risk in the foothill areas. Slopes Table 1 Burbank Population Data*
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
11 range from less than three percent in the valley floor areas, from three percent to ten percent in the alluvial fan areas, and to greater than ten percent in the hill areas.
The major waterways in the City include the Los Angeles River Flood Control Channel along Highway 5, the Burbank Western Flood Control Channel, and the Lockheed Drain Channel. The 2008 FEMA Flood Insurance Study for Los Angeles County identifies the Los Angeles River as the primary flood hazard however later FIRM studies for the confluence of the Burbank Western and Lockheed Drain Channels as having a greater risk.
The area’s climate is subtropical with average highs ranging from 67 o in January to 90 o in August. Average lows range from 41o in December to 62 o in July and August. Record high and low temperatures are 113 o and 22 o, respectively. Mean annual rainfall is about 16.5 inches, with more than 90% of the rainfall occurring from November to April, with about two-thirds of annual rainfall between January and March. The respective record low and high annual precipitation amounts are 0.57 inches (1939) and 39.77 inches (1983). The mean average snowfall is about 0.1 inch, although measurable snow has occurred only six times from 1938 to 2006. The record snowfall of 4.7 inches which occurred in January 1948 accounts for much of the mean average snowfall.
Other notable snowfalls were 0.5 inches in March 1950 and 0.10 inches on four occasions. The last measurable snowfall occurred in January 1966. The historical climate data above are for the Burbank Valley Pumping Plant meteorological station with a period of record from 1938 through 2006 as compiled by the Western Regional Climate Center.
2.3 GOVERNMENT
Burbank is a charter city with a City Council – City Manager form of government. The City Council serves as the elected legislative and policy-making body of the City, enacting all laws and directing all actions necessary to provide for the general welfare of the community through appropriate programs, services, and activities.
The City Council is the body which formally adopts the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The City government has 14 departments, all of which have roles in hazard mitigation planning, community outreach efforts, and/or the implementation of mitigation action items: Burbank Water and Power, City Attorney, City Clerk, City Manager, City Treasurer, Community Development, Financial Services, Fire, Information Technology, Management Services, Parks and Recreation, Police, Public Library, and Public Works.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
12 Departments with major roles related to hazard mitigation planning and implementation are briefly summarized below:
✓ The Community Development Department functions include building plan review and inspection, building code development, land use planning/zoning, updating the General Plan, and code enforcement.
✓ The Fire Department includes the Emergency Management Division , which has responsibility for developing, implementing and maintaining a comprehensive program to ensure that the City and the community are ready for various threats including natural disasters and human -caused incidents. Important elements of the program include disaster preparedness, hazard mitigation, response procedures, and recovery operations. ✓ The Public Works Department functions include maintaining the wastewater collection and treatment facilities, city buildings, and streets.
✓ The Burbank Power & Water Department maintains the infrastructure providing electric power and water for Burbank.
✓ The City Manager’s Office has a major role in setting and overseeing city policies and practices, including those related to mitigation.
2.4 DEMOGRAPHICS
Selected demographic data for Burbank from the U.S. Census Bureau are shown in Table 2. Age and ethnicity categories intentionally include overlapping subsets of the ACS Census Bureau data as compiled for 2019 for planning purposes. For emergency planning purposes, children, elderly adults, the disabled, p eople whose primary language is not English, and low-income residents are considered special needs population groups.
The number of people in these groups may also be a factor in mitigation planning, including community participation efforts, and in developing and prioritizing mitigation goals, objectives, and action items. Burbank has a substantial population of children and elderly adults. As shown below, about 18% of the population are children less than 18 -years, while about 15% are adults over 65 -years. Roughly 6% of the population is classified as having a disability. Almost 11% of the population is below the poverty level.
Just over 41% of Burbank’s residents speak a language other than English at home, with some 13% speaking Spanish and the remaining population speaking a wide variety of Indo -European, Asian, Pacific Island, and other languages. About 19% of Burbank’s residents speak English less than very well. Approximately, 30% of the population was born outside of the United States.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
13 2.5 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
The overall pattern of land use and development in Burbank is shown in Figure 2, a simplified version of the Burbank zoning map. The City has a balanced mix of commercial and industrial to complement its residential areas.
Table 2 Burbank Population Demographics*
*U.S. Census Bureau Data: 2019
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
14 Burbank is a virtually fully built-out city. The only significant areas of vacant land remaining are in the Verdugo Hills, which are preserved as open space. This open space, along with the City’s parks, comprises nearly 25% of Burbank’s land area. By use, the largest fraction of Burbank’s land area, about 30%, is occupied by single- family homes. The remaining land area is devoted to a mix of types and intensit ies of development and transportation infrastructure , including multiple -family residential, commercial, light and heavy industrial, railroads, freeways, streets, and the Hollywood-Burbank Airport.
As Burbank is a fully developed city, there is almost no land left for new development aside from a few individual residential parcels in the hillside area. Out of the approximately 25,000 parcels in Burbank, only about 420 are undeveloped. Most of these undeveloped parcels are owned by government agencies and used for public utilities or preserved as open space.
Figure 2 Burbank Zoning Map (Simplified)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
15 Nearly all development that occurs in Burbank is infill or redevelopment projects on previously developed lots.
There has been some development in Burbank since 2005, but the overall pattern and intensi ty of development has not changed. The greatest potential for additional development exists with the long -term master plans for the three major studio facilities in Burbank. Since 2005, the main notable development related to these master plans was the con struction of a 14 -story, 485,000 square foot office building on the former NBC lot.
During the housing boom that lasted through 2007, Burbank experienced substantial redevelopment in multifamily and commercial projects. Dozens of new units in multistory apartments and condominium projects were added to the city, replacing single -family homes or smaller apartment buildings. Notable commercial projects during this time included two mixed -use projects in the downtown area that included commercial space and condominiums: The Collection and Village Walk and a new Marriott Residence Inn hotel. Starting in 2008, development slowed substantially as it did throughout the country. Applications for new multiple family residential projects dropped dramatically. Most residential projects seen today are small projects with one or two new units being added to an existing single-family home or duplex. Commercial project applications have also been relatively low compared to prior years. The notable ex ceptions to this trend are two new office buildings completed in 2009 (one of which is on the NBC lot as noted above) and a major apartment complex with 276 units completed in 2010. All three of these projects received approvals prior to the economic decline.
Because Burbank is extensively built out, it is not expected that the overall distribution of land uses will change significantly in the future. Rather, there will be further intensification through redevelopment of existing development in areas other than the single-family residential neighborhoods.
However, the rate of future redevelopment will continue to be heavily dependent upon the economy. The state of the housing market and similarly the commercial real estate market have growth and contractio n phases which can be difficult to forecast. As a result of Burbank’s location amid the Los Angeles metropolitan area and the strong presence of the media industry, it does not face the same challenges as some outlying suburbs face in retaining its land va lue and attraction for redevelopment. There is little concern that Burbank will not fully recover from any downturns in the commercial or residential markets and that demand will remain constant even though the timing or extent is uncertain.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
16 Section 3 PLANNING GUIDANCE
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A2
Q: Does the plan document an opportunity for neighboring communities, local, and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as other interested parties to be involved in the planning process? A: See 3.1 INTRODUCTION details below.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A3a
Q: Does the plan document how the public was involved in the planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement §201.6(b)(1))
A: See 3.1 INTRODUCTION details below.
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Throughout the planning project, City of Burbank Departments were considered the primary stakeholders as therein rested responsibility for , and implementation of, the LHMP on behalf of the people working, visiting, and residing within the jurisdiction. Along this line of responsibility, other government agencies that are “Authorities Having Jurisdiction” within the City of Burbank were considered secondary stakeholders.
The secondary stakeholders included but were not limited to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACoDPW) Flood Control District with jurisdiction over floodplains and watersheds, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (LACoDPH) with jurisdiction over public and environmental health, the Burbank Glendale Pasadena Airport Authority, which is a Joint Powers Authority with jurisdiction over the commercial Hollywood-Burbank Airport and attendant f acilities and the Burbank Unified School District with jurisdiction over K-12 schools.
Tertiary stakeholders included neighboring governments (the cities of Glendale and Los Angeles), Non- Governmental Organizations (NGOs), non -profits, major media studios, and the public at large. Members of the public, and particularly vulnerable demographics, including those with a disability, access and functional needs (AFN), and disenfranchised communities in general gained additional representation through participating NGOs and non-profit organizations.
In the planning process, a concerted effort was made to gather information from the general public, external agencies, joint powers authority jurisdictions, utility providers, and special districts. In addition, the Planning Team solicited information from agencies and people with specific knowledge of hazards and past historical events, as well as building codes and facilities maintenance planning. The various hazard mitigation strategies contained in this plan were developed through the planning process and involved the City of Burbank staff, related external agencies, and the general public at large.
The City Planning Team , which included the primary and secondary stakeholders , contributed to the initial development of the First Draft of the mitigation plan via in -person and virtual meetings as well as circulated Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
17 copies of the draft plan in progress. Once a foundational First Draft was complete, the tertiary stakeholders (including the general public) were invited to contribute to the mitigation plan in the Second Draft phase.
The First Draft Plan was posted on the Ready Burbank website on 06/29/2020 and public notice was provided through social media, publicly posted memo as well as emails directly to identified t ertiary stakeholder agencies and neighboring city jurisdictions . The comments and feedback gathered during this process was reviewed by the City Planning Team and incorporated into the Final Draft Plan. This Final Draft Plan was posted on the Ready Burbank website on 10/04/2021 and public notice was provided through social media, publicly posted memo as well as emails dir ectly to identified tertiary stakeholder agencies and neighboring city jurisdictions for final review and comment prior to submission to Cal OES and FEMA.
The Final Draft Plan was submitted to Cal OES and FEMA along with a request for a determination of “approval pending adoption”. Upon receiving “approval pending adoption” from FEMA, the City of Burbank Emergency Management Coordinator will prepare a staff report to the City of Burbank City Council requesting adoption of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Following adoption by the City Council, proof of adoption w ill be forwarded to FEMA. The FEMA Letter of Approval (see Appendix C) was included in the Final Plan. The planning process noted above is outlined in section 3.5 Planning Team Involvement.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A1b
Q: Does the plan list the jurisdiction(s) participating in the plan that are seeking approval? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1))
A: See 3.2 LEGAL FOUNDATION below.
3.2 LEGAL FOUNDATION
The Hazard Mitigation Plan (Mitigation Plan) was prepared in response to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000). DMA 2000 (also known as Public Law 106 -390) has required State and local governments (including special districts and joint powers authorities) to prepare mitigation plans to document their mitigation planning process, and identify hazards, potential losses, mitigation needs, goals, and strategies since 2005.
This type of planning supplements the City’s comprehensive land use planning and emergency management planning programs. This document is a federally mandated update to the City of Burbank 2011 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and ensures eligibility for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funding.
DMA 2000 was designed to establish a national program for pre-disaster mitigation, streamline disaster relief at the Federal and State levels, and control Federal disaster assistance costs. Congress believed these requirements would produce the following benefits:
✓ Reduce loss of life and destruction of property, human suffering, economic disruptions, and disaster costs.
✓ Prioritize hazard mitigation at the local level with an increased emphasis upon planning and public involvement, assessing risks, implementing loss reduction measures, and ensuring critical facilities and services survive a disaster.
✓ Promote educational and economic incentives to form community-based partnerships and leverage non-federal resources to commit to and implement long-term hazard mitigation activities.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
18 The following FEMA definitions are used throughout this plan (Source: FEMA, 2002, Getting Started, Building Support for Mitigation Planning, FEMA 386-1):
Hazard Mitigation – “Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards.”
Planning – “The act or process of making or carrying out plans; specifically, the establishment of goals, policies, and procedures for a social or economic unit.”
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A3b
Q: Does the plan document how the public was involved in the planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement §201.6(b)(1))
A: See 3.3 PRIMARY and SECONDARY STAKEHOLDERS and 3.4 TERTIARY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT below.
3.3 PRIMARY and SECONDARY STAKEHOLDERS
A Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (Planning Team), consisting of the City of Burbank staff, was initially guided by the primary stakeholders.
As required by DMA 2000, the Planning Team expressly involved primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders, including the general public. Primary and secondary stakeholders were invited to contribute to the mitigation plan during the plan during the initial First Draft writing phase via in-person and virtual meetings as well as circulated copies of the draft plan in progress . Once a foundational First Draft was complete, the tertiary stakeholders (including the general public) were invited to contribute to the mitigation plan in the Second Draft phase.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A2a
Q: Does the plan document an opportunity for neighboring communities, local, and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as other interested parties to be involved in the planning process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2)) A: See 3.1 INTRODUCTION above and 3.4 TERTIARY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT below.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A2b
Q: Does the plan identify how the stakeholders were invited to participate in the process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2))
A: See 3.1 INTRODUCTION and, 3.3 PRIMARY and SECONDARY STAKEHOLDERS above, and 3.4 TERTIARY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
19 3.4 TERTIARY STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
Tertiary stakeholders, including the general public and neighboring cities (Cities of Glendale and Los Angeles) were provided opportunities to provide feedback during the Second Draft phase. The First Draft Plan was posted on the Ready Burbank website on 06/29/2020 and public notice was provided through social media, publicly posted memo a s well as emails directly to identified tertiary stakeholder agencies and neighboring city jurisdictions. All relevant feedback and gathered information was incorporated into the Final Draft Plan.
This Final Draft Plan was posted on the Ready Burbank website on 10/04/2021 and public notice was provided through social media, publicly posted memo a s well as emails directly to identified tertiary stakeholder agencies and neighboring city jurisdictions for final review and comment prior to submission to Cal OES and FEMA.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A1
Q: Does the plan document an opportunity for neighboring communities, local, and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as other interested parties to be involved in the planning process? A: See 3.5 PLANNING TEAM INVOLVEMENT below.
3.5 PLANNING TEAM INVOLVEMENT
The Planning Team consisted of diverse representatives and included individuals from City Departments with a role in the hazard mitigation processes. The Planning Team served as liaisons among all stakeholders throughout the planning process. During the pl anning process the Planning Team was faced with unique challenges related to COVID-19, resulting in a mix of in-person and virtual meetings. As noted previously, the general public and external agencies served as tertiary stakeholders in the planning proce ss. The Planning Team was responsible for the following tasks:
✓ Confirming planning goals
✓ Prepare timeline for plan update
✓ Ensure plan meets DMA 2000 requirements
✓ Organize and solicit involvement of public and external agencies ✓ Analyze existing data and reports
✓ Update hazard information
✓ Update status of Mitigation Action Items
✓ Develop new Mitigation Action Items
✓ Participate in Planning Team meetings and City Council public meetings ✓ Provide existing resources including maps and data
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
20 3.6 PLANNING APPROACH
The four-step planning approach outlined in the FEMA publication, Developing the Mitigation Plan: Identifying Mitigation Actions and Implementing Strategies (FEMA 386-3) was used to develop this plan:
✓ Develop mitigation goals and objectives - The risk assessment (hazard character, inventory, and findings), along with municipal policy documents, was utilized to develop mitigation goals and objectives.
✓ Identify and prioritize mitigation actions - Based on the risk assessment, goals and objectives, existing literature/resources, and input from participating entities, mitigation activities were identified for each hazard.
✓ Prepare implementation strategy - Generally, high-priority activity is advised for implementation first; however, based on organizational requirements and goals, project costs, and available funding, some medium or low priority activities might be implemented before some high priority items. ✓ Document mitigation planning process - The mitigation planning process is documented throughout this plan document.
Q&A | ELEMENT E: PLAN ADOPTION | E1
Q: Does the plan include documentation that the plan has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) A: See 3.7 PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS below.
3.7 PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS
Adoption of the plan by the local governing body demonstrates the City of Burbank’s commitment to meeting mitigation goals and objectives. Governing body approval legitimizes the plan and authorizes accountable agencies to execute their responsibilities. The City Council must adopt the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan before it can be approve d by FEMA. The Final Draft Plan was submitted to Cal OES and FEMA for review and approval. FEMA issued an Approval Pending Adoption on 01/26/2023 requiring the adoption of the Plan by the City of Burbank City Council. The adoption resolution was submitted to FEMA along with a request for a FEMA Letter of Approval.
In preparation for the public meeting with the City Council, the Emergency Management Coordinator prepared a Staff Report to the City Manager . The City Council heard the item on _ DD/MM/YYYY_. The City Council voted to adopt the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Resolution of adoption by the City Council is in Appendix B.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
21 3.8 PLAN APPROVAL
FEMA issued an Approval Pending Adoption notice on 01/26/2023. A copy of the FEMA Letter of Approval Pending Adoption is in Appendix C. Upon adoption by the City Council, the resolution was forwarded to FEMA. A copy of the City Council Adoption Resolution is in Appendix B.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C1a
Q: Does the plan document each jurisdiction’s existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3))
A: See 3.9 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT - RESOURCES below.
3.9 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT – RESOURCES
The City of Burbank incorporate s mitigation planning as an integral component of daily operations. This will be accomplished by the Planning Team working with their respective departments to integrate mitigation strategies into the planning documents and the City of Burbank operational g uidelines. In addition to the Capability Assessment, the Planning Team strives to identify additional policies, programs, practices, and procedures that could be created or modified to address mitigation activities. Details of existing resources with mitigation activity capability are listed in Tables 3 through 7 below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C1b
Q: Does the plan document each jurisdiction’s ability to expand on and improve these existing policies and programs? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3))
A: See 3.9.1 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT - RESOURCES TYPES below.
3.9.1 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT – RESOURCE TYPES
The capabilities noted in this LHMP as resources available to the City to use towards reducing long-term vulnerability via mitigation actions fall into four categories : planning and regulatory, financial , administrative and technical, and education and outreach. In this section how the resources noted in Tables 3 through 7 fit into this schema are detailed with specific examples. Tables 3 through 7 organize capabilities hierarchically with respect to the following jurisdictions: City, County, State-Regional-Federal, and Private. Additionally, how the selected cases demonstrate forward thinking to expand and improve mitigation is noted.
Planning and regulatory resources accessible for application toward reducing vulnerability with mitigation planning are considerable. These resources are available at each jurisdictional level and include capabilities related to ordinance, policy, laws, statutes, plans, and programs for managing growth and development. They include the Burbank Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the LAC General Plan (LACGP), the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan (CSHMP), the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Founded on the 2019 California Building Code and guided by City Council mandated amendments to Title 9 of the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC), t he Burbank CIP is in an ongoing state of revision to improve safety and mitigate hazards across the jurisdiction ’s physical infrastructure.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
22 Financial resources for application toward reducing vulnerability via mitigation planning come in a wide but not always readily accessible variety. These resources are available at each governmental jurisdiction levels and include capabilities related to funding of mitigation actions. They include the Electric Utility Fund, the Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Management (LAC -OES), the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), and the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Burbank seeks to diversify and expand access to financial resources, ranging from the frequently used to the obscure, that can be employed to fund hazard mitigation actions. In this vein, Burbank Water & Power (BWP) has initiated an expansion of its Drought Contingency Plan that promises to open access to ongoing mitigation funding. This USBR grant funded update will make the City eligible to win future funding that promotes improved hazard mitigation with better water resource management.
Administrative and technical resources are broadly accessible to apply toward reducing vulnerability with mitigation planning both within and across jurisdictions . T hese resources include capabilities related to coordination of staff, their skills, and departmental tools available to them . Examples of these resources include the Burbank Fire Department (BFD), the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LAC -FCD), the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES), and Southern California Edison (SCE). Do to the nature of the metropolitan area in which it is located, t here is an extensive pool of ex perience, skill sets, and tools available both internally and externally for the City to apply to ward hazard mitigation. Additionally, where any of these aspects are lacking due to routine positional vacancies mechanisms to hire, promote, or backfill administrative and technical resources from either the eligible workforce permanently or larger jurisdictional entities temporarily are available. Within the BFD’s Emergency Management Division an Emergency Management intern program was created to act as a project management tool to research, organize, and codify material for the current LHMP revision. Future expansion of this program by the Emergency Management Coordinator will support personnel skills development, departmental training through Cal OES’s California Specialized Training Institute, and a more actively managed mitigation plan maintenance process.
