Agenda packet, special meeting — Glendale City Council, March 1, 2022

A G E N D A
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL
(STAFF ACCESS ONLY) COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings are broadcast live on Glendale TV, viewable on Spectrum Cable, channel 6, and AT&T U- verse, channel 99. Meetings are also streamed live in high definition (HD) on the city's webpage, glendaleca.gov/live , on YouTube.com/myglendale , and on Apple TV, Roku, and Amazon Fire devices using a free app called Screenweave and choosing “Glendale TV” from the menu. Meetings are also archived on the City Website for viewing anytime at glendaleca.gov/agendas . Call (818) 548-4013 for program schedules. DVDs of the proceedings are available for purchase in the City Clerk's Office.

If you have any question about matters on the agenda, or requests for assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, auxiliary hearing aids, sign language translation, and Braille transcripts are available upon request. Assisted listening devices are available same-day upon request. At least 48 hours (or two business days) notice is required for requests regarding sign language translation and Braille transcription services. All documents related to open session items on this agenda that are received less than 72 hours prior to this meeting, and are public records, will be available for review in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation services are provided for meetings through the use of bilingual staff for speakers who wish to utilize the service as available. Speakers should state their request by contacting the City Clerk’s office at (818) 548-2090, at least 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please specify the language for which you require translation. The exclusive use of City provided interpreters is not required and persons are welcome to use their own interpreter or speak in their native language.

MARCH 1, 2022 AT 2:00 PM
To help slow the transmission of COVID-19, and protect the health and safety of the community, City Council, as well as Board & Commission meetings, will continue to be closed to the public for in-person attendance.

The public is encouraged to watch and participate from the safety of their homes to practice social distancing. Meetings are broadcast live on Glendale TV, viewable on Spectrum Cable, channel 6, and AT&T U-verse, channel 99. Meetings are also streamed live in high definition (HD) on the city's webpage, glendaleca.gov/live , on YouTube.com/myglendale , and on Apple TV, Roku, and Amazon Fire devices using a free app called Screenweave and choosing “Glendale TV” from the menu.

For public comments and questions during the meeting, call (818) 937-8100. Public comments on a specific agenda item will be taken when that agenda item is discussed. 1 TYPED 3/3/2022 2:40:06 PM
03 01 22
SP CC

REVISED
- Item 3 was added

ROLL CALL
- 2:00 PM
- Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Tuesday, March 1, 2022 Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on February 23, 2022 on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING of the City Council is hereby called to meet at 2:00 PM on Tuesday, March 1, 2022 , in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor , Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Management Services, re: Consideration of Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy
a. Resolution Establishing the Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy

2. Libraries, Arts, and Culture, re: City-Wide Public Art Landmarks - Artsakh Ave.

Overhead and Gateway Public Art Pieces
a. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Matthew Mazzotta Studio, in an amount not to exceed $500,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Bountiful,” for the Artsakh Ave.

Overhead Public Art Piece
b. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Paul Cocksedge Studio, in an amount not to exceed $550,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Curtain,” for the Artsakh Ave.

Gateway Public Art Piece

3. Public Works, re: Further Recommendations on the State of the Community Forest a. Motion to set Glendale's citywide tree canopy goal at 25% b. Resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to amend contract 8000974 for City Tree Services, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) increasing the contract amount by $250,000 to $7,306,000, for the purpose of utilizing Measure S funds to plant trees

ADJOURNMENT
2 TYPED 3/3/2022 2:40:06 PM
03 01 22
SP CC
1 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Consideration of Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy

1. Resolution Establishing the Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for March 1, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed Public Monument and Memorial Plaque Policy establishes the criteria and process for the placement of Monuments and Memorial Plaques sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on City property.

The proposed policy would allow for the placement and public display of these Monuments and Memorial Plaques on City property, provided that they and their proposed locations are determined to be appropriate, compatible with existing uses, do not adversely impact the use of public spaces, and do not create liability or public funding issues. Monuments will be subject to approval by City Council. Memorial Plaques will be subject to approval by the Director of the Community Services and Parks Department.
3 of 75
21 3
1 4
5 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Exceptional Customer Service: Having a policy in place will allow staff to address requests that are received in an efficient manner.

Community Services & Facilities: Such monuments will enhance the City, its parks and community facilities, and reflect the City's diversity.

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council adopt the attached Resolution establishing a Public Monument and Memorial Plaque Policy.

BACKGROUND
Over the years, the Community Services and Parks Department has received many requests for memorial plaques throughout City parks. The Department has, in large part, denied these requests because no policy exists to guide such requests.

Additionally, the City has recently received a couple of requests to install public monuments in various locations in the City of Glendale. The City Manager wishes to formalize these processes by establishing a policy that will allow staff to address these requests in an efficient, equitable manner.

ANALYSIS
The proposed Public Monument and Memorial Plaque Policy establishes the criteria and process for the placement of Monuments and Memorial Plaques sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on City property. The proposed policy would allow for the placement and public display of these Monuments and Memorial Plaques on City property, provided that they and their proposed locations are determined to be appropriate, compatible with existing uses, do not adversely impact the use of public spaces, and do not create liability or public funding issues.

Monuments or Memorial Plaques promoting violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on any of the following attributes will not be permitted: age, caste, ethnicity, nationality, race, immigration status, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition, physical or mental disability, victims of a major violent event and their kin. By accepting, placing, and publically displaying a privately-funded and donated Monument or Memorial Plaque on City property, the City deems these as an expression of government speech. Any accepted Monument or Memorial Plaque is meant to convey a government message, and is not for the purpose of providing a forum for private speech.

Monuments and Memorial Plaques shall be limited to a single representation per person or event commemorated. In the event that a request is made for a Monument or Memorial Plaque in honor or commemoration of a person or event that is the same or 4 of 75
31 3
1 4
5 similar to an already-existing Monument or Memorial Plaque within the City, such request may be denied by the administrative body considering that request.

Monuments
For purposes of this proposed policy, “Monument” refers to memorials, statues, objects, or installation of other permanent materials commemorating individuals, groups, events, or concepts with an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale. The policy details what those identifiable connections may be.

Monuments may be free standing or affixed to buildings or other features.

The proposed policy does not permit Monuments commemorating living persons, and a minimum of five years from the occurrence of or conclusion of any specific event and its memorialization is required. If a proposal is submitted for a Monument to commemorate a living person or within the five-year exclusion period, the request must include a detailed rationale as to why that criteria should not apply in this instance.

Requests for a proposed Monument would be submitted to the City Manager, and include information regarding the association between the subject matter of the proposed Monument and the City of Glendale, along with suggested locations for placement. Should the proposal comply with the provisions of the proposed policy, the City Manager will then submit a report to the Arts and Culture Commission for its review and recommendation. Additionally, should a monument be proposed for placement in a City park facility, it shall also be reviewed by the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission for recommendation. A Commission reviewing a monument shall consider the same criteria for City Council approval, as detailed below. A Commission reviewing a monument shall recommend the proposal to City Council or recommended changes or request supplemental information to be included prior to City Council review.

The City Council will consider the following criteria, as well as any other relevant factors it deems appropriate:
Appropriateness
oSensitive to social, environmental, historical, or relevant contexts, and suitable for all ages
oLong-term impact of the Monument (both physically and contextually) oWhether the proposed subject has made a contribution to the community Compatibility
oHow well the Monument integrates with the surrounding environment oConsistent with existing City ordinances and policies
Impact on Use of Public Space
oProposals likely to negatively impact existing park or right-of-way functions may be denied
5 of 75
41 3
1 4
5 Aesthetics
oA primary determinant in the acceptance of Monuments
oMonuments must show a high level of quality
oProposals reflecting inferior workmanship will not be approved Maintenance and Insurance
oThe proposal must specify the manner in which the Applicant will pay in advance, bond, or guarantee general liability insurance, and property insurance, in a form and amounts approved by the City
oThe proposal must also detail all projected Maintenance costs for the expected life of the Monument; elements likely to create extraordinary maintenance costs may cause an application to be denied Safety
oMonuments must be safe to passersby, especially children, and the environment as a whole
oMonuments with sharp projecting elements, loose parts, and other potential hazards will not be approved
The City Council may decide, in its sole discretion, to accept or reject a proposal for a Monument, to determine the appropriate location for a proposed Monument, or take whatever action(s) it deems appropriate. The City Council may impose additional conditions reasonably necessary to protect public health and safety.

After Council approval, final approval for installation of a Monument will not occur until the Applicant enters into a signed agreement with the City. This agreement will include, but is not limited to, the following provisions:
Transfer of Ownership to the City
Engineering, Construction, and Installation Standards
Maintenance and Insurance
Property Rights
Indemnification of the City
Additionally, the Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the design, fabrication, placement, permitting, site preparation, and installation of a Monument, subject to this policy for final approval. The City shall pay for all basic maintenance of an approved Monument. Applicants may enter into a separate agreement to undertake any additional maintenance or refurbishment of a Monument, if desired.

Memorial Plaques
This proposed policy also establishes the criteria and process for the placement of Memorial Plaques sponsored by individuals and/or groups on benches or picnic table sets in City parks, subject to the administrative jurisdiction of the Community Services and Parks Director (“Parks Director”). For purposes of this policy, “Memorial Plaque” refers to a metal plate made of bronze which is attached to a concrete bench or picnic table set placed in a City park in honor of someone who has passed and who should be recognized for a notable contribution to the community, as detailed in the policy. 6 of 75
51 3
1 4
5 Additionally, installation of Memorial Plaques commemorating living persons will not be approved. It should be noted that this proposed policy will not apply to plaques which may be used as a form of recognition for building dedications, official historical designation, donors, or sponsors.

The Memorial Plaque and concrete bench or picnic table set will be procured by the Community Services and Parks Department, based on the Department’s specifications and requirements. The Department will undertake construction, installation, and site preparation. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with a Memorial Plaque, including the procurement of a new concrete bench or picnic table set and all associated staff costs, which will be included in the Citywide Fee Schedule. The City will assume responsibility for maintaining the plaque and the bench/picnic table; however, if the Memorial Plaque is vandalized in such a manner that warrants its replacement, the applicant must pay for the replacement costs; otherwise, the Memorial Plaque will be permanently removed.

Applications for proposed Memorial Plaques will be considered by the Parks Director.

While an applicant can make a request for a specific site, it will be up to the Parks Director whether the application is approved, and if so, where the Memorial Plaque and bench or picnic table set will ultimately be sited. Plaque content, including design, text font, verbiage, illustration or graphics, and scope, is subject to staff review, recommendation, and approval. Any appeals to the Director’s decision may be made to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission. An appeal must be in writing and filed with the Department no later than 15 calendar days after the date of the Park Director’s written decision.

Once the proposed Public Monument and Memorial Plaque Policy has been adopted, the City Manager, or a designee, is authorized to amend the adopted policy as may be appropriate, necessary, or in the City’s best interest for implementing and administering the policy.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
A few community groups have reached out to staff to discuss placement of public monuments in the City of Glendale. These conversations have informed staff as to what the needs of local groups will likely entail, and have been considered when drafting the proposed policy. Staff has also reviewed similar policies of neighboring cities.

