Agenda packet, second session — Glendale City Council, November 15, 2022 (part 3 of 5)

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

1. The foregoing facts are deemed to be true and correct, and are a basis for dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the execution of an agreement with a single source.

2. The Council hereby:

A. Dispenses with competitive bidding;
B. Accepts and approves the proposal submitted by TRIO Community Meals, LLC in response to the Request for Proposals issued by the Community Services & Parks Department— to provide regularly scheduled and emergency congregate meals and home-delivered meals (“services”) for the City’s Elderly Nutrition Program; and C. Authorizes the City Manager or a designee to enter into and execute a 4-year agreement, from December 1, 2022 to November 30, 2026 (initial term)— subject to approval by the City Attorney— with TRIO Community Meals, LLC to provide the services in an amount not to 619 of 1517
3 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\FACTFIND\ENP MEALS CONTRACT AWARD - 2022-2026 - RESO - DISPENSE BID - MGF.docx exceed $2,000,000, with the City’s having a one-time option to renew for two additional years (renewal term) in an amount not to exceed $1,100,000, for a total allocated amount not to exceed $3,100,000 for the combined initial and renewal terms.

Adopted this _____________ day of __________________________, 2022. ___________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., 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
620 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
1 City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

CATERING SERVICES FOR

THE ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM
Issue Date: August 29, 2022

Exhibit 1
621 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
2 CONTENTS
Message to Proposers.............................................................................................. Page 3 I. Introduction .................................................................................................... Page 4 A. Summary .................................................................................................... Page 4 B. Assumptions / Definitions.......................................................................... Page 4 C. About the City of Glendale ........................................................................ Page 5 D. Scope of Work............................................................................................ Page 5 E. City’s Project Representatives.................................................................... Page 6 II. RFP Process .................................................................................................... Page 6 A. Schedule of Events..................................................................................... Page 6 B. RFP Distribution......................................................................................... Page 7 C. Mandatory Proposer Conference................................................................ Page 7 D. Proposal Deadline and Proposal Submission ............................................. Page 7 E. Interim Inquiries and Responses; Interpretation or Correction of RFP...... Page 8 F. Addenda...................................................................................................... Page 8 III. General Requirements and Instructions...................................................... Page 8 A. Examination of Documents........................................................................ Page 8-9 B. Proposer’s Representations in the Response .............................................. Page 9 C. Withdrawal, Cancellation, or Modification of a Proposal.......................... Page 9 D. Proposal Preparation Expenses .................................................................. Page 10 E. Insurance .................................................................................................... Page 10 F. Proposer’s Indemnification of the City ...................................................... Page 11 IV. Proposal Content and Format....................................................................... Page 11 A. Using the Attached Proposal Forms........................................................... Page 11 B. Identifying Proprietary Information; Public Records Act.......................... Page 12 C. Meal Rates.................................................................................................. Page 12 D. Proposal Signature(s) ................................................................................. Page 12 V. Method of Selection........................................................................................ Page 13 A. Basis for Award and Evaluation Criteria ................................................... Page 13 B. Selecting a Food Service Provider ............................................................. Page 14 C. City’s Reservation of Rights ...................................................................... Page 14 VI. Award of Contract.......................................................................................... Page 15 VII. Letter of Objection; Procedures ................................................................... Page 16 EXHIBIT I ― Food Service Specifications ............................................. Page 17 EXHIBIT II ― Menu Writing Specifications........................................... Page 26 EXHIBIT III ― 2022-2023 Menu................................................................ Page 37 EXHIBIT IV ― Sample Contract............................................................... Page 54 EXHIBIT V ― Insurance Requirements.................................................. Page 82 PROPOSAL FORMS..................................................................................... PF:1-35 622 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
3 Message to Proposers
The City of Glendale Community Services & Parks Department (“Parks Department”) provides a wide variety of recreation, leisure and arts programs for all ages and interests, and manages one of the finest parks and open space systems in the Southern California region. It is within the nature of the City of Glendale to provide its community quality service to enhance personal achievement and create unique experiences and opportunities.

The City’s Mission Statement is:

The City of Glendale delivers exceptional customer service through precision execution and innovative leadership.

As a premier City anchored in pride of civic ownership, Glendale’s success is realized through a community that is safe, prosperous, and rich in cultural offerings. The City accomplishes its mission and realizes its vision by providing emphasis on: fiscal responsibility; exceptional customer service; economic vibrancy; informed & engaged community; safe & healthy community; balanced, quality housing; community services & facilities; infrastructure & mobility; arts & culture; sustainability.

The purpose of this Request for Proposals is to enable the Community Services & Parks Department to evaluate a list of candidates and select a qualified and experienced food service contractor to prepare daily meals for the Elderly Nutrition Program. The City of Glendale traditionally operates three sites for lunchtime hot meal services: Adult Recreation Center (seven days per week), Sparr Heights Community Center (five days per week), and Pacific Community Center (three days per week). During the pandemic, meal service was altered to “Grab and Go” hot and cold meal service seven days per week from the Adult Recreation Center and five days per week from Sparr Heights Community Center.

The Home Delivered Meals program includes meal service to homebound seniors in which seven (7) frozen meals are prepared/packaged for each homebound senior for a weekly meal delivery route. Therefore, the City is seeking Food Service Provider to who may provide a traditional model or pandemic response model of meal service delivery during the length of the contract.

Thank you in advance for your interest in this Request for Proposals.

Onnig Bulanikian, Director,
Community Services & Parks Department
623 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
4 I. Introduction
A. Summary
The City of Glendale (“City”) is soliciting Proposals from suitably qualified food service contractors (“Food Service Provider”) for the purpose of providing daily food service (“Services”) at selected City of Glendale facilities in accordance with the instructions and requirements in this Request for Proposals (“RFP”).

The City requires well-managed and financially sound individuals or firms with demonstrated skills and technical ability, and high levels of customer service and satisfaction, to fulfill the requirements outlined in this RFP.

This document is for use by City personnel and potential Food Service Providers who should read it carefully before preparing any response.

B. Definitions / Assumptions
In this RFP, the following words and phrases have the meaning ascribed to them below:
 Agreement / Contract /
Lower Tier Subaward
The entire and integrated written agreement between the City and the Contractor that takes the place of prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral.  City / Subrecipient The City of Glendale. Depending on the context in which it is used, the term City also may refer to:
 The geographic area known as the City of Glendale; or  A person whom the City of Glendale employs or uses and who is authorized to represent the City of Glendale in
matters concerning the Project.
 City Project Manager /
Project Director
The City’s designated representative for all issues related to the Project.
 Contractor / Lower Tier
Subrecipient
The selected Proposer(s) to whom the City has awarded a Contract for the Project.
 Project The entire Services described in this RFP. Services may constitute the whole or a part of the Project.
 Proposal The documents and other items that a Proposer submits in response to this RFP.
 Proposer The person, entity, or organization (i.e., Food Service Provider) that submits a Proposal in response to this RFP.
 RFP This Request for Proposals and all of its attachments, 624 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
5 including documents and other items from the City and relevant third parties.
 Services The work, labor, tasks, operations, activities, materials, supplies, equipment, deliverables, duties, and obligations:
 Described in this RFP; and
 Required by, and reasonably inferable from, the
Contract— whether completed or partially completed.
 Subcontractor A contractor, supplier, vendor, person, entity, or organization whom Contractor hires, employs, or uses on Contractor’s behalf to provide, perform, or fulfill a portion of the Services.

The following assumptions were used in preparing this RFP, and should be adopted by the Proposer:
 This RFP is based on the best available information. Information not in this document, and not said to be forthcoming, should be assumed to be unavailable.  Departure from the standards outlined in this RFP must be communicated via written notice to the City.

C. About the City of Glendale
Glendale is the fourth largest city in Los Angeles County and spans over 30 square miles. A superior quality of life in Glendale is the result of the City’s focus on safety, neighborhoods, education and community involvement. These are reflected in Glendale’s city government, which includes the Glendale Police and Fire Departments; Community Services & Parks; Library; Community Development, as well as other departments focused on improving the citizens’ quality of life.

The Parks Department is responsible for 47 parks and facilities, 37 developed parks, 20 ballfields, 5,000+ acres of open space, and 138 managed landscaped sites (including medians and parking lots).

D. Scope of Work

1. TERM OF SERVICES AND CONTRACT
The Services described in this RFP and in the proposed Contract are for a period of four (4) years (“initial term”), beginning on December 1, 2022, and ending on November 30, 2026. The City will have a one (1) time option to renew the Food Service Provider’s Contract for a period of two (2) years (“renewal term”).

Exercise of the one-time renewal option is at the sole discretion of the Director of Community Services & Parks and requires the written approval of the City Manager. NOTE: the initial term and renewal term are contingent upon continued funding from the Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department and the City of Glendale.
625 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
6 2. RESPONSIBILITIES
A Food Service Provider must be an approved Catering Contractor with the Los Angeles County Area Agency on Aging. Any Food Service Provider who wishes to receive approval or verify the status of their agency as an approved Catering Contractor must contact Miguel Robleto at, (213)738-2737 or [email protected]
A Food Service Provider must meet the Contractor requirements and responsibilities listed in the Food Service Specifications, EXHIBIT I, and Menu Writing Specifications, EXHIBIT II.

All work that a Food Service Provider performs under this RFP must comply with all applicable standards, laws and regulations.

The City will be responsible for items identified as “City’s responsibilities” in the Food Service Specifications, EXHIBIT I.

F. City’s Project Representatives
The City Project Manager, also referred to as “Project Director” in Los Angeles County ENP documents, in charge of this project is Aylin Isayan, Community Services Supervisor. The executive in charge is Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks.

II. RFP Process
A. Schedule of Events
The following events will take place in this project (see further explanations, below):

Event Responsibility Date(s)
RFP Distribution City August 29, 2022
Mandatory Proposers Conference City/Proposer September 8, 2022 Last Day to Submit Interim Questions Proposer September 19, 2022 RFP Proposals Due Proposer September 30, 2022
City Opens Proposals for Completeness City October 3, 2022 Panel Reviews Proposals City October 3-5, 2022
Candidate Interviews City/Proposer October 6, 2022
Final Candidate Announced City October 7, 2022
Last Day to Object to RFP or Evaluation Process Proposer October 24, 2022 Contract Award (City Council approval) City TBD (November 2022) Contract Begins City December 1, 2022
626 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
7 B. RFP Distribution
A prospective Food Services Provider may receive this RFP by mail, e-mail, in-person or online at https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/finance/purchasing/rfp-rfq-bid-page. Distribution of the RFP in no way represents the City’s acceptance of a Food Services Provider’s qualifications, reputation, or ability to perform the Services.

C. Mandatory Proposer Conference
A MANDATORY Proposer Conference will be held on September 8, 2022. If a Proposer is unable to attend, a representative must be present. Failure to do so will result in rejection of a Proposal.

Attendees or their representatives will be required to sign-in at the conference. The conference will be held at the Adult Recreation Center – 201 E. Colorado Street, Glendale, CA 91205. Check in at the front desk. 90-minute free parking is available in the structure at Maryland and Harvard. In the event of a Los Angeles County and/or City of Glendale order to cancel in-person meetings due to the evolving situation with the COVID-19 pandemic, a virtual proposer’s conference will be made available to attendees in place of an in-person conference. Notice of a virtual conference will be sent out informing prospective Proposers.

The purpose of the Proposer Conference is to ensure that Proposers have adequate information to respond fully and comprehensively to the City’s requirements. During the conference, City staff will discuss with prospective Proposers the work to be performed and answer questions arising from Proposers’ initial review of this RFP. Proposers should have reviewed the RFP thoroughly prior to the conference and Proposers should be familiar with its content, as well as the City’s functional and technical requirements.

Proposers may e-mail questions to Aylin Isayan ([email protected]) prior to the conference.

D. Proposal Deadline and Proposal Submission
The City must receive the Proposal on or before 5:00 p.m., September 30, 2022. A Proposal received after this date and time will be considered non-responsive and the City will return the Proposal, unopened.

A Proposal must be submitted on the attached Proposal Form package. Oral, telephonic, facsimile, telegraphic, or electronically transmitted Proposals are invalid and the City will not accept or consider them.

Proposer must submit four (4) printed Proposal documents [one (1) original and three (3) copies] in a sealed, clearly labeled envelope (or box). A Proposal may be delivered by mail or in person.

The Proposal must be clearly marked “Elderly Nutrition Program Proposal” and addressed to:

City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
Attention: Aylin Isayan
201 East Colorado Street, Glendale, CA 91205
627 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
8 E. Interim Inquiries and Responses; Interpretation or Correction of RFP If a Proposer has any question about this RFP, the proposed Contract, or the scope of work― or if a Proposer finds any error, inconsistency, or ambiguity in the RFP, or the proposed Contract, or both― the Proposer must make a “Request for Clarification” before submitting its Proposal.

The Proposer must submit a Request for Clarification to: Aylin Isayan via email at [email protected]
The City must receive the Request for Clarification on or before 5:00 p.m., September 19, 2022.

If necessary, the City will make clarifications, interpretations, corrections, or changes to the RFP, or the proposed Contract, or both, in writing by issuing Addenda, as described in Section IIF (below). A Proposer must not rely upon, and the City is not bound by, purported clarifications, interpretations, corrections, or changes to the RFP and the proposed Contract, that are made verbally or in a manner other than a written advisory from the City.

F. Addenda
The City will issue Addenda in writing only. The City will make reasonable efforts to deliver Addenda to all Proposers whom the City knows have received the RFP and have provided a street address and email address for receipt of Addenda. The City cannot guarantee that all Proposers will receive all Addenda.

Proposers may also inspect the Addenda at the Adult Recreation Center, during its business hours, Monday - Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. This RFP is also on file there.

At any time before the “Proposal Deadline” (Section IID of this RFP), the City may issue Addenda withdrawing the RFP or postponing the Proposal Deadline. However, if any Addenda results in a material change to this RFP, or the proposed Contract, or both, the City will extend the Proposal Deadline by not less than seventy-two (72) hours.

The City will treat transmittal of Addenda to Proposers e-mail as sufficient notice of the changes made by the City.

III. General Requirements and Instructions
A. Examination of Documents
Before submitting an RFP Response, each Food Service Provider must:
 Make all necessary investigations, examine documents, and understand the Food Service Specifications (EXHIBIT I) and Menu Writing Specifications (EXHIBIT II) as required by the Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department.
628 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
9  Be able to furnish the City with valid insurance forms (including insurance certificates and additional insured endorsements) in compliance with the Insurance Requirements described in EXHIBIT V.
 Thoroughly examine the RFP. A thorough review of this RFP is critical to obtaining an in-depth understanding of the requirements of this RFP.
 Inspect the kitchen facilities at the Adult Recreation Center.

B. Proposer’s Representations in the Response
By submitting a Proposal, a Proposer represents that:
 The RFP is sufficient in scope and detail to indicate and convey reasonable understanding of all requirements, terms, and conditions for performance of the work required in this project;  The Proposer has exercised all necessary due diligence in making investigations and inquiries, examining documents, and inspecting City sites and facilities for this project;  The Proposer is fully familiar with— and has fully considered— all facts, conditions, circumstances, and matters that may affect, in any way, the Proposer's services or costs;  The Proposal is an irrevocable offer for a period of at least ninety (90) calendar days following City’s opening of all Proposals; and
 The Proposer is, and will be, in compliance with the RFP’s requirements, terms, and conditions.

C. Withdrawal, Cancellation, or Modification of a Proposal Before the Proposal Deadline, a Proposer may withdraw and then modify a Proposal, by giving written notice, signed by the Proposer. A withdrawal request must be addressed as follows and delivered to:

City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
Attention: Aylin Isayan
201 East Colorado Street
Glendale, CA 91205
For a withdrawal to become effective, the City must receive the Proposer’s request for withdrawal before the Proposal Deadline. The City will not accept or consider a Proposer’s verbal request for modification or withdrawal of a Proposal.

If a Proposer withdraws its Proposal, the withdrawal will not prejudice the Proposer’s right to submit a new Proposal, if the new Proposal is submitted: (a) in accordance with the RFP’s requirements, and (b) before the Proposal Deadline.
629 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
10 After the Proposal Deadline, a Proposer must not withdraw, cancel, or modify its Proposal for a period of at least ninety (90) calendar days following the Proposals’ opening on October 3, 2022 subject to the exception described in the next paragraph below. The City may extend the 90-day period upon the City’s written request and upon the affected Proposers’ written approval.

The City may allow a Proposer to withdraw or cancel a Proposal after the opening of the Proposals, if the Proposer establishes, to the City’s satisfaction, that all of the following circumstances exist:

1. The Proposer made a mistake in its Proposal;

2. Within five (5) days after the Proposal’s opening, the City receives from the Proposer written notice of the mistake and the notice specifies in detail how the mistake occurred;

3. The mistake made the Proposal materially different from what the Proposer had intended it to be; and

4. The mistake was made in filling out the Proposal and was not due to error in judgment, or carelessness in reading the RFP or the proposed Contract.

D. Proposal Preparation Expenses
Expenses for developing the RFP response are entirely the responsibility of the Proposer and are not chargeable to the City in any manner. The City is not liable for any pre-contractual expenses, which are defined as expenses incurred by Proposer in:
 Preparing its Proposal in response to this RFP.
 Negotiating with the City any matter related to the Proposal.  Any other expense incurred by Proposer prior to the date of award of the Contract for this RFP.

E. Insurance
Specific insurance requirements are noted in EXHIBIT V (“Insurance Requirements”), and evidence of the insurance coverages will need to be in place before the start of the work. The City will require certificates of insurance and additional insured endorsements when the successful Food Service Provider submits a signed Contract to the City. A Food Service Provider does not need to submit proof of insurance to submit a Proposal, but must be prepared to meet all City insurance requirements (with no additional cost to the City), if the Food Service Provider is awarded a Contract.

A Proposer must submit to its insurance company, or insurance agent, the “Insurance Requirements” in this RFP and the proposed Contract. The insurance company’s underwriter or agent must complete the “Insurance Requirements Affidavit” (at page PF:32 of the attached PROPOSAL FORMS) which states that the insurer’s underwriter or agent will furnish the City with the required insurance documents within fourteen (14) calendar days after the Proposer’s having been notified of the Contract’s award. The Proposer must submit this form with its Proposal. The City may reject any Proposal made without this affidavit, or made with an incomplete affidavit form. 630 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
11 F. Proposer’s Indemnification of the City
At its expense, Proposer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against any and all liability, suits, actions, proceedings, judgments, claims, demands, liens, losses, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys’ fees, litigation, arbitration, mediation, appeal expenses) if a dispute, lawsuit, or other proceeding arises out of any one or more of the following:
 Proposer’s submitting the Proposal;
 The City’s accepting Proposer’s Proposal; or
 The City’s awarding a Contract to Proposer in compliance with this RFP, or state, federal, or local laws.

IV. Proposal Content and Format
A. Using the Attached Proposal Forms
“Proposal Forms” (PF:1 to PF:35) are attached to this RFP. A Proposer must submit its Proposal only on those forms. With its Proposal, the Proposer must submit various attachments (e.g., employees’ resumes, financial statements, a bank’s reference letter, and further explanations) that this RFP and the Proposal Forms describe.

The Proposer must fill in the blanks on the Proposal Forms, using a typewriter, printing legibly in ink, or using a fillable PDF. When answering the Proposal Forms’ questions, the Proposer must furnish pertinent and relevant information rather than merely provide promotional facts or materials. The Proposer must respond to the Proposal Forms’ questions with all applicable information, in order for the City to consider the Proposal as “responsive.”
If a Proposer fails to provide the information that the forms require, fails to return all of the forms, or fails to submit the required attachments, the City may treat the Proposal as “non-responsive.” The Proposer must place initials next to all interlineations, alterations, and erasures on the Proposal Forms.

The Proposer must not modify or qualify the Proposal Forms in any manner. Unauthorized conditions, exemptions, limitations, or provisions attached to a Proposal will render it informal and may cause its rejection.

With the Proposal each Proposer must submit the following attachments:
 Proposers’ resume and, if applicable, its employees’ resumes (See: PF:18);  Audited or reviewed financial statements, or compilations (See: PF:21); and  Bank’s reference letter (See: PF:21).
631 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
12 B. Identifying Proprietary Information; Public Records Act A Proposer must identify and list all copyrighted material, trade secrets, or other proprietary information (“protectable documents”) that the Proposer included in its Proposal which Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure under California’s Public Records Act, Government Code Section 6250, et seq. (See: PF:33).

By listing the documents, the Proposer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against any action, claim, lawsuit, or proceeding, including costs and expenses, arising out of or connected with the City’s refusal to disclose the protectable documents to any party making a request for those items.

The City will treat any Proposer, who fails to identify documents that the Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure, as having waived its right to an exemption from disclosure, as the Public Records Act provides.

All Proposals and other material submitted become the property of the City and may be returned only at the City’s option. The City reserves the right to use any ideas presented in any response to the RFP.

Selection or rejection of the Proposal does not affect this right.

C. Meal Rates
A Proposer must provide the total price per meal for the “Congregate Meal Program, Hot or Cold Meals/Boxed Lunches and “Home Delivered Meals Program, Frozen Meals” (See: PF:34).

D. Proposal Signature(s)
The person or persons legally authorized to bind the Proposer to the RFP must sign the Proposal. The individuals signing the Proposal must represent that they are authorized to bind the Proposer’s legal entity.  A corporation must execute the Proposal by its duly authorized officer(s) in accordance with its corporate bylaws.
 A partnership must execute the Proposal by all of its partners. After each signature, each partner must list a residential address or the firm’s address, either of which must include the state, zip code, and telephone number.
 If the Proposer is a joint venture consisting of a combination of any of the above entities, each entity in the joint venture must sign the Proposal.
 An individual signing a Proposal as an agent of another or others must attach to the Proposal evidence of that person’s legal authority to sign on behalf of another or others. 632 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
13 V. Method of Selection
All Proposals received on time will be opened on October 3, 2022. Proposals will first be reviewed to ensure compliance with the terms of this RFP. Non-compliant or non-responsive Proposals may be rejected. The City will then evaluate the Proposals in accordance with the criteria listed below.

A. Basis for Award and Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation of a Proposal will be based on a competitive selection process. Experience, references, demonstrated successes, and the proposed fee will be considered in the selection process. The City reserves the right to award the Contract not necessarily to a Proposer with the lowest cost proposal, but to a Proposer who will provide the best overall match to the RFP requirements and who best serves the City’s interests. Each Proposer’s submission will be evaluated and scored on the criteria listed below. Each criterion has a maximum allowable point.

Description Weight
Proposal Responsiveness:

A. Proposer has provided the information, document(s),
and other item(s) that the RFP specifies.

B. Proposer has proposed one or more modifications to
the Contract.

Pass/Fail
Proposal may be deemed non-responsive, or up to 10 Points may be deducted as follows:
-4 Points for modification to Indemnity provision
-4 Points for modification to Insurance provision
-1 to -2 Points for modification to one or more Contract provisions (other than indemnity orinsurance)
No Point Deduction for Proposer’s accepting Contract without Modification
Services requirements 20 Points
Quality of meal 20 Points
Cost per meal 25 Points
Qualifications of personnel and management 15 Points
Prior Experience 15 Points
References 5 points
MAXIMUM TOTAL POINTS 100
The City may investigate the qualifications of any Food Service Provider under consideration, require confirmation of information furnished by the Food Service Provider, and require additional information or evidence of qualifications to provide the Service described in this RFP. 633 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
14 B. Selecting a Food Service Provider
A panel comprised of City representatives and a member of the Senior Services Committee― selected by the Director of Community Services & Parks Department― will: 1) evaluate each RFP submission, 2) will select up to three finalists for an interview, and 3) will submit a final recommendation to the Director. The Director will submit a recommendation to the City Council for approval.

The City Council must approve an award of a Contract to the successful Proposer and no rights or obligations begin under an award until the approval is secured and a Contract has been duly signed by all parties.

Once selected, the successful Proposer must enter into a written Agreement with the City within fourteen (14) calendar days following Proposer’s receiving the City’s Notice of Award.

C. City’s Reservation of Rights
This RFP and the proposal evaluation process do not:
 Obligate the City to accept or select any Proposal;
 Constitute an agreement by the City that it will actually enter into any contract with any Proposer.

When it best serves the City’s interests, the City may do any one or more of the following:
 Reject any Proposal or all Proposals at its sole discretion.  Extend the deadline for accepting Proposals.
 Accelerate the pace of the RFP process if only one or a handful of Proposals are received.  Waive any or all information, defects, irregularities, or informalities in a Proposal.  Accept amendments to Proposals after the Proposal Deadline.  Amend, revise, or change the RFP’s evaluation or selection criteria.  Cancel, withdraw, amend, revise, change, or negotiate the terms of this RFP, the proposed Contract, or both.
 Reissue a Request for Proposals.
 Conduct oral interviews.
 Visit a Food Service Provider’s facilities or business.  Examine financial records of a Food Service Provider to the extent necessary to ensure financial stability.
 Make a partial award.
 Negotiate with one or more Food Service Providers.
 Award contracts to one or more Food Service Providers.  Require a best and final offer from one or more Food Service Providers.  Provide its own services for daily meals for the Elderly Nutrition Program, or contract directly— without an RFP or bids— for those services.
634 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
15 VI. Award of Contract
Within ninety (90) calendar days after the City opens all Proposals, if the City Council selects a Proposal, the City will give the selected Proposer a “Notice of Intent to Award Contract” that will specify the “start date” for performing the Contract’s services.

Once selected, the successful Proposer must enter into a written Agreement with the City within fourteen (14) calendar days following Proposer’s receiving the City’s “Notice of Intent to Award Contract” or within any extension that the City may allow. The RFP, or any part of it, and the Proposer’s responses, will be incorporated into and made a part of the Contract. A copy of the proposed Sample Contract is provided as EXHIBIT IV.

Before any services can commence, the selected Proposer will be required to execute the Contract, which is a standard form of agreement. To facilitate the project’s smooth and timely implementation, Proposers responding to this RFP shall review all the terms and conditions of the Contract, including, but not limited to, provisions relating to insurance, indemnity, and termination.

The City’s policy is that the Contract be accepted as is. By submitting a Proposal to the City in response to this RFP, each Proposer is deemed to have provided its approval to the Contract, accepting it without qualification. If a Proposer seeks limited modification of the Contract, then in the Proposal a Proposer must identify the proposed changes.

However, changes or qualifications to the Contract may be weighed in the evaluation of the Proposal. In the City’s determination, the City may deduct points in the scoring of the Proposal or the City may reject the Proposal as non-responsive, thereby taking no further action on it.

Further details on the point deductions are set forth in the chart on page 13 of this RFP (V. Method of Selection / A. Basis for Award and Evaluation Criteria).

The City reserves the right to further negotiate the terms and conditions of the Contract. The Proposer whom the City Council selects must cooperate with the City in good faith to negotiate, sign, and deliver the final Contract. The City will draft the Contract and may require the selected Proposer to attend one or more Contract negotiation conferences to discuss possible:
 Revisions to the Contract’s service-related terms, conditions, requirements, specifications, or minimum performance standards, other than the insurance and the indemnity provisions; and
 Additions to the Contract, by the parties’ mutual agreement, or as a City Ordinance or Resolution, the City’s Charter or Municipal Code, or any other law may require.

At any time, and for any reason, if contract negotiations with the selected Proposer fail to progress, to the City’s reasonable satisfaction, the City reserves the right to not only end negotiations with the selected Proposer, but also cancel the award and reject the Proposal. At its discretion, the City may then: reopen the proposal process; choose from among the remaining, if 635 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
16 any, qualified Proposers; reissue the RFP; negotiate directly with any Proposer for services; or choose not to contract for services.

Within fourteen (14) calendar days after the City issues the Notice of Intent to Award Contract, or within any extension that the City may allow, the selected Proposer must submit to the City all of the following items:
 The Contract, properly signed by the Proposer. (The City will notify the selected Proposer whether the Contract requires an ink signature or an authenticated electronic signature through DocuSign or Adobe Sign).
 Insurance certificates and additional insured endorsements that fully conform to the Contract’s requirements. (The City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager will review the required insurance).

If the selected Proposer has not changed any terms of the Contract, and if the insurance and the bond(s) conform to the Contract’s requirements, the City will sign the Contract and then provide the Proposer with a fully signed ink version, or an electronic version, of the Contract.

VII. Letter of Objection; Procedures
A Proposer, who believes that any part of this RFP is discriminatory against the Proposer or precludes the Proposer from being given reasonable consideration in the procurement process, must submit a letter, clearly stating the specific objections, the areas of concern, and a proposed method for resolving the objections. The Proposer, or the person who is duly authorized to represent the Proposer, must sign the correspondence. The City must receive the letter of objection on or before 5:00 p.m., October 24, 2022. The City will not consider any verbal objection. The letter of objection must be addressed as follows and delivered to:

City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
Attention: Aylin Isayan
201 East Colorado Street,
Glendale, CA 91205
Upon the City’s timely receipt of the objection letter, the City will review the Proposer’s contention(s). If the City decides that the RFP― whether in whole or in part― needs revision, the City will prepare Addenda, as described in Section IIF of this RFP. 636 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
17 EXHIBIT I – Food Service Specifications

STATEMENT OF WORK AND SCHEDULE
During the time of performance as set forth herein, the Contractor shall furnish all food, labor and equipment necessary to prepare and deliver individual meals and/or bulk food for persons 60 years of age and older, in compliance with the Title III Congregate and Home Delivered Nutrition standards as described in Federal, State and County regulatory statutes; the California Health and Safety Codes, more specifically the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law (CURFFL), as amended January 1, 2020 the older Americans Act (OAA), Amendment of 1992, and the Area Agency on Aging (AAA) Policy and Procedures.

To assure that meals are prepared in a safe, sanitary environment, in compliance with the California Health and Safety Codes, the AAA Policies and Procedures and Contracts Management Manual, the Contractor shall comply with the following requirements:

The Contractor shall hire a part-time Registered Dietitian (minimum 20 hours a week) who possesses a Bachelor’s degree and/or Master’s Degree in Nutrition/Dietetic with an institutional food service management emphasis from an accredited college or university, for supervision of the food services operation within the catering company and/or Central Kitchen; or
The Contractor shall hire a qualified Food Service Manager who possesses a B.S. degree in Food and Nutrition with emphasis on food service management or restaurant management from an accredited college or university, and/or two (2) years professional experience as a food service supervisor. No less than six (6) years of experience in the food service industry at a supervising level can be substituted for the 4-year degree requirements.

The Contractor must submit, to the County, the registration I.D. number and expiration date of Registered Dietitian along with complete verifiable resumes of the Registered Dietitian or Food Service Manager for the County’s Area Agency on Aging (AAA) approval.

The County may, at its sole discretion, waive this requirement or for repeated deficiencies of non-compliance, require the Contractor to fill both positions, and/or to expand the required positions to full time positions.

1. NUMBER OF MEALS
The minimum requirement is estimated at 57,680 meals and the maximum requirement is estimated at 156,000 meals annually with the following breakdown. There is no guarantee that the minimum number of meals will be ordered by the City of Glendale. 637 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
18 TOTAL ANNUAL MEALS (estimate)

Monday-Friday 31,200
Saturday 6,240
Sunday 6,240
Holidays N/A
Frozen Meals (Home Delivered) 14,000

GRAND TOTAL

ANNUAL MEALS
57,680

2. DELIVERY STANDARDS
a) The Contractor shall prepare and portion in bulk, all food and necessary supplies for the Congregate Meal program by 10:30 a.m. All food to be transported to satellite sites shall be placed in appropriate hot and cold boxes. A label shall be attached to each food product indicating name of meal locations, number of servings and size of serving.
b) The Contractor shall pack and portion all frozen food and supplies for the Home Delivered Meals program by 1:30 p.m. All food transported to client homes shall be placed in ice chests.
c) The meals shall be delivered as follows:

City of Glendale Meal Location Approx.
# Meals per
day
Time Food
Preparation
Completed
Time Food
Leaves the
Kitchen
Time Food
Arrives at
the Site
Congregate Meals Program
Adult Recreation Center
100 10:30am Food Prepared
for onsite dining
Food Prepared
for onsite dining.

Congregate Meals Program
Pacific Community Center
20 10:10am 10:30am 10:40am
Congregate Meals Program
Sparr Heights Community Center
60 10:10am 10:30am 11:00am
Home Delivered Meals Program 67
Food Prepared
at Contractor’s
Central
Kitchen
1:30 pm varies
c) The City reserves the right to add or delete Congregate meal sites or designate alternate meal locations, as appropriate, subject to approval by the AAA. 638 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
19 d) The City may change the days and time of delivery and service by giving the Contractor seven (7) days’ notice.
e) The City may change the number of meals to be delivered to any of the meal locations by notifying the Contractor by 2:00 pm of the day prior to delivery. f) The Contractor shall prepare Home Delivered Meals for City delivery no more than 50 minutes’ prior the agreed upon delivery time.
g) Food for Congregate Meals Program shall be served by the City; within two (2) hours after food preparation has been completed.
h) The last Home Delivered Meal shall be delivered by the City within two hours (2 hours) after food preparation has been completed.
i) The City shall deliver meals; all dirty dishes, silverware and pans shall be returned by the City to the Adult Recreation Center kitchen for cleanup by the Contractor. j) All food must be packaged under conditions that will ensure temperature control to prevent bacterial contamination, spillage, and/or insect infestation. Hot foods shall be delivered at a minimum temperature of 140F and cold foods at a maximum temperature of 40F. These temperatures must be maintained until serving time. k) Hot portion of meals (entree, vegetable, potatoes, etc.) to be cooked and prepared not more than two (2) hours before serving time.
l) Deliveries to the Adult Recreation Center kitchen and to satellite sites shall be accompanied by a delivery slip, executed in triplicate, designating the number of meals and supplies delivered. Delivery of invoices shall be signed by site manager and one copy left with same.
m) The Contractor shall be liable for meals that do not meet the nutritional standards and requirements, are spoiled or unwholesome at the time of delivery from Contractor’s Central Kitchen to the Adult Recreation Center kitchen and are incomplete or insufficient in number ordered, or are delivered after the time specified by the City. In the event the Contractor fails to deliver complete meals, other foods, or supplies as agreed upon from Contractor’s Central Kitchen, the City may provide a substitute meal with emergency meals or supplies purchased from other places and charge the cost of the purchased meal to the Contractor. n) If any portion of a meal other than the entrée is delivered from Contractor and/or their subcontractors to the Adult Recreation Center kitchen in an unacceptable condition, such as incorrect temperature (potentially hazardous) less than contracted portion, spoiled or too late, the Contractor shall be liable for the cost of that portion. If the entrée is unacceptable, the Contractor shall be liable for the 639 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
20 cost of the entire meal. All shortages shall be noted on the delivery slip for proper crediting.
o) A chemical analysis of any food delivered from Contractor’s Central Kitchen may be made by the City at any time. The Contractor agrees to cooperate in having the analysis made. If the analysis discloses that the food does not comply with these specifications, the Contractor shall be liable for the cost of the analysis. p) The Contractor and the City both agree to implement and/or maintain a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system as required by the AAA.

3. MEAL SERVICE
Contractor’s Responsibilities. The Contractor shall be responsible for the following:
a) Preparing all meals to be served at the Adult Recreation Center, Pacific Community Center and Sparr Heights Senior Center at the Adult Recreation Center Kitchen.

Home Delivered Meals may be prepared at an off-site location and transported to the Adult Recreation Center kitchen.
b) Maintaining all Health Department Regulations, CURFFL, OSHA, COSHA, Fire Department Codes, and Los Angeles County Area Agency on Aging. c) Complying with Los Angeles County Code Title 2 - Administration, Division 4, Chapter 2.212 (COVID-19 Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel) and Los Angeles County’s Subaward Requirements for COVID-19 Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel (Included in Sample Contract- Exhibit IV as “EXHIBIT K and EXHIBIT L”).
d) Developing and following a daily routine, as approved by the City, to maintain above-average cleanliness in Adult Recreation Center kitchen. The Adult Recreation Center’s grease interceptor is pumped by the City of Glendale four (4) times per fiscal year. If additional pumping is required over 4 times in a fiscal year, it will be the financial responsibility of the Contractor to do so. e) Securing all doors (interior and exterior) and windows nightly; and taking responsibility for facility keys to protect from theft and employee misuse. f) Allowing Adult Recreation Center kitchen to be used by community groups during evening and weekends. (Contractor shall use the Adult Recreation Center kitchen from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. daily).
g) Maintaining accurate records of food temperature at the time the food is placed in holding equipment and at the time the food is packed for transport to the satellite sites; taking and recording daily temperature readings of storeroom, freezer, and 640 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
21 refrigerator and submit all records at month’s end to Project Director; and maintaining other elements of a HACCP Program.
h) Completing an inventory of kitchen equipment at the beginning and conclusion of Contract, and replacing all items lost, broken, stolen or damaged by the Contractor.
i) Immediately repairing or replacing all appliances or large equipment that is damaged due to misuse or negligence by the Contractor.
j) Providing labor and supplies for the daily washing of all dishes, silverware, cooking utensils, pots, pans, etc., used to prepare and serve meals at all sites. k) Providing iodized salt, pepper, sugar and napkins for each site. l) Coordinating the time of meal preparation, kitchen cleaning and delivery by purveyors with the Project Director to minimize disruption of activities planned in adjacent rooms.
m) Ordering and being on-site to receive all necessary food, cleaning supplies and related items. (City of Glendale staff cannot accept or take the responsibility for deliveries while the Contractor is not on-site).
n) Following all standard cooking procedures, as specified by the Project Director or Project Dietitian, to ensure that the meals prepared will contain the maximum amount of essential nutrients. HACCP style recipes and food production schedules must be provided and followed.
o) Being able to provide upon request written specifications of ingredients for all convenience or processed food items.
p) Storing sufficient back-up supply of disposable marine biodegradable 9” plates, eating utensils and coffee cups on-site at the Adult Recreation Center to serve up to 200 people in the case of emergency.
q) Providing marine biodegradable paper products (plates, cups, knives, forks, spoons, etc.) to serve people when the Contractor’s employees are not available to wash dishes.
r) Notifying the Project Director of any substitutions on the menu due to non-delivery or other uncontrollable circumstances at least 24 to 48 hours prior to service. s) Providing emergency back-up food at satellite sites. t) Providing any additional cooking utensils necessary to prepare meals that are not provided by the City.
641 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
22 u) Providing all necessary linen for meal preparation and cleanup. v) Providing telephone services as necessary for the catering operation.

City’s Responsibilities. The City shall be responsible for the following:
a) Repairing the City’s building, grounds and equipment which may need repair because of normal or ordinary wear. The City will clean and pump the grease interceptor four (4) times per fiscal year.
b) Assuming financial responsibility for utilities such as gas, water, electricity, except if the City determines that the Contractor is not following adequate conservation measures. After the City has given written notice to the Contractor, the City may elect to bill the Contractor for utility charges exceeding a reasonable, acceptable level, as determined by the City.
c) Providing the Adult Recreation Center kitchen with mobile refrigerator/freezer, walk-in refrigerator/freezer, range, convection oven, dishwasher, mixer, slicer, Crescor ovens, Cambros boxes, performance coolers, work tables, small tableware, small kitchenware, hot and cold boxes to transfer bulk meals, locking cabinets, storage space and other miscellaneous equipment. The City will maintain keys to the freezer and refrigerators and reserves the right, at any time, to inspect any equipment, including storage rooms, freezer and refrigerators. d) Providing tableware, including meal plates, forks, knives, spoons, bowls, and straws. d) Cleaning the Adult Recreation Center kitchen following community groups’ use. f) Providing “Grab and Go” lunch products including: bags, food storage containers, utensils, and other items for pandemic response food delivery method.

4. MENUS
a) All menus shall be in compliance with Title III-C Menu Writing Specifications for 2022-2023 (EXHIBIT II).
b) C-1: A five-week menu cycle shall be used that is written once yearly.

Traditional Meal Menu (5-week cycle)
Pandemic Altered Meal Menu (Sample Menu)
C-2: A four-week menu cycle shall be used that is written once yearly.

Traditional HDM Meal Menu (5-week cycle)
Emergency Meals Menu
642 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
23 The City has the responsibility for menu writing and duplicating, with input from the Contractor. The menu shall be approved by the Dietary Administrative Support Services (DASS) Contractor Dietitian.
b) All menus must be signed by the Project Director, the Dietary Administrative Support Services Contractor Dietitian, and certified by the AAA nutritionist prior to the start of the menu cycle.
d) All menu substitutions by the Contractor shall be submitted in writing for approval by the Project Director or Dietary Administrative Support Services Contractor Dietitian at least five (5) days prior to serving date. The Contractor may, however, in an emergency situation, make menu substitutions on verbal approval of the Project Director or Dietary Administrative Support Services Contractor Dietitian, with a written notice to follow for documentation. e) The Contractor shall make provisions to provide in-service training regarding food sanitation and safety for their food service staff. Documentation of such training shall be submitted to the City. The county Area Agency on Aging may require the City, based upon major finding of noncompliance items in food and safety, to provide additional food service training.
f) All menus will be identical at all sites unless otherwise specified by the City. g) The Contractor shall provide a birthday cake in place of regular desert once a month as specified by the Project Director.
h) The Contractor shall provide for holiday meal menus on the day specified for a holiday event. This will not occur on Los Angeles recognized holidays, but rather on alternate celebration days.

5. MEAL PATTERN SPECIFICATIONS
a) All food must be of the highest quality standard and conform to USDA requirements. It must be prepared in a manner to preserve optimum flavor and appearance while retaining nutrients and food value. Special consideration should be given to tenderness of meat because of the age of our participants. b) Minimum grades for all foods shall be as follows:

Beef: USDA Grade A choice
Pork: USDA Number 1 (as defined in SRA., Number 171, U.S.

Standards and Grades of Pork Carcasses)
Lamb: USDA Choice
643 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
24 Poultry: USDA Grade A to be used for all fresh or frozen poultry products.

Necks, backs, nor wings, alone shall not be used prior approval of the Project Director or project designee.

Variety Meats:Grade Number 1 from USDA Government inspected plants Dairy Products: The following is to be used as minimum specifications for all Graded dairy products:
a. Eggs, fresh USDA or State Graded A
b. Cheese, USDA Grade A, non-processed cheese
c. Milk: nonfat, 1% low-fat, shall be available
Fish and seafood must be fresh or frozen and be nationally distributed brand packed under continuous inspection of the U.S. Department of Interior Canned fruits and juices: USDA Grade A (Fancy) and Grade B (Choice) are to be used for all graded fruits and fruit juices. Grade C (Standard) may be used for pies and cobbler production only.

Fresh Fruits: USDA Fancy to USDA No. 1 to be used for all graded fresh fruits as a minimum standard.

Fresh vegetables: USDA Fancy and No. 1 to be used for all graded fresh vegetables as a minimum standard.

Frozen fruits and vegetables: USDA Grade A to be used for all graded frozen fruits and vegetables as a minimum standard.

7. EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR
The City and the Dietary Administrative Support Services (DASS) Dietitian shall evaluate the Contractor’s performance to determine if it is in compliance with meeting requirements. All evaluations must be sent to AAA nutritionist.

8. RECEIPTS AND INVOICES PROCEDURES
a) The Contractor shall issue daily delivery receipts to each site. b) After the close of each calendar month, the Contractor shall furnish to the City an invoice of meals ordered by the program for the previous month. The City will pay such invoices monthly for the month prior within 30 days after receipt of final 644 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
25 monthly invoice for the month. The Contractor’s failure to maintain current insurance and provide verification may result in delayed payments. 645 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
26 EXHIBIT II – MENU WRITING SPECIFICATIONS
These specifications are provided by Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department and are subject to change at the discretion of that agency. The City and the Contractor are required to adhere to these specifications and any subsequent changes to these specifications.

Menu Writing Specifications are provided by Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department and from the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020-2025. ______________________________________________________________________ These menu writing specifications and requirements are developed to facilitate the menu writing process and encourage agencies and caterers to meet the new Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) included in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020-2025.

The specifications will assist agencies and project dietitians in providing nutritious, appetizing, tasty, and cost effective Title IIIC meals for the seniors we serve.

GENERAL RECIPE AND SPECIFICATION SHEET REQUIREMENTS

1. If a food item is purchased ready prepared, a food specification sheet is required.

Serving size, nutritional analysis, and brand name should be included. Copy the Nutrition Panel on the food label, or obtain Food Specification sheets (cut sheets) from your suppliers. The baseline goal for the amount of sodium allowable in ready prepared or processed entrees is 400-450mg.

2. Experiment with herbs, seasonings, and flavor blends that do not contain sodium.

3. If your agency or caterer develops a low sodium recipe popular with seniors, PLEASE SHARE IT.

4. Recipes must include a Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) plan detailing safe food handling procedures for all menu items made by the Central Kitchen or Caterer.

5. Each agency and/or caterer may use standardized HACCP recipes, or may modify their own recipes to meet HACCP requirements. Standardized recipes are included in the L.A. County Foodservice Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Manual.

6. HACCP recipes developed by agencies and caterers should follow the recipe format found in the SOP Manual, or follow the format outline in the National Restaurant Association’s (NRAs) HACCP Reference Book. Each recipe should note the Critical Control Point (CCPs) and Potentially Hazardous Foods (PHF’s).

7. Agencies and caterers are encouraged to try new recipes. The recipe must be put in a HACCP format when it is added to the cycle menu. 646 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
27 8. All food specification sheets and HACCP recipes must be on file by July 1st of each fiscal year.

9. It is critical that the Elderly Nutrition Nutritional Analysis for FY 2022-2023 the most recent menu cycle that was completed by the (DASS) contractor be an integrated part of the menu writing process. The Project Dietitian will provide this analysis as a part of the menu review and planning process. This analysis highlights critical components of the menu and provides a focus for menu planning and improving.

10.The “Menu Writing Template” must be utilized as a part of the menu development process. This template is to be completed first prior to typing the menu. It is a valuable tool and aid in ensuring that items are properly meeting the specifications (such as no bac to back entrees, etc.) and all requirements are met. The template worksheets should be all on one sheet to easily see if there are duplications for any of the components. Once the template has been checked and verified to meet requirements, the menu can be typed. An accurate template must be turned in with your completed menu as they assist with the review and certification process. Menus will not be accepted without the menu template.

GENERAL MENU REQUIREMENTS

1. All menus using nutritional analysis must be updated for nutritional content.

Nutritional content can be averaged each week to see if nutrient standards have been met. However, the menu must contain at least 25mg Vitamin C every day, 233ug Vitamin A on a at least three out of five different days of the week or four out of seven days a week and 200 IU of vitamin D daily (may be averaged over the week). Serve potassium rich food consistently.

2. The component meal pattern template may be used instead of nutrition analysis for determining nutritional adequacy. If the component method is used, the AAA Standardized Menu Form must be used. The menu must meet the Senior Meal Patterns requirements. The menu must contain at least 25mg Vitamin C every day, and 233 ug Vitamin A three times per week in a 5-day program, or four times per week in a 7 day-program. Vitamin C sources must be indicated by; Vitamin A sources must be indicated by two ** Two foods can be used to provide the Vitamin C or the Vitamin A. However, the amount that each component provides must be noted on the menu and totaled at the bottom of the menu for that day. The menu must contain at least ½ serving of whole grains each day, with each serving providing at least 3-grams of fiber. Sodium that exceeds 1,000 mg must be noted with a ‘+’ symbol and can only be used in a holiday menu with ethnic catered menus being exempt. Potassium rich foods must be on the menu consistently and notes with an ‘=’ symbol. For HOLIDAY meals exceeding 1,000 mg sodium the amount of Potassium must be noted at the bottom of the menu column 647 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
28 for that meal. If for any reason the menu does not meet the menu component requirements, the Nutrition Project must obtain the approval of the AAA Nutritionist and/or DASS RD.
 Senior Component Meal Pattern Requirements:

Food Group Required
Servings Per
Meal
2020 Dietary Guidelines Servings Per
Meal
Meat or meat
alternate
3 oz. 
 3 oz. servings whole or ground meats,
chicken or fish. Limited ground meat to
two times per week for a five day menu or
three times per week for a seven-day
menu.
3 oz.  3oz meat or meat alternate used in
casserole dishes.
 Limit casseroles to two times per week.
 3 oz. meat or meat alternate used in salad
entrée recipes
 2 oz. meat or meat alternate used in
sandwich recipes.
 Limit sandwiches to one time per week.