Education and Outreach resources are a readily accessible but practically constrained capability to apply toward reducing hazard vulnerability and enhancing mitigation plans . The constraint found here is that capability efficacy is based on the degree to which the public participates in a given educational and/or outreach resource. Available at all jurisdictional levels, these resources are mutually supporting and actively promote participation in both their own and affiliated activities as they seek to spread hazard mitigation and disaster preparedness educational material throughout the community . Examples of these resources are Ready Burbank’s Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program, CalOES’s California Specialized Training Institute (CSTI), FEMA’s Independent Study program , and t he Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES). Each of these resources has a hazard mitigation component as is demonstrated by Burbank CERT training which advocates for the national Firewise -USA wildfire mitigation program. Ongoing efforts by the BFD and Ready Burbank aims to bolster CERT membership and registration of a larger pool of qualified disaster service worker volunteers. Coordinated with these effort is expanded membership of the Burbank Fire Corps thus promoting proactive whole community fire safety.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
23 RESOURCE RESOURCE
TYPE MITIGATION SUPPORT CAPABILITY
CITY RESOURCES
Capital Improvement
Program Planning and Regulatory
The CIP is a set of planned construction projects at City owned buildings, facilities, and infrastructure.
Examples include new or retrofit City facilities, technology disaster resilience, and communications equipment. The current CIP is for the 2020/2021 fiscal year and is updated annually. Mitigation actions that involve construction or retrofits to City buildings, facilities, and infrastructure may be implemented through inclusion in the Capital Improvement Program.
General Plan Planning and Regulatory
The City of Burbank’s General Plan (Burbank2035) is the community’s comprehensive, long-range blueprint that guides how the City will change and develop. It addresses topics such as land use, public safety, noise, and open space. Individual goals and policies in the General Plan create a framework for municipal programs and projects. The General Plan was adopted in 2013. Mitigation actions are supported by the goals and policies in the General Plan, and these actions can be directly integrated into the General Plan in future updates, providing a stronger enforcement mechanism.
General Fund Planning and Regulatory
The General Fund is revenue that the City collects from sales tax, property tax, license and permit fees, and various other sources. The General Fund revenue may be used for any City expenses.
Most General Fund revenue is spent on the salary and benefits of City staff but also supports mitigation actions by providing the financial resources to implement projects such as debris flow and seismic mitigation work.
Water and
Wastewater Funds Financial
The Water Reclamation & Sewer Fund is separate from the fees charged to City water and wastewater customers. Salaries for water and wastewater employees are paid from these funds, along with maintenance and operations of water and wastewater systems, capital improvements to water and wastewater infrastructure, and other charges related to these services. Mitigation actions that involve water or wastewater service and requisite infrastructure in the City is supported by the Water and Wastewater utility fund.
Electric Utility Fund Financial
The Electric Utility Fund is a dedicated amount of money from the fees charged to City customers for electrical service. The fund is used to pay for maintenance and operations of the City’s electricity network as well as improvement projects. Mitigation actions that promote resiliency of electrical services and infrastructure, such as micro-grids, data line redundancy, and operational reliability are supported by the Electric Utility Fund.
Seismic Retrofit
Regulations Planning and Regulatory
Burbank’s Seismic Retrofit Ordinances are a set of standards requiring all existing buildings with an unreinforced masonry bearing wall or concrete walls with a flexible diaphragm to be reinforced.
Mitigation actions that relate to the seismic resiliency of other building types in the City may be implemented through amendments to this set of regulations. Other mitigation actions related to the resiliency for other building types (including to other hazards) may be implemented or changed from voluntary to mandatory under these ordinances.
Floodplain
Management
Regulations
Planning and Regulatory
Floodplain Management Regulations (FMRs) are a required component of the City’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. Under them, construction activities within the 100-year flood plain must feature flood-resilient design features. Additionally, regulations limit the types of land use activities that can be conducted within the flood plain. Mitigation actions that address the vulnerability of buildings could be implemented through amendments to the City's FMRs as climate changes affect the region.
Building and
Construction
Regulations
Planning and Regulatory
The 2019 California State Building Code are adopted and enforced with Local amendments found in Title 9 of the Burbank Municipal Code which governs the construction of new and renovated buildings. The Building and Construction Regulations as updated with local amendments require new or renovated buildings to better resist damage or harm to occupants during a hazardous event and as such support hazard mitigation activities.
Zoning Code Planning and Regulatory
Zoning Ordinances are a set of regulations for different land uses in the community. They establish standards for where different types of development and land use activity may occur (including defining hazard-prone areas where different development and land use standards may apply), how they look and how they can be operated, and the necessary permitting and approval processes for development. The Zoning Code is an implementation tool of Burbank’s General Plan, and plays a significant role in determining Burbank’s appearance and community characteristics. Mitigation actions that govern the siting, construction, and operation of new developments are implemented through City Zoning Ordinances.
Table 3 Capability Assessment – City Resources 1
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
24 RESOURCE RESOURCE
TYPE MITIGATION SUPPORT CAPABILITY
CITY RESOURCES
Community
Emergency
Response Team
Outreach and Education
Burbank’s Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) is a group of volunteer residents who can provide assistance during an emergency event. CERT participants are trained in first aid, disaster preparedness, search and rescue, and other light emergency response duties. CERT volunteers can also assist with organizing and maintaining shelters for persons displaced by an emergency. Burbank’s CERT program is operated by the City’s Fire Department. Mitigation actions that involve community training and education can be implemented through the CERT program, and CERT volunteers can assist with mitigation-related outreach activities.
Community
Development
Department
Planning and Regulatory
The Community Development Department (CDD) is responsible for conducting short term and long term planning activities, approving building permits and business licenses, and inspecting properties. The CDD enforces Building and Construction Regulations and related standards, as well as land use regulations. Mitigation actions related to land use, construction of structures or retrofits, and private property conditions, are carried out through CDD staff.
Water and Power
Department Planning and Regulatory
The Water and Power Department (WPD) provides electrical service to properties in the community and maintains the city’s electricity distribution network. As a part of these duties, it is responsible for setting electrical rates and has purview over local renewable energy and electrical energy efficiency programs.
Mitigation actions that relate to the resiliency of electrical service and electrical infrastructure will be implemented through WPD staff.
Police Department Administrative and Technical
The Police Department (BPD) is responsible for maintaining public safety in the community. This includes investigating criminal activity, directing traffic, and responding to public safety emergencies.
Mitigation actions that fall within the BPD’s purview include those related to the safe movement of traffic and the public safety of community members during hazard events.
Emergency
Communication
Services
Outreach and Education
ARES is provided by volunteer FCC-licensed amateur radio operators who can provide backup communication services if a disaster damages or destroys conventional communication networks. ARES volunteers can provide communication services for emergency response personnel and other key City staff. The program is part of the National Association of Amateur Radio. ARES volunteers may also assist with community-wide outreach and education, with respect to emergency communication through the CERT program.
Financial Services
Department Financial
The Finance Services Department (FSD), is responsible for City financial operations. It conducts budgeting activities, handles payroll, provides general accounting services, and prepares financial reports. The FSD integrates mitigation actions into the City budget and administers mitigation-related grants staff in their efforts to improve local resiliency.
Fire Department Administrative and Technical
The BFD is responsible for firefighting, fire protection, and emergency medical response services in the community. This includes mitigation activities that reduce the likelihood of fires and limit their damage.
BFD activities also include efforts to prepare for local disasters such as mitigation actions against wildfire. The BFD is also responsible for more general emergency preparedness and can coordinate with other agencies to implement mitigation actions related to a wide variety of hazard events.
Water and Power
Department Administrative and Technical
Burbank’s Water and Power Department (WPD) provides water service to the community as well as wastewater collection and treatment services. This includes constructing, maintaining, and operating the infrastructure that sources and distributes most of the City’s water and conveys wastewater. Such systems include groundwater wells, pump stations, pipes, storage tanks, and wastewater treatment facilities. The WPD is also responsible for conservation activities within its service are. Any mitigation actions that involves water sources, how much water the community uses, the City’s water or wastewater-related infrastructure, or runoff channels may be implemented by the WPD staff.
Public Works
Department Administrative and Technical
The Public Works Department (PWD) is responsible for maintaining City-owned buildings and parks, constructing and maintaining City streets, and sidewalks which includes public landscaping. The PWD also provides engineering services to the City, oversees the CIP, and issues permits for engineering activities. Mitigation activities that involve construction or maintenance activities for City facilities or on City-owned land, relate to the City fleet, or involve standards for other engineering activities, are implemented through PWD staff.
Table 4 Capability Assessment – City Resources 2
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
25 RESOURCE RESOURCE
TYPE MITIGATION SUPPORT CAPABILITY
LAC RESOURCES
Los Angeles County
Office of Emergency
Services
Administrative and Technical
& Financial
The LAC-OES is responsible for emergency planning, hazard mitigation, and emergency response and recovery activities throughout the county in collaboration with local communities. It helps coordinate activities between the county and cities, conducts emergency training and exercises, manages emergency grants, among other activities. Mitigation actions involving coordination with county agencies or other cities may be facilitated through LAC-OES and can support Burbank’s own hazard mitigation activities by providing funding or other resources.
Los Angeles County
Flood Control
District
Administrative and Technical
The LAC-FCD, part of the county’s Department of Public Works, is responsible for constructing and maintaining flood control infrastructure in Los Angeles County. The LAC-FCD completes hydraulic surveys for FEMA NFIP maps and has purview over flow from the Burbank Western Channel as well as various storm drainage channels throughout the City. Mitigation actions that involve changes to flood control infrastructure will require support and coordination with the LAC-FCD.
Los Angeles Valley
Municipal Water
District
Administrative and Technical
The Los Angeles County Waterworks Districts (LACWD), a division of Los Angeles County Public Works, provides customers with water from local groundwater, water imported through the State Water Project, and the Colorado River Aqueduct. It is responsible for long-term water supplies in Los Angeles County.
The district acts as a water wholesaler, obtaining water and distributing it to local water suppliers. The City works with LACWD on mitigation actions that relate to local water supply and water use.
Los Angeles County
General Plan Planning and Regulatory
The LACGP guides the long-term growth and development of the County’s unincorporated areas. This includes minor adjacent unincorporated areas within Burbank’s sphere of influence. Hazard mitigation actions that require coordination with the County or action in these unincorporated areas may be integrated into the County’s General Plan to provide a stronger framework and make them more enforceable.
Los Angeles County
Multi- Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation
Plan
Planning and Regulatory
The Los Angeles County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies hazard events present in the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County (LAC) and recommends mitigation actions to reduce the harm from these events. LAC and Burbank share resources and best practices for hazard mitigation activities. Aligned mitigation actions in the county’s and Burbank’s plans can help create more regional consistency. Mitigation actions that require coordination with the LAC-OES or other county agencies may be integrated into the county’s plan.
Table 5 Capability Assessment – LA County Resources
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
26 RESOURCE RESOURCE
TYPE MITIGATION SUPPORT CAPABILITY
STATE, REGIONAL, & FEDERAL RESOURCES
Cal-Adapt Administrative and Technical
Cal-Adapt is an online tool to share information about climate change projections in California. It allows users to learn about expected climate conditions throughout the state at a highly refined level for a variety of factors such as temperature, precipitation, wind, wildfire, and sea level rise. The tool was created by the California Energy Commission and a host of institutional, governmental, and nonprofit partners. Cal-Adapt can be used to support implementation of this LHMP and future updates, providing the best available science on climate change to guide Burbank’s mitigation actions.
California Dept. of
Transportation
Administrative and Technical
& Financial
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is responsible for construction and maintenance of California’s state-owned highways, including sections of I-5 and the Ventura Freeway in Burbank. It provides funding and other resources to local and regional governments to support transportation-related projects. Mitigation actions related to these corridors or other transportation activity can be implemented in coordination with Caltrans.
California
Governor’s Office of
Emergency Services
Administrative and Technical
& Financial
The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) is the agency responsible for conducting statewide hazard mitigation, supporting emergency response/recovery activities, and coordinating such activities as disaster recovery fund disbursement from the federal government.
CalOES distributes grant funding, provides guidance on hazard mitigation, and shares best practices.
Mitigation actions in Burbank may be guided, supported and funded through grant opportunities provided by CalOES.
California State
Hazard Mitigation
Plan
Planning and Regulatory
The CSHMP identifies and analyzes the hazards common to the state. It includes descriptions of these hazards, summaries of past events, assessment of how hazards may affect citizens and assets of the state, and projections of future hazard changes. The CSHMP was last updated in 2018 and changes to Burbank’s LHMP will continue to be informed through the latest data and analyses available within it.
US Bureau of Land
Reclamation
Administrative and Technical
& Financial
The USBR, is a federal agency that oversees water resource management, specifically as it applies to the oversight and operation of the diversion, delivery, and storage projects that it has built throughout the western United States. The agency works to develop and implement a thoughtful approach to water allocations to serve water users while protecting the environment, modernizing infrastructure, advancing storage projects, implementing water operation plans amongst others. Water resource mitigation activities in Burbank may be guided by and funded through the USBR.
Federal Emergency
Management
Agency
Planning and Regulatory,
Outreach and Education
Administrative and Technical
& Financial
The FEMA is the agency responsible for hazard mitigation, emergency preparedness, and emergency response/recovery at the national level. FEMA provides hazard mitigation guidance to state and local governments, including information on best practices and compliance with federal requirements for hazard mitigation plans. Mitigation actions in Burbank can be supported through and developed with assistance from FEMA grants. The agency also provides LHMP guidance that will be used in plan updates.
RESOURCE
RESOURCE
TYPE MITIGATION SUPPORT CAPABILITY
PRIVATE RESOURSES
American Red Cross
Outreach and Education &
Administrative and
Technical
The American Red Cross is a humanitarian assistance organization that provides disaster relief services in the aftermath of major hazard events. This includes operating emergency shelters, distributing meals and relief supplies, and providing basic health services. Although the American Red Cross’s services are more related to preparation than mitigation actions, there may be opportunities for the organization to support mitigation activities related to community engagement and education.
Southern California
Edison
Outreach and Education
Administrative and
Technical
SCE is a primary electricity provider for much of southern California. Although it supplies electricity to a limited number of properties in Burbank, it owns and operates high-voltage electrical transmission lines and most of the electrical substations in LAC. Mitigation actions that involve the resiliency of Burbank’s electrical infrastructure not owned by the city present an opportunity for coordination with SCE.
Southern California Gas
Company
Administrative and
Technical
The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the primary natural gas service provider for most of southern California, including Burbank. It also owns and operates the natural gas infrastructure in and around LAC. Mitigation actions which involve natural gas use or are relate to the resiliency of natural gas infrastructure would be implemented in coordination with SoCalGas.
AMTRAK
Planning and Regulatory &
Administrative and
Technical
AMTRAK is a major national rail corporation that manages the Metrolink train system serving Burbank's citizens with a quasi-corporation, nationally essential service. They are also responsible to managing other rail line's (Union Pacific, BNSF, etc.) traffic on their rail lines. Any mitigation activities regarding passenger or freight transportation would be coordinated with their local staff.
Table 6 Capability Assessment – State, Regional, Federal Resources Table 7 Capability Assessment – Private Resources
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
27 Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A4
Q: Does the plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement §201.6(b)(3))
A: See 3.10 USE OF EXISTING DATA below.
3.10 USE OF EXISTING DATA
The Planning Team gathered and reviewed existing data and plans during plan writing and specifically noted these as “sources .” Numerous electronic and hard copy documents were used to support the planning process:
City of Burbank Website
https://www.burbankca.gov/departments
Applicable Incorporation: Department information.
City of Burbank Municipal Code
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Burbank/
Applicable Incorporation: Building code information.
City of Burbank General Plan - Burbank2035 (2013)
https://new.burbankca.gov/documents/173607/0/Burbank2035+General+Plan.pdf/139656b0-80e9-3b11- dc6d-751642c85b38?t=1612301807431
Applicable Incorporation: Information about hazards contributed to the hazard-specific sections in the City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan.
City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan (2011)
https://www.burbankfire.us/divisions/emergency-management/hazard-mitigation-plan-2011 Applicable Incorporation: Information about hazards contributed to the hazard -specific sections in the City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan.
County of Los Angeles General Plan (2015)
http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/gp_final-general-plan.pdf Applicable Incorporation: Information about the planning area and geography.
County of Los Angeles All-Hazards Mitigation Plan (2019) http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/lac/1062614_AHMPPublicDraft_Oct1.pdf Applicable Incorporation: Information about hazards in the County contributed to the hazard-specific sections in the City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan and Previous Occurrences.
State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018)
https://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes-divisions/hazard-mitigation/hazard-mitigation-planning/state-hazard- mitigation-plan
Applicable Incorporation: Used to identify hazards posing the greatest threat to the State.
FEMA State and Local “How To” Mitigation Series (Documents 386-1 to 386-9) https://www.hsdl.org/c/
Applicable Incorporation: Mitigation Measures Categories and 4 -Step Planning Process are quoted across several sections.
National Flood Insurance Program
www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program
Applicable Incorporation: Repetitive Loss Information.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
28 Local Flood Insurance Rate Maps
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
Applicable Incorporation: Provided by FEMA and included in Flood Hazard section.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) www.fire.ca.gov
Applicable Incorporation: Wildland fire hazard mapping.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
www.usgs.gov
Applicable Incorporation: Earthquake records and statistics.
SCEDC – Southern California Earthquake Data Center
https://scedc.caltech.edu/earthquake/verdugo.html
Applicable Incorporation: Earthquake Information.
California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment: Los Angeles Region Report (2019) https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Reg%20Report-%20SUM-CCCA4-2018- 007%20LosAngeles_ADA.pdf
Applicable Incorporation: Climate Information.
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, Climate at a Glance (2019) https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/county/time-series
Applicable Incorporation: Data Image.
County of Los Angeles Public Health, Acute Communicable Disease Control (2019) https://admin.publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/WNVData.htm Applicable Incorporation: Pandemic/Epidemic/Vector Borne Disease Information.
Western Regional Climate Center
www.wrcc.dri.edu
Applicable Incorporation: Climate information.
FEMA, Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (2008) https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/state-mitigation-planning-guidance.pdf Applicable Incorporation: Plan guidance.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
29 Section 4 RISK ASSESSMENT
4.1 OVERVIEW OF RISK ASSESSMENT
Conducting a risk assessment can provide information regarding the location of hazards, the value of existing land and property in hazard locations as well as an analysis of risk to life, property, and the environment that may result from natural hazard events.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1a Q: Does the plan include a general description of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1b Q: Does the plan provide rationale for the omission of any natural hazards that are commonly recognized to affect the jurisdiction(s) in the planning area? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) A: See 4.2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING below.
4.2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND SCREENING
This section covers the description of the geographic extent, potential intensity, and the probability of occurrence of a given hazard. Maps are used in this plan to display hazard identification data. The City of Burbank utilized the categorization of hazards as identified in California’s State Hazard Mitigation Plan, including earthquakes, floods, levee failures, wildfires, landslides and earth movements, climate -related hazards, volcanoes, and other hazards.
The Planning Team reviewed existing documents to determine which of these hazards posed the most significant threat to the City and its ability to deliver services. Expressly, which hazards would likely result in a local declaration of emergency became the plan focus.
The geographic extent of each relevant hazard was identified by the Team utilizing maps and data contained in the City’s 2013 General Plan and 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan. In addition, numerous internet resources and the 2019 County of Los Angeles All -Hazard Mitigation Plan served as valuable consultation resources.
Utilizing the Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI) ranking technique, the Planning Team concluded the following hazards posed a significant threat for the City of Burbank:
Earthquake | Wildfire | Flood | Windstorm | Epidemic/Pandemic/Vector-Borne Diseases | Drought
The hazard ranking system is described in Table 8 below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
30 Profiling hazard events describes the causes and characteristics of each hazard and which part of the City facilities, infrastructure, and environment may be vulnerable to each specific hazard. A profile of each hazard discussed in the Plan is provided in Section 4.3 Hazard Profile and Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1a Q: Does the plan include a general description of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Table 8 Calculated Priority Risk Index*
* (Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
31 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1c Q: Does the plan include a description of the type for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 10 Hazards: Standardized Measurement Scales below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below.
Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank below indicates a generalized perspective of the community’s vulnerability of the various hazards according to extent/degree, location, and probability.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
32 Table 10 Hazards: Standardized Measurement Scales below note the standard scales accepted nationally as measures of intensity for the listed disaster types.