FISCAL IMPACT
Should this policy be established by Council, staff will include a program in the FY 2022- 23 budget for Memorial Plaque expenditures. Additionally, staff is working to identify all costs associated with the procurement and installation of memorial plaques and benches through the Citywide Fee Study, and this cost will be reflected in the Fee Schedule that will come before Council in the near future. Public Monuments and Memorial Plaques should have no fiscal impact as all costs shall be borne by 7 of 75
61 3
1 4
5 applicants. Additionally, the Community Services and Parks and the Public Works Departments may request a service level increase for the FY 2022-23 budget for maintenance of public monuments.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The establishment of a policy for the acceptance, placement, and public display of privately-funded and donated public monuments and memorial bench plaques on City property is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15311 (Accessory Structures), which consists of the construction or replacement of minor structures accessory to existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, including, but not limited to on premise signs, small parking lots, and seasonal or temporary uses. The policy is also categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15304 (Minor Alternations to Land) which involves minor public or private alterations in the condition of land water and or vegetation which do not involve the removal of healthy, mature, or scenic trees. Implementation of the policy would not involve the removal of any trees, and would not involve anything other than minor alterations to existing landscapes or hardscaped areas on existing public property.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Establish the proposed policy as recommended.

Alternative 2: Establish the proposed policy with the change to require public monuments be presented directly to the City Council (and not to any Commissions) for review/recommendation to City Council.

Alternative 3: Change any portion of the proposed policy prior to adoption.

Alternative 4: Do not establish the proposed policy. For proposed Public Monuments, staff will present them for City Council approval on a case-by-case basis, but have no process in place to ensure consistency. For Memorial Plaques, staff will continue denying these requests as no policy is in place to approve them.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Christine Powers, Senior Executive Analyst
8 of 75
71 3
1 4
5 Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: City of Glendale Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy 9 of 75
1 C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\GLENDALE\TEMP\SPCC_03012022_RESOLUTION_1A.PDF RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE CITY’S ACCEPTANCE, PLACEMENT, AND

PUBLIC DISPLAY OF PRIVATELY-FUNDED AND DONATED MONUMENTS AND

MEMORIAL PLAQUES ON CITY PROPERTY
WHEREAS, over the years, individuals, groups, and organizations have sought to commemorate persons or significant events through the placement of monuments and memorial plaques on City property, often times in City parks;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that a need exists to provide a mechanism and policy guidance for commemorating individuals, groups, events, or concepts with an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale; WHEREAS, the Council wishes to establish a uniform policy with criteria and procedures for regulating the City’s acceptance, placement, and public display of privately-funded and donated monuments, and memorial plaques, on City property; WHEREAS, the Council desires to ensure that the placement and public display of these monuments and memorial plaques are suitable for the location proposed, correlate with existing or future City plans or projects, and can be maintained properly to provide a long-term asset to the City;
WHEREAS, the Council determines that the “Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy” (“Policy”)— which is attached as Exhibit 1 to the March 1, 2022 Report to the City Council, and is hereby incorporated into this Resolution by this reference— will not only facilitate commemoration, but also protect the aesthetics, character, integrity, and functionality of City properties and parks; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of a policy for the acceptance, placement, and public display of privately-funded and donated public monuments and memorial plaques on City property is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15311 (Accessory Structures) and section 15304 (Minor Alternations to Land).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1.The Council approves and adopts the Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy.

SECTION 2. The Council authorizes the City Manager or a designee to amend the Policy as may be appropriate, necessary, or in the City’s best interest for implementing and administering the Policy.
10 of 75
2 C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\GLENDALE\TEMP\SPCC_03012022_RESOLUTION_1A.PDF Adopted this _____________ day of __________________________, 2022 ___________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Aram Adjemian, the City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2022, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
________________________
City Clerk
11 of 75
EXHIBIT 1
City of Glendale

PUBLIC MONUMENT & MEMORIAL PLAQUE
POLICY
A. Public Monument – Purpose and Policy
The purpose of the Public Monument Policy is to establish the criteria and process for the placement of Monuments sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on City property which is subject to the administrative jurisdiction of the City Manager.

It is the policy of the City of Glendale (“City”) to allow for the placement and public display on City property of Monuments sponsored by individuals and/or groups provided that Monuments and their proposed locations are determined to be appropriate, compatible with existing uses, do not adversely impact the use of public spaces, and do not create liability or public funding issues.

1. Definition
“Monument” refers to memorials, statues, objects, or installation of other permanent materials commemorating individuals, groups, events, or concepts with an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale.
“Identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale” refers to the individual’s, group’s, event’s, or concept’s nexus to the City through any one or more of the following:
The advancement of:
Education;
Quality of life;
Health or social well-being;
Civic pride or community involvement;
Arts, culture, heritage, or science;
Human rights; religious or racial harmony; or diversity, equity, and inclusion; or conflict resolution or reconciliation;
Environmental protection or improvement; or
Economic development, growth, or opportunity;
12 of 75
2 The prevention or relief of poverty, or those in need, by reason of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship, or other disadvantage; or Other purposes or activities recognized as charitable, philanthropic, benevolent, or providing a public benefit to the City’s community or serving the City’s public interest or common good.

Monuments may be free standing or affixed to buildings or other features.

2. Zoning Code
Notwithstanding any other policy regarding compliance of City projects with the Zoning Code, all Monuments approved under this policy are considered personal property or fixtures to real property, will become property of the City of Glendale, and are thereby exempt from the Zoning Code so long as they are placed in or on City property.

3. Cost
The Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the design, fabrication, placement, permitting, site preparation, and installation of a Monument subject to this policy. Final approval of a Monument will not be given until all associated costs have been paid in advance or secured in a form and manner approved by the City.

4. Process
Monuments will be considered in the following manner:
a.Application:
i. Monument proposals must be submitted to the City Manager. An Applicant shall submit a proposal that details the concept for the proposed Monument. The proposal must include:
Information regarding the association, if any, between the subject matter and the City of Glendale; and
To the extent possible, other pertinent information such as suggested locations for placement.
ii. The City Manager shall provide the initial screening of Monument proposals to determine if the proposed Monument complies with the provisions of this Policy. All Monument proposals then will be reviewed by the Arts and Culture Commission and, if proposed for placement within a 13 of 75
3 City park facility, by the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission. The City Manager will submit a report with the proposal, along with a recommended location for the proposed monument to the Arts and Culture Commission, and to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission, if appropriate. A Commission reviewing a Monument proposal shall consider the same criteria for City Council Approval and shall recommend the proposal to City Council or recommend changes or request supplemental information to be included prior to City Council review.
b.City Council Approval:
i. The City Manager will submit a report to the City Council, along with the recommendations of the appropriate Commission(s), for consideration of approval.
ii. In considering the proposed Monument, the City Council will consider the following criteria, as well as any other relevant factors it deems appropriate:
Appropriateness:

A monument should be sensitive to social, environmental, historical, or relevant contexts, and must be suitable for individuals of all ages.
The long-term impact of the Monument (i.e., subjects should be of sufficient stature to weather the vagaries of time and changing attitudes; and whether the subject proposed for recognition has an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City).
The City does not permit Monuments commemorating living persons, and a minimum of five years from the occurrence of or conclusion of any specific event and its memorialization is required. If a proposal is submitted for a Monument to commemorate a living person or within five-year exclusion period, the proposal must include a detailed rationale as to why that criteria should not apply in this instance. Compatibility:
How well the Monument integrates with the surrounding
environment.
A proposal must be consistent with the Glendale Municipal Code and any other appropriate policy documents of the City. 14 of 75
4 Impact on Use of Public Space:
A proposal that is likely to negatively impact existing park or right- of-way functions may be denied on this basis.
Aesthetics:
Aesthetic merit is a primary determinant in the acceptance of Monuments.
Proposed Monuments must show a high level of quality. A proposal reflecting inferior workmanship will not be approved.
Maintenance and Insurance:
The proposal must specify the manner in which the Applicant will pay in advance, bond, or guarantee general liability insurance and property insurance in a form and amounts approved by the City. The proposal must also detail all projected Maintenance costs for the expected life of the Monument (which projections will be reviewed by City staff for accuracy and completeness). Elements of a Monument which are reasonably likely to create extraordinary maintenance costs, including, but not limited to, water elements, may cause a proposal to be denied.
Safety:

Monuments must be safe to passersby, curious spectators (especially children), and the environment as a whole.
Sharp projecting elements, loose parts, and other potential hazards will result in disapproval of a proposed Monument.
iii. The City Council may decide, in its sole discretion, to accept or reject a proposal for a Monument, to determine the appropriate location for a proposed Monument, or take whatever action(s) it deems appropriate. The City Council may impose additional conditions reasonably necessary to protect public health and safety.
c.Final Approval:
i. After Council approval, final approval for installation of a Monument will not occur until the Applicant enters into a signed Agreement with the City.

The Agreement will include, but will not be limited to, the following provisions:
15 of 75
5 Transfer of Ownership to the City:
Upon the City’s written acceptance of installation, the Applicant shall transfer all rights, title, and interest in, and ownership of, the Monument to the City of Glendale.
The City’s ownership includes, but is not limited to, the right to change, modify, remove, relocate, move, transport, repair, restore, replace, destroy, sell, or donate the Monument, in whole or in part, in City’s sole discretion.
Engineering, Construction, and Installation Standards:
The Applicant shall undertake engineering and construction of the Monument consistent with valid plans and permits approved by the City.
The Applicant shall install the Monument according to the Agreement’s right of entry terms and conditions.
Maintenance and Insurance:

The City will take on responsibility for basic maintenance as further described in the Agreement. If the Applicant desires greater maintenance to occur, or greater involvement in the maintenance of the Monument, Applicant may enter into a separate Maintenance Agreement with the City.
Property Rights:
The Applicant shall transfer all Intellectual Property rights, including copyright, to the City, and City will obtain and retain all rights except those that the City may specifically reserve for the Applicant, or the Monument’s designer, or both.
The Applicant shall waive all rights and benefits that Applicant has, or may have, under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (17 U.S.C.

Sections 106A and 113(d)), the California Art Preservation Act (California Civil Code Sections 987 and 989) and any other local, state, foreign or international law (collectively, “Moral Rights Laws”) that protect against alteration of the Monument and the right to attribution.
16 of 75
6 Indemnification of the City:
The Applicant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City from all claims and lawsuits related to the Monument, including, but not limited to, claims or lawsuits arising out of the Monument’s design, construction, installation, movement, display, or an infringement of any intellectual property or Moral Rights of any party.

B. Memorial Plaques – Purpose and Policy
The purpose of the Memorial Plaques Policy is to establish the criteria and process for the placement of Memorial Plaques sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on benches or picnic table sets in City parks which are subject to the administrative jurisdiction of the Director of Community Services and Parks (“Parks Director”).

It is the policy of the City of Glendale to allow for the placement of Memorial Plaques on benches or picnic table sets in City parks in honor of someone who has passed and who should be recognized for a contribution to the community.

This policy does not apply to plaques which may be used as a form of recognition for building dedications, official historical designation, donors, or sponsors.

1. Definition
“Memorial Plaque” refers to a metal plate made of bronze which is attached to a bench made of concrete or picnic table set that is placed in a City park. “Contribution to the community” refers to any of the following:
Service on the Glendale City Council, or a City of Glendale board, committee, or commission; or
A volunteer leadership or board role in:
A service club or organization within the City; or
A 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization whose primary objectives or activities are philanthropy, social well-being, or other activities serving the City’s public interest or common good; or
An organization partnered with the Community Services and Parks department for implementation of its Community Development Block Grant Social Services, Homeless Services, or Senior Services programs.
17 of 75
7 2. Concrete Bench or Picnic Table Set and Memorial Plaque Procurement, Installation, and Maintenance
The Community Services and Parks Department will procure a Memorial Plaque and a concrete bench or picnic table set which meet the Department’s specifications and requirements. The Department will undertake construction, installation, and site preparation. The City will assume responsibility for maintaining the Memorial Plaque and bench or picnic table set.