Vegetable/Fruit 1-2 servings  1 to 1 ½ cups total servings of vegetables and fruits.
 Serve 3 servings a minimum of 2 times per
week.
 ½ cup lettuce salad counts as ½ serving.
 ½ cup or 1 piece of fruit for dessert counts
as 1 serving.

Grain/Bread 1-2 servings  1 to 2 servings per meal such as 1 slice whole grain bread or ½ cup rice, pasta.
 There must be at least ½ serving of whole
grain daily.
 Frequently use brown rice, whole grain
pasta, or half brown and white rice mixture.
 Try to incorporate grains like quinoa,
bulgur, or barley.

Fiber 7 grams May be averaged over the week
Milk 1 serving 1 cup; Serve 1% fat or non-fat milk.

Fats Optional—1
serving Transfat free
Margarine
1 teaspoon or equivalent measure.

No trans fats or foods containing trans fats
can be served.**
648 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
29 Dessert 1 serving fruit
grain/bread, or
dairy
½ cup
 Fruit (Serve daily)
 Non fruit-based desserts including
milk-based, baked (cookies) or gelatin
should be served no more than once
per week.

Water 6-8 ounces Must be provided daily at Congregate Sites.

Beverages
Optional
Beverages (regular and decaffeinated coffee
and tea) do not contribute to meeting the
meal pattern and are not an allowable AAA
expense.

Menu Writing Components

3. All FY 2022-2023 menus must be provided on the revised menu forms. This includes holiday, frozen and box lunch menus.

4. Review the nutritional analysis of the menu provided by the DASS contractor of the current menu cycle in order to improve menu planning, as needed, review menu preferences of senior population and items from QA meetings as a part of the menu planning.

5. All cycle menus shall be planned for a minimum of four weeks or a maximum of six weeks, approved by the Project Dietitian, and approved/certified by the DASS contractor. Menus must be certified once per year.

6. To increase variety, include entrée alternates in the cycle. The agency can serve alternate one in the first month, alternate two in the next cycle. Menus will be analyzed using both alternates.

7. Two to four times a month, have a “Choice Day” when the seniors can select one of two entrees served. Pair a popular item like pork chops with one not so popular, like fish to increase the variety of entrees served.

8. The menu cycle should include holiday meals, ethnic meals, box lunches, special breakfast and/or dinner menus. Special menus should be substituted in the menu at least once per month to add variety and interest. The Project Dietitian must approve all menu substitutions.

9. Serve an entrée salad twice a month during July, August, and September.

10.Serve soup with sandwich and salad meals on the standard menu. 649 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
30 11.Menus shall reflect seasonal availability of food. The term “Seasonal fruit” may be listed on the menu no more than once per week. If the fruit is the Vitamin C source, the type of fruit must be identified.

12.Most meals providing one-third of the DRI’s containing on average approximately 550 to 700 calories. There must be no less than 550 calories.

13.The sodium content must target 760mg per meal average over the number of meals per week. A high sodium meal can only be provided as a holiday menu, excluding ethnic catered menus. In addition, Potassium rich foods must be identified with an [=] symbol and the total Potassium for the meal must be noted at the bottom of the meal column. When possible, use low sodium cheese, meats and sauces. The sodium levels of all processed foods MUST be listed on the menu. It is the caterer’s responsibility to provide this information during the menu planning phase. This would include such items as ready prepared or processed meat lasagna, stuffed cabbage, stuffed peppers, breaded meat or chicken patties, etc.

14.Low sodium products to make soups, gravies, and sauces MUST be used. The Caterer/Central Kitchen needs to provide a copy of the nutrition facts label from sauces, salad dressings, and other prepared foods. Use herbs, spices, and lemon that do not contain sodium to enhance the flavor of food prepared. Do not use monosodium glutamate (MSG).

15.Limit use of ground meat or poultry to twice per week for 5 days per week programs and to three times per week for 7 days per week programs. One of the products must be a formed ground meat product.

16.Encourage low fat methods of preparation (bake instead of fry), and use of reduced fat products such as 1% and nonfat milk. Meals should contain less than 35% with a target of 20-35% total calories from fat (may average over a week).

17.Trans fat free oils must be used in food preparation. Trans fat free prepared entrees crackers, and desserts shall be served. A trans-fat free prepared food contains less than 0.5 grams’ trans-fat per serving. There cannot be any Trans Fats.

18.Food items shall be varied within the week and within the menu cycle. a. Avoid having the same entree, fruit, vegetable or dessert on the same day of the following week. For example, do not serve turkey on Monday of two consecutive weeks.
650 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
31 b. Do not use the same meat, poultry starch, vegetable, or fruit, even in a different form, two consecutive days in a row. For example, do not serve apple juice on Monday and baked apple on Tuesday.
c. Provide a variety of foods and preparation methods. Consider color, different food combinations, texture, size, shape, taste, and appearance.

19.Specify foods used. For example, identify vegetables used in vegetable soup and stew; the type of gelatin and fruit used in fruited gelatin; the specific fruit used for dessert; or fruits used in a fruit cup. If vegetable soup provides the vegetable serving for the day, then ensure that ½ cup of vegetable is in each portion.

20.Indicate the type of dressings for salads. Use dressings low in saturated fat and sodium. Program must now offer at least one low-sodium salad dressing option (such as oil and vinegar) as a choice.

21.Specify the types and amounts of gravies, sauces, and relishes to be served.

22.Double check that the word “Fortified” is indicated for margarine, and “Vitamin C Fortified” for juice and mashed potatoes if appropriate.

23.Serving sizes and/or serving implements must be included for all items served.

Example: 2 peanut butter cookies; 4 oz. grapefruit juice; 2” x 2” spice cake; 2 4- oz ladles beef stew.

24.Encourage a switch from Styrofoam cups, plates, and bowls. Start using paper or reusable dishware. City has implemented a policy to begin using marine biodegradable paper products or reusable dishware. Ordinance:
https://library.qcode.us/lib/glendale_ca/pub/municipal_code/item/title_8- chapter_8_46

25.Menus must be typed and is the responsibility of the agency, not the Project Dietitian.

26.It is the Project Dietitian’s responsibility to carefully review the menus aftr they have been typed to ensure all menu requirements are met, and to correct any errors.

27.When the menu has been approved by the Project Dietitian, e-mail one complete menu to the DASS contractor (CNS). Be sure the agency maintains a copy. The menu must be a Word Document, not a pdf file. Do not fax or mail menus.

Menus must be submitted electronically except for the Menu Cover Sheet (the signed original which must be mailed to CNS). The Menu Cover Sheets must be completed in full prior to mailing to CNS.
651 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
32 The certified cycle menu for each week shall be posted in a conspicuous spot in the kitchen at each congregate meal site. The Site Manager shall check the certified menu for the proper serving utensils (such as scoops, spoodles and ladles) needed to serve each meal. The approved menu shall be available for seniors.

28.All menu substitutions must be pre-approved by the Project Dietitian. Serving unapproved menu changes may result in disallowed costs for the meals by the AAA.

MEAL COMPONENTS

1. Protein: Include a variety of protein foods from both animal & plant sources:
3 oz. protein equivalent from the protein subgroups:

Meat (lean), Poultry and Eggs Seafood
Beans, Pea & Lentils Soy Products (Includes Tofu)
Must provide 15-22 grams of protein from the 3 oz protein equivalent.

The meal shall contain 3 ounces of cooked, edible portions of meat, fish, poultry, legumes, eggs, cheese (or a combination there of) or, in casserole dishes, entrée salads, and sandwiches, 3 oz of cooked, edible portions of meat, fish, poultry or fish providing at least 15 grams of protein for one meal per day. Meat and poultry should be lean or low fat, and nuts should be unsalted.
a. If proteins normally high in sodium are served for variety and client satisfaction, use low sodium versions whenever possible. b. Serve legume dishes using mature dried beans, peas, and lentils as often as possible in accordance with participant acceptance. Try to include legumes at least once per week. Each serving must provide 15mg protein. c. Legume dishes may not be counted as both a vegetable and a protein in the same meal.
d. Soups containing at least one-half cup of beans, lentils, or split peas may be counted as one ounce of protein/meat. Soup containing one ounce of protein/meat must be served with an entrée containing at least two ounces of meat.
e. 3 oz. tofu equals 6gm of protein. Entrees must at least have 15gm of protein.

2. Vegetables: Include a variety of vegetables from all five subgroups Minimum of 1-2 servings with at least one serving from each subgroup per week.

Vegetable subgroups;
652 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
33 1. Dark Green Vegetables Red &7 Orange Vegetables Beans, Peas, Lentils

2. Starchy Vegetables Other Vegetables
One Serving is ½ c or 1 c raw leafy greens. Some Servings may be more than ½ cup to meet the vitamin C requirements, such as coleslaw. Refer to the certified menu.
a. Vegetables as a primary ingredient in soups, stews, casseroles or other combination dishes must total ½ cup per serving.
b. One serving of raw leafy vegetables equals 1 cup. ½ cup of raw leafy greens may be served, but is counted as ½ serving.
c. Legume dishes may not be counted as both a vegetable and a protein in the same meal.
d. Potatoes and sweet potatoes count as vegetables. Cornbread counts as a grain, but not a whole grain. Sweet corn would be a vegetable.

4. Fruits: Must have 1-serving DAILY with at least ½ of the fruit from whole fruit.

One serving Equals: Whole fruit includes 1 medium, ½ c fresh, chopped, cooked, frozen or canned (in juice) ¼ c dried fruit, or ½ c 100% fruit juice. [Recommend limiting juice to 2Xweek & must have ½ serving of whole fruit with it. a. A serving of fruit is generally:

1. Medium sized whole fruit

2. ½ cup dried fruit

3. ½ cup 100% fruit juice
b. Vitamin C fortified juice bases may be used as vitamin C sources, but do not count as servings of fruit.
c. Fresh, frozen, or canned fruit should be packed in juice, light syrup, or water.

Rinse fruit packed in heavy sugar syrup.
d. Fruit- Based desserts, such as pies or cobblers, may not be used to meet the full required servings for fruit in a meal. If it contains at least ¼ c fruit it may be counted as a half serving.

5. Grains 1-2 servings DAILY with at least half of the total grains a whole grain.

One serving Equals: 1 slice bread, ½ c cooked brown rice, pasta, quinoa, bulgur, barley, 1-6” corn tortilla, 1 oz. whole wheat crackers. All must be trans-fat free. 653 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
34 A variety of whole grain products should be consumed. Recommended are those highest in fiber (barley, brown rice, buckwheat, bulgur, oats, quinoa, whole rye, and whole wheat.

1. A variety of whole grain product should be consumed. Recommended are those highest in fiber (barley, brown rice, buckwheat, bulgur, oats, quinoa, whole rye, and whole wheat.
a. There must be ½ serving of a whole grain each day.
b. Grains that are processed (not whole) must be fortified. c. High sodium grains are to be used only in conjunction with low sodium entrees. This would include cornbread, biscuit, large flour tortillas and the large French rolls. ½ of French roll could be used to cut sodium to 200mg.

6. Dairy & Soy Alternatives- Include 1-serving daily.

One serving Equals: 8oz. (1 cup) of fat-free or 1% milk or yogurt OR fortified Soy beverage OR fortified soy yogurt.
a. Each meal shall contain eight ounces of vitamin A&D fortified skim, reduced fat, or buttermilk (maximum of 1% milk fat) or fortified soy beverage OR fortified soy yogurt. Low-lactose and lactose-free dairy products are available le for individuals who are lactose intolerant. b. Products made from plants (e.g., almond, rice, coconut, oat and hemp “milk”) are not included as a part of the dairy group because their overall nutritional content is not similar to dairy milk and fortified soy beverages. c. Cream, sour cream and cream cheese are not included due to their low calcium content.
d. If religious preference precludes the acceptance of milk with the meal, it may be omitted from the menu. However, another substitute (dry milk solids or fortified soy milk) should be available.

6. Fat
Fat is not a requirement. Each meal may contain fat components to increase the palatability and acceptability of the meal. Trans fat free fat or oils may be used in food preparation or served as an accompaniment to the meal. 654 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
35 a. Fats and oils are part of a healthful diet. The type of fat consumed makes a difference to heart health, and total amount consumed is also important.
i. Consume less than 10% of calories from saturated fatty acids Foods containing trans fatty acids cannot be used for preparation or service.
b. Keep total fat intake between 20 to 35% of calories. Use sources of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, such as fish, nuts, and vegetable oils.
i. Select lean, low-fat, or fat-free meats, poultry. Chose low-fat or fat-free beans, milk, and milk products.

7. Other/Optional [Dessert/Condiments]- Limit sweets to once per week, all must be trans-fat free.
a. One Serving Equals: ½ cup pudding, fruit crisp, gelatin, ice cream or 2 small cookies, cake or pie OR Yogurt Parfait.
b. When serving pudding or gelatin consider using a sugar-free product for all participants.
c. If a high calorie dessert is served, it must be trans-fat free. d. Salt substitute shall not be provided.
e. Sugar substitutes, pepper, herbal seasonings, lemon, vinegar, non-dairy creamer, salt, and sugar may be provided, but do not count as fulfilling any part of the nutrient requirements.
f. Salad dressings, salsa, hot sauce, ketchup, soy sauce, mustard, mayonnaise do not need to be counted as long as they are served on the side and are not mixed in with the food.
g. Shelf stable meals may be used as emergency supplies. Meals must follow menu standards. If purchased for emergencies, the meals must be used before or discarded after the use by/expiration date. h. Vitamin and or mineral supplements shall not be provided. i. Medical foods, nutritional supplements and food for special dietary uses shall not be provided with federal or state nutrition funds. 655 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
36 8. Water 6-8 oz. Daily- Vital hydration, water must be ready accessible to participants during mealtimes. The water can be bottled or can be provided from pitchers or a water cooler with cups available. Optional beverages (regular and decaffeinated coffee and tea) do not contribute to meeting 1/3 RDA and are not an allowable AAA expense.

9. Fat- Fat is not a requirement. Each meal may contain fat components to increase the palatability and acceptability of the meal. Trans-fat free margarine or oils may be used in food preparation or served as an accompaniment to the meal.
a. Fats and oils are part of a healthful diet. The type of fat consumed makes a difference to heart health, and total amount consumed is also important.  Consume less than 10% of calories from saturated fats. Foods containing trans fatty acids cannot be used for preparation or service.  Keep total fat intake between 20% to 35% of calories. Use sources of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, such as fish, nuts, and vegetable oils.
656 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
37 EXHIBIT III – 2022-2023- Menu
The City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program 2022-2023 Approved menu is attached on the following pages for your review. This menu is in effect through June 30, 2023. 657 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
38 658 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
39 659 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
40 660 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
41 661 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
42 662 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
43 663 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
44 664 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
45 665 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
46 666 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
47 667 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
48 668 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
49 669 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
50 670 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
51 671 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
52 672 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
53 673 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
54 EXHIBIT IV – Sample Contract
The proposed Contract is set forth below. THIS IS A DRAFT VERSION OF THE CONTRACT.

The City reserves the right to revise this proposed Contract, including its service-related terms, conditions, requirements, specifications, or minimum performance standards. THE FINAL VERSION MAY CONTAIN NEW OR DIFFENENT TERMS.

CONTRACT No.

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT*

BETWEEN THE CITY OF GLENDALE
AND
____________________
THIS LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT (“Lower Tier Subaward”), effective , 20 (“Effective Date”), is between the City of Glendale ("SUBRECIPIENT"), a municipal corporation, and _________________ (“LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT”), a [(Name of State) corporation/ partnership/ limited partnership/ limited liability company/ a sole proprietor/ an individual] (collectively, “PARTIES” or individually, “PARTY”).

RECITALS

1. This Lower Tier Subaward is:

A. A contract for services that the PARTIES make under the terms of a prime Subaward (identified as Subaward Number ENP______)— between the County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department (“AD”) and the SUBRECIPIENT— which is attached as “Exhibit A” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference; and
B. Subject to all the provisions of the prime Subaward, and all representations and warranties under this Lower Tier Subaward inure to the benefit of the County of Los Angeles.

2. SUBRECIPIENT is a public entity organized and existing under its Charter and the State of California’s Constitution.

3. Under the Older Americans Act Grant awarded to SUBRECIPIENT by Los Angeles County, SUBRECIPIENT operates an Elderly Nutrition Program that provides daily catered meal service for both congregate and homebound seniors at three meal sites. SUBRECIPIENT provides hot meal / prepared boxed lunch services seven days per week, as well as frozen / home delivered meal services five days per week for homebound clients.
674 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
55 4. SUBRECIPIENT desires to hire a qualified and experienced food services provider to:

A. Serve as the LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT under the Los
Angeles County administered Older Americans Act Grant; and B. Prepare and deliver daily meal service for both congregate and homebound seniors at specified sites within Glendale.

5. On , 2022, SUBRECIPIENT issued a “Request for
Proposals” for the Elderly Nutrition Program (“RFP”)— which is attached as “Exhibit B” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference— describing SUBRECIPIENT’s need for a food services provider, and setting forth qualifications, conditions, and requirements for a food services provider.

6. On , 2022, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT submitted
a Proposal (“LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Proposal”), which is attached as “Exhibit C” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference.

7. On , 2022, the Glendale City Council (“City Council”) adopted a Motion— which is attached as “Exhibit D” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference— accepting LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Proposal and awarding LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT the right to prepare and deliver daily meal service under SUBRECIPIENT’s Elderly Nutrition Program, subject to the terms and conditions of this Lower Tier Subaward.

8. On , 2022, SUBRECIPIENT mailed LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT a “Notice of Intent to Award,” which is attached as “Exhibit E” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference.

9. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is, and will continue to be for this Lower Tier Subaward’s duration, a [(Name of State) corporation in good standing/ partnership/ limited partnership/ limited liability company/ a sole proprietorship/ an individual.] [ADD, IF APPLICABLE:
(which) (who) employs persons who are duly registered or licensed to practice in the State of California.]

10. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT possesses the competence, experience, expertise, skill, facilities, equipment, personnel, financial wherewithal, and other resources necessary to perform this Lower Tier Subaward’s tasks in a professional and competent manner.

11. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT desires to furnish and perform professional services for SUBRECIPIENT, on the terms and conditions described in this Lower Tier Subaward. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has the legal authority to provide, engage in, and carry out the professional services set forth in this Lower Tier Subaward.
675 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
56 AGREEMENT
THEREFORE, SUBRECIPIENT engages LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s services, and in consideration of the PARTIES’ mutual promises, the PARTIES agree as follows:

1.0 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS

1.1. The Recitals constitute the factual basis upon which SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT have entered into this Lower Tier Subaward.

SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledge the Recitals’ accuracy and, therefore, incorporate them into this Lower Tier Subaward.

2.0 TERM

2.1. Initial Term. This Lower Tier Subaward is for a period of four (4) years, beginning on December 1, 2022, and ending on November 30, 2026 (“initial term”), unless the Lower Tier Subaward is terminated sooner according to the terms elsewhere in this document.

2.2. Renewal Term. Before the initial term’s expiration, SUBRECIPIENT will have a one (1) time option to renew the Lower Tier Subaward for a period of two (2) years (“renewal term”). Exercise of the renewal option is at the Director of Community Services and Parks’ sole discretion and requires the City Manager’s written approval. Upon renewal, the Lower Tier Subaward may be subject to new or additional terms and conditions.

3.0 SERVICES

3.1. Scope of Work. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall furnish all food and labor necessary to prepare and deliver daily individual meals, or bulk food, or both, for persons sixty (60) years of age and older (“Services”), in compliance with:
(A) The Older Americans Act (OAA), as amended in 2006, including Title III Congregate and Home Delivered Nutrition standards, as described in Federal, State, and County regulatory statutes; (B) California’s Health and Safety Code, including the California Retail Food Code (Cal Code), effective January 1, 2020;
(C) The Area Agency on Aging (AAA) Policies and Procedures; 676 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
57 (D) The requirements defined in the “Food Service Specifications” which is attached as “Exhibit F” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference; and
(E) The “Menu Writing Specifications” which is attached as “Exhibit G” and is fully incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this reference.

3.2. Written Authorization. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not make changes in the Scope of Work or perform any additional work, without first obtaining written authorization from SUBRECIPIENT. If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT provides additional work or services without written authorization, or if LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT exceeds the Maximum Cost in Paragraph 7.4 of this Lower Tier Subaward, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT proceeds at LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s own risk and without payment.

3.3. Professional Standard of Care. During this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term:
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and its Subcontractors, employees, and agents (collectively, “LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT PARTIES”) shall perform all of the Services in this Lower Tier Subaward in an expeditious and professional manner, using professionals properly licensed and duly qualified to perform the Services. (B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT
PARTIES shall perform the work described in this Lower Tier Subaward in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and principles, and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by members of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT PARTIES’ profession currently practicing in California. By performing the Services, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT PARTIES represent and certify that their work conforms to: the requirements of this Lower Tier Subaward; all applicable (federal, state, county, local, City) laws, rules, regulations, orders, and procedures; and the professional standard of care in California. (C) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall adhere to:
(1) All required Los Angeles County terms and conditions, as set forth in the “City of Glendale (SUBAWARD) with County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department (“Exhibit A”); and
(2) The elements indicated in Los Angeles County’s Statement of Work, as set forth in the “City of Glendale (Statement of Work) with County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department” (“Exhibit J”), which is attached and fully
incorporated into this Lower Tier Subaward by this
reference.
677 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
58 (D) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT PARTIES are responsible for making an independent evaluation and judgment of all conditions affecting performance of the work, including without limitation: site conditions; existing facilities; seismic, geologic, soils, hydrologic, geographic, climatic conditions; applicable (federal, state, county, local, City) laws, rules, regulations, orders, and procedures; and all other contingencies or design considerations. Data, calculations, opinions, reports, investigations, or any other information or documents that SUBRECIPIENT provides relating to site, local, or other conditions are not warranted or guaranteed, either expressly or implied, by SUBRECIPIENT.
(E) When the Scope of Work requires or permits SUBRECIPIENT’s review, approval, conditional approval, or disapproval, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that SUBRECIPIENT’s review, approval, conditional approval, or disapproval:
(1) Is solely for the purposes of administering this Lower Tier Subaward and determining whether LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT is entitled to payment for its Services;
(2) Is not to be construed as a waiver of any breach, or acceptance by SUBRECIPIENT, of any responsibility—
professional or otherwise— for the Services or LOWER
TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s work;
(3) Does not relieve LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT of the
responsibility for complying with the standard of performance or professional care; or laws, regulations, or industry standards; and
(4) Does not relieve LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT from liability for damages arising out of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s:
negligent acts, errors, or omissions; recklessness; willful misconduct; or noncompliance with industry standards.
(E) Without additional compensation to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and at no cost to SUBRECIPIENT, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall correct or revise all errors, mistakes, or deficiencies in its work or the Services.

4.0 TIME FOR PERFORMANCE

4.1. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall perform and complete the Services according to the schedules and deadlines in the “Food Service Specifications” (“Exhibit F”). 678 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
59 4.2. Force Majeure. If an event or condition constituting a “force majeure”— including an act of God, labor dispute, civil unrest, epidemic, or natural disaster— prevents or delays a PARTY from performing or fulfilling an obligation under this Lower Tier Subaward, the PARTY is not in Default, under Paragraph 13.1 of this Lower Tier Subaward, of the obligation. A delay beyond a PARTY’s control automatically extends the time, in an amount equal to the period of the delay, for the PARTY to perform the obligation under this Lower Tier Subaward. The PARTIES shall prepare and sign an appropriate document acknowledging any extension of time under this Paragraph.

5.0 PERSONNEL

5.1. Project Management. Each PARTY shall appoint a Project Manager. The Project Managers shall meet [ SET FORTH SPECIFIC TIMES: hourly/ daily/ weekly/ as needed ] to coordinate, review, and ensure LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performance under this Lower Tier Subaward. SUBRECIPIENT’s Project Manager will oversee the administration of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s tasks under this Lower Tier Subaward.

5.2. Personnel.
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s project team shall work under the direction of the following key personnel [IDENTIFY LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s KEY PERSONNEL AND TITLE] . LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall minimize changes to its key personnel. SUBRECIPIENT may request key personnel changes, and SUBRECIPIENT may review and approve key personnel changes proposed by LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT. SUBRECIPIENT will not unreasonably withhold approval of key personnel assignments and changes.
(B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT Personnel shall:
(1) Comply fully with Los Angeles County Code Title 2 - Administration, Division 4, Chapter 2.212 (COVID-19
Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel), and Los
Angeles County’s Subaward Requirements for COVID-19
Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel (Exhibit K); and (2) Submit to SUBRECIPIENT, when LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT signs this Lower Tier Subaward, a completed COVID-19
Vaccination Certification of Compliance (Exhibit L).

5.3. Use of Agents or Assistants. With SUBRECIPIENT’s prior written approval, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT may employ, engage, or retain the services of persons or entities (“Subcontractors”) that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT may deem proper to aid or assist in the proper performance of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s duties. SUBRECIPIENT is an intended beneficiary of all work that the Subcontractors perform for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the Subcontractors and 679 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
60 SUBRECIPIENT. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is as responsible for the performance of its Subcontractors as it would be if it had rendered the Services itself. All costs of the tasks performed or the expenses incurred by the Subcontractors are chargeable directly to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT. Nothing in this Lower Tier Subaward constitutes or creates a contractual relationship between SUBRECIPIENT and anyone other than LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT.

5.4. Independent Contractor.
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT understands and acknowledges that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is an independent contractor, not an employee, partner, agent, or principal of SUBRECIPIENT. This Lower Tier Subaward does not create a partnership, joint venture, association, or employer-employee relationship between the PARTIES. At its own expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is responsible for providing compensation; employment benefits; disability, unemployment, and other insurance; workers’ compensation; training; permits and licenses; and office space for LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and for LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s employees and Subcontractors. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has, and shall retain, the right to exercise full control over the employment, direction, compensation, and discharge of all persons whom LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT uses in performing the Services under this Lower Tier Subaward. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide the Services in LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s own manner and method, except as this Lower Tier Subaward specifies. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall treat a provision in this Lower Tier Subaward that may appear either to give SUBRECIPIENT the right to direct LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT as to the details of doing the work, or to exercise a measure of control over the work, as giving LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT direction only as to the work’s end result. (B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall indemnify, defend (including LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s providing and paying for legal counsel for SUBRECIPIENT), and hold harmless SUBRECIPIENT for any obligation; claim; suit; demand for tax or retirement contribution, including any contribution or payment to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS); social security; salary or wages; overtime, penalty, or interest payment; or workers’ compensation payment that SUBRECIPIENT may be required to make on behalf of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT , an employee of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT , or any employee of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT construed to be an employee of SUBRECIPIENT, for the work done under this Lower Tier Subaward.

5.5. Non-Discrimination in Employment. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not discriminate against any employee or person who is subject to this Lower Tier Subaward because of race, color, religion, religious belief, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, medical condition, physical or mental disability, genetic information, or military or veteran status.
680 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
61 5.6. Disability Access Laws. CONSULANT represents and certifies that the Services that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT performs under this Lower Tier Subaward fully conform to all applicable disability access and design laws, regulations, and standards— including the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. Sections 12101 et seq.) and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations— when the Scope of Work requires or calls for compliance with those laws, regulations, or standards.

5.7. Prevailing Wage Laws. Services by persons deemed to be employees of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT possibly may be subject to prevailing wage, payroll records, apprenticeship, and contract award reporting requirements under California Labor Code Sections 1770-1781 (collectively, “prevailing wage laws”).

LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s sole responsibility is to comply with those requirements, should they apply. If a dispute based upon the prevailing wage laws occurs, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, at its expense, shall indemnify, defend (including LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s providing and paying for legal counsel for SUBRECIPIENT), and hold harmless SUBRECIPIENT, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against all liability, claims, suits, demands, damages, fines, penalties, wages, costs, or expenses pertaining to the prevailing wage laws.

5.8. Workers’ Compensation. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT
understands and acknowledges that all persons furnishing services to SUBRECIPIENT under this Lower Tier Subaward are, for the purpose of workers’ compensation liability, employees solely of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and not of SUBRECIPIENT. In performing the Services or the work under this Lower Tier Subaward, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is liable for providing workers’ compensation benefits to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s employees, or anyone whom LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT directly or indirectly hires, employs, or uses. SUBRECIPIENT is not responsible for any claims at law or in equity caused by LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s failure to comply with this Paragraph.

6.0 FACILITIES

6.1. SUBRECIPIENT shall provide LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT with access to and use of the kitchen facilities at the Adult Recreation Center for meal preparation, and access to the community centers specified in the “Food Service Specifications” (“Exhibit F”) for meal deliveries. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide all other facilities necessary to fully perform and complete the Services.

6.2. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall pay for any damage to SUBRECIPIENT property, facilities, structures, or streets arising out of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s use, occupation, operation, or activities in, upon, under, or over any portion of them.
681 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
62 7.0 PAYMENT

7.1. SUBRECIPIENT’s payment to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT will be based upon LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s “Meal Rates” (“Exhibit H”), which is contained in LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Proposal (“Exhibit C”). Except as itemized in SUBRECIPIENT’s RFP or LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s “Meal Rates,” LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall pay for all expenses, including reimbursable or out-of-pocket expenses, that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT incurs in performing the Services. The “Meal Rates,” including price per meal, will remain in effect for the Lower Tier Subaward’s initial term and renewal term.

7.2. Fee. For the Services that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT provides under this Lower Tier Subaward, SUBRECIPIENT shall pay LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT as follows:

MEAL TYPE PRICE PER MEAL
Hot/Cold Meals / Boxed Lunches Prepared $_______
Frozen, Home Meals Delivered $_______

7.3. SUBRECIPIENT shall pay for the Services in monthly installments, the TOTAL amount of which is not to exceed _______ dollars ($_________). Each installment will be payable upon satisfactory performance and completion, in SUBRECIPIENT’s determination, of the Services.

7.4. Maximum Cost. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT expressly
acknowledges that the total cost to complete all Services under this Lower Tier Subaward must not exceed ___________________________________ dollars ($__________) (“Maximum Cost”). When LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has billed 75% of the Maximum Cost, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide written notice to SUBRECIPIENT’s Project Manager that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has expended 75% of the Maximum Cost.

7.5. If SUBRECIPIENT requires additional work not included in this Lower Tier Subaward, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT shall negotiate the additional work, mutually agree on the amount of additional compensation, and memorialize the terms in either a separate written contract or an amendment to this Lower Tier Subaward.

7.6. Invoices. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall submit:
(A) An original, itemized invoice to SUBRECIPIENT for approval, before receiving compensation. All invoices must contain:
(1) The word “INVOICE”;
(2) An invoice number;
682 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
63 (3) An invoice date;
(4) The words “BILL TO: City of Glendale”;
(5) The SUBRECIPIENT-issued contract number;
(6) The number, type, and date of meals served, the cost per meal, and the totally monthly costs;
(7) The total phase or Services costs to date;
(8) The total amount due on the invoice; and
(9) Payment instructions (“Make payable to___” or “Remit to___”). (B) The invoice:
(1) At no more than monthly intervals; and
(2) Directly to SUBRECIPIENT’s Finance Department in one of the following two ways:

Option 1: Electronically via:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/depart
ments/finance/accounting/invoice-submittal
LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall:
 Prepare the invoices in PDF format; and
 Submit only one (1) invoice per PDF file.

Submitting multiple invoices in a single PDF file,
or submitting an invoice without the
SUBRECIPIENT- issued contract number, will
cause a delay in payment.

Option 2: By mail to the following address:

City of Glendale
Attn: Accounts Payable
141 N. Glendale Ave, Room 346
Glendale, CA 91206
683 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
64 7.7. Taxes. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall pay all applicable (federal, state, county, local, SUBRECIPIENT) excise, sales, consumer use, possessory interest, or other similar taxes required by law that are levied upon this Lower Tier Subaward or upon the Services that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performs under this Lower Tier Subaward.

8.0 AUDIT BY SUBRECIPIENT

8.1. During this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term and for a period of four (4) years after the expiration, cancellation, or termination of this Lower Tier Subaward, or any extension of it, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall:
(A) Keep and maintain, in their original form, all records, books, papers, or documents related to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performance of this Lower Tier Subaward; and
(B) Permit SUBRECIPIENT or its authorized representatives, at all reasonable times, to have access to, examine, audit, excerpt, copy, photocopy, photograph, or transcribe all records, books, papers, or documents related to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performance of this Lower Tier Subaward, including: direct and indirect charges, and detailed documentation, for work LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has performed or will perform under this Lower Tier Subaward.

9.0 DATA, RECORDS, PROPRIETARY RIGHTS

9.1. Copies of Data. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with copies or originals of all data that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT generates, uses, collects, or stores in relation to all work associated with this Lower Tier Subaward. Data that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT generates, uses, collects, stores, or provides must be in a form acceptable to, and agreed upon by, SUBRECIPIENT.

9.2. Ownership and Use.
(A) Unless SUBRECIPIENT states otherwise in writing, each document— including each report, draft, record, drawing, or specification (collectively, “work product”)— that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT prepares, reproduces, or causes its preparation or reproduction for this Lower Tier Subaward is SUBRECIPIENT’s exclusive property.
(B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited to the purposes contemplated by the Scope of Work. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT makes no representation of the work product’s application to, or suitability for use in, circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Work. 684 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
65 9.3. Intellectual Property.
(A) If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT uses or incorporates patented, trademarked, copyrighted, or proprietary work, ideas, or products— in whole or in part— into LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s work product, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT represents that:
(1) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s work product does not
infringe on any patent, copyright, trademark, trade name, or proprietary right of any person, organization, or entity; and (2) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT holds the patent, trademark, copyright or proprietary right to the work, idea, or product; or (3) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is licensed to use the
patented, trademarked, copyrighted, or proprietary work, idea, or product.
(B) Unless SUBRECIPIENT states otherwise in writing, all proprietary rights or intellectual property rights, including copyrights, that arise from creation of the work under this Lower Tier Subaward vest in SUBRECIPIENT. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT waives and relinquishes all claims to proprietary rights and intellectual property rights, including copyrights, in favor of SUBRECIPIENT. (C) Without SUBRECIPIENT’s prior written approval, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not use, reproduce, or display SUBRECIPIENT’s corporate insignia in any document or medium, including: an advertisement, promotional material, television or radio commercial, social media, or the internet or LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s website.
(D) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall indemnify, defend (including LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s providing and paying for legal counsel for SUBRECIPIENT), and hold harmless SUBRECIPIENT, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against all liability, claims, suits, demands, damages, royalties, fines, penalties, costs, or expenses arising out of or alleging any infringement or misappropriation of a patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or other intellectual property right or proprietary right.

9.4. Confidentiality. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not use any information that it obtains from performing the Services for any purpose other than for fulfillment of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Scope of Work. Without SUBRECIPIENT’s prior written authorization, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not disclose or publish— or authorize, permit, or allow others to disclose or publish— data, drawings, designs, specifications, reports, or other information relating to the Services or the work that SUBRECIPIENT assigns to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT or to which LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has access.
685 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
66 9.5. Public Records Act.
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that this Lower Tier Subaward is a public record. This Lower Tier Subaward, its Exhibits, and all documents produced under this Lower Tier Subaward are subject to the California Public Records Act (Government Code Sections 6250 et seq.), including its exemptions. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that SUBRECIPIENT has no obligation to notify LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT when a request for records is received. (B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall identify in advance all records, or portions of them, that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT believes are exempt from production under the Public Records Act.
(C) If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT claims a privilege against public disclosure or otherwise objects to the records’ disclosure, then:
(1) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT may, when notified by
SUBRECIPIENT of the request, seek protection from
disclosure by timely applying for relief in a court of
competent jurisdiction; or
(2) SUBRECIPIENT may either decline to produce the
requested information, or redact portions of the documents and produce the redacted records.
(D) If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT fails to identify one or more protectable documents, in SUBRECIPIENT’s sole discretion, and without its being in breach of this Lower Tier Subaward or its incurring liability to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, SUBRECIPIENT may produce the records— in whole, in part, or redacted— or may decline to produce them.
(E) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall indemnify, defend (including LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s providing and paying for legal counsel for SUBRECIPIENT), and hold harmless SUBRECIPIENT, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against all liability, claims, suits, demands, damages, fines, penalties, costs, or expenses arising out of or alleging SUBRECIPIENT’s refusal to publicly disclose one or more records that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT identifies as protectable, or asserts is protectable.

10.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

10.1. Conflict of Interest. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT represents and certifies that:
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s personnel are not currently officers, agents, employees, representatives, or elected officials of SUBRECIPIENT; 686 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
67 (B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT will not employ or hire a SUBRECIPIENT officer, agent, employee, representative, or elected official during this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term;
(C) SUBRECIPIENT’s officers, agents, employees, representatives, and elected officials do not, and will not, have any direct or indirect financial interest in this Lower Tier Subaward; and
(D) During this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term, LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT will inform SUBRECIPIENT promptly about an existing or potential conflict of interest that may arise as a result of any change in circumstances.

10.2. Campaign Contributions.
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and its Subcontractors shall fully comply with Glendale Municipal Code Section 1.10.060, which places limitations on LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s and its Subcontractors’ ability to make campaign contributions to certain elected SUBRECIPIENT officials or candidates for elected City office. Specifically, Section 1.10.060 prohibits:
(1) A contractor (including a LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT )― who has a contract with the City of Glendale, Glendale
Successor Agency, or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, Successor Agency, or Housing Authority― from
making a contribution to a City Council member, City Clerk, or City Treasurer, when the contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more, or a combination or series of contracts having a value of $50,000 or more; and (2) A City Council member, Successor Agency member, or
Housing Authority member from voting on a contract in which a contractor (or a Subcontractor) has provided a campaign contribution.
(B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that even if the Maximum Cost in Paragraph 7.4 of this Lower Tier Subaward is less than $50,000, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT still may be subject to the campaign contribution limitations in Glendale Municipal Code Section 1.10.060, when:
(1) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT
amend the Scope of Work in this Lower Tier Subaward
which increases the Maximum Cost to equal or exceed
$50,000; or
687 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
68 (2) SUBRECIPIENT, Glendale Successor Agency, or the Housing Authority awards LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT another
contract which has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more, or awards LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT a
combination or series of contracts which have a value of $50,000 or more.
(C) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT represents and certifies that:
(1) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has read and fully
understands the provisions of Glendale Municipal Code
Section 1.10.060;

(2) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT will not: (a) make a
prohibited campaign contribution to an individual holding City of Glendale elective office; or (b) otherwise violate Glendale Municipal Code Section 1.10.060; and
(3) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall timely complete, return, and update one or more disclosure or reporting forms that SUBRECIPIENT provides.

11.0 INSURANCE

11.1. When LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT signs and delivers this Lower Tier Subaward to SUBRECIPIENT, and during this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall furnish SUBRECIPIENT with insurance forms that fully meet the requirements of— and contain provisions entirely consistent with— all of the “Insurance Requirements,” which are attached as “Exhibit I” (I-1 through I-8) to this Lower Tier Subaward and are incorporated into it by this reference.

11.2. This Lower Tier Subaward’s insurance provisions:
(A) Are separate and independent from the indemnification and defense provisions in Article 12.0 of the Lower Tier Subaward; and (B) Do not limit, in any way, the applicability, scope, or obligations of the indemnification and defense provisions in Article 12.0 of the Lower Tier Subaward.

12.0 INDEMNITY

12.1. To the maximum extent permitted by law— including, but not limited to, California Civil Code Section 2778— LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT , its employees, agents, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENTS, and persons whom LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT employs or hires (individually and collectively, “LOWER TIER 688 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
69 SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR”) shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless SUBRECIPIENT, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives (individually and collectively, “SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE”) from and against a “liability” [as defined in Subparagraph (A) below], or an “expense” [as defined in Subparagraph (B) below], or both, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to an act, error, or omission of a LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR:
(A) “Liability” means claims, suits, actions, causes of action, proceedings, judgments, decrees, awards, settlements, liens, losses, damages, injuries, or liability of any kind, whether the liability is:
(1) Actual or alleged;
(2) In contract or in tort; or
(3) For bodily injury (including accidental death), personal injury, advertising injury, or property damage.
(B) “Expense” means fees, costs, sums, penalties, fines, charges, or expenses of any kind, including:
(1) Attorney’s fees;
(2) Costs of an investigation, litigation, arbitration, mediation, administrative or regulatory proceeding, or appeal;
(3) Fees of an accountant, expert witness, consultant, or other professional; and
(4) Pre or post: judgment interest or settlement interest.

12.2. Under this Article, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s defense and indemnification obligations:
(A) Apply to a liability, or an expense, or both, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the actual or alleged passive negligence of a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE; but
(B) Do not apply to a liability, or an expense, or both, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE.

12.3. To the extent that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s insurance policy provides an upfront defense to a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s obligation to defend a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE under this Article:
689 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
70 (A) Means that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR shall provide and pay for legal counsel, acceptable to SUBRECIPIENT, for the SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE;
(B) Occurs when a claim, suit, complaint, pleading, or action against a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE arises out of, pertains to, relates to, or asserts an act, error, or omission of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR; and (C) Arises regardless of whether a claim, suit, complaint, pleading, or action specifically names or identifies LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR.

12.4. Paragraph 12.3 does not limit or extinguish LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s obligation to reimburse a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE for the costs of defending the SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE against a liability, or an expense, or both. The defense costs charged to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR will not exceed LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s proportionate percentage of fault. A SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE’s right to recover defense costs and attorney’s fees under this Article does not require, and is not contingent upon, the SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE’s first:
(A) Requesting that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR
provide a defense to the SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE; or
(B) Obtaining LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s consent to the SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE’s tender of defense.

12.5. If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT subcontracts all or any portion of the Services under this Lower Tier Subaward, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with a written agreement from each Subcontractor, who must indemnify, defend, and hold harmless a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE under the terms in this Article.

12.6. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR’s obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless a SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITEE will remain in effect and will be binding upon LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT INDEMNITOR whether the liability, or the expense, or both, accrues— or is discovered— before or after this Lower Tier Subaward’s expiration, cancellation, or termination.

12.7. Except for Paragraph 12.3, this Article’s indemnification and defense provisions:
(A) Are separate and independent from the insurance provisions in Article 11. In addition, the indemnification and defense provisions in this Article; (B) Are neither limited to nor capped at the coverage amounts that SUBRECIPIENT now, or at a later date, specifies under the insurance provisions in Article 11.0; and
690 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
71 (C) Do not limit, in any way, the applicability, scope, or obligations of the insurance provisions in Article 11.0.

13.0 DEFAULT, REMEDIES, AND TERMINATION

13.1. Default. Default under this Lower Tier Subaward occurs upon any one or more of the following events:
(A) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT refuses or fails— whether partially, fully, temporarily, or otherwise— to:
(1) Provide, obtain, or maintain enough properly trained personnel, or licensed personnel, or both, to perform the Services that this Lower Tier Subaward requires;
(2) Pay for, obtain, maintain, or renew the insurance policies or coverages that this Lower Tier Subaward requires;
(3) Comply with indemnification, defense, or hold harmless provisions that this Lower Tier Subaward requires; or
(B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, or its personnel, or both— whether partially, fully, temporarily, or otherwise:
(1) Disregards or violates a law, ordinance, rule, procedure, regulation, directive, or order;
(2) Refuses or fails to pay for, obtain, maintain, or renew requisite licenses;
(3) Refuses or fails to observe, perform, or fulfill a covenant, condition, obligation, term, or provision of this Lower Tier Subaward;
(4) Commits an unlawful, false, fraudulent, dishonest, deceptive, or dangerous act while performing the Services under this Lower Tier Subaward; or
(C) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT:
(1) Or another party for or on behalf of LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT: institutes proceedings under any
bankruptcy, reorganization, receivership or other insolvency; or assigns or transfers assets to its creditors;
691 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
72 (2) Delegates— whether in whole, in part, temporarily, or otherwise— its duties or obligations under this Lower Tier Subaward, without notifying SUBRECIPIENT, or without
SUBRECIPIENT’s written authorization;
(3) Assigns, transfers, pledges, hypothecates, grants, or encumbers— whether in whole, in part, temporarily, or
otherwise— this Lower Tier Subaward or any interest in it, without notifying SUBRECIPIENT, or without
SUBRECIPIENT’s written authorization;
(4) Or one of its partners, directors, officers, or general managers, or a person who exercises managerial authority on LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s behalf, is convicted
(i.e., a plea of guilty, a verdict of guilty by a judge or jury, a plea of nolo contendere, or a forfeiture of bail) under state or federal law, during this Lower Tier Subaward’s Term, of embezzlement, theft, fraud, forgery, bribery, deceptive or unlawful business practices, perjury, falsifying or destroying records or evidence, receiving stolen property, or other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty; or
(D) Any other justifiable cause or reason, as reasonably determined by the City Manager, or a designee.

13.2. Notice of Default. If SUBRECIPIENT deems that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is in Default, or that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has failed in any other respect to perform satisfactorily the Services specified in this Lower Tier Subaward, SUBRECIPIENT may give written notice to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT specifying the Default(s) that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall remedy within ten (10) days after receiving the notice. The Notice of Default will set forth one or more bases for any dissatisfaction and may suggest corrective measures.

13.3. Remedies upon Default. Within ten (10) days after receiving SUBRECIPIENT’s Notice of Default, if LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT refuses or fails to remedy the Default(s), or if LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT does not commence steps to remedy the Default(s) to SUBRECIPIENT’s reasonable satisfaction, SUBRECIPIENT may exercise any one or more of the following remedies:
(A) SUBRECIPIENT may, in whole or in part and for any length of time, immediately suspend this Lower Tier Subaward until such time as LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has corrected the Default;
692 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
73 (B) SUBRECIPIENT may provide for the Services either through its own forces or from another contractor or vendor, and may withhold any money due (or may become owing to) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT for a task related to the claimed Default; (C) SUBRECIPIENT may withhold all moneys, or a sum of money, due LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT under this Lower Tier Subaward, which in SUBRECIPIENT’s sole determination, are sufficient to secure LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performance of its duties and obligations under this Lower Tier Subaward;
(D) SUBRECIPIENT may immediately terminate the Lower Tier Subaward;
(E) SUBRECIPIENT may exercise any legal remedy, or equitable remedy, or both, including filing and action in court:
(1) Seeking LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s specific
performance of all or any part of this Lower Tier Subaward; or
(2) Recovering damages for LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s
Default, breach, or violation of this Lower Tier Subaward; or (F) SUBRECIPIENT may pursue any other available, lawful right, remedy, or action.

13.4. Termination for Convenience. Independent of the remedies provided in Paragraph 13.3, SUBRECIPIENT may elect to terminate this Lower Tier Subaward at any time upon thirty (30) days’ prior written notice. On and after the termination date, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall stop performing the Services. Upon termination, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall receive compensation only for that work which LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT had satisfactorily completed to the termination date.

SUBRECIPIENT shall not pay LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT for de-mobilization, takedown, disengagement, wind-down, or other costs incurred arising out of this Lower Tier Subaward’s termination.