Hazard Type Location
(Where)
Extent
(How Big an Event)
Probability (How
Often)*
Previous
Occurrences
Epidemic/Pandemic/
Vector-Borne
Disease
Natural; Infectious
Disease Global; citywide
Quarantines, shelter-in-place
orders, closed business and
functions, curfews.
Highly Likely COVID-19, March 2020 to
present
Windstorm
Natural;
Meteorological;
katabatic wind
South of the 134
Freeway to City
limits
Historically, winds ranging from
55-60 mph have impacted the
City.
Likely No significant events on
record.
Drought
Natural;
Hydrological; water
source precipitation
deficit
Regional; citywide
97.6% of California, per NOAA,
is categorized as in Severe
Drought
Highly Likely
Moderate drought
conditions prevailed
across California in the
period 2013 through 2019.
Wildfire
Natural;
Climatological;
surface and crown
fires
Verdugo Hills; See
Figure 23
The City of Burbank has a
Moderate Fire Threat rating
designated by CAL FIRE.
Likely
September 1, 2017: La
Tuna Fire, 7200 acres and
3 homes burned.
Flood
Natural;
Hydrological; river
and sewage
flooding
Burbank Western
and Lockheed Drain
Channel confluence:
See Figures 10, 11,
12 An instance of flooding for the
City is greatest at the
confluence of the main drainage
channels however the area
affected is limited in both depth
and breadth.
Possibly
No significant events
within record with current,
modern flood controls in
place.
Earthquake
Natural;
Geophysical;
tectonic; shallow
and subduction
Regional; citywide
The Southern California
Earthquake Center (SCEC) in
2007 concluded that there is a
99.7% probability that an
earthquake of M6.7 or greater
will hit California within 30
years. Earthquake would most
likely originate from the San
Andreas fault. **
Likely
January 17, 1994: the
Northridge earthquake,
caused damage to streets,
the sewer system, the
water system, public
buildings, and privately-
owned residential and
commercial structures in
the City.
* Probability is defined as: Unlikely = 1:1,000 years, Possibly = 1:100-1:1000 years, Likely = 1:10-1:100 years, Highly Likely = 1:1 year ** Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast
Table 9 Vulnerability: Location, Extent, and Probability for the City of Burbank (See Table 8 for Probability details and explanation.)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
33 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.2.1 CRITICAL FACILITIES below.
4.2.1 CRITICAL FACILITIES
Speaking generally, FEMA separates critical buildings and facilities into the five categories shown below based on their loss potential. All of the following elements are considered critical facilities:
Essential Facilities are essential to the health and welfare of the whole population and are especially important following hazard events. Essential facilities include hospitals and other medical facilities, police and fire stations, emergency operations centers and evacuation shelters, and schools.
Transportation Systems include airways – airports, heliports; highways – bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, transfer centers; railways – trackage, tunnels, bridges, rail yards, depots; and waterways including canals, locks, seaports, ferries, harbors, dry docks, piers.
Lifeline Utility Systems such as potable water, wastewater, oil, natural gas, electric power and communication systems.
High Potential Loss Facilities are facilities that would have a high loss associated with them, such as nuclear power plants, dams, and military installations.
Hazardous Material Facilities include facilities housing industrial/hazardous materials, such as corrosives, explosives, flammable materials, radioactive materials, and toxins.
Q&A | ELEMENT D: MITIGATION STRATEGY | D1
Q: Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) A: See 4.2.2 CHANGES IN DEVELOPMENT below.
Table 10 Hazards: Standardized Measurement Scales
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
34 4.2.2 CHANGES IN DEVELOPMENT
Since the 2011 HMP, there have been no significant alterations to the development pattern of the City in the hazard-prone areas. This conclusion was reached after a review of the General Plan and discussion with the Planning Team. Furthermore, the Planning Team concluded the overall vulnerability to identified hazards had generally remained the same.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1a Q: Does the plan include a general description of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See introduction for each respective hazard in 4.3 HAZARD PROFILES subsections below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1c Q: Does the plan include a description of the type for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See introduction for each respective hazard in 4.3 HAZARD PROFILES subsections below.
4.3 HAZARD PROFILES
An important aspect of preparing a mitigation plan is to understand the hazards facing a particular community.
Understanding the various hazard risks and consequences is a first step in mitigating adverse effects of these events. A hazard profile is a description and analysis of a specific type of local hazard. It is performed for each hazard and based on criteria, such as frequency, duration, and speed of onset.
4.3.1 EARTHQUAKE
A seismic event, more commonly known as an earthquake or quake, is the sudden motion or trembling that results from the release of strain accumulated within or along the edge of the e arth's tectonic plates without warning. Quakes manifest by shaking, displacing, and disrupting the earth and anything on its surface with a range of seismicity from undetectable to levels capable of triggering landslides and/or tsunami. Events of the latter magnitude will have profound effects in the built environment both immediately and over time from aftershocks, topography shifts, and consequent events like ground subsidence, water course shift, etc.
Of the hazards discussed here, earthquakes are a type of disaster that can profoundly affect the integrity of the City’s infrastructure. As such, the recovery period for such an event can be on the order of decades as transportation routes are disrupted, structures destroyed, and the citizenry displaced and injured. As with any such incident, those individuals who are part of the access and functional needs (AFN) community would be impacted to a greater degree than the majority of residents.
Essentially, the euphemistic “Big One” can be either a single large earthquake (M7.8 and higher) on the 30mi distant San Andreas Fault or a smaller local event (M6.5 to M7.0+) on faults within or near Burbank. The damage scenarios in the latter case are challenging to model as the event size and proximity are not the only variables. An event could , for example, involve multiple faults cascading to have a cumulative effect.
Furthermore, this scenario presupposes that all fault lines in the area are known and this may not be the case.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
35 A localized event in this lower magnitud e range on the Verdugo Fault, an unknown fault within the City, or some combination thereof are all possibilities. Estimated economic and casualty impact from simplified scenarios are presented in Section 4.3.1.9.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.1 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF EARTHQUAKES IN BURBANK below.
4.3.1.1 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF EARTHQUAKES IN BURBANK
The two most significant earthquakes to affect the City were the 1971 Sylmar and the 1994 Northridge events.
According to the City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Plan Update (2011), the 1971 Sylmar earthquake struck on February 9th with an epicenter six miles northeast of Sylmar. The earthquake caused 65 deaths and millions of dollars in property loss. There were numerous instances of bridge, freeway, and hospital damage. The San Gabriel Mountains east of Burbank rose several feet. Surface breaks caused by faulting during the earthquake appeared across the northeastern corner of the San Fernando Valley.
The second major earthquake affecting the City was the Northridge earthquake on January 17 th,1994. This event was measured at a magnitude of 6.7 and caused extensive damage to structures and utilities in the City of Burbank. The earthquake originated in a hidden fault approximately eight miles below the surface of the San Fernando Valley to the west. The earthquake caused a rupture along the fault line that traveled upwards in a northwestern direction. The fault, now called the Oak Ridge or Northridge fault system, intersected with a branch of the Sierra Madre fault, which was responsible for the 1971 Sylmar earthquake.
The earthquake lasted approximately 15 seconds. After the initial event, aftershocks of varying magnitude occurred at the rate of approximately 1,000 per day for several weeks. The earthquake caused substantial damage to streets, the sewer system, the water system, public buildings, and privately-owned residential and commercial structures in the City. In the first six months following this disaster, the City expended more than $1 million and thousands of personnel hours on earthquake-related activities.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See LOCAL CONDITIONS for each respective Hazard Profile below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
36 4.3.1.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
There are several active faults that have the potential to impact the City. Among these, t he well-known San Andreas fault is considered a “master fault” because it is the boundary of the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. There are also a number of minor faults in the eastern San Fernando and northern San Gabriel Valleys, including the Sierra Madre, Newport-Inglewood, Northridge, and Verdugo faults to consider.
Although seismic events are inherently unpredictable due to many factors including the region’s highly complex geologic nature, the City has been diligent in adopting new and upgraded building standards as they are available. Continuing this wise practice, the Burbank City Council passed resolution 15-7-22 (July, 2022) adopting the most current version of the International Building Code (IBC) as one aspect of an ongoing process of improving building safety and community resilience through higher structural standards.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.3 SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.3 SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.3 SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
37 4.3.1.3 SAN ANDREAS FAULT ZONE
The San Andreas Fault zone has the potential for a strong effect on the City of Burbank. This fault zone extends from the Gulf of California northward to the Cape Mendocino area where it continues northward along the ocean floor. The total length of the San Andreas Fault Zone is approximately 750-miles. The activity of the fault has been recorded during historic events, including the 1906 M8.0 event in San Francisco and the 1857 M7.9 event between Cholame and San Bernardino, w here at least 250 -miles of surface rupture occurre d.
These seismic events are among the most significant earthquakes in California history. Geologic evidence suggests that the San Andreas Fault has a 50% chance of producing a magnitude 7.5 to 8.5 quake comparable to the great San Francisco earthquake of 1906 within the next 30 years.
Figure 3 Shake Intensity Map – San Andreas Fault M7.8*
*(Source USGS, Scenario Map, Star indicates City of Burbank)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
38 4.3.1.4 SIERRA MADRE FAULT ZONE
The Sierra Madre fault zone is a series of moderate angle, north -dipping, reverse faults (thrust faults).
Movement along these frontal faults has resulted in the uplift of the San Gabriel Mountains. According to the Southern California Earthquake Data Center, rupture on the Sierra Madre fault zone could, theoretically, be limited to one segment at a time, it has recently been suggested that a large event on the San Andreas fault to the north (like that of 1857) could cause simultaneous rupture on reverse faults south of the San Gabriel Mountains – the Sierra Madre fault zone being a prime example of such. Whether this could rupture multiple Sierra Madre fault zone s egments simultaneously is unknown. Seismic activity on the Sierra Madre fault is expected to have a maximum magnitude of 7.2.
*(Source USGS, Scenario Map, Star indicates City of Burbank)
Figure 4 Shake Intensity Map – Sierra Madre Fault M7.2*
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
39 4.3.1.5 NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD FAULT
The Newport-Inglewood fault is a right -lateral fault with a length of 75 kilometers in the Los Angeles Basin.
The fault zone can easily be noted by the existence of a chain of low hills extending from Culver City to Signal Hill. South of Signal Hill, it roughly parallels the coastline until just south of Newport Bay, where it heads offshore, and becomes the Newport-Inglewood – Rose Canyon fault zone. The most recent rupture on March 10th, 1993, was an M6.4 subterranean event.
*(Source USGS, Scenario Map, Star indicates City of Burbank)
Figure 5 Shake Intensity Map – Newport-Inglewood Fault M7.2* Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
40 4.3.1.6 OAK RIDGE FAULT
The Oak Ridge fault is a thrust fault with a length of 90 kilometers. The fault drops south at an angle less than 45 degrees, meaning the epicenter of an earthquake on this fault could appear distant from the surface trace.
The surface track of the Oak Ridge thrust forms a ridge to the south of its trace and is roughly par alleled by both the Santa Clara River and California State Highway 126, from the town of Piru to the coast, just southeast of Ventura. The Oak Ridge thrust continues offshore, out to a point about 20 kilometers due south of Santa Barbara. The offshore segment is associated with a definite zone of active seismicity, though the only known Holocene surface rupture is found well onshore, between the towns of Bardsdale and Fillmore. At its eastern end, the Oak Ridge thrust becomes progressively more difficult to follow and appears to be over thrust by the Santa Susana fault, thus becoming a blind thrust fault. Indeed, the fault associated with the 1994 Northridge earthquake is probably part of the Oak Ridge fault system, as it shares many of the characteristics of this latter fault. This blind thrust fault is known either as the Pico Thrust, named for the Pico Anticline (a geologic fold it is creating), or as the Northridge Thrust, for more obvious reasons. The fault has a probable magnitude of between 6.5 and 7.5.
Figure 6 Shake Intensity Map – Oak Ridge Fault M7.2*
* (Source USGS, Scenario Map, Scenario Map, Star indicates City of Burbank) Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
41 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.7 VERDUGO FAULT below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.7 VERDUGO FAULT below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.1.7 VERDUGO FAULT below.
4.3.1.7 VERDUGO FAULT
The presence of a considerable number of active faults makes the City vulnerable to a broad range of interrelated earthquake activity. The segment of the San Andreas fault system in closest proximity and potentially of greatest impact, is the Verdugo Fault, which runs through the City in a southeast to northwesterly direction along Highway 5. According to Weber, et. al., (1980) the fault may be most active between Verdugo Wash on the southeast and Big Tujunga Wash on the northwest portion of the Verdugo’s western aspect across a distance of approximately 21 km. The fault runs along the southwest edge of the Verdugo Hills as a north-dipping reverse fault just south of the topographic Verdugo Hills range front. The fault curves under the hills and is covered by sediments to a depth of between 500 and 3500 ft. Over the years, urban development has hidden the 2 to 3 meter high scarps found in alluvial fan deposits along its length in both the Burbank and Glendale jurisdictions prior to urbanization. While the surface of the fault is generally apparent from mapped soil displacement, both the depth and width of the fault zone are not well understood. Previously considered capable of producing a M6.9 quake, as modeled in USGS Figure 7, some recent structural analysis indicates that the fault is not a reverse fault but a somewhat less rupture prone left-lateral strike-slip fault (Walls et al., 1998). Essentially this means that there is gradual horizontal creep along the fault that gradually releases tension that would otherwise be released suddenly during a rupture. It is estimated that the Verdugo Fault is capable of producing a maximum M6.8 magnitude earthquake (SCEDC, 2022).
The City’s vulnerability to earthquakes on the Verdugo fault is directly related to the nature of an earth quake instance affecting the jurisdiction, impacts of a given event (liquefaction, uplift, lateral movement, etc.), local soil conditions, and the degree to which the structures in the city have been improved to resist damage. While current technology does not allow us to predict the timing of any given event, how the fault will move, or what surface impacts will predominate, we can measure fault slippage and make estimates of the probability of when a quake within a magnitude range will occur. The Verdugo Fault is slipping at a rate of about 0.5mm/yr, Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
42 holds the potential for an event ranging from M6.0 to M6.8 (SCEDC, 2022) and has a 0.063% chance of a M6.5 or greater quake occurring over the next 20 years (USGS, 2008).
The Verdugo Fault presents something of a challenge for vulnerability planning as details regarding both its nature and the danger it poses are limited to intermittent studies and informed probabilities. This lack of detail is owed to the fault’s limited scale and lack of profound activity within a time scale of either the City or United States’ existence. It is only considered active as there has been rupture movement on it within the Holocene— approximately the last 12,000 years. Regardless of whether any impact from an event on the fault is likely in the near future or not, the City government will continue to work toward fostering a safer environment for its residents through close adherence to best practices and improved building codes.
*(Source USGS, Scenario Map, Scenario Map, Star indicates City of Burbank)
4.3.1.8 EARTHQUAKE-RELATED HAZARDS
Direct hazards include ground shaking, landslides, and liquefaction and are the specific hazards associated with earthquakes. The severity of these hazards depends on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to the fault, earthquake magnitude, and the type of earthquake . There are also consequential hazards that result from these events which can occur, such as building collapse, hazardous material release, structural fire, and other events which are not addressed in depth here
Figure 7 Shake Intensity Map – Verdugo Fault M6.9*
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
43 4.3.1.8.1 GROUND SHAKING
Ground shaking is the motion felt on the earth's surface caused by seismic waves generated by the earthquake. It is the primary cause of earthquake damage. The strength of ground shaking depends on the magnitude of the earthquake, the type of fault, and distance from the epicenter --where the earthquake originates. Buildings on poorly consolidated and thick soils will typically see more damage than buildings on consolidated soils and bedrock.
4.3.1.8.2 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED LANDSLIDES
Earthquake induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground shaking. They can destroy the roads, buildings, utilities, and other critical facilities necessary to respond and recover from an earthquake. Many communities in Southern California have a high likelihood of encountering such risks, especially in areas with steep slopes. Rock falls may happen suddenly and without warning but are more likely to occur in response to earthquake induced ground shaking, during perio ds of intense rainfall, or as a result of human activities, such as grading and blasting. Ground acceleration of at least 0.10g in steep terrain is necessary to induce earthquake-related rock falls.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.1.8.3 LIQUEFACTION below.
4.3.1.8.3 LIQUEFACTION
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil is reduced by earthquake shaking or equivalent events. Liquefaction occurs in saturated soils, which are soils in which the space between individual soil particles is completely fil led with water. This water exerts a pressure on the soil particles that influences how tightly the particles themselves are pressed together. Prior to an earthquake, the water pressure is relatively low; however, earthquake shaking can cause the water pressure to increase to the point where the soil particles can readily move with respect to each other. As liquefaction only occurs in saturated soil, its effects are most commonly observed in low lying areas. Typically, liquefaction is associated with shallow groundwater, which is less than 50 -feet beneath the earth’s surface. The are a noted in F igure 8 Burbank Liquefaction Potential Area has remained mapped to the same extent as in 1999 on the California Dept. of Conservation’s California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application (EQ Zapp), however the regional water tables have dropped owing to long term drought conditions and growing urban use requirements over the last 20 years. What should be taken from the area in this map is that the soils have the potential for liquefaction under the right conditions even if they are not at the time of the release of the current LHMP. It should be noted that settlement and spreading of soil can occur as well and these impacts can be challenging to differentiate from the consequences of liquefaction following seismic events.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
44 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.1.9 IMPACTS OF EARTHQUAKES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.1.8 IMPACTS OF EARTHQUAKES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Figure 8 Burbank Liquefaction Potential Area*
* (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazard Zones, Burbank Quadrangle (Excerpt), Updated Sept 23, 2021) Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
45 4.3.1.9 IMPACTS OF EARTHQUAKES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK Based on the risk assessment, it is evident that earthquakes w ill continue to have the greatest potential for devastating impacts across the City of Burbank . Impacts that can generally be anticipated in future events include:
✓ Injury and loss of life
✓ Commercial and residential structural damage
✓ Disruption of and damage to public infrastructure
✓ Damage to roads/bridges resulting in loss of mobility ✓ Negative impact on commercial and residential property values ✓ Significant economic impact (jobs, sales, tax revenue) within the community ✓ Significant disruption to citizens as temporary facilities and relocations would be needed
Specific physical impacts that can be expected include some or all of the following localized issues: flooding from fire sprinkler system failure, minor hazardous material spills, unsecured residential furniture and water heater displacement, cracked water lines, and natural gas leaks. On a wider scale , electrical distribution system damage, both localized potable or recycled water distribution system disruption, transportation system interruption, sewage system breaks, and combinations/hybrids of these issues could manifest . To be fair, there is a wide range of qualifications to consider with respect to when, if, and what degree the physical impacts above and the economic and casualty numbers below are realized . These qualifications include diverse factors such as economic fluctuations, property valuation, soil types, seismic event timing, and steadily improving structural and mitigation guidance among many others. Regardless of these provisos, the scenario estimates here remain valuable to critical discussions, underscoring challenges, and informing planning.
When addressing either residential buildings or City infrastructure a key vulnerability consideration is that they have been constructed across decades of building codes. As a result, it is reasonable to expect uneven structural performance during seismic events across the built environment with more recent construction likely to perform better due to improved safety standards. A critical component of the City’s infrastructure that makes for an illustrative example of this can be found in the campus of Burbank’s Providence Saint Joseph Medi cal Center (PSJMC).
The privately owned, 446 bed facility has had considerable construction completed since it opened in 1943 and unsurprisingly has seen uneven structural performance during seismic events that have more directly affected neighboring Southern California communities. Medical facilities of this type cost tens of millions of dollars to upgrade and the only functionally and financially realistic approach to meeting rising safety standards is with ongoing incremental improvement s. At the minimum, PSJMC has had strong compliance with state and federal seismic safety standards such as the Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Act of 1973 and FEMA’s suggested seismic performance goals for health care facilities (2014). Further addressing seism ic safety, the facility's administration has implemented deep soil stabilization work across the center, added structural upgrades informed by building code updates, and replaced aging structures as demonstrated by 2022's $73 million state-of-the-art emergency department building. So, while it can be expected that structural performance will remain uneven, the likelihood of buildings critical to the facility remaining not just structurally sound but in full operation following seismic events has been markedly increased.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
46 In a wider and more historical perspective, certain trends since the previous LHMP was published, which have mitigation planning implications, should be noted for Burbank as a whole. The first is that the population of the city has remaine d relatively stable with the most recent estimate showing approximately 2% gro wth (Census.gov 2021). It should be noted however, that the daily gross population can fluctuate greatly when visitors and day worker numbers are considered. The second is a migration of residents from single family to multi-family dwellings. This trend is strongly reflected in a jurisdiction wide building inventory reduction of some 840 structures. The City, with key infrastructure depicted in Figure 9 below, is clearly a built o ut urban environment subject to rapid re-division, renewal, and structural changes under City code and State law. The result of th is significant alteration in the urban residential landscape, regardless of more than a decade of construction under earthquak e hazard mitigation focused building codes, has been to increase population density and potential risk. This is reflected in the 2022 HAZUS projections for both economic and casualty impacts.