3. Cost
The Applicant shall pay all costs associated with a Memorial Plaque, including the procurement of a new concrete bench or picnic table set, which are fixed and referenced in the Citywide Fee Schedule. If the Memorial Plaque, or the bench or picnic table set, or both, are vandalized to the point that either one or both of them have to be replaced, the Applicant must pay for the replacement cost(s); otherwise, the Memorial Plaque and the bench or picnic table set will be permanently removed.

4. Process
Memorial Plaques will be considered in the following manner:
a.Application:
i. An application that details the proposed Memorial Plaque must be submitted to the Parks Director. The proposal must include:
Information regarding the association, if any, between the subject matter and the City of Glendale; and
Suggested locations for placement.
b.Evaluation:
i. City staff will evaluate the application as it relates to the proposed location, compatibility with the surroundings, potential impact on other uses, potential liability, safety and maintenance issues, and will apply the following criteria:
Appropriateness:
The long-term impact of the Memorial Plaque. A proposal must include a clear statement of the contributions to the community by the person proposed for recognition.
18 of 75
8 The City does not permit the installation of Memorial Plaques commemorating living persons.
Compatibility:
How well the Memorial Plaque integrates with the surrounding environment.
A proposal for a Memorial Plaque must be consistent with the Glendale Municipal Code and any other appropriate policy documents of the City.
Impact on Existing Use:
Proposals that would negatively impact existing uses of public property may be denied on this basis.
Aesthetics:
Plaque content, including design, text font, verbiage, illustration or graphics, and scope, must meet the criteria and standards set by the Community Services and Parks Department.
Maintenance:
Memorial Plaques and benches or picnic table sets that are likely to have ongoing, onerous maintenance costs will not be approved. Safety:
The proposed placement of the bench or picnic table set with the Memorial Plaque must be safe to a passersby and the environment as a whole.
Ownership:
Upon the City’s installation of the Memorial Plaque on the bench, the Applicant shall transfer to the City ownership of the Memorial Plaque and bench.
The City’s ownership includes, but is not limited to, the right to change, modify, remove, relocate, move, transport, repair, restore, replace, destroy, sell, or donate the Memorial Plaque, or bench or picnic table set, or both, in whole or in part, in City's sole discretion. 19 of 75
9 c.Approval:
i. The Parks Director or a designee is the approval authority for Memorial Plaques.
d.Appeals:
i. The Applicant may file a timely appeal of the Park Director’s decision to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission. An appeal must be in writing and filed with the Community Services and Parks Department no later than 15 calendar days after the date of the Park Director’s written decision.

C. Policies Applicable to Public Monuments and Memorial Plaques

1.Monuments or Memorial Plaques promoting violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on any of the following attributes will not be permitted: age, caste, ethnicity, nationality, race, immigration status, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition, physical or mental disability, victims of a major violent event and their kin.

2.The City deems its acceptance, placement, and public display of privately-funded and donated Monuments and Memorial Plaques on City property as an expression of government speech. The accepted Monuments and Memorial Plaques are meant to convey, and have the effect of conveying, a government message, and are not for the purpose of providing a forum (whether public forum, designated public forum, limited public forum, or other type of forum) for private speech.

3.Monuments and Memorial Plaques shall be limited to a single representation per person or event commemorated. In the event that a proposal/application is made for a Monument or Memorial Plaque in honor or commemoration of a person or event that is the same or similar to an already-existing Monument or Memorial Plaque within the City, such proposal/application may be denied by the administrative body considering that proposal/application.

4.The City Manager or a designee is authorized to amend this Policy as may be appropriate, necessary, or in the City’s best interest for implementing and administering the Policy.
20 of 75
1 C:\Users\rghazarian\OneDrive - City of Glendale - CA\Desktop\PUBLIC MONUMENTS & MEMORIAL BENCH PLAQUES POLICY - RESO - 3 - MGF - CC_03012022_RESO v2.docx RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE CITY’S ACCEPTANCE, PLACEMENT, AND

PUBLIC DISPLAY OF PRIVATELY-FUNDED AND DONATED MONUMENTS AND

MEMORIAL PLAQUES ON CITY PROPERTY

WHEREAS, over the years, individuals , groups, and organizations have sought to commemorate persons or significant events through the placement of monuments and memorial plaques on City property, often times in City parks;

WHEREAS, the Council finds that a need exists to provide a mechanism and policy guidance for commemorating individuals, groups, events, or concepts with an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale;

WHEREAS, the Council wishes to establish a uniform policy with criteria and procedures for regulating the C ity’s acceptance, placement, and public display of privately -funded and donated monuments, and memorial plaques, on City property;

WHEREAS, the Council desires to ensure that the placement and public display of these monuments and memorial plaques are suitable for the location proposed, correlate with existing or future City plans or projects, and can be maintained properly to provide a long -term asset to the City;

WHEREAS, the Council determines that the “Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy” (“Policy”)— which is attached as Exhibit 1 to the March 1, 2022 Report to the City Council, and is hereby incorporated into this Resolution by this reference— will not only facilitate commemoration, but also protect the aesthetics , character, integrity, and functionality of City properties and parks; and

WHEREAS, the establishment of a policy for the acceptance , placement, and public display of privately -funded and donated public monuments and memorial plaques on City property is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15311 (Accessory Structures) and section 15304 (Minor Alternations to Land).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1. The Council approves and adopts the Public Monument & Memorial Plaque Policy.

SECTION 2. Notwithstanding paragraph (A )(4)(a)(ii) of the Policy, t he Council exempts any proposed Public Monument from review by the Arts & Culture Commission prior to Council consideration and approval if it has been reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission before this Resolution’s effective date stated in Section 4 below.

21 of 75
2 C:\Users\rghazarian\OneDrive - City of Glendale - CA\Desktop\PUBLIC MONUMENTS & MEMORIAL BENCH PLAQUES POLICY - RESO - 3 - MGF - CC_03012022_RESO v2.docx

SECTION 3. The City Manager or a designee is authorized to make minor, non- substantive amendments, from time to time, that are intended to carry out the overall intent of the Policy.

SECTION 4. This Resolution becomes effective on the date of its adoption.

Adopted this _____________ day of __________________________, 2022

___________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:

____________________
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

I, Aram Adjemian, the City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2022, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

________________________
City Clerk

22 of 75
EXHIBIT 1

City of Glendale

PUBLIC MONUMENT & MEMORIAL PLAQUE
POLICY

A. Public Monument – Purpose and Policy

The purpose of the Public Monument Policy is to establish the criteria and process for the placement of Monuments sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on City property which is subject to the administrative jurisdiction of the City Manager.

1. Definition

“Monument” refers to memorials, statues, objects, or installation of other permanent materials commemorating individuals, groups, events, or concepts with an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale.

“Identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City of Glendale” refers to the individual’s, group’s, event’s, or concept’s nexus to the City through any one or more of the following:

• The advancement of:
 Education;
 Quality of life;
 Health or social well-being;
 Civic pride or community involvement;
 Arts, culture, heritage, or science;
 Human rights; religious or racial harmony; or diversity, equity, and inclusion; or conflict resolution or reconciliation;
 Environmental protection or improvement; or
 Economic development, growth, or opportunity;
23 of 75
2 • The prevention or relief of poverty, or those in need, by reason of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship, or other disadvantage; or

• Other purposes or activities recognized as charitable, philanthropic, benevolent, or providing a public benefit to the City’s community or serving the City’s public interest or common good.

Monuments may be free standing or affixed to buildings or other features.

2. Zoning Code

Notwithstanding any other policy regarding compliance of City projects with the Zoning Code, all Monuments approved under this policy are considered personal property or fixtures to real property, will become property of the City of Glendale, and are thereby exempt from the Zoning Code so long as they are placed in or on City property.

3. Cost

The Applicant shall pay all costs associated with the design, fabrication, placement, permitting, site preparation, and installation of a Monument subject to this policy. Final approval of a Monument will not be given until all associated costs have been paid in advance or secured in a form and manner approved by the City.

4. Process

Monuments will be considered in the following manner:

a. Application:

i. Monument applications must be submitted to the City Manager. An Applicant shall submit a proposal that details the concept for the proposed Monument. The proposal must include:

• Information regarding the association, if any, between the subject matter and the City of Glendale; and

• To the extent possible, other pertinent information such as suggested locations for placement.

ii. The City Manager shall provide the initial screening of Monument applications to determine if the proposed Monument complies with the provisions of this Policy. All Monument applications then will be reviewed by the Arts and Culture Commission and, if proposed for placement within 24 of 75
3 a City park, by the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission. A Commission reviewing a Monument application shall consider the same criteria for City Council Approval and shall recommend the application to City Council or recommend changes or request supplemental information to be included prior to City Council review.

b. City Council Approval:

i. The City Manager will submit the application, along with a report to the City Council, for consideration of approval.

ii. In considering the proposed Monument, the City Council will consider the following criteria, as well as any other relevant factors it deems appropriate:

• Appropriateness:

 A monument should be sensitive to social, environmental, historical, or relevant contexts, and must be suitable for individuals of all ages.

 The long-term impact of the Monument (i.e., subjects should be of sufficient stature to weather the vagaries of time and changing attitudes; and whether the subject proposed for recognition has an identifiable connection to the history, cultural makeup, or identity of the City).

 The City does not permit Monuments commemorating living persons, and a minimum of five years from the occurrence of or conclusion of any specific event and its memorialization is required. If an application is submitted for a Monument to commemorate a living person or within five-year exclusion period, the application must include a detailed rationale as to why that criteria should not apply in this instance.

• Compatibility:

 How well the Monument integrates with the surrounding environment.

 A proposal must be consistent with the Glendale Municipal Code and any other appropriate policy documents of the City.

25 of 75
4 • Impact on Use of Public Space:

 A proposal that is likely to negatively impact existing park or right- of-way functions may be denied on this basis.

• Aesthetics:

 Aesthetic merit is a primary determinant in the acceptance of Monuments.

 Proposed Monuments must show a high level of quality. A proposal reflecting inferior workmanship will not be approved.

• Maintenance and Insurance:

 The proposal must specify the manner in which the Applicant will pay in advance, bond, or guarantee general liability insurance and property insurance in a form and amounts approved by the City.

 The proposal must also detail all projected Maintenance costs for the expected life of the Monument (which projections will be reviewed by City staff for accuracy and completeness). Elements of a Monument which are reasonably likely to create extraordinary maintenance costs, including, but not limited to, water elements, may cause an application to be denied.

• Safety:

 Monuments must be safe to passersby, curious spectators (especially children), and the environment as a whole.

 Sharp projecting elements, loose parts, and other potential hazards will result in disapproval of a proposed Monument.

iii. The City Council may decide, in its sole discretion, to accept or reject a proposal for a Monument, to determine the appropriate location for a proposed Monument, or take whatever action(s) it deems appropriate. The City Council may impose additional conditions reasonably necessary to protect public health and safety.

c. Final Approval:

i. After Council approval, final approval for installation of a Monument will not occur until the Applicant enters into a signed Agreement with the City.

The Agreement will include, but will not be limited to, the following provisions:

26 of 75
5 • Transfer of Ownership to the City:

 Upon the City’s written acceptance of installation, the Applicant shall transfer all rights, title, and interest in, and ownership of, the Monument to the City of Glendale.