14.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS

14.1. Entire Agreement. This Lower Tier Subaward represents the entire and integrated agreement between the PARTIES. This Lower Tier Subaward supersedes all prior and contemporaneous communications, negotiations, understandings, promises and agreements, either oral or written. Neither LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT nor SUBRECIPIENT has made any promises or representations, other than those contained in this Lower Tier Subaward or those implied by law. The PARTIES may modify this Lower Tier Subaward, or any part of it, by a written amendment with SUBRECIPIENT’s and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s signature. 693 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
74 14.2. Interpretation.
(A) This Lower Tier Subaward is the product of negotiation and compromise by both PARTIES. Every provision in this Lower Tier Subaward must be interpreted as though the PARTIES equally participated in its drafting. Therefore, despite the provisions in California Civil Code Section 1654, if this Lower Tier Subaward’s language is uncertain, the Lower Tier Subaward must not be construed against the PARTY causing the uncertainty to exist.
(B) In interpreting this Lower Tier Subaward and resolving any ambiguities, this Lower Tier Subaward will take precedence over any cover page or attachments. If a conflict occurs between a provision in this Lower Tier Subaward and a provision in an attachment, the following order of precedence applies, with the terms and conditions in the document higher on the list governing over those lower on the list:
(1) Lower Tier Subaward.
(2) Exhibit A– (City of Glendale (SUBAWARD) with County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department).
(3) Exhibit J – (City of Glendale (Statement of Work) with County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department).
(4) Exhibit K – (Los Angeles County’s Subaward Requirements for COVID-19Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel).
(5) Exhibit L – (COVID-19 Vaccination Certification of Compliance). (6) Exhibit I – (Insurance Requirements).
(7) Exhibit B – (SUBRECIPIENT’s Request for Proposals). (8) Exhibit H – (Meal Rates).
(9) Exhibit F – (Food Service Specifications).
(10) Exhibit G– (Menu Writing Specifications).
(11) Exhibit C – (LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Proposal).
(12) Exhibit D – (City Council Motion).
(13) Exhibit E – (Notice of Intent to Award Contract).
(C) Unless the contexts requires otherwise, the term “including” means “including but not limited to.”

14.3. Headings. All headings or captions in this Lower Tier Subaward are for convenience and reference only. They are not intended to define or limit the scope of any term, condition, or provision.

14.4. Governing Law; Conflict of Law; Jurisdiction.
694 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
75 (A) California’s laws govern this Lower Tier Subaward’s construction and interpretation regardless of the laws that might otherwise apply under applicable principles of conflicts of law or choice of law.
(B) If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT or SUBRECIPIENT brings a lawsuit to enforce or interpret one or more provisions of the Lower Tier Subaward, jurisdiction is in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, California, or where otherwise appropriate, in the United States District Court, Central District of California.

LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT acknowledge that the Lower Tier Subaward was made (negotiated, entered into, and executed)— and the Services were performed— in the City of Glendale, which is in Los Angeles County. (C) Unless this Lower Tier Subaward provides otherwise, any reference to laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations include their later amendments, modifications, and successor legislation.

14.5. Waiver of Breach. If a PARTY fails to require the other to perform any term in this Lower Tier Subaward, that failure does not prevent the PARTY from later enforcing that term, or any other term. If a PARTY waives the other’s breach of a term, that waiver is not treated as waiving a later breach of the term. A waiver of a term is valid only if it is in writing and signed by the PARTY waiving it. This Lower Tier Subaward’s duties and obligations:
(A) Are cumulative (rather than alternative) and are in addition to (rather than a limitation on) any option, right, power, remedy, or privilege; and (B) Are not exhausted by a PARTY’s exercise of any one of them.

14.6. Attorney’s Fees. If SUBRECIPIENT or LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT brings an action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret one or more provisions of this Lower Tier Subaward, the “prevailing party” is entitled to “reasonable attorney’s fees” in addition to any other relief to which the prevailing party may be entitled.

A “prevailing party” has the same meaning as that term is defined in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1032(a)(4). “Reasonable attorney’s fees” of the City Attorney’s office means the fees regularly charged by private attorneys who:
(A) Practice in a law firm located in Los Angeles County; and (B) Have an equivalent number of years of professional experience in the subject matter area of the law for which the City Attorney’s services were rendered.

14.7. Further Assurances. Upon SUBRECIPIENT’s request at any time, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall promptly:
695 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
76 (A) Take further necessary action; and
(B) Sign, acknowledge, and deliver all additional documents as may be reasonable, necessary, or appropriate to carry out this Lower Tier Subaward’s intent, purpose, and terms.

14.8. Assignment, Delegation, and Change of Ownership.
(A) This Lower Tier Subaward does not give any rights or benefits to anyone, other than to SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT. All duties, obligations, and responsibilities under this Lower Tier Subaward are for the sole and exclusive benefit of SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, and are not for the benefit of another person, entity, or organization. Without SUBRECIPIENT’s prior written authorization, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not do any one or more of the following:
(1) Assign or transfer a right or interest— whether in whole, in part, temporarily, or otherwise— in this Lower Tier
Subaward; or
(2) Delegate a duty or obligation owed— whether in whole, in part, temporarily, or otherwise— under this Lower Tier
Subaward.
(B) A change in the legal form of ownership of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s business, or in the control of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s business, or in both, is deemed to be an assignment under this Lower Tier Subaward. (C) Any actual or attempted assignment of rights or delegation of duties by LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, without SUBRECIPIENT’s prior written authorization, is wholly void and totally ineffective for all purposes; and does not postpone, delay, alter, extinguish, or terminate LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s duties, obligations, or responsibilities under this Lower Tier Subaward. (D) If SUBRECIPIENT consents to an assignment of rights, or a delegation of duties, or both, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s assignee or legal representative shall agree in writing to personally assume, perform, and to be bound unconditionally by the covenants, obligations, terms, and conditions in this Lower Tier Subaward.

14.9. Successors and Assigns. Subject to the provisions in Paragraph

14.8, this Lower Tier Subaward is binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the respective PARTIES.

14.10. Time is of the Essence.
696 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
77 (A) Except when this Lower Tier Subaward states otherwise, time is of the essence in this Lower Tier Subaward. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT acknowledges that this Lower Tier Subaward’s time limits and deadlines are reasonable for LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performing the Services under this Lower Tier Subaward. (B) Unless this Lower Tier Subaward specifies otherwise, any reference to “day” or “days” means calendar and not business days. If the last day for giving notice or performing an act under this Lower Tier Subaward falls on a weekend, a legal holiday listed in either Glendale Municipal Code Section 3.08.010 or California’s Government Code, or a day when City Hall is closed, the period is extended to and including the next day that SUBRECIPIENT is open for business. A reference to the time of day refers to local time for Glendale, California.

14.11. Recycled Paper. LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall endeavor to submit all reports, correspondence, and documents related to this Lower Tier Subaward on recycled paper.

14.12. Notices.
(A) Method. The PARTIES shall submit in writing all notices and communications that this Agreement requires or permits, place the notice or communication in a sealed envelope or package for delivery methods (1) through (4) below, and use the following delivery method:
(1) In-person hand-delivery;
(2) Messenger or overnight delivery service;
(3) U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid;
(4) “Certified” U.S. mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested; (5) Fax; or
(6) Email.
(B) Receipt of Notice. All written notices or communications done in the manner described in Subparagraph (A) with the street address or place, facsimile number, or email address listed in Subparagraph (C) is considered “given” or “delivered” to a PARTY on the effective date listed below, as noted next to the applicable delivery method:
(1) In-person hand-delivery: The date on which the envelope or package is handed in-person to the PARTY;
(2) Messenger or overnight delivery service: The date on which the PARTY signs for the envelope or package, or refuses to accept it; or the date on which the messenger or overnight 697 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
78 delivery service leaves the envelope or package with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the PARTY’s
office— as noted on the proof of delivery, tracking receipt, or other form;
(3) U.S. mail: The third business day after deposit with the U.S.

Postal Service;
(4) “Certified” U.S. mail: The date on which the PARTY signs for the envelope or package, or refuses to accept it— as noted on the return receipt or other U.S. Postal Service form; (5) Fax: The date of the fax’s transmission— as noted on the fax machine’s activity or transmission report verifying that transmission occurred without error;
(6) Email: The date on which the PARTY acknowledges, by email or other delivery method specified in Subparagraph (A), as having received the email (with an automatic “read receipt” not constituting acknowledgment of an email); or (7) (1) through (4) above — when undeliverable: The date on which the messenger, overnight delivery service, or U.S.

Postal Service mail carrier attempts delivery on the PARTY, but is unable to do so, because the PARTY is no longer at the address and did not give notice of a change in address— as noted on the proof of non-delivery, tracking or return receipt, or other form.
(C) Contact Information. SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT designate the following contact person, street address or place, telephone number, and facsimile number or email address for giving notice. At any time, by providing notice to the other PARTY, SUBRECIPIENT or LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT may change the contact information:

SUBRECIPIENT: City of Glendale
Dept.: Community Services and Parks
613 E. Broadway, Room 120
Glendale, CA 91206
Attn: Aylin Isayan
Tel. No. (818) 548-3772
Fax. No. (818) 543-0793
Email: [email protected]
LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT:

698 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
79 Attn:

Tel. No.

Fax. No.

Email:

14.13. Survival. This Paragraph and the obligations set forth in Paragraphs

5.4, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 7.7, 8.1, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5,11.1, 11.2, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4, 12.5,

12.6, 12.7, 13.3, 14.5, 14.6, 14.7, 14.8, 14.9, and 14.12 survive this Lower Tier Subaward’s expiration, cancellation, or termination.

14.14. Severability. The invalidity, in whole or in part, of any term of this Lower Tier Subaward will not affect this Lower Tier Subaward’s remaining terms.

14.15. Counterparts. This Lower Tier Subaward may be executed in counterparts, each of which is an original, but all of which constitutes one and the same document. The PARTIES shall sign a sufficient number of counterparts, so that each PARTY will receive a fully executed original of this Lower Tier Subaward.

14.16. Digital Signatures. The PARTIES deem a copy of this Lower Tier Subaward, or any amendment to it, that bears a digital signature as having the same legal effect, for all purposes, as delivery of a signed original of this Lower Tier Subaward or the amendment, and each digital signature will have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature.

14.17. Representations – Authority. The PARTIES represent that:
(A) They have read this Lower Tier Subaward, fully understand its contents, and have received a copy of it;
(B) Through their duly authorized representative, they are authorized to sign this Lower Tier Subaward, and they are bound by its terms; and (C) They have executed this Lower Tier Subaward on the date opposite their signature.

CITY OF GLENDALE:

By Date: , 20
Roubik Golanian
City Manager
LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT:

By Date: , 20
699 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
80 (Name)
(Title)

APPROVED AS TO FORM
NAME:

TITLE:

SIGNATURE:

DATE:
700 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
81 EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit A”: City of Glendale (SUBAWARD) with County of Los Angeles Aging and Disabilities Department
“Exhibit B”: SUBRECIPIENT’s Request for Proposals
(__ pages)
“Exhibit C”: LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Proposal
(__ pages)
“Exhibit D”: City Council Motion
(__ pages)
“Exhibit E”: Notice of Intent to Award Contract
(__ pages)
“Exhibit F”: Food Service Specifications
(__ pages)
“Exhibit G”: Menu Writing Specifications
(__ pages)
“Exhibit H”: Meal Rates
(__ pages)
“Exhibit I”: Insurance Requirements
(__ pages)
“Exhibit J”: City of Glendale (Statement of Work) with County of Los Angeles (__ pages) Aging and Disabilities Department
“Exhibit K”: Los Angeles County’s Subaward Requirements for COVID-19 (__ pages) Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel
“Exhibit L”: COVID-19 Vaccination Certification of Compliance (__ pages)
701 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
82 EXHIBIT V – Insurance Requirements
The insurance requirements for all City of Glendale Contractors are described on the next ten pages of this RFP, beginning on page 77.

In addition to the City of Glendale’s insurance requirements, a Food Service Provider who receives a City Contract and who performs the Services under funding from the Los Angeles Area Agency on Aging must comply with the County of Los Angeles’ insurance requirements (Paragraphs 8.24.1 through 8.24.15.1; and 8.25.1 through 8.25.8.1), beginning on page 89. This language is directly from the contract between the City of Glendale and the Los Angeles County Aging and Disabilities Department.

If the City of Glendale’s insurance requirements and the County of Los Angeles insurance requirements differ, a Proposer must comply with the requirements of the entity who has a higher coverage amount, has additional coverages, or whose insurance is more stringent. For example, if the City requires $2 million in coverage, while the County requires $1 million, or vice versa— a Proposer must obtain $2 million in coverage.

The full text of the contract between the City of Glendale and Los Angeles County for the Elderly Nutrition Program is available for review at 201 E. Colorado Street, Glendale CA 91205 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 702 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
83 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT “PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY” INSURANCE

1.1 Without limiting LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s liability and at its sole expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain a Professional Liability insurance policy.

1.2 The Professional Liability policy must:
(A) Include “errors and omissions” coverage or “malpractice” coverage; (B) Afford “practice specific” or “project specific” coverage; (C) Provide limits of liability in an amount not less than:
(1) ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per claim; and
(2) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) in the aggregate;
(D) Cover a claim or claims arising out of the performance of professional services by:
(1) CONSULTANT;
(2) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Subcontractor(s);
(3) Anyone whom LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT or its Subcontractor(s) directly or indirectly employs or uses; or
(4) Anyone whose acts LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT or its Subcontractor(s) may be liable; and
(E) Provide coverage for:
(1) The duration of this Lower Tier Subaward; and
(2) At least three (3) years after the Lower Tier Subaward’s expiration or termination:
(a) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain an endorsement that adds an “extended reporting period” (“ERP”) or a “discovery” feature— to allow SUBRECIPIENT to report a claim— for a period of not less than three (3) years following (whichever date is later): (i) the initial policy’s expiration; or (ii) final close-out of the Lower Tier Subaward. The endorsement for the ERP or discovery feature must provide identical policy limits, and meet the conditions, described in subparagraphs 1.2 (A) through (D) above; or
703 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
84 (b) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain successive renewal or replacement policies (with “prior acts” coverage), for a period of three (3) years following (whichever date is later): (i) the initial policy’s expiration; or (ii) final close-out of the Lower Tier Subaward. Each policy must have a “retroactive date” that coincides with, or is earlier than, this Lower Tier Subaward’s Effective Date.

Additionally, each policy must provide identical policy limits, and meet the conditions, described in subparagraphs 1.2 (A) through (D) above.

1.3 All ERP or discovery endorsements, renewal policies, and replacement coverage policies are subject to SUBRECIPIENT’s review and approval, in its sole discretion.

1.4 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall pay the full amount of all deductibles and any self-insured retention per claim for coverage under the Professional Liability insurance policy. 704 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
85 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT “WORKERS’ COMPENSATION” INSURANCE

1.1 At its own expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain— and shall require each of its Subcontractors to obtain and maintain— for the duration of this Lower Tier Subaward:
(A) Complete Workers’ Compensation insurance, meeting or exceeding the coverages and amounts that California law requires; and
(B) Employer’s Liability insurance in an amount not less than:
(1) ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease; (2) ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per employee for bodily injury or disease; and
(3) ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) policy limit.

1.2 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with a “certificate of insurance” and a subrogation endorsement, “Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others”— on forms satisfactory to the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager, and signed by the insurance carrier or its authorized representative— which fully meet the requirements of, and contain provisions entirely consistent with, this Lower Tier Subaward’s workers’ compensation insurance requirements.

1.3 SUBRECIPIENT shall not be liable to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s personnel, or anyone LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT directly or indirectly employs or uses, for a claim at law or in equity arising out of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s failure to comply with this Lower Tier Subaward’s workers’ compensation insurance requirements.
705 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
86 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT “COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY” OR “BUSINESSOWNERS LIABILITY” INSURANCE

1.1 At its own expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain— and shall require each of its Subcontractors to obtain and maintain— a “Commercial General Liability” or a “Businessowners Liability” insurance policy on an occurrence basis to fully protect LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT from claims and suits for bodily injury, personal and advertising injury, property damage, and medical payments. The policy must add the City of Glendale and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives (collectively, “SUBRECIPIENT AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES”) as additional insureds.

1.2 Coverage afforded to SUBRECIPIENT AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES must be at least as broad as that afforded to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT. If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has higher limits than the limits specified in these insurance requirements, or has additional broader coverage, or has both, the insurer shall make available the higher limits and broader coverage to SUBRECIPIENT AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES. The insurance must be written for the limits of liability specified below:
(A) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence, or the full per occurrence limits of the policy― whichever limit is greater― for bodily injury (including accidental death) to any one person;
(B) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence, or the full per occurrence limits of the policy― whichever limit is greater― for personal and advertising injury to any one person; (C) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence, or the full per occurrence limits of the policy― whichever limit is greater― for property damage; (D) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence, or the full per occurrence limits of the policy— whichever limit is greater— for products completed; and (E) THREE MILLION DOLLARS ($3,000,000) general aggregate limit, or the full aggregate limits of the policy― whichever limit is greater.

1.3 The liability insurance must include all major divisions of coverage and must cover:
(A) Independent Contractors’ Protective Liability;
(B) Products and Completed Operations (maintain same limits as above until three (3) years after the Lower Tier Subaward’s expiration or termination); (C) Personal and Advertising Injury (with Employer’s Liability Exclusion deleted); (D) Contractual Liability; and
(E) Broad Form Property Damage.
706 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
87 1.4 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with a “certificate of insurance” and an “additional insured endorsement”— on forms satisfactory to the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager, and signed by the insurance carrier or its authorized representative— which fully meet the requirements of, and contain provisions entirely consistent with, all of the Insurance Requirements.

1.5 The “certificate of insurance” and an “additional insured endorsement” must state:
“The City of Glendale, and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives are included as additional insureds under the policy(s). This insurance is primary to all other insurance of the City. The City’s insurance, or self-insurance, or both, will apply in excess of— and will not contribute with— this insurance. This insurance applies separately to each insured or additional insured who is seeking coverage, or against whom a claim is made or a suit is brought. The issuing company shall mail thirty (30) days advance notice to the City for any policy cancellation, termination, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage.”
707 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
88 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT “BUSINESS AUTOMOBILE” LIABILITY INSURANCE

1.1 At its own expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain— and shall require each of its Subcontractors to obtain and maintain— a “Business Automobile” insurance policy on an occurrence basis to fully protect LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT from claims and suits for bodily injury, property damage, and medical payments. The policy must add the City of Glendale and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives as additional insureds.

1.2 The insurance must not be written for less than the limits of liability specified below or required by law, whichever coverage amount is greater:
(A) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury (including accidental death) to any one person; and
(B) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence for property damage; or (C) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) combined single limit (“CSL”).

1.3 The liability insurance must include liability, physical damage, medical payments, and uninsured motorist coverages and must cover all vehicles, whether rented, leased, hired, scheduled, owned or non-owned.

1.4 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with a “certificate of insurance” and an “additional insured endorsement”— on forms satisfactory to the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager, and signed by the insurance carrier or its authorized representative— which fully meet the requirements of, and contain provisions entirely consistent with, all of the Insurance Requirements.

1.5 The “certificate of insurance” and an “additional insured endorsement” must state:
“The City of Glendale, and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives are included as additional insureds under the policy(s). This insurance is primary to all other insurance of the City. The City’s insurance, or self-insurance, or both, will apply in excess of— and will not contribute with— this insurance. This insurance applies separately to each insured or additional insured who is seeking coverage, or against whom a claim is made or a suit is brought. The issuing company or the insured shall mail thirty (30) days advance notice to the City for any policy cancellation, termination, nonrenewal, or reduction in coverage.” 708 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
89 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM AGREEMENT
“SEXUAL ABUSE OR MISCONDUCT” LIABILITY INSURANCE

1.1 At its own expense, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall obtain, pay for, and maintain— and shall require each of its Subcontractors to obtain and maintain— “Sexual Abuse or Misconduct Liability” insurance coverage on an occurrence basis to fully protect LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and SUBRECIPIENT from claims and suits for bodily injury and emotional distress. This insurance may be in a stand-alone policy, separate coverage as part of a multi-line policy, or as an endorsement to a Commercial General Liability policy.

1.2 The insurance must not be written for less than the limits of liability specified below:
(A) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence for sexual abuse or molestation to any one person; and
(B) TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) general aggregate limit.

1.3 The liability insurance must cover:
(A) Physical, emotional, psychological injury or harm of a person; and (B) Negligent employment, supervision, investigation, reporting or failing to report to proper authorities, or retention of an employee, agent, representative, volunteer, Subcontractor, or person whose actual, alleged, attempted, or threatened behavior, conduct, or verbal or nonverbal communication— whether or not intentional— results in physical, emotional, psychological injury or harm of a person or persons.

1.4 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall provide SUBRECIPIENT with a “certificate of insurance”— on forms satisfactory to the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager, and signed by the insurance carrier or its authorized representative— which fully meet the requirements of, and contain provisions entirely consistent with, all of the Insurance Requirements. 709 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
90 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

1.1 In addition to LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s having to fully comply with these Insurance Requirements of SUBRECIPIENT, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance must fully meet, and must contain provisions entirely consistent with, the insurance requirements of the County of Los Angeles (Paragraphs 8.24.1 through 8.24.15.1; and 8.25.1 through 8.25.8.1, beginning on page 87 of these Insurance Requirements).

At all times, the insurance company issuing the policy must meet all three of these requirements:
(A) It must be an “admitted” insurer by the State of California Department of Insurance or must be listed on the California Department of Insurance’s “List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers” (“LASLI”);
(B) It must be domiciled within, and organized under the laws of, a State of the United States; and (C) It must carry a minimum A.M. Best Company Financial Strength Rating of “A:VII,” or better.

1.2 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Representation and Warranty. For Professional Liability Insurance coverage, and for Privacy and Network Security coverage— as set out in these Insurance Requirements by SUBRECIPIENT, or by County of Los Angeles, or by both— LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT, states that the following facts are accurate: LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Professional Liability Insurance coverage, and Privacy and Network Security coverage, fully comply with SUBRECIPIENT’s and County of Los Angeles’ insurance requirements.

1.3 If the Lower Tier Subaward requires any of the foregoing insurance coverages to remain in force after the Final Payment, and if they are reasonably available, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall submit to SUBRECIPIENT— with the final Application for Payment— all certificates and additional insured endorsements evidencing the coverages’ continuation.

1.4 A deductible or self-insured retention is subject to SUBRECIPIENT’s review and approval, in its sole discretion. The insurance company or its authorized representative must state either on the insurance certificate or in a separate correspondence:
(A) The amount of the deductible, or self-insured retention, or both; (B) Whether a limit of insurance has been lowered by any pending or paid claim; and (C) The current limit amount, as lowered by the pending or paid claim.

1.5 Despite any conflicting or contrary provision in LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance policy:
(A) If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance company adds SUBRECIPIENT, and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives (collectively, “its representatives”) as additional insureds, then for all acts, errors, or omissions of SUBRECIPIENT, or its representatives, or both, that insurer shall:
(1) Pay those sums that SUBRECIPIENT, or its representatives, or both, become legally obligated to pay as damages; and
710 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
91 (2) Defend— and pay the costs of defending— SUBRECIPIENT, or its representatives, or both;
(B) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance is primary;
(C) Other insurance (whether primary, excess, contingent or self-insurance, or any other basis) available to SUBRECIPIENT, or its representatives, or both, is excess over LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance;
(D) SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance, or self-insurance, or both, will not contribute with LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance policy;
(E) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT and LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance company waive— and shall not exercise— any right of recovery or subrogation that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT or the insurer may have against SUBRECIPIENT, or its representatives, or both;
(F) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance policy applies separately to each insured or additional insured who is seeking coverage, or against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except that the naming of multiple insureds will not increase an insurance company’s limits of liability;
(G) LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance policy applies to a claim or suit brought by an additional insured against a Named Insured or other insured, arising out of bodily injury, personal injury, advertising injury, or property damage; and (H) SUBRECIPIENT is not liable for a premium payment or another expense under LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s policy.

1.6 At any time during the duration of this Lower Tier Subaward, SUBRECIPIENT may do any one or more of the following:
(A) Review this Lower Tier Subaward’s insurance coverage requirements; or (B) Require that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT:
(1) Obtain, pay for, and maintain more or less insurance depending on SUBRECIPIENT’s assessment of any one or more of the following factors:
(a) SUBRECIPIENT’s risk of liability or exposure arising out of, or in any way connected with, the services of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT under this Lower Tier Subaward;
(b) The nature or number of accidents, claims, or lawsuits arising out of, or in any way connected with, the services of LOWER TIER
SUBRECIPIENT under this Lower Tier Subaward; or
(c) The availability, or affordability, or both, of increased liability insurance coverage;
(2) Reduce or eliminate a deductible or self-insured retention as it applies to SUBRECIPIENT; or
711 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
92 (3) Obtain, pay for, and maintain a bond (as a replacement for an insurance coverage) from a California corporate surety, guaranteeing payment to SUBRECIPIENT for liability, or costs, or both, that SUBRECIPIENT incurs during SUBRECIPIENT’s investigation, administration, or defense of a claim or a suit arising out of this Lower Tier Subaward.

1.7 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall maintain the insurance policy without interruption, from the Project’s commencement date to the Final Payment date, or until a date that SUBRECIPIENT specifies for any coverage that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT must maintain after the Final Payment.

1.8 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance company or self-insurance administrator shall mail SUBRECIPIENT written notice at least thirty (30) days in advance of the policy’s or the self-insurance program’s cancellation, termination, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage.

1.9 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall not allow any insurance to expire, cancel, terminate, lapse, or non-renew. Twenty-one (21) days before its insurance policy’s expiration, cancellation, termination, or non-renewal, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall deliver to SUBRECIPIENT evidence of the required coverage as proof that LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s insurance policy has been renewed or replaced with another insurance policy which, during the duration of this Lower Tier Subaward, meets all of this Lower Tier Subaward’s insurance requirements.

1.10 At any time, upon SUBRECIPIENT’s request, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall furnish satisfactory proof of each type of insurance coverage required— including a certified copy of the insurance policy or policies; certificates, endorsements, renewals, or replacements; and documents comprising LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s self-insurance program— all in a form and content acceptable to the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager.

1.11 If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT hires, employs, or uses a Subcontractor to perform work, services, operations, or activities on LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s behalf, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall ensure that the Subcontractor:
(A) Meets, and fully complies with, this Lower Tier Subaward’s insurance requirements; (B) Delivers to SUBRECIPIENT— for its review, or approval, or both— all insurance policies, certificates, and endorsements that this Lower Tier Subaward requires; and (C) Furnishes SUBRECIPIENT, at any time upon its request, with a complete copy of the Subcontractor’s insurance policy or policies for SUBRECIPIENT’s review, or approval, or both.

1.12 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s failure to comply with an insurance provision in this Lower Tier Subaward constitutes a breach upon which SUBRECIPIENT may immediately terminate or suspend LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s performance of this Lower Tier Subaward, or invoke another remedy that this Lower Tier Subaward or the law allows. At its discretion, SUBRECIPIENT may obtain or renew the insurance, and SUBRECIPIENT may pay all or part of the premiums. Upon demand, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall repay SUBRECIPIENT for all sums or monies that SUBRECIPIENT paid to obtain, renew, or reinstate the insurance, or SUBRECIPIENT may offset the cost of the premium against any sums or monies that SUBRECIPIENT may owe LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT.
712 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
93 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM LOWER TIER SUBAWARD AGREEMENT LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’S SUBMITTAL OF CERTIFICATES AND ENDORSEMENTS

1.1 LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT shall have its insurance carrier(s) or self-insurance administrator(s) complete and execute the following insurance documents, unless an exception below applies. When LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT signs and delivers the Lower Tier Subaward to SUBRECIPIENT, LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT also shall deliver:
(A) A “certificate of insurance” for each required liability insurance coverage; (B) An additional insured endorsement for Commercial General Liability coverage or Businessowners Liability coverage and Automobile Liability coverage, unless this Lower Tier Subaward does not require LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT to obtain and maintain Commercial General Liability coverage, Businessowners Liability coverage, or Automobile Liability coverage;
(C) A “certificate of insurance” for Workers’ Compensation insurance; or If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is self-insured for workers’ compensation, a copy of the “Certificate of Consent to Self-insure” from the State of California; or If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT is lawfully exempt from workers’ compensation laws, an “Affirmation of Exemption from Labor Code §3700” form; (D) A subrogation endorsement, “Waiver of Our Right to Recover From Others,” for Workers’ Compensation coverage; and
(E) A complete copy of LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT’s Professional Liability insurance policy, including all forms and endorsements attached to it.

1.2 SUBRECIPIENT will neither sign this Lower Tier Subaward nor issue a “Notice to Proceed” until the City Attorney or City’s Risk and Insurance Services Manager has reviewed and approved the insurance documents. SUBRECIPIENT’s decision as to the acceptability of all insurance documents is final. Unless LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT obtains SUBRECIPIENT’s written approval, SUBRECIPIENT will not permit or allow a substitution of an insurance policy, or a change in a certificate’s or an endorsement’s form and content, or both.

INSURANCE OBLIGATION IS SEPARATE FROM INDEMNITY OBLIGATION

2.1 This Lower Tier Subaward’s insurance provisions:
(A) Are separate and independent from the indemnification and defense provisions in Article 12 of the Lower Tier Subaward; and
(B) Do not limit, in any way, the applicability, scope, or obligations of the indemnification and defense provisions.
713 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
94 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

LOS ANGELES COUNTY
714 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
95 715 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
96 716 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
97 717 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
98 718 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
99 719 of 1517
City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program RFP
100
720 of 1517
- ORIGINAL -
SEPTEMBER 30, 2022

CITY OF GLENDALE

ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM PROPOSAL

PRESENTED BY
TRIO

COMMUNITY MEALS
Exhibit C
Exhibit 2
721 of 1517
September 30, 2022
Aylin Isayan, Community Services Supervisor
City of Glendale Community Services & Park Department
201 East Colorado Street
Glendale, CA 91205
Dear Ms. Aylin Asayan,
TRIO is honored to partner with the City of Glendale, a premier city anchored in pride of civic ownership. Thank you for trusting us for the past 30-plus years to serve your program. TRIO promises to provide quality meals and services for your community to enhance the lives of older adults. TRIO’s local California team and corporate support teams will abide by all requirements stated in your RFP.

TRIO is committed to remaining agile in operating a traditional model or the pandemic response model. Our team understands the importance of ensuring your community is safe and healthy. We will strategically pivot to adapt to your service model.

We look forward to leveraging our knowledge of your program to grow our partnership and enhance the dining experience of the elderly in Glendale. As participants return to the dining sites, we can implement a BeWell Kitchen event to create excitement and promote your three (3) sites.

TRIO shares your mission to provide exceptional service through precise execution and innovative leadership. TRIO is hiring two (2) support management team members dedicated to supporting TRIO’s elderly nutrition programs in the West Coast region. Both members reside in California, adding strength to our local California teams.

Please do not hesitate to contact me directly or Donna Doran, TRIO Client Partnership Director, at 601.594.0252 or donna. [email protected] regarding our proposal.

With kind regards,
John Kirk
Managing Director, TRIO Community Meals
[email protected]
TRIOCOMMUNITYMEALS.COM
722 of 1517
PF:1

PROPOSAL
FOR

CATERING SERVICES FOR ELDERLY NUTRITION PROGRAM
FOR

CITY OF GLENDALE
Date: 20

Proposer: Name of Business
Tax Identification No.: DUNS Number: _________________________ Contact Person:

Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Telephone: FAX:

Email:

TO THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA:

In response to the Request for Proposals (“RFP”) by the City of Glendale (“City”), the undersigned person or entity (“Proposer”) now submits this Proposal (“Proposal”), with the accompanying forms and attachments.

1. In submitting this Proposal, Proposer certifies that:

A. Proposer has read, examined, and is fully familiar with all three of the items below (collectively, “the Documents”):
(1) The RFP’s provisions;
(2) The Contract’s terms, conditions, requirements, specifications, and minimum performance standards; and
(3) Any Addenda issued during the proposal period;
B. Proposer has carefully checked all words, figures, and statements made in the Documents;
C. Proposer is satisfied that the Documents are accurate; D. Proposer understands and accepts all of the Documents’ provisions; E. Proposer has examined the Adult Recreation Center Kitchen and the Elderly Nutrition Program for which this Proposal is submitted, and Proposer is fully familiar with all facts, conditions, circumstances, and matters that may affect, in any way, Proposer’s services or costs;
F. Proposer has fully considered all other matters that may affect, in any way, Proposer’s services or costs;
September 30 22
TRIO Community Meals, LLC
26-2223480 110555591
Contractually, John Kirk; Proposal, Donna Doran
300 S. Tryon Street, Suite 400
Charlotte NC 28202
844.773.0370
[email protected];
[email protected]
723 of 1517
PF:2
G. If Proposer is awarded a Contract; Proposer will not make a claim against City based upon ignorance of local conditions or misunderstanding of any of the Contract’s provisions. If the conditions turn out otherwise than what Proposer anticipated, Proposer agrees to assume all risks incident to it; H. Proposer offers to fully perform all of the duties and obligations specified in the Documents in exchange for the consideration described in the Documents; I. This Proposal is an irrevocable offer for a period of at least ninety (90) calendar days following City’s opening of all Proposals;
J. Except as the Contract or California law allow, City is not liable or responsible for any costs, fees, or expenses that Proposer incurs for any one or more of the following:
(1) Responding to this RFP;
(2) Anticipating or preparing for an award of a Contract; (3) Obtaining any equipment, personnel, facilities, or other items to comply with the Documents’ provisions; or
(4) Performing the services under the Contract;
K. Within fourteen (14) calendar days after City issues the Notice of Intent to Award a Contract, or within any extension that City may allow, Proposer agrees to:
(1) Sign and deliver the Contract, of which the RFP, its attached Exhibits, and the Notice calling for Proposals are a part; and
(2) Furnish the insurance that the Documents require; and L. At its expense, Proposer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against any and all liability, suits, actions, proceedings, judgments, claims, demands, liens, losses, damages, costs, and expenses (including attorneys’ fees, litigation, arbitration, mediation, appeal expenses), if a dispute, lawsuit, or other proceeding arises out of any one or more of the following:
(1) Proposer’s submitting the Proposal;
(2) City’s accepting Proposer’s Proposal; or
(3) City’s awarding a contract to Proposer in compliance with this RFP, or state, federal, or local laws.

2. Under the penalty of perjury, Proposer certifies that:

A. This Proposal is genuine, is not a sham or collusive, and is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any person, partnership, corporation, firm, organization, or another entity not named or disclosed in the Proposal;
B. Proposer did not, directly or indirectly, induce, agree, or solicit anyone else to submit a false or sham Proposal, to refrain from proposing, to withdraw a Proposal, or to attempt to induce an action prejudicial to City’s interests; C. Proposer has not sought by collusion, in any manner, to secure for Proposer any advantage over other proposers; and
D. All facts and statements in the Proposal are completely true, accurate, and correct. 724 of 1517 PF:3
E. By signing this Proposal, each individual below represents and warrants that the individual:
(1) Has the right, power, legal capacity, and authority not only to sign this Proposal on the Proposer’s behalf, but also to bind the Proposer to this Proposal; and
(2) Binds the Proposer to this Proposal.

PROPOSER:

SIGNATURE MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED
BEFORE A NOTARY (USE FORM PF:5) → → → → → → By
Signature
Name
Printed
Its
Title
Address
Telephone

IF PROPOSER IS A CORPORATION, IF PROPOSER IS A PARTNERSHIP,

PLACE IMPRINT OF CORPORATE SEAL JOINT VENTURE, OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY, BELOW: THEN EACH PARTNER, PRINCIPAL, OR

INDIVIDUAL MUST SIGN THIS PROPOSAL ON
PAGE PF:4, IN FRONT OF A NOTARY SEAL
John Kirk
President
100 Valley Drive; Pearl, MS 39208
601-664-3221
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C2E2B81-1A8C-432C-B1C8-67CA15985514 725 of 1517
PF:4

ADDITIONAL SIGNATURE PAGE

FOR PROPOSAL
PROPOSER:

SIGNATURE MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED
BEFORE A NOTARY (USE FORM PF:5) → → → → → → By Signature Name Printed
Its Title
Address

Telephone

SIGNATURE MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED
BEFORE A NOTARY (USE FORM PF:5) → → → → → → By Signature Name
Printed
Its Title
Address

Telephone

SIGNATURE MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED
BEFORE A NOTARY (USE FORM PF:5) → → → → → → By Signature Name
Printed
Its Title
Address

Telephone

SIGNATURE MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED
BEFORE A NOTARY (USE FORM PF:5) → → → → → → By Signature Name
Printed
Its Title
Address

Telephone
726 of 1517
PF:5

CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California
}} County of
On before me, Date Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s)
Place Notary Seal Above
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature Signature of Notary Public

OPTIONAL
Although the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form to another document.

Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document:

Document Date: Number of Pages:

Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:

Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer’s Name:

Individual
Corporate Officer — Title:

Partner: Limited General
Attorney-In-Fact
Trustee
Guardian Conservator
Other:

Signer is representing:

RIGHT THUMBPRINT

OF SIGNER
Top of Thumb Here
Signer’s Name:

Individual
Corporate Officer — Title:

Partner: Limited General
Attorney-In-Fact
Trustee
Guardian Conservator
Other:

Signer is representing:

RIGHT THUMBPRINT

OF SIGNER
Top of Thumb Here
XXXXX South Dakota
Minnehaha
09/19/2022 John Kirk - President- TRIO Community Meals
John Kirk
exp: 11/06/2024
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C2E2B81-1A8C-432C-B1C8-67CA15985514 727 of 1517
PF:6
PROPOSER’S QUALIFICATIONS STATEMENT
All responses must be typewritten or printed legibly in ink. When additional space is needed to explain an answer, attach sheets as necessary. In Section 17 of this form, list and describe each attachment. Failure to (1) complete this form, (2) return it, or (3) attach a required document may render the Proposal non-responsive.

1. BUSINESS ORGANIZATION / STRUCTURE

1.1 Your firm is a:

Corporation Sole Proprietorship Partnership
Limited Liability Company Other:

1.2 If your firm is a corporation, answer the following:

1.2.1 Date of incorporation:

1.2.2 State of incorporation:

1.2.3 Corporate ID number:

1.2.4 President’s name:

1.2.5 Vice President’s name:

1.2.6 Secretary’s name:

1.2.7 Treasurer’s name:

1.2.8 Agent for Service of Process:

1.2.9 Agent’s address:

1.2.10 Is your firm a publicly traded corporation?
Yes No

1.2.11 For any person, firm or entity who owns 25% or more of the corporation’s stock, identify the individual, firm or entity and the corresponding percentage of ownership:

Name: Percent:

X
728 of 1517
PF:7

1.3 If your firm is a limited liability company, answer the following:

1.3.1 Date of formation:

1.3.2 State of formation:

1.3.3 Secretary of State’s File or ID number:

1.3.4 Chief Executive Officer’s name:

1.3.5 Name of Manager(s):

1.3.6 Agent for Service of Process:

1.3.7 Agent’s address:

1.3.8 For any person, firm or entity whose ownership or membership interest in the company exceeds 25%, identify the individual, firm or entity and the corresponding percentage of ownership or membership:

Name: Percent:

1.4 If your firm is a partnership, answer the following:

1.4.1 Date of formation:

1.4.2 Type of partnership (General, Limited, LLP):

1.4.3 Secretary of State’s Registration or ID number:

1.4.4 List the name of the General Partner(s) and any individual who has any equity interest in the partnership:

6/8/2021
Mississippi
2021299656
John Kirk, President, TRIO Community Meals, LLC
Thomas Heim
300 S. Tryon St., Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202
729 of 1517
PF:8

1.4.5 List jurisdictions in which your firm’s fictitious name (dba) is filed:

1.5 If your firm is individually owned (a sole proprietorship), answer the following:

1.5.1 Date your firm started:

1.5.2 Name of owner:

1.5.3 List jurisdictions in which your firm’s fictitious name (dba) is filed:

1.6 If your firm is other than the type listed above, such as a joint venture, consortium, trust, association or other combination, describe the business organization or structure, identify the principals, and list their corresponding percentage of ownership or control:

1.6.1 Description of business organization or structure:

1.6.2 Principals and their corresponding percentage of ownership or control:

Name: Percent:

2. OWNERSHIP AND NAME CHANGES

2.1 How many years has your firm been in business under its present name?

2.2 In the past ten years, has your firm changed names? Yes No
If Yes, list all prior names, addresses, and the dates they were used. Explain the reason for each name change:

2.2.1 Prior name:
4 years as TRIO
Community meals;
TRIO is a merger of 3
companies: Bateman
started in 1993, Valley
started in 1960, and
X Lindley started in 1981
Compass Group USA dba Bateman Community Meals, LLC 730 of 1517 PF:9

2.2.2 Address:

2.2.3 Reason name changed:

2.2.4 Starting / ending dates of prior name: /

2.2.5 Prior name:

2.2.6 Address:

2.2.7 Reason name changed:

2.2.8 Starting / ending dates of prior name: /

2.3 Is your firm a subsidiary, parent, holding company, or affiliate of another firm? Yes No
If Yes, explain the relationship between your firm and the associated firms. Include information about an affiliated firm only if one firm owns 50% or more of another firm, or if an owner, partner or officer of your firm holds a similar position in another firm:

2.3.1 Associated firm’s name:

2.3.2 Address:

2.3.3 Relationship between your firm and the associated firm:

2.3.4 Principals and their corresponding percentage of ownership or control:

Name: Percent:

2.3.5 Associated firm’s name:

2.3.6 Address:

2.3.7 Relationship between your firm and the associated firm:

2.3.8 Principals and their corresponding percentage of ownership or control:

Name: Percent:
3155 W. Pinhook Rd, Lafayette, LA 70508
Elior North America purchased Bateman from Compass
Group. Elior North America merged Bateman with
Valley Services and Lindley Food Services to form TRIO Community Meals X
Elior North America
300 S. Tryon St., Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202
Elior North America is the parent company of TRIO Community Meals.

Elior North America is a publicly owned company.
731 of 1517
PF:10
Name: Percent:

Name: Percent:

3. LICENSING
For the following questions, the term “owner” does not include owners of stock in your firm if your firm is a publicly traded corporation.

3.1 Are any of your firm’s licenses held in the name of a corporation or partnership? Yes No
If Yes, list below the name of the corporation or partnership that actually holds the license:

3.1.1 Corporation’s or partnership’s name:

3.2 List jurisdictions in which your firm is legally qualified to do business, provide license or registration number, and set forth the type of license. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

3.2.1 Jurisdiction:

3.2.2 License or registration number:

3.2.3 Type of license:

3.2.4 Jurisdiction:

3.2.5 License or registration number:

3.2.6 Type of license:

3.2.7 Jurisdiction:

3.2.8 License or registration number:

3.2.9 Type of license:

3.3 In the past seven years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees been investigated, cited, assessed any penalties, subject to any disciplinary action by a licensing agency, or found to have violated any licensing laws or regulations? Yes No
If Yes, identity the licensing agency, type of license, date and reason for the disciplinary action. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

3.3.1 Licensing Agency:

3.3.2 Type of license:

3.3.3 Date of disciplinary action:

3.3.4 Reason for disciplinary action:

X
TRIO Community Meals
TRIO is licensed to do business in 90 jurisdictions
in 26 states. We provided 12 CA jurisdictions, and
can provide all locations upon request. Please see
Attachment 3.2 for the rest of TRIO’s response.

City of Los Angeles, CA
0003298457-0001-1
Tax Registration for 3355 E Gage, Huntington Park, CA
City of Los Angeles, CA
0003298457-0002-0
Tax Registration for 8329 De Celis North Hills, CA
X
732 of 1517
PF:11

3.3.5 Licensing Agency:

3.3.6 Type of license:

3.3.7 Date of disciplinary action:

3.3.8 Reason for disciplinary action:

3.3.9 Licensing Agency:

3.3.10 Type of license:

3.3.11 Date of disciplinary action:

3.3.12 Reason for disciplinary action:

4. EXPERIENCE AND PERFORMANCE HISTORY
For the following questions, the term “owner” does not include owners of stock in your firm if your firm is a publicly traded corporation.

4.1 How many years has your firm been in business as a food service provider?

4.2 In the past five years, have any of your firm’s owners, partners, or officers operated a similar food service provider business?
Yes No
If Yes, list the business’ name and address, and the person who operated the business.

Attach additional sheets as necessary.

4.2.1 Food service provider business name:

4.2.2 Address:

4.2.3 Name of your firm’s owner, partner or officer who operated other food service provider business:

4.2.4 Starting / ending dates of ownership: /

4.2.5 Food service provider business name:

4.2.6 Address:

4.2.7 Name of your firm’s owner, partner or officer who operated other food service provider business:

4.2.8 Starting / ending dates of ownership: /

4.3 Does your firm currently own or operate any other business? Yes No
If Yes, list the business’ name and address, and the person who operates the business. 50 years as Valley
Services, 1 of 3 legacy
TRIO companies.

X
X
733 of 1517
PF:12
Attach additional sheets as necessary.

4.3.1 Business name:

4.3.2 Address:

4.3.3 Person’s name that operates business:

4.3.4 Description of business:

4.3.5 Business name:

4.3.6 Address:

4.3.7 Person’s name that operates business:

4.3.8 Description of business:

4.4 List the government entities for which your firm has provided food service for an Elderly Nutrition Program. Provide the name and telephone number of the person within the government entity who is most familiar with your performance of the services (i.e., “Contact Person”). Attach additional sheets as necessary.

4.4.1 Government entity’s name:

4.4.2 Services that your firm provided:

4.4.3 Starting / ending dates of services: /

4.4.4 Was your firm:

Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes No
Under a contract or agreement? Yes No

4.4.5 Contact Person: Phone Number:

4.4.6 Government entity’s name:

4.4.7 Services that your firm provided:

4.4.8 Starting / ending dates of services: /

4.4.9 Was your firm:

Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes No
Under a contract or agreement? Yes No

4.4.10 Contact Person: Phone Number:

4.4.11 Government entity’s name:

4.4.12 Services that your firm provided:

4.4.13 Starting / ending dates of services: /

4.4.14 Was your firm:

Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes No
Human Services Association
Freshly prepared meals for congregate dining and
homebound elderly. Frozen meals for homebound elderly
1987 Present
X
X
Darren Dunaway 562.806.5400 x200
MOW of Contra Costa Senior Nutrition Program
Lunch and breakfast for congregate and homebound
elderly. Meal types: hot, refrigerated and frozen. Delivery to 21 locations. 1989 Present
X
X
Sara Cortez 925.787.5874
MOW of Solano County
All meals for senior nutrition programs and MOWSC
community food service contracts. 2016 Present
LiveWell with Traditions (LWWT)
100 Valley Dr, Pearl, MS 39208
Brian Campbell manages the business. Brian
reports to John Kirk, TRIO’s President.

LWWT partners with Health Plans to provide direct to the door frozen meals for Medicaid Advantage plans.

X
Please see Attachment 4.4 for the rest of TRIO’s response. 734 of 1517
PF:13
Under a contract or agreement? Yes No

4.4.15 Contact Person: Phone Number:

4.4.16 Government entity’s name:

4.4.17 Services that your firm provided:

4.4.18 Starting / ending dates of services: /

4.4.19 Was your firm:

Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes No
Under a contract or agreement? Yes No

4.4.20 Contact Person: Phone Number:

4.4.21 Government entity’s name:

4.4.22 Services that your firm provided:

4.4.23 Starting / ending dates of services: /

4.4.24 Was your firm:

Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes No
Under a contract or agreement? Yes No

4.4.25 Contact Person: Phone Number:

4.5 List the volume (by number of meals) of business that your firm performed for all Elderly Nutrition Programs for the years below:
2018 2019 2020
Congregate meals:

Frozen home delivered meals:

Hot home delivered meals:

4.6 Describe your firm’s experience related to preparing and providing congregate and home delivered meals for an elderly population. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

TRIO has 50 years of experience preparing and providing congregate and home-delivered meals for the elderly. For 32 years, initially as Bateman, TRIO has provided meals for the City of Glendale’s Elderly Nutrition Program. Through the years, TRIO has perfected processes and procedures to continuously provide you with a quality program that positively impacts the lives of the elderly.