It is well documented that, single family dwelling, which generally are single story wood framed structures, are more resilient to moderate seismic events than multifamily, multistory structur es. An additional factor in the performance of the type of multistory structures implemented regionally is that they frequently have soft story ground level construction to comply with parking requirements. These units, while reinforced with seismic events in mind, are still considered less resilient to earthquakes and the 2022 HAZUS calculations reflect this.
The percentages depicted in Table 11 reflect how the respective seismic events would affect the City as a whole while being more relatable than the granular building counts provided by HAZUS software. It is clear from these projections that the damage, economic impact, and casualties are expected to be substantially lower for a large quake (M7.8) on the San Andreas fault than a moderate quake on the proximate Verdugo fault (M6.7). Relatively speaking , a seismic event o n the Verdugo Fault would result in approximately three times the number of damaged structures, seven times the economic loss, and between six and twelve times the casualties (injuries and deaths) of that of a considerably stronger event on the distant San Andreas Fault.
M7.8
SAN ANDREAS SCENARIO
M6.7
VERDUGO FAULT
2011 2022 2011 2022
DAMAGE & ECONOMIC LOSS
Undamaged 94.7% 80.5% 28% 33.3%
Minor 4.8% 15.7% 55% 39.4%
Moderate 0.5% < 3.4% 17% 21.4%
Major < 0.1% < 0.1% 2.5% 4.5%
Destroyed << 0.1% << 0.1% 0.5% 1.5%
Total impacted structures 5.3% 19.6% 75% 66.8%
Building economic loss $76.8MM $297.87MM $1,081MM $2,140.31MM Transportation economic loss $3.4MM $28.76MM $21.3MM $120.28MM Utility economic loss < $100K $93.48MM < $100K $561.38MM Total economic loss $80.2MM $420.11MM $1,103MM $2,821.97MM
CASUALTIES
Injuries - 2PM 11 143 473 753
Injuries - 2AM 3 23 154 266
Deaths - 2PM 0 1 19 46
Deaths - 2AM 0 0 5 10
Table 11 Impact Summary Comparison for Earthquake Scenarios Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
47 Finally, it should be clearly stated that the projections summarized in Table 11 should not be interpreted as the literal results of these earthquake scenarios. They should be taken as guidelines and reasonable estimates of the damages, economic impacts, and casualties for an event whose potential toll might be considerably different depending on a large number of interrelated factors.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.2 FLOODS below.
Figure 9 Burbank Critical Infrastructure*
*(GIS-NET Public – Dept. of Regional Planning, Planning and Zoning Information)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
48 4.3.2 FLOODS
A flood is an environmental water load that overwhelms natural and/or manmade drainage processes such that a land area which is usually not submerged becomes so for a period sufficient to be hazardous and damaging. Water can pool or be flowing depending on local topology, drainage, soil type, and other factors of the local geography . The extent of damage the water causes is general ly a function of its depth, motion, content, and residence time outside its usual channels. While the ponding of water from sustained precipitation is a potential hazard , it is not considered significant for the vast majority of the City of Burbank ’s area as a result of regional climatic conditions (See Section 4.3.5 DROUGHT) and extensive water management works.
Runoff, “riverine”, water management is addressed by the Burbank Public Works department in conjunction with the Los Angeles County-Flood Control District (LACFCD) and Army Corps of Engineers. That area with the greatest potential to be affected is the conjunction of the Lockheed Drain Channel and the Burbank Western Channel—the latter being a minor tributary of the Los Angeles River. These channels are lined in concrete as flood control works and are scheduled to receive improvements by the Army Corps to further reduce the possibility of bank overtopping in the event of heavy regional precipitation. That area which would be affected is noted as the floodplain designated in the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of Burbank below.
A floodplain is a land area adjacent to a river, stream, lake, estuary, or other water body that is subjec t to flooding. This area, depending on extent and urban land use changes, acts to store flood waters that exceed drainage channel capacity. The floodplain is made up of two sections: the floodway and the flood fringe. These components of the floodplain are judged with respect to 100 -year flood events. The 100-year flood is that event having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in magnitude in any given year.
Consequently, the 100-year floodplain is the ar ea adjoining a given watercourse that becomes inundated during the occurrence of a 100-year flood.
4.3.2.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
Established in 1968, FEMA’s NFIP provides federally backed flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and businesses in communities that adopt and enforce floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage. The City of Burbank adopted a floodplain management ordinance as noted in California Building Code 9-1-2-G102.2 [Appendix-G] and has Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that show floodways, 100 - year flood zones, and 500 -year flood zones. The Chief Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer is designated as floodplain administrator and their duties are noted in California Building Code 9-1-2-G103.10 [Appendix-G]. These components of the Burbank Municipal Code are current as of August 10th, 2021 relative to this mitigation plan.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
49 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C2
Q: Does the plan address each jurisdiction’s participation in the NFIP and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii)) A: See 4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION below.
4.3.2.2 NFIP PARTICIPATION
The City of Burbank ( Community #065018) participates in the NFIP, and its FIRMs were last updated on September 26 th, 2008. These maps represent flood risk s at that time and did not incorporate planning for floodplain changes due to future development. While FEMA is considering changing that policy, it would be marginally relevant for a built -out city, such as Burbank, where even redevelopment is infrequent and the areas of mapped flood risk area–rated A, AE, or AO–are of limited extent. The area noted in Figures 10, 11, and 12 detail the extent of concern for flooding in Burbank as a result of channel overflow during a 100-year flood event. The extent is limite d based on current data and may be reduced further as more recent climate data enters the calculated record for what constitutes a 100-year flood in the region.
The FEMA floodplain maps delineate the 100 -year floodplain boundaries and other potentially flood -prone areas as defined above. The 100 -year flood is the flood with a 1% chance of being exceeded in any given year. A 1% annual chance of flooding corresponds to about a 26% chance of flooding in a 30-year time period.
Detailed floodplain boundaries are shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
The FEMA Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Maps include a large number of terms of art and acronyms. A glossary of the terms used in flood hazard mapping is available on the FEMA website in the following document:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/floodplain/nfip_sg_appendix_d.pdf
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
50 *(Source FEMA, FEMA Flood Map Service Center)
*(Source FEMA, FEMA Flood Map Service Center)
Figure 10 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1328*
Figure 11 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1329*
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
51 The City’s Non-Special Flood Hazard Area (NSFHA) is not in any imminent danger from flooding as a result of geography, ongoing water management improvements, and increasingly common drought conditions throughout the region; however, it is important to note that structures within an NSFHA are still at some risk as more than 20% of all flood insurance claims nationwide come from areas outside of mapped high-risk flood zones. With this in mind, the City will continue to adopt and enforce building codes, as noted abo ve, that protect the citizens and property within its jurisdiction.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B4 Q: Does the Plan address NFIP insured structures within the jurisdiction that have been repetitively damaged by floods? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii))
A: See 4.3.2.3 REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES below.
4.3.2.3 REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES
Repetitive Loss Properties (RLPs) are most susceptible to flood damages; therefore, they have been the focus of flood hazard mitigation programs. Unlike a countywide program, the Floodplain Management Plan (FMP) for repetitive loss properties involves highly diversified property profiles, drainage issues, and property owner’s interest. It also requires public involvement processes unique to each RLP area. The objective of an FMP is to provide specific potential mitigation measures and activities to best add ress the problems and needs of communities with repetitive loss properties. A repetitive loss property is one for which two or more claims of $1,000 or more have been paid by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) within any given 10-year period. According to FIRM map resources and a lack of recorded loss within the noted 10-year window, none of the properties within the City of Burbank borders are designated to be within the RPL category.
Figure 12 Los Angeles County FIRMette, Panel 1337*
*(Source FEMA, FEMA Flood Map Service Center)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
52 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.2.4 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.2.4 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.2.4 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
4.3.2.4 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The potential for flooding in Burbank is primarily related to one or more major winter rain events causing flood control channels to spill over bank. Although this type of flooding has not occurred in the City since modern flood controls were implemented, FIRMs designate the areas illustrated in Figures 10, 11, 12 as being within the 100-year floodplain. The City’s 2011 LHMP describes these areas of the 100-year floodplain as follows:
✓ A narrow area west of Victory Boulevard in the vicinity of South Main Street ✓ Several limited areas south of Highway 134 near Burbank’s southern boundary ✓ An area adjacent to the Lockheed Drain Channel near Empire Avenue and W. Vanowen St.
Street from near the B urbank Airport eastwards towards Interstate 5, then southward in the vicinity of Victory Boulevard
The possibility of flooding in the latter area is expected to be reduced upon completion of soon to be scheduled Army Corps of Engineer flood control improvements. Furthermore, it should be stressed that the extent of areas within the FEMA mapped 100-year floodplains have far larger adjoining areas that are mapped outside even the 500 -year flood area (Zone X). The majority of the City is in fact categorized as Zone X with the exception of one section in northeastern Burbank where no FIRM analysis has been conducted (Zone D) due to its elevation in the Verdugo Hills.
There are no large dams in the immediate vicinity of Burbank and water storage works within the City are limited to relatively small potable water storage sites. Reservoirs are, for the sake of hazard analysis, considered dams and as such we note that minor “dams” exist in the jurisdiction: Reservoir 4 and Reservoir 5 being the largest of these holding units and the only ones with a limited potential flood risk.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
53 The inundation maps depict scenarios in which there were catastrophic structural failures in Reservoir 4’s east side, Reservoir 4’s south side, Reservoir 5’s east side, Reservoir 5’s south side, or Reservoir 5’s west side in Figures 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 respectively. In addition to these reservoirs, there are several “debris basins” within the City with the largest identified as the Stough and Lower Sunset Debris Basins. These structures are works designed to capture sediment, gravel, boulders, and vegetative debris that are washed out of the canyons during storms but allow water to flow into the downstream storm drain system, thereby reducing flood risk for communities downstream of the facility. They are typically located at the mouths of canyons and are key components of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District's flood risk management system. It is notable that these basins do not normally either retain water or have the potential for catastrophic failure as a reservoir.
In the event flooding were to occur, the geographical areas affected include those delimited in figures 13 through 17 below related to failure of water containment structures and figures 10 through 12 above related to bank overflow due to exceptional regional precipitation. For the figures that outline the areas affected by sudden containment failure, there is potential for highly localized property damage and personal injury mainly at the initial release where water levels would be highest. In an effort to mitigate this danger, there has been ongoing maintenance and upgrade work as part of the City’s CIP budget for storage facilities (See adopted CIPs FY2018-19 thru 2022 -23 for recent individual project funding and work detail examples ) within the jurisdiction. As these units are small scale water retention locations, the released water can reasonably be expected to drain expeditiously into the subsurface water drainage system as it spreads out.
It should be noted that Burbank has instituted mitigation efforts for sudden flooding events that include educational material, public services, and street design. Educational material for homeowners and a limited supply of free sandbags to residents who are unable to acquire them from local commercial sources are available through the City’s Publ ic Works Department. In areas prone to heavy runoff from sudden high precipitation events, geographically relevant roadways are designed to contain and channel runoff such that water flow is directed into the City’s drainage system. A prime example of this design can be found in Burbank’s Country Club Drive which accesses the Verdugos and can act as a drainage channel for flooding.
Flooding is the most common disaster event in the United States and while a disaster declaration as a result of this type of e vent is unlikely in Burbank, there are conditions in which flood waters could impact transportation routes and hence emergency response services indirectly with traffic complications. Emergency response vehicles are not expected to be directly affected. As a caveat we should remember that evolving urban surface conditions within, up, and downstream of Burbank, seasonal and climatic precipitation variability, and flood protection measure updates can act to influence the flood potential for any given or series of precipitation events.
While neither flood maps from Los Angeles County’s Public Works Department or FEMA’s Flood Map Service Center indicate extensive areas affected by flooding there are key transportation routes in close proximity to or running through lands which have that potential during extended periods of heavy precipitation. Flooding in these locations can impact both residential and commercial traffic at the locations noted below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
54 • Burbank Roadways:
- The intersection of Burbank Boulevard, Victory Boulevard and Victory Place - North Buena Vista Street
- Griffith Park Drive between Chandler Boulevard and Olive Avenue - Virginia Avenue between Olive Avenue and Oak Street
- Oak Street between Virginia Avenue and Glenwood Place - The intersection of Lake Street and Chestnut Street
- Empire Avenue in the vicinity of the Burbank airport
- Lincoln at the Interstate 5 freeway off ramp*
- Country Club Drive and Harvard Canyon Road above the golf course • Southern Pacific Railway crossings:
- Railroad above Hollywood Way at Empire*
- Railroad above Hollywood Way at San Fernando*
- Railroad at the San Fernando pedestrian tunnel*
- Railroad above Victory Place*
- Railroad above Alameda*
*(Storm water pumps have been installed to mitigate flooding)
In a general hazard perspective, the impacts on the jurisdiction from flooding are expected to be minimal as a result of robust flood control measures and profound drought conditions across the region which reduce both the number and severity of precipitat ion events. Historically, the City does not have any recent incidents of flooding which have resulted in either minor widespread or severe localized damage . The last such events occurred in 1938 with the Los Angeles river over spilling its banks and 1941 w hen Lockheed Corporation factory buildings were damaged. There are no documented resident casualties since the 1938 event nor extensive damage since the 1941 event respectively as a result of flooding and none are currently anticipated due to extensive flood control works, drier conditions, and modern forecasting and alerting systems. Finally, there are no properties in the jurisdiction that are categorized as repetitive loss buildings within the FEMA mapped flood zones noted as type A, AE, or AO.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
55 Figure 13 Reservoir 4 East Side Failure Inundation Map Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
56 Figure 14 Reservoir 4 South Side Failure Inundation Map
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
57 Figure 15 Reservoir 5 East Side Failure Inundation Map
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
58 Figure 16 Reservoir 5 South Side Failure Inundation Map
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
59 Taking into consideration the extensive flood control works throughout the city, high percentage of the land that is outside the 100-year floodplain, and prevalence of severe drought across the region, it would appear that floods in the jurisdiction are unlikely. However, remembering that floods are the most common disaster in the United States and ongoing climate change is responsible for a higher degree of variability with respect to both type and severity of local weather, ongoing reevaluation of vulnerabilities to flooding will remain a consideration.
Figure 17 Reservoir 5 West Side Failure Inundation Map
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
60 4.3.3 WINDSTORMS
Santa Ana winds are generally defined as warm, dry winds that blow from the east or northeast offshore .
These winds occur below the passes and canyons of the coastal ranges of Southern California and in the Los Angeles and Orange County basins. Santa Ana winds often blow with exceptional speed in the Santa Ana Canyon. Forecasters at the National Weather Service offices in Oxnard and San Diego usually place speed minimums on these winds and reserve the use of "Santa Ana" for winds greater than 25 knots where 1 knot is 1.15MPH or 1.85KPH. These winds accelerate to 35 knots as they move through canyons and passes with gusts as high as 60 knots.
The complex topography of Southern California combined with various atmospheric conditions create numerous scenarios that may cause widespread or isolated Santa Ana events. Commonly, Santa Ana winds develop when a region of high pressure builds over the Great Basin (the high plateau east of the Sierra Mountains and west of the Rocky Mountains , including most of Nevada and Utah). Clockwise circulation around the center of this high-pressure area forces air downslope from the high plateau. The air warms as it descends toward the California coast at the rate of five degrees Fahrenheit per thousand feet due to compressional heating. The air originates in an arid climate, and its relative humidity decreases further as its temperature rises.
These regional winds typically occur from October to March as depicted in Figure 18 . According to most accounts, they are named either for the Santa Ana River Valley where they originate, or for the Santa Ana Canyon, southeast of Los Angeles, where they are known to accelerate though. For scale and perspective we have included the widely known Beaufort Wind Scale, reproduced with land wind speeds in Table 12 below.
Force Speed
(MPH/KPH) Description Specification
0 0-1 / 0-2 Calm Calm; smoke rises vertically.
1 1-3 / 2-5 Light Air Direction of wind shown by smoke drift, but not by wind vanes. 2 4-7 / 6-11 Light Breeze Wind felt on face; leaves rustle; ordinary vanes moved by wind. 3 8-12 / 12-19 Gentle Breeze Leaves and small twigs in constant motion; wind extends light flag. 4 13-18 / 20-29 Moderate Breeze Raises dust and loose paper; small branches are moved. 5 19-24 / 30-39 Fresh Breeze Small trees in leaf begin to sway; crested wavelets form on inland waters. 6 25-31 / 40-50 Strong Breeze Large branches in motion; whistling heard in telegraph wires; umbrellas used with difficulty. 7 32-38 / 51-61 Near Gale Whole trees in motion; inconvenience felt when walking against the wind. 8 39-46 / 62-74 Gale Breaks twigs off trees; generally, impedes progress. 9 47-54 / 75-87 Severe Gale Slight structural damage occurs (chimney-pots and slates removed) 10 55-63 / 88-101 Storm Seldom experienced inland; trees uprooted; considerable structural damage occurs. 11 64-72 / 102-116 Violent Storm Very rarely experienced; accompanied by wide-spread damage. 12 72-83 / 117-134 Hurricane Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale applicable at this speed and higher.
Table 12 Beaufort Wind Scale*
*(Source: Weather.gov)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
61 4.3.3.1 WINDSTORM IMPACTS
Windstorm events can be expected, perhaps annually, across widespread areas of the region which can be adversely impacted during a windstorm event. This can result in the involvement of emergency response personnel during wide-ranging windstorm or microburst tornadic activity.
4.3.3.1.1 LIFE AND PROPERTY
Both residential and commercial structures with weak reinforcement are susceptible to damage. Wind pressure can act as a direct assault on a structure, pushing walls, doors, and windows inward. Conversely, passing currents create forces that pull building components and surfaces outward. With extreme wind forces, roofs can be displaced, or entire buildings can collapse resulting in considerable local damage and injury or death to both occupants and those nearby.
4.3.3.1.2 UTILITIES
Historically, falling trees are the major cause of power outages in the project area. Windstorms, such as strong microbursts and Santa Ana Wind conditions cause flying debris and downed utility lines. For example, tree limbs breaking from winds of only 45MPH/72KPH can be thrown over 75-feet, while overhead power lines are damaged in even relatively minor windstorm events. Furthermore, falling trees bring electric power lines down to the pavement, creating the potential for lethal electric shock and fires.
4.3.3.1.3 INFRASTRUCTURE
Windstorms damage buildings, power lines, and other infrastructure, due to falling trees and branches.
During the rainy season, particularly rare heavy precipitation events, saturated soils result in trees becoming unstable and more vulnerable to uprooting during high wind events.
4.3.3.1.4 FIRE THREAT
Perhaps the greatest danger from windstorm activity in the project area comes from the combination of the Santa Ana winds with the major fires that occur every few years in the urban/wildland interface. With the Santa Ana winds driving the flames, the speed and reach of the conflagration can be greatly enhanced making both civil population warning and firefighting activities difficult if not impossible.
4.3.3.1.5 TRANSPORTATION
Windstorm activity impacts local transportation in addition to the problems caused by downed trees and electrical wires blocking streets and highways. During periods of extremely strong Santa Ana winds, major highways can be temporarily closed to truck and recreatio nal vehicle traffic; however, these disruptions are typically not long lasting, and they do not carry a severe long-term economic impact on the region.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.3.2 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
62 4.3.3.2 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK The City has not directly experienced devastation from windstorm hazards; however, neighboring communities in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains endured toppled trees, power outages, and millions of dollars’ worth of damage due to the 2011 Santa Ana winds. Based on local history, most incidents of high wind in the County of Los Angeles are the result of Santa Ana and El Niño related conditions. While high -impact wind incidents are not frequent in the area, significant wind events and sporadic tornado activity have been known to negatively affect the county. Between 2015-2019, the County of Los Angeles experienced 49 wind related events with gusts reaching 79MPH/127KPH. Although the region did not suffer fatalities or serious injuries, high winds fueled the devastating Thomas Fire (2017).