 The City’s ownership includes, but is not limited to, the right to change, modify, remove, relocate, move, transport, repair, restore, replace, destroy, sell, or donate the Monument, in whole or in part, in City’s sole discretion.

• Engineering, Construction, and Installation Standards:

 The Applicant shall undertake engineering and construction of the Monument consistent with valid plans and permits approved by the City.

 The Applicant shall install the Monument according to the Agreement’s right of entry terms and conditions.

• Maintenance and Insurance:

• Property Rights:

 The Applicant shall transfer all Intellectual Property rights, including copyright, to the City, and City will obtain and retain all rights except those that the City may specifically reserve for the Applicant, or the Monument’s designer, or both.

 The Applicant shall waive all rights and benefits that Applicant has, or may have, under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (17 U.S.C.

27 of 75
6 • Indemnification of the City:

 The Applicant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City from all claims and lawsuits related to the Monument, including, but not limited to, claims or lawsuits arising out of the Monument’s design, construction, installation, movement, display, or an infringement of any intellectual property or Moral Rights of any party.

B. Memorial Plaques – Purpose and Policy

The purpose of the Memorial Plaques Policy is to establish the criteria and process for the placement of Memorial Plaques sponsored by individuals and/or groups (whether they are private parties, non-profit organizations, or others) on benches or picnic table sets in City parks which are subject to the administrative jurisdiction of the Director of Community Services and Parks (“Parks Director”).

This policy does not apply to plaques which may be used as a form of recognition for building dedications, official historical designation, donors, or sponsors.

1. Definition

“Memorial Plaque” refers to a metal plate made of bronze which is attached to a bench made of concrete or picnic table set that is placed in a City park.

“Contribution to the community” refers to any of the following:
• Service on the Glendale City Council, or a City of Glendale board, committee, or commission; or
• A volunteer leadership or board role in:
 A service club or organization within the City; or
 A 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization whose primary objectives or activities are philanthropy, social well-being, or other activities serving the City’s public interest or common good; or
 An organization partnered with the Community Services and Parks department for implementation of its Community Development Block Grant Social Services, Homeless Services, or Senior Services programs.

28 of 75
7 2. Concrete Bench or Picnic Table Set and Memorial Plaque Procurement, Installation, and Maintenance

The Community Services and Parks Department will procure a Memorial Plaque and a concrete bench or picnic table set which meet the Department’s specifications and requirements. The Department will undertake construction, installation, and site preparation. The City will assume responsibility for maintaining the Memorial Plaque and bench or picnic table set.

3. Cost

The Applicant shall pay all costs associated with a Memorial Plaque, including the procurement of a new concrete bench or picnic table set, which are fixed and referenced in the Citywide Fee Schedule. If the Memorial Plaque, or the bench or picnic table set, or both, are vandalized to the point that either one or both of them have to be replaced, the Applicant must pay for the replacement cost(s); otherwise, the Memorial Plaque and the bench or picnic table set will be permanently removed.

4. Process

Memorial Plaques will be considered in the following manner:

a. Application:

i. An application that details the proposed Memorial Plaque must be submitted to the Parks Director. The proposal must include:

• Information regarding the association, if any, between the subject matter and the City of Glendale; and

• Suggested locations for placement.

b. Evaluation:

i. City staff will evaluate the application as it relates to the proposed location, compatibility with the surroundings, potential impact on other uses, potential liability, safety and maintenance issues, and will apply the following criteria:

• Appropriateness:

 The long-term impact of the Memorial Plaque. A proposal must include a clear statement of the contributions to the community by the person proposed for recognition.

29 of 75
8  The City does not permit the installation of Memorial Plaques commemorating living persons.

• Compatibility:

 How well the Memorial Plaque integrates with the surrounding environment.

 A proposal for a Memorial Plaque must be consistent with the Glendale Municipal Code and any other appropriate policy documents of the City.

• Impact on Existing Use:

 Proposals that would negatively impact existing uses of public property may be denied on this basis.

• Aesthetics:

 Plaque content, including design, text font, verbiage, illustration or graphics, and scope, must meet the criteria and standards set by the Community Services and Parks Department.

• Maintenance:

 Memorial Plaques and benches or picnic table sets that are likely to have ongoing, onerous maintenance costs will not be approved.

• Safety:

 The proposed placement of the bench or picnic table set with the Memorial Plaque must be safe to a passersby and the environment as a whole.

• Ownership:

 Upon the City’s installation of the Memorial Plaque on the bench, the Applicant shall transfer to the City ownership of the Memorial Plaque and bench.

 The City’s ownership includes, but is not limited to, the right to change, modify, remove, relocate, move, transport, repair, restore, replace, destroy, sell, or donate the Memorial Plaque, or bench or picnic table set, or both, in whole or in part, in City's sole discretion.

30 of 75
9 c. Approval:

i. The Parks Director or a designee is the approval authority for Memorial Plaques.

d. Appeals:

i. The Applicant may file a timely appeal of the Park Director’s decision to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission. An appeal must be in writing and filed with the Community Services and Parks Department no later than 15 calendar days after the date of the Park Director’s written decision.

C. Policies Applicable to Public Monuments and Memorial Plaques

1. Monuments or Memorial Plaques promoting violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on any of the following attributes will not be permitted: age, caste, ethnicity, nationality, race, immigration status, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition, physical or mental disability, victims of a major violent event and their kin.

2. The City deems its acceptance, placement, and public display of privately-funded and donated Monuments and Memorial Plaques on City property as an expression of government speech. The accepted Monuments and Memorial Plaques are meant to convey, and have the effect of conveying, a government message, and are not for the purpose of providing a forum (whether public forum, designated public forum, limited public forum, or other type of forum) for private speech.

3. Monuments and Memorial Plaques shall be limited to a single representation per person or event commemorated. In the event that an application is made for a Monument or Memorial Plaque in honor or commemoration of a person or event that is the same or similar to an already-existing Monument or Memorial Plaque within the City, such application may be denied by the administrative body considering that application.

4. The City Manager or a designee is authorized to make minor, non-substantive amendments, from time to time, that are intended to carry out the overall intent of this Policy.

31 of 75
2 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: City-Wide Public Art Landmarks - Artsakh Ave. Overhead and Gateway Public Art Pieces

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Matthew Mazzotta Studio, in an amount not to exceed $500,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Bountiful,” for the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece.

2. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Paul Cocksedge Studio, in an amount not to exceed $550,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Curtain,” for the Artsakh Ave.

Gateway Public Art Piece.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for March 1, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On January 28, 2022, the Arts and Culture Commission approved two recommendations for landmark public art pieces to be located on Artsakh Avenue as part of the Downtown Arts and Entertainment District’s revitalization project:
1) Artsakh Avenue – Overhead Public Art Piece (located directly across from Home Goods in front of the Marketplace Parking Lot): Matthew Mazzotta Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Bountiful.”
2) Artsakh Avenue – Gateway Public Art Piece (located on the south corner of Artsakh Avenue and Broadway): Paul Cocksedge Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Curtain.” Staff recommends that City Council Authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into Agreements for Commission of Artwork with the aforementioned artists/artist teams to design, fabricate, and install public art pieces for the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece (in an amount not to exceed $500,000) and the Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece (in an amount not to exceed $550,000).
32 of 75
22 3
1 3
2 COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Arts & Culture:

The proposed landmark public art pieces located on Artsakh Avenue will advance the City’s mission of making Glendale an arts and culture destination, in addition to providing arts and cultural experiences celebrating the community’s diverse cultures, values and heritage.

Economic Vibrancy:

The proposed landmark public art pieces located on Artsakh Avenue will encourage tourism in Glendale which would increase visitation and patronage for nearby restaurants and businesses.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork with the artists/artist teams, as recommended by the Arts and Culture Commission, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece for (1) the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece, in an amount not to exceed $500,000; and (2) Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece, in an amount not to exceed $550,000.

BACKGROUND
On October 20, 2020, the Council approved a Motion, upon the Arts and Culture Commission’s recommendation, authorizing the Interim City Manager to enter into and execute a Professional Services Agreement with LeBasse Projects (LBP Consulting, LLC), in an amount not to exceed $300,000 dispersed throughout three fiscal years (FY 2020/2021, FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23), from the Urban Art Program Fund, for professional public art procurement and management services for the commission of up to ten long-term to permanent pieces of artwork in all parts of Glendale where public space may be available and/or feasible.

In February 2021, LeBasse Projects began working with Staff to develop a project plan for establishing recommendations for proposed public art locations throughout the City.

On May 20, 2021, LeBasse Projects presented their proposed strategic plan to the Arts and Culture Commission, and recommended locations for public art within the City.

During this meeting, the Commission chose 6 locations for an initial City-Wide Public Art Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process:

1. Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece

2. Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece

3. Artsakh Ave. Ground-level Sculpture

4. Central Park Ground-level Sculpture

5. Glenoaks Blvd. / Brand Blvd. Median Sculpture

6. Verdugo Park Ground/Building Mural
33 of 75
32 3
1 3
2 On August 16, 2021, LeBasse Projects released a City-Wide Public Art Landmarks RFQ via the online application collection website, Submittable. The RFQ’s set out the following three criteria for evaluating and scoring of Artists:
(1) Artistic Qualifications (strong artistic ability and experience); (2) Public Engagement / Community Outreach (connectivity to the community in their work); and
(3) Cultural Equity (“Cultural and racial equity will be highly considered throughout the selection process. Cultural equity will be viewed through the lens of artist demographics as well through the perspectives showcased and represented through the artwork and experiences of the Artist or Artist Team.”).

LeBasse Projects also reached out to several local and international artists regarding this opportunity. The RFQ closed on October 8, 2021, and Staff received 256 applications for consideration.

On September 16, 2021, the Arts and Culture Commission appointed Chairperson Sue Bell Yank to represent the Commission on an Artist Review & Selection Committee to review applications for the City-Wide Public Art Landmarks RFQ.

In November 2021, the Committee met to review applications and discussed recommendations for finalists to submit design concept proposals for two opportunities:

Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece and Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece.

In December 2021, LeBasse Projects proceeded to work with 8 artists/artist teams to submit design concept proposals for the aforementioned opportunities.

On January 28, 2022, the Arts and Culture Commission reviewed a total of 8 design concept proposals for the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece and Artsakh Ave.

Gateway Public Art Piece, and agreed on a First Recommendation, and an Alternate Recommendation for the two locations.

ANALYSIS
The Commission provided the following recommendations for each opportunity:
34 of 75
42 3
1 3
2 Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece:

First Recommendation: Matthew Mazzotta Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Bountiful.” Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece:

First Recommendation: Paul Cocksedge Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Curtain.” 35 of 75
52 3
1 3
2 Project Description: City-Wide Public Art Landmarks

RFP Approved: Yes.

Advertisement Method: Public Art Consultant, LeBasse Projects, promoted the RFQ to their artist networks and Staff also administered strategic outreach to artists/artists teams for the RFQ process.

RFP Issued: August 16, 2021
RFP Due Date: October 8, 2021

Company Name(s) and
Proposal Amount(s):

LeBasse Projects (Public Art Consultant) administered
the RFQ process. The proposal amount for the Artsakh
Ave. – Overhead Public Art Piece is $500,000, The
proposal amount for the Artsakh Ave. – Gateway Public
Art Piece is $550,000.