TRIO prepares and packages over 30 million congregate and home-delivered meals at 90 central kitchens in 26 states through partnerships with over 500 client elderly nutrition agencies. Because every program is unique, TRIO provides each client agency with a custom operational approach focusing on menu development, meal production, and logistics.

Please see Attachment 4.6 for the rest of TRIO’s response.

X
Laurie Hartmann 704.425.0638
Salt Lake County Aging & Adult Services
Freshly prepared congregate meals delivered to sites.

Homebound elderly receives frozen meals prepared
fresh by TRIO. An
average of 1,600
meals per day.
2016 Present
X
X
Russell Stoddard 801.538.3910
City of Inglewood
Fresh, hot congregate and home-delivered meals.
2019 Present
X
X
Baz Devlia 310.412.4360
8,466,923
8,842,825
13,812,124
12,086,332
11,101,831
17,563,394
10,395,227
18,672,187
18,129,105
735 of 1517
PF:14

4.7 Describe the extent of your firm’s knowledge and qualifications which demonstrate your understanding and ability to meet the complex requirements of the Elderly Nutrition Program.

Use the Food Services Specifications (RFP – EXHIBIT I) and Menu Writing Specifications (RFP – EXHIBIT II) as a guideline for expectations. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

4.8 Describe the extent of your firm’s business experience in any field, which would indicate your firm’s ability to successfully operate a regulated or complex business. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

TRIO’s ability to successfully operate a regulated or complex business is reflected by our financial stability and strong 98% client retention rate. The success is among over 600 client agencies in elderly nutrition agencies and the highly regulated CACFP, after-school programs, k-12 meal programs, summer lunch programs, adult day care, Medicaid waiver meals, and emergency disaster meals.

Ensuring TRIO meets all regulations, teams are supported by these resources provided by Elior North America, our parent company. At the helm of each resource is a leader with cutting-edge knowledge in their area of expertise. Our leaders provide programs, training, and tools for TRIO food service directors to effectively manage the wide breadth of an operation.

Please see Attachment 4.8 for the rest of TRIO’s response.

For elderly nutrition programs, TRIO prepares and packages 30 million meals annually in 90 central kitchens in 26 states. TRIO has had the distinct privilege since 1990 of providing quality, fresh and nutritious meals to the City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program. At the beginning of our partnership, our team began as Bateman, and we continued our commitment to your program throughout the years.

Using RFP Exhibit I, Food Services Specification as a guideline, TRIO’s practices will continue to include these critical elements:
• TRIO will furnish all food, labor, and equipment necessary to prepare and deliver individual meals and/or bulk food for persons 60 years and older.
• Meals will comply with all Federal, State, and County regulations, codes, and laws and Older Americans Act as stated in the RFP.
• TRIO will maintain a safe, sanitary environment meeting all local and state codes. • TRIO’s Food Service Manager, Israel Mazariego, 28 years of experience. • TRIO’s Registered Dietitian, Stephanie Pradun, meets all requirements stated in the RFP.

Stephanie’s resume and credentials are included in the attachments.

Please see Attachment 4.7 for the rest of TRIO’s response. 736 of 1517
PF:15

5. PERSONNEL

5.1 At present, how many people (whether paid or unpaid) work at your firm? _________________

5.2 Does your firm have an agreement or an arrangement with any other firm to loan or share your firm’s employees?
Yes No

5.3 When your firm submits this Proposal, if your firm does not have the personnel required by the RFP and the Contract, the following information must be provided. For each employee whom your firm intends to hire to fulfill and perform the services, describe below your firm’s plan for hiring personnel, qualification standards, training program or process, and date when the hiring process will be completed. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

5.4 List the personnel who will perform the work under this Request for Proposals.

5.4.1 Food Service Manager name:

5.4.2 Professional background:

5.4.3 Number of months / years with your firm:

5.4.4 Number of professional degrees / licenses / certifications this person holds:

For the City of Glendale
ENP 3 on-site and 3
support. TRIO employs
216 individuals in
California and additional
1, 385 outside
California.

X
TRIO employs three (3) team members dedicated to the City of Glendale program: Israel Mazariego, Vedy Mazariego, and Iris Lanterman. In addition, TRIO is hiring two (2) support management team members, who reside in California, adding strength to our local team.

These TRIO team members provide impactful support to TRIO’s City of Glendale dedicated team and support other TRIO operations in the region:

Jose Vargas, TRIO FSD at Huntington Park, supports the operation and is on-site at the Adult Recreation Center 2 days a week.

Joel Medina, TRIO Area Manager, supports the overall program ensuring TRIO meets your expectations.

Stephanie Pradun, TRIO Registered Dietitian, supports the City of Glendale menus ensuring all menu and nutritional requirements are met.

Victor Carranza, TRIO District Manager, a new TRIO team member, will support the City of Glendale program ensuring TRIO’s operations standards are practiced.

A Resource Manager will be hired to support the operation for specific needs, such as implementation of new programs.

Please see Attachment 5.3 for the rest of TRIO’s response.

Israel Mazariego, Food Service Manager & Main On-Site Cook Israel has 28 years experience preparing fresh meals from scratch for the City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program. He also leads the team ensuring quality procurement, production and packaging standards are met. Israel ensures the team follows TRIO’s protocols for food safety and sanitation, workplace safety, and training. Israel writes the Millennial Menu.
28 years
3 737 of 1517
PF:16

5.4.5 List professional degrees / licenses / certifications:

5.4.6 Professional affiliations:

5.4.7 Related professional experience:

5.4.8 Honors and awards:

5.4.9 Registered dietician name:

5.4.10 Professional background:

5.4.11 Number of months / years with your firm:

5.4.12 Number of professional degrees / licenses / certifications this person holds:

5.4.13 List professional degrees / licenses / certifications:

5.4.14 Professional affiliations:

ServSafe Certified,
Seafood HACCP Certified, Food Handler’s Card
Prior to Israel’s 28 years at the City of Glendale,
he held a position at a hotel.

Stephanie Pradun, RDN, LDN
Stephanie has 11 years of experience as a Registered Dietitian. Stephanie has a passion for food service with specalties in food serve management, budget-conscious menu design, and training and development.
4 years
Certified Food Protection Manager, ServSafe
B.S.in Nutritional Science, Dietetics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison Completed CADE-Accredited Dietetic Internship from the University of Wisconsin Hospital & Clinics
2 Member, Academy of Nutrition & Dietetics
738 of 1517
PF:17

5.4.15 Related professional experience:

5.4.16 Honors and awards:

5.4.17 On-site cook name:

5.4.18 Professional background:

5.4.19 Number of months / years with your firm:

5.4.20 Number of professional degrees / licenses / certifications this person holds:

5.4.21 List professional degrees / licenses / certifications:

5.4.22 Professional affiliations:

5.4.23 Related professional experience:

5.4.24 Honors and awards:

• Writes nutritionally complete menus to satisfy contract requirements and participant requests. • Conducts ongoing focus groups and interviews to collect feedback and suggestions. • Performs nutrition analysis to ensure adequacy.
• Presents nutrition information and other education sessions to address needs within the community.

Vedy Mazariego, the Cook Helper to Israel Mazariego who is the Food Service Manager and Head On-Site Cook.

For 6 years, Vedy has been TRIO’s cook helper on-site at the City of Glendale’s Adult Recreation Center. Vedy preps the majority of the ingredients following recipes. 6 years
1 ServSafe Certification
739 of 1517
PF:18

5.5 Are the resumes of all of the employees listed in 5.4 attached to this Proposal? Yes No

6. EMPLOYEE SAFETY AND TRAINING

6.1 Does your firm have a written Injury and Illness Prevention Program (“IIPP”) that complies with California’s Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 3203, or any other written policy manual for your employees’ safety?
Yes No

6.2 Does your firm have a written policy for handling, transporting, and disposing of hazardous materials?
Yes No

6.3 Does your firm have a training program for new employees? Yes No

6.4 Does your firm have regular training for its food service handlers? Yes No

6.5. Is your firm in full compliance with Los Angeles County Code Title 2 - Administration, Division 4, Chapter 2.212 (COVID-19 Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel), and Los Angeles County’s Subaward Requirements for COVID-19 Vaccinations of County Contractor Personnel (Exhibit VI and Exhibit VII to the RFP)?
Yes No
If No, describe with which requirements your firm is not in compliance; and whether your firm will be able to fully comply with the County requirements if awarded a Contract. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

6.6 In the past five years, has your firm received an OSHA or Cal/OSHA citation or notice of violation?
Yes No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
740 of 1517
PF:19
If Yes, list the date; describe the facts and circumstances about each instance; identity any citation or notice of violation that the agency issued; list the date, court and case number of any criminal action or civil suit arising out of each instance; and set forth the status, outcome or disposition of the citation, notice of violation, criminal action or civil suit. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

7. SECURITY

7.1 In the past five years, have any crimes occurred or been attempted at your firm’s business office or principal place of operations?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, identify the location, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

8. FINANCIAL RESOURES AND RESPONSIBILITY

8.1 In the past ten years, has your firm, or anyone else acting on behalf of your firm, filed for bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership, or reorganization? X
741 of 1517
PF:20
Yes No
If Yes, list the filing date, identify the court and case number, describe the facts and circumstances giving rise to each instance, and set forth the disposition or current status.

Attach additional sheets as necessary.

8.2 In the past ten years, has your firm had any consolidations, mergers, acquisitions, closings, layoffs, or staff reductions?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

8.3 Is your firm in the process of, or in negotiations toward: (a) consolidating, merging, selling, or closing its food service provider business, or (b) laying off employees or reducing staff? Yes No
X
X
X
Bateman, Valley Services, and Lindley Food Services merged to form TRIO Community Meals in 2019.
742 of 1517
PF:21
If Yes, describe the transaction; list the anticipated date for completing the transaction, laying off employees, or reducing staff; and describe the facts, circumstances, and reasons for taking the action. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

8.4 The RFP requires an audited or reviewed financial statement, or a compilation, prepared by a Certified Public Accountant, and a letter of reference from a bank or other financial institution, to accompany the Proposal. This information will be used only for the purpose of determining whether the Proposer has sufficient financial resources to perform the requested services.

Place an “X” below for each year that your firm has attached a financial statement:

8.4.1 2018:

8.4.2 2019:

8.4.3 2020:

8.5 Is a letter of reference from the bank or other financial institution attached to this Proposal? Yes No

9. BID REJECTION AND CONTRACT TERMINATION
For the following questions, the term “owner” does not include owners of stock in your firm if your firm is a publicly traded corporation.

9.1 Has a government entity or a client ever rejected your firm’s Bid or Proposal for services? Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
X
X
X
743 of 1517
PF:22

9.2 Has a government entity or a client ever determined that your firm is a non-responsible bidder or contractor?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

9.3 Has a government entity or a client ever debarred or suspended your firm from bidding or contracting?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
744 of 1517
PF:23

9.4 Has your firm ever failed to fulfill or perform, either partially or completely, a contract or an agreement with a government entity or a client?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

9.5 In the past ten years, has any officer or principal of your firm been an officer of another firm which failed to perform a contract or agreement?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
745 of 1517
PF:24

9.6 Has a government entity or a client ever terminated, suspended, or non-renewed your firm’s contract or agreement before its completion?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

9.7 Has a government entity or a client ever notified or advised your firm that its performance under a contract or agreement is poor, sub-standard, or non-compliant? Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
746 of 1517
PF:25

9.8 In the past ten years, has your firm paid, or has your firm been assessed, liquidated damages on a contract or agreement?
Yes No
If Yes, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

10. BUSINESS INTEGRITY
For the following questions, the term “owner” does not include owners of stock in your firm if your firm is a publicly traded corporation. The term “convicted” includes a verdict of guilty by a judge or jury, a plea of guilty, a plea of nolo contendere, or a forfeiture of bail.

10.1 In the past ten years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees been convicted in a criminal action, or found liable in a civil suit, for making false claim(s)— including false claims(s) for payment— or material misrepresentation(s) to any government entity? Yes No
If Yes, identify the government entity; list the date, court and case number; describe the facts X
X
747 of 1517
PF:26
and circumstances about each instance; and set forth the outcome or disposition. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

10.2 Is a government entity currently investigating your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers or employees for making false claim(s)— including false claims(s) for payment— or material misrepresentation(s)?
Yes No
If Yes, identify the government entity, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

10.3 In the past ten years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees been convicted of a crime involving embezzlement, theft, fraud, forgery, bribery, deceptive or unlawful business practices, perjury, falsifying or destroying records or evidence, or receiving stolen property?
Yes No
If Yes, identify the crime or offense; list the date, court and case number; describe the facts and circumstances about each instance; and set forth the penalty or punishment imposed.

Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
748 of 1517
PF:27

10.4 In the past ten years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers or employees been convicted of a felony?
Yes No
If YES, explain the details of that conviction and, if so, whether you or said officer have served his or her sentence. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

10.5 In the past ten years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers or employees been convicted of a crime related to the bidding of a government contract, the awarding of a government contract, or the performance of a government contract? Yes No
If YES, identify the government entity; list the date, court and case number; describe the facts and circumstances about each instance; and set forth the penalty or punishment imposed.

Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
749 of 1517
PF:28

10.6 In the past ten years, has any government entity ever: (a) investigated, cited, disciplined, or assessed any penalties against your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees, or (b) determined that your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees violated any laws, rules, or regulations?
Yes No
If Yes, identify the government entity, list the date, and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

11. CLAIMS AND SUITS
For the following questions, the term “owner” does not include owners of stock in your firm if your firm is a publicly traded corporation.

11.1 In the past ten years, has your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees been a defendant in court― participated in an arbitration or mediation, or administrative hearing― on a matter related to:

11.1.1 The performance, non-performance, default, violation, or breach of a contract or agreement?
Yes No
X
X
750 of 1517
PF:29

11.1.2 Preparing or serving food, beverages, or meals?
Yes No

11.1.3 Violating any laws, rules, or regulations?
Yes No

11.1.4 Bodily injury or personal injury (libel, slander, false imprisonment)? Yes No

11.1.5 Employment-related litigation brought by an employee of your firm? Yes No

11.1.6 Payment or non-payment to a subcontractor or supplier? Yes No

11.1.7 California Labor Code requirements relating to underpayment of wages, failure to maintain or produce payroll records, or failure to maintain workers’ compensation insurance?
Yes No

11.1.8 Defective, deficient, substandard, or noncompliant work or services? Yes No
If the answer to questions 11.1.1 to 11.1.8 is Yes, identify the name of the person or entity that sued (i.e., “the plaintiff”); list the date, court, and case number; describe the facts and circumstances giving rise to the lawsuit, mediation, or arbitration; and set forth the outcome or disposition. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

11.2 Has your firm ever filed a claim for damages or a lawsuit, or requested arbitration or mediation, against a government entity or client?
Yes No
If Yes, identify the government entity or client; list the date, court and case number; describe the facts and circumstances about the claim for damages, lawsuit, mediation, or arbitration; and set forth the outcome or disposition. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
751 of 1517
PF:30

11.3 Are there any pending or outstanding judgments or liens against your firm or any of its owners, partners, officers, or employees?
Yes No
If Yes, identify the name of the person or entity entitled to payment; list the date, court and case number; describe the facts and circumstances giving rise to the judgment or lien; and set forth the amount of the judgment or lien. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

12. INSURANCE

12.1 For the last five years, state how many claims (whether or not your firm believes it was responsible for the loss, damage, or injury), filed by clients, persons receiving your firm’s meals, or third parties, that your firm forwarded to its insurance carrier(s). Include paid and unpaid claims:

12.1.1 2017:

14.1.2 2018:

14.1.3 2019:

14.1.4 2020:

14.1.5 2021: ______

12.2 In the past ten years, has an insurance company or a surety company:

12.2.1 Refused to insure your firm?
Yes No

12.2.2 Canceled or non-renewed your firm’s insurance coverage? Yes No

12.2.3 Refused to issue your firm a bond?
X
X
X
5 3
2 5
2 752 of 1517
PF:31
Yes No

12.2.4 Canceled or revoked a bond obtained by your firm? Yes No
If the answer to questions 12.2.1 to 12.2.4 is Yes, identify the name of the insurance company or surety company; list the date; and describe the facts and circumstances about each instance. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

12.3 Your firm must submit to its insurance company, or insurance agent, the “Insurance Requirements” in the RFP and the proposed Contract.

Your insurance company’s underwriter or agent must complete the “Insurance Requirements Affidavit”― on the next page― which states that if the City awards a Contract to your firm, your insurer’s underwriter or agent will furnish the City with the required insurance documents within fourteen (14) calendar days after your firm’s having been notified of the Contract’s award.

YOUR FIRM MUST SUBMIT THE COMPLETED AFFIDAVIT FORM WITH ITS PROPOSAL.

The City may reject any Proposal made without the affidavit, or made with an incomplete affidavit form.

12.3.1 Has your firm submitted the “Insurance Requirements Affidavit” to your insurance company’s underwriter or agent?
Yes No

12.3.2 Has your insurance company’s underwriter or agent completed the affidavit form? Yes No

12.3.3 Is the completed affidavit form attached to this Proposal?? Yes No
X
X
X
X
X
Please see Attachment 12.3 for TRIO’s response regarding the Insurance Requirements Affadavit.
753 of 1517
PF:32

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AFFIDAVIT
THE CONTRACTOR’S INSURANCE COMPANY(S) OR INSURANCE AGENT MUST COMPLETE THIS FORM AND
THE CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT WITH THE CONTRACTOR’S PROPOSAL.

I, the undersigned (check one box:  underwriter  agent), certify that I and the Contractor listed below have jointly reviewed the “Insurance Requirements” in this Request for Proposals. If the City of Glendale (“City”) awards the Contractor the contract for “Elderly Nutrition Program Catering Service,” I will be able— within fourteen (14) calendar days after the Contractor’s having been notified of the contract’s award— to furnish the City with valid insurance forms (including: one or more insurance certificates and additional insured endorsements) that fully meet all of the “Insurance Requirements.”

Underwriter’s / Agent’s Signature Date

Underwriter’s / Agent’s Name (Printed)

Address City State Zip Code

Telephone Number FAX Number Email Address
Elderly Nutrition Program
Contractor’s Name Request for Proposal
Place a check mark () next to each line of coverage, and furnish the name of the Insurance Company providing the coverage.

DO NOT write “Will Provide,” “To Be Determined,” “When Required,” or similar phrases.  Commercial General Liability
 Automobile Liability
 Workers’ Compensation Liability
 Professional Liability
 Pollution Liability Not required
 Builder’s Risk Not required
NOTE TO THE UNDERWRITER / AGENT: If the insurance forms that the Contractor submits to the City do not fully comply with the “Insurance Requirements,” and/or if the Contractor fails to submit the forms within the 14 days’ time limit, the City may: (1) declare the Contractor’s Proposal non-responsive, and (2) award the contract to the next highest scoring, responsible proposer.

If you have any questions about “Insurance Requirements,” please contact (Veronica Padron), Risk and InsuranceAnalyst, at (818) 550-4354.

Please see Attachment 12.3 for TRIO’s response regarding the Insurance Requirements Affadavit.
754 of 1517
PF:33

13. REFERENCE CHECK

13.1 The City of Glendale may: (1) request credit, criminal, and investigative reports about your firm, and (2) contact the references, government entities, and other persons listed in this Proposal.

The City of Glendale will use this information to evaluate your firm’s financial resources, responsibility, and integrity with respect to this Proposal, an award of the Contract, or any contract renewal. The City of Glendale will treat any information that it obtains now or later as confidential.

13.1.1 Does your firm authorize the City of Glendale to obtain credit, criminal, and investigative reports about your firm?
Yes No

13.1.2 Does your firm authorize the references, government entities, and other persons listed in this Proposal to release information about your firm to the City of Glendale? Yes No

14. PUBLIC RECORDS EXEMPT INFORMATION
Below identify (by a general description) all copyrighted material, trade secrets, or other proprietary information (“protectable documents”) that Proposer has included in this Proposal which Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure under California’s Public Records Act, Government Code Section 6250, et seq. By listing the protectable documents below, Proposer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives from and against any action, claim, lawsuit, or proceeding, including costs and expenses, arising out of or connected with the City’s refusal to disclose the protectable documents to any party making a request for those items. The City will treat any Proposer, who fails to identify below protectable documents that Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure, as having waived its right to an exemption from disclosure, as the Public Records Act provides.

TRIO’s answer to 4.4 of the Proposal Form is confidential and proprietary.

The audited annual financial results for 8.4.1 - 8.4.3 (years 2018, 2019, and 2020) are confidential and proprietary.

X
X
TRIO’s answer to 15.1 of the Proposal Form (Meal Rates) is confidential and proprietary.

TRIO’s answer to 5.4 (Attachment 5.4 - Resumes) is confidential and proprietary. 755 of 1517
PF:34

15. MEAL RATES

15.1 Your firm’s proposal for meal pricing must be based on the Menu Writing Specifications (EXHIBIT II) and the 2022-2023 Menu (EXHIBIT III). Pricing must be within the terms and conditions of the Food Service Specifications (EXHIBIT I).

Price per meal is based on meals prepared by the Contractor at the Adult Recreation Center, with the City’s delivering meals to two satellite locations.

In the blanks below, list the total price per meal for each program:

15.1.1 Hot Meals / Boxed Lunches Prepared Program: $

15.1.2 Frozen, Home Meals Delivered Program: $

16. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Below state any other information that your firm believes is essential to a complete evaluation of the Proposal. If your firm has no additional information, state below: “Our firm does not have any additional information to present.”

4.56 4.75
Nutrition Education: Monthly Handouts, Virtual Events, and BeWell Kitchen Events.

Please see Attachment 16 for the rest of TRIO’s response. 756 of 1517
PF:35

17. ATTACHMENTS
For any attachment that is a part of this Proposal, list and describe the attachment (e.g., “Explanation concerning question 9.3 - 2 pages” or “Information required by Section 6 of the RFP – 6 pages”).

Our firm declares that the attachments listed below are added and are made a part of this Proposal in order to fully and accurately respond to the RFP:

16.1 16.2

16.3 16.4

16.5 16.6

16.7 16.8

16.9 16.10

16.11 16.12

16.13 16.14

16.15 16.16

16.17 16.18

16.19 16.20

Attachment 4.4 - 2 pages
Attachment 4.6 - 1 page
Attachment 4.8 - 1 page
Attachment 8.4.1 - 2018 Financial Report for our parent company, Elior Group - 8 pages Attachment 8.4.2 - 2019 Financial Report for our parent company, Elior Group - 9 pages Attachment 8.4.2 - 2020 Financial Report for our parent company, Elior Group - 10 pages Attachment 8.5 - Letter of Reference from Bank of America - 1 page Attachment 3.2 - 1 page
Attachment 4.7 - 2 pages
Attachment 5.4 - Resumes - 7 pages
Attachment 5.3 - 2 pages
Attachment 12.3 - Insurance Requirements Affadavit - 3 pages Attachment 16 - Additional Information - 7 pages
757 of 1517
Attachment 3.2

3.2 (cont.) List jurisdictions in which your firm is legally qualified to do business, provide license or registration number, and set forth the type of license. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

Jurisdiction: City of Santa Clara, CA
License or registration number: 209785
Type of License: Business License Tax Certificate
Jurisdiction: City of Martinez, CA
License or registration number: 02508767
Type of License: Business License Tax Certificate
Jurisdiction: City of Antioch, CA
License or registration number: 3023819
Type of License: Business License
Jurisdiction: City of San Jose, CA
License or registration number: 1209962200
Type of License: Business Tax Certificate
Jurisdiction: City of El Monte, CA
License or registration number: 04920536
Type of License: Business License
Jurisdiction: City of Walnut Creek
License or registration number: 16524680
Type of License: Business Tax License
Jurisdiction: City of Suisun City, CA
License or registration number: 22763
Type of License: Business License
Jurisdiction: County of Sacramento
License or registration number: GNB32021-02565
Type of License: General Business License
Jurisdiction: CA Secretary of State
License or registration number: 201929810066
Type of License: Certificate of Status
Jurisdiction: California Seller’s Permit
License or registration number: 097893675-00010
Type of License: Seller’s Permit
758 of 1517
Attachment 4.4

4.4 (cont.) List the government entities for which your firm has provided food service for an Elderly Nutrition Program. Provide the name and telephone number of the person within the government entity who is most familiar with your performance of the services (i.e., “Contact Person”). Attach additional sheets as necessary.

TRIO is proud to partner with over 500 elderly nutrition programs. We provided examples and can provide the entire list upon request.

Government entity’s name: County of Santa Clara
Services that your firm provided: Fresh prepared congregate dining includes hot bulk, hot prepackaged & chilled prepackaged. Homebound elderly receives 2 fresh sandwich meals and 5 frozen meals each week. TRIO has a fleet of 10 vehicles. An average of 1,600 meals per day.

Starting / ending dates of services: 2000 - Present
Was your firm Selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Vanessa Sittauer
Phone Number: 408.975.4860
Government entity’s name: City of Gardena
Services that your firm provided: Hot congregate, hot home-delivered, and frozen meals.

Starting / ending dates of services: 2020 to Present
Was your firm selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Stephany Santin
Phone Number: 310.217.9537
Government entity’s name: Northwest Senior & Disability Services Services that your firm provided: Freshly prepared hot meals, deli meals, and frozen meals delivered to senior sites.

Starting / ending dates of services: 1984 to Present
Was your firm selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Stacie Zuercher
Phone Number: 503.304.3475
Government entity’s name: Oregon Cascade West Council of Governments Services that your firm provided: TRIO prepares 900 scratch-made hot meals and 250 frozen meals. Hot meals are packaged and transported in bulk by TRIO drivers to ten (10) senior centers.

Starting / ending dates of services: 1985 to Present
Was your firm selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Scott Harper
Phone Number: 541.924.8455
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
759 of 1517
Attachment 4.4
Government entity’s name: Rogue Valley Council of Governments Services that your firm provided: TRIO prepares 600 hot meals 85 frozen meals each day. TRIO drivers daily deliver all meals to 14 senior centers and 8 home-delivered sites.

Starting / ending dates of services: 1995 to Present
Was your firm selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Kristi Welburn
Phone Number: 541.734.9505 ext. 3
Government entity’s name: Detroit Area Agency on Aging
Services that your firm provided: Fresh prepared hot congregate meals, frozen meals, and shelf-stable meals.

Starting / ending dates of services: 2002 to Present
Was your firm selected by a bid or RFP? Yes
Under a contract or agreement? Yes
Contact Person: Gil Lopez
Phone Number: 313.446.4444
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
760 of 1517
Attachment 4.6

4.6 (cont.) Describe your firm’s experience related to preparing and providing congregate and home-delivered meals for an elderly population. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

TRIO has experience providing several types of meals such as fresh, hot congregate bulk, hot pre-packaged, chilled salads, fresh sandwiches, fresh frozen, and frozen prepared in a USDAinspected facility. To ensure we meet nutritional and menu requirements, TRIO has a team of fifteen (15) registered dietitians devoted to writing menus for elderly nutrition programs. Our registered dietitians maintain a highly accurate nutrition database in our computer software program thus ensuring we provide truthful nutritionals. We are expanding our menus to include more culturally diverse menu items to broaden our reach in the communities.

TRIO organizes every kitchen to maximize efficiency for meal preparation, meal packaging, and logistics to ensure a quality meal is delivered consistently on time. We have experience designing and renovating central kitchens, and selecting the best equipment to optimize the preparation and packaging of congregate and home-delivered meals.

TRIO understands the logistics of an elderly nutrition program including packaging, transport equipment, and fleet management. Our teams thoughtfully organize and label meals to ease delivery to sites and homes. When TRIO delivers meals, our drivers receive continuous safety and hospitality training.

TRIO continuously seeks to enhance the dining experience of elderly nutrition programs.

Recently, we launched a new concept, BeWell Kitchen, providing an interactive experience that demonstrates the simplicity of healthy eating. TRIO continuously promotes healthy eating to improve the health outcomes of our elderly. TRIO welcomes the opportunity to host BeWell Kitchen events at the City of Glendale’s dining locations.

TRIO’s sustained and continued growth ensures that we will continue to provide uninterrupted service to the City of Glendale. Examples of current government entities are provided in Section

4.4. 761 of 1517
Attachment 4.7

4.7 (cont.) Describe the extent of your firm’s knowledge and qualifications that demonstrate your understanding and ability to meet the complex requirements of the Elderly Nutrition Program.

Use the Food Services Specifications (RFP – EXHIBIT I) and Menu Writing Specifications (RFP – EXHIBIT II) as a guideline for expectations. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

NUMBER OF MEALS. TRIO has the capability to meet the maximum meal requirements. TRIO can expand beyond the maximum number of meals. TRIO acknowledges that we will remain flexible with your direction for the types of meals adjusting to pandemic needs to best serve the community.

DELIVERY STANDARDS. TRIO will prepare and package all food and supplies as detailed in the RFP.

TRIO will continue to plan, organize, and direct the preparation of all meals ensuring quality production standards. The on-site team, led by Israel Mazariego, takes great pride in carefully preparing each item as they realize what great joy these meals bring to your seniors.

The team is committed to providing you with sound standards which include:
• By 10:30 a.m., all congregate meals and supplies to be transported to the satellite sites are portioned, labeled, and loaded in the hot or cold transport equipment. • By 1:30 p.m., all supplies are packaged and labeled, and the frozen home-delivered meals are prepared, packaged, and placed in ice sheets clearly labeled. • All deliveries are accompanied by a delivery ticket prepared in triplicate. The site manager will verify the number of meals and supplies delivered and sign the ticket. The site manager retains a copy of the ticket. The ticket is used to provide accurate invoices. • Congregate food preparation is planned so that meals are served within 2 hours of preparation.
• Home-delivered meal preparation is planned so that the last meal delivered is within 2 hours after the preparation is completed.
• Bulk menu items are sensibly portioned into steam table pans. Portioning aligns with meal counts ensuring all participants receive a meal.
• Hot food pans are properly sealed to minimize spillage. • Each pan is identified for content, the number of portions, and the satellite site.

MEAL SERVICE. TRIO will comply with all meal service requirements stated in the RFP. • Meals will be prepared at the Adult Recreation Center for all three sites. Frozen homedelivered meals will be prepared at TRIO’s Huntington Park Central Kitchen and transported to Adult Recreation Center Kitchen.
• TRIO will abide by all codes and regulations for the health department, fire department, and all other county and state agencies.
• Team members will participate in our monthly mandatory training focusing on food safety and workplace safety. TRIO will provide the City documentation of all training. 762 of 1517 • TRIO also provides opportunities for our diversity and inclusion initiatives that enable us to grow as a community and as a business by leveraging the invaluable collective experiences, backgrounds, and expectations of our team members, clients, and those we serve. • TRIO will follow a daily cleaning and sanitation schedule ensuring we maintain aboveaverage cleanliness. • TRIO will take great care of the Adult Recreation Center Kitchen space, equipment, and storage.
• Inventory of all equipment will be provided to the City annually. • For C-1 meals, TRIO will follow the 5-week cycle menu for traditional meals and altered menus when pandemic protocols are in place.
• For C-2 meals, TRIO will follow the 4-week cycle menu, and for traditional HDM a 5-week cycle.
• Celebrations such as Birthday Cake once a month and holiday meals will continue to be offered.
• Temperatures are checked three different times throughout production and before meals are portioned in pans ensuring a minimum temperature of 140°F for hot foods and a maximum temperature of 40°F for cold foods.
• Temperatures are recorded on temperature logs. Israel Mazariego and Jose Vargas monitor temperature logs and take corrective action when necessary. • TRIO maintains a backup plan in unexpected emergencies such as losing electricity or water at the Adult Recreation Center Kitchen. The plan entails drawing upon nearby TRIO central kitchen operations in Huntington Park, North Hills, Inglewood, and Paramount to support production and delivery. Depending on the type of emergency, TRIO will vary the type of meals to include cold meals, frozen meals, or shelf-stable meals. • Additionally, TRIO will maintain backup food at the two satellite sites. • TRIO will abide by the food grades stated in the RFP. Our Procurement team secures contracts with reputable vendors that provide consistent products.

MEAL WRITING SPECIFICATIONS. TRIO will comply with all meal writing specifications stated in the RFP.
• TRIO will continue to follow the menus provided by the City of Glendale ensuring • Food preparation will include scratch-made foods prepared with recipes for large-scale production and preserving nutrients and flavor.
• Production will account for transportation time so that meals retain eye appeal. • Recipes will state HACCP protocols.
• TRIO will continue to share written ingredient specifications when processed food is used. • TRIO will comply with all meal pattern specifications and portion sizes stated in the RFP. • The City will be notified 5 days in advance of any menu substitution.

TRIO is committed to adapting the City of Glendale to support your positive impact on the lives of the elderly in your community.

Attachment 4.7
763 of 1517
Attachment 4.8

4.8 (cont.) Describe the extent of your firm’s business experience in any field, indicating your firm’s ability to successfully operate a regulated or complex business.

FOOD SAFETY/RISK MANAGEMENT TRIO has safety protocols detailed in our comprehensive Food Safety Manual and crisis management procedures in our Crisis Manual. The risk management team ensures proper insurance coverage and accident reporting.

TRAINING Monthly training modules foster food and workplace safety.

NUTRITION and MENUS TRIO provides the supporting documents required for menu and nutritional compliance. Our dietitians maintain an accurate database in our Computrition system so you can provide truthful documentation.

FINANCE TRIO’s comprehensive suite of integrated accounting and human resources practices provides sound financial and operational controls imperative for complex operations. Our Shared Services Center performs all core accounting functions with analysis support from our Regional Finance teams allowing the food service director to focus on operations and client relationships.

LICENSES A dedicated team ensures state and local licenses for each operation are current.

HUMANS RESOURCES Employment laws and practices are detailed in our employee handbook.

TRIO has an HR team readily available to support operations.

PROCUREMENT All foods, supplies, disposables, chemicals, and other products are secured through contracts with reputable companies. TRIO can purchase at the best possible prices and pass on savings to our clients.

CULINARY TRIO’s culinary teams continuously expand meal offerings to add menu variety and host events such as our BeWell Kitchen.

Every TRIO Operation has another layer of support from the Operations team who are on-site ensuring the complex business is meeting regulations. For the City of Glendale Elderly Nutrition Program, the on-site teams are supported by Area Manager Joel Medina, Jose Vargas, Food Service Director, Regional Manager Lisa Jackson, Registered Dietitian Stephanie Pradun, Director of Safety & Operations Excellence Rose Ashraf, and Client Partnership Director Donna Doran.

All are dedicated to elderly nutrition and are actively involved with operation protocols.

TRIO’s District Manager Audit is a comprehensive audit addressing all aspects of an elderly nutrition program. Twice a year, the district manager will conduct an audit to ensure the local team is meeting all regulations. Deficiencies are addressed with a corrective action plan date.

TRIO’s multiple layers of support from industry experts continue to ensure we meet regulations within a complex business model.
764 of 1517
Attachment 5.3

5.3 (cont.) When your firm submits this Proposal, if your firm does not have the personnel required by the RFP and the Contract, the following information must be provided. For each employee whom your firm intends to hire to fulfill and perform the services, describe below your firm’s plan for hiring personnel, qualification standards, training program or process, and date when the hiring process will be completed. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

Lisa Jackson, TRIO Regional Manager, oversees the City of Glendale program and all of TRIO’s West Coast operations ensuring each team meets contract obligations while providing a quality program.

HIRING PERSONNEL. While we currently have all positions staffed to carry out successful operations for the City of Glendale, we are also confident in our ability to attract top talent when the need arises. As an industry leader, TRIO has access to top talent both internally and externally, which allows our partnership to grow and team morale to flourish. We recruit within the local communities, conduct interviews, and select the best candidate for each position. For all new hires, TRIO provides a comprehensive onboarding via our MyEliorJourney program.

QUALIFICATIONS. All managers pass an approved food safety manager certification course within 30 days of hire, and a Certified Food Manager must always be on site during operating hours. Additionally, all Food Service Directors are Seafood HACCP Certified. Kitchen workers are ServSafe Certified or equivalent.

TRAINING. TRIO is committed to providing our team members with training and development opportunities to foster their personal growth, and reinforce proper sanitation protocols, food safety practices, hospitality, and safe driving. Also, proper training empowers the team to perform at their best. Known as our SAFE training, all team members receive required monthly food safety and workplace safety training. This required monthly training compliments our food safety and workplace protocols keeping safety at the forefront of operations. Training modules include a facilitator guide with participant activities and a handout or a corresponding poster.

Some examples of our SAFE training modules include: Cleaning and Sanitizing; Temperatures:

Cooking, Holding, Cooling, Reheating; Labeling and Date Marking; and Handwashing and Illness Reporting.

Below details other important training TRIO provides for team member growth and development.

Driver Training (drivers): To ensure that we deliver meals in safe manger, drivers receive ongoing training in addition to our safety monthly training. There are over twenty-five (25) driver training modules, some examples include: Driver Orientation (mandatory before a team member can assume driving responsibilities; Loading Area Safety, Backing Up Safely, Disabled Vehicle Safety, Don’t Tailgate, and more.

Hospitality and Safety Training (drivers): Ensuring that TRIO drivers deliver on our commitment to you, drivers receive continuous training focusing on these key focus areas: Food Safety, Communication, Complaints and Requests, Driver Appearance, Vehicle Trip Inspection Training, Driver Safety, Parking Safety.
765 of 1517
Attachment 5.3
HIPPA Training (all applicable team members): At TRIO we take seriously the privacy of the individuals we serve. All associates with access to client data and/or all associates who provide door-to-door delivery are trained to understand HIPAA policies and, if requested, sign a formal HIPAA agreement not to disclose any confidential information regarding the individuals we serve.

New associates receive HIPAA training as part of the onboarding process and the training for all associates is refreshed annually.

Management Training (managers): Within 60 days of starting, our new managers are enrolled in Elior North America’s “Leadership Development Program.” This learning opportunity is two days of skills development and practice conducted by Elior North America’s certified professional trainers and key operational leaders. This is done on-site at your location or at one of our regional offices.

Onboarding (all members): Highlights include immersing and empowering team members in senior dining program mission and objectives, TRIO standards of operation with a focus on food safety and workplace safety, Elior North America’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion program, and Elior North America’s Prep Book including TRIO’s policies and procedures. 766 of 1517

E D U C A T I O N
University of Wisconsin-Madison
B.S. in Nutritional Science –
Dietetics
University of Wisconsin Hospital
& Clinics
CADE-Accredited Dietetic Internship

CERTIFICATIONS
Member, Academy of Nutrition
& Dietetics
Certified Food Protection Manager, ServSafe

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS/ELIOR NA
Menu Systems Dietitian: 2018-Present
• Writes nutritionally complete menus to satisfy contract requirements and participant requests.
• Conducts ongoing focus groups and interviews to collect feedback a nd suggestions. Performs nutrition analysis to ensure adequacy. • Presents nutrition information and other education sessions to address needs within the community.
• Supports daily operations of 12 kitchens, serving an average of 1100 meals per day.

ARAMARK
Assistant Food Service Director, CUSD300: 2016-2018
• Assisted in oversight of daily operations of school meal program, providing over 16,000 meals per day for 27 schools.
• Supported all business aspects including marketing, menu planning, client relations, employee relations, and budgeting activities. • Promoted school meal programs while engaging in classroom and community events for outreach and nutrition education with parents, students, and stakeholders.

SODEXO
Food Service Manager, Centegra Health System: 2011-2016 • Managed 45 production staff (~15 per shift) in daily preparation and service of meals for patient services, retail, and catering functions, including over 400 daily trays for the patient room service program and $1.2 million volume in annual cafeteria revenue.
• Totally redesigned inpatient room service menu,
including recipe development, menu design, and
nutritional analysis.
• Innovated new use of existing menu software to
track allergens for improved patient safety and
satisfaction.
• Served as district expert for menu software and
traveled to other accounts for training and new
account openings.

FERGUSON MIDDLE SCHOOL
Cafeteria Manager: 2011

STEPHANIE PRADUN

REGISTERED DIETITIAN
S ignature
R egistration I.D. Number
R egistered Dietitian (R D)
R egistered Dietitian
Nutritionist (R DN)
Chair, Commission on Dietetic R egistration
Stephanie L Pradun
1061886
CDR certifies that
has successfully completed
requirements for dietetic registration.

R egistration Payment Period
9/01 /22 - 8/31 /23
Christina R ollins,

MBA, MS , R DN, LDN, FAND, CNS C
PDF Copy
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
Attachment 4.8
767 of 1517

CERTIFICATIONS
ACA Accredited ServSafe
Seafood HACCP Certified
Food Handler’s Card

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS/ELIOR NA
Food Service Director and Head Cook: 1994-Present
• Directs all functions of the food service operation at the City of Glendale Adult Recreation Central Kitchen
• Leads the team in ensuring quality procurement, production, and packaging standards of congregate and home-delivered meals • Ensures the team follows TRIO’s protocols for food safety and sanitation, workplace safety, and training.
• Orders food and supplies necessary to produce menus according to specifications
• Inventories food and supply each week
• Completes weekly financial reports
• Writes the Millennials Menu
•

ISRAEL MAZARIEGO

FOOD SERVICE MANAGER AND HEAD COOK
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
Attachment 4.8
768 of 1517

CERTIFICATIONS
ACA Accredited ServSafe

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS/ELIOR NA
Cook Helper: 2016-Present
TRIO Community Meals at City of Glendale Adult Recreation Central Kitchen • Pre-preps ingredients for the head cook
• Measures ingredients
• Portions and labels hot menu items for transportation to satellite sites • Counts and packs milk and other cold items and components such as desserts for congregate meals and home-delivered meals
• Cleans and sanitizes all workspaces and storage areas

VEDY MAZARIEGO

COOK HELPER
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
Attachment 4.8
769 of 1517

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS
Food Service Director: 2018-Present
• Responsible for food production, purchasing, staff training, client relations, inventory cost control, quality control/quality assurance, safety, and sanitation.

MORRISON HEALTHCARE INC.

Assistant to Foodservice Director: 2011-2018
Supervisor: 2006‑2011

MORRISON MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Supervisor, Central Juvenile: 2002-2006
Foodservice Worker, Central Juvenile: 2001-2002

CERTIFICATIONS
HACCP
ServSafe Certified
Food Handler

JOSE VARGAS

FOOD SERVICE DIRECTOR
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
Attachment 4.8
770 of 1517

E D U C A T I O N
California State University
Long Beach, CA
BA in Hospitality –
Food Service Management

C E R T I F I C A T I O N S
Dietary Service Supervisory
Certified

LISA JACKSON

REGIONAL MANAGER

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS
Regional Director of Operations: 2017-Present
• Reports to the Regional Vice President of TRIO.
• Supervises all senior meal programs on the East Coast. • Is responsible for training management and staff, client menu planning, communications, logistics planning, nutrient analysi,s and total P&L accountability for all accounts.

General Manager: 2013-2017
• Acted as multi-unit manager for senior nutrition programs. • Managed, staffed, and directed three high-volume commercial kitchens. • Managed staff of 40, menu design, and planning.
• Oversaw P&Ls and budgeting as they pertained to account. • Maintained excellent relationships with customers, guests, and clients. • Developed and implemented new programs in conjunction with senior nutrition program.

CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE
Sr. Food Service Director/Multi-Unit Director: 2009-2013 • Oversaw multiple units to ensure compliance standards met for annual survey/ inspection.
• Conducted Quarterly training seminars for food service directors. • Proctored and administered ServSafe test for all food service staff. • Directed and managed 13 nursing homes/facilities’ dietary departments. • Oversaw annual budget of $3.5 million.
• Was responsible for budgeting, forecasting, training, hiring, administering performance evaluations, and scheduling IDT, MDS, Title 22, Hippa experience.

MALAKAI’S CATERING AND EVENTS
Catering Director: 2000-2009
Attachment 4.8
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
771 of 1517

CERTIFICATIONS
HACCP
ServSafe Certified
Food Handler

JOEL MEDINA

AREA MANAGER

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS
Area Manager: 2019-Present
• Responsible for food production, purchasing, staff training, client relations, inventory cost control, quality control/quality assurance, safety, and sanitation for the Los Angeles area contracts. Supervises all of the central kitchens in the Los Angeles area under TRIO Community Meals and reports to Regional Director of Operations.

MORRISON HEALTHCARE
Director of Food Service: 2011-2018
Assistant Director: 1997-2011

MORRISON MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Shift Supervisor, Cook: 1991-1997
Storeroom Supervisor: 1989-1991
Food Service Worker, Satellite Driver: 1987-1989
Attachment 4.8
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —
772 of 1517
Attachment 4.8
— CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY —

JOHN KIRK

PRESIDENT

EDUCATION
University of Southern Mississippi
Hotel and Restaurant Management
Northern Virginia College
Accounting
Tulane University
Information Technology

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS
President: 2015–Present
• Directs, administers and coordinates the activities of the Traditions and Seniors Division in support of policies, goals and objectives. • Oversees those who manage the daily operations of this division in order to achieve the budgeted contribution to the fixed overhead, client and customer satisfaction, team member training and development objectives and operational support for new sales.

JACKIE'S INTERNATIONAL, LLC
Vice President of Operations: 2006—2015
• Led all restaurant divisions comprised of 45 units ranging from fine dining to QSR with over 1,400 team members with revenues in excess of $70MM.
• Innovated development and direction of all operational standards and initiatives including brand development, menu design, recipes, all product R&D, purchasing, contract negotiations and marketing strategies and tactics that delivered improved performance and results across multiple divisions.
• Full financial and P & L responsibility for all restaurant divisions and concepts, revenue growth and budget creation.
• Won numerous awards including “Best New Restaurant” in the greater Jackson area by Metromix Jackson 2011 and “Best Asian Restaurant” by the readers of Mississippi Magazine and the Jackson Free Press for 3 straight years.

CLAREMONT RESTAURANT GROUP
Director of R&D (Culinary & Concept Development): 2001—2006 • Recruited by company CEO to design and develop upscale chop house concept for an eighty unit western themed steakhouse chain with annual sales in excess of $100MM.
• Wrote all recipe and operation manuals for BOH management and enhanced understanding of systems by conducting preimplementation workshops, delivering group and individual training sessions and creating user-friendly training materials. • Lead project team in designing, developing and opening new upscale BBQ concept in 2003 as a retrofit in an existing, underperforming location, which included concept development of name, logo and menu design, product line development, food photography, recipes and procedures, facility layout and design. 773 of 1517

Bank of America
Carolinas Treasury Management
150 North College Street,
NC1-028-13-05
Charlotte, NC 28255-0001
Tel 980.386.8021
Fax 704.388.9506
August 3, 2022

City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
Attention: Aylin Isayan
201 East Colorado Street, Glendale, CA 91205
RE: TRIO Community Meals -- Food Services Proposal

Dear Aylin:

I, Reggie Pretty of Bank of America, N.A., do hereby certify that TRIO Community Meals (“Client”) and its Parent, Elior, Inc., have been a client of Bank of America, N.A. for a period of over 20 years. During this period, both the Client and its Parent have always satisfactorily fulfilled its obligations to Bank of America, N.A..

The Client and its Parent currently have cash, marketable securities or other investments on deposit with Bank of America, N.A. and its affiliates in the eight figure range.

This certification is being delivered to you at the request of our Client. Please note that the information set forth in this letter is subject to change without notice, and is provided in strict confidence to you for your own use only, without any responsibility, guarantee, commitment or liability on the part of Bank of America, N.A., its affiliates or any of its or its affiliates' directors, officers or employees. Bank of America, N.A. cannot provide any credit ratings or opinions of the creditworthiness of Client or any of its/his/her affiliates, and the above information does not constitute an opinion of Bank of America, N.A. of Client’s ability to successfully perform its obligations under any agreement it may enter into with you, Bank of America, N.A. or any other entity. Finally, Bank of America, N.A. undertakes no responsibility to update the information set forth in this letter.

If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
Reginald F. Pretty, CTP
Senior Vice President
Bank of America - Global Treasury Services
980.386.4998
Attachment 8.5
801 of 1517
TRIO Community Meals is open to further discussion around any claim scenarios the City of Glendale is concerned about and the insurance coverages we have in place that would align with those claim scenarios. We are confident we have the appropriate coverage in place to meet the needs of this partnership.