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.3.3 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.3.3 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Figure 18 Santa Ana Wind Direction and Impact Area*
*(Source AccuWeather)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
63 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.3.3 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
4.3.3.3 LOCAL CONDITIONS
Incidents of high winds in the City are primarily the result of Santa Ana conditions . These conditions and related damaging events have been known to negat ively impact the local Southern California communities .
Windstorm events can be expected, perhaps even annually, across widespread areas of the region as a result of progressing climate change. The City and surrounding area can be adversely impacted during a windstorm event to a limited extent by direct damage and profoundly i n relation to increasing the extent, likelihood of, and damage by instances of wildfire.
Santa Ana’s occur from fall through early spring with the strongest winds typically occurring in late autumn.
The City is not widely vulnerable to direct wind damage but may be impacted by downed trees, electrical and communication services interruption in those areas where lines have not been moved underground, and blocked roadways that interfere with responding emergency personnel. Certainly trees have a higher probability of being affected directly by severe wind conditions in the Verdugo Hills and along the wildland/urban interface as delimited in Figure 22 : Burbank Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, however their contribution to hazard vulnerability is constrained by their scarcity. The Verdugo Hills are mostly chaparral and scrubs with trees such as coast live oaks, California bay laurel, and sycamore limited to shadier north slope canyons. Along the wildland/urban interface , e.g. Cabrini Dr. and Villa Cabrini Par k, and along service access routes into the Hills, e.g. Chandler Fire Road, there are scattered examples of both native and invasive tree species, however access to natural or restricted municipal water resources prevents the existence of anything that could be considered forested land.
Additionally, unreinforced local structures are susceptible to toppling damage and variable wind pressure can directly damage even moderately reinforced structures should severe conditions persist. If a severe wind event strikes the community, downed trees, electrical/data service interru ption, and blocked roadways can be hindrances to responding emergency personnel. In general, any of these conditions can result in the reduced availability of emergency response personnel across the region and access to mutual aid resources but not to the same degree as found in geographies that support more extensive wild and municipal tree growth.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.3.4 IMPACT OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
64 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.3.4 IMPACT OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.3.4 IMPACT OF WINDSTORMS IN THE CITY OF BURBANK
Based on the risk assessment, it is evident that windstorms will continue to have potentially devastating economic impacts to the City of Burbank. Impacts that are not quantified, but can be anticipated in future events, include:
✓ Injury and loss of life
✓ Commercial and residential structural damage
✓ Disruption of and damage to public infrastructure
✓ Secondary health hazards e.g., toxic chemical spills
✓ Damage to roads/bridges resulting in loss of mobility ✓ Negative impact on commercial and residential property values ✓ Significant economic impact (jobs, sales, tax revenue) upon the community ✓ Significant disruption to citizens as temporary facilities and relocations would be needed
Geographically, Burbank is located in the eastern end of the San Fernando Valley and as such is subject to seasonal Santa Ana wind conditions. The majority of the City benefits from its position in the lee of the Verdugo Hills with respect to such winds and this coupled with well enforced modern building codes reduces their direct impact. It should be noted however that at le ast two factors may result in more pronounced hazardous conditions due to windstorms in the future. The first i s an increase in their prevalence from climate change leading to a higher degree of variability in local weather conditions. This may result in an increase in both the number and severity of wi ndstorms across the Los Angeles region. The second is that a synergy with drier conditions due to regional drought may set the City up for more extensive and more rapidly spreading wildfire during high wind events . To be clear, while there is no way to accurately forecast either the frequency or severity of events for which no historic record exists, we can envision increasingly hazardous conditions due to windstorms as evolving climatic conditions influence local weather events. Looking to more vulnerable adjoining communities subject to damage from Santa Anas for a glimpse of potential impacts, damages can range from less than $100,000 to tens of millions of dollars as a result of either their direct impact or synergy with drought conditions and wildfire.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.4 EPIDEMIC/PANDEMIC/VECTOR-BORNE (EPV) DISEASE below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
65 4.3.4 EPIDEMIC/PANDEMIC/VECTOR-BORNE (EPV) DISEASE
The 2018 California State Hazard Mitigation Plan, as noted by the California Department of Public Health, identified epidemics, pandemics, and vector borne (EPV) diseases as specific hazards having a profound impact throughout the State. This statement has proven both timely and accurate. According to the Ce nters for Disease Control (CDC), an epidemic refers to an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population area. A pandemic refers to an epidemic that has spread over several countries or continents, usually affecting a large number of people. Vector-borne diseases are human illnesses caused by parasites, viruses and bacteria t hat are transmitted by vectors –living organisms that can transmit infectious pathogens between humans or from animals to humans. The recurrence interval for EPV disease is an ongoing challenge for epidemiologists as factors that include climate change, increased human-wildlife contact, growing human movement globally, and disease variation over time result in non-seasonally constrained outbreaks. Inter-pandemic intervals for influenza are roughly 40 years (NIH, 2010) based on historical records however other diseases, particularly novel strains, have a more limited historical records to give clues as to when they might reemerge as public health crises.
4.3.4.1 SEASONAL INFLUENZA
Seasonal influenza, also known as “the flu”, is a disease that attacks the respiratory system (nose, throat, and lungs) in humans. Seasonal influenza occurs annually . In the United States, the influenza season typically occurs from October through May, peaking in January or February with yearly epidemics of varying severity.
Although mild cases may be similar to a viral “cold,” influenza is typically much more severe. Influenza usually comes on suddenly; may include fever, headache, tiredness (which may be extreme), dry cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, and body aches; and can result in complications , such as pneumonia. Persons aged 65 years and older, those with chronic health conditions, pregnant women, and young children are at the highest risk for serious complications, including death.
4.3.4.2 PANDEMIC INFLUENZA
A pandemic influenza occurs when a new influenza virus, for which there is little or no human immunity, emerges and spreads on a worldwide scale, infecting a large proportion of the human population. The 20th century saw three such pandemics. The most notable pandemic was the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic that was responsible for 20 to 40 million deaths throughout the world. There have been two pandemics in the 21st century: H1N1 in 2009 and the most recent COVID -19 outbreak in 2019. As demonst rated historically and recently, pandemic influenza has the potential to cause serious illness and death among people of all age groups and have a major impact on society . These societal impacts include significant economic disruption that can result due to death, loss of work time, and the costs of treating or preventing the spread of influenza.
4.3.4.3 H1N1 INFLUENZA
In 2009, a pandemic of H1N1 influenza, popularly referred to as “The Swine Flu,” resulted in many hospitalizations and deaths. Pandemic H1N1 influenza is spread in the same way as seasonal influenza, from person to person through coughing or sneezing by infected people. In April 2009, two children living more than 100 miles apart in Southern California came down with the flu. By mid-April, their illnesses had been diagnosed as being caused by a new strain of H1N1 influenza. Persons infected with H1N1 experienc ed fever and mild respiratory symptoms, such as coughing, runny nose, and congestion. In some cases, symptoms were severe and included diarrhea, chills, and vomiting, while in rare cases respiratory failure occurred. The H1N1 virus caused relatively few de aths in humans. In the United States, it caused fewer deaths (between 8,870 and Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
66 18,300) than seasonal influenza, which, based on data for the years 2014–2019, causes an average of about 40,000 deaths each year. The H1N1 virus was most lethal in individuals affected by chronic disease or other underlying health conditions.
4.3.4.4 COVID-19
As of 202 2, the CDC is responding to a pandemic of respiratory disease spreading from person to person caused by a novel (new) coronavirus. The disease has been named “Coronavirus Disease 2019” (COVID - 19). Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that are common in people and many different species of animals, including camels, cattle, cats, and bats. Rarely, animal coronaviruses can infect people and then spread between individuals such as was the case with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
According to the CDC, many of the patients at the epicenter of the outbreak in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China had some link to a large seafood and live animal market, suggesting animal-to-person spread. Later, a growing number of patients reportedly did not have exposure to animal markets, indicating person -to-person spread.
Person-to-person spread was subsequently reported outside Hubei and in countries outside China, including in the United States. Most international destinations now have ongoing community spread with the virus that causes COVID-19, as does the United States. On March 4th, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency in California in response to the COVID-19 outbreak.
On March 19th, 2020, Governor Newsom issued an executive order directing all residents immediately to heed current State public health directives to stay home, except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of essential critical infrastructure sectors. This pandemic is an ongoing event that has demonstrated a lack of seasonality similar to influenza. COVID-19, as a result of variant strains of the virus, will likely continue to be endemic to human populations worldwide until such time as appropriate health measures and vaccines are administered globally.
4.3.4.5 AVIAN INFLUENZA
Avian Influenza, commonly referred to as “Bird Flu,” remains a looming pandemic threat. Avian Influenza primarily spreads from birds to birds and rarely to humans. Public health experts continue to be alert to the possibility that an avian virus may mutate or change so that it can be passed from birds to humans, potentially causing a pandemic in humans. Some strains of the Avian Influenza could arise from Asia or other continents where people have very close contact with infected birds. This disease could have spread from poultry farmers or visitors to live poultry markets who had been in very close contact with infected birds and contracted fatal strains of Avian Influenza. Thus far, Avian Influenza viruses have not mutated and have not demonstrated easy transmission from person to person ; however, if Avian Influenza viruses were to mutate into a hi ghly virulent form and become easily transmissible from person to person, the public health community would be very concerned about the potential for an influenza pandemic. Such a pandemic could disrupt all aspects of society and severely affect both the United States and world economies.
4.3.4.6 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE
Vector-borne diseases are human illnesses caused by parasites, viruses and bacteria that are transmitted by vectors. Every year , there are more than 700,000 deaths from diseases , such as malaria, dengue, schistosomiasis, trypanosomiasis, leishmaniosis, Chagas disease, yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis and Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
67 onchocerciasis. Vectors are living organisms that can transmit infectious pathogens between humans, or from animals to humans. Many of these vectors are bloodsucking insects, which ingest disease -producing microorganisms during a blood meal from an infected host (human or animal) and later transmit it into a new host, after the p athogen has replicated within the insect. Often, once a vector becomes infectious, they can transmit the pathogen for the rest of their life during each subsequent bite/blood meal.
4.3.4.7 MOSQUITO-BORNE VIRUSES
Mosquito‐borne viruses belong to a group of viruses commonly referred to as arboviruses (for arthropod ‐ borne). Although 12 mosquito ‐borne viruses are known to occur in California, only West Nile virus (WNV), western equine encephalomyelitis virus (WEE), and St. Louis encephalitis virus (SLE ) are significant causes of human disease. WNV continues to seriously affect the health of humans, horses, and wild birds throughout the State. Since 2003, there have been over 6,000 WNV human cases with 248 deaths, and over 1,200 equine cases. WNV first appeared in the United States in 1999 in New York and rapidly spread across the country to California in subsequent years. California has historically maintained a comprehensive mosquito ‐borne disease surveillance and control program , including the M osquito-borne Virus Surveillance and Response Plan, which is updated annually in consultation with local vector control agencies.
Climate change will likely affect vector -borne disease transmission patterns. Changes in temperature and precipitation can in fluence seasonality, distribution, and prevalence of vector -borne diseases. A changing climate may also create conditions favorable for the establishment of invasive mosquito vectors in California.
For most Californians, WNV poses the greatest mosquito -borne disease threat. Above-normal temperatures are among the most consistent factors associated with WNV outbreaks. Mild winters are associated with increased WNV transmission due, in part, to reduced mosquito and resident bird mortality. Warmer winter and spring seasons may also allow for transmission to start earlier. Such conditions also allow more time for virus amplification in bird-mosquito cycles, increasing the potential for mosquitoes to transmit WNV to people.
The effects of increased temperature a re primarily through acceleration of physiological processes within mosquitoes, resulting in faster larval development and shorter generation times, more frequent mosquito biting, and shortening of the incubation period time required for infected mosquitoes to transmit WNV. During periods of drought, especially in urban areas, mosquitoes tend to thrive due to changes in storm water management practices. Mosquitoes in urban areas can reach higher abundance due to stagnation of water in underground storm water systems that would otherwise be flushed by rainfall. Runoff from landscape irrigation systems mixed with organic matter can also create ideal mosquito habitat. Drought conditions may also force birds to increase their utilization of suburban areas where water is more available, bringing these WNV hosts into contact with urban vectors.
4.3.4.8 VALLEY FEVER
Valley Fever is caused by Coccidioides, a fungus that lives in the soil in the southwestern United States and parts of Mexico, Central America, and South America. Inhaling the airborne fungal spores can cause an infection called coccidioidomycosis, which is also known as “cocci” or “Valley Fever.” Most people who are exposed to the fungus do not get sick, but some people develop flu‐like symptoms that may last for weeks to months. In a very small proportion of people who get Valley Fever, the infection can spread from the lungs to other parts of the body and cause more severe conditions, such as meningitis or even death. Valley Fever cannot spread from person to person. Most cases of Valley Fever in the United States occur in people who Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
68 live in or have traveled to the southwestern United States, especially Arizona and California. The map below shows the areas where the fungus that causes Valley Fever is thought to be endemic, or native and common in the environment. The full extent of the current endemic areas is unknown and is a subject of further study.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.4.9 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.4.9 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK The City doesn’t have specific records of previous cases; however, because the County of Los Angeles has been affected by outbreaks, it is assumed that Burbank has also. In the past century, Los Angeles County has been struck by pandemics. In 1918 Spanish Flu, a form of H1N1 swine flu, killed between 50 and 100 million people worldwide. In the US, the flu was reported simultaneously in the Midwest and New England and rapidly moved across the country, killing thousands on the West Coast. Of greatest concern to densely populated urban areas are influenza strains such as the avian flu (H5N1) and swine flu (H1N1).
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.4.10 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.4.10 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
4.3.4.10 LOCAL CONDITIONS
While a variety of influenza, vector borne, and mosquito borne diseases continue to affect the City, COVID - 19 currently has the widest and most profound impact across all aspects of society. According to the County of Los Angeles Public Health Department, the City of Burbank has had 10,086 ca ses and 246 deaths as of August 15th, 2021. This virus has spread at an alarming rate due to its ease of transmission and, unfortunately, variants of the disease have displayed higher transmissibility and morbidity than the strain that initiated the outbreak; t herefore, urban communities with dense, mobile populations, such as Burbank, are especially vulnerable to COVID-19.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
69 Figure 19 Adjusted COVID-19 Case Rate by City Within LA County* *(Source LA County Public Health Dept.)
Figure 20 Cumulative Cases and Deaths Due to COVID-19 for LA County* *(Source LA County Public Health Dept.)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
70 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.4.11 IMPACT OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.4.11 IMPACT OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.4.11 IMPACT OF EPV DISEASES IN THE CITY OF BURBANK
Based on the risk assessment and recent real-world experience, it is evident that epidemics, pandemics, and vector-borne diseases will continue to have devastating human and economic impacts on the City of Burbank.
Impacts that are not quantified, but can be anticipated in future events, include:
✓ Injury and loss of life
✓ Rapid and profound social structure impact
✓ Wide scale disruption of public infrastructure systems ✓ Extensive transportation system usage patterns changes ✓ Negative impact on commercial and residential property values ✓ Catastrophic economic downturn in terms of jobs, sales, and tax revenue ✓ Business operations may be closed or limited to essential and critical needs only
The vulnerability to and resultant impact of EPV diseases in Burbank is a consequence of a spectrum of reasons from environmental to the nature of the disease in question. In the case of the current EPV disease affecting the jurisdiction, COVID-19, it spread through the City rapidly due to many factors including the City’s cosmopolitan nature, central role in the entertainment industry, proximity to several international airports, and the highly infect ious nature of the disease. I mpacts from the disease are still accruing but have included a massive economic downturn for local business, health considerations that range from lost work hours to death, extensive transportation system use pattern changes for both leisure and commute , considerable political fallout related to civic health care guidance, and widespread healthcare system modifications.
Given that these effects have been seen across adjoining j urisdictions and all levels of government with a disease for which an effective vaccine exists, it is frightening to consider the impact of such a disease if it had either a higher mortality or was more resistant to medical countermeasures. One can discuss impacts in terms of the financial costs, long term health consequences or other socioeconomic/health factors but the most black and white numbers relate to fatalities. The impact of COVID-19, in terms of age standardized mortality rate for the unvaccinated as of Jan, 2022 per the CDC was 7.8% for patients contracting the virus. That translates into more than 1 M dead nationally (as of June, 2022) even considering an adjusted mortality of 0.1% with vaccination. LA County has had the highest numbers across the state for both cases at 3.03M and deaths at Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
71 32,201 (as of June, 2022). Total number of deaths for the City of Burbank has reached 327 per the LA County Public Health Dept. While, the pandemic is not over and the socioeconomic and health impacts from COVID- 19 cannot be fully gauged as yet, it is clear that they will be felt for decades to come.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.5 DROUGHT below.
4.3.5 DROUGHT
A drought is an extended interval with precipitation levels that are significantly below normal for a given area.
Most commonly, this makes less water available for natural environments, causing plants to dry out resulting in their susceptibility to pests and/or disease. An abundance of dry plant matter increases the risk of wildfires or may cause fires to be more intense. Agricultural areas, particularly those that do not rely on irrigation, can suffer most acutely during drought conditions.
In more severe instances, droughts can impact urban areas. A significant drought can lead to water use shortages, which may force local water suppliers to institute mandatory restrictions on nonessential usage.
In extreme cases, there may not be enough water to meet basic health and hygiene needs, requiring communities to find alternative water supplies. Since many communities in Southern California import water from non-local sources, such as the Sierra Nevada or Colorado River, it is common in for them to experience “long-distance droughts”. This is a situation where precipitation levels may be normal loca lly but reduced precipitation in the region of the community’s primary water source may result in shortages.
Counterintuitively, d roughts can result in an increased flooding impact. Soil that has been dried out by drought conditions hardens and subsequently becomes less capable of readily absorbing water. When the precipitation eventually does occur, more water remains on the surface, increasing the amount of runoff and potentially exacerbating flooding events. Additionally, dry soils do not bind together as well as moist soils, which can increase the potential for landslides and/or erosion.
As d roughts are large -scale events, risk and adverse conditions are generally equal across the City.
However, it should be noted that the impacts to natural lands are generally different than those to urban areas. As these areas are generally not irrigated, the potential for damage to both flora and fauna is extensive and ongoing. Long term drought can result in land use changes as the quality of the land is degraded due to increasingly arid conditions related to shifting climatic conditions. While it is currently not possible to predict extended weather patterns with any reliability, there are global indications of temperatures increases that are leading to both more arid and variable weather patterns for the Western United States. Seasonal weather patterns over the last few decades have been notably drier than in the preceding half century and this does not bode well for either urban or natural environments should these conditions persist or degrade further.
There are many ways to measure drought conditions. One of the most sensible is the U.S. Drought Monitor Classification Scheme, which combines multiple scales into a single descriptive index. Figure 21 below shows the U.S. Drought Monitor Classification Scheme.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
72 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.5.1 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.5.1 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK Droughts are a regular feature of California’s climate. They have occurred repeatedly in the State’s recorded history and frequently lead to changes in California’s economy, infrastructure, or governing policies. One of the earliest recorded droughts, the “Great Drought” of 1863 –1864, followed the largest flood in recorded history and caused widespread devastation to the cattle industry. Another series of droughts from 1928 to 1935, known as the “Dust Bowl Droughts,” caused significant harm to California’s agriculture and led to the creation of the Federal Central Valley Project to ensure a reliable source of water for Central Valley farmers.
Further droughts from 1947 to 1950 and from 1959 to 1960 encouraged the creation of the State Water Project, which imports water from the Sierra Nevada to communities throughout the State, including Burbank.
A drought from 1976 to 1977 created emergency -level conditions across most of California and resulted in strong water conservation practices that continue to this day. A drought from 1987 to 1992 caused significant statewide impacts, particularly to small rural communities and the timber industry, and led to stronger water conservation landscape standards. The statewide 2007 to 2009 drought caused further changes and helped spur regulation for groundwater basins (Cal OES 2013; Kotin and Marion 2014; DWR 2015).