Selection Criteria
(If SS, list applicable
Provision):

Artistic qualifications, public engagement/community
outreach, and cultural equity. For more information,
please refer to EXHIBIT A – City Wide Public Art RFQ,
page 5.

Recommended
Consultant(s):

Matthew Mazzotta Studio (for the Artsakh Ave. –
Overhead Public Art Piece) and Paul Cocksedge
Studio (for the Artsakh Ave. – Gateway Public Art
Piece).

New / Existing
Consultant(s):

N/A

Procurement Method
(RFP / SS):

RFP

Contract Term:

Approximately March 2022 – December 2022

Project Begins:

March 2022

Project Ends:

December 2022

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
LeBasse Projects (Public Art Consultant) reached out to several artists/artists teams within their networks for these opportunities. Staff also administered direct strategic outreach to artists/artists teams for these opportunities. The RFQ was also posted on the 36 of 75
62 3
1 3
2 Arts and Culture Commission’s website ( www.glendaleartsandculture.org), and was shared via social media and sent to the Arts and Culture Commission’s e-newsletter list.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece and Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece will cost $1,050,000, which was approved as a part of the FY 2021-22 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$1,050,000 43110-2100-LAC-0010-P4148 Urban Art Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Under California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15301, the proposed monuments on Artsakh Avenue are categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review as a Class 1 Existing Facilities project (Minor Alternations to Structures or Facilities) that consists of the operation or minor alteration of existing public structures, facilities, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Installing the monuments would not involve anything other than minor alterations to existing landscapes or hardscaped areas on existing public property.

In addition, Under California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15304, the proposed monuments are categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review as a Class 4 Existing Facilities project (Minor Alternations to Land) that entails minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve the removal of healthy, mature, or scenic trees. Installing the monuments would not involve the removal of any trees, and would not involve anything other than minor alterations to existing landscapes or hardscaped areas on existing public property.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: The City Council may adopt two separate Motions:

2. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the 37 of 75
72 3
1 3
2 City Attorney— with Paul Cocksedge Studio, in an amount not to exceed $550,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Curtain,” for the Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece.

Alternative 2: The City Council may decline to adopt one or more Motions.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Jennifer Fukutomi-Jones, Principal Library, Arts & Culture Administrator Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
EXHIBIT A – City-Wide Public Art Landmarks RFQ
EXHIBIT B – Arts and Culture Commission Motion for Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece
EXHIBIT C – Arts and Culture Commission Motion for Artsakh Ave. Gateway Public Art Piece
38 of 75
C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\GLENDALE\TEMP\SPCC_03012022_MOTION_2A.PDF 5 2
8 8
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into and execute an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Matthew Mazzotta Studio, in an amount not to exceed $500,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Bountiful,” for the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Public Art Piece, as more fully described in the Director of Library, Arts and Culture’s March 1, 2022 Report to the City Council.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
39 of 75
C:\INETPUB\WWWROOT\GLENDALE\TEMP\SPCC_03012022_MOTION_2B.PDF 5 2
8 9
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby authorizes the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into and execute an Agreement for Commission of Artwork— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with Paul Cocksedge Studio, in an amount not to exceed $550,000 dispersed from the Urban Art Program Fund, to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece entitled, “Curtain,” for the Artsakh Ave.

Gateway Public Art Piece, as more fully described in the Director of Library, Arts and Culture’s March 1, 2022 Report to the City Council.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
40 of 75

CITYWIDE PUBLIC ART LANDMARKS RFQ

OVERALL PROJECT OPPORTUNITY
The City of Glendale aims to become an arts and culture destination in the Los Angeles metropolitan region. Reflecting on its diverse population, history and innovation in public spaces, the City seeks to further enrich the day-to-day experiences of the community with its emphasis on the importance of arts and culture. The Arts and Culture Commission (ACC) realizes this vision by consciously integrating arts and culture into the daily life of the people of Glendale. As community stewards of the arts, the ACC is responsible for advising City Council on the use of the City’s Urban Art Fund, and recommending how the City should invest in the Arts.

As part of the City of Glendale’s initiative to become a prime arts and culture destination, up to ten long-term to permanent artwork installations will be commissioned, developed and established over the course of the next few years. These landmark installations will be strategically placed throughout the City in locations that focus on public accessibility and encourage public engagement and interactivity.

We envision a public art program that draws in the local community and is highly alluring to the greater LA area and visitors/tourists.

This call for artists will reach out for multiple unique project opportunities. The aim across the various artwork opportunities is to create world-class public artwork in a diverse range of mediums that are designed to engage the community, showcase the cultural diversity of the City and enhance the various civic and public spaces.

Each location is different and asks for its own unique mediums utilizing highly imaginative and forward-thinking approaches. Selected artists and artist teams will be asked to demonstrate creative applications to support the building and activation of a city and community interconnected by its public art.

GLENDALE
41 of 75
We encourage Artists and Artist Teams to review the opportunities and consider how their own practice relates to the conceptual and visual demands and how their art practice might address the stated project goals. When applying to the RFQ, Artists and Artist Teams may apply for one or multiple opportunities that they feel they can develop strong concepts and visions for.

UNDERSTANDING THE CITY OF GLENDALE
Glendale has a wealth of assets that can be amplified through visual arts and cultural activities. The City, founded in 1906, evokes specific images for its residents and people who visit it. Glendale is bordered by the Verdugo Mountains and surrounded by other mountain ranges. It boasts gracious hillside homes that reflect a diverse architectural heritage, lush landscape, freeways, and the large flat expanse of South Glendale that was once rich farm and ranchland but now contains modest homes, apartments and condominiums. Glendale was originally populated by the Tongva people. Glendale is also notable for its remarkable accessibility to key Los Angeles neighborhoods and other municipalities.

Glendale has a large Armenian population, in addition to Black, Latinx, Korean, and Filipino communities. Glendale has openly acknowledged its unfortunate history of racial discrimination, apologizing and committing to atone for these practices in a formal resolution issued in September 2020 - making it the first city in California and third city in the nation to do so. Additionally, in 2017 the City Council passed a resolution against LGBT discrimination. The
City’s recognition of its diversity is reflected in its arts and cultural offerings, its political life, its neighborhoods and its many language-immersion programs. Glendale is also
a regional shopping destination, with the Glendale
Galleria, The Americana at Brand, the Brand Boulevard of Cars. Downtown Glendale contains a mix of department
stores, chains, and small independent businesses. Lastly, San Fernando Boulevard is a media-tech corridor for
many film- related businesses including DreamWorks
Animation and Walt Disney Studios. Glendale’s Tech
Strategy provides a road map for growing Glendale’s
technology-based business sector.
42 of 75
Over the last decade, Downtown Glendale has been transforming with the creation of the Downtown Strategic Plan and the support of the former Redevelopment Agency and the Department of Community Development. Condominiums and apartment buildings have joined the already bustling retail environment. The presence of more and more people living downtown, particularly Millennials, has led Glendale toward envisioning an “18-hour downtown.” The City recognizes the need to provide more arts and cultural activities to encourage activity day and night.

The City of Glendale’s position as an arts and cultural destination has been bolstered by Redevelopment Agency and City investments in cultural infrastructure including:
• The Alex Theatre
• Brand Library & Art Center
• The Japanese Tea House and Garden
• The Doctor’s House
• Verdugo Adobe
• ReflectSpace exhibits in the Downtown Central Library • Antaeus Theatre
• ACE 121 Gallery and artist live/work space
• Museum of Neon Art
• Casa Adobe de San Rafael
In addition, there are numerous multi-cultural organizations and a sprinkling of art galleries located around the City. Outdoor performing arts events, including summer concerts in Verdugo Park and the Brand Library Plaza Series, have become more popular every year. And, while Glendale’s Redevelopment Agency no longer exists, it left an indelible legacy of arts infrastructure and urban design.

All these assets contribute to the City’s cultural potential. Now is the time to look at Glendale’s arts and cultural activities and find ways to support them, amplify them and make them more visible.
43 of 75

CURATORIAL EXPECTATIONS
This program is searching for innovative Artists and Artist Teams with an ability to creatively approach engaging and active public art, and a deep understanding of how public art complements and challenges our community and civic environment.

Artists or Artist Teams shortlisted through this RFQ will be asked to address the selected locations as landmark visual opportunities and to create an engaging and dynamic element inviting residents and visitors to the City to interact, connect and utilize the spaces around the art.

Each of the individual locations demand unique approaches and creative uses of materials and sustainability and we invite Artists and Artist Teams to offer their approaches to attaining the project goals. Artist and Artist Teams should take the following under consideration across each of the opportunities:
• Physical engagement with the public
• Creating multiple visual angles and approaches
• All day activation - Day and night
• Utilization of creative mediums
• Artwork sustainability and conservation

ELIGIBILITY
Artists age 18 or older may apply as an individual or as a team. The RFQ is open to all and not restricted to any geographic location but the following considerations will be strongly considered:
• Artists who can demonstrate the ability to oversee the design, fabrication and installation of public works - or who have a history of working with design/build/engineering//fabrication teams to accomplish these needs. • Artists without previous public art experience that demonstrate an ability to manage a team to accomplish the goals are still strongly encouraged to apply.
• Artists in traditionally and historically underrepresented groups are strongly encouraged to apply.
44 of 75

SELECTION PROCESS
The Art Consultant (LeBasse Projects) for the City will evaluate all responses to this RFQ and present a short list for review by the Artist Review and Selection Committee for selection.

Selected Artists or Artist Teams will then be invited to create a RFP (Request for Proposal) and tasked with delivering site specific concepts and designs. These invited Artists will be provided a stipend upon submitting responses. The stipend totals will depend on their individual location opportunities. Invited Artists and Artist Teams will be given additional site details as well as sample contracts to review during this process.

The Art Consultant and the Artist Review and Selection Committee will then make recommendations to the Arts and Culture Commission on which Artists will be awarded the individual commissions.

The evaluation and scoring of Artists submitting an RFQ will center around the following criteria:

1. ARTISTIC QUALIFICATIONS
Based on written response and examples of prior work submitted:
• The Artist can display a strong artistic ability based on their past work. • The Artist has a proven ability to successfully execute the project within the timeline and budgets provided.
• The Artists past work shows an appropriate connection to the art opportunity.

2. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Based on past work and written responses:
• The Artist shows a strong sense of public engagement and connectivity to the community in their work.
• The Artists past work shows a level of activation with the viewer/audience.

3. CULTURAL EQUITY
Based on application responses:
• Cultural and racial equity will be highly considered throughout the selection process. Cultural equity will be viewed through the lens of artist demographics as well through the perspectives showcased and represented through the artwork and experiences of the Artist or Artist Team.
45 of 75
BUDGET
Each of the 10 artwork locations has an allocated budget ranging from $75,000 to $750,000.

The exact final commission contracts will be determined based on the approved and selected proposals and the needs of each.

Commission budgets are to be inclusive of Artist fees, artwork fabrication and installation costs, insurance, engineering and any transportation costs as well as any other costs associated with creating the artwork including foundations, footings, lighting or signage.

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

1. Letter of Interest: Include the Proposer’s name, address, phone number, and email. Compose a statement (maximum 1000 words) outlining relevant experience completed within the past five years and your interest in developing a public art proposal that would positively impact the City of Glendale.

2. Detailed Resume and CV

3. Samples of Past Projects (Up to 5): Showcase up to 5 r elevant past pr ojects.

Details must include appropriate images and photography as well as information including - Title, budget, client, location, media/materials, year completed and a short description of the project.

A pdf and details may be uploaded to the submission platform.