General Liability Insurance 1.2 (pg. 86)
We request this sentence “If LOWER TIER SUBRECIPIENT has higher limits than the limits specified in these insurance requirements, or has additional broader coverage, or has both, the insurer shall make available the higher limits and broader coverage to SUBRECIPIENT AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES” with the following:
“Lower Tier Subrecipient’s liability under this Agreement shall not exceed the limits of coverage required to be carried by Lower Tier Subrecipient under this Agreement.” Auto Liability Insurance 1.3 (pg. 88)
The RFP states that uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage is required. It is typical for a company of our size with a robust master insurance program to reject uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage. This coverage is deemed cost prohibitive in high deductible programs. In the event of an auto accident involving a third party, our workers compensation policy would cover employee injuries, and our auto insurance policy would cover physical damage (first party and third party) and third party bodily injury claims. We request to strike this requirement.

Sexual Abuse or Misconduct Liability Insurance (pg. 89) In order to meet the sexual misconduct liability requirement, we have added language to our liability certificate of insurance that verifies sexual misconduct liability is not excluded from our General Liability policy. Our general liability policy has limits of $2M per claim and $4M aggregate. Please confirm whether this form of coverage is acceptable.

Attachment 12.3 - Insurance Requirements Affadavit
802 of 1517

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE
INSURER F :

INSURER E :

INSURER D :

INSURER C :

INSURER B :

INSURER A :

NAIC #
NAME:

CONTACT
(A/C, No):

FAX
E-MAIL
ADDRESS:

PRODUCER
(A/C, No, Ext):

PHONE

INSURED
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

OTHER:
(Per accident)
(Ea accident)
$
$
N / A
SUBR
WVD
ADDL
INSD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $
$
$
$ PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY (Per accident)
BODILY INJURY (Per person)

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT

AUTOS ONLY

AUTOS ONLY AUTOS

NON-OWNED

OWNED SCHEDULED

ANY AUTO

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
Y / N

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
(Mandatory in NH)
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
If yes, describe under

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
$
$
$
E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT
ER

OTH- STATUTEPER
(MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS POLICY EXP (MM/DD/YYYY)

POLICY EFF LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER INSR
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

EXCESS LIAB
UMBRELLA LIAB EACH OCCURRENCE $
AGGREGATE $
$
OCCUR

CLAIMS-MADE
DED RETENTION $
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $
GENERAL AGGREGATE $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
MED EXP (Any one person) $
EACH OCCURRENCE $

DAMAGE TO RENTED
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY

CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:

POLICY PROJECT LOC

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)

CANCELLATION

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
ACORD 25 (2016/03)
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE HOLDER
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
HIRED

AUTOS ONLY
X
20699
X
24988
X
X
X
A
Aging and Disabilities Department
1,000,000
1,000,000
10,000
10,000
X
X
X
X
Dawn Heinemann or Angela Whirley
and Los Angeles County
City of Glendale
66257295
66257295
Charlotte, NC 28202
10,000,000
201 E. Colorado Street
612-373-7270
USA
2,000,000
08/01/2022
X
X 10,000,000
1,000,000
9018840005

ACE PROP & CAS INS CO

SENTRY INS CO
ddebuhr
B
X
X
09/01/23
1,000,000
Glendale, CA 91205
Hays Companies
A
A
A
4,000,000
X
1,000,000
09/01/22
09/01/22
Suite 700
09/01/22
80 South 8th Street
09/01/23
300 S. Tryon Street, Suite 400
09/01/23
09/01/23
9018840003 (AOS)
N
9018840004 (MA)
2,000,000
9018840006 (VA)
A
A
TRIO Community Meals, LLC
Elior, Inc DBA Elior North America
09/01/22
Minneapolis, MN 55402
9018840002 (OR, WI)
9018840001 (AOS)
09/01/22
612-333-3233
09/01/22
09/01/22
09/01/23
1-612-333-3323
4,000,000
XEUG71175194004
09/01/23
09/01/23
30 day notice of cancellation applies subject to policy(s) terms and conditions.

Sexual misconduct or abuse is not excluded on the general liability policy, subject to the policy terms and conditions. [email protected]
workers compensation policy where required by written contract subject to the policy terms and conditions. subject to the policy terms and conditions. Waiver of subrogation applies in favor of the additional insured as respects non-contributory basis as respects general and automobile liability policy where required by written contract City of Glendale and its officers, agents, employees, and representatives are additional insured on a primary and RE: RFP - Elderly Nutrition Program.
803 of 1517
8/2/2022
Hays Companies Inc.
80 South 8th Street
Suite #700
Minneapolis MN 55402
Sydney Westmacott
(612)333-3323
[email protected]
Elior, Inc, DBA: Elior North America
TRIO Community Meals , LLC
300 S. Tryon Street
Suite 400
Charlotte NC 28202
TDC Specialty Insurance Company 34487
The Hanover Insurance Company 22292
21/22 Crime/E&O
A Professional Liability MFP-02091-21-00 9/1/2021 9/1/2022 Limit of Liability $3,000,000 B Crime / Fidelity BDA-1046399-01 9/1/2019 9/1/2022 Limit of Liability $3,000,000 RE: RFP – Elderly Nutrition Program
City of Glendale and Los Angeles County
Aging and Disabilities Department
201 E Colorado Street
Glendale, CA 91205
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD

CERTIFICATE HOLDER
© 1988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

ACORD 25 (2014/01)

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE

CANCELLATION

DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE

JECT LOC PRO- POLICY
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:

CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ DAMAGE TO RENTED
EACH OCCURRENCE $
MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
GENERAL AGGREGATE $
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $
DED RETENTION $

CLAIMS-MADE
OCCUR
$
AGGREGATE $
EACH OCCURRENCE $ UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) INSR

LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF
(MM/DD/YYYY) POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS
PER
STATUTE OTHER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE
E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT
$
$
$

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
If yes, describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
(Mandatory in NH)
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?

WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY Y / N

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

ANY AUTO

ALL OWNED SCHEDULED

HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED

AUTOS AUTOS
AUTOS

COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
BODILY INJURY (Per person)
BODILY INJURY (Per accident)
PROPERTY DAMAGE $
$
$
$

INSD
ADDL
WVD
SUBR
N / A
$
$
(Ea accident)
(Per accident)
OTHER:

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

INSURED
PHONE
(A/C, No, Ext):

PRODUCER
ADDRESS:

E-MAIL
FAX
(A/C, No):

CONTACT
NAME:

NAIC #
INSURER A :

INSURER B :

INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

INS025 (201401)
804 of 1517
A Senior-friendly layout
• A simple font type and a font size of 14 pt. are preferred by older adults for ease of reading.
• Ample white space and color blocking provides an uncrowded page that is easier to read.
• Two formats: handout and infographic.
• Three Languages: The handout is available in English, Spanish, and Chinese languages providing the ability to educate and inspire more seniors in our communities.

Sharing
• Tammy Kingery will continue to provide all 12 monthly handouts prior the start of a new year. You will also receive the handout and infographic monthly via an email from TRIO's Marketing Director.

FRUITS & VEGGIES MORE MATTERS MONTH
September is Fruit and Vegetable
month! Fruits and vegetables provide
essential nutrients that support health
and prevent disease. According to the
Centers for Disease Control (CDC), on
average, only 12.2% of adults meet
the daily fruit intake recommendation
of 1½ to 2 cups per day, and only

9.3% of adults meet the daily
vegetable intake recommendation of
2 to 3 cups per day!
Risks related to
underconsumption of
fruits and vegetables:
• heart disease
• stroke
• diabetes
• high blood pressure
• digestive disorders
• vision problems
• lack of protection
against certain cancers
• obesity
• and more!

BUSY LIFESTYLE
• Wash, chop, and store vegetables
right after grocery shopping for
later use
• Choose fruits such as apples, bananas,
and oranges that can be taken with
you on the go
• Keep cut up vegetables on hand such
as carrots, celery, and peppers for
quick snacks
• Use pre-cut frozen vegetables that
just need heating

ON A BUDGET
• Prepare meals at home to save money
• Incorporate frozen, canned, and dried
forms of fruits and vegetables as they
are just as nutritious as fresh versions
• Make soups or casseroles that can be
consumed multiple times throughout
the week or frozen for later use
• Buy fruits and vegetables when they
are in season
Sources: www.fruitsandveggies.org | www.cdc.gov | http://www.pbhfoundation | www.hsph.harvard.edu

ELIOR NORTH AMERICA

B E W E L L M O N T H L Y N U T R I T I O N

EDUCATION

TRIO'S WELLNESS PROGRAM
Our BeWell wellness approach encourages
positive behavior change through monthly
nutrition education. Designed by our team
of registered dietitian nutritionists, nutrition
education provides congregate and homedelivered meal recipients an opportunity to learn more about food and health.

TRIO’s nutrition and marketing teams designed our monthly Nutrition Education with the senior audience in mind.

Some highlights include:

Topics important to today’s seniors
• A sampling of our topics includes: Starting New Year with Healthy Goals, Alzheimer and Brain Health, National Nutrition Month, American Diabetes Awareness, Sleep Management and Healthy Heart. • As the baby boomers age, they have expressed a desire to expand their knowledge for a variety of health and nutrition topics. As you are aware, this audience has connected nutrition to a healthy lifestyle and a longer life span. Hence, TRIO will continue to broaden our scope of topics to meet the need of these rising baby boomers.

Attachment 16
805 of 1517
Best practices from our partners indicate
higher site attendance when nutrition
education is introduced. Nutrition
education days enhance the client
experience and present an opportunity
for increased socialization.

To promote your monthly nutrition
education, we will provide monthly
calendar icons for your activity calendar.

We evaluate and evolve our wellness
education programs on a regular basis.

The upcoming monthly education topics
are below.

CALENDAR
January
New Year, New You: Eat Like a
Centenarian
February American Heart Health Month
March National Nutrition Month
April Plant-Forward Eating Month
May
National Physical Fitness & Sports
Month
June Alzheimer & Brain Awareness Month
July Hydration Month
August Healthy Eating on a Budget Month
September Fruit & Veggies Month – More Matters
October Healthy Lung Month
November American Diabetes Month
December Cut Back on Added Sugar Month
Sources: www.bls.gov, www.cdc.gov, www.zagat.com and www.eatright.org ELIOR NORTH AMERICA NATIONAL NUTRITION MONTH® 2019
EATING Right FOR A Busy LIFESTYLE
Take ACTION

PLAN AHEAD EAT RIGHT WHILE DINING OUT

5.9x
Americans dine
out an average of
each week for breakfast,
lunch, and dinner
37% of all adults in
America consume
fast food daily
» Meal prep on a day off
or double your favorite
recipe to have leftovers.
» Make breakfast the night
before with overnight
oats, hardboiled eggs or
breakfast bars.
» Have healthy snacks on
hand at all times.
» Review the menu before
choosing a place to dine out.
» Customize your meal with
vegetables, whole grains
and lean protein.
» Make smart choices about
sides. Choose a side salad,
fruit or vegetables instead
of fries.
$3,365
The average
American spent
in 2017on food
away from home
806 of 1517
Have a nutrition or wellness-related question?
Our Registered Dietitians are here to assist.
• Answer general food, nutrition, special diet,
and wellness-related questions
• Provide personalized nutrition
recommendations based on desired goals
• Guide healthy dining choices
[email protected]

A COMPLIMENTARY SERVICE BY TRIO
ASK

DIETITIAN

DAILY NUTRITION TIPS
TRIO’s daily nutrition tips promote the health and
well-being of older adults. These short, yet impactful
tips engage seniors with awareness to current health
topics. Nutrition tips are posted on TRIO's Facebook and Instagram pages.

A S K A

DIETITIAN
Ask a Dietitian is a
complimentary program that
connects the older adults
in the City of Glendale
with a registered dietitian
nutritionist that promotes
health and well-being.

Taking nutrition education
a step further, our dietitians
are here to assist seniors
in making educated food
choices that meet their
nutrition and wellness goals,
or to answer questions
related to special diet needs.
807 of 1517

V I R T U A L B E W E L L
EVENTS
Recognizing that older adults are
experiencing long periods of isolation,
TRIO began hosting virtual events as a new
avenue to reduce isolation while the senior
centers are closed. Following the same
pattern as our monthly nutrition education,
each virtual event focuses on a single health
topic important to seniors. Topics include
Alzheimer's and Dementia Prevention,
Eating Fruits & Vegetable Matters and
Diabetes Awareness.

For each event, a TRIO registered dietitian
shares foods that can positively impact that
health topic, thus connecting food’s ability
to positively impact our health. Bringing the
health focus full circle, TRIO’s Chef Mario
Reyes, using those same foods, leads seniors
through the preparation of a recipe.

As an example, in June for Alzheimer
Awareness, we discussed how inflammation
contributes to dementia. Thus, eating antiinflammatory foods such as fatty fish, flaxseed, walnuts and avocados can reduce
the risks for developing Alzheimer's. Chef
Mario prepared a delicious salad using
salmon, walnuts, avocado and strawberries.

By connecting the ingredients to a simple
recipe, participants are more likely to
adapt new eating behaviors when they
prepare meals.

Seniors look forward to the engagement/
socialization and health promotion these
events provide. We record the virtual events
so if participants are unable to watch the
event live, then they can view the recorded
event at their leisure.

Monthly, TRIO's Marketing Director will
share with you and your team, a link to the
Virtual BeWell Event. Many programs share
the video link with their participants to
watch as their leisure. Other agencies that
have opened senior centers, play the video as
an activity or during meal time.
808 of 1517
The role of nutrition education is to improve an
older adult's willingness to try, buy and eat more
healthy foods. Through our BeWell Kitchen, TRIO
combines nutrition education with a hands-on
learning workshop that connects food to health.

This approach is known as a Teaching Kitchen, as
established by the Culinary Institute of America
and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

TRIO designed each workshop to illustrate a food’s
ability to prevent a specific health issue relevant to
older adults. BeWell Kitchen focus topics include
brain health, heart health, muscle building,
boosting immunity and other topics impacting an
older adult's lifestyle.

At BeWell Kitchen events, attendees are led by
TRIO’s Corporate Chef to prepare a recipe using
ingredients that impact a health issue. TRIO’s
registered dietitian provides impactful nutritional
information for the ingredients, thus connecting
food to health. It is truly a special event that
participants enjoy.

BeWell Kitchen benefits older adults
with an opportunity to socialize and
gain knowledge to improve their health
and wellness. BeWell Kitchen is a special
event that draws older adults to your senior
centers, thus boosting participation and
socialization.

A L I V E L E A R N I N G W O R K S H O P C O N N E C T I N G F O O D T O HEALTH
As participants return to the City of Glendale dining sites, TRIO is offering to host a BeWell Kitchen event to create excitement and promote your three sites.
809 of 1517
The TRIO team truly looks forward to hosting BeWell Kitchen events. The excitement of the participants, the knowledge gained to impact participant health and wellness combined with the cheerful atmosphere makes these events a favorite of older adults and the TRIO team.

B E W E L L K I T C H E N E N G A G E S
MEAL PARTICIPANTS WITH:

Chef explanation and demonstration.

A TRIO Chef travels to your center or site, providing fun recipe facts. Recipes require few ingredients and are
simple to prepare, making them easy for older adults to enjoy.

Chef-led hands-on recipe preparation.

TRIO's Chef will lead all participants through the
preparation of a recipe. You can expect other TRIO team members such as the Dietitian, Marketing Director, and
Food Service Directors to assist participants.

Registered Dietitian presentation intertwined throughout the event.

The RD will connect how the ingredients in the recipe
impact brain health, heart health, muscle building, or
immunity.

Take-home recipe card, featuring the functional food’s
health benefits.

Promoting health and well-being, each participant
receives the recipe prepared at the event as well as the key health benefits of the recipe ingredients.

RECIPE

RECIPE NUTRITION
810 of 1517
TRIO TEAM: MARIE ASHMAN, RD, LD, CHEF DARREN, ROSIE EUBANKS, DIRECTOR, AND DONNA DORAN, CLIENT PARTNERSHIP DIRECTOR. GRENADA, MS
e l i o r n o r t h a m e r i c a
COMING SOON!
Live Learning Workshop that
Connects Food to Health
SIGN-UP TODAY!

KITCHEN
c o n n e c t i n g f o o d t o h e a l t h
Live Learning Workshop that
Connects Food to Health
elior north america

B U I L D I N G E X C I T E M E N T
TRIO provides the City of Glendale with
marketing materials to create excitement for
the events and solicit participation.

Marketing materials to promote events
include:

Coming Soon Banner: 10-14 days before the
vent, the banner is placed at the the hosting site
Calendar Square: perfect for a monthly
Activities Calendar
Flyer: Post at the center
Newsletter Ad: content to build awareness and
excitement
Sign-up Sheet: ensures we provide adequate
space, recipe ingredients, supplies, and TRIO
team members to assist. BANNER
FLYER
811 of 1517
City of Glendale

DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE
A contractor must provide the information listed below when: A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:

The City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more; or The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
A combination or series of City Contracts have a value of $50,000 or more. A combination or series of subcontracts, for the same or different projects, have an aggregate value of $25,000 or more. Information that must be disclosed: Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Chairperson
All members of the Board of Directors
All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner * Contractor is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, , or HA or any member of that persons, entitys, or organizations Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons name and business address.

Exhibit 3
812 of 1517
Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM CONTRACTOR 6-7-12.doc Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner ** Subcontractor is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. Subcontractor includes any member of that persons, entitys, or organizations Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named Contractor Subcontractor:

I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute or if I select additional architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and I hereby certify that:

I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages. , 20 , at: , California.

Print Full Name:

Address:

Phone Number: E-mail Address:

Executed on:

Signature:
813 of 1517

TRIO COMMUNITY MEALS, LLC

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Name Position Business Address
Olivier Poirot Chairman of the Board 300 Tryon Street, Suite 400, Charlotte NC 28202 Jeffrey Hunt CFO and Treasurer 300 Tryon Street, Suite 400, Charlotte NC 28202 Brian Herrmann Assistant Treasurer 300 Tryon Street, Suite 400, Charlotte NC 28202 Tom Heim Secretary 300 Tryon Street, Suite 400, Charlotte NC 28202 814 of 1517
8b

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Verdugo Wash Visioning Report

1. Note and File and provide direction regarding design concepts and next steps.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Report Only
Approved for November 15, 2022 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In April of 2021, staff began the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study. The study was aimed at identifying opportunities to re-imagine the Verdugo Wash as an active transportation spine, while also pursuing opportunities for open space and sustainability. The visioning process was intended to identify the opportunities and limitations of a modified wash, and for City Council to determine if the study warranted additional work. As a visioning process, this is a very high-level concept of the possibilities within the wash. Significant detail would need to be developed in subsequent phases regarding operations and maintenance, safety, engineering, and environmental work. The designs that are included in the final report are only preliminary and subject to change as the project continues to develop.

The report presented to Council includes the rich history and background information of the Verdugo Wash. It also includes analysis on the flood control performance of the channel, mobility opportunities, sustainability, and hydrology analysis. The concepts presented in the report are informed from these studies and history, as well as the public engagement that was conducted throughout the visioning process. Upon review, staff is seeking feedback on the design concepts, as well as direction on future phases of work related to advancing the design.
815 of 1517
2 b 8

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
• Mobility and Infrastructure – Providing recreational space, active transportation opportunities, and contributes to the well-being and health of our citizenry. • Environmental Stewardship– The project will incorporate enhanced vegetation and other sustainable strategies to mitigate the urban heat island effect and stormwater runoff.

RECOMMENDATION
City Council provide feedback on the final visioning report, on the design concepts, and direction related to next steps and future phases of the project.

BACKGROUND
The Verdugo Wash is a 9.5-mile-long flood control channel that interfaces with 15 distinct neighborhoods throughout the city. Prior to its channelization, the Wash served as a vital source of life for the Tongva tribe, the original inhabitants of the immediate area. Though not a formal river, the Verdugo Canyon provided valuable resources through vegetation, wildlife, acorns, and water. Combined with the favorable climate, Crescenta Valley and the northern terminus of the modern day wash were an important and vital village for the Tongva people.

As Glendale emerged as a new city in the late 19th century, the Verdugo Canyon was important feature of the landscape. But significant flooding events in 1933 and 1934 caused extensive damage and loss of life. Dozens perished in the 1934 New Year’s Day flood, prompting the need to channelize what would become the Verdugo Wash. The creation of the modern day wash allowed for the flow of water and debris without causing significant flooding events, protecting both life and property. While the channelization has served its purpose in reducing flood risk, it has eroded many of the natural benefits that the former canyon provided. The city was also fragmented by the concrete channel and eliminated the opportunity for much needed biodiversity through substantial portions of the city.

Originally identified in the 2012 Bicycle Transportation Plan, the Verdugo Wash was perceived as a potential opportunity to create an active transportation spine that would connect to the broader pedestrian and cyclist network of the city. As part of the 2020- 2021 fiscal year budget, City Council allocated funding to begin a visioning study to understand the possibilities for alternative uses within the wash, focused on the premise of active transportation, the creation of new open space, and the enrichment of the natural environment. Following a nationwide search which resulted in over 20 submittals, !melk was selected as the lead design consultant to assist in developing the initial analysis and design concepts, while identifying the various possibilities of the wash. Initial analysis and work commenced in April of 2021.

ANALYSIS
The consultant team and city staff began with a tour of the wash facility to assess the existing conditions and to better understand the physical space that exists within the 816 of 1517
3 b 8
wash. In-depth analysis was conducted of the existing and surrounding conditions to understand the influences of the existing transportation network, existing civic and recreational assets, and adjacent land use patterns along the wash. This initial framework assisted in helping to understand the potential influences of a re-imagined wash and its potential impacts and benefits it may have to surrounding neighborhoods. It also allowed for the building of a framework and understanding of how the design of the wash would need to be contextually sensitive to these different neighborhoods along the wash.

Overall Design Concept
At the beginning of the visioning process, early ideas considered creating a soft bottom of the Wash. This would include the removal of the concrete floor and returning to exposed soil. This intent was to have the floor of the Wash function as a natural river while presenting opportunities to return natural habitat and vegetation. After extensive analysis this concept was deemed infeasible. This is primarily due to the fact that the prior condition of the Wash was not a true river, as there is not a consistent body or flow of water within the area. As such, softening of the bottom of the Wash would not complete the objective of sustaining wildlife or vegetation without the consistent flow of water.

Additionally, the Verdugo Wash must retain its ability to serve as a flood control channel.

Given the speed of the water flow and the need to move the water through the wash quickly in order to prevent flooding, the softening of the Wash bottom would slow the flow of water and increase flood risk.

Upon this analysis and evaluation, a new alternative was developed that would preserve the function of the Wash as a flood control channel. The current alternative would include a raised platform that would allow water to flow under the Wash during a typical rain condition. During more significant events, the platform and all additional elements would be able to withstand the flow and be submerged by water. With the elevated platform, deep planting wells would be created to support significantly enhanced vegetation. The platform height could be calibrated in a number of ways in response to local conditions.

The pathways for pedestrians and cyclists could be set at different heights in order to appropriate for its surrounding context. In areas where it is predominately single-family residential, the pathways could be set lower to respect privacy of the surrounding land uses, and the planting wells and vegetation could be located to create a buffer between the pathways and surrounding development patterns. In more urban and commercial areas, the pathway could be set at a higher elevation to promote access and interface with the surrounding land uses. It should be noted that while the platform would be designed to withstand significant rain events, the entire Wash would be closed during rain events for safety.

North of the Debris Basin
The area north of the debris basin and Oakmont Country Club is distinctly different from the portions south of the debris basin. The Wash itself is much narrower than other segments and is primarily abutted by single-family homes. The report illustrates potential concepts, but additional hydrology analysis has shown that without changes to the 817 of 1517
4 b 8
physical Wash, interventions consistent with the rest of the Wash design concepts would not be feasible. A design that is consistent with the balance of the project would require increased depth or width of the existing Wash. Both would be a significant infrastructure undertaking and would likely be cost prohibitive. Furthermore, widening of the Wash would have significant impact to adjacent properties and would not be possible.

Additionally, as part of public engagement, conversations with neighborhoods north of the debris basin exhibited a clear lack of desire for the project to connect with their neighborhoods. This was largely due to concerns related to impacts on surrounding properties such as privacy, as well as public safety. Lastly, the character of the neighborhoods north of the debris basin is significantly different than the southern portions. These neighborhoods are primarily single-family with limited to no commercial or civic uses in the immediate area. As such, staff believes that given the prohibitive nature of the existing infrastructure as it relates to any modifications and combined with the lower density and lack of significant nodes of commercial, recreational, or civic uses, that any further work in this area should be suspended if the project is to advance to next phases. Design work would not be recommended in any future phase, but conversations would be ongoing to understand if there are mitigating measures that could address their concerns.

Debris Basin and Oakmont Country Club
The debris basin represents a unique opportunity to enhance the natural habitat. This is also considered to be the northern terminus per the recommendation outlined above. As an area intended to retain water, it presents an opportunity to enhance the natural landscape and habitat through vegetation and re-wilding of the area. This would also incorporate improvements for pedestrian and cyclist use that would encourage a “lighttouch” that would minimally impact the existing basin. As an area intended as respite from an urban environment, the design calls for boardwalks and pathways that cause minimal disturbance, and an opportunity to absorb the enhanced natural environment that would be created as part of the design.

The portion of the Wash through the Oakmont Country Club is unique in both its setting and form. The only segment with a box channel, it also traverses through the center of the golf course. It should be noted that individual conversations were conducted with the Country Club, and any advance of the design work would take many additional conversations to ensure that elements such as privacy, safety, and sound were addressed. It would also include the development of an alternative that may go off the route and not through the golf course.

The current concept allows for separated pedestrian and cyclist paths. Limited open space is offered in this segment as it is intended to be a place to pass through, rather than linger, in order to ensure minimal interference with the golf course. This would also include interventions that would provide visual screening for the users of the golf course, and protection for those that would pass through this segment. This initial concept only demonstrates the interventions within the Wash, and not those mitigating features which 818 of 1517
5 b 8
will be further explored in subsequent phases.

South of Oakmont Country Club
The remaining segments of the Wash are a wider box channel compared to points north.

This presents new opportunities for open space and creating social spaces that encourage engagement. Directly south of the Country Club, there are a remaining number of single-family neighborhoods. As such, the concepts call for spaces that are more passive such as landscaped areas, opportunities for engagement on the history of the Wash, and uses that are respectful to the surrounding context. As this area is wider, dedicated paths can be created for pedestrians and cyclists to minimize potential conflicts between the two modes, and ensure a safe active transportation environment. Planting wells would be deeper and wider in this segment, given the size of the wash. This would allow for more substantial planting contributing to enhanced privacy and beautification.

As the route moves further to the south and west, there are more opportunities to incorporate active recreational elements and social and civic engaging places. This could include playgrounds, performance spaces, and other uses that are conducive with a denser and more commercial-oriented environment. Pathways for cyclists and pedestrians would remain separated, again with the intent to provide safety for both modes of travel. Similar to other segments to the north, deep planting wells would allow for enhanced vegetation to be incorporated into the project.

It is important to note that the conceptual designs are not location specific. This would be accomplished in future phases to ensure that any proposal has maximum compatibility with the surrounding context. This could include changes in the elevation for the pedestrian or cyclist pathways, as well as the planter beds.

These concepts have been presented and discussed with Los Angeles County Flood Control, which has provided direction regarding access, security, and preserving the wash’s role as a flood control channel. Coordination would be increased as the vision becomes clearer in subsequent phases and would also advance conversations with the Army Corps of Engineers.

Access, Safety, Security, Privacy, and Future Considerations There are a series of existing access points along the wash that will provide access to key locations such as the debris basin and near future stops of the North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit route. The current report illustrates potential locations, but are not specific to parcels or streets. It would take additional work to better understand the implications of any new access point, such as the existing context and impacts to parking. Rather, the locations indicate a general area that are modeled based upon the opportunity to enhance connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists to key assets and locations along the route. It is important to note that any new access point would not occur on private property, but through existing public property or right-of-way. 819 of 1517
6 b 8
Safety, security, and privacy were priority topics from the public engagement events. And while an operations and maintenance plan would be developed in subsequent phases, it was still considered as part of the visioning process. As highlighted earlier, the height of pedestrian and cyclist pathways, as well as planting beds, can be calibrated to ensure that users of the path have limited visual access into homes and to mitigate sound impacts. Additionally, the elevated platform will not always run from wall-to-wall.

Separation may exist in particular segments, such as single-family communities to prevent people from accessing private property or accessing the wash in a manner that is not consistent with the defined access points.

Through conversations with police, safety and security could be accomplished through the installation of emergency call boxes and lighting. Much of the wash is visible from surrounding public right-of-way, providing visual access from police whom are conducting their typical patrols. Additionally, the pathways within the wash will remain wide enough for police motorcycles to access in the event of an emergency. To mitigate fire risk, the project will use a fire resistant planting plan consistent with City standards. While much of this will be addressed in future phases of work and through a full operations and maintenance plan, it is important to address these early and to develop an understanding of the types of access, equipment, and visibility will be necessary to ensure a safe and attractive environment for all users.

Future planning and development phases will continue to address these topics and develop more refined plans. As a visioning process, this portion of work only addresses these on a higher level until it is better understood what is possible within the framework of the wash. As these solutions are developed in future phases, work groups will be created by each neighborhood to make sure they are addressing the unique conditions of each community. Additional topics that will be explored in future phases will include stormwater retention and treatment, groundwater recharging, wildlife connectivity, environmental and indigenous people education, and public art.

Next Steps
Staff is seeking input and feedback from City Council regarding the final report and design concepts for the Verdugo Wash, as well as any additional considerations that the Council may wish to see examined in future phases of work. It should be noted that if the City Council wishes to proceed with future phases, staff recommends that the portions of the Wash north of the debris basin be excluded from future study, but not from public engagement. On November 3, 2022, Assemblymember Laura Friedman presented the City with $6 million in funds to be used towards future phases of work. City Staff continues to pursue additional funding sources for future phases of work as well.

Upon Council’s direction to continue the study, staff will draft a Request for Proposals (RFP) that will include the feedback heard from City Council, as well as the public and Commissions. Staff will return to Council and ask for authorization to release the RFP.

This portion of the work would be funded by the State provided $6 million, in addition to any other grant and funding sources that Staff is able to identify. 820 of 1517
7 b 8
A subsequent phase of work would include:
• Preliminary engineering;
• Environmental review;
• Significantly expanded public engagement;
• Design refinement;
• Public art plan; and
• Limited construction documentation.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Various forms of outreach were conducted during the visioning process. While the project was launched during the Covid-19 pandemic, additional efforts were made to solicit input and feedback from the general public. This process began by creating a project based website (www.verdugowash.com) by providing a brief history of the wash and requesting input on how the public would like to see the wash re-imagined. The surveys were allowed participants to input their specific neighborhood so that the design team could better understand each neighborhood’s specific interests, concerns, and desires. Subsequent surveys were also released that allowed participants to identify precedent examples and where they could imagine a similar intervention in their neighborhood. It gave respondents the opportunity to identify the type of character that they would like to see adjacent and within their community. The final online survey allowed respondents to rate their favorability and provide written responses to the initial design concepts. The website provided a means to subscribe and stay up to date on any changes during the process.

Support for the project was relatively strong from website respondents. When asked how strongly they supported a re-imagined Wash (1=little to no support and 5=strongly supported) the average score was 4 out of 5. When asked what was most important to a re-imagined Wash, respondents stated that pedestrian and cyclist access, parks and open space, and public safety. A summary of the survey responses is included with the report.

In addition to the online engagement, staff and the design team conducted a number of in-person and virtual meetings. These meetings ranged from various neighborhoods, as well as stakeholder organizations. Neighborhood meetings were sponsored by the subject neighborhood, and were held in the front or backyards or residents so that the conversation could address in-person conditions. This provided an opportunity to have localized conversations and to better understand their input, feedback, and concerns. A larger scale event was also held on February 19, 2022 at three different locations; Verdugo Park, Fremont Park, and the Orange Street storefront. Participants had the opportunity to participate in in-person engagement activities that were originally created for the website including precedent image mapping, anticipated access points and trips, and general questionnaires on the project, interests, and concerns.

Sentiment from neighborhood meetings was mixed to opposed. This was largely focused around elements of public safety and privacy, particularly for those that abutted the wash.

The larger community meeting brought primarily positive responses but also questions 821 of 1517
8 b 8
and concerns. While the pandemic limited in-person events, those that were held proved to be the most valuable in soliciting input and to have open conversations about concerns and mitigation.

Supporting the general public outreach, a working group was assembled with primary focus on those who had particular technical knowledge related to the project. This included experts in mobility, sustainability, conservancy, parks, those involved with the Los Angeles River project, and general representatives for residents and businesses to help inform the overall feedback. It should be noted that this is and will not be the only working group that will be assembled. This working group was created to provide technical guidance, and if the project advances into advanced phases, a series of working and advisory groups will be established to address specific neighborhood desires and concerns.

Further supporting the outreach efforts, an internal working group was established to assist in providing feedback, responses, and solutions to the input received from the general public. This group was comprised of City staff from Community Development, Parks and Community Services, Police, Public Works, and the Office of Sustainability.

This assisted in providing responses and solutions requested by the general public and to also provide input on elements related to public safety, operations and maintenance, and improved sustainability.

Lastly, staff presented the project to various boards and commissions at the City. This included Parks and Community Services Commission, Planning Commission, Sustainability Commission, and Transportation and Parking Commission. Support from the Commissions was strong, primarily focused on the ability to create a landmark asset for the city and to further safe active transportation, sustainable strategies, and an increase in open space.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. If Council provides direction to continue the study, the additional cost would be funded by the State’s $6 million in funds, in addition to any other grant and funding sources that Staff is able to identify.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Environmental review would be conducted on future phases of the project as the design and plan are refined.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Note and file the report, provide feedback on the current design concepts, and issue direction to advance to the next stages of design, study, and analysis. This will ensure that progress continues to be made.
822 of 1517
9 b 8

2. Note and file the report, provide feedback on the current design concepts, and direct staff to not pursue additional design, study, and analysis. This would end any additional progress on the study.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Bradley Calvert, Assistant Director of Community Development Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Verdugo Wash Visioning Report
823 of 1517

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council hereby notes and files the Report to Council dated November 15, 2022 pertaining to the Verdugo Wash Visioning Report and directs staff regarding design concepts, next steps and future phases of the project as follows:

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
824 of 1517
!melk
+BuroHappold
visioning report
November 2022
825 of 1517
Verdugo Wash Project Team touring the Verdugo Wash debris basin, April 2021 826 of 1517
This report for the Verdugo Wash Visioning was written for the City of Glendale, California.

It was authored by !melk landscape architecture &
urban design, with the support of key project collaborator, Buro Happold Engineering.

Key contributions were provided by the Planning Staff of the City of Glendale, as well as valuable project stakeholders including Chief Anthony Morales and Richard Toyon of the Tongva Tribe, the Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy, and the Verdugo Wash Visioning Working Stakeholder Group.

In addition to thanking the above contributors, we
are grateful to the Los Angeles County Public Works
Department for their cooperation, the City Council for the opportunity to study this corridor, and to every Glendale community member who offered immensely constructive
input in the effort to re-imagine the Verdugo Wash.

City of Glendale, California
Community Development
633 E Broadway Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206
landscape architecture & urban design
111 John Street Suite 2650
New York City, 10038
!melk
about this report
Buro Happold Engineering
800 Wilshire Blvd 16th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
827 of 1517
828 of 1517
the Verdugo Wash Visioning final report
table of contents
introduction
the project & the process
stakeholder & community engagement
the site today
existing conditions
historical accounts
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
first impressions
improved connectivity
potential impact
hydrological function
enhanced ecology
phasing implementation
community considerations
baseline hydrology
mobility considerations
interconnected ecologies
sustainability & planning
community outreach survey results
raw results
7 9
15 41
43 57
73 77
113
123
131
139
159
171
189
205
283
343
359
chapter 1.
chapter 2.
chapter 3.
appendix A.
appendix B.
appendix C.
appendix D.
appendix E.
829 of 1517
830 of 1517

1. introduction
831 of 1517
8 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 832 of 1517
A successful 21st century city includes accessible, open, public spaces that help improve walkability, safety, and physical and mental health.

The Verdugo Wash Visioning is the one of the first steps to realizing a truly connected Glendale - connected to the LA River, to Downtown, to various social and civic programs such as Glendale Community College, and - via an extensive mountain trail system - to multiple geographies.

A reimagined Verdugo Wash has the potential to bolster
resilience, both across Glendale’s natural environment
and its diverse communities.

The Visioning for the Verdugo Wash was not conceived
of in a vacuum! In fact, the premise of this project and this Visioning Study is rooted in ideas voiced by the
Glendale community!
Glendale, whose urban and suburban fabric is fully “builtout” - recognizes the importance of green open space. It is important to note that Glendale is simultaneously “parksrich” and “parks-poor” - while the publicly-accessible natural areas are tremendous resources for Glendale, they most
enrich the lives of northern Glendale.

Glendale needs more green space.
introduction
the project & the process
project location: the Verdugo Wash is a 9.4-mile-long tributary of the Los Angeles River located in the Glendale area of Los Angeles County, California.

The channel begins just south of Interstate 210 in the Crescenta Valley. It flows southeast along the eastern edge of the Verdugo Mountains, then south through a pass between those mountains and the San Rafael Hills, and finally west to ultimately join the Los Angeles River just northeast of Griffith Park. san rafael
hills
griffith park
san gabriel mountains
Consider the Verdugo Wash, a 60-acre linear concrete
channel that runs through the 18 Glendale neighborhoods.

While the Verdugo Wash represents just 0.3% of the land area of Glendale, consider the following:

1. if one excludes the “natural / wild” areas, these 60-acres would represent a significantly substantial - equally
distributed - land area within Glendale;

2. The Verdugo Wash is a corridor - a contiguous spine that connects north and south Glendale. At some points, it is 90- feet wide, and more importantly, it comfortably navigates the pinching topographies of the Verdugo Mountains and San
Rafael Hills
The sum of these parts is greater than its whole. The
Verdugo Wash is the tremendously unique opportunity
to stitch together North and South Glendale!
The initial channelization of the Verdugo Wash was
engineered nearly 90 years ago. The City of Glendale
neither looks like it did in the 1930s (physically and
demographically) nor has the same overall sentiments about the Wash. Furthermore, hydrology engineering technology has made monumental strides since the mid 1930s, and
similarly, Glendale has experienced the advantages and
disadvantages of concretized waterways.
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 9 833 of 1517

9. 10.

11. The Visioning Process
The Verdugo Wash Visioning effort, led by the
!melk+BuroHappold team in close collaboration with the
City of Glendale, will be an approximately one-year effort, comprised of the following stages:

Stage 1: Project Initiation & Pre-Design
The pre-design stage established the basic framework
for the study and involved: collecting and documenting
physical and visual data of the study area including existing conditions and future citywide initiatives; reviewing and discussing precedent projects; establishing goals and
objectives for the Verdugo Wash Visioning; establishing a public engagement strategy and schedule; and establishing a branding strategy for project identification.

Stage 2: Visioning
Using data collected from Stage 1, public feedback, and design direction established as part of the charrette
process, the !melk+BuroHappold team developed design
alternatives and interventions for the Verdugo Wash.

This included potential route alternatives for pedestrians and cyclists, identifying locations for public space improvements, types of open space, exploring areas for habitat restoration, design approaches to respond to different neighborhood
contexts, and sustainability measures.

The design team’s efforts were compiled and presented
by the City of Glendale, Community Development to City
Council on February 7, 2022.

The presentation was an update on the Verdugo Wash
Visioning Process, and requested a motion to provide input and feedback to staff regarding the current stage of the aesthetically compelling and interactive urban space.

This may include, but is not limited to; paving materials, landscape palette, art installations, wayfinding, and other unique design strategies that will create an identifiable vision. (Currently, Lighting Design, Public Art Strategy/ Procurement and Signage & Wayfinding are not
accounted for in the landscape scope.)
Create a strategic branding program that will provide
a recognizable identity for the Verdugo Wash and the
project that will serve as an identifiable symbol and brand to be incorporated into wayfinding and other graphic
representation of the vision.

Identify opportunity parcels that can serve as significant moments along the route. This should include parcels
to consider for acquisition, or those that are already in possession of the city that can be repurposed to support the objectives of the Verdugo Wash.

Identify early and easily implementable strategies by
creating a comprehensive vision that will make the
project viable for long-term implementation, but creates early “win” opportunities to stake claim in the corridor.

2. 3.

4. 5.

6. 7.

8. Develop new pedestrian and cycling trails that will
allow the Verdugo Wash to serve as a multi-modal
transportation spine while supporting and enhancing the Citywide Pedestrian Plan and Bicycle Transportation Plan.

Establish connections amongst existing assets along the route such as Downtown Glendale, business districts,
entertainment venues, parks, and Griffith Park.

Identify and develop opportunities for public open space such as parks above or adjacent to the Verdugo Wash.

Identify and develop opportunities for fixed and
temporary uses along the Verdugo Wash to promote civic
and social engagement using urban design, art, and other placemaking strategies to create inspiring and activated places.

Identify sustainability, environmental restoration, and remediation measures including opportunities to restore the natural habitat in segments in or along the Verdugo Wash, and other strategies that will counter the effects of climate change.

Establish identifiable segments of the route that will
create unique urban design visions and environments
that are responsive to the surrounding urban context.

Utilize innovative experiential urban design, landscape architecture, art, and placemaking tools to create an
The Verdugo Wash Visioning offers a unique place-making opportunity that would significantly reshape the urban
framework and character of a major area of Glendale.

The goal of the project is to develop a high-level
vision, including but not limited to, conceptual design, programming, and integration of a re-imagined Verdugo
Wash into the existing and potential land use framework of the City.

The vision will help transform the utilitarian design of the Wash (as a flood control channel) into a significant contributor to the City’s character and amenities. The
original tributary path will be revitalized, biodiversity will be reactivated, and the community will be reconnected with an active transportation corridor.

The Verdugo Wash Visioning will build upon strategies
identified in the Greener Glendale Plan and other existing efforts. Related city goals and targets will be incorporated into the design where possible. The key project objectives, as defined by the City of Glendale and the brief for the Verdugo Wash Visioning, are:

1. Create an overall urban design vision for the Verdugo Wash that extends from its northernmost origin to its
confluence with the Los Angeles River and Griffith Park.

The vision should respect the various neighborhoods
along the route, but also create an identifiable theme that is consistent for the entire Verdugo Wash.

We believe that the Verdugo Wash has the potential to go beyond a single utilitarian function to integrate multiple benefits to enrich the community.
10 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 834 of 1517
visioning process for the Verdugo Wash Project, and to note and file the report.

Subsequent to Community Development’s presentation, a
lengthy and robust period of comment and question ensued, and ultimately the project received City Council approval.

Other interactions included a presentation and discussion with the Upper Los Angeles River & Tributaries (ULART)
working group, and periodic “check-ins” with Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) regarding project intent,
feasibility, and overall operations and maintenance
considerations.

Stage 3: Visioning Refinements,
Community Input & Engagement
The !melk+BuroHappold team - with the valuable input
and feedback from various stakeholders - went back to the drawing boards to further refine the vision / framework for the Verdugo Wash.

Another layer of input was collected at a city-wide public event, hosted by the !melk team in Glendale on February 12, 2022. At this engagement effort, which occurred
simultaneously at three locations throughout the City
(Verdugo Park, Fremont Park, and the City’s downtown
storefront) in order to maximize attendance. A great deal of valuable input and education occurred that day!
The team was able to - first-hand - present the work done to date, while listening to feedback and reactions from the community. The team was then able to incorporate
the feedback received during public engagement events
and hearings, stakeholder review, and through City staff guidance. This includes refinement of all work products undertaken in Stage 2, and advancing them from the
conceptual to finalized vision documents.

Stage 4: Final Design & Report
The efforts of the Visioning stage culminate in (this)
final design report, which documents the process and
components of developing the Verdugo Wash Vision.

Ultimately, upon completion of the Visioning stage, it is the goal that the Final Vision Report encapsulates a set of tangible design ideas and schemes for the Verdugo Wash
that offers a unique identity, a distinct design vocabulary and offers enough welcome impressions that will be beloved by the community
It is our aim that these schemes will spark interest for the project - to further develop the Vision into a Concept Master Plan, which will be used to identify potential future phases (perhaps even pilot projects), which can be further developed in subsequent design stages.
!melk is particularly expert in creating strong “brand
identities” for places, and has cultivated a reputation for delivering well-crafted designs, from small to large scales. !melk’s designs - and as is the case for the Verdugo Wash Vision - almost always include a fundamental and simple “built-in” fundraising approach in order to activate the appropriate expertise to facilitate with fundraising strategies.

Visioning Design Report
This Vision report, shared herein, focuses on urban design challenges, landscape strategies, sustainability initiatives, mobility solutions, as well as the hydrological and biological function of the Verdugo Wash. Collectively, each of these areas contribute to a re-imagined multi-benefit Verdugo Wash. It is the sincere hope of the !melk team that the ideas provided herein will inspire future project phases including concept master planning on to implementation!
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 11 835 of 1517
Depending on considerations like
available funding and phasing
priorities, distinct projects can be
lifted out from the Masterplan and put
on their own track /timeline towards
implementation.

What is a “visioning study”?
In the grand scheme of things, the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study is in its very initial (exciting) stages!
The objective of a Visioning Study, in short, is to paint the picture of what is possible.

Possibility is formally defined as “feasibility” - and the feasibility of the Verdugo Wash Vision has been vetted
based on available data and as this project stage duration has allowed. Kindly reference the “road map” diagram below to understand where the Verdugo Wash project is today in relation to following design stages and any implementation.

VISIONING STUDY

DESIGN PACKAGES

AGENCY APPROVALS

DESIGN COMMISSION

PRESENTATIONS

COMMUNITY INPUTCOMMUNITY INPUT

STAKEHOLDER

COMMUNITY INPUT

ENGAGEMENT

STAKEHOLDER

ENGAGEMENT

STAKEHOLDER

ENGAGEMENT
develop a design framework and
narrative overlay for the site
full-stage development of design
documents, by phase or project area, in
preparation for implementation

PROJECT

IDEATION

CONCEPT

MASTERPLAN
DETAIL

MASTERPLAN
define zoning, program, toolkit of
elements; identify funding streams
refinement of masterplan /
development of design packages
Feasibility
Most design ideas in this Design Report are organized as a “kit-of-parts”, which means each design idea is not yet pinned to a specific location within the Verdugo Wash.

An example of this would be the included “Access Point” study. Consider this a “catalogue” of options or possibilities, given the existing opportunities and constraints. Since these access points were initially suggested in the project’s Pre-Design Report, the community has provided input, and the project team responded by advancing the catalogue
by adding/deleting, shifting/expanding, and differentiating (e.g. human/wildlife). During the master planning stage of the project, additional and significant community
and stakeholder input will be crucial to advancing this “catalogue” into an actual, defined plan including “what access points, where,” “what design segment, where,” and “what program, where.”
The feasibility for a project the magnitude of the Verdugo Wash is rooted in its political, economical, and engineering realities.

With regard to Engineering Feasibility, any successful reimagined Verdugo Wash must be anchored in a rigorous analysis of what volume of space is available - or “freeboard” - to locate landscape elements. The Verdugo Wash has the potential to become a one-of-a-kind linear park, but must still of course function to convey stormwater.