The most severe drought in California’s recorded history (and considered the most severe in the past 1,200 years) occurred from 2012 to 2017 (Griffin and Anchukaitis 2014). At its peak, virtually all of California experienced D2 (severe drought) conditions, and close to 60 percent of California was classified in D4 (exceptional drought) conditions (US Drought Monitor 2014). Burbank experienced D3 (extreme d rought) conditions from July 2014 to January of 2017. Governor Brown declared a statewide emergency and water Figure 21 U.S. Drought Monitor Classification Scheme*
* (Source U.S. Drought Monitor, Aug 2021)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
73 conservation standards were strengthened throughout the State. The drought ended with the wet winter of 2016–2017, although a number of water conservation policies enacted during the drought remained in force.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.5.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.5.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.5.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
4.3.5.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
Although the winter of 2016 –2017 functionally ended California’s most recent significant drought, a single year of above average precipitation was hydrologically insufficient to make up for five drought years. The following 2017–2018 winter also saw less precipitation than normal across the State (NOAA 2018a). Drought conditions had resumed. As of August 17 th, 2021, some 98.5% of Los Angeles County was categorized as in extreme drought, and approximately 50% of California in a state of exceptional drought. Approximately 20% percent of LA County, including Burbank, was experiencing this latter drought condition (US Drought Monitor 2021). Figure 22 below shows the drought conditions in and around Burbank as of August 17 th, 2021.
The primary concerns with local drought conditions are their tendency to create/enhance wildfire conditions and constrain the availability of potable water. The impact on wildfire conditions is touched on throughout sections 4.3.5 and 4.3.6. The availability of water and relevant City water rights is a topic beyond the scope of the mitigation plan . The City must app roach water usage carefully by not only employing use restriction programs but engaging in water recycling for non-potable uses. Local requirements have prompted Burbank city planners to build and maintain costly water storage works as hydrological caches to ensure a steady supply to residents.
Drought conditions have exacerbated the City’s vulnerability to wildfire during a period where storage works have improved resilience in the potable water supply. Unfortunately, e merging trends indicate a growing vulnerability to the potable water supply from regional droug hts. These droughts have progressively Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
74 constrained water delivery across the western United States with their growing geographic extent and as a result of climatic change.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.5.3 IMPACT OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.5.3 IMPACT OF DROUGHT IN THE CITY OF BURBANK
Based on the risk assessment and the last decade of real -world experience, it is evident that drought will continue to have serious human and economic impacts on the City of Burbank. Impacts that are not entirely quantified, but can be anticipated in future events, include:
✓ Loss of life and injury
✓ Increase fire hazard regionally
✓ Profound land use planning changes
✓ Wide scale disruption of public infrastructure systems ✓ Negative impact on commercial and residential property values ✓ Economic downturn in terms of agricultural jobs, sales, and tax revenue Figure 22 LA County Drought Conditions 2021*
*(Source U.S. Drought Monitor, Aug 2021)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
75 ✓ Business operations may be closed or limited to essential and critical needs only
Drier conditions across the region over the last decade have resulted in ongoing issues for the citizens of Burbank ranging from inconvenient to hazardous: water use changes due to constrained water supplies and higher fire danger in both the natural and urban environment respectively. Burbank has established a six stage phased water use plan and can implement any of the stages in this approach as drought conditions dictate.
The City has generally been in at least Stage II of water use restrictions since its enactment with intervals of stage III and IV. While restrictive water use laws are inconvenient, the danger that protracted dry periods pose with respect to fire, flooding, and environmental degradation may require their extensive use in the near future.
4.3.6 WILDFIRE
A wildfire is an uncontrolled conflagration which spreads through vegetative fuels and frequently damages or destroys structures in its path. Often beginning unnoticed and spreading quickly, wildland fires occur in areas in which development is generally l imited to roads, railroads, power lines and similar facilitie s. A wildland- urban interface fire is a wildfire in a geographical area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with wildland or areas with vegetative fuel sources.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2a Q: Does the plan include information on previous occurrences of hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.6.1 PREVIOUS OCCURRENCES OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.6.1 PREVIOUS OCCURENCES OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK Small wildland fires are relatively common in the Verdugo Hills adjacent to Burbank. The major historical fire events are summarized below for the wildland/urban interface in Burbank:
1927 Burbank Canyon Fire started in La Crescenta and jumped Foothill Boulevard into the Verdugo Hills. On day two, it came over a ridge and burned in Sunset Canyon, destroying about 100 homes. 1964 Verdugo Brush Fire occurred when power lines fell into brush in the Whiting Woods are a. The fire quickly spread into the Sunset Canyon area and then into Scott Canyon and Cabrini Canyon. This fire was contained to undeveloped wildland with only minor damage to local structures. 1980 Verdugo Brush Fire started due to downed power lines in the La Tuna Canyon area. The City of Burbank suffered about $1.5 million in damage to a water reservoir , as well as to electrical transmission facilities located outside of city limits, several residential buildings, and one restaurant. 2005 Harvard Fire was a brush fire that started on Harvard Road in Burbank on the De Bell Golf Course on September 29 th. The fire quickly burned into steep terrain , impeding suppression efforts . The fire ultimately burned about 1,000 acres with fire suppression costs of about $2 million. No structures were lost, but evacuations were implemented.
2017 La Tuna Fire was a wildfire that started on September 1st and burned 7,194 acres through the Verdugo Hills. It led to the destruction of five homes and the evacuations of over 300 more.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
76 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1d Q: Does the plan include a description of the location for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.6.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B1e Q: Does the plan include a description of the extent for all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.6.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS below.
4.3.6.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The burn area for the 2005 Harvard Fire area subsequently experienced mudflows underscoring the domino effect of hazards. With somewhat worse fire conditions – fuel load, temperature, humidity, wind speed , and wind direction – this fire could easily have burned numerous structures. In the worst-case scenario fires, flames could reach into the heavily developed areas of Burbank. Wildfire hazard zones in Burbank have been mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). Cal Fire identified high and very high fire hazard areas across some 30% of Burbank, with additional areas of high and moderate fire hazard on the borders of very high hazard areas. The largest such area is in northeastern Burbank, east of Interstate 5, with limited development; however, there are a large number of homes in both the foothills region and a smaller area in the southernmost part of Burbank, south of the Ventura Freeway and north of the Los Angeles River.
The latter area includes studio buildings, as well as a residential area. The respective areas identified by Cal Fire are illustrated in Figure 23 below.
Please note that the map shown below reflects information from Cal Fire Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM), Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps for Burbank. At the time of this plan’s development, the OSFM was in the process of revising and updating the Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
77 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B2b Q: Does the plan include information on the probability of future hazard events for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
A: See 4.3.6.3 IMPACT OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3a Q: Is there a description of each hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction (what happens to structures, infrastructure, people, environment, etc.)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.6.3 IMPACT OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
Figure 23 Burbank Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone*
*(Cal Fire 2011)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
78 Q&A | ELEMENT B: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT | B3b Q: Is there a description of each identified hazard’s overall vulnerability (structures, systems, populations, or other community assets defined by the community that are identified as being susceptible to damage and loss from hazard events) for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) A: See 4.3.6.3 IMPACT OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK below.
4.3.6.3 IMPACT OF WILDFIRE IN THE CITY OF BURBANK
Based on the current risk assessment and unfavorable climatic changes, it is clear that wildfires will continue to present serious human and economic risk to the City of Burbank. Impacts that are not easily quantified, but can be anticipated in future events, include:
✓ Loss of life and injury
✓ Increase mudflow hazard regionally
✓ Profound land use planning changes
✓ Commercial and residential structural damage
✓ Wide scale disruption of public infrastructure systems ✓ Secondary health hazards, e.g., air quality degradation ✓ Negative impact on commercial and residential property values ✓ Significant economic impact (jobs, sales, tax revenue) upon the community ✓ Significant disruption to citizens as temporary facilities and relocations would be needed
As in any city with a wildland-urban interface, Burbank is vulnerable to instances of wildfire . The degree to which it is vulnerable is challenging to assess as a result of competing factors which affect the likelihood, extent, and impact on Burbank’s evolving geophysical environment. Factors which would result in a greater vulnerability and potential impact include ongoing drought, increasing instances of high wind events, accumulating vegetative fuel loads, and aging power transmission infrastructure. These factors are balanced by increased activity on the part of both the residents in the wildfir e prone areas and government agencies working to mitigating the issue. Media coverage of wildfires across western states over the last decade has inspired residents to improve private property with defensible spaces, reduce vegetative fuel sources , and implement fire resistance construction/ remediation work. Government actions, such as fire ordinances and policy enforcement, City and Fire Code updates that address historically prone structures, enhanced local fire service integration, and low -cost loan programs that fund local efforts are all actively aimed at reducing vulnerability to wildfire. While public and private work to reduce the likelihood of wildfire is ongoing, there is no guarantee that either will be sufficient in the face of the large -scale environmental variance resulting from climate change and subsequent increases in drought, windstorms, etc.
As the State Legislature continues to allow for expanded residential construction in the Wildland Urban Interface areas within the Burbank foothi lls in the form of sub -dividing existing lots to build additional homes or building Auxiliary Dwelling Units on existing property , the risk of life safety as wel l as property damage increases. Even in the best of circumstances, where no li ves or structures are lost in these areas, air quality degradation from blowing smoke remains a health risk . This is particularly significant for vulnerable populations, such as individuals with asthma or more substantial respiratory/cardiovascular disease , the Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
79 elderly, and developing children. Furthermore, should an instance of extreme wildfire occur along the lines of the more devastating fires across the western United States in the last decade then we could see substantial loss of life/injury and economic impact. Using figures based on predicative modeling, employing a range between 1 and 1000 structures destroyed, and utilizing the median home value of $1,2 49,000 (Spring, 2022 value), there is the potential for damages between $1,249,000 and $1,249,000,000 before commensurate public costs are considered.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
80 Section 5 MITIGATION PLANNING PROCESS
Burbank has always considered natural hazards as part of ongoing community pl anning and development programs. This includes building code enforcement, zoning, land use planning, environmental planning, capital improvement planning, emergency planning, post -disaster recovery planning, and the safety element of the City’s general plan. Burbank has also enforced special hazard mitigation provisions for FEMA-mapped 100-year floodplains and the Fire Severity Hazard Zone (formerly known as the Mountain Fire Zone).
Burbank has gone beyond Federal and State requirements and adopted municipal seismic retrofit ordinances for unreinforced masonry buildings, pre-1994 welded steel moment frame buildings, and pre-1976 reinforced masonry buildings. The City has evaluated the seismic vulnerability of all City owned buildings and implemented an aggressive seismic retrofit program for the most vulnerable and critical government buildings.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C3
Does the plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i))
A: See 5.1 GOALS below.
5.1 GOALS
The Planning Team identified the overall goal to guide the direction of future activities aimed at reducing risk and preventing loss from natural hazards . The Team agreed to maintain the overall goal , as well as the individual mitigation goals identified below. These goals are based on the risk assessment that represent s a long-term vision for hazard reduction and enhanced mitigation capabilities . Each goal is supported by mitigation action it ems. These action items were develo ped through knowledge of the local area, risk assessment, review of past efforts, identification of mitigation activities, and qualitative analysis.
The mitigation goals and descriptions are listed below.
5.1.1 PROTECT LIFE AND PROPERTY
The primary goal is to implement activities that assist in protecting lives by making homes, businesses, infrastructure, critical facilities, and other property more resistant to losses from natural, human-caused, and/or technological hazards. Additionally , there is an imperative to reduce losses and repetitive damages due to chronic hazard events along with promoting insurance coverage for catastrophic hazards. While being focused in this manner, there is also an imperative to improve hazard assessment inf ormation in order to make recommendations for avoiding new development in high hazard areas and encourage preventative measures for existing development in areas known to be vulnerable to specific hazards.
5.1.2 PUBLIC AWARENESS
In regard to the wider public awareness goal, the aim was to develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase jurisdictional resident understanding of the risks a ssociated with natural hazards.
Additionally, the focus was to p rovide information on tools, p artnership opportunities, and funding resources to assist in implementing mitigation activities. Both the LHMP and public communications were provided in multiple languages based on current City demographics to reach the largest audience possible.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
81 5.1.3 PARTNERSHIP AND IMPLEMENTATION
This area aims to strengthen communication and coordinate participation both among and within public agencies, citizens, non -profit organizations, business, and industry to achieve a greater vested interest in implementation. It also encourages leadership within public and private sector organizations to prioritize and implement local, county, and regional hazard mitigation activities.
5.1.4 EMERGENCY SERVICES
These services establish policy to ensure mitigation projects for critical facilities, services, and infrastructure.
They strengthen emergency operations by increasing collaboration and coordination among public agencies, non-profit organizations, business, and industry. Finally, they coordinate and integr ate natural hazard mitigation activities, where appropriate, with emergency operations plans and procedures.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C5a
Q: Does the plan explain how the mitigation actions and projects will be prioritized (including cost benefit review)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii)) A: See 5.1.5 BENEFIT/COST RATINGS and 5.1.6 PRIORITY RATINGS below.
5.1.5 BENEFIT/COST RATINGS
The benefits of proposed projects were weighed against estimated costs as part of the project prioritization process. The benefit/cost analysis was not of the detailed variety required by FEMA for project grant eligibility under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant program. A less formal approach was used because some projects may not be implemented for up to 10 years, and as such the associated costs and benefits could change dramatically in that time frame. Therefore, a review of the apparent benefits versus the apparent cost of each project was performed. Parameters were established for assigning subjective ratings (high, medium, and low) to the costs and benefits of these projects.
Cost ratings were defined as follows:
High: Existing jurisdictional funding will not cover the cost of the action item such that other sources of revenue would be required.
Medium: The action item could be funded through existing jurisdictional funding but would require budget modifications.
Low: The action item could be funded under existing jurisdictional funding.
Benefit ratings were defined as follows:
High: The action item will provide short-term and long-term impacts that reduce risk exposure to life and property.
Medium: The action item will have long-term impacts that reduce risk exposure to life and property.
Low: The action item will only have short-term impacts that reduce risk exposure to life and property.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
82 5.1.6 PRIORITY RATING
The Planning Team utilized the following rating tool to establish priorities. Designations of “High”, “Medium”, and “Low” priority have been assigned to all of the action items using the criteria below:
Does the Action…
● solve the problem?
● address multiple hazards?
● address Vulnerability Assessment?
● have benefits that equal or exceed costs?
● reduce the exposure or vulnerability to the highest priority hazard? ● implement a goal, policy, or project identified in the General Plan or CIP? Can the Action…
● be implemented with existing funds?
● be implemented with currently available technologies? ● be completed within the 5-year life cycle of the LHMP? ● be implemented by existing State or Federal grant programs? Will the Action...
● be accepted by the community?
● be supported by community leaders?
● positive or neutral impact on the environment?
● require a change in local ordinances or zoning laws?
● adversely impact segments of the population or neighborhoods? ● comply with all local, State and Federal environmental laws and regulations?
Is there...
● sufficient staffing to undertake the project?
● existing authority to undertake the project?
As mitigation action items were updated or written, the Planning Team representatives were provided worksheets for each of their assigned action items.
Answers to the criteria above determined the priority according to the following scale.
● 1-6 = Low priority
● 7-12 = Medium priority
● 13-18 = High priority
Q&A | ELEMENT D. MITIGATION STRATEGY | D2
Q: Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation efforts? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) A: See 5.2 MITIGATION ACTION ITEMS – 2011 PLAN below.
5.2 MITIGATION ACTION ITEMS – 2011 PLAN
Hazard mitigation action items set forth in the previous Burbank LHMP, All-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2011 which were completed or discontinued are noted in Table 11 2011 Burbank Mitigation Action Items below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
83 5.2.1 MITIGATION ACTION ITEM STATUS – 2011 PLAN
The status of the Mitigations Actions previously undertaken by the City are noted in both Table 11 2011 Burbank Mitigation Action Items above and Appendix A – 2022 Burbank Mitigation Action Items below. Table 11 contains mitigation actions that were either completed or, for a spectrum of reason including budgetary constraints, changing City goals or priorities, integration with other projects, or some combination of factors thereof, discontinued. In contrast, Appendix A contains 2011 mitigation items that are either ongoing in their status (as they require continuous attention ) or are in progress toward completion. Those 2011 mitigation projects that have been reevaluated, re -funded, and/or extended into the current planning period have been assigned u pdated project numbers in City records and/or integrated into departmental maintenance schedules. This mitigation action continuity is reflected in the project numbers assigned to them where the first two numbers indicate the year in which the mitigation action was reinitiated under the current City project number system.
Project
#
Hazard(s)
Addressed Project/Action Description
Goal Addressed
Lead Department &
Point of Contact Status
Life Safety
Property Protection
Response/Recovery
Public Awareness
Land Use
N/A
(2011)
Landslide/
Mudslide
Implement landslide mitigation actions for slides
seriously threatening buildings or infrastructure X X X X Community Development 0% 20-005
(2011) Earthquake
Encourage owners of public and private
buildings in Burbank to evaluate and
implement structural and nonstructural
mitigation measures and structural refits for
seismically vulnerable residential buildings.
X X X X Building Division 100%
18-004
(2011) Earthquake
Disseminate FEMA pamphlets to educate
homeowners and business owners about
structural and nonstructural retrofitting of
vulnerable buildings and encourage retrofit.
X X X X Building Division 100%
20-006
(2011) Flood
Complete detailed inventory of buildings and
infrastructure in FEMA-mapped floodplains X X X X X
Public Works, Community
Development, Information
Technology
100%
N/A
(2011) Flood
Increase public awareness of flood-prone
areas, encourage mitigation and flood
insurance.
X X X X X
Community Development,
Public Works, Emergency
Management Coordinator
0%
N/A
(2011) Windstorm
Ensure that all City and non-City critical
facilities in Burbank have backup power. X X X X Public Works, Burbank Water & Power 0%
20-008
(2011) Wildfire
Evaluate and upgrade selected fire access
roads in the Verdugo Mountains which are
inadequate for emergency response vehicles
and/or subject to repetitive damage.
X X X Fire, Los Angeles County 100%
N/A
(2011) Wildfire
Provide periodic brush clearance around the
perimeter of radio communication towers,
Reservoir #3, and Mount Tom to minimize
communication disruption during wildfire.
X X X Fire, Public Works 0%
N/A
(2011) Wildfire
Develop financial assistance programs to aid
Burbank residents with cost-effective
solutions to comply with the city-wide wood
roof ordinance and the Fire Hazard
Reduction Program requirements for brush
clearance in the Fire Severity Zone.
X X X X Fire, Building Division 0%
Table 13 2011 Burbank Mitigation Action Items
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
84 5.2.2 INTERIM MITIGATION ACTIONS
In addition to mitigation items set forth in the 2011 LHMP, a number of actions were undertaken and completed prior to publication of an updated LHMP. The se actions show both a continuity of effort to mitigate potential hazards to the jurisdiction and highlight the direct relation ship between cornerstone documents and implementation of goals outline d there. These actions are noted in Table 12 Interim Mitigation Action Items below.
Project
#
Hazard(s)
Addressed Project/Action Description
Goal Addressed
Lead Department &
Point of Contact Status
Life Safety
Property Protection
Response/Recovery
Public Awareness
Land Use
19-005 Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Conduct educational campaigns for City
residents that emphasize cost-effective
mitigation efforts, making material
available through multiple multilingual
media routes in conjunction with the
Ready Burbank Program.
X X X X
Community
Development,
Emergency Management
100%
18-002
Multi-Hazard
(Earthquake,
Windstorm)
Conduct a seismic analysis of all key
City owned facilities and retrofit
vulnerable sites. X X X Engineering Division 100%
18-003 Flooding
Require new large developments and
significant retrofits to use low-impact
flood plain development strategies in
accordance with Burbank Zoning Code.
X
Public Works
Department, Community
Development
100%
N/A* Flooding
Conduct frequent cleanings of storm
drain intakes, especially before and
during rainy seasons.
X
Public Works
Department, Water and
Power Department
100%
19-006 Flooding
Identify areas with known ponding or
poor drainage during rain events and
increase storm drain capacity in these
areas.