4. References: Submit two references that include client name and contact person along with title, contact details, and specific project information associated with the listed reference. References will only be contacted if the candidate meets the qualifications to continue on in the selection process. 46 of 75

RFQ TIMELINE
The following schedule may be updated by the City at any point, but the below is the intended RFQ timeline:

RFQ released: August 16th, 2021 (9am PST)
Deadline for questions: August 27th, 2021 (5pm PST)
Response to questions posted: August 31st, 2021 (5pm PST) Deadline to apply: October 8th, 2021 (5pm PST)
Shortlist Selected: October 29th, 2021
• Shortlisted Artists start on conceptual designs to present in December Shortlisted Artists present concepts at Arts and Culture Commission Meeting:

December 2021
Finalists Selected: January 2021

HOW TO APPLY
Applications will be received via Submittable:
https://lebasseprojects.submittable.com/submit
Installation deliveries estimated April through December 2022. 47 of 75
3 2
4 1

ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT
Gateway Installation - $550,000

ARTSAKH AVE
Overhead Installation - $500,000

ARTSAKH AVE
Ground Level Installation - $100,000

CENTRAL PARK / ARMENIAN MUSEUM
Ground Level Installation - $100,000
1 2
3 4
5 6

VERDUGO PARK
Ground / Building Mural - $50,000

GLENOAKS / BRAND BLVD
Median Installation - $100,000
5 6

LOCATIONS
48 of 75
OPPORTUNITY 1 | ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT

DISTRICT

GATEWAY INSTALLATION
Budget $550,000
Located near the intersection of E Broadway and Artsakh Ave within Glendale’s Arts and Entertainment District, this large installation will be a bold gateway along Artsakh Ave. The installation will be featured in the upcoming remodeled Artsakh Ave streetscape, placing it in the center of outdoor dining spaces, public gathering areas, local businesses, retail and restaurants.

This location and project is calling for an Artist or Artist Team to deliver a monumental and iconic gateway installation or sculpture that would potentially span the street.
49 of 75
OPPORTUNITY 2 | ARTSAKH AVE

OVERHEAD INSTALLATION
Budget $500,000
Placeholder rendering of installation
The overhead installation will be located within Artsakh Ave, as both an active and engaging art piece and a shade structure for the public to enjoy in the future outdoor plaza. Due to the location of the installation, the design must be in compliance with Glendale Fire Code. The plaza will include outdoor seating, gathering areas, and nearby businesses, encouraging heavy foot traffic and creating a space the overhead installation will be highly visible.

This location and project is calling for an Artist or Artist Team to deliver an overhead installation that can potentially act as a landmark to the area. Options that provide some potential shade or lighting are highly desirable.
50 of 75
OPPORTUNITY 3 | ARTSAKH AVE

GROUND LEVEL INSTALLATION
Budget $100,000
This ground level installation will be located within the upcoming remodeled Artsakh Ave streetscape, featured in the public outdoor plaza. The plaza will include outdoor seating, gathering areas, and nearby businesses, encouraging heavy foot traffic and creating a space the ground level installation will be highly visible and interacted with.

This location and project is calling for an Artist or Artist Team to deliver a ground level sculpture that can be directly viewed by the public. Options including new media, lighting elements or interactivity are highly recommended. 51 of 75
OPPORTUNITY 4 | CENTRAL PARK /

ARMENIAN MUSEUM

GROUND LEVEL INSTALLATION
Budget $100,000
Located between Glendale Central Library and the upcoming Armenian Museum, the art installation at Glendale Central Park will be an iconic and stimulating art piece for the community and visitors. With many people passing by, coming to and from the Museum and Library, or enjoying the open greenery of the Park, this location is perfect for an active installation for the public to engage with.

GROUND / BUILDING MURAL
Budget $50,000
Verdugo Park is located near Glendale Community College in northern Glendale. It features a playground, skatepark, and facilities for baseball and basketball. The mural at Verdugo Park could be a bright and vibrant addition to the ground plane of the basketball court or the bathroom facilities in the park.

This location and project is calling for an Artist or Artist Team to deliver a painted or surface applied installation.
53 of 75
OPPORTUNITY 6 | GLENOAKS / BRAND

MEDIAN INSTALLATION
Budget $100,000
Glenoaks Blvd is a roadway spanning across Glendale from its east end in Burbank through Glenoaks Canyon to the west. In North Glendale, near the intersection with N Brand Blvd, W Glenoaks Blvd sports wide medians that make great locations for an art installation. Being at a busy intersection and frequented route into Glendale, the median installation will be a bold, enjoyable statement for those driving past.

This location and project is calling for an Artist or Artist Team to deliver a sculpture that would sit within the median but provide enough visibility to create a gateway or marker to the entrance to Glendale.
54 of 75
FAQS

1. Who can apply to the Glendale Citywide Public Landmarks RFQ? Practicing artists or artist teams over the age of 18 can apply. The RFQ is open to all and is not restricted to any geographic location.

2. What qualiﬁes as an eligible artist or artist team?
The following considerations will be strongly noted:
• Artists who can demonstrate the ability to oversee the design, fabrication and installation of public works - or who have a history of working with design/ build/engineering//fabrication teams to accomplish these needs. • Artists without previous public art experience that demonstrate an ability to manage a team to accomplish the goals are still strongly encouraged to apply.
• Artists in traditionally and historically underrepresented groups are strongly encouraged to apply.

3. Will artists need to propose a concept to apply?
No, this RFQ is for qualifications only. A shortlist of artists will be selected from the applicants to move on to the next stage of developing concepts to present to the Glendale Arts and Culture Commission. These finalists will receive a stipend for their concept design work. Applicants should not propose a concept when applying to the RFQ.

4. Can artists apply for multiple installation locations? Yes, artists are encouraged to apply for the installation opportunities that best fit their qualifications. Please apply only for opportunities best reflected by past work and practices.

5. Will artists need to submit an application for each location? No, artists will only need to submit one application . The application will allow artists to check each location they are interested in applying for. 55 of 75

6. Will artists receive a stipend for their work?
Selected finalists will be asked to create site-specific concept designs to present to the Glendale Arts and Culture Commission. These selected artists will receive a stipend for their concept work.

7. Will all artists be able to look at the city contract when applying to the RFQ?
No, only the selected finalists will be sent examples of the final contract.

8. When is the deadline to apply?
The deadline to apply to the RFQ is October 8, 2021 at 5pm PST.

9. How should artist teams submit their CVs?
Artists can combine their CVs into a single PDF for submission.

10. Is there a maximum word count for providing the associated project information under References?
There is no maximum word count, but a short description of the project and artwork done is preferred.

11. If applying as an artist team, will the collective experiences of the artist team be considered, or will selection be based primarily on the work of one artist?
Selection will be based on the collective experience of an artist team. It is more advantageous to provide experience of the team as a whole in order to showcase the work of the group.

12. How can artists submit the descriptions of the ﬁve work examples? Artists can submit five different files, one for each work example, with the description of that artwork in each of those files. Artists can also combine all work examples and descriptions into a single PDF .
56 of 75
MOTION
M
oved by Commissioner Vidor, seconded by Vice-Chair Viar, that the Arts and Culture Commission hereby recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork with the artist/artist team listed below to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece for the Artsakh Ave. Overhead Artwork in an amount not to exceed $500,000, as more fully outlined in the January 28, 2022 Report by the Library, Arts & Culture’s Principal Arts & Culture Administrator:

First Recommendation: Matthew Mazzotta Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Bountiful.”
Alternate Recommendation: Ivan Depena Studio, for the artwork entitled, “ Louvered Canopy.”
V
ote as Follows:

Ayes: Commissioners Tufenkian, Vidor, Zadorian, Vice-Chair Viar, Chairperson Yank
Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

OTION ADOPTED BY THE ARTS & CULTURE CO MMISSION AT ITS SPECIAL MEETING HELD ON: Friday, January 28, 2022.
2-8-2022
57 of 75
MOTION
Moved by Vice-Chair Viar, seconded by Commissioner Tufenkian, that the Arts and Culture Commission hereby recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or a designee, to enter into an Agreement for Commission of Artwork with the artist/artist team listed below to design, fabricate, and install a public art piece for the Artsakh Ave. Gateway Artwork in an amount not to exceed $550,000 , as more fully outlined in the January 28, 2022 Report by the Library, Arts & Culture’s Princip al Arts & Culture Administrator:

First Recommendation: Paul Cocksedge Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Curtain.” Alternate Recommendation: Christian Moeller Studio, for the artwork entitled, “Clip.” Vote as Follows:

Ayes: Commissioners Tufenkian, Vidor, Zadorian, Vice-Chair Viar, Chairperson Yank
Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

MOTION ADOPTED BY THE ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION AT ITS SPECIAL MEETING HELD ON: Friday, January 28, 2022.
2-10-2022
of 75
Dear Mayor Devine and Councilmembers,
I want to give my full-throated endorsement of the pieces selected by the Arts and Culture Commission for the Gateway and Overhead public art opportunities located along Artsakh, which we feel will distinguish Glendale as an arts and culture destination. After sitting on the review panel and reviewing over 200 applications, I feel strongly that the artists we chose were imminently qualified, consummate professionals, working to an extremely high standard, with proven abilities to design, fabricate, install and manage all aspects of these monumental projects.

Moreover, the artists whose proposals we ultimately selected, we felt designed pieces that were unique, artistic in form, extremely memorable, and culturally relevant. These will not just fade into the background, as
public art sometimes does, but become iconic landmarks in people’s minds. “Meet me by the tree, meet me by the curtain,” are phrases that we could imagine Glendaleians saying to each other as they meet on Artsakh.

For Curtain, we felt that this was an iconic Gateway artwork, designed to span over the street, but with a beautiful form that would be supremely memorable. This won’t look like something every city has - it will be unique to Glendale. We also loved its dynamic nature, how it looks like air is flowing through, welcoming you into our city and creating an inviting portal. We wanted these pieces to represent our city’s diverse cultures, and the artists proposed working with a local Glendale poet or group of poets to create phrases in the multiple languages spoken here that would be inscribed on the sculpture.

We also were drawn to the kinetic form and cultural relevance of Bountiful by Matthew Mazzota, which promises not only to move with the wind in a beautiful way, but also provide a shaded meeting place, seating, and images of the bountiful fruits and flowers of the Artsakh region, referencing Armenian cultural history in a way that speaks to all the diversity of our city.

As chair of the arts and culture commission, I am grateful to my fellow commissioners and to the Library Arts
and Culture staff, as well as our public art consultant LeBasse Projects, for conducting a professional, thorough, equitable, and transparent process that has comprised hours of extremely careful consideration on all of our parts. I thank the Council for their consideration of our recommendations.

With much respect,
Sue Bell Yank
Chair of the Arts and Culture Commission of the City of Glendale 59 of 75
3 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Further Recommendations on the State of the Community Forest

1. Motion to set Glendale's citywide tree canopy goal at 25%

2. Resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to amend contract 8000974 for City Tree Services, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) increasing the contract amount by $250,000 to $7,306,000, for the purpose of utilizing Measure S funds to plant trees

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for March 1, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Following two reports to City Council on May 18 and September 21, 2021 regarding the State of the Community Forest and its maintenance, this report provides recommended actions based on Council comments. This report also reflects comments and recommendations from a February 3, 2022 Sustainability Commission meeting reviewing these topics. Staff recommends adoption of a 25% citywide tree canopy goal. Consistent with this goal, as part of the FY 2021-22 budget, the City Council approved an appropriation of $250,000 for new tree plantings as part of strategies to mitigate the heat island effect. In order to maximize these monies, staff recommends increasing the City Tree Services contract amount with WCA 8000974 by $250,000 to incorporate these Measure S funds allocated for tree planting activities. Plantings will be targeted to areas where new trees will benefit most. Staff also reviewed programs from the cities of La Cañada Flintridge and Pasadena as requested by Council, as well as other cities, regarding private tree replacement regulations; however, staff recommends no changes to existing protection ordinances based on these examples. 60 of 75
23 3
1 5
6 COUNCIL PRIORITIES

1. Exceptional Customer Service: Planting additional trees and performing timely maintenance on city trees enhances the quality of life in Glendale.