With regard to City Policy / Politics and Economics, a project such as the Verdugo Wash will require a sequence of
growth checks in its lifespan. Such “checks” might include:

Cost Estimating of Capital Improvements; Operations &
Maintenance (O+M) Planning; City Council & City Agency
approvals
12 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 836 of 1517
quantity and phasing of individual
packages to be confirmed

IMPLEMENTATION/

BUILD-OUT
PACKAGE “A”
PACKAGE “X”
PACKAGE “Z”
PACKAGE “B”
PACKAGE “C”
phased development of tender packages
for construction and phases of project
build-out
PACKAGE “Y”
public access to project
areas as they are
completed
OPENING(S)!
In the master planning process alone, the Project Team
recommends two cost estimates of the developing plan done by a professional cost estimator familiar with the contracting landscape in LA County. Additional cost estimating work is recommended in the Design, Engineering, and Project
Approvals stage as well. In the typical scenario when a design is shown to be too expensive, the project team gets creative in “right-sizing” the design, a process called valueengineering. This financial growth check ensures the project stays on budget.

Operations and Maintenance (O+M) planning functions
similarly, checking the design at regular intervals as more detailed design information becomes available. An expert O+M consultant will evaluate the plan to develop estimates of the time, staff, and funding required to maintain the design. In the scenario that the design becomes too costly to maintain, a possible solution would be to simplify the design.

Community & Stakeholder Input
Community and stakeholder input is essential to public
space design - it’s for the public after all!
A portion of this report is dedicated to the Community
Engagement and Public Outreach process to date. There
will be many more opportunities to weigh in on the reimagination of the Verdugo Wash.

We look forward to these interactions!
At every stage in the process, there will be numerous “checkins” planned to interact with the community and stakeholder groups in order to collect input and feedback, which the design team will genuinely consider within the wider picture of stakeholder input and project realities.
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 13 837 of 1517
14 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 838 of 1517
We’re the first to tell you that the success of a public realm project hinges on a well-conceived public engagement
process. Here at !melk, we have demonstrated a long-term commitment to genuine community outreach and are proud
of our deep portfolio showcasing these efforts and glowing reputation among the communities we have served.

A simple but critical aspect to public engagement is
consistent, direct, and honest conversations with community leaders, residents, stakeholders, and local agencies. There is nothing as formative to a design as this set of conversations and we welcome everyone’s participation in the process! An aspect of the community engagement process that
we too often see under-emphasized by others is the
methodology for soliciting, documenting and responding to input. !melk, however, recognizes the importance of a strong methodology to ensure:

1. We honor the time and effort of participating community members. For instance, we go to lengths to document
conversations so that they we can refer back to them as needed.

2. We honor participants’ voice, ensuring this rich community input (e.g. general information, ideas, and concerns) is folded into the process and truly informs the resulting design and solutions.

With this methodology, we can be confident the design is of and for your community! For our team, a successful project means that our design and related solutions are “futurefocused” and inspiring - a place for the people of the local community that is representative of them and feels like “home”.

What we offer as designers is the ability to transform the identity of a place into a unique and community-specific expression of the community’s histories, desires, and pride; a welcoming place where one you can connect with yourself, others, and the environment.

For the Verdugo Wash Visioning project, stakeholder
engagement and community outreach has occurred in
various ways throughout the entire project duration,
per a Public Engagement Plan that was carefully
developed together with the City of Glendale.
a proven process: how the project will be a holistic integration of program and identity/form/character, guided by input from the City of Glendale, the community, and the design team. ©MELK introduction
stakeholder & community engagement
“ruled out”
program
!melk input
community input
community input

PROGRAM
FORM /

CHARACTER /

IDENTITY
CoG+!melk input
Project Website
In early 2021, Glendale city staff created a website specific to the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study, verdugowash.com, to communicate the premise of the Verdugo Wash Visioning
Study, share project updates, and invite residents to
participate in various engagement conversations.

As a project team, we are committed to promoting diversity and neighborhood representation throughout the design
process. Not everyone has the time or headspace to attend a formal community engagement event. To connect with these community members, the community dialogue began on the
platform of the Verdugo Wash website via an online survey.

Using this tool, we were able to collect general sentiments, initial ideas, preferences, aspirations, wishes, and aversions for consideration in the re-thinking of the Verdugo Wash and its potential transformation.
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 15 839 of 1517
This page captures the online community survey as it
appears on the verdugowash.com website.

ONLINE SURVEY: “My Vision Survey”

1. Do you work in Glendale?

YES / NO

2. What is your age group?
Under 18 / 18-24 / 25-34 / 35-44 / 45-54 / 55-65 / 65+

3. Image Preference Survey
Please rate the following pictures on a scale of 1 -10, 1 being not favored and 10 being excellent. My vision of the Verdugo Wash includes:

4. The new Verdugo Wash should cater to...
select priority level for each: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
Glendale Residents / Daily Commuters / Public Transit Users Tourists / Families / People with Disabilities / Children Teenagers / Older Adults / Wildlife

5. Which modes of transportation should the new
Verdugo Wash accommodate?
select priority level for each: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
Pedestrian / Skateboarding / Cycling / Electric Scooter Shared Shuttle Service / Delivery Robot / Equestrian

6. Which sorts of commutes should the new Verdugo
Wash serve?
select priority level for each: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
Commuting to Work / Transit Connections / Recreational
Amenity-Destination Based / Commuting to School
Ecological Mobility / Local Neighborhood Mobility / City Wide

7. “A key outdoor amenity for us could be...”
Write in answer

8. “The Verdugo Wash should be unique and memorable
because...?”
Write in answer

9. “The Verdugo Wash could become the ‘IT PLACE’ to
visit, if we had...”
Write in answer
the Verdugo Wash Visioning project website: https://www.verdugowash.com/ is an important platform, where key project information is uploaded for public reference and review and online surveys were hosted.

Example image-based question where participants asked to rate their level of preference 1 to 10.

Above: the remaining images included in the image preference survey. 2 3 4
5 6 7
8 1
9 10
16 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 840 of 1517
Neighborhood-Based Meetings
Since Glendale is known for its collection of well-organized neighborhoods, these groups proved to be an excellent
conduit for connecting with groups of Glendale residents, reaching engaged citizens, sharing the objective of the project, and for soliciting community input to guide the Verdugo Wash Visioning.

Neighborhood-based meetings were generally conducted
in the front and back yards of residents in their respective communities. This process facilitated pointed conversations around the existing conditions specific to each
neighborhood so that design solutions could respond to
each neighborhood’s unique context.

During these conversations, staff heard feedback related to issues such as:
• Crime and Safety
• Operations and Maintenance
• Privacy
• Impacts to surrounding land uses
• Opportunities for enhanced vegetation
• Overall cost
Additional meetings were also held with other interest
groups such as the Kiwanis Club and GoGlendale.

If the project moves into additional phases, an even
more robust approach will also be taken by forming
specific groups and committees that are focused
on their specific neighborhood to ensure that as the
design is refined, that it responds to each unique
condition that exists along the route.

Online Survey Results
The Project Team thanks everyone who made time to
answer the surveys! All results are included in Appendix E in this report, where you’ll see how sentiments and comments varied. There were:

Participants who expressed outstanding concerns about
the project (e.g. residential privacy for those whose homes back up the Wash, or questions regarding the hydrological feasibility of the project).

Participants who were open to the project with reservations (e.g. how much would both the capital improvements and
ongoing maintenance cost).

Participants who displayed great enthusiasm for the project and suggested ideas to enrich the project (e.g. ensure south Glendale can access opportunities at the Wash without
having to drive and park nearby).

The Verdugo Wash has immense potential to transform
the community of Glendale, so it’s natural for community members to have varied reactions to that potential change at this early point in the design process. Please enjoy reading people’s responses, as we did. We find it useful to put ourselves in each commenters’ shoes, to do our best to understand their perspective, which is all then folded into the design process.

In good faith response - especially to those with outstanding concerns and reservations - we have written a new report chapter, “Community Considerations” that includes
preliminary design solutions to questions like residential privacy.

September 11, 2021
Whiting Woods Neighborhood Meeting
October 23, 2021
Sycamore Woods Neighborhood Meeting
March 19, 2022
Woodbury Neighborhood Meeting
February 19, 2022
Verdugo Park, Fremont Park,
Downtown Storefront
February 12, 2022
Verdugo Wash Coalition
April 22, 2022
Kiwanis Club
August 4, 2021
West Glendale
April 2, 2022
Glendale Riverwalk Event
June 15, 2022
Planning Commission
July 7, 2022
Sustainability Commission
August 15, 2022
Parks and Community
Services Commission
October 24, 2022
Transportation and Parking
Commission
Throughout the visioning process City staff and the
design team engaged in several meetings with the
general public, neighborhood groups, and various
boards and commissions to obtain feedback and input.

The following outreach events / meetings for the Verdugo Wash Visioning were held throughout 2021 and 2022 as part of the Visioning process:
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 17 841 of 1517
Community-Wide Outreach Event
Feb 19th, 2022
While most of 2021’s outreach and engagement efforts were led by the City of Glendale Community Development staff, the Design Team organized a “grand” public outreach event advertised to the wider open to the public.

The largest in-person engagement conversation during
the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study occurred on Saturday
February 19th, 2022 at (3) three different locations within the City: Fremont Park, the 142 California Avenue city storefront, and Verdugo Park. Each location was staffed by City of
Glendale staff as well as representatives from the Design Team.

This vision of this large-scale public outreach event was twofold: 1) to connect with a “Greater Glendale” audience and 2) introduce a different method and scale of engagement that is - most importantly - fun!
To aid the Design Team to connect with a more diverse
cross-section of the community (e.g. those who may not
participate in a Homeowner’s Association, who may not own

PATTTERSON AVE

GREYDALE DR

N KENILWORTH AVE
CAÑADA BOULEVARD

COLINA DRIVE

FREMONT PARK
11am
11am
11am
142 W CALIFORNIA AVE
public outreach event
We want to hear what YOU want for the Verdugo Wash!
Participate in outreach activities (at any one of 3 locations), to learn first-hand important project information, to give feedback on the current design vision, and to participate in visioning exercises with the Design Team to shape the future Verdugo Wash. Please stop by whether you have 5 minutes or 45!

We look forward to meeting you! - let us know which
location you’ll be at, by RSVPing here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/NW3KBY5
additional details at verdugowash.com
Saturday, February 19th
11am - 2pm outreach activities
3pm - 5pm debriefing & after party! VERDUGO PARK

LOCATION C

LOCATION B

LOCATION A
February 19, 2022 public outreach event flyer: the above flyer was translated into Spanish and Armenian and circulated on numerous platforms to advertise this grand public outreach event, which was to take place at (3) three locations throughout Glendale - Fremont Park, the 142 California Avenue City storefront, and Verdugo Park. The event was well attended with 100+ participants! a home, whose first language is not English, or simply have not yet heard about the project), the Design Team prioritized community convenience and social equity.

To make attendance as convenient as possible, the Design Team hosted the same set of staffed activities at each of the (3) three public-facing locations throughout the City. The agenda and associated activities were purposely devised to establish interaction among attendees.

The City of Glendale Community Development staff
facilitated the translation of all event marketing and meeting materials to connect with Spanish and Armenian speakers, and had translators on-hand on Event day!
It was the Design Team’s hope that selecting public-facing venues would also entice members of the Community to
“stop on by” during one’s typical Saturday morning activities.

Significant marketing efforts were deployed to promote
attendance from as many Glendale community members
as possible! Specifically, marketing for the event occurred on the project website, social media blasts through citywide and department specific accounts, and various citywide and department newsletters.
18 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 842 of 1517
The ultimate objective for each was to promote an open, welcoming, and robust dialogue about the project. To vary the “rhythm” of the form of engagement, the Design Team crafted (6) six hands-on, interactive activities for an openhouse/fair-style format.

At the event Welcome Station, attendees were greeted and oriented to the event layout and activities. Participants were encouraged to sign-in, and complete an initial survey and submit suggestions and considerations to the “Ideas Box”.

Introduce the Verdugo Wash Visioning Study
Premise, Context, Analysis, Opportunities &
Constraints, and “First Ideas”
Gather data and ideas about both the current and
desired mobility patterns and activities in/around
the Wash
Help Glendale community members “see” the scale
and impact of Verdugo Wash if it were to become a
community amenity; discuss how it might improve
quality of life.

Build rapport with the community and generate
positive “buzz” about the work being done.

Communicate how the community can contribute
and author the Vision, and have continued
involvement by staying abreast of project
developments.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. February 19, 2022 public outreach event table-long corridor mapping exercise at Verdugo Park location.

February 19, 2022 public outreach event: the public reviewing the background information on the Verdugo Wash and the Visioning project !melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 19 843 of 1517
character various sections segments / spatial conditions connectivity & access opportunity for improved mic 1 /2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/8 87’
(in commercial area)
TYPE 5C 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in open space area) TYPE 5B 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in residential area)
TYPE 5A 87’
12’
15’
75’
(in golf course)
TYPE 4 73’
22’
4’
11’
43’
(in open space area)
TYPE 3B 43’ 13’
12’
40’ - 45’
TYPE 3A
(in residential area)
40’
6’
7’
25’
TYPE 2 (in residential area)
25’
6’
7’
10’ - 25’
TYPE 1 (in residential area) 24’ 6’
6’ W: 10’ - 25’
TYPE 1

LAUDERDALE AVE
P.O.B

CONFLUENCE

PARK VISTA DR

CLOUD AVE

SHIRLYJEAN ST

SPILLWAY
Cañada BLVD

GLORIETTA AVE

WABASSO WAY

VERDUGO SKATE PARK

PACIFIC AVE
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 4
TYPE 3B
TYPE 5A
TYPE 5B
TYPE 5C
W: 25’
W: 40’
W: 45’
W: 43’
W: 87’
W: 60’-80’
8-MINUTE WALK
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
P.O.B.
8-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
8-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
18-MINUTE WALK
4-MINUTE WALK
6-MINUTE WALK
6-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
4-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
8-MINUTE WALK
9-MINUTE WALK
10-MINUTE WALK 16-MINUTE WALK
2-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK

EXISTING WASH

ACCESS POINT

WASH TRACE

POTENTIAL WASH

ACCESS POINT
X.XX DISTANCE (IN MILES)

LA RIVER

TYPICAL SECTION
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 1
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 2
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 3
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 4
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 5
W: 75’

BOSTON AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

NEW YORK AVE

WHITING WOODS ROAD

OAKENDALE PI

DOLARITA AVE

SAN GABRIEL AVE

GLORIETTA TENNIS PARK
2551 N VERDUGO ROAD

WABOSSO WAY

BABE HERMAN

FIELD PARKING LOT

VERDUGO SKATE PARK
LOT 32
LOT 30

E GLENOAKS BLVD

N BRAND BLVD

N PACIFIC AVE

FREMONT PARK

BONNIE ACADEMY

CONCORD ST
805 FAIRMONT AVE

SAN FERNANDO RD
VerdugoWASHvisioning
W: 87’
W: 87’
“UPPER WASH”
“LOWER WASH”

GLENDALE BOUNDARY CATCH BASIN
INLET
OUTLET

PUMP STATION

ENERGY DISSIPATOR
PLUG
JS
OTHER

LA RIVER

WATERSHED

WASH WATERSHED
BASIN

STORMWATER ROUTES
character various sections segments / spatial conditions connectivity & access opportunity for improved mic 1 /2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/8 87’
(in commercial area)
TYPE 5C 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in open space area) TYPE 5B 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in residential area)
TYPE 5A 87’
12’
15’
75’
(in golf course)
TYPE 4 73’
22’
4’
11’
43’
(in open space area)
TYPE 3B 43’ 13’
12’
40’ - 45’
TYPE 3A
(in residential area)
40’
6’
7’
25’
TYPE 2 (in residential area)
25’
6’
7’
10’ - 25’
TYPE 1 (in residential area) 24’ 6’
6’ W: 10’ - 25’
TYPE 1

LAUDERDALE AVE
P.O.B

CONFLUENCE

PARK VISTA DR

CLOUD AVE

SHIRLYJEAN ST

SPILLWAY
Cañada BLVD

GLORIETTA AVE

WABASSO WAY

VERDUGO SKATE PARK

PACIFIC AVE
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 4
TYPE 3B
TYPE 5A
TYPE 5B
TYPE 5C
W: 25’
W: 40’
W: 45’
W: 43’
W: 87’
W: 60’-80’
8-MINUTE WALK
BASIN

EXISTING WASH

ACCESS POINT

WASH TRACE

POTENTIAL WASH

ACCESS POINT
X.XX DISTANCE (IN MILES)

LA RIVER

TYPICAL SECTION
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 1
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 2
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 3
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 4
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 5
W: 75’

BOSTON AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

NEW YORK AVE

WHITING WOODS ROAD

OAKENDALE PI

DOLARITA AVE

SAN GABRIEL AVE

GLORIETTA TENNIS PARK
2551 N VERDUGO ROAD

WABOSSO WAY

BABE HERMAN

FIELD PARKING LOT

VERDUGO SKATE PARK
LOT 32
LOT 30

E GLENOAKS BLVD

N BRAND BLVD

N PACIFIC AVE

FREMONT PARK

BONNIE ACADEMY

CONCORD ST
805 FAIRMONT AVE

SAN FERNANDO RD
VerdugoWASHvisioning
W: 87’
W: 87’
“UPPER WASH”
“LOWER WASH”

GLENDALE BOUNDARY CATCH BASIN
INLET
OUTLET

PUMP STATION

ENERGY DISSIPATOR
PLUG
JS
OTHER

LA RIVER

WATERSHED

WASH WATERSHED
BASIN

LAUDERDALE AVE
P.O.B

CONFLUENCE

PARK VISTA DR

CLOUD AVE

SHIRLYJEAN ST

SPILLWAY
Cañada BLVD

GLORIETTA AVE

WABASSO WAY

VERDUGO SKATE PARK

PACIFIC AVE
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 4
TYPE 3B
TYPE 5A
TYPE 5B
TYPE 5C
W: 25’
W: 40’
W: 45’
W: 43’
W: 87’
W: 60’-80’
8-MINUTE WALK
BASIN

EXISTING WASH

ACCESS POINT

WASH TRACE

POTENTIAL WASH

ACCESS POINT
X.XX DISTANCE (IN MILES)

LA RIVER

TYPICAL SECTION
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 1
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 2
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 3
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 4
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 5
W: 75’

BOSTON AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

NEW YORK AVE

WHITING WOODS ROAD

OAKENDALE PI

DOLARITA AVE

SAN GABRIEL AVE

GLORIETTA TENNIS PARK
2551 N VERDUGO ROAD

WABOSSO WAY

BABE HERMAN

FIELD PARKING LOT

VERDUGO SKATE PARK
LOT 32
LOT 30

E GLENOAKS BLVD

N BRAND BLVD

N PACIFIC AVE

FREMONT PARK

BONNIE ACADEMY

CONCORD ST
805 FAIRMONT AVE

SAN FERNANDO RD
VerdugoWASHvisioning
W: 87’
W: 87’
“UPPER WASH”
“LOWER WASH”

GLENDALE BOUNDARY CATCH BASIN
INLET
OUTLET

PUMP STATION

ENERGY DISSIPATOR
PLUG
JS
OTHER

LA RIVER

WATERSHED

WASH WATERSHED
BASIN

STORMWATER ROUTES
February 19, 2022 public outreach event: Informational boards with background material on the Verdugo Wash and the Visioning project Attendees were further encouraged to spend some time absorbing the content presented on the Project Introduction boards, in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the extent of the scope and scale of the Visioning study. Actually, a majority of the day’s dialogue ended up occurring at these boards’ location than any other, as staff walked participants through the information on the boards, fielded questions, and followed the conversation as needed.
20 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 844 of 1517
cro-mobility
existing cycling times projected cycling times w/ additional access points / activatedVerdugo Wash enhanced ecology establishing a community amenity maintaining existing hydrological infrastructure while creating a new public realm datum !melk
+BuroHappold

BARE GROUND / SOIL

SCRUB VEGETATION

CONIFER FOREST

HARDWOOD FOREST

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSLAND

NON-NATIVE / ORNAMENTAL VEGETATION

VERDUGO WASH TRACE
1/4 MILE BUFFER

GLENDALE CITY LIMIT
5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES

COHESIVE, CONNECTED

LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR

EXISTING CHANNEL
URBAN FRAMEWORK:

ENHANCED ACCESS &
CONNECTIVITY “SPECIAL MOMENTS”
cro-mobility
existing cycling times projected cycling times w/ additional access points / activatedVerdugo Wash enhanced ecology establishing a community amenity maintaining existing hydrological infrastructure while creating a new public realm datum !melk
+BuroHappold

BARE GROUND / SOIL

SCRUB VEGETATION

CONIFER FOREST

HARDWOOD FOREST

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSLAND

NON-NATIVE / ORNAMENTAL VEGETATION

VERDUGO WASH TRACE
1/4 MILE BUFFER

GLENDALE CITY LIMIT
5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES

COHESIVE, CONNECTED

LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR

EXISTING CHANNEL
URBAN FRAMEWORK:

ENHANCED ACCESS &
CONNECTIVITY “SPECIAL MOMENTS”
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 21 845 of 1517
“The Verdugo Wash should be
unique and memorable because...”
“A key outdoor amenity for us
could be...”
“The best linear park or trail
that I’ve seen/visited is...”
“It would be great if
the Verdugo Wash had...”
“The Verdugo Wash could become
the ‘IT PLACE’ to visit, if we had...”
The first guided, group activity was titled “What If ... ?”, for which the objective is to encourage participants to think imaginatively about opportunities for the Wash.

Prompts such as, “The Verdugo Wash would be the ‘It’
place to be if...” were designed to encourage fresh thinking.

Participants were encouraged to write their responses
on post-it notes and stick them to the board to create a collection to each of the five prompts/boards.
22 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 846 of 1517
February 19, 2022 public outreach event Mapping Exercise documentation: attendees were invited to map out important daily routes and destinations in/around the Verdugo Wash and its environs !melk+BuroHappold
VerdugoWASH
!melk+BuroHappold
VerdugoWASH
!melk+BuroHappold
VerdugoWASH
!melk+BuroHappold
VerdugoWASH
!melk+BuroHappold
VerdugoWASH
February 19, 2022 public outreach event: Selfie opportunity! Attendees were encouraged to snap a photo in front of one of the initial renderings of the vision for Verdugo Wash.

For a Mobility Mapping activity, participants were encouraged to map one or more typical mobility patterns of their daily routine such as commutes to work/school; “dot” stickers were placed on a large-format map indicating important destinations, or start/end locations. Attendees were prompted questions during this activity to gain a better understanding of how Glendale residents make mobility pattern decisions (e.g. why do you bike to this park location and not this one?) - in order to ultimately glean overall ease/safety. !melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 23 847 of 1517
February 19, 2022 public outreach event / Verdugo Park location: programming/character engagement mapping exercise For another Mapping exercise of Precedent Imagery, participants were handed a small deck of cards with curated precedent images and prompted to consider where along the Verdugo Wash it would be most ideal (or not!) to host a particular programs (e.g. gathering area) or design elements (e..g bench in a particular style). Participants placed the cards on the map, which was actually 3 separate 6-foot long maps of the Verdugo Wash corridor!
24 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 848 of 1517
To further discuss the Verdugo Wash Visioning study, the public was invited to a debriefing “social event” upon the conclusion of the more structured outreach activities which had occurred earlier that day at various locations throughout Glendale.

February 19, 2022 public outreach event / Verdugo Park location: programming/character engagement mapping exercise “Continuing the Dialogue”
The day of Outreach was extended to an informal
rendezvous, where the Design Team and the City of Glendale staff convened locally for a Debriefing “social event”. The purpose of this convening was to further promote open
dialogue with the community - in a less structured format - and discuss the takeaways of the day, and share great ideas for the Verdugo Wash within a fun atmosphere!
There were no formal activities related to data gathering or project feedback, and conversations were not moderated.

All were welcome!
For the Project Team – comprised of City of Glendale staff and the !melk+BuroHappold consultants – this gathering
was used to discuss what was said throughout the day at each of the three “satellite” outreach events / locations, while continuing to set the tone that outreach can occur in a comfortable, positive environment to foster authorship together with the community!
It’s important to note that public outreach is a process. There will continue to be opportunities to weigh in on the Verdugo Wash Visioning, as it might progress. Public Outreach will continue in parallel to any future design stages.

The Public Outreach format - overall, to date - has allowed for the presentation of a brief introduction to the project (for those unfamiliar) and an open forum - through guided discussion - to learn about participants’ interests and desires for the Wash. Ultimately, there was general consensus and a spirit of unity around the notion that a re-imagined Verdugo Wash would certainly enhance quality of life in Glendale! !melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 25 849 of 1517
February 19, 2022 public outreach event:

Verdugo Park location
examples of the “precedent mapping” exercise
26 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 850 of 1517
general discussion around the project introduction boards !melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 27 851 of 1517
February 19, 2022 public outreach event:

Fremont Park location
examples of the “precedent mapping” exercise
28 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 852 of 1517
examples of the “mobility mapping” exercise
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 29 853 of 1517
February 19, 2022 public outreach event:
142 California Avenue storefront location
examples of the “what if” exercise
30 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 854 of 1517
examples of the “precedent mapping” exercise
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 31 855 of 1517
What did Glendalians have to say about this project?
I fell in love with my house 20 years ago because it
backs up to the Wash, offering a magnificent view
of the Verdugo Mountains. I love to host garden
parties. I admit the Wash itself isn’t conventionally
attractive, but I’ve selected attractive low-growing
plants to enhance the mountain view.

The Wash’s concrete geometry amplifies sounds
up and down the Wash, like one neighbor’s barking
dog several blocks away, so I am open to ideas
for re-imagining the Wash! I have concerns about
operations, maintenance, and safety, and want to
ensure that access points are equitably placed and
not requiring any of my neighbors to move.

I am in my mid-30s and live in the Montrose
neighborhood. I live with epilepsy and unable to
drive at this time. I was contently biking to work
in Downtown Glendale and really enjoying the
additional activity in my day. And the autonomy - I
don’t like relying on public transit schedules.

I purchased a pedal-assist bike to support my uphill
commute home. But just before the pandemic
shutdowns, I was commuting to work on Verdugo
Road when I was hit by a car and broke my leg. I
haven’t biked since, and honestly, I won’t until
protected bikeways are implemented around me.

Biking in the Verdugo Wash would be incredible!
I live in a retirement home along the Wash north
of downtown Glendale. I visit my doctor regularly
who, at every appointment, encourages me to be
more active to better manage my blood sugar. My
daughter lives in Chicago, but we talk every Sunday
evening. She the real nag - getting on my case to
be more active! I was using the exercise facilities in
my multi-unit complex before the pandemic closed
it down. My vision has gotten worse so I can’t drive
any more, making it harder to be active other places.

If Verdugo Wash became a park, I think it would be
a safe place to walk since it is so close to the Home.

Besides a walking path, it would be great if there
were also shady spots to sit, chat, and maybe play
cards with my girlfriends.

I am a first generation Hispanic American, and attend
Glendale Community College. I currently live in a “parkspoor” community in west Glendale.

Between a full credit load this semester and a part-time job, I feel stressed out all the time and can’t seem to make the time to go the gym, even though I know it reduces my anxiety. I try to carpool with classmates to class, but when that doesn’t work out, I have to hustle to make the bus, an experience that always leaves me super frazzled!
I am enthusiastic about the idea of utilizing the Wash as a route to walk to class, especially if it was really green and shady with places to pause and review my notes before class.

I moved with my family to the US 6 years
ago. We rent an apartment in Vineland.

My husband uses the family car to go to
work on Saturdays so I am home with the
kids alone and always looking for things
to do with them! My oldest son always
wants to go to the skate park at Verdugo
Park, but it’s difficult to get there by public
transportation. I’d love to bike, but am
uncomfortable taking the streets, especially
after hearing a chilling story from my
neighbor. It occurred to me that if there was
a bike path in the Verdugo Wash, I’d be able
to connect with many places in Glendale
(by bike) that were really difficult to get to
before!
- “Gloria”
- “Erik”
- “Florence”
- “Bianca”
- “Elen”
32 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 856 of 1517
We live in a secluded neighborhood in north Glendale
nestled in the Verdugo foothills. Our house is located on a street that runs directly along the Verdugo Wash. We take a lot of pride in our neighborhood and love how quiet, safe, and remote it feels. We understand that the Wash in its current utilitarian state is needed to mitigate flood risk. We have intense concern that facilitating public access could jeopardize the safety and quiet that we value so much about our neighborhood. And as a wealth management advisor, I am skeptical about how the City could finance both the capital improvements and upkeep of a new public space. But as an enthusiastic bird watcher, I’d love to see more supportive native plantings and am curious about how additional planting could consider wildfire risk.

I also live in a secluded northern neighborhood along the Wash, and have more concerns about the Wash than hopes
it could benefit the City. I wonder about the security of my home if the Wash was made accessible to the public and what options would be available if people using the Wash behind my house riled up my dog into a barking frenzy, or what I should do if I ever witnessed antisocial behaviors behind my house? I wonder how the Wash improvements will be paid for, and then maintained and operated in perpetuity. I also want to be assured that any Wash improvements wouldn’t exacerbate
flood risks. I am particularly concerned that integrating public space in a neighborhood known for and sought out for its peace and quiet could reduce property values.

I am a student at Glendale High School and
live in Citrus Grove. A couple of nights a
week, I have practice at Glendale Sports
Complex, but it’s difficult for my mom to
get me there on time with other family
obligations.

I could go to practice on my own by bike if
the Verdugo Wash had a bike path. I’d get
there pretty quickly!
It would be great if there were also larger
gathering areas integrated along the route
so that my friends and I can hang out after
school and on the weekend.

I am an environmentalist! I live near the
Wash, and am keen to learn how this
project could support the surrounding
ecosystems. I have lots of questions! How
will the proposed deck system work?
Could parts of the concrete channel be
exposed so we can see the water? What is
the quality of the water in the Wash? Can
it be filtered to improve water quality?
There’s way too much concrete! Could
the concrete be removed to infiltrate
water to the aquifers? How can the Wash
be naturalized to enhance wildlife value?
There are so many species, including
native bees, butterflies, birds, and
mammals that the project could support!
We live in La Crescenta-Montrose and really
enjoy biking as couple. We have become
increasingly frustrated recently though...
we’ve witnessed a handful of vociferous
folks from a nearby neighborhood shoot
down modest - but otherwise well-supported
- proposals to integrate even basic bicycle
facilities! We are interested in how we
can support the Verdugo Wash Vision
as an active transportation corridor and
community amenity for Glendale.
- “Wendy & Scott”
- “Matt”
- “Dylan”
- “Carl”
- “Stephen & Judy”
Since the objective of any public space is to foster and enrich its community, we are sharing snippets of anecdotes we’ve heard so far from Glendale community members, capturing various points-of-view, hopes, desires, and concerns. Note these quotes are based on conversations with community members, but names and some details have been modified for privacy.
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 33 857 of 1517
Stakeholder Outreach
34 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE The Verdugo Wash Vision’s objective is to integrate multipurpose benefits including public space, mobility, equity, climate resilience, and ecological connectivity. Given
this complexity, the Project Team invited key project
stakeholders to champion their “stakes” throughout this Visioning Study process and guide the Visioning for the Verdugo Wash.

We’d like to thank the members of the Working Stakeholder Group for their time, effort, and investment in this Visioning Study! Their contributions have been invaluable:
• George Ballteria, Board of Directors, Glendale Parks
and Open Space Foundation; Director of Design and
Construction, North East Trees; before that 25 year Director of Facilities and Senior Project Manager, City of Glendale Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency
• Shana Bonstin, Deputy Director of City Planning, Chief Sustainability Officer, City of Los Angeles*; lives near Glorietta Park
• Dave Gallagher, Landscape Architect at Los Angeles
County Public Works*; lives near the Oakmont Debris Basin • John Howell, Chief Executive Officer, Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy
• Mickey Long, field biologist, retired Natural Areas
Administrator, Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation
• Evan Meyer, Executive Director, Theodore Payne
Foundation
• Tim Martinez, Land and Program Administrator, Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy
• Nancy Steele, Executive Manager, Friends of the Verde River; past Executive Director, Council for Watershed Health in Los Angeles; co-founder and president of Arroyos &
Foothills Conservancy 2000-2011
• Laura Stotler, retired Principal Planner, City of Glendale • Ana Tabuena-Ruddy, landscape architect; Project
Development & Inter-agency Coordination Manager,
Department of Public Works Bureau of Street Services, City of Los Angeles*; lives near the Oakmont Debris Basin
• The Tongva Tribal Council, represented by Rich Toyon, retired landscape architect
• Diego Zapata, Nursery Manager, North East Trees
* comments are as individuals; titles are for reference The Role of a Stakeholder
While individual community members enrich the
engagement process by entrusting their insights, their points of view, what they’re excited about, and what concerns them, with the Design Team, stakeholders are engaged to tackle larger overarching themes.

It’s the Design Team’s role to say, “we heard you,” and respond with design options that collectively integrate feedback from the Community while managing wider project objectives and constraints.

Members of the working stakeholder group are also
members of the community, but they are distinguished from individual community members in that they don’t represent a single property, but a specific stake in the outcome or decision.

While Glendalians can offer valuable personal insights, the members of Verdugo Wash Working Stakeholder Group offer wider points-of-view, focusing on more overarching themes such as climate resilience, regional ecology, urban impact, connectivity, etc.

The complexity around establishing the Verdugo Wash as
a multi-benefit (enhancing public space, mobility, equity, climate resilience, ecological connectivity) place for Glendale is not something the Design Team can take on alone!
Together with the City of Glendale, the Design Team invited local stakeholders to champion their “stakes” throughout this Visioning Study process - to guide, direct, and challenge the visioning process! We would like to thank the members of the Working Stakeholder Group for their time, effort, and investment in this process! Their contributions have been invaluable.
858 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 35 Championing Safety & Operations+Maintenance
An internal working stakeholder group was also convened by the City of Glendale in order to discuss potential security, operations and maintenance of the Verdugo Wash.

The group was comprised of representatives from Police, Fire, Parks and Community Services, Public Works, Mobility, Office of Sustainability, and Community Development, and feedback included:

Police
Parks
Fire
Sustainability
Championing Functionality & Hydrology
A specific example of a Verdugo Wash-relevant “stake” being championed by local stakeholders is groundwater recharge.

The City of Glendale purchases and imports 60-70% of
the city’s drinking water, meaning only 30-40% is procured locally via well pumping of aquifer-based groundwater.

Aquifer stores are important because: 1) well water is vastly less expensive than importing water, gallon-for-gallon; 2) they promote climate resilience by cushioning water
stores during times of drought; and 3) they contribute to the region’s ecology as the LA River basin’s hydrology is naturally a complex mélange of above and below surface
flows.

Add emergency call boxes
Create operating hours
Leave enough room for motorcycle access in the event of an emergency
Some bicycle and foot patrol could be incorporated with appropriate funding
Good visibility from the street will allow for incorporation into existing patrols
Supports the idea of ambassadors looking over the wash
Ensure good lighting
Separation of pedestrians and cyclists
Would like to see a trail safety patrol
Create operating hours
What would the process be to clear and close the wash
when necessary
Ecological education opportunities
Stormwater retention
Using sustainable construction materials
Identify mental heal and environmental health benefits
(carbon capture)
Ensure equitable access
Follow fire resistant code requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Available data indicates that the upper Verdugo Wash was in fact a creek before it was channelized north of the debris basin. Given that length of soft bottom condition, it likely facilitated meaningful groundwater recharge.

With this in mind, it is only reasonable that some
stakeholders - including the Tongva Tribe, the Arroyos
& Foothills Conservancy, and the Upper Los Angeles
River Tributaries Working Group - have taken interest in “groundwater recharge projects”.

In addition to this, and in connection with larger hydrological systems, the Design Team has also engaged with key
Agency Stakeholders such as Los Angeles County Public
Works (LACPW) Flood Control Department.

LACPW is charged with the responsibility of overseeing the mitigation of flood and debris flow risks for all the residents of LA County. Aside from this important functionality,
LACPW also recognizes the merit of multi-purpose benefits, and is endeavoring to weave such benefits into improvement projects while of course never compromising storm event capacities.

The !melk+BuroHappold, together with the City of Glendale, has been in contact with the LACPW, regarding the Vision for the Verdugo Wash.

The Design Team is in receipt of a Flood Permit Guidance note, which summarizes the key flood control permit issues and the permit’s purpose. The note recommends submitting a Flood Control Permit, and has served as guidance in this initial Visioning stage. (It is indicated that the LACFCD will be able to assign a County staff person to the Verdugo Wash project once a permit application has been filed.)
In addition to interactions with LACPW, the Design Team has also met with the United States Army Corps of Engineers, whereby the Design Team became aware of the potential
permits that might be required for future Reviews and
Approvals.

Last, but not least - with regard to functioning site hydrology - the Design Team engaged with the Upper Los Angeles
River Tributaries working group during the Visioning
process.
859 of 1517
36 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 860 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 37 Working Stakeholder Group “sustainability” recommendations for the Verdugo Wash Vision graphic by !melk based on June 5, 2022 correspondence 861 of 1517
Incredibly important is the Gabrielino-Tongva culture, which was - at one point in time - deeply intertwined with the “Verdugo Wash” and surrounding environs of the Crescenta Valley. While the Tongva were forcibly uprooted from their land centuries ago, the Tongva culture is still very much tied to the land in the Crescenta Valley and its environs.

Given the Tongva’s great legacy of land stewardship and resilient sensibility towards resource management, they would like to contribute to the collective dialogue around the most appropriate Vision for the Verdugo Wash.

Headwaters: Because there are few opportunities for
habitat restoration and water sequestration along with
developed recreation in the Crescenta Valley, the entire Verdugo Hills Golf Course property should be obtained
to create a true regional park that has both recreational and educational opportunities by re-imagining a park that utilizes storm water capture, native plant materials managed as the Tongva people have for thousands of years, a laid back riparian Blanchard channel, hiking and recreation, and dedicated learning memorials for the WPA Tuna CCC
Camp, the Tuna Camp Detention Center (as supported
and promoted by the Los Angeles Japanese American
Museum), and Tongva Village site of Wiqanga. The learning opportunities are enormous for this site at the nexus of history.

Stream Bed: The Verdugo Wash should be re-imagined
as the life giving force it had been for thousands of years by creating daylighted areas where the channelized stream can exit and create not only wildlife/riparian opportunities through pools and side tributary streams but gathering areas that were common during the centuries Tongva habitation.

Only native vegetation should be used
Mid Stream: Crescenta Valley Park and Mountain Oaks
represent the next best opportunity for water sequestration and stream daylighting. The importance of creating a
sustainable water supply through aquifer re—injection
cannot be over emphasized and to create recreational and educational opportunities through that same opportunity is fundamental. Mountain Oaks is a property the city of Glendale needs to pursue and obtain. Within the Mountain Oaks property and near the stream bed is an opportunity to create a native plant material gathering area endemic to the region and managed as the Tongva would have and a
ceremonial ground for tribal purposes is necessary and a tribute to the people who have stewarded these lands for centuries. Additionally, daylighting in this area provides a direct access to the Verdugo Mountains slopes and would establish a direct wildlife corridor.

Oakmont Debris Basin: The Oakmont Debris Basin
needs to also be re-imagined as a seasonal wetland as
managed by the Tongva people. The debris basin is a grand recreational and educational opportunity to return the
area to the probable seasonal wetland it once was. Without doubt it was a gathering area for materials integral in daily Native life such as food, pharmaceuticals, and for basketry and other structural materials. It is recommended that a boardwalk system be implemented to preserve the fragile environment of a wetland with informational and educational opportunities throughout.

Oakmont Golf Course: The golf course was once a riparian environment and flood plain as evidenced by the number of riparian trees still within the property. Recently, the course has reduced their greens to reduce their water consumption.

It is highly recommended the golf course goes further and adopts the Audubon International Golf Course design for sustainability and utilizes daylighting and tributary side streams to support native non-exotic plant species for- both wildlife habitation and creates swales and depressions for water sequestration.

Verdugo Park: Once a riparian environment and floodplain, the seasonal stream bed at the base of the Verdugo
Mountains is a ripe opportunity to restructure the area as a more natural riparian area with Tongva managed native plantings for gathering, recreational and educational
opportunities. Any interpretive signage should be more
than piecemeal but imagined and executed as a region
wide system of information from the headwaters to the
convergence with the Los Angeles River.

Confluence: Water served a daily ritual and importance
in the life of the Tongva people as it was celebrated and central to their existence. Water was managed closely and provided the many resources in their daily existence and subsequently held a sacred place in their spirituality. Thus, the convergence of waters was a strategic and celebrated place. It was the place of meeting and council and the
recognition of the significance of water central to their history and daily existence. The Tongva simply believed that if they cared for their water and their land, the land and water cared for them. The meeting place of the two waters is a near sacred place to the Tongva and the land at this place should include a specific space for council, reflection and celebration. It is the culmination of the life of the Verdugo Wash and the life it supported both human and non-human.

This space should be of careful consideration and careful design and should have a direct interaction and access with the water and the land and human beings. This is also the culmination in an educational journey from headwaters to confluence and the final expression of the natural and native landscape architectural expression and possibly the most important. It needs to recognize the natural system of the movement of water through a land and it must be respectful to the people who stewarded the land for thousands of years. “The Tongva Tribal Council requests involvement in all
phases of design and planning of the Verdugo Wash
Sustainability project to ensure proper representation but to also ensure sustainable improvements are executed in the manner customary to the Tongva stewardship principles.

The Tribal Council also requests that the nomenclature of the project incorporates Tongva nomenclature and tells the history of the Tongva people in a true and proper manner as the basis of all history of the region the Verdugo Wash entails.” (excerpt from correspondence with GabrielinoTongva chief, Rich Toyon, May 27, 2022) Gabrielino-Tongva Vision for the Verdugo Wash
38 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE right: Tongva recommendations for the Verdugo Wash Vision graphic by !melk based on correspondence with Gabrielino-Tongva Chief Anthony Morales and Richard Toyon
862 of 1517
What does the Gabrielino-Tongva tribe recommend?
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 39 863 of 1517
40 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 864 of 1517

2. the site today
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 41 865 of 1517
866 of 1517
Overview
The Verdugo Wash is a 9.4-mile long tributary of the LA River that was channelized to swiftly convey rainwater and debris from Glendale and surrounding areas to mitigate flood and debris flow risk. The quintessential Wash experience feels heavily engineered with its strict rectangular
geometries and hard, sterile concrete floor and walls. Nearly 60-acres in size, the Wash feels inhospitable lacking human scale, being sunk an average of 12-ft from the adjacent city fabric and any other human activity, and secured on all perimeters by chain link fencing.

Temporal Character
The Wash has two primary temporal characters: dry & empty or wet & coursing. Below are two sets of photos - at three areas along the Wash - to illustrate this contrasting condition.

In the left column are photos of what the Wash feels like the majority of the year: dry, vast, and underutilized. In the right column are those same three moments during the few annual precipitation events when the Wash feels wet, coursing, and useful. Here, the Wash performs as hydrological infrastructure:
receiving and channeling water from the hundreds of
stormwater outlets that drain the watershed, then hurriedly escorting that fresh water out of the city.
location: Confluence with LA River, looking upstream. left: “low-flow” condition during dry season; right: coursing condition during December 2021 rain event. These stairs were engineered to dissipate energy from Verdugo Wash water joining the LA River. location: Fremont Park. left: “low-flow” condition during dry season, April 2021; right: coursing condition during December 2021 rain event location: Oakmont Debris Basin. left: dry season, April 2021; right: wet condition, December 2021 rain event the site today
existing conditions
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 43 867 of 1517
The “UPPER” Wash reach starts just south of Interstate 210 and flows into the Oakmont Debris Basin located just north of the Oakmont Golf Course. Water collects in the debris basin and is detained for a interval to allow debris to settle from the water flow. After spilling from the concrete dam, water enters the “LOWER” Wash reach and flows until it meets the Confluence to join the LA River. ©!MELK “UPPER WASH”
“LOWER WASH”
Project Site Segmentation
44 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE “UPPER WASH”“UPPER WASH”
1 /
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 “LOWER WASH”“LOWER WASH”

OAKMONT
DEBRIS
BASIN

CONFLUENCE
210
868 of 1517
The “LOWER WASH” ranges in width from approximately 43 ft to 86 ft and terminates at the confluence with the Los Angeles River The Oakmont DEBRIS BASIN & spillway split the “upper” & “lower” segments of the wash and is the only non-concrete bottom section north end of debris basin where water flows down into
the basin
water collecting in the debris basin, April 2021 water is detained behind the concrete spillway for a period of time, allowing debris to settle and be later
cleaned out during regular maintenance
The “upper wash” is the narrowest segment beginning at approximately 10 ft wide and widening to about 40 ft box culvert (highlighted by dotted
white circle) just south of interstate
210 is the start of the Verdugo
Wash in Glendale
The Verdugo Wash meeting the LA River at the
confluence (highlighted by dotted white rectangle)
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 45 869 of 1517
Spatial Character
The Wash varies considerably in its width and depth in relation to the adjacent city fabric. 46 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 87’
(in commercial area)
TYPE 5C 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in open space area)
TYPE 5B 87’
12’
12’
87’
(in residential area)
TYPE 5A
87’
12’
15’
75’
(in golf course)
TYPE 4
73’
22’
4’
11’
43’
(in open space area)
TYPE 3B 43’ 13’
12’
40’ - 45’
TYPE 3A
(in residential area)
40’
6’
7’
25’
TYPE 2
(in residential area)
25’
6’
7’
10’ - 25’
TYPE 1
(in residential area)
24’
6’
6’
Sections are cut within square call-outs on opposite page “Types” refer to areas of the wash with similar widths, shapes, and adjacent land uses 870 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 47 site analysis / !melk 3d model:
massing & land use along the corridor
of Verdugo Wash
W:XXX WASH OVERALL WIDTH

TYPICAL SECTION
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 1
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 2
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 3
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 4
SECTION / SEGMENT TYPE 5

LOS ANGELES RIVER
W: 10’ - 25’
TYPE 1

LAUDERDALE AVE
P.O.B

CONFLUENCE

PARK VISTA DR

CLOUD AVE

SHIRLYJEAN ST

SPILLWAY
Cañada BLVD

GLORIETTA AVE

WABASSO WAY

VERDUGO SKATE PARK

PACIFIC AVE
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 4
TYPE 3B
TYPE 5A
TYPE 5B
TYPE 5C
W: 25’
W: 40’
W: 45’
W: 75’
W: 43’
W: 87’
W: 60’-80’
871 of 1517
48 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE (in residential area)
(in residential area)
(in residential area)
(in open space area)
TYPE 1
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 3B
this page / opposite page:
3D model development of areas typifying certain conditions along the Verdugo Wash, such as the channel’s profile (width and shape), as well as the adjacent land uses such as open space, residential and commercial. Graphics: ©!MELK W: 10’ - 25’
TYPE 1

LAUDERDALE AVE
P.O.B

CONFLUENCE

PARK VISTA DR

CLOUD AVE

SHIRLYJEAN ST

SPILLWAY
Cañada BLVD

GLORIETTA AVE

WABASSO WAY

VERDUGO SKATE PARK

PACIFIC AVE
BASIN

GOLF COURSE
TYPE 2
TYPE 3A
TYPE 4
TYPE 3B
TYPE 5A
TYPE 5B
TYPE 5C
W: 25’
W: 40’
W: 45’
W: 75’
W: 43’
W: 87’
W: 60’-80’
872 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 49 (in commercial area)
TYPE 5C
TYPE 4
TYPE 5B
(in golf course)
(in open space area)
TYPE 5A
(in residential area)
873 of 1517
The Verdugo Wash has been inaccessible to the public since it was channelized. A useful exercise for starting the conversation of “what is possible” in this space is to digest just how much space there is. Have you visited any of these linear public spaces? If so, how does its footprint (black footprint below) and your experience there compare to the footprint of the Verdugo Wash (green footprint below)? How big is the Verdugo Wash? How does it compare in scale to other linear public spaces we may be familiar with?
50 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE At 9.4 miles long, the total surface area of
Verdugo Wash is approximately

2.6 million square-feet!
874 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 51 875 of 1517
52 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 876 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 53 877 of 1517
54 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Verdugo Wash alignment, and surrounding environs
How does Verdugo Wash relate to the rest of Glendale?
The Wash touches at least eighteen distinct
neighborhoods as defined by the City of Glendale. There are even more distinct communities with unique characters within these neighborhoods, which should be studied in
more depth in future design phases.