X X
Public Works
Department, Water and
Power Department
100%
17-001 Flooding
Participate in FEMA’s Community
Rating System to reduce flood
insurance premiums for Burbank
property owners.
X X X
Public Works
Department, Community
Development
100%
17-002 Flooding
Work with the US Army Corps of
Engineers and the Los Angeles County
Flood Control District to support safety
assessments and any needed retrofits
to local water storage structures.
X X X Engineering Division 100%
17-003
Multi-Hazard
(Drought,
Flood,
Wildfire)
Use drought-tolerant plants or
xeriscaping when installing new or
significantly redoing City owned
landscapes. Limit turf that is not drought
tolerant to recreational fields and lawns,
and only in instances where no feasible
drought-tolerant alternatives exist.
X X Public Works Department 100%
17-004
Multi-Hazard
(Drought,
Flood)
Plant street trees and other vegetation
to provide shade and green spaces
throughout Burbank, particularly around
senior and medical facilities. Emphasize
drought-tolerant and wind-resistant
species.
X X Public Works Department 100%
Table 14 Interim Burbank Mitigation Action Items
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
85 Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C1b
Q: Does the plan document each jurisdiction’s ability to expand on and improve these existing policies and programs? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3))
A: See 5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C4c
Q: Do the identified mitigation actions and projects have an emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii))
A: See 5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS & APPENDIX A below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C5a
Q: Does the plan explain how the mitigation actions and projects will be prioritized (including cost benefit review)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii)) A: See 5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS & APPENDIX A below.
Q&A | ELEMENT D. MITIGATION STRATEGY | D1
Q: Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) A: See 5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS & APPENDIX A below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C6c
Q: The updated plan must explain how the jurisdiction(s) incorporated the mitigation plan, when appropriate, into other planning mechanisms as a demonstration of progress in local hazard mitigation efforts. (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii))
A: See 5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS & APPENDIX A below.
5.3 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS
Based on the criteria and evaluation process described above, the Planning Team prepared a list of hazard mitigation actions that are consistent with the City’s goals and designed to improve resilience to hazard events.
These actions collectively form Burbank’s hazard mitigation strategy. Details noted in the Appendices below list the mitigation actions by the hazard they are intended to mitigate , completion status at the time of this plan’s preparation, responsible agency, project number, and expected implementation time frame. The actions include preparedness activities, which are intended to improve emergency response for the City and community members when hazard events occur or are imminent. Althoug h these actions are not strictly considered mitigation activities, they are expected to decrease the danger the community faces from hazard events and as such will support the same goals as mitigation actions.
Additionally, items noted in the Appendices will be implemented congruent to ongoing jurisdictional plans and processes detailed in, and as an extension of, official City and State policy documents. The documents and Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
86 official programs that give the Burbank LHMP wider context include the Burbank2035 General Plan, Burbank Zoning Code, Burbank Emergency Operations Plan, and the Ready Burbank Program. The planning noted in these documents affects and will in turn be influenced by the mitigation actions noted in the Appendices. How each of these documents aligns with the Burbank LHMP is as follows:
GENERAL PLAN
The Burbank2035 General Plan (BGP) is a state mandated policy document adopted on February 19th, 2013.
It provides direction to City governance on resources allocation, physical structure, and the nature of community development. The BGP is detailed in its goals while remaining sufficiently flexible to incorporate new ideas and methods that support best practice approaches to reaching stated goals and meeting new challenges. Overarching areas articulated in the BGP include physical, economic, and environmental goals.
More specifically, it discusses the following planning elements: Air Quality and Climate Change, Land Use , Mobility, Noise, Open Space and Conservation, Plan Realization, and Safety.
The Safety element expands on goals and policies to preserve the welfare of residents, businesses, and visitors and incorporates the current LHMP as if it were part of the BGP draft. Importantly, the General Pl an makes it clear that safety is its paramount concern as it states that “in the event of any conflict between the provisions of the All ‐Hazard Mitigation Plan and the provisions of Burbank2035, the provisions of the All ‐ Hazard Mitigation Plan shall control.” The BGP is undergoing revision to comply with State legislative changes and to address climatic, social, and economic challenges with expected implementation in 2022. In this revision, the BGP maintains the primacy of the LHMP with respect to the Safety element for the City , its property, environment, and residents.
ZONING CODE
Title 10 of the Burbank Municipal Code documents terms and requirements for City land use and development.
While the BGP applies broad policy to land use, the Burbank Zoning Code (BZC) is highly specific in its guidance for development. The first item noted in section 10 -1-202 Purpose of Ordinance clearly states the direction the Code will take: “1. Provide a precise guide for the physical development of the City in such manner as to achieve progressively the arrangement of land uses depicted in the General Plan”. Furthermore, this section makes it clear that the Code’s purpose “ is to promote the public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity and welfare of the City and its inhabitants ”. Examples of Code that align with Mitigation Actions of the LHMP as it implements the BGP are found throughout the BZC : 10-1-107 wherein all aspects of the Code are required to align with the General Plan overall, 10-1-620-3-J requiring appropriate access for fire and EMS in new development , and 10-1-620-3-M specifying property brush clearance regulations in the Burbank Fire Department’s Mountain Fire Zones. The Zoning Code is a living document and revisions by the City Council relevant to safety will be incorporated as guidance from the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is available.
EMERGENCY OPS PLAN (EOP) / STANDARDIZED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (SEMS) The Burbank Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was updated in July of 2020. The plan’s purpose, in its own words, is to describe “the methods for carrying out emergency operations, the process for rendering mutual aid, the emergency services of governmental departments and agencies, how resources are mobilized, how the public will be informed and the process to ensure continuity of government during an emergency or disaster.” In accordance with Titl e 19 section 2443 of the California Code of Regulations , the Standardized Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
87 Emergency Management System (SEMS) is used to implement the Burbank EOP. As noted in the EOP, the mitigation actions documented in the LHMP realize the SEMS ideology related to a unified approach to moderating hazard impacts regardless of type or scale. In short, the Burbank EOP implements aspects of this LHMP plan via SEMS in accordance with Federal, State, and Local mandates.
READY BURBANK PROGRAM
The Ready Burbank Program i s designed to empower Burbank’s residents on the specifics of preparing for, reacting to, and getting information about hazards that may affect their lives. Based on the premise that a well- informed population can act as a force multiplier for mitigation efforts across all hazard types, Ready Burbank enables residents to w ork in concert with local governance plans rather than be wholly reliant on them .
Mitigation actions outlined in the LHMP speak directly to supporting Ready Burbank and its goals. It cannot be sufficiently underscored that an engaged citizenry is substantially safer and more likely to provide direct input on their current and ongoing safety needs such that it may be embodied in updates to both Mitigation and General Plans.
CORNERSTONE DOCUMENT AND MITIGATION ACTIONS
Specific Mitigation Actions that reference the cornerstone documents as each pertains to implementation are detailed below. These actions include but are not limited to the following : Appendix A, Community Preparedness Action: Conduct evacuation studies for foothill developments, include looking at opportunities to provide secondary access particularly in accordance with the Burbank Zoning Code ; Appendix A, Community Preparedness Action: Expand participation in the Burbank Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program for residents and businesses in conjunction with Ready Burbank Program; Appendix A, Community Preparedness Action: Ensure that information is accessible to persons with disabilities and functional needs as outlined in the General Plan; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Conduct educational campaigns for City residents that emphasize cost - effective mitigation efforts, making material available through multiple multilingual media routes in conjunction with the Ready Burbank Program – recently completed City project 19-005; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Promote water conservation, drought tolerant landscaping, and defensible space practices in accordance with the Burbank Zoning Code ; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Work with community groups to increase awareness of hazard events and resiliency opportu nities across the whole community in conjunction with the Ready Burbank Program ; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Monitor changes in boundaries for mapped hazard areas due to land use or climate change and revise mitigation actions to ensure continued resiliency routes in conjunction with Burbank Zoning Codes; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Improve waste and runoff water systems against hazardous events in conjunction with General Plan conservation priorities; Appendix A, Multi-Hazard Action: Integrate policy direction and details from this Plan into City documents, including the General Pl an, Emergency Operations Plan, and Capital Improvements Program; Appendix A, Seismic Action: Explore amending the Burbank Zoning Code to incorporate standards requiring new buildings to retain habitability and functionality following seismic events; Appendix A , Flooding Action: Require new large developments and significant retrofits to use low -impact flood plain development strategies in accordance with Burbank Zoning Code ; Appendix A, Flooding Action: Discourage new schools, child care centers, and adult and senior assisted living facilities from locating in any flood prone areas in conjunction with the Burbank Zoning Code; Appendix A, Windstorm Action: Encourage significant retrofits to existing buildings to meet wind speed design specifications in the Burbank Zoning Code; Appendix A, Windstorm Action: Explore amending the Burbank Zoning Code to incorporate wind loading provisions such as those contained in the ASCE 7 Standard as a Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
88 central part of the impact reduction effort; Appendix A, Human Caused Action: Discourage or prohibit new hazardous material facilities from locating near sensitive land uses in conjunction with the Burbank Zoning Code.
Q&A | ELEMENT D. MITIGATION STRATEGY | D3
Q: Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) A: See 5.3.1 MITIGATION ACTION PRIORITY CHANGES below.
5.3.1 MITIGATION ACTION PRIORITY CHANGES
As with any plan, the mitigation actions proposed for implementation are a response to the known and/or expected hazards for the jurisdiction. The actions are oriented with respect to a hazard analysis snapshot and reflect many considerations including social, technological, demographic, and geographic factors to name but a few. The 2011 LHMP included consideration of a wide spectrum of hazards while the current plan is less speculative and focuses more directly on hazards the City has experienced within the last 25 years. This was a conscious choice to focus on real-world hazard experiences from across the City, State, and R egion pragmatically.
Hazards that were identified as a lower priority in the current plan include d landslides, windstorm s, and flooding. This was the case as each of these hazards, while still a possibility either on their own or as a result of other hazards that enhance their occurrence, had not significantly affected the jurisdiction in recent years.
The priority of earthquakes has not changed for the jurisdiction as Burbank is located in a highly active seismic zone. Occurrences of small quakes are common and larger instances in nearby cities are frequent enough (Northridge M6.7-1994, Antelope Valley M6.0-2021, etc.) to act as a clear reminder of this hazard.
Hazards that have seen greater emphasis in this plan are drought, wildfire, and EPV diseases. Droughts are not an uncommon hazard for Burbank but have gained greater focus as a result of their increasing duration, expanded geographic scope, and enhancement of wildfire conditions. The lack of dependable precipitation has extended the wildfire season to a greater proportion of the year with an increasing number of red flag days and “extreme” fire weather conditions in which hazard events are likely . As climatic conditions have deteriorated, there have been a growing number and increased severity of wildfire across the region. This acts as a reminder that even with ongoing zoning, fuel reduction, and regulatory measures that fire hazard remains a clear and present danger to the jurisdiction. The COVID19 pandemic is an ongoing disaster that has resulted in more than 1 million deaths in the US at the time of this mitigation plan’s update. As a result, this and similar diseases that fall under this hazard type have been addressed for the first time in the jurisdiction’s Plan with attention given not only to personal loss but to the socioeconomic impacts felt by Burbank and its residents.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A1c
Q: Does the plan identify who represented each jurisdiction? (At a minimum, it must identify the jurisdiction represented and the person’s position or title and agency within the jurisdiction.) (Requirement §201.6(c)(1))
A: See 5.4 HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
89 5.4 HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM
To guide development of Burbank’s LHMP, the City utilized an extended Hazard Mitigation Planning Team with representatives from key City departments designated as Department Disaster Liaisons , as well as representatives from major community organizations contributing both their unique perspective and material.
The City also reached out to representatives from diverse external organizations for input. The members contributing as part of the extended Planning Team included:
City Departments
✓ Fire Department
✓ City Clerk’s Office
✓ Police Department
✓ City Attorney’s Office
✓ City Manager’s Office
✓ Treasurer’s Office
✓ Public Works Department
✓ Library Services Department
✓ Water and Power Department
✓ Financial Services Department
✓ Parks and Recreation Department
✓ Management Services Dept.
✓ Information Technology Department
✓ Community Development Department
Associated External Organizations
✓ American Red Cross – Territory Representative for Disaster Management Area C ✓ Burbank Unified School District
✓ California Army National Guard – Local Armory
✓ Providence St. Joseph’s Medical Center
✓ Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena Airport Authority
✓ LA County Public Works (Flood Control District)
Other External Organizations
✓ YMCA – Burbank YMCA
✓ NBC Universal Studios – Emergency Services
✓ Warner Brothers Studios – Crisis Management & Security ✓ Burbank Temporary Aid Center (BTAC)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
90 Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A1a
Q: Does the plan document the planning process, including how it was prepared (with a narrative description, meeting minutes, sign-in sheets, or another method)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1)) A: See 5.4.1 FORMATION OF THE PLANNING TEAM , 5.4.2 PLANNING TEAMD MEETINGS AND TASKS below.
5.4.1 FORMATION OF THE PLANNING TEAM
The planning process has been interrupted several times with the most recent revision of the City’s HMP previously expected in 2016. Efforts were renewed in 2018 resulting in progress that was disrupted first by staff departures and then critically by COVID-19 in 2020. Currently, the Emergency Management Coordinator for the City of Burbank, is leading the process to create an updated, financially responsible LHMP that adheres to guidelines published by Cal OES and FEMA.
5.4.2 PLANNING TEAM MEETINGS AND TASKS
As a result of healthcare guidelines and the ongoing nature of the pandemic, many of the traditional meetings associated with a whole community process were severely impacted during the draft phase of Burbank’s LHMP update. Meetings and contributions were arranged through teleconferencing and email to maintain social distancing. Tasks assigned to contributors included material inclusion suggestions, topic revision/extension requests relevant to their area of expertise, and a general request for commentary (RFC) across the draft LHMP.
5.5 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
The goal of public engagement is to inform, educate, and motivate members of the community served by the LHMP to take part in the process of its creation. To foster this engagement, copies of the First Draft LHMP were initially posted to the Ready Burbank website on 06/29/2020 and the Final Draft posted on 10/04/2021 (see Section 5.5.1 Public Notices). Interested citizens were directed to provide comments and discuss concerns via email submission. In 2020, a link to a survey regarding public awareness of hazards identified in Burbank’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan , as well as community preparedness and insurance levels was circulated through social media . T he results help ed guide the strategic efforts of the F ire Department’s Emergency Management Division (survey results are located in Appendix D). In addition, in 2021, a townhall- style meeting was held at the Burbank Fire Training Center. This meeting was held to present the second draft of the plan to the pub lic, as well as educate the public on the purpose of the plan and receive constructive feedback for the ongoing development of the pla n. While direct dialog via townhall forums has been limited, opportunities for dissemination of details and a broad discussion of public interest remains available through virtual methods.
5.5.2 PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
Two public townhall -style meetings were held to gather comments and ideas from the community about mitigation planning and priorities for mitigation plan goals . Initially, a single meeting was planned however attendance was lower than expected. As a result of the poor attendance, notice was posted for and a second meeting . In addition to the general public, community stakeholders were engaged through regularly scheduled planning meetings. Moving forward, the City of Burbank will look at additional avenues to engage the public.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
91 Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A4
Q: Does the plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement §201.6(b)(3))
A: See 5.6 INCORPORATION OF EXISTING PLANS below.
5.6 INCORPORATION OF EXISTING PLANS
During the planning process, numerous sources were incorporated into the Burbank LHMP. Information from studies, reports, and technical sources , as well as relevant City, County, and State hazard mitigation plans were reviewe d. In addition to the sources noted in Section 3.10, the following HMPs from geographically proximate cities and other agencies were referenced:
• City of Glendale, Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018)
• City of San Fernando, Hazard Mitigation Plan (2020)
• City of Pasadena, Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018) • County of Los Angeles, Hazard Mitigation Plan (2019)
• State of California, Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018)
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
92 Section 6 PLAN MAINTENANCE
This section details the process to ensure that Burbank’s Hazard Mitigation Plan remains both effective and relevant while integrating ongoing public participation. The maintenance process includes monitoring and evaluating the Plan annually and producing a revision every five years. Additionally, an outline of how the City's government intends to incorporate outlined mitigation strategies with existing planning mechanism s, such as the General Plan, Capital Improvement Plans, and Building and Safety Codes, is discussed.
6.1 ADOPTION AND REVIEW PROCESS
Burbank's City Council is responsible for adopting the Mitigation Plan. The Council has the mandate to promote sound publi c policy regarding hazards. Once adopted, it will be submitted to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer at the California Office of Emergency Services. Following Cal OES approval, they will submit the plan to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for review and approval. This review will address the requirements set forth in 44 C.F.R. Section 201.6 (Local Mitigation Plans) . Upon acceptance by FEMA, the City of Burbank will have gained eligibility for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A6a
Q: Does the plan identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be monitored (how will implementation be tracked) over time? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i))
A: See 6.2 MONITORING below.
6.2 MONITORING
The hazard mitigation plan team leadership, the Emergency Management Coordinator will hold annual meetings with representatives from the coordinating City departments in order to gather status updates on the mitigation action items. These meetings will provide an opportunity to discuss the progress of the action items and maintain the partnerships that are essential for the sustainability of the mitigation plan. The focus of the annual meeting will be on the progress and changes to the Mitigation Action Items , as well as significant changes to identify hazards indicated in the plan.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C6a
Q: Does the plan identify the local planning mechanisms where hazard mitigation information and/or actions may be incorporated? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii)) A: See 6.3 IMPLEMENTATION below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C6b
Q: Does the plan describe each community’s process to integrate the data, information, and hazard mitigation goals and actions into other planning mechanisms? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii)) A: See 6.3 IMPLEMENTATION below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
93 Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C6c
Q: The updated plan must explain how the jurisdiction(s) incorporated the mitigation plan, when appropriate, into other planning mechanisms as a demonstration of progress in local hazard mitigation efforts. (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii))
A: See 6.3 IMPLEMENTATION below.
6.3 IMPLEMENTATION
The City of Burbank addresses civic, county and statewide mitigation goals and legislative requirements through the General Fund, Capital Projects, and Grants. The Mitigation Plan provides a series of recommendations - many of which are closely related to the goals and objectives of existing planning programs. The City will implement recommended mitigation action items through existing programs and procedures. Burbank is responsible for adhering to the State of California’s Building and Safety Codes. In addition, the City may work with other agencies at the State level to review, develop, and ensure Building and Safety Codes are adequate to mitigate or prevent damage from hazard incidents. This is to ensure that life safety criteria are met for both new construction and retrofit structures.
Some of the goals and action items in the Mitigation Plan will be achieved through activities recommended in the strategic and other budget documents. The various departments involved in developing it will review the Plan on an annual basis. Upon review, t he Planning Team will work with the various departments to identify areas where the Mitigation Plan action items are consistent with strategic and budgetary documents to ensure the Plan goals and action items are implemented in a timely fashion.
Upon FEMA approval, the Planning Team leadership will initiate incorporation of risk information and mitigation action items into existing planning mechanisms including the General Fund (Operating Budget and Capital Projects - see Appendix A below for links between individual action items and associated planning mechanism). Meetings of the Planning Team will provide an opportunity for members to report back on the progress made on the integration of mitigation planning elements into the City of Burbank’s planning documents and procedures. Specifically, the Planning Team will utilize the updates of the following documents to guide the Mitigation Plan implementation:
✓ Risk Assessment, City Profile, Planning Process – EOP, Climate Action Plan, etc. ✓ Appendix A – General Fund, Capital Projects, Grants
6.4 ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT
Upon approval and adoption of the Plan, the schedule for an Annual Implementation Report will be added to the Plan’s Attachments. An integral aspect of the monitoring pro cess is the need to maintain a strategic planning process which should include funding and organizational support. In that regard, at least one year in advance of the FEMA -mandated 5 -year update submission requirement , the Emergency Management Coordinator will communicate with the Planning Team to discuss funding and timing of the update planning process. In the fourth year of the planning cycle , the Planning Team will broaden its scope to include discussions and research on all of the sections within the Plan with particular attention given to goal progress and public participation.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
94 6.5 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF MITIGATION PROJECTS
In order to identify the costs and benefits associated with hazard mitigation strategies/measur es/projects, FEMA uses two methods: benefit-cost analysis (BCA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Implementing a BCA can assist in determining whether a project is worth undertaking presently in order to avoid disaster - related damages in the future. C EAs evaluate how best to spend a given amount of money to achieve a mitigation goal.