2. Economic Vibrancy: Trees not only improve property values, they have also been shown to increase consumer spending in nearby businesses, and natural views increase employee productivity.

3. Safe & Healthy Community: Trees help to calm traffic, improve air quality, and prevent crime when well-kept.

4. Infrastructure & Mobility: Shade from trees encourages use of public sidewalks and trees are the only public infrastructure to increase in value with age.

5. Sustainability: A large, healthy urban forest is a critical component of a sustainable community due to trees’ positive impact on health, pollution reduction, and water savings.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve a motion to adopt a citywide tree canopy coverage goal of 25%, and resolution to dispense with competitive bidding and increase the City Tree Services contract by $250,000 for Measure S funded tree planting activities.

BACKGROUND
Following the September 21, 2021 City Council meeting, in which the Public Works Department presented a follow up to the May 18, 2021 State of the Community Forest report, staff was asked to prepare this subsequent report on topics raised for discussion and action by Council. These topics include the tree canopy coverage goal, tree species to be planted, watering and stewardship, and a comparison of private tree replacement strategies in neighboring communities. On February 3, 2022, the Sustainability Commission reviewed these previous reports, and a version of this report, and added additional comments and recommendations.

On May 12, 2020, following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the City Council approved a resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorized execution of a six-year contract with WCA for $7,056,000, for tree maintenance services. WCA has provided contractual tree maintenance services for the city for 20 years.

ANALYSIS

1. City Canopy Coverage Goal
Staff recommends Glendale adopt a 25% citywide canopy goal. This goal is to be met by an enhanced planting and watering program for new street trees with the goal of replacing all trees lost since 2010, while maintaining and preserving existing trees. The tree canopy should be equalized across the city as much as possible to ensure no area is left behind from the value and benefits of a community forest. To achieve this equalization, Public Works will select new tree sites based on the following criteria:
61 of 75
33 3
1 5
6 replacement of removed trees, planting upon request, planting near freeways, bus stops, and census tracts below 25% canopy coverage. Public Works will also consider planting projects outside of these areas. If adopted, this goal will be included in Public Works’ guiding Community Forest Management Plan, make the city competitive in tree grant applications, and assist in our annual Tree City USA recognition and other awards.

The Sustainability Commission recognized the receding city tree canopy and recommended to Council to adopt the goal, along with staff’s focus on the above mentioned ways to increase tree canopy equity.

2. Measure S Funded Tree Planting
Public Works is identifying specific tree locations based on the above criteria, specifically impactful sites near freeways and major thoroughfares, that will provide the most benefits per city tree. City personnel do not have the capacity to plant such a large number of trees in one planting season, due in part to our efforts being focused on responding to resident tree maintenance requests and performing young tree maintenance. We recommend increasing the City Tree Services contract amount with WCA by $250,000 in order for the planting and associated watering to proceed, in tandem with other tree planting and maintenance services covered by this contract.

3. Tree Species
Glendale, as with other cities that have a history of progressive forestry programs, makes strategic tree species planting decisions. These decisions are informed by guidance and research from academic institutions such as the University of California and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, which other cities and local organizations such as Tree People and Northeast Trees also reference. One recent UC study utilized long-term test plots located throughout Southern California to study the performance of various uncommon species in our climate. Glendale is glad to be part of this effort to increase planting of many uncommonly available, but suitable, tree species.

The Sustainability Commission raised concerns regarding various tree species lists that are used by different City departments, and requested clarification on how City departments communicate when it comes to tree species selection. They referenced three lists: PWD’s Designated Street Trees, GWP’s Free Shade Tree Program, and Zoning Ordinance 30.32.160 - Landscaping of parking and loading areas. The Commission suggested there may be a disconnect between these lists, and that Public Works Department should have oversight. PWD is involved in these programs and exercises some respective oversight of tree species selection for them. The variation in tree species for each program is intentional.

The intent of GWP’s shade tree program is to plant trees on private property to provide shade and reduce energy costs. Since the plantings are on private property, the property owner is afforded some discretion to select a tree species they prefer, provided it’s appropriate for the Southern California climate and compatible with power lines. GWP’s consulting arborist handles site visits and collaborates on tree selection with the property owner. This consulting arborist is well-known to Public Works staff, and is in regular 62 of 75
43 3
1 5
6 communication with us regarding other area projects. The GWP program has distributed 4,816 private trees since its inception in 2014.

It is appropriate for the GWP shade tree program species list to be different from the PW designated street tree list. The street tree list is more diverse across the city, and more focused based on characteristics of the neighborhood, existing street trees, and neighborhood tree palettes. The street tree list is limited to species suitable for parkway space, while the GWP list is suitable for landscaped yards.

The ‘Species Palette of Glendale’ in GMC 30.32.160 is related to parking lot landscaping requirements and the tree species to be planted as a component of this landscaping. Staff recommends revising this code section to omit the species list and replace it with more general tree guidelines such as requiring low water, pest resistant species with substantial crowns based on the planting space available. Public Works has oversight of this code section and provides comments during plan reviews for private parking lots. Similarly, staff provides comments on any protected private trees and street trees during plan review, as does Glendale Fire Department, if necessary for the location.

Palms were also raised as a tree of concern at the Sustainability Commission meeting.

These trees require more frequent trimming than a shade tree, cost more to trim and provide less shade and associated benefits than a typical shade tree. Additionally, palm fronds are currently handled as trash and are not easily recyclable like tree trimming debris from other tree species. The Commission suggested a citywide ban on the use of palm trees. Public Works’ practice is to not replace removed palms with new palms, except along signature streets such as Royal, Brand, and Glenoaks, where palms are part of the area’s identity. We have planted 12 palms total since 2000. Residents are not permitted to plant palm street trees in the parkway but they are allowed on private property.

4. Watering
As mentioned in previous reports, Public Works mails a letter to the adjacent property owner prior to any tree planting. This letter includes information on tree care and the resident’s responsibility to provide water to the tree. In addition, Council’s recommendation to consider a ‘tree adoption’ program is another feasible and positive approach to encourage stewardship of our public trees. The Sustainability Commission recommended a similar partnership with local business. In these programs, the abutting property owner is brought on board prior to a planting project, and labels are often hung from tree ties with watering and other care information. Public Works will assess the feasibility of developing a pilot project for an area of the city, and will analyze existing programs from other communities for ideas.

5. Funding
These estimates are based on the previous reports’ recommendations for annual routine trimming and increased planting and watering that would achieve regular tree maintenance and progress towards the 25% tree canopy goal. 63 of 75
53 3
1 5
6 Table 1: Recommended Annual Increase Funding Summary
Needed Tree Planting $175,500
Needed Tree Watering $148,122
Needed Tree Maintenance $437,000
Total Annual Additional Funding Recommended $760,622

6. Ordinance – Replacement private trees and in lieu fees Glendale’s Indigenous Tree Ordinance requires mitigation when any of the six protected native tree species is approved for removal. Trees must have trunks of at least 6” diameter. The replacement ratio is at least 1:1, meaning at least one tree is required to be planted on site per one tree removed, although additional tree plantings may be required. There is no codified replacement tree size requirement or a standard replacement ratio, so replacement quantities are considered based on the landscape plan and site layout. If a tree cannot be replanted on site, in-lieu fees are set per tree based on the cost to the City for planting trees elsewhere in Glendale. There is no replacement requirement for private non-protected trees of any size or species type in Glendale.

Glendale appears to be one of the few cities where a Public Works certified arborist reviews plans and reports critically, rather than a Planner or similarly-placed staff.

As requested by Council, PWD researched private tree replacement ordinances in the neighboring communities of La Cañada Flintridge and Pasadena. A summary table of these cities compared with Glendale can be found in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Comparative Private Tree Ordinance Replacement Guidelines Glendale La Cañada
Flintridge
Pasadena
Protected
tree species
6 native trees 8 native trees,
cedars in one
Historic District
13 native species, 116
other species
Protected
tree minimum
trunk size
6” or greater 12” or greater 8” or greater,
depending on species.

Non-protected trees
over 18”
On-site tree
replacement
ratio
At least 1:1, subject to
city discretion
1:1 2:1 up to 12:1,
depending on size of
removed tree
On-site tree
replacement
size
Typically 24” box, but
not codified
requirement
24” box to 48” box
depending on size of
removed tree
15-gallon to 36” box,
depending on size of
removed tree
In lieu fee Value of removed
tree OR cost for city
to plant replacement
in city-owned land
$354, $706, $3,600
depending size of
removed tree
Appraised value of
removed tree (typically
$500 - $40,000)
Post-project
Monitoring
None after initial
planting inspection
None after initial
planting inspection
Fee paid for Code
Compliance to inspect
annually for five years
64 of 75
63 3
1 5
6 In La Cañada Flintridge, more classes of trees are protected. Eight native oak and sycamore species are protected citywide if their trunks measure at least 12” thick and are located in a R-1 Single Family Residential Zone. Deodar cedars of at least 12” trunk size are protected in one specific Historic District only if they are located within 20’ of a road.

Finally, any tree more than five feet tall in a non-R-1 Single Family Residential Zone is protected.

If any protected tree is approved for removal, La Cañada Flintridge specifies a 1:1 replacement ratio. If the removed tree is larger, a larger replacement tree is required, from 24” up to 48” box size. If trees cannot be planted on site, in lieu fees are equal to the cost of a replacement tree based on those same size determinations. Fees range from $350 to $3,600 for the largest trees. La Cañada Flintridge’s protection of cedars is very limited in scale.

Pasadena has the most protected trees of the three cities. 13 species of native trees are protected when over 8” in trunk size, and another 116 species of trees are protected when of a mature size, ranging from 8” for the smallest trees and 35” for the largest. When protected trees are approved for removal, Pasadena also follows replacement ratios. This replacement ratio includes non-protected trees over 18” in trunk size. Pasadena requires anywhere from 2-12 trees per one removed protected tree, depending on tree size and the box size of the replacement tree. Non-protected trees must be replaced by 1-6 trees of any kind when approved for removal, based on the same sizing guidelines. At least half of the required trees must be planted on site.

When the full amount of trees cannot be planted on site, the in lieu fee per tree is equal to the appraised value of the removed tree based on an arborist’s report. Tree values can range from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands, depending on tree condition, location, and other factors per industry standard tree valuation formulas.

Beyond these two specifically requested comparison cities, staff reviewed the protective tree ordinances of 18 other cities. Ten had no protections for either native or non-native tree species and 4 included limited protections for non-native trees such as for especially large trees or for specific species in historical districts. The most notable examples are shown in Table 3 attached to this report. While these policies vary, staff found Glendale’s ordinance to be fairly consistent with these examples in providing effective protections for native trees using limited in-house resources.