Land uses vary along the Wash. At the northern end, these land uses tend to be single family residential and open space.

Immediately south of the debris basin is the golf course, where the wash is trapezoidal in shape and unfenced. After the golf course, the Wash returns to its typical rectangular, fenced condition. Cutting through Glendale to meet the LA River, land uses trend towards higher density residential and commercial, especially near downtown.
1 /
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 878 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: EXISTING CONDITIONS 55 site analysis / !melk 3d model:
urban scale massing & land use
Verdugo Wash alignment, and adjacent urban land uses 1
/
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 879 of 1517
56 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 880 of 1517
TONGVA: ITS ORIGINAL PEOPLE
The Tongva are original people of the Los Angeles basin; their presence can be traced back 9,000 years, although some studies indicate 11,500 to 18,000 years. Their territory “Tovaangar” stretched over 2,500 square miles and included modern-day Glendale. Due to the area’s favorable climate and their strategic location along the ocean extending
into the mountains, the Tongva developed a sophisticated social structure and rich oral history and demonstrated great economic strength. Not only did the Tongva name
most villages and physical features in the area, but many individuals spoke several different dialects and languages to facilitate trade amongst the neighboring nations.

TONGVA IN THE CRESCENTA VALLEY
The Tongva people’s history in the Crescenta Valley
(includes modern-day Glendale and La CrescentaMontrose) and their relationship and stewardship of the Verdugo Mountains is well-established and predates written California history. When translated to English, the name “Tongva” means “People of the Earth” and so it follows that the Tongva’s livelihood was deeply tied to the land. Primarily hunter-gathers, they changed location seasonally and
actively managed the land.

Tongva village sites were carefully considered & established according to three critical criteria: a credible water source, stable land placement, and a credible food source. The
Verdugo Mountains and immediate environs provided all
three of these conditions. At least three of the villages in this region – Wiqanga, Tujungna (Tohuunga)/Muuhungna,
and Hahamongna – were all located near water sources,
underscoring the Tongva ethic in which water was not just a resource that supported their people, but a gift worthy of celebration. The Tongva’s enduring occupancy in Crescenta Valley testifies to their great stewardship of the land, the lifegiving waters of the Verdugo Mountain watershed, and the rich alluvial plains of the Crescenta Valley.
the site today
historical accounts
The approximate homeland of the Tongva Nation was surrounded by many other first Nations, facilitating rich trade. A neighborhood in Long Beach changed its Western name to Tonga nomenclature to honor its original people.

Image source: Long Beach Post News
In the Crescenta Valley, the Tongva founded several villages including Muuhonga, Tohuunga, & Haahamonga (circled) / Area mountain ranges labeled with today’s western names for reference. Image source: Decolonial Atlas Special thanks to Rich Toyon and the Tongva Tribe
for their contributions to this section of the report.
“Wiyot’s Children,” a painting by Mary Leighton Thomson, depicts the Tongva village of Sa-angna at Playa del Rey, Ballona Wetlands. Tongva village sites were carefully considered based on Tongva traditions of land stewardship, even shifting to respond to ecological dynamics. Image source: via SMBAS

GLENDALE
AREA
Tongva woman at her shelter covered with tule mats on the banks of the Los Angeles River. Image source: Bowers Museum Collection via SMBAS “SAN GABRIEL”

MOUNTAINS
“SANTA MONICA”

MOUNTAINS
“VERDUGO”

MOUNTAINS
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 57 881 of 1517

VILLAGE OF WIQANGA
The Tongva village of Wiqanga in the western Crescenta
Valley was inhabited for at least a thousand years and most likely originated as a seasonal village that later became permanent. The age of the village is reasonably much older and concurrent with the age of the other nearby villages:

Tujungna (6,000 years old), Muuhungna (4,500 years old), & Hahamongna (4,000 years old). Over the centuries, the village most likely expanded and contracted, and possibly shifted position or established new boundaries. Based on artifacts found, Wiqanga extended into La Tuna Canyon
beyond the western Crescenta Valley.

Wiqanga supplied and traded with the two nearby Tongva
villages, Tujungna and Muuhungna, as well as Hahamongna.

Smaller villages, including Wiqanga, were strategically established to provide management bases over sustaining resources like forests, fresh water, and hunting grounds, as well as those with cultural significance like gathering areas.

Thus, it is unsurprising that Wiqanga was located near
both permanent and seasonal water sources including area springs and - in today’s western names – Blanchard Creek, Cook’s Creek, Dunsmore Creek and La Barranca Creek (now buried under the 210 freeway).

The Tongva name of “Wiqanga” means “place of the thorn,” referring to the thorns of the Opuntia cactus species
endemic to the area, a species the Spaniards later referred to as “Las Tunas” (La Tuna). Early missionaries traveling from Mission San Gabriel to Mission San Fernando would stop
at or near Wiqanga to replenish their water supplies before continuing their journey. The missionaries’ preferred route, “Old Indian Trail” and later “Old Padre Trail,” roughly followed the northern base of the Verdugo Mountains and is today a fair portion of La Crescenta and Honolulu Avenues.

The Village of Wiqanga was responsible for the
stewardship of the large, almost uninterrupted oak
forests on the northern side of the Verdugo Mountains. Dominated by Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak), these forests supplied an annual bounty of acorns that was key to their diet. At the northern base of the Verdugo Mountains, creeks flowing down joined creeks flowing from the San
Gabriel’s, forming the Verdugo Creek – and almost certainly sporting Tongva nomenclature – which likely flowed yearround without the interruptions of today’s Crescenta Valley.

This relationship of the Verdugo Creek (credible water
source) adjacent to the Verdugo Mountains’ oak forests
(credible food source) was blissful. Each Fall when the oak forests yielded their harvest of acorns, the Tongva people would process them into carbohydrate-rich acorn flour using the waters of the now-named Verdugo Creek to leech out
their tannic acid. On average, it took five hundred pounds of acorns per Tongva household per year for subsistence when combined with other dietary staples. Based on the
prominence of acorns in the Tongva diet, Wiqanga’s oak
stewardship role for the Nation, and the Tongva’s estimated population in the area, one can surmise that the Verdugo Creek flow at this location must have been quite ample to process multiple tons of acorns.

The Crescenta Valley was like many other parts of California where native peoples actively stewarded the land. Their land management practices had developed over thousands
of years and was based on a near complete understanding of the landscape ecology’s relationships, rhythms, and
intricacies. As a result, their stewardship was complex, sophisticated, and unequivocally sustainable.
58 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Wiqanga was named by the Tongva in reference to the Opuntia cactus species endemic to the area, pictured above. image source: University of California CalPhotos
A Tongva woman storing acorns in a granary. image source: California Historical Society Collection at the University of Southern California via wikipedia commons 882 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 59 Based on tribal knowledge and artifacts found, the village of Wiqanga was likely located at the former Verdugo Hills Golf Course. The Tongva would have selected this location to steward the acorn-yielding oak woodlands of the “Verdugo” Mountains, and process them using fresh water from the site’s two artesian springs and the “Verdugo” Creek - where the Verdugo and San Gabriel Mountain streams converge. Graphic by !MELK per 05/27/2022 correspondence with Gabrielino-Tongva chief Rich Toyon Remnant Oak Woodlands in the Verdugo Mountains. Image source: r/socalhiking 883 of 1517
SPECIES PROFILE: QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA
The Coast Live Oak / syn. California Live Oak / Quercus agrifolia, is a medium-sized tree that grows along the
coasts of mid and southern California. It is characterized by evergreen foliage and a much-branched trunk that can become massive, highly contorted, and gnarled with age.

The lower limbs of ungrazed trees often recline on the
ground. Legacy specimens can be over 250 years old with trunk diameters 3-4 meters. Q. agrifolia is among the most important wildlife plants where it grows.

Mature Size: 25 - 82 ft tall by 15 - 35 ft wide
Crown: Typically broadly rounded and dense, especially
when aged 20 to 70 years; in later life the trunk and
branches are more well defined and the leaf density lower.

Younger trees are often shrubby.

Growth Rate: medium; height increases of 13–24”/year.

Leaves: dark green, oval, convex, spine-toothed margins Flowering: early-to-mid spring. Pendulous male catkins and inconspicuous yellow / cream / green female flowers.

Fruit: slender, reddish brown acorn 2-3.5 cm long x 1-1.5 cm broad; matures about 7-8 months after pollination (most red oak acorns take 18 months to mature). Acorns attract variety of birds and butterflies.

Climate: Only California-native oak thriving on coast.

Prefers mild climate afforded by ocean proximity; coastal fog supplies summer heat relief. Not frost tolerant.

Vegetation Communities: Grows on well-drained soils of
lower elevation coastal hills and plains, usually near yearround or perennial streams below 3,000 ft. It’s also often found in rocky hillsides that capture and hold more moisture.

Common vegetation communities are “Mixed Evergreen
Forest,” “Southern Oak Woodland,” and “Foothill Woodland.” Soils: Tolerates various soils; prefers deep, well draining loam Soil PH: 4.0 - 8; obligate relationship with mycorrhizal fungi, which provide moisture and nutrients
Planting/Water Needs: Fairly easy to grow and droughttolerant after establishment. Ensure weekly watering through year one, then monthly starting at year two until tree is 10 ft tall. Once established, avoid direct summer water. May be planted near irrigated areas; trees will extend roots to access wetter areas. Shade root zones with mulch, rocks, or smaller native plants. Do not fertilize - trees will amend their root zone soil over time with their own leaves and build the natural mycorrhizal fungus in the soil they need to thrive. Gradually, they become islands of natural fertility that improve the health of the nearby plants.

Maintenance: Prune July-August; avoid pruning large limbs or over-thinning interior branches. Susceptible to several pests/diseases, especially oak crown and root rot fungi roots.

Avoid activities that disturb or compact soil around trees within the dripline. Avoid direct summer irrigation, especially in urban landscapes, as it could lead to oak root and crown rot.

Fire Resistance: Large trees are exceptionally fire resistant with thick bark. Generally recover well from fire. Branches may produce new shoots after having been lightly burned and trunks exposed to moderate fires often re-sprout from the base. Smaller trees are less resistant, with even low- to moderately severe fires often killing seedlings/saplings.

Wildlife Value: Very high. Attracts ~30 species of birds including Oak Titmouse, Western Scrub Jay, Steller’s Jay, Chestnut-backed Chickadee and Acorn Woodpecker. Hosts
41 (confirmed) up to 122 (likely) butterfly/moth species including California Sister, Propertius Duskywing, and Golden Hairstreak, other invertebrates like weevils and wasps and mammals like the California ground squirrel.
significance of the Coast Live Oak to the Tongva tribe
60 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE (1) (2)
(3)
(4)
information sources: Calscape - Calflora - USDA NRCS - USDA FEIS - LBJ Wildflower Center
Hundreds of animal species rely on the coast live oak during at least one part of their life cycles including the above native species (1) California scrub jay with acorn, (2) golden hairstreak butterfly, (3) bushtit nest, (4) acorn woodpecker and granary, (5) wasp gall, (6) california sister butterfly image sources: SCV Audubon - Socal Butterflies - Wikimedia
(5) (6)
884 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 61 Q. agrifolia often flourish along the edges of seasonal washes like here in La Tuna Canyon of the Verdugo
Mountains. image source: LA Creek Freak
Q. agrifolia acorns are preferred by species like scrub jays and squirrels whose seed caching behavior helps sustain the oak’s populations. image source: Calflora Q. agrifolia tends to grow either along
seasonal or perennial streams or towards
the bottom of hills in furrows to catch
the winter rains. image source: CNPS
Q. agrifolia rounded form in open-grown conditions
of Oak Savannah. image source: Calflora
A mature Coast Live Oak woodland dominated
by Quercus agrifolia at the Jack and Laura
Dangermond Preserve near Santa Barbara.

Image source: The Nature Conservancy
885 of 1517

CHANGES FOR THE TONGVA
Between 1769 and 1840, the Tongva’s culture and landscape were irrevocably changed. The Spanish arrived bringing with them disease, invasive species, and livestock. The Spanish forced the Tongva to resettle around three missions, repurposed their hunting and gathering lands for grazing and agriculture, in addition to inflicting suffering and cruelly enforcing religious conversion and assimilation. The changes at the hand of the Spanish had many effects:
1) UPENDED ECOLOGY
Removed from their villages, the Tongva were no longer
able to manage the sustaining landscape as they had for millennia. Their diet changed from acorn flour, other plants, and wild game. Grazing accelerated ecological changes as cattle foraged at will, kneading the earth with their hard hoofs, dispersed alien seeds, and defecated in waterways. 2) ALTERED HYDROLOGY
Whereas the Tongva selected village sites based on criteria such as “stable land placement” and were nimble in shifting their villages’ locations in sync with ecological dynamics, the Spanish mission sites were static and heavy.

Infrastructural investment exemplified the settlers’ pattern.

Notably, open, usually earthen canals called “zanjas” were dug to divert water from stream courses for agricultural and household purposes in the colonial settlements. Increasing populations and lack of respect for the waterways resulted in highly polluted water quality that become a true city hazard.

Competition for limited water resources also resulted in the earliest forms of modern day “water masters” to regulate and enforce zanja use. Flood events precipitated the first attempts at “controlling” waterways. Yet the zanjas were essential to young Los Angeles and surrounding areas.

These gravity-fed water channels supplied farmers with
irrigation water and children could often be found splashing around in them, many even using it as a bathtub. The zanjas were also dangerous, a source of crime and corruption, and an unofficial sewer - a streaming washing machine and giant trash can.

After California became an American state in 1850, new
zanjas began to be dug throughout the city. However, by 1903, an official end-of-year report to Los Angeles’s newly formed Board of Water Commissioners was the nail on the coffin for the zanja typology: “The zanja system has made its usual poor showing for the year,” he wrote. “It would certainly be the greatest folly to spend any more money in new
construction on this system.”
3) NEW NOMENCLATURE
Being advantaged in power and the written word, the
Spanish not only renamed the region’s physical and
topographical elements as they saw fit, but even renamed the “Tongva” people “Gabrielino” for the San Gabriel Mission.

While the Verdugo Mountains, the Verdugo Creek/Wash,
and the Crescenta Valley alluvial plains and canyons all had original Tongva names, these cultural landmarks of the Tongva were lost to history, especially following the Spanish Land Grants. Few Tongva place names in the LA Basin
remain, though some have been reestablished like “Tongva Peak” located in the Verdugo Mountains in 2002.

The Tongva have called the LA Basin and modern-day
Glendale home for at least 9,000 years and have been the land’s champions, despite the friction that began with the arrival of the Spanish. In fact, Native history is fiercely alive and abundant in the area of the Verdugo Wash today: at the northern base of Verdugo Mountains, in the alluvial plains that make up the Crescenta Valley, and the waters that flow south from the San Gabriel Mountains.
62 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Misión San Gabriel Arcángel painted by Ferdinand Deppe, 1828. Deppe’s painting depicts the landscape in the aftermath of the Spanish conquest of the Tongva and neighboring Indigenous. In the foreground is an independent, “gentile” or un-baptized and therefore still free Tongva village (possibly Shevaangna, at Whittier Narrows on the San Gabriel River and the Rio Hondo). On the left are the large barracks in which more than 1,000 Indigenous - largely Tongva - were required to live. The largest building in the center are the many workshops in which Tongva and other Indigenous peoples manufactured items required to support Spanish ruler. To the right is the Mission chapel itself, which like every other building in the complex, was the work of Tongva artisans. Commentary & image source: California Historical Society Collection, via USC via Dornsife Dept of History
Despite their range of problems, many visitors commented on the beauty of the zanjas. Above: A zanja (center left) runs in front of sprawling lawns on Figueroa Street, circa 1892. The banks of zanjas often functioned as de facto parks. source: Los Angeles Public Library via LA curbed 886 of 1517
Given the Tongva’s great legacy, their engaged, wise
presence today, and how the premise of this Visioning
process has been to re-imagine a Verdugo Wash (in today’s western name) that is dynamic, resilient, and contributes to the regional ecology, would it not be appropriate to reestablish a Tongva-honoring nomenclature for newly
envisioned place names along the corridor?
Relying on rigorous research, this nomenclature would
ground the establishment of new or improved features and connect the re-imagined Wash to the Tongva’s legacy of
stewardship and land knowledge in the basin.

The Tongva are original people of Los Angeles. Tovaangar, their territory, was once home to 100+ Tonga villages with Tongva nomenclature. Image source: Decolonial Atlas !melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 63 887 of 1517
64 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE RANCHOS, EARLY GLENDALE, & “THE JEWEL CITY”
European land expeditions provide the earliest written
descriptions of this area and were remarkably illustrative.

An diarist from the 1769 de Portolá expedition described the scene after crossing the Arroyo Seco, rhapsodizing for more than a thousand words that day about this “green, lush valley” its “very full flowing, wide river”, the “riot of color in the hills.” “The place defined abundance - native grapevines, wild roses and sage growing in rich soils, grizzly, antelope, quail and steelhead trout for the taking.” This expedition led to the founding of the Mission San Gabriel in 1771 and later, the Pueblo of Los Angeles.

The Glendale area was initially established quite loosely when corporal José María Verdugo, a Spanish soldier,
petitioned the Spanish governor in 1784 to allow him to graze his livestock in the area. The land was approximately one and a half leagues from the Mission on the road to
Monterey (which is still called Monterey Road), and lay roughly between the Arroyo Hondo (now called Arroyo
Seco) and the Los Angeles River as far as the “Saca de
Agua” (or water dam).

The area was called “Haleameupet” by the Tongva. The
vast grassy acres, the more than adequate water supply, and the beautiful green mountains to the north appealed to the corporal. The Governor granted Verdugo’s petition with several conditions including peaceful relations with the native peoples and agricultural improvements. The small empire thus obtained by Corporal José Maria Verdugo,
later known as Rancho San Rafael, was originally called by him, “Parajé de Zanja de Zacamutin” or “Rancho La Zanja”, meaning “ditch that brought water from the rivers.” Such nomenclature indicates the area was quite rich in water, no doubt due to the Verdugo Creek.

With the cession of California to the United States following the Mexican-American War, a 1848 Treaty provided that
land grants like this be honored; the US Land Commission confirmed the grant in 1855. In 1882, the grant was patented to the Julio and Catalina Verdugo Family for 36,403 acres.

Today, the Rancho would contain all or a good part of
Glendale, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Highland Park, Garvanza, Flintridge, Montrose, La Canada, the west part of Pasadena, and all of the area contained within the triangle formed by the junction of the Arroyo Seco and the Los Angeles River.

The Rancho was willed to Verdugo’s unmarried, blind
daughter, Catalina, upon his death, and managed by his son Júlio. Eventually split between the siblings, the Rancho was ultimately partitioned in 1871 into thirty-one parcels.

Catalina Verdugo Adobe, Glendale’s oldest home was constructed c. 1828 by Teodor Verdugo, who was Verdugo’s grandson & Catalina’s nephew. image source: Glendale (CA) Public Library Special Collections 1900 map of the initial Glendale town site and its relationship to Rancho San Rafael and region’s rich topography. Image source: book “Sectional & Road Map of Los Angeles County Including Part of Orange & Ventura Counties Showing the Oil and Mining Districts Compiled From Official Records” via Homestead Museum 888 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 65 In 1884, area residents gathered to form a town site and chose the name “Glendale”. Development in the area then consisted of agriculture, a few homes along Figueroa Street, and summer cottages in the hills overlooking the Arroyo Seco. Unsurprising given the area’s natural beauty, areas like Mount Washington began attracting tourists by the 1890’s.

As part of a wave of public fascination with the romantic days of California’s Spanish and Mexican past, visitors made their way in droves “Out Glendale Way” to stroll about the area’s lush grounds.

Legacy oak tree at the Catalina Verdugo adobe in Glendale where the Treaty of Cahuenga was drafted in January 1847, and signed the following day in Cahuenga Pass. The tree was named “El Roble de la Paz” or “the oak of peace” by the adobe’s later owners. Sadly in 1987, estimated at 500 years old, this tree succumbed to disease. image source: Glendale (CA) Public Library Special Collections
Circa 1917 postcard explaining how Glendale was named for its natural setting.

In the 1910s, Glendale took its moniker, “the Jewel City” for how the city, with its background of the Verdugo Hills, ‘“sparkled like a jewel in the sun.” image source: Glendale (CA) Public Library Special Collections Circa 1917 postcard with “Panoramic View from Woodberry Hill, Orange Groves in Foreground, Glendale, California” illustrates the area’s rich agricultural era thanks to the area’s historic water resources. image source: Glendale (CA) Public Library Special Collections
postcards from “Out Glendale Way” advertising the new location of the famous, longtime beloved destination in Glendale, Casa Verdugo restaurant image source: Water & Power Museum
889 of 1517
How did early surveying portray the Verdugo Wash?
66 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE United States Geographical Survey (USGS) Topographical
Survey, 1894 is one of the oldest recorded maps for this area.

The Verdugo Wash is called out as three distinct segments:

1. Northern 1/3rd - “VERDUGO CREEK” starts approximately just south of today’s 210 Freeway and runs to the seasonal creek running down between Whiting Woods and Mesa Lila
Roads. The contours are very similar today, indicating the creek was relatively steep in this segment. While named a “Creek,” the legend signature indicates some intermittent hydrology at this point in time. However, given its nomenclature at this point in time, was likely more major than other “intermittent streams” such as those originating in the Verdugo Mountains.

2. Middle 1/3rd - “VERDUGO CANYON” starts at the Whiting Woods seasonal creek and appears to end where the natural canyon formed by the Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills ends. The brown relief signature is not identified in the legend, however by reading similar named features, one can surmise it indicates a seasonally wet, wash-like condition.

3. Southern 1/3rd - “VERDUGO WASH” begins where the
canyon yields to the plains and ends at the Wash’s confluence with the LA River. Note how the “Wash” portion bifurcates and then converges in the area just north of today’s Fremont Park. Likely due to the flatter plain topography and lack of development, flowing water had time and space to meander - and likely, infiltrate into the aquifers below.

LEGEND
map source: University of Texas - Austin PerryCastañeda Library Map Collection 890 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 67 891 of 1517
Glendale on the map! A historically popular destination in Los Angeles

TRANSPORTATION INNOVATIONS
In 1902, the Glendale Rail Line was pioneered by L.C. Brand and Associates as “The Los Angeles & Glendale Electric
Railway”. One year later, the Los Angeles City Council
approved an electric railway line running from Los Angeles to Glendale. The franchise was soon sold to Henry E.

Huntington, owner of Pacific Electric Railway Co., who
would bring the “Red Cars” to Glendale by 1904 under the name of Los Angeles Interurban Railway (later changed to Pacific Electric). Noteworthy is the way in which this 1906 promotional brochure reads for the project,
“The fame of this ride, decidedly the most picturesque to any suburb, attracts thousands of tourists, requiring many additional cars on Sundays and holidays, while the hundreds of commuters going daily to and from business and home
are rapidly increasing in numbers.

The passage through the city, passing Central Park,
traversing Figueroa Street, Lake Shore Drive (today, Glendale Blvd), skirting Echo Park, through Edendale and the Pass between Elysian and Griffith Parks to the point where the most enchanting of all valley panoramas burst upon the view, is accomplished in fifteen minutes. The scene is framed on the north, in ascending order, by the San Rafael Hills, Verdugo Mountains and the San Gabriel range, showing Mts.

Lowe and Wilson in the foreground, while far to the east Mt.

Cucamonga’s dome and the other snow-capped peaks of the San Bernardino mountains rising eight thousand and nine thousand feet are discovered. The flight along the borders of Griffith Park, over the trestles spanning Los Angeles River, and through Tropico to the fine depot at Brand Boulevard and Fourth Street (today, Broadway), Glendale occupies but ten minutes.

Here, midway the broad valley, its beauties and surpassing advantages are fully realized. But five minutes are required for the remainder of the trip down the center of Brand
Boulevard, a thoroughfare 130 feet in width, flanked by seventy-two monoliths, eleven and one-half feet high,
capped by electric lights, with the space between the broad cement walks and curbs filled by graceful palms, on to
Mountain Avenue. Here at the end of the line is found the choicest residential portion of the valley, at the foothills. This is not a picture of a dissolving view, but one as eternal as the everlasting hills.”
With its proximity to Downtown, rail connection, and
picturesque landscapes, Glendale quickly became a popular destination. Acres of land in/around the Verdugo Wash
were part of a lush park with meandering pathways lined with vegetation - including varieties of cacti and a fragrant grove of oranges that was intended to represent the type of gardens found in the “old California days”.
68 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1904 map showing the Inter-Urban Railway route. The rail was eventually extended north, generally following today’s Canada Blvd to connect passengers to Montrose, La Canada, La Crescenta, and Tujunga. image source: Water and Power Museum 892 of 1517
sources for this section:
https://www.kcet.org/shows/departures/hahamogna-native-tongva-people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hahamongna,_California#cite_note-gnis-1 https://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=GNISPQ:3:::NO::P3_FID:1732526 https://www.latimes.com/socal/glendale-news-press/entertainment/tngnp-me-yamada-20180126-story.html https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/forgotten-residents/
http://www.tongvapeople.org/?page_id=696
http://www.laalmanac.com/history/hi05.php
https://gabrielinotribe.org/history/
https://www.theriverproject.org/
https://gabrielenoindians.org/
https://la.curbed.com/2016/4/28/11490196/los-angeles-history-water-zanjas https://online.ucpress.edu/scq/article-abstract/32/4/269/84340/The-Casa-Adobe-de-San-Rafael-The-Sanchez-Adobe-In?redirectedFrom=PDF As a result of these transportation innovations, a commercial district was created in the Casa Verdugo neighborhood at the corner of North Central Avenue and West Stocker Street, which established a new solid “urban core” within Glendale.

This economic district included a theatre, various stores, a school, and a post office - all of which sparked interest in more permanent residential development.

Subsequently, Glendale and its surrounding area
experienced a significant growth spurt beginning around 1904, due in large part to the arrival of the Pacific Electric line. In 1906, the City of Glendale was incorporated. The city’s population rose from ~14,000 in 1920 to over 60,000 by 1930.
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 69 Acres of land in/around the Verdugo Wash were part of a lush park with meandering pathways lined with vegetation - including varieties of cacti and a fragrant grove of oranges that was intended to represent the type of gardens found in the “old California days.” source: https://www.theriverproject.org/

HISTORY OF FLOODING
The success of “Out Glendale Way” and the town’s quick
growth was threatened during the early 1930s when the
region was devastated by a series of unprecedented
flood events. The most damaging flood event came
after a November 1933 wildfire denuded the San Gabriel
Mountains of its vegetation, producing ubiquitous ash and compromising soil stability. Intense rain storms occurred in December, and on New Year’s Day 1934, the Verdugo
Wash began to swell and overflow its then natural channel, even bucking its banks and destroying homes, washing
out bridges, and blanketing the town in mud, boulders, and debris.On January 2nd, the Glendale News-Press published the headline, “36 dead and 31 Missing, Seek U.S. Aid.”
This news headline, “...Seek U.S. Aid,” embodied a larger national shift. Many American cities were founded along economically and agriculturally rich waterways and were similarly struggling with flood conflicts. So in response to public demands for federal aid for flood-prone areas like Glendale’s (and also for work relief in the midst of the Great Depression), Congress passed the Flood Control Act in
1936. This was the first act that recognized flood control as “a proper activity of the Federal Government.” Most
of the responsibility for planning and designing federal flood control projects was assigned to the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
893 of 1517
Why was the Verdugo Wash channelized?
70 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE flooded condition: pre-channelization
Left: the 1933-34 flood sent water, mud, and debris down the steep slopes of the San Gabriels. The flood followed the then mostly-natural wash through the Woodlands. The photo taken Jan 5, 1934 by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District shows the devastation. Right: a man surveys the heavily eroded banks the Verdugo Wash after the 1934 flood. image sources: https://digital-collections.csun.edu/digital/collection/SFVH/id/1278/ Engineering report map documenting the extents of damage from the New Year’s Day Flood in La Canada Valley and vicinity. typical condition, pre-channelization the area that today known as the “Verdugo Wash” was originally a natural canyon channeling seasonal precipitation
the “BEFORE”
894 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE SITE TODAY: HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS 71 sources:

Special Collections, Glendale Public Library
https://waterandpower.org/museum/Early_Views_of_Glendale_2_of_2.html https://digital-collections.csun.edu/digital/collection/SFVH/id/1278/ http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wmd/Watershed/LA/Larmp/LARMP-33%20Appendix%20A%20-%20History%20of%20the%20Los%20Angeles%20River.pdf https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Publications/EngineerPamphlets/EP_870-1-29.pdf The significant and impervious mountainous topography surrounding Glendale is a primary reason why this area has been particularly susceptible to flooding. During storm events, rain cascades down the mountains with force, having no “horizontal” distance before the town begins to slow down and infiltrate into the ground. When this forceful storm water “runs off,” it also carries considerable debris and mud, disturbing city activities.
typical condition, post-channelization
one of the standard segments of the Verdugo Wash, which was created to mitigate and divert waters from large-scale flood events
Verdugo Wash construction
Given the recent devastating flood events and the federal political climate regarding flooding, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District and USACE partnered to engineer nearly

9.5 miles of the Verdugo Wash and mitigate flood risk in Glendale.

What was once a natural canyon channeling (and sometimes overflowing) seasonal precipitation was lined in concrete in order to create a safe place for water and debris to go during flash storm events and reduce, if not prevent, future flooding of Glendale homes and businesses. The use of concrete was an intentional material choice, selected to efficiently move stormwater from the city grid to the new wash channel and onto the LA River. Unlike the stream’s natural banks, concrete would not erode away during storm events, and would facilitate easier clean up of the mud and debris the floodwaters carry downstream.

While the Verdugo Wash channelization project was
certainly successful in reducing flood risk in Glendale, the channelization denuded the natural river of its many natural benefits. Wildlife habitats were fragmented, storm water runoff and pollution increased, and the original identity of the stream began to fade away. The Verdugo Wash
Visioning project aims to revitalize the original tributary path, reactivate biodiversity, and reconnect the community with an active transportation corridor.
the “AFTER”
895 of 1517
72 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 896 of 1517

3. the Vision for
Verdugo Wash
!melk+BuroHappold INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT & THE PROCESS 73 897 of 1517
74 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE “sphere of influence” - notional urbanistic transformations for the Verdugo Wash in order to establish a multi-purpose community amenity for Glendale (graphic ©!melk) 898 of 1517 the Vision for Verdugo Wash
the opportunity
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 75 Effectively, the Verdugo Wash was channelized with
a single-purpose in mind: to reduce flood risk. And in
1930s Glendale, and in light of flood events,
this made sense!
But Glendale today neither looks the same as 1930s
Glendale, nor are the needs of its residents the same as those who lived there in the 1930s.

In 1940 after the initial channelization of the Verdugo Wash, Glendale’s population was approximately 85,000; in 2020 this number had grown to nearly 200,000.

Glendale has undoubtedly been enlivened by this growth, but the City is spatially constrained with a built-out urban and suburban fabric. One could say that Glendale’s growth plates have fused. While fledgling “1930s Glendale” needed the safety of flood control to continue establishing, “2020s Glendale” is craving additional benefits related to health, happiness, and resilience.

These benefits include additional parks & open space,
convenient recreation opportunities, improved pedestrian and bicycle access & connectivity, improved water quality and aquifer recharge, reconnected ecologies, reduced
urban heat island effect, social equity, and new economic development opportunities.

At a scale of approximately 60-acres, navigating significant geographies that connect north and south Glendale, the
Verdugo Wash is a key opportunity for the City of Glendale to further mature urbanistically.

This is a critical moment to respond to the needs of today (and tomorrow’s!) constituents, and fold in additional
community benefits to this robust hydrology infrastructure.

The overall objective of the Verdugo Wash Visioning is to ensure that the channel continues to provide the safety of base flood control while integrating benefits to enrich Glendale’s health, happiness, and resilience.

Unique Identity
Regionally, southern California is unique in its mild, sunny Mediterranean climate, Hollywood glamour, laid-back
culture, and wild surrounding landscapes. Glendale is even more unique nestled as a foothill city between the San
Gabriel Mountains, the Verdugo Mountains, and San Rafael Mountains - yielding a beauty and fertility recognized by the Tongva, the Spanish explorers, City Founders and Current residents alike.

Glendale’s more recent history has been most remarkable, too, having supported a range of identities. From being historically home to some of the most extensive citrus
groves and wine crops, to serving as a crossroads of land and air mobility (railroad networks and Grand Central
Airport), to housing film studios and a thriving epicenter at Brand Boulevard, Glendale has so much to be proud of!
In addition, the City of Glendale is wonderfully diverse and can boast being the “safest mid-sized-city-in-America”! To this end, we recognize that any visioning for the
Verdugo Wash must be equally unique! The re-imagined
Verdugo Wash - like the City of Glendale - must be one of a kind!
Glendale: the “Jewel City”
The Verdugo Wash’s current form has enabled hundreds
of local residences, businesses, community institutions and open spaces to safely build “up against” the Wash. But this growth pattern is like a generations-long, city-scale gesture of the City “turning its back” to this critical waterway.

Once upon a time, the Wash was a multi-dimensional
link that connected the region physically, hydrologically and ecologically. After all, prior to its channelization, the Verdugo Wash was once a wild, naturalistic waterway
comprised of a creek, a canyon, and a wash! It connected the bejeweled hillsides and nurtured Glendale’s beloved coast live oaks and sycamore trees. It contributed to
Glendale’s identity.

It is the Project Team’s opinion that this identity is
important to underscore and reinstate, and that an
authentic re-imagining of the Verdugo Wash would honor
this heritage as a connector within a uniquely natural, geographic setting.

To be clear, it is not feasible to “naturalize” the Verdugo Wash by wholesale removing the concrete at this time.
(This would compromise its current hydrological function within the larger urban system as it relates to larger
infrastructure networks in Glendale.) What is feasible is establishing a landscape that offers experiences which
evoke these cultural and natural histories. It is our belief that this approach - re-imagining the Verdugo Wash as
a community amenity that also functions hydrologically - will contribute to the Glendale’s overall sustainability and resilience.
899 of 1517
900 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
first impressions
901 of 1517
78 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE establishing a multi-benefit open space for Glendale: the Verdugo Wash as an immersive, cohesive, connected landscape corridor that still functions as an active piece of hydrological infrastructure 902 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 79 Overarching Design Principles
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
18 17 19 20 21
22 23

1. establish a cohesive,
connected landscape
corridor

2. enhance access &
connectivity

3. define gateways, markers,
“special moments”
903 of 1517
80 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Conceptual diagram illustrating optimal corridor rhythm. graphic: ©!melk The engineered Verdugo Wash channel today is
monotonous and inhospitable.

The key to activating the Verdugo Wash as a meaningful
community amenity - to attract a baseline of routine
use - is integrating relevant program / activity, all
while maintaining hydrological function and increasing
ecological connectivity
This could include playgrounds, plazas, flexible gathering areas, seating areas, pavilions, kiosks, gardens, planted areas, etc. The placement and location of any additional program is one of careful consideration and calibration with existing offerings throughout the city.

The Verdugo Wash also offers the tremendous opportunity to serve as a prominent north-south connector within
greater Glendale, while serving as a meaningful public space that maintains visitor interest and attention.

To break up the potential monotony of a 9.4-mile linear corridor, a collection of “moments” and “interventions” can help attract visitors, aid their navigation, and keep their interest to make the most of their experience in the reimagined Verdugo Wash.

To attract visitors to the Verdugo Wash, we envision a
“macro-rhythm” of iconic “moments” that could, for example, coincide with gateway features, viewing platforms, or plazas or pocket parks at designated entrances.

These moments will function as places of intensity and be strategically located along the length of the Verdugo Wash, functioning as physical beacons and destinations.

As a second layer, we envision a “micro-rhythm” of
“interventions” that enrich the walking experience minuteby-minute, which translates into intervals of approximately 250-feet. These interventions provide both physical
comfort and continued interest. They can consist of spaces and objects like shady seating areas, artwork, kiosks, or water features, but can also be achieved through design variations such as shifts in topography or riffs of materials or geometries.
904 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 81 !melk
establishing a connective spine: the existing project site navigates significant topographies (e.g. the “bottleneck” where the Verdugos and San Rafaels pinch) to make walking and biking as easy as possible between north and south Glendale.
integrating areas for activity: a “micro-rhythm” of programmatic interventions such as this seating area offer comfort and interest along the Verdugo Wash experience, which safeguards the journey from monotony!
placing interventions: gateways would welcome residents and visitors alike to the Verdugo Wash. Functioning as gateways, markers, and shade canopies, these elements will create a strong silhouette and facilitate navigation and orientation throughout the Verdugo Wash as a newly imagined linear park 250’-0”
125’-0”
905 of 1517
82 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE below: existing open space program / community programming along the Verdugo Wash

VERDUGO WOODLANDS

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

BABE HERMAN FIELD

VERDUGO PARK

GLORIETTA TENNIS
PARK
GOLF
CLUB

SOCCER FIELD
DAM

WHITING WOODS

TRAILHEAD

CRESCENTA VALLEY

SKATE PARK

CRESCENTA VALLEY

COMMUNITY PARK

GOLDEN FARMS

MARKET FREMONT
PARK

TUNNELED

WALKWAY

LA RIVER

GLENDALE COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

N BRAND BLVD

N GLENDALE AVE

N VERDUGO RD

VERDUGO BLVD

HONOLULU AVE

FOOTHILL BLVD

OCEAN VIEW BLVD
906 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 83 below: possible synergies that program within the Wash can have with its environs 5 7
9 16
18 17
20 21
23 22
10 11
12 13
4 14
1 2
3 6
8 15
19 GLENDALE COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

N BRAND BLVD

N GLENDALE AVE

N VERDUGO RD

VERDUGO BLVD

HONOLULU AVE

FOOTHILL BLVD

OCEAN VIEW BLVD

LA RIVER

PLAYGROUND

COFFEE SHOP
KIOSK
KIOSK

FOOD TRUCK
PLAYGROUND
PLAYGROUND

AMPHITHEATER

MUSIC FESTIVAL
FLEA
MARKET

OUTDOOR
“OFFICE”

AREAS OUTDOOR

RECREATION

OUTDOOR MOVIE
BRIDGE
DAM
907 of 1517
84 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE physical attributes of the Verdugo Wash channel: The dimensions of the existing channel vary. Generally, the width increases as the channel curves towards its confluence with the LA River, since the channel was hydrologically engineered to convey greater volumes of water in these lower reaches. The lower reaches of the wash, especially south of Glorietta Park, are 86 feet wide! 908 of 1517
possibilities for passive recreation:

The Verdugo Wash can serve as a much-needed place of respite to complement a growing, densifying Glendale. Chat with a friend in a pleasant pedestrian comfort area with design elements like shade, benches, and picnic tables. Enjoy activities like bird watching in one of the native planted areas, or take in rich public art like murals or sculpture. !melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 85 physical constraints: any proposed program - or proposed mobility - must correlate with the profile of the Verdugo Wash in any given location.

Based on current surrounding land use, the width / footprint of the Verdugo Wash is unlikely to expand much, if at all. a relevant ecology: Native plants,
planted responsibly to manage
wildfire risk, would greatly
increase habitat value along
the Wash, attracting birds and
pollinators. In conjunction with
smart lighting, these measures
would invite wildlife to travel
along the corridor at night
between regional ecological
refuges such as the Verdugo
Mountains, San Gabriels, and
Griffith Park.
909 of 1517
86 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Where appropriate, and as it relates to adjacent land use and context, the Verdugo Wash can have integrated program for multi-benefit community use! 910 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 87 911 of 1517
88 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 912 of 1517
possibilities for active recreation:

The Verdugo Wash will be most successful as a community amenity if it is activated - a destination in and of itself. This will attract more visitors, and by extension, promote appropriate, social behaviors that keep more “eyes on the street,” which promotes safety for all!
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 89 913 of 1517
90 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE An inventory of existing public recreational facilities in the City of Glendale. Locations for recreational programs within the Verdugo Wash will need to work smartly within this system to add geographical and activity diversity for Glendale residents. The City is currently working to update its Recreational Element, which coupled with further community outreach conversations in the future Master Planning phase will inform how the “additional programs” are sited along the Verdugo Wash. (graphic by !melk based on information from the City of Glendale’s 1996 Recreational Element)
914 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 91 915 of 1517
Any intervention within the Verdugo Wash must be carefully located and calibrated against the required flood control capacities of the channel. The available flood capacity is known as “freeboard.” However, at the confluence area at the junction with the LA River, we have envisioned a strategy of intervention that “floats” above the Wash since this area of the existing Wash is basically at flood capacity.

Further feasibility work is anticipated in future planning phases. 92 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 916 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 93 917 of 1517
94 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 918 of 1517
possibilities for enhanced mobility:

The Verdugo Wash is a prime opportunity to connect Glendale.

Class 1 (traffic-separated) bikeways and gracious walkways are envisioned to establish a pleasant realm free of vehicular traffic! !melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 95 919 of 1517
A primary project goal is to integrate continuous biking and walking paths along the length of the Wash.

Where space allows, the Class 1 bikeways would be
physically separated from the pedestrian paths. In instances where project constraints push the biking and walking paths together, materiality changes and related design elements will be turned up to ensure clarity of pathways for user safety.
at Fremont Park, a wider section of the Verdugo Wash an example of a Class-1 Bikeway that can be integrated into a new mobility corridor within the Verdugo Wash
different modes of mobility (designated cycling / scooter routes and pedestrian routes) will co-exist in a safe, clear, and efficient layout, to ultimately improve mobility throughout greater Glendale 96 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 920 of 1517
reinstated ecologies
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 97 EXISTING CHANNEL PROFILE (TYPICAL) *
*Reference page 46 of the report for a more comprehensive catalogue of the spatial character of the Verdugo Wash.

PROPOSED INTERVENTION: “LANDSCAPE PLATFORM(S)”
newly integrated bikeways within the Verdugo Wash will positively impact commuting within Glendale
clear distinctions will be made between multi-modal routes to promote safety the newly integrated “green amenity space” is intended to vary in width and extent, in order to appropriately relate to the adjacent context / city fabric (a series of studies relating to potential privacy issues and solutions can be found in the “Community Considerations” chapter of this report) multi-modal, multi-level connectivity within a re-imagined Verdugo Wash the big idea!
Create a “platform”, within the concrete channel which will effectively serve as a new “elevation” for community benefit and use! Integrating a platform will expand the functionality of the channel whereby the Wash can continue to function as a flood channel, while simultaneously offering a one-of-a-kind immersive landscape experience.

The reimagined Verdugo Wash is still a vital piece of hydrological infrastructure, however - with this simple “platform” solution - the possibility opens up to transform the channel into a 9.4-mile long linear park, replete with biking and walking paths, program, shade and ecologically-rich planting within water bio-filtration planters whose vegetation utilizes excess organic nutrients from city runoff and contributes cleaner water to the LA River. bikeways
trails
pathways GATEWAYS
native plantings

WILDLIFE
activity HABITATS
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 97 921 of 1517
98 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE “rewil
922 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 99 lding”
923 of 1517
100 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE !melk
A nod to Glendale’s rich natural landscape
The proposed gateway structures are inspired by the
surrounding landscape. Sculptural volumes clad in fire
resistant materials evoke the hills, mountains, and boulders that constitute the geologic base of Glendale’s natural history. They are strategically located at access points to serve as markers, which will both orient and draw people to the re-imagined Verdugo Wash!
early sketches of Verdugo Wash gateway designs ©MELK
924 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 101 !melk
this page: various locations and iterations of the Verdugo Wash gateways 925 of 1517
At the flexible gathering areas, residents of Glendale and visitors alike can - during the day - find respite at the plaza under the canopy, while - in the evening - look forward to attending community events such as small performances or film screenings. 102 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 926 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 103 927 of 1517
!melk
104 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE bespoke canopies - totally unique to the Verdugo Wash, that exist nowhere else! - will serve as gateways for the project the gateways will facilitate navigation and orientation for visitors to - and within - the Wash 928 of 1517 !melk
!melk
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 105 access to the Verdugo Wash will be integrated into the existing conditions in equitable and immersive ways! access to the Verdugo Wash will be integrated into the existing conditions in equitable and immersive ways! 929 of 1517 106 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE A nod to Glendale’s rich natural landscape: the proposed gateway structures are inspired by the surrounding landscape.

Sculptural volumes clad in fire resistant materials evoke the hills, mountains, and boulders that constitute the geologic base of Glendale’s natural history.

The gateways are strategically located at access points to serve as markers, which will both orient and draw people to the re-imagined Verdugo Wash! 930 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 107 931 of 1517
The Oakmont Debris Basin is a highly viable opportunity to significantly enhance ecological diversity and bolster hydrological resilience along the Verdugo Wash.

Accessible walkways elevated above the sensitive soft-bottom vegetation, wayfinding and educational signage, and other interventions would transform the basin into a rich natural park for Glendale. 108 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 932 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 109 933 of 1517
110 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE above left (view looking north from the dam), and above right (view looking north at the “mouth” of the wash) the Oakmont Debris Basin reimagined with accessible walkways elevated above the sensitive soft-bottom vegetation the new debris basin area would feature ample seating,
as well as wayfinding and educational signage
934 of 1517
the Oakmont Debris Basin as a rich natural eco-park for Glendale !melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: FIRST IMPRESSIONS 111 935 of 1517
936 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
improved
connectivity
937 of 1517
114 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Connectivity
The Verdugo Wash Visioning project team has studied
in depth all of the land uses and transportation networks as they relate to larger Glendale, with a guiding question:
how can the Verdugo Wash improve connectivity for all
Glendalians?
It is important to note that a more successful Verdugo Wash will effectively connect logical destinations for the Glendale community, and prioritize areas that are disadvantaged or underserved.

As presented herein, we are promoting active transportation solutions that are suitable for all! - a principle that is based on the belief that a City should be “8-to-80”, accommodating for both 8-year-olds and 80-year-olds!
While there are many excellent definitions of social equity, design solutions must take into account the community’s varying needs. This includes understanding the existing offerings and adjacent land uses to ensure the distribution and mix of program throughout the community is equitable and accessible.
right: taking cues from adjacencies; initial “zoning” for the Verdugo Wash It is essential that the re-imagined Verdugo Wash takes cues from its adjacencies.

To the right is an initial “zoning” recommendation that takes into account the current “composition” of Glendale:
residential areas, schools, parks, open spaces, recreational facilities, commercial corridors, areas with higher urban heat island effects/higher pollution burdens/lower green space access, civic institutions, as well as office and commercial areas.

It is our aim for the Vision for Verdugo Wash to “feel” as if it always belonged to Glendale. Its appropriateness
will be informed by distinct sub-areas that unify
program, land use, and mobility to enhance overall
cohesion and connectivity for Glendale.
938 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY 115

GLENDALE COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

N BRAND BLVD

N GLENDALE AVE

N VERDUGO RD

VERDUGO BLVD

HONOLULU AVE

FOOTHILL BLVD

OCEAN VIEW BLVD

LA RIVER
939 of 1517
116 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE BASIN

GOLF COURSE
P.O.B.

EXISTING ACCESS

POTENTIAL ACCESS
X.XX DISTANCE (IN MILES)
8-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
5-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
7-MINUTE WALK
18-MINUTE WALK
4-MINUTE WALK
6-MINUTE WALK
4-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
4-MINUTE WALK
2-MINUTE WALK
11-MINUTE WALK
9-MINUTE WALK
8-MINUTE WALK 10-MINUTE WALK 12-MINUTE WALK
2-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
3-MINUTE WALK
8-MINUTE WALK
Public Access
The Project Team studied land use, physical constraints, ecological connectivity potential, key community
destinations (e.g. parks & commercial zones) and locations significant to mobility-disadvantaged user groups (e.g. schools for youth and senior housing for the elderly) to suggest this set of potential access point candidates
These candidates were also rationalized based on the
distances between them, and refined based on community
input received to date.