Determining the economic feasibility through these analyses can provide decision -makers with an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternatives. Given Federal funding, the Planning Team will use a FEMA -approved benefit -cost analysis approach to prioritize mitigation action items. For other projects and funding sources, the Planning Team will use other locally accepted methodologies to understand the costs and benefits of each action item and develop a prioritized list. The benefit, cost, and overall priority of each mitigation action item was included in the Mitigation Actions above. A more technical as sessment will be required in the event grant funding is pursued through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidelines are discussed below.
6.5.1 FEMA BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
The Stafford Act authorizes the President to establish a program to provide technical and financial assistance to state and local governments to assist in the implementation of hazard mitigation measures. These measures are mandated to be cost effective and designed to substantially redu ce injuries, loss of life, hardship, or the risk of future damage and destruction of property. To evaluate proposed hazard mitigation projects prior to funding, FEMA requires a BCA completion to validate cost effectiveness. BCAs are the method by which the future benefits of a mitigation project are estimated and compared to its cost. The end result is a benefit -cost ratio (BCR), which is derived from a project’s total net benefits divided by its total project cost.
The BCR is a numerical expression of the cost effectiveness of a project. A project is considered to be cost effective when the BCR is 1.0 or greater, indicating the benefits of a prospective hazard mitigation project are sufficient to justify the costs. Although the preparation of a BCA is a technical process, FEMA has developed software, written materials, and training to support the effort and assist with estimating the expected future benefits over the useful life of new mitigation or a retrofit project. It is imperative to conduct a BCA early in the project development process to ensure the likelihood of meeting the cost-effective eligibility requirement in the Stafford Act. The BCA program consists of guidelines, methodologies, and software modules for major natural hazards, protective measures, and review processes as listed below:
✓ Flood
✓ Wildfire
✓ Earthquake
✓ Hurricane Wind
✓ Tornado Safe Room
✓ Hurricane Safe Room
✓ Damage-Frequency Assessment
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
95 The BCA program provides up-to-date program data, default, and standard values, user manuals and training.
Overall, the program makes it easier for users and evaluators to conduct and review BCAs and to address multiple buildings and hazards in a single BCA module instance.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A6b
Q: Does the plan identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be evaluated (assessing the effectiveness of the plan at achieving stated purpose and goals) over time? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i)) A: See 6.6 EVALUATION below.
6.6 EVALUATION
At the a nnual Implementation Meeting, the Emergency Manageme nt Coordinator will guide discussion with the Planning Team on the progress of the Mitigation Plan to meet the plan goals. Progress toward realization of plan goals will be evaluated with respect to allocated funding, initiation of work, and completion of projects.
The results of that discussion will be added to the Evaluation section of the Semi -Annual Implementation Report for subsequent inclusion in the five year update to the Plan. Efforts will be initiated promptly by the Planning Team to address unrealized plan goals by noting roadblocks to progress, solution(s) available, and expectations for realization of reviewed goals. These updates will form the basis of mitigation project progress in both the current projects, as well as modified or subsequent projects for the following LHMP.
Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A6c
Q: Does the plan identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be updated during the 5-year cycle? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i))
A: See 6.7 UPDATE PROCESS below.
6.7 UPDATE PROCESS
As noted above, the Mitigation Action Items will be monitored for status on an annual basis and updated as conditions warrant. The Emergency Management Coordinator or designee will be responsible for contacting the Planning Team members and organizing the annual meeting which will, preferably, take place annually during the anniversary month of the Plan’s FEMA approval. Planning Team members wi ll be responsible for participating in the formal update to the Plan every fifth year of the planning cycle. The Planning Team will begin the update process with a review of the goals and mitigation action items to determine their relevance to changing situations within the City of Burbank, as well as changes in State or Federal policy to ensure they are addressing current and expected conditions.
The Planning Team will also review the Plan’s Risk Assessment to determine if this information should be updated as a result of new data. The coordinating organizations responsible for the various action items will report on the status of their projects, including the success of various implementation processes, difficulties encountered, success of coordination ef forts, and which strategies should be revised. Amendments will be made to the Mitigation Actions and other sections in the Plan as deemed necessary by the Planning Team.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
96 Q&A | ELEMENT A: PLANNING PROCESS | A5
Q: Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii))
A: See 6.8 EXTENDED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT below.
6.8 EXTENDED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The City of Burbank Hazard Mitigation Planning Team is committed to involving the public in the ongoing review of and updates to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Copies of the plan will be made available at the City of Burbank City Hall in print version and on the City’s website electronically. The availability and location of these copies will be publicized via press release and on the website. This site will also contain an email address, phone number, and address where residents can direct their comment s and concerns. At the discretion of the Emergency Management Coordinator, a public meeting may be held after the Annual Implementation Meeting. The meeting would provide the public a forum in which interested individuals and/or agencies could express thei r concerns, opinions, or ideas about the Plan. The Emergency Management Coordinator will be responsible for using City resources to publicize any public meetings and to maintain community involvement through the public access channels of social, web page, and traditional media.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C4a
Q: Does the plan identify and analyze a comprehensive range (different alternatives) of specific mitigation actions and projects to reduce the impacts from hazards? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii)) A: See APPENDIX A below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
97 Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C4b
Q: Does the plan identify mitigation actions for every hazard posing a threat to each participating jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii))
A: See APPENDIX A below.
Q&A | ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY | C5b
Q: Does the plan identify the position, office, department, or agency responsible for implementing and administering the action/project, potential funding sources and expected timeframes for completion? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii)) A: See APPENDIX A below.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
98 APPENDICIES
APPENDIX A: 2022 Burbank Mitigation Action Items and Status
Project
#
Hazard
Addressed
Project/Action
Description
Goal Addressed
Lead
Department
&
Point of
Contact
Estimated
Timeline Status
Potential
Funding
Sources
LHMP
Origin
Life Safety
Property Protection
Response/Recovery
Public Awareness
Land Use
20-001 Multi-
Hazard
Install adequate
back up power for
emergency shelters
(McCambridge
Recreation Center,
Verdugo
Recreation Center,
Joslyn Adult
Center, Olive
Recreation Center)
and Burbank's
EOC.
X X Public Works 1-2 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
Pending Multi-
Hazard
Maintain a
continuing role for
the Mitigation
Planning
Committee to
develop a
sustainable process
to encourage,
implement, monitor,
and evaluate
citywide mitigation
actions.
X X X X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2011
19-001
(2011)
Multi-
Hazard
Enhance education
and outreach
programs to
increase public
awareness of
natural hazards and
emergency
preparedness and
to provide
information on how
individuals and
businesses can
mitigate their
vulnerability to
hazards.
X X X X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2011
20-002 Multi-
Hazard
Integrate the
Mitigation Plan
findings into
planning and
regulatory
documents and
programs, including
emergency
planning.
X X X X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2011
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
99 Pending Multi-
Hazard
Create and
maintain a
comprehensive
citywide database
for tracking
declared and non-
declared natural
disaster and other
emergency events.
X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
and
Information
Technology
Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2011
21-003 Multi-
Hazard
Create a
comprehensive GIS
mapping database
in cooperation with
other agencies to
identify high hazard
areas within
Burbank and
overlay with critical
and important
buildings and
facilities.
X X X X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
and
Information
Technology
2-3 Years 10% General
Fund 2011
Pending Multi-
Hazard
Create and
maintain an
electronic database
of all stakeholders
involved in planning
for and responding
to natural disasters.
X X X
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
and
Information
Technology
Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2011
20-003 Drought
Continue and
enhance water
conservation
measures.
X X X
Burbank
Water &
Power
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
20-004 Drought
Expand recycled
water use and
capacity
commensurate with
demand and
funding availability.
X X X
Burbank Water
& Power,
Public Works
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
18-001 Landslide/
Mudslide
Enhance
emergency
notification and
evacuation
procedures.
X X X X
Public
Information
Officer,
Emergency
Management
Coordinator,
Police
1-2 Years 80% General
Fund 2011
18-002 Earthquake
Complete the
remaining seismic
retrofits on the
important city-
owned buildings as
tabulated in Ch6
2011 Burbank
LHMP.
X X X Public Works 5 Years 75%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
100
18-003 Earthquake
Develop programs
to help
homeowners
implement
nonstructural
mitigation
measures and
structural retrofits
for seismically
vulnerable
residential
buildings.
X X X Building
Division 5 Years 75% Grants 2011
Pending Earthquake
Develop and
implement a long
term plan for
nonstructural
mitigation for City
buildings and
facilities.
X X X
Building
Division,
Public Works
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
Pending Flood
Increase public
awareness of flood-
prone areas,
encourage
mitigation and flood
insurance.
X X X X X
Community
Development,
Public Works,
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
20-007 Flood
Identify locations
where storm water
drainage are
needed and
implement
mitigation
measures.
X X X Public Works 5 Years 80%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
Pending Flood
Continue to enforce
fully all of the NFIP
requirements to
ensure full
compliance.
X X X X X Public Works Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
Pending Windstorm
Ensure that all City
and non-City critical
facilities in Burbank
have backup
power.
X X X X
Public Works,
Burbank
Water &
Power
3 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
19-002 Windstorm
Maintain tree
trimming efforts
especially for
transmission lines
and trunk
distribution lines.
X X X
Burbank
Water &
Power, Parks
Recreation
and
Community
Services
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
19-003 Windstorm
Encourage property
owners to trim trees
near service drops
to individual
customers.
X X X X
Burbank
Water &
Power
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
101
22-001 Wildfire
Develop and
disseminate
informational
materials to
residents in the Fire
Severity Zone to
enhance
awareness and
encourage fire safe
practices, including
fuel reduction,
defensible space,
and fire-safe
construction.
X X X X Fire 1-2 Years 25%
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
22-002 Wildfire
Identify evacuation
routes and
procedures for high
risk areas and
educate the public.
X X X
Police, Fire,
Emergency
Management
Coordinator
1-2 Years 75%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2011
22-003 Wildfire
Implement fuel
reduction/
management
including
demonstrator
projects in the Fire
Severity Zone.
X X X X X Fire 1-3 Years 25%
General
Fund, Utility
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2011
20-009 Community
Preparedness
Identify a new
primary location for
the Emergency
Operations Center.
X X X Emergency
Management 5 Years 25%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Community
Preparedness
Conduct evacuation
studies for foothill
developments,
include looking at
opportunities to
provide secondary
access particularly
in accordance with
the Burbank Zoning
Code.
X X
Emergency
Management,
Development
Services,
Community
Services
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
21-004 Community
Preparedness
Develop an
emergency
telephonic
notification system
for City employees.
X X X X Emergency
Management 3 Years 90% General
Fund 2022
Pending Community
Preparedness
Conduct regular
emergency
preparedness drills
and training
exercises for City
staff.
X X X Emergency
Management Ongoing N/A* General
Fund 2022
Pending Community
Preparedness
Continue to
coordinate with
local school
districts to ensure
that school facilities
can act as
evacuation sites
during major
emergencies.
X X X Emergency
Management Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund, School
District
Funds/Bonds
and/or
Grants
2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
102
20-010 Community
Preparedness
Work with Burbank
business groups to
provide hazard
mitigation and
preparedness
information to
reduce loss.
X X X X Emergency
Management Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
19-004 Community
Preparedness
Expand
participation in the
Burbank
Community
Emergency
Response Team
(CERT) program for
residents and
businesses in
conjunction with
Ready Burbank
program.
X X X X Emergency
Management 5 Year 50%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Community
Preparedness
Store and maintain
critical emergency
supplies and
equipment in
strategic locations
across the
community.
X X Emergency
Management 1-2 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
21-005 Community
Preparedness
Ensure that
community
evacuation plans
include provisions
for community
members who lack
access to private
vehicles or are
otherwise
transportation
challenged.
X X X
Emergency
Management,
Development
Services,
Community
Services
5 Years 20%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Community
Preparedness
Continue to ensure
effective
emergency
notifications
through multiple
media, in English
and Spanish, about
pending, imminent,
or ongoing
emergency events.
Ensure that
information is
accessible to
persons with
disabilities and
functional needs as
outlined in the
General Plan.
X X X X
Emergency
Management,
Development
Services,
Community
Services
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
22-004
Multi-
Hazard
(Universal)
Improve Fire
Station locations
and facilities
against hazard
events.
X X X Fire
Department 5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
103
Pending
Multi-
Hazard
(Universal)
Improve emergency
power systems at
water processing
facilities and
harden them
against hazard
events.
X X X
Water and
Power
Department
5 Years 0%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or
Grants
2022
22-005
Multi-
Hazard
(Universal)
Install backup
generators at
community facilities
that serve as
cooling or
evacuation centers
X X
Community
Development,
Emergency
Management
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
20-010
Multi-
Hazard
(Drought,
Wildfire)
Promote water
conservation,
drought tolerant
landscaping, and
defensible space
practices in
accordance with
the Burbank Zoning
Code.
X X X
Engineering
Division, Fire
Department
2-3 Years 75%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or
Grants
2022
22-006
Multi-
Hazard
(Earthquake,
Windstorm)
Work with
community groups
to increase
awareness of
hazard events and
resiliency
opportunities
across the whole
community in
conjunction with the
Ready Burbank
Program.
X X X X
Community
Development,
Emergency
Management
Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Ensure that key
City-owned facilities
are hardened
against hazards
beyond minimum
building
requirements/
mitigation
standards.
X X X Community
Development 5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Install backup
power systems for
key City-owned
water pumps.
X X
Water and
Power
Department
5 Years 0%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Coordinate with
regional social
service agencies
and nonprofit care
providers to obtain
temporary shelters
in advance of
hazard events.
X X X Community
Development Ongoing 0% General
Fund 2022
Pending Multi-Hazard
(Earthquake)
Work with Caltrans
and railroad
operators to harden
bridges against
hazard events.
X X X Engineering
Division 5 Years 0% N/A
Staff Time 2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
104
22-007
Multi-Hazard
(Flood,
Wildfire)
Monitor changes in
boundaries for
mapped hazard
areas due to land
use or climate
change and revise
mitigation actions to
ensure continued
resiliency routes in
conjunction with
Burbank Zoning
Codes.
X X
Engineering
Division,
Planning
Division
Ongoing N/A* N/A
Staff Time 2022
21-006 Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Improve waste and
runoff water
systems against
hazardous events
in conjunction with
Burbank2035
conservation
priorities.
X X
Water and
Power
Department,
Public Works
Department
5 Years 0%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or
Grants
2022
20-011 Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Integrate policy
direction and
details from this
Plan into City
documents,
including the
General Plan,
Emergency
Operations Plan,
and Capital
Improvements
Program.
X X X
Engineering
Division,
Community
Development,
Emergency
Management
5 Years 50% N/A
Staff Time 2022
Pending Multi-Hazard
(Universal)
Monitor funding
sources for hazard
mitigation activities
opportunities.
X X Emergency
Management Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or Staff
Time
2022
21-007
Multi-Hazard
(Earthquake,
Windstorm)
Conduct an
inventory of
seismically
vulnerable buildings
and structures and
pursue funding to
incentivize retrofits
of buildings and
structures not
covered by the
existing state and
local seismic
strengthening
ordinances to be
more resilient to
seismic events.
X X X
Community
Development,
Planning
Division,
Public Works
Department
2-3 Years 50%
General
Fund and/or
Staff Time
2022
21-008
Multi-Hazard
(Earthquake,
Windstorm)
Promote small-
scale seismic
retrofits, such as
window films to
minimize
shattering, anchors
for rooftop-mounted
equipment, and
bracing for masonry
chimneys.
X X X Community
Development 2-3 Years 50%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
105
Pending
Multi-Hazard
(Earthquake ,
Wildfire)
Consider the use of
flexible water pipes,
particularly across
known faults, to
enhance seismic
resiliency.
X X
Water &
Power
Department
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Earthquake
Explore amending
the Burbank Zoning
Code to incorporate
standards requiring
new buildings to
retain habitability
and functionality
following seismic
events.
X X
Community
Development,
Planning
Division
5 Years 0%
General
Fund, Staff
Time and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Earthquake
Encourage
community groups
and industry
representatives to
conduct outreach
about earthquake
insurance to
Burbank community
members, including
renters.
X X X Financial
Services Ongoing N/A* NA
Staff Time 2022
18-002 Flooding
Use permeable
paving and
landscaped swales
for new and
replacement City
owned hard-scape
areas.
X X Public Works
Department 1-2 Years 80%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
18-004 Flooding
Develop incentives
to harden private
buildings and
structures against
flooding.
X X
Public Works
Department,
Community
Development
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Flooding
Discourage new
schools, child care
centers, and adult
and senior assisted
living facilities from
locating in any flood
prone areas in
conjunction with the
Burbank Zoning
Code.
X X X X Community
Development Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Flooding
Encourage renters
in flood prone areas
to obtain rental
insurance that
includes flood
protection.
X X X Financial
Services Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Flooding
Secure funding for
storm drain system
improvements.
X X Public Works
Department Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
106
21-009
Multi-Hazard
(Drought,
Flood,
Wildfire)
Aggressively
search for and
repair leaks in
Burbank’s water
infrastructure.
X X
Water and
Power
Department,
Public Works
Department
2-3 Years 25%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Utility Funds
and/or
Grants
2022
Pending
Multi-Hazard
(Windstorm,
Earthquake,
Wildfire)
Survey and
improve power
lines.
X X X
Water &
Power
Department
5 Years 0%
General
Fund,
Enterprise
Funds and/or
Grants
2022
Pending
Multi-Hazard
(Windstorm,
Earthquake)
Encourage
significant retrofits
to existing buildings
to meet wind speed
design
specifications in the
Burbank Building
Zoning Code.
X X X Community
Development Ongoing N/A*
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending Windstorm
Explore amending
the Burbank Zoning
Code to incorporate
wind loading
provisions such as
those contained in
the ASCE 7
Standard as a
central part of the
impact reduction
effort.
X X X
Community
Development,
Planning
Division
5 Years 0%
General
Fund and/or
Grants
2022
Pending
Multi-Hazard
(Windstorm,
Earthquake)
Encourage
enforcement and
inspection by local
building officials of
new and existing
California Building
Code requirements
in areas of higher
risk to wind borne
hazards.
X X X
Public Works
Department,
Community
Development
Ongoing N/A* N/A
Staff Time 2022
Pending Human
Caused
Discourage new
sensitive land uses,
including schools,
parks, child care
centers, adult and
senior assisted
living facilities, and
community centers,
from locating near
identified
hazardous material
facilities.
Discourage or
prohibit new
hazardous material
facilities from
locating near
sensitive land uses
in conjunction with
the Burbank Zoning
Code.
X X X X Community
Development Ongoing N/A* N/A
Staff Time 2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
107
N/A* - Marked items under the Status column are mitigation actions that are ongoing and not expected to reach completion over the course of foreseeable mitigation plans. Items marked N/A in the Potential Funding column indicates that funding is not expected to originate outside personnel salaries. Examples of this include environmental actions such as vegetation clearance or community relations actions such as educational programs.
Pending Human
Caused
Work with solid
waste service
contractors to
educate Burbank
residents and
businesses on safe
disposal of small
quantities of
hazardous
materials.
X X X Public Works
Department Ongoing N/A* N/A
Staff Time 2022
Pending Human
Caused
Maintain and
improve
relationships with
both air and rail
operators within
City limits with
respect to
transportation
safety.
X X X City Manager Ongoing N/A* N/A
Staff Time 2022
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
108
APPENDIX B: Place Holder For City of Burbank Adoption Resolution
Final plan will be submitted to City Council for adoption A copy of the City Council Resolution for adoption will be inserted here upon submission to City Council for adoption.
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
109
APPENDIX C: Place Holder For FEMA Approval Letter
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
110
APPENDIX D: Hazard Mitigation Public Survey
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
111
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
112
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
113
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
114
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
115
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
116
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
117
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
118
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
119
Burbank LHMP
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | January 2023
120
APPENDIX E: California Building Codes 9-1-2-G102.2 & 9-1-2-G103.10
See: https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Burbank/html/Burbank09/Burbank0901.html#9-1-2-G102.2 See: https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Burbank/html/Burbank09/Burbank0901.html#9-1-2-G103.10