The benefit of Glendale’s current ordinance with regards to replacement of removed protected trees is that it affords flexibility. If a forested lot removes one tree, it makes sense to require a single replacement tree in its place. If the only large tree on a lot is removed, staff is able to require additional replacement trees to replace the lost canopy.

Similarly, flexibility on tree species and size is important. All native trees are not always commonly available at nurseries, so this ordinance enables Public Works to require different sizes and species. In addition, larger trees are not always preferred. They are more difficult to care for, require more water, have higher mortality rates, and take longer to become established. Also, because the in-lieu fee funds tree planting in adjacent 65 of 75
73 3
1 5
6 parkways, it is a key tool for Public Works in maintaining Glendale’s native tree canopy.

There is no current process in the ordinance for post-project replacement tree monitoring, which is why staff ensures replacement trees are a planned, site-appropriate and central component of approved Landscape Plans.

7. Sustainability Commission Comments on Private Protected Trees The Commission highlighted the jacaranda’s status as the official Glendale tree, and multiple commissioners requested Council consider protecting this tree in addition to those already protected by the existing Indigenous Tree Ordinance (ITO). Additional species mentioned as worthy of protection on private property included deodar cedars, magnolia, sweetgum, other species of oaks, and potentially other trees.

As Public Works staff reported to Council and the Commission, protecting any additional trees will require additional resources across multiple departments, since substantive enforcement would be required. Private tree protection requires the city to assume an increased level of control over private property and how people manage their trees and yards. The benefits of additional protections would be longer-lived, healthier private trees, since many of these trees may have suffered from poor landscape or pruning practices.

The drawback for Glendale residents is that overhauling the landscaping of a private yard will be costlier and require permits and consulting from industry professionals.

With the current ordinance existing in some form for nearly 30 years, Glendale residents frequently call to report potentially unpermitted tree work. Adding more protected tree species that are increasingly difficult to identify by laypersons will lead to more calls and field response. Furthermore, plans will need to incorporate these tree species, requiring more time for review from CDD and PWD. Additional disputes between neighbors will require PWD, CDD, and Legal involvement. These resources would need to be requested and added to the budget, which would be partially offset by additional permit fee revenue.

While the tree species the Sustainability Commission suggested be considered for additional protections have increased local nostalgic and sentimental value, staff believes climate change has caused them to be less suitable to the local environment. For example, Magnolias require a large amount of water, have surfacing root tendencies, and structural concerns. Jacaranda are drought-tolerant in many cases, but typically have weak limbs and are susceptible to damage in even minor wind events.

The City can improve preserving healthy mature trees during private construction activities. With advancements in arboricultural knowledge and construction techniques, it is increasingly possible to perform construction near trees in a manner that preserves the trees. This can be achieved by plan review, informed design recommendations from staff, and most importantly consistent monitoring during construction. This level of customer service will necessitate costlier permits as it involves additional staff time across multiple departments and divisions, including PWD, Planning, Building and Safety, Code Compliance, to name a few. Inspection and enforcement are critical components of the process, not because it is punitive, but because even easily avoidable, seemingly minor damage from construction can cause a tree to die or fail months or years in the future. 66 of 75
83 3
1 5
6 As ITO cases (including other kinds of ITO permit and violation review) increase, staff must allocate less time per case. This can be mitigated by restricting construction near trees, in order to simplify the review process and guarantee the tree’s preservation.

Continuing to permit complex projects near protected trees maintains the risk that trees will be inadvertently damaged and destroyed. ITO permit requests have doubled since 2011, from approximately 150 per year to 300 per year at present. For complex design cases, at least 7 hours of staff time are required from start to end for a single permit.

Therefore, if Council chooses to increase the scope of the ITO without significantly increasing staff resources, staff recommends considering a tree replacement fee based on a tree appraisal for any protected tree as in Pasadena, rather than a flat fee currently used in La Canada Flintridge and Glendale. This fee would not simply be based on the cost of the city to procure and plant a replacement tree, but instead on the appraised tree value. This places the burden on applicants to include a professional tree report that encompasses every protected tree on a property, along with a calculation of the value of trees proposed for removal based on industry standards, for direct payment to the city should something go awry.

The Sustainability Commission suggested staff seek out a middle ground between protecting every tree and protection at the current level of six native species. As an alternative approach, staff recommends that the Council consider instead to provide protections for any trees at a certain trunk size that could be considered of a specimen quality, regardless of species. One recommended target for protection could be trees with a 32” trunk diameter or greater. Trees of this size are the largest in the City, and provide important benefits to the area in which they grow. Only 5% of the city public tree population is this size, due to the limited space available for street trees. Requiring applicants to include any tree this size in their tree reports and accommodate in site design would be one method to assist in their preservation, while limiting increased demand on city resources to administer an expanded program. However, some large trees may have been poorly maintained for decades, reducing their benefits or making them potentially unsuitable for protection. Still, we recommend this action if Council wishes to preserve additional trees without requiring protection for species which are currently, or expected to be, less suited to our changing climate.

Project Description: City Tree Services

Plans/Specs Adopted: February 2020
Advertisement Method: Websites and Outreach to Known Vendors

Specs Issued: February 2020
Bids Opened: March 2020
Company Name
and Bid Amount:

West Coast Arborists, Inc. $7,056,000
67 of 75
93 3
1 5
6 Selection Criteria: Proposal Price; Qualifications, Business History and Past Performance; Workplan, Project Approach,
and Corporate Capability; Responsiveness
Recommended
Contractor(s):

West Coast Arborists, Inc.

New / Existing Contractor: Existing

Procurement Method (Bid /
SS):

RFP

Contract Term: Six Years

Construction Phase Begins: July 20, 2020
Construction Phase Ends: July 19, 2026
Change Orders (When Applicable)
Company Name: West Coast Arborists, Inc.

Original Approved Contract
Amount:
$7,056,000
Approved Contingency: $0
Change Order History: N/A
This Change Order
(Increase):
$250,000
New Contract Total (If
Approved):
$7,306,000

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Adopting these recommendations will benefit the community by resulting in new tree planting and providing a focus on how Public Works can effectively fill tree canopy gaps in the most impactful and noticeable areas within Glendale. Staff will conduct thorough outreach targeted at those residents and business impacted by specific projects associated with the forestry programs. Additionally, the Sustainability Commission has reviewed previous reports, and a version of this report, and added additional comments and recommendations.

FISCAL IMPACT
The targeted tree planting will cost $250,000, which was approved as part of the FY 2021-22 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:
68 of 75
103
3 1
5 6
Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$250,000 GL: 52100-4011-PWD-0020-P0000-
PL: PWD00586AN
Measure S CIP

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item is considered a ministerial activity and therefore, not subject to CEQA review.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are listed below, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744.

Officers of West Coast Arborists, Inc.:

Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Patrick Mahoney CEO/President 2200 E. Via Burton Anaheim CA 92806 Richard Mahoney Chief Operating
Officer 2200 E. Via Burton Anaheim CA 92806
Rose Epperson Chief Financial
Officer 2200 E. Via Burton Anaheim CA 92806
Ownership Interest in more than 10% in West Coast:

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: Approve a Motion declaring a citywide tree canopy goal of 25% coverage and a Resolution to dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to amend contract 8000974 for City Tree Services, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) increasing the contract amount by $250,000 to $7,306,000, for the purpose of utilizing Measure S funds to plant trees. This will enable the city to clearly state its intent to increase its tree canopy with a one-time tree planting program.

Alternative 2: Take no action, which will result in no additional trees being planted and no citywide canopy goal being adopted.

Alternative 3: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff. 69 of 75
113
3 1
5 6

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION

EXHIBITS / ATTACHMENTS
Table 3: Additional Comparative Private Tree Ordinance Replacement Guidelines Prepared by:

Loren Klick, Urban Forester
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
70 of 75
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ,
seconded by Council Member , that the Council of
the City of Glendale hereby adopts a 25% citywide tree canopy goal.

Votes as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
e
71 of 75
1 RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE,

CALIFORNIA, DISPENSING WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR A DESIGNEE TO AMEND THE CONTRACT WITH WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. INCREASING THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT FOR NEW TREE PLANTING AND WATERING GOALS.

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2020, following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the City Council approved a resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing execution of a six-year contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) for $7,056,000 for tree maintenance services; and
WHEREAS, concurrently with this Resolution, the City Council is setting a 25% citywide tree canopy goal which will entail significant planting and watering targets over the next planting season; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works department strategically uses a combination of in-house- staff and contractual tree trimming services to maintain the urban forest consistent with industry best practices; and
WHEREAS, City personnel do not have the capacity to plant such a large number of trees in one planting season, due in part to efforts being focused on responding to resident tree maintenance requests and performing young tree maintenance, and WHEREAS, WCA has demonstrated superior knowledge, qualifications, staffing, project approach, and experience, as well as a lower price; and WHEREAS, West Coast Arborists, Inc. also demonstrated a thorough understanding of important legal and industry issues related to invasive pests, accident reporting and response, and wildlife protection as well as responsive customer service, outreach, and emergency response capabilities; and
WHEREAS, within a City that places great value in its urban forest and faces the unique challenges of a Southern California urban environment, an outside contractor’s corporate philosophy and approach to a project of this size and scope are important factors to consider and difficult factors to quantify; and
WHEREAS, Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Sec. 9 provides an exemption to competitive bidding when the Council determines it is in the best interest of the City to dispense with competitive bidding; and
WHEREAS, given the foregoing findings and facts, it appears that adequate justification exists and it is in the City’s best interest ― upon recommendation of the Director of Public Works ― to (1) dispense with competitive bidding, and (2) authorize the City Manager or a designee to amend the current six-year contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $250,000 for a new total amount not to exceed $7,306,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 72 of 75
2 GLENDALE:

1. The foregoing facts are deemed to be true and correct, and are a basis for dispensing with competitive bidding.

2. The Council hereby dispenses with competitive bidding and authorizes the City Manager or a designee to amend the contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc., increasing the contract amount by $250,000 for a new not to exceed amount of $7,306,000.

Adopted this day of , 2022.

Mayor
73 of 75
3 ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Aram Adjemian, City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2022, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

City Clerk
74 of 75
Table 3: Additional Comparative Private Tree Ordinance Replacement Guidelines City and
Ordinance
Private Tree
Protection (native)
Private Tree
Protection (non-
native)
In Lieu Fee Fee
Methodology
City of Los
Angeles: LAMC

46.0; LAMC 62.177
Yes: oaks, sycamore,
bay, and walnut;
specific Heritage
Parks trees
None Per tree; range of
$1945 to $2612.

Cost
replacement
Pomona: Sec.
.5809-23 Yes: oaks Yes, any tree over
10“ diameter.

Calculated based
on ratio that
replaces the
benefit loss of the
removed trees
using industry
appraisal
standards.

Cost
replacement or
trunk appraisal
method
Santa Clarita:

17.51 Yes, oaks
Yes, non-oak
trees must be
approved for
removal during
development.

Fee or box trees
shall be of
equivalent value
to any and all oak
trees removed as
defined by
current industry
appraisal
standards; highly
varied.

Trunk appraisal
method
LA County: LACC

22.46.2100
Yes: all native
trees None
$2,700 for each
oak removed.

Fee adjusted
annually based on
Consumer Price
Index
Cost
replacement
West Covina: Sec

17.83 Yes: oaks Specific individual
Heritage Trees
Fees up to
$2,100, or
donation of a
boxed tree
directly to City.

Trunk appraisal
method
75 of 75

Glendale City CouncilMarch 1, 2022

Glendale City Council
March 1, 2022