Kindly note that the final quantity of access points
is not a “magic number” (a successful Verdugo Wash
could have many fewer than this initial study set).

Secondly, the exact locations will likely to shift to
respond to additional engineering and community input
in any future design phases.

Design/engineering advancement scenarios that would
influence access point recommendations include:

1. A traffic study that concludes safer options could be achieved elsewhere;

2. Conversations with utility companies reveal
insurmountable utility conflicts.

Differentiation of access points is also expected in future design phases. Examples of differentiation include:

3. Be design solely for wildlife use (no public access);

4. Have gated codes so that they are semi-private (e.g. for the use of a local community or business only).

What will be key in supporting a successful Verdugo Wash is not reaching a magic number of access points, but creating a rich, rationalized constellation of access points that are located based on where Glendale wants to go!
above / right: mapping of study of possible (existing & proposed) access points to the Verdugo Wash 940 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY 117 P.O.B.

BASIN

GOLF COURSE

BOSTON AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

NEW YORK AVE

EAGLE CANYON CHANNEL

WHITING WOODS ROAD

OAKENDALE PI

SHIRLYJEAN ST

THE BASIN

SAN GABRIEL AVE

GLORIETTA TENNIS PARK

FERN LN

WABASSO WAY

OAK KNOLL RD

VERDUGO WOODLANDS

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

VERDUGO PARK
LOT 30

E GLENOAKS BLVD

GENEVA ST

N BRAND BLVD

N PACIFIC AVE

FIRST GERMAN UNITED

METHODIST CHURCH

FREMONT PARK

CONCORD ST

ESTELLE AVE

SAN FERNANDO RD
note: a photo inventory of the annotated access points is provided in the Appendix of this report 941 of 1517
118 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE existing access point “P1”
Boston Avenue
existing access point “P7”
Shirlyjean Avenue
proposed access point “P13”
Verdugo Elementary School
proposed access point “P19”
Pacific Avenue
existing access point “P2”
Dunsmore Avenue
existing access point “P8”
the Basin
proposed access point “P14”
Verdugo Skate Park
proposed access point “P20”
First German United Methodist Church
proposed access point “P3”
New York Avenue
existing access point “P9”
San Gabriel Avenue
proposed access point “P15”
“Lot 30”
existing access point “P21”
Fremont Park
note: more detailed documentation of each of these vignettes is provided in the Appendix of this report 942 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY 119 proposed access point “P4”
Eagle Canyon
proposed access point “P10”
Glorietta Tennis Park
existing access point “P16”
E Glenoaks Boulevard
existing access point “P23”
Concord Street
existing access point “P5”
Whiting Woods
proposed access point “P11”
Fern Lane / El Rito Avenue
proposed access point “P17”
Geneva Street / Monterey Road
proposed access point “P24”
Estelle Avenue
proposed access point “P6”
Oakendale Place
proposed access point “P12”
Wabasso Way
proposed access point “P18”
Brand Boulevard
proposed access point “P25”
San Fernando Road 943 of 1517
Opportunities for Mobility
The Verdugo Wash’s positioning and surrounding networks provide great potential for a future multi-modal mobility corridor. Strategically positioned entry points will greatly improve the Wash’s frequency by welcoming youth activity, encouraging an active lifestyle, seamlessly connecting
commuters to major transit hubs, and providing a safe
alternative for bicyclists and pedestrians.

To model a future cycling network, an isochrone analysis was performed on the Verdugo Wash cycling network.

An isochrone analysis presents numerous travel lines, all originating from the same point simultaneously to display efficiency and accessibility. Assumptions of this analysis were that the average speed on a road without a bike lane is 5mph, with a bike lane is 10mph, and within the Wash is 20mph. Shown below is an isochrone analysis of presentday cycling times, originating from Downtown Glendale.

The most efficient bike travel is limited to the Downtown commercial hub and employment center, averaging 15
minutes or less.

If the Verdugo Wash opened tomorrow, utilizing only the existing entrance points, the analysis portrays the increased accessibility along the entire Wash; specifically improving efficiency within residential settings north of Downtown Glendale. There is a wider east to west reach, connecting to existing bike infrastructure. Bike travel efficiency to the suburb of Woodbury and Glendale Community College
would also improve.

If additional entrances were added to the Verdugo Wash
opening, the full impact of an integrated transit corridor can be projected. Bike travel cycling times under 10 minutes expand in Downtown Glendale and average 10 to 15 minutes within the ¼-mile Verdugo Wash buffer, significantly
improving accessibility within Woodbury and Verdugo
Woodland. This scenario also expedites travel to the LA River Bike Path and adjacent bike networks.

Ultimately, the Verdugo Wash should prioritize new entrance locations based on proximity to transit corridors and stops with higher ridership. Entrances should also be situated near Park & Ride lots to increase regional accessibility. Bike share and micro-mobility options should be integrated into existing transit service locations to maximize use. Connections to the LA River bike network should be established, mainly at the LA River and Verdugo Wash junction of Confluence Park.

Additional Wash entrances will also create opportunities for improved accessibility and transit equity in neighborhoods with limited mobility options.

The evaluation of entrance locations should include road hierarchy levels and the presence of on-street parking
to accommodate new traffic flows. These increases will
necessitate road diets, traffic calming, and adjusted
speeding limits. Identifying criticalities and priority areas for pedestrian safety enhancements should be prioritized, including studying the potential integration of school trips by analyzing youth walkability and school bus routes.

Gaps and Challenges for Mobility
A significant challenge for Verdugo Wash engagement
will be the transition from driving to cycling or walking for commuting. Reconfiguring the public space will potentially encourage active transportation options and reduce
the probability of fatal injuries due to pedestrian vehicle collisions. However, strategies need to be established as to what types of commutes the Wash will serve. The Wash could assist in commutes to work or school, recreational use, access to events or open spaces, and local to citywide mobility. Users of the Wash will not be limited to Glendale residents, as visitors and commuters will be welcome.

Individuals of all ages will interact with the Wash, including people with disabilities. The increased biodiversity will also welcome the presence of wildlife.

Establishing a transit corridor requires evaluations of all potential modes of transportation. Precedents tend to
primarily attract pedestrians and bicyclists, but active transportation also includes the use of manual or electric scooters and skaters, even stretching to delivery robots, drones, and equestrian travel. The Verdugo Wash mobility infrastructure will need to accommodate a wide range of modal activity.
120 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Existing cycling times
5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES
944 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY 121 Projected cycling times if existing access points were opened to the public Projected cycling times if both existing and proposed entrances were opened to the public
What level of connectivity is possible by an
accessible wash?
The heat maps below demonstrate the tremendous level
of connectivity that is possible when the Wash is opened at the studied access points. As previously mentioned,
these access points are by no means “decided” and
subject to shifting, modification, deletion, feasibility checks, differentiation, and additional discussion with neighbors and other stakeholders.

IMAGINE! What if you could connect conveniently to
the Wash, zip along its spine to another destination, all while shaded by leafy trees and safely removed from
busy vehicular traffic? Evaluate the bottom right heat
map. If a start point of yours lands in the colored areas, you could bike anywhere within its bounds within 30-minutes! 5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES
5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES
945 of 1517
946 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
potential
impact
947 of 1517
124 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE Urban Design & Urban Impact
A number of factors need to be considered if we are to
imagine the Verdugo Wash transforming into a multi-benefit public space amenity that also continues to mitigate flood risk as a critical piece of hydrological infrastructure.

Some important considerations include:

Most importantly, the Verdugo Wash has not been
abandoned as stormwater infrastructure, nor will it be.

Glendale’s physical situation in and around mountainous terrain, the City’s continued development over the decades, and climate change scenarios all indicate the city is as prone to flooding as ever. The re-imagined Verdugo Wash must
continue to function as stormwater infrastructure at its current design capacity (100 year storm event),
!melk studied the Verdugo Wash corridor, as defined by
a 1/2-mile buffer (coincidentally also a 10-minute walking radius), on the basis of architecture, open space, land use, owner, scale, shape, proximity to the wash, access, and other factors to highlight a number of “opportunity” parcels. “Opportunity Parcels,” in short, are properties whose
direct or indirect integration with the re-imagined
Verdugo Wash would enhance the future Verdugo Wash
experience as a public space amenity for Glendale.

More specifically, an “opportunity parcel” could mean:

Kindly note that what is presented is a “working list” of opportunity parcels that are intended to evolve and be
further calibrated as community outreach and design efforts advance in future phases.

The Verdugo Wash is a utilitarian concrete stormwater
channel varying in width from as narrow as 10ft to 87ft wide at its maximum where it merges with the Los Angeles River.

The Verdugo Wash is a “sunken” space, sitting at an
average of 10-feet to 12-feet below most of Glendale. This “contained” property would be conducive to a distinct, safe and connected cycling and pedestrian network. However
elevational barriers associated with this condition would require inspired and thoughtful access solutions in order to accommodate all types and levels of mobility.

The “sunken” condition of the channel will require careful consideration when it comes to public safety.

The majority of the Verdugo Wash channel lacks
an adjacent “right-of-way” (which, if available which
typically support maintenance activities or could serve as potential connection routes along the upper banks of the channel). A related constraint is the fact that there are many established homes and businesses whose
properties directly abut the channel, further challenging the establishment of any routes of connectivity or areas for program / activity along the banks of the channel.

Any intervention(s) within the Verdugo Wash channel
would require significant environmental permitting efforts.

The Verdugo Wash has been an important hydrological
infrastructure corridor, in place for nearly 100 years. It is a permanent fixture within the City of Glendale. Overhead power lines, various utilities and pipelines, pedestrian and vehicular crossings all interact with the channel. The
associated agencies will need to be engaged in order to prioritize concerns and establish basic parameters and
guidelines.

Vetting interest of a possible sale to increase the footprint of the project.

Working with an adjacent property owner to provide
access to the wash (e.g. restaurant owner wants customers to be able to access their business via the Wash).

Transition an adjacent property to be in stronger
relationship with the Wash. An example of this would be a public park whose future restoration could integrate wash access, strong sight lines into the wash, potentially mutual programming, and green infrastructure
Collaborating with a property owner to enhance wildlife value like integrating native planting.

Working with a property owner to integrate Wash access
near. This process would address concerns such privacy
and security.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
948 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: POTENTIAL IMPACT 125

VERDUGO WASH

VERDUGO

MOUNTAINS

GRIFFITH
PARK

SAN GABRIEL

MOUNTAINS

CONFLUENCE

VERDUGO WOODLANDS

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

GLORIETTA

TENNIS PARK
LOWELL

PARK N RIDE

FORMER VERDUGO

HILLS GOLF COURSE

GLENDALE CIVIC

AUDITORIUM

GLENDALE

COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

COLLEGE VIEW
SCHOOL
OPEN
SPACE

WOODROW
WILSON
MIDDLE
SCHOOL

RD WHITE

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

COLUMBUS

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
POWER

SUBSTATION

PARKING
LOT 30

PARKING
LOT 31 SARTORIS
FIELD

CAMP BOB

WALDORF

J FREMONT

ELEM SCHOOL

CATALINA

VERDUGO
ADOBE

VERDUGO
PARK

BACHMAN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL MTNS OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
NIBLEY
PARK

FREMONT
PARK

FAIRMONT

PARK N RIDE

ELEANOR
TOLL
MIDDLE
SCHOOL
LOS

ANGELES
ZOO

DREAMWORKS
STUDIO

GLENDALE

WATER &
POWER

HERBERT
HOOVER
HIGH
SCHOOL

VERDUGO MOUNTAINS

PARK PROPERTY

OAKMONT

COUNTRY
CLUB

MONTROSE
PARK

CRESCENTA
VALLEY

SCHOOLS

LINCOLN

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

CRESCENTA
VALLEY
PARK

VERDUGO

WASH BASIN
New York Ave
Dunsmore Ave
Boston Ave
Lowell Ave
N Central Ave
N Pacific Ave
Pioneer Dr
W Dryden St
Coronado Dr
N Glendale Dr
Pioneer Dr
Patterson Ave Fairmont Ave
Omar St
Patterson St
Burchett St
Arden Ave Arden Ave
Burchett St
N Brand B vl d
N Louise St
E Mountain St
N Jackson St
Geneva St
N Verdugo Rd
Alpha Rd
Rustic Ln
Glorietta
El Rito Ave
Opechee Way
Wabasso Way
Cañada B vl d Ave
San Gabriel Ave
Santa Rosa Dr
Country Club Dr
Cañada Blvd
Country Club Dr
N Verdugo Rd
Oakmont V ei w Dr Shirlyjean St
Glenwood Ave
Ramsdell Ave
Whiting Woods Rd
El Lado Dr
El Lado Dr
El Lado Dr
Mills Ave
Park Vista Dr
E Glenoaks B
Glenoaks Blvd
lvd
Cañada Blvd
Montrose Ave
Honolulu Ave
Foothill Freeway
Honolulu Ave
Foothill Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
Pennsylvania Ave
La Crescenta Ave
N Verdugo Rd
N Verdugo Rd
N Brand Blvd
S Verdugo Rd
S Chevy Chase
E Broadway St
E Wilson Ave
Concord St
N Pacific Ave
N Glendale Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Kenneth Rd
Glenoaks Blvd
Ventura Freeway Camino San Rafael
San Fernando Rd

L A R I V E R

GLENDALE CITY BOUNDARY
1/2-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/2-MILE RADIUS
~10-MIN WALKING
949 of 1517
1 /
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 VERDUGO WASH
LOWELL

PARK N RIDE

FORMER VERDUGO

HILLS GOLF COURSE

VERDUGO MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO MOUNTAINS

PARK PROPERTY
Boston Ave
Lowell Ave
El Lado D
Foothill Freeway

GLENDALE CITY BOUNDARY
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER
1 /
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 BUILDING FOOTPRINT

VERDUGO WASH CORRIDOR
“OPPORTUNITY” PARCELS
(NORTHERN PORTION)

OPPORTUNITY PARCEL

EXISTING WASH

ACCESS POINT

POTENTIAL WASH

ACCESS POINT
Based on studies of land use, ownership, Wash
Right-Of-Way including service roads, development
patterns, open space, community destinations, mobility, hydrology, biology, sustainability recommendations,
and neighborhood character, !melk has highlighted the
following parcels as potential opportunities for elevating the re-imagined Verdugo Wash experience.

Highlighted in orange are parcels located within 1/2-mile of the Wash that offer opportunity to further enhance the Verdugo Wash experience.
126 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 950 of 1517

VERDUGO

MOUNTAINS

SAN GABRIEL

MOUNTAINS

GLORIETTA

TENNIS PARK

CAMP BOB

WALDORF

J FREMONT

ELEM SCHOOL

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL MTNS OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE PRESERVE

OAKMONT

COUNTRY
CLUB

MONTROSE
PARK

CRESCENTA
VALLEY

SCHOOLS

LINCOLN

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

CRESCENTA
VALLEY
PARK

VERDUGO

WASH BASIN
New York Ave
Dunsmore Ave
Alpha Rd
Rustic
Glorietta
Ave
San Gabriel Ave
Santa Rosa Dr
Country Club Dr
Cañada Blvd
Country Club Dr
N Verdugo Rd
Oakmont V ei w Dr Shirlyjean St
Glenwood Ave
Ramsdell Ave
Whiting Woods Rd
El Lado Dr
El Lado Dr
Dr
Mills Ave
Park Vista Dr
Montrose Ave
Honolulu Ave
Honolulu Ave
Foothill Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
Pennsylvania Ave
La Crescenta Ave
N Verdugo Rd
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: POTENTIAL IMPACT 127 951 of 1517
1 /
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 1
/
2 1 mile 1
/
4 1
/
8 GRIFFITH
PARK

CONFLUENCE

COLUMBUS

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL

FREMONT
PARK

FAIRMONT

PARK N RIDE

ELEANOR
TOLL
MIDDLE
SCHOOL
LOS

ANGELES
ZOO

DREAMWORKS
STUDIO

GLENDALE

WATER &
POWER

HERBERT
HOOVER
HIGH
SCHOOL
N Pacific Ave
Pio
Pioneer Dr
Patterson Ave Fairmont Ave
Omar St
Patterson St
Burchett St
Arden Ave Arden Ave
Burchett St
Concord St
N Pacific Ave
San Fernando Rd
S Kenneth Rd
Glenoaks Blvd
Ventura Freeway
San Fernando Rd
L
A
R I V
E
R

L A R I V E R
1/2-MILE WASH BUFFER
1/4-MILE WASH BUFFER

VERDUGO WASH CORRIDOR

PARCEL OPPORTUNITIES
(SOUTHERN PORTION)

BUILDING FOOTPRINT

OPPORTUNITY PARCEL

EXISTING WASH

ACCESS POINT

POTENTIAL WASH

ACCESS POINT
128 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 952 of 1517

VERDUGO

MOUNTAINS

VERDUGO WOODLANDS

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

GLORIETTA

TENNIS PARK

GLENDALE CIVIC

AUDITORIUM

GLENDALE

COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

COLLEGE VIEW
SCHOOL
OPEN
SPACE

WOODROW
WILSON
MIDDLE
SCHOOL

RD WHITE

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
POWER

SUBSTATION

PARKING
LOT 30

PARKING
LOT 31 SARTORIS
FIELD

CATALINA

VERDUGO
ADOBE

VERDUGO
PARK

BACHMAN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

VERDUGO

MOUNTAIN

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE

SAN RAFAEL

MOUNTAINS

OPEN SPACE
SAN R
MOUN
OPEN

SAN RAFAEL MTNS OPEN SPACE
NIBLEY
PARK

OAKMONT

COUNTRY
CLUB
N Central Ave
oneer Dr
W Dryden St
Coronado Dr
N Glendale Dr
N Brand B vl d
N Louise St
E Mountain St
N Jackson St
Geneva St
N Verdugo Rd
Alpha Rd
Rustic Ln
Glorietta
El Rito Ave
Opechee Way
Wabasso Way
Cañada B vl d Ave
San Gabriel Ave
Santa Rosa Dr
Country Club Dr
Cañada Blvd
untry Club Dr
N Verdugo Rd
E Glenoaks B
Glenoaks Blvd
lvd
Cañada Blvd
N Verdugo Rd
N Brand Blvd
S Verdugo Rd
S Chevy Chase
E Broadway St
E Wilson Ave
N Glendale Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
Camino San Rafael
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: POTENTIAL IMPACT 129 953 of 1517
954 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
hydrological
function
955 of 1517
above: !melk visualization of the current United States Army Corps HEC-RAS hydrological model depicting heat map of available “freeboard”. After accounting for flow contingencies including climate change precipitation variations, wash segments shown in red and orange appear hydrologically constrained. Unless otherwise noted, these areas would require further study to vet for hydrological feasibility.

CONFLUENCE AREA
While the area of the Wash near the Confluence is a prime opportunity to restore ecological habitat and integrate public realm including mobility connections, this set of red dots indicates this area first requires further hydrological study to ensure the concept is feasible.
132 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Hydrology and Freeboard Analysis
Using the data available from the United State Army Corps HEC-RAS model, the !melk team has constructed a working parametric model to study and visualize the various flood risk considerations of the Verdugo Wash.

The physical section of the existing Wash changes in width, height, and profile along its 9.4-mile length.

Additionally, stormwater flows vary along the existing Wash.

Because water flows are inherently dynamic, the HEC-RAS model captures the design storm event (1 in 100 year statistical rain event) using a hundreds of “snapshots” with various defined parameters like water velocity and volume; hence the collection of data points visualized below. Together, these data points can be interpreted to understand how water flows during the storm event in today’s existing Wash configuration.

Stormwater velocities matter because water that is moving too quickly can scour the floor and walls surface of the Wash itself, causing events like wash wall collapse or even undermining bridge pilings. The existing Wash channel is concrete to prevent scouring while simultaneously causing water to move more quickly to the LA River in comparison to its historic, vegetated state. Any elements in the wash like vegetation slow down water flows and different types of vegetation can withstand higher water velocities before being uprooted/ broken and carried downstream.

Stormwater volumes are an critical parameter, too, and have been the focus of this Visioning Study stage. The integration of public realm elements (e.g. pedestrian and bicycle
pathways) depicted in this Design Vision Report have been conceptualized as inhabiting a structural deck built within the Wash safely above stormwater flows. This deck concept relies on additional stormwater capacity as expressed as the available “freeboard” - the distance between the
water level required to safely convey the storm event,
and the bottom of the “deck” that hosts any landscape
interventions.

The !melk team has studied various volumes associated with possible flood events (including that of the 100-year flood, plus an additional contingency for climate change, as well as an additional FEMA contingency). The Hydrology Appendix described this all in greater detail.

This valuable data and series of depictions will serve as a critical benchmark to facilitate design direction and decisions moving forward in future design phases to ensure public realm is safely integrated while maintaining the current level of flood protection.
956 of 1517

NORTHERN SEGMENTS
Analysis of the red and orange dots north of
the debris basin (indicated by green dots)
reveals that the segment of the Wash is
hydrologically challenged.

This hydrological challenge is compounded
by its physical context (built-out residential
land uses), and given that there are fewer
community destinations in this area in
comparison to other segments of the Wash,
the project team recommends that no further
design work is done in this area at this time.

This recommendation would focus future
design efforts to the areas of the Wash
containing greater opportunities and fewer
challenges.

GOLF COURSE
While initial analysis of the golf course segment of the Wash reveals hydrological challenges, this area, in fact, contains multiple opportunities for relieving hydrological pressures. For instance, the golf course section of the Wash is currently a trapezoidal section configuration. Modifying to rectangular section configuration would effectively carry greater stormwater flows, which i turn increasing available “freeboard”.
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: HYDROLOGICAL FUNCTION 133 < 0

AVAILABLE FREEBOARD
> 5
0 - 2
2 - 3.5

3.5 - 5
957 of 1517
134 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE the current channel has capacity for all flood contingencies, however the FEMA floodplain sits almost at the top of the channel above axonometric view: floodplain freeboard contingencies isolated for clarity above: cross-section of the Verdugo Wash channel, identifying the elevations of freeboards associated with various flood contingencies at “Condition A” along the Wash condition “A”
958 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: HYDROLOGICAL FUNCTION 135 the current channel has capacity for all flood contingencies above axonometric view: floodplain freeboard contingencisolated for clarity above: cross-section of the Verdugo Wash channel, identifying the elevations of freeboards associated with various flood contingencies at “Condition B” along the Wash condition “B”
959 of 1517
136 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE the current channel does not have adequate capacity for all flood contingencies, including the FEMA floodplain above axonometric view: floodplain freeboard contingencies isolated for clarity above: cross-section of the Verdugo Wash channel, identifying the elevations of freeboards associated with various flood contingencies at “Condition B” along the Wash condition “C”
960 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: HYDROLOGICAL FUNCTION 137 Recommendations
It has become increasingly clear from our studies and
observations of the Verdugo Wash - as a piece of hydrological infrastructure that is effectively functioning as a “channelized” tributary of the LA River - that any solution to mitigate future flooding and extreme events must be holistic.

A successfully re-imagined Verdugo Wash must be integrated within the Wash’s adjacent context, greater Glendale, and LA County and watershed. The recommended hydrological
approach for this project cannot be isolated or hyper-local, but rather holistic and tied into regional strategies.

In any future design studies, the project team recommends the following opportunities be drawn, modeled, and rigorously evaluated to increase the resilience of the Verdugo Wash, and by extension a facilitate the integration of a robust public realm. - designating floodable “extensions” or “bulbs” of the wash; - modifying the channel section such as selectively increasing the height(s) of the channel wall or deepening the channel.

The golf course’s trapezoid section channel could be modified to a rectangle channel section
- infiltrating stormwater with the Wash’s footprint, such as with suitable concrete alternatives and at the Debris Basin. - identifying streets surrounding the Wash to facilitate water catchment, like a “greenstreets” district;
- identifying opportunities for water filtration to improve water quality
- study the next level tributaries including Dunsmore Canyon, that feeds water to Wash from the San Gabriel Mountains, for opportunities to slow or infiltrate stormwater flows. These tributaries are routes that could function as safer wildlife routes within the region.
961 of 1517
962 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
enhanced
ecology
963 of 1517
Enhanced Ecology
Unique precipitation patterns and the rich topography
surrounding Glendale bore - through natural processes - the original Verdugo Wash (Creek), which served as the credible water source attracting the Tongva to the Wiqanga village just north of (today’s) I-210 on the Verdugo Creek. The Verdugo Wash is the central, defining element for Glendale’s foundation.

For various reasons explained throughout this report,
we understand that the channelization of the Verdugo
Wash greatly facilitated Glendale’s growth as a young
American city - however, we equally understand that
there were impacts to the local and regional ecologies.

The habitat areas in/around Glendale are fragmented, not infrequently degraded, and subject to climate change -
leading experts to conclude that many local flora and fauna populations are at serious risk.

Ecological enhancement along the Verdugo Wash
is a bona fide opportunity for Glendale to become a
leading example within the region, as it prioritizes
the vegetative and wildlife populations which will
collectively contribute to the City’s identity!
140 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE ULART revitalization plan - ecological connectivity opportunities 1 2
3 964 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 141

SAN RAFAEL CONNECTION DESIGN AREA
Improved ecological connections between Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills support wildlife
VERDUGO WASH / LA RIVER CONFLUENCE*
Improved community and ecological connections from LA River to upstream the Verdugo Wash *Confluence identified as key restoration moment in LARMP

URBAN TRAIL ACCESS
Improved trail connections and facilities between Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills increase community access to open space

VERDUGO PARK HUB
Improved ecological connections and trail access between the Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills support wildlife and increase community access to open space VERDUGO WASH / LA RIVER CONFLUENCE*
Improved community and ecological connections from LA River upstream to the Verdugo Wash. *Confluence identified as key restoratino area in LA River Master Plan

SAN RAFAEL CONNECTION
Improved ecological connections between the Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills support wildlife
965 of 1517
verdugo mountains
significant ecological area
san rafael hi
verdugo wash trace
142 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 966 of 1517
san gabriel mountains
lls
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 143 967 of 1517
Verdugo Mountains
significant ecological area
Oakmont
golf course
debris
basin
not channelized
soft-bottomed
rich ecology
Oakmont Debris Basin
an ecologically-focused park
144 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 968 of 1517
to San Gabriel Mountains
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 145 969 of 1517
pollinator
meadows
Oakmont Debris Basin
an ecologically-focused park
146 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE goals for the debris basin
- establish habitats & wildlife corridors
- improve water quality & increase recharge opportunities - create a safe and accessible recreational amenity
- develop experiential and educational opportunities around key habitats - explore partnerships with ULART and Tongva-Gabrielino Tribe - partner with LACPW to develop management approach that supports established habitats 970 of 1517
bio-infiltration
wetland habitat
bio-infiltration
wetland habitat
elevated pathways are accessible and
protect sensitive vegetation below
potential structure for visitor comfort and
formal environmental education programs
pollinator
meadows
pollinator
meadows
improved wooded edge / roadway buffer
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 147 971 of 1517
Oakmont Debris Basin
an ecologically-focused park
148 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE above rendered views: elevated pathways at the Oakmont Debris Basin 972 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 149 above rendered views: elevated pathways at the Oakmont Debris Basin 973 of 1517
elevated accessible paths
protect sensitive habitat
improved wooded
edge/roadway buffer
pollinator
meadows

HABITAT CONNECTIVITY TO SAN GABRIEL & SAN RAFAEL MOUNTAINS Oakmont Debris Basin
an ecologically-focused park
150 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 974 of 1517
bio-filtration wetland habitat

HABITAT CONNECTIVITY TO VERDUGO MOUNTAINS
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 151 975 of 1517
the “pollinator meadows”
pollinator
meadow
Invertebrates like southern California’s native bees and monarch butterflies are promising faunal candidates
to feature at the debris basin park, especially if further conversations with LACPW reveal the debris basin needs to function at historically high levels of debris collection.

Avian species, being highly mobile creatures, are innately more resilient to seasonal disturbances like debris
management, provided such activities are timed with
species’ vulnerable life cycle moments.

Pollinating neighbors typically can be easily invited to a new habitat - simply by providing their favorite food sources! 152 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE above rendered view: ecological park at the Oakmont Debris Basin976 of 1517 purple
sage
native milkweed
& monarch
valley
carpenter bee
chaparral night- shadecommon
sunflower
white sage
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 153 977 of 1517
Oakmont Debris Basin
an ecologically-focused park
154 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE above rendered view: accessible recreation & environmental education opportunities at the Oakmont Debris Basin 978 of 1517 !melk
observation / viewing
platform / outdoor
classroom
potential
gathering area
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 155 979 of 1517
native planting design considerations
It has been the initial intention and instinct - and
underscored in conversations at community
outreach events and with local stakeholders like
ULART and the Arroyos and Foothills Conservancy
- that native planting directly enhances a place’s
ecology.

By providing seed banks for local ecological areas,
food and shelter for creatures, and facilitating
wildlife movement between the adjacent protected
areas like the Verdugo Mountains Significant
Ecological Area, tremendous ecological strides can
be achieved.

In addition, these planted areas will also provide
attractive, shady respite areas whose qualities are
also considerate of wildfire risks.
above: some plants that could be featured along the Wash and enhance the area’s ecology 156 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 980 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: ENHANCED ECOLOGY 157 981 of 1517
982 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
phasing
implementation
983 of 1517
At 9.4-miles long, the transformation of the Verdugo Wash would need to be phased, meaning the Verdugo Wash would not be built all at once!
This is clear from many standpoints including that of actual construction, which will be limited to the “dry season” as well as the “lead time” required for any material procurement for hardscape and softscape elements. Phasing is also heavily dependent on available funding. The Visioning team has
studied various parameters and scenarios to begin to answer the following questions:
1) Where should implementation first begin?
2) What sort of initial segmentation makes sense?
3) Should 100% of the design intent be implemented in each of the identified segments of the Verdugo Wash? Or should a “minimum viable product” (e.g. 50% of the design intent) be implemented in certain sections to prioritize connectivity? 4) Is there potential for pilot projects to be implemented as “early-win” moments along the corridor that could function anchor parks, key connections between destinations, or as wildlife bridges across the Wash?
Benefits of a Phased Approach
There is a plethora of benefits with regard to phasing
implementation! A phased approach to implementing the
Verdugo Wash Vision would allow for the identification and establishment of logical implementable “segments”.

Each of these segments - even if implemented in the most minimal form - will enhance Glendale’s current transportation network, and have a real impact on way movement occurs
throughout the City. At each phase, improvements to the public realm and connections to existing transportation systems will ensure that the project is integrated with its surroundings and is welcoming for users.

Location Considerations
Social equity analyses indicate that western Glendale is in the greatest need of the benefits that are associated with the Verdugo Wash Vision, such as green open spaces and
recreational opportunities. For this reason, the Project Team recommends an implementation scenario in that begins with this section (encircled in below diagrams) of the Verdugo Wash.
region may increase vulnerability in another. Therefore, sustainable urban drainage systems have introduced a more interdisciplinary and inclusive approach to current urban infrastructure design criteria.

Re-envisioning the stormwater management systems
around the Verdugo Wash as a holistic network, rather than solely concrete channels, will provide a more equitable and sustainable future.

Existing Conditions - Heat
Globally, temperatures have steadi
1950s, with five of the hottest year
the last six years.

Changes in air temperature will inc
of extreme heat, heat waves, warm
wildfires. When populations are exp
P riority for Cool and
Green Infrastructure
(Urban Heat Island)
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
E xisting E ntry Points
Verdugo Wash
(Open Channel)
1/4 Mile Buffer
City of Glendale
P riority for Cool and
Green Infrastructure
(Urban Heat Island)
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
E xisting E ntry Points
Verdugo Wash
(Open Channel)
1/4 Mile Buffer
City of Glendale
Cool and Green
Infrastructure
Priority Areas
Data S ource(s): City of
Glendale Public W orks, Los
Angeles County Department
of Public W orks, The Trust
for Public Land (ClimateS mart Cities).
!melk+BuroHappold V
Urban heat island priority areas
data source(s): City of Glendale Public Works, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, The Trust for Public Land (Climate-Smart Cities).

LOW

PRIORITY FOR COO

INFRASTRUCTURE

MODERATE
HIGH

VERY HIGH
1/4 MILE BUFFE

VERDUGO WAS

CITY OF GLEND
1 /
2 1
/
4 1 mile

EXISTING ENTR
The Verdugo Wash also has an opportunity to align with and build upon strategies identified in the Greener Glendale Plan and other existing reportsThese strategies may include
een
.0)
try Points
ash
nnel)
ffer
ndale
een
.0)
try Points
ash
nnel)
ffer
ndale
B urden
lation
ristics
City of
W orks, Los
Department
California
mental
ssessment.
save energy by offering them up to three free shade trees to plant on their property. Properly planted shade trees can help residents save 10%-50% in air conditioning costs
Pollution & population map: this figure outlines the CES 3.0 scores for census tracts within Glendale. The highest pollution burden is concentrated around Downtown and the western border of Glendale, intersecting the Verdugo Wash. CES 3.0 emphasizes that these census tracts experience pollution from more than one source, where populations facing socioeconomic vulnerability can be further susceptible to negative health effects. data source(s): City of Glendale Public Works, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 10-20

CAL ENVIROSCREEN SCORE
(CES 3.0)
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
60-70
70-80
80-90
90-99
1/4 MILE BUFFER

VERDUGO WASH

CITY OF GLENDALE

EXISTING ENTRY POINTS
Pollution burden by population in Glendale ©BuroHappold Urban Heat Island Priority Areas ©BuroHappold 160 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 984 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: PHASING IMPLEMENTATION 161 Mobility & Connectivity Considerations
Mobility analyses and community outreach conversations
have resulted in a list key destinations that would greatly benefit from increased active transportation connectivity:
- Downtown Glendale;
- Glendale Community College;
- Existing public parks, especially Verdugo Park;
- Glendale Sports Complex;
- LA River multi-use pathways;
- Destinations serving mobility-challenged neighbors
including schools, senior housing, and community centers. “Building Future Demand”
A very relevant consideration to phasing is the level at which connectivity is successful.

Perhaps 100% of the ultimate design intent does not
need to be implemented on “Day 1” of implementation for the area to reach “minimum product viability” supporting Glendale in walking and biking along the Verdugo Wash.

The Project Team also suggests considering making
use of a “Phase 0”, or a “pilot stage” of the project before major design changes are implemented. This is useful
in identifying the minimum intervention for cyclists and visitors to be able to use the Verdugo Wash.

A pilot project helps reinforce the demand for a project and encourages early adoption to allow visitors to become comfortable with proposed change in the built environment.

Potential interventions for a pilot project to open the Wash may include the following:
• Existing access points are opened & made accessible
• Safety measures in place to avoid sliding/falls,
including resurfacing as needed
• Ensure access points and wash pathway grades are
ADA compliant
• Integrate clear wayfinding and temporary
interventions
• Implement needed safety measures at adjacent
intersections near existing access points
• Parking locations are communicated to visitors

Users who may be interested in using the Verdugo Wash as a mobility corridor, might include local residents and cycling enthusiasts, who will be able to generate feedback about the experience of interacting with the Verdugo Wash and their mobility patterns.

Having users enter the Verdugo Wash also helps to include it in online platforms like Google Maps, Waze and Strava.

This also creates the opportunity for placemaking and
programming within the Wash, such as bike repair stalls, popups, and other retail activation facilities.
985 of 1517
phasing approach
“segmentation” considerations
162 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE The Project Team studied various phasing scenarios
based on social equity factors, with the assumption that implementation would begin near the Confluence/Downtown area and continue northwards towards the Oakmont Debris Basin.

As studies, these phasing scenarios serve simply to
reveal lessons in what happens when implementation is
“segmented” in different ways.

Kindly note: Access points, in particular, would
be vetted with local residents and community
stakeholders (like utility companies) in higher detail
for feasibility during any future design phases. As
discussed in the Hydrology Section, the segment of the
Wash north of the Debris Basin is not being recommended for further design study at this time.
phasing study:

SCENARIO “A”
opposite page>
986 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: PHASING IMPLEMENTATION 163

SCENARIO
A
987 of 1517
164 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE phasing approach
“segmentation” considerations
phasing study:

SCENARIO “B”
opposite page>
Kindly note: in any future
design phases, access points, in
particular, would be vetted with
local residents and community
stakeholders (like utility
companies) in higher detail for
feasibility. The segment of the
Wash north of the Debris Basin is
not being recommended for further
design study at this time.
988 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: PHASING IMPLEMENTATION 165

SCENARIO
B
989 of 1517
166 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE phasing approach
“segmentation” considerations
phasing study:

SCENARIO “C”
opposite page>
Kindly note: in any future
design phases, access points, in
particular, would be vetted with
local residents and community
stakeholders (like utility
companies) in higher detail for
feasibility. The segment of the
Wash north of the Debris Basin is
not being recommended for further
design study at this time.
990 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: PHASING IMPLEMENTATION 167

SCENARIO
C
991 of 1517
The Project Team recommends the following segments -
preliminarily named for convenience - as the starting point for further discussion, with regard to the potential phased implementation of the re-imagined Verdugo Wash.
“NORTH”
Segment would offer connections to Crescenta Valley
YMCA, existing Lowell Parking Lot, and potentially to
northern Verdugo Mountain trail heads. If Verdugo Wash
could be connected across I-210, this segment could link to the Wiqanga (Tongva village) / La Tuna Canyon site. This additional scope extending to Wiqanga/La Tuna could be
considered in future design/planning phases. The “NORTH” segment is not being recommended for further design
study at this time (refer to Hydrology Section)
“DEBRIS BASIN”
Envisioned as ecologically-focused pilot project featuring habitat restoration, water filtration, and aquifer recharge.

The basin would function as a stand-alone park until linked from the south by wash improvements in future phases.
“GOLF COURSE”
Golf course manager in favor of project. Opportunity to enhance key wildlife corridor by collaborating with this landowner. Changing existing trapezoidal channel to box channel will improve hydrology and provide more secure
boundary between the transformed wash public space and
the surrounding private golf facility.
“GLORIETTA CONNECTOR”
Key wash link through canyon that connects to destinations such as Catalina Verdugo Adobe and Glendale Sports
Complex.
“SAN RAFAEL CONNECTION”
Provide wildlife corridor between Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills, as initially proposed by Upper LA River Tributaries (ULART) and seconded & ground-truthed by
Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy (AFC). This segment
would also connect neighbors to key civic, recreational, and educational destinations. A potential pilot project in this segment could provide an essential wildlife corridor.
“VERDUGO CONNECTOR”
Key Wash link that connects historic neighborhoods and
destinations including multiple local schools and trail heads. “DOWNTOWN”
Connects largest office and commercial node in the City; high economic opportunities and programming synergies
possible.
“CONFLUENCE”
Area should be prioritized to address high social equity needs, to connect Glendale to LA River trails and Griffith Park and increase ecological value. Preliminary analysis of the USACE HEC-RAS model indicate severe hydrological
constraints; Additional hydrological feasibility studies are needed. Optimally, this segment is married with LA River Master Plan vision and United States Army Corps Alternative 20 for this area, which would re-create vital habitats. 168 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE phasing approach
summary
992 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: PHASING IMPLEMENTATION 169

VERDUGO

MOUNTAINS
134
210
2 SAN RAFAEL
HILLS
glendale community college
downtown glendale
fremont park
LA river confluence
oakmont country club
glorietta tennis park
wiqanga / la tuna
canyon site
verdugo park
oakmont debris basin
crescenta valley park
“NORTH”
“DEBRIS BASIN”
“GOLF COURSE”
“GLORIETTA
CONNECTOR”
“SAN RAFAEL
CONNECTION”
“VERDUGO
“DOWNTOWN” CONNECTOR”
“CONFLUENCE”
993 of 1517
994 of 1517
the Vision for Verdugo Wash
community
considerations
In response to conversations with community
members, we offer several additional studies
995 of 1517
172 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE

SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
10’

RESIDENCE
FRONT
YARD
5’
SIDE
WALK
33’

ROADWAY
20’

PLANTED BUFFER

7.3’
45’

VERDUGO WASH FLOOD CHANNEL
40’

RESIDENTIAL

BACK-YARD
14’

SERVICE ROAD
15’

SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
25’

RESIDENTIAL

BACK-YARD
20’

RESIDENTIAL

BACK-YARD
90’

VERDUGO WASH FLOOD CHANNEL
15’

SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL

MULTI FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL
90’

VERDUGO WASH FLOOD CHANNEL
12’ RESIDENTIAL

BACK-YARD
30’

MULTI-FAMILY PARKING LOT
A) Below are two conditions of residential land uses abutting the Wash. On the left is a residence with a street buffering their front yard from the Wash (e.g. stretches of El Lado Dr) & on the right is a residence whose backyard abuts the Wash. The condition on the right is more sensitive to privacy than that on the left based on 1) the increased horizontal distance to the Wash for a “front yard” Wash condition & 2) the psychological difference we feel between a “back-yard” vs a “front yard” since a front yard meets a public space - the street.

B) In many instances, residential properties line both sides of the Verdugo Wash. Residents’ spatial relationships with the Wash vary, however. Where some residents keep dense vegetation along the Wash (left) obscuring the view of the Wash, others maintain minimal vegetation (right). The condition on the left is currently maintaining a higher level of back-yard privacy. Similarly, some residents have elected to erect privacy fencing along their Wash edge, in comparison to residents who experience the County’s Wash security fence, which is the porous chain-link type.

C) In some cases, multi-family unit properties abut the Verdugo Wash. Single-family residents are acclimated to higher levels of privacy than those who reside is multi-family units.

In conversations during community outreach events, the
Project Team heard concerns about potential privacy
conflicts along the Verdugo Wash, should it become
accessible as a public space amenity. In response, the
Project Team explored various notions of residential privacy and devised an initial set of straightforward, implementable solutions.

The opposite page features a map / inventory of residential land uses along the Verdugo Wash corridor that has been codified to illustrate the “privacy study” extents.

Below, on this page, a sectional analysis studies the various conditions along the Verdugo Wash (varying width and
depth dimensions of the channel against existing land use plans and satellite imagery).

Spatial factors identified to affect levels of privacy are: (A) the difference between a residence whose backyard abuts the Wash in comparison to a resident whose frontyard is across a public street that runs directly along the Wash; (B) the difference in residents’ existing choices to either enhance privacy or increase views along a back-yard Wash edge; & (C) the difference between single-family and multifamily properties abutting the Wash. “I live along the Wash, how can my privacy be maintained?” 996 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 173 997 of 1517
174 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE

FENCE WALL

RESIDENTIAL

LANDSCAPE BUFFER

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC REALMWASH CHANNEL

WASH CHANNEL
A vegetated buffer can be implemented along the edges of the Wash - within the channel - in order to physically distance any public realm from residential properties and decrease visual connectivity.

Fences can be integrated to establish a clear limit between private property and the public realm. Fences can range in type, and the final material and design can offer solutions from completely “screened and solid” to “open and perforated”.

If a fence solution is deemed inadequate, a wall can be proposed in certain locations. Walls are more robust than fences, severing visual and acoustic connectivity.

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC REALM

WASH CHANNEL

HORIZONTAL OFFSET
Offsetting the public realm - within the channel - to leave a “gap” between the private and public realms enhances privacy. This offset can be horizontal or vertical.

EXISTING

RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC REALMWASH CHANNEL

VERTICAL
OFFSET
Privacy solutions
After mapping the extents and studying the factors affecting levels of privacy, the Project Team devised an initial set of possible solutions for maintaining adjacent residents’ privacy. 998 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 175 perforated fence consideration: a perforated fence will allow sound to travel directly through the fence, with only a slight reduction in noise level.
berm consideration: similar to vegetated buffers, berms with densely planted vegetation can also reduce noise levels by refracting sound. planted buffer consideration: dense, layered planting consisting of a mixture of tree canopy, shrubs, and dense understory planting will decrease noise level by refracting sound. A 30-foot planting buffer, for example, could reduce the perceived noise level by up to 5dB. wall consideration: a solid wall will provide the greatest reduction in noise level by blocking and reflecting sound, and reducing noise levels by up to 15dB.

Noise reduction over distance: a typical conversation occurs at a volume of 70 decibels (dB). The human voice’s volume decreases as distance from the source increases. For example, a person standing six feet from a conversation will hear the conversation at 54dB, while someone standing 24 feet away would hear the conversation at 42dB.
6’-0”

PERFORATED FENCE

MINIMAL REDUCTION OF NOISE LEVEL
direct sound refracted sound
30’ PLANTING BUFFER
REDUCES SOUND LEVEL AN ADDITIONAL 5DB
24’-0”
54 dB (-16dB) 70 dB 42dB (-28dB) 70 dB
sources: Dobson, Martin, and Jo Ryan. “Trees & Shrubs for Noise Control.” Trees.org.uk, Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service, https://www.trees.org.uk/Trees.org.uk/files/8c/8c69f212-a82e-424b-96d1-c8ff6dc02403.pdf.

Engineering ToolBox, (2005). Required Voice Level at Distance. [online] Available at: https://www.engineeringtoolbox. com/voice-level-d_938.html [Accessed Day Mo. Year].
reflected sound
transmitted sound

SOLID WALL
REDUCES SOUND LEVEL AN ADDITIONAL 15DB
Noise mitigation solutions
The Project Team learned from community members
that the existing Verdugo Wash conveys sound too well
and can be a source of disruption. The hard lines and
concrete materiality of the Wash are responsible for this sound-carrying effect.

Interventions in the Wash are expected to dampen this
sound-carrying effect, yet the creation of adjacent public realm brings the sound of new people and activities. Below is an initial set of possible acoustic reduction solutions that could offset the new source of noise. Remember that the decibel system is logarithmic, so reduction figures are significantly greater than they appear!
999 of 1517
The Project Team studied the City of Glendale’s
fire codes and related sources to outline landscape
parameters to promote fire-resistance.

The objective of the City of Glendale’s fire codes (for building and landscape) is to promote and protect public health, safety, and welfare by recognizing the hazardous fire potential created by grass, weeds, shrubs, and trees, which all provide a ready fuel supply that augments the spread or intensity of a wildfire.

The fire code should be generally understood as a set of minimum requirements to manage “hazardous vegetation”
while maintaining sufficient vegetation for soil erosion control, functional, and aesthetic purposes. City Fire Officials have discretion over these minimums.

Relevant Definitions from the Glendale Fire Code:
“Defensible Space” - space within 100 feet of a building or structure where vegetation capable of causing a fire to spread must be modified to slow the rate and intensity of an advancing wildfire to provide access by fire and other emergency personnel to defend the building or structure from the threat of fire.
“Hazardous Vegetation” - Refuse, grass, weeds, shrubs,
trees, and other vegetation which, in the opinion of the fire code official, are in such condition and location, or by the unique characteristics of a species, as to provide a ready fuel supply to augment the spread of intensity of a fire.

According to the map of the City of Glendale - last updated in February 2008 - several areas have been designated
as “High Fire Hazard Areas”. The area of Glendale that is most at risk of wildfire exposure is the northern-most parts surrounded by the natural area of the Verdugo Mountains, San Rafael Hills, and San Gabriel Mountains.

The fire code stipulates for “defensible spaces” in the “Wildland Urban Interface Fire Areas” or “High Fire Hazard Areas”. In Glendale, hazardous vegetation - including
dry grass, weeds and shrubs - near homes is one of the
major contributors to catastrophic wildland fires. Creating defensible space - a buffer - is a proven strategy to slow the spread of wildfire, to improve both the safety of firefighters and a structure’s chance of surviving a wildfire.

Community members expressed concerns about wildfire risk with the addition of vegetation in and or around the Verdugo Wash (that would come with the realization of the Vision for the Verdugo Wash).

Glendale has been known for its natural beauty since
before its incorporation. This natural setting serves as the benchmark for a future Verdugo Wash, however notably
carries wildfire risk.

ZONE 1
Two zones make up the required
100 feet of defensible space.

DEFENSIBLE SPACEZONE 2
Extends 30 feet out from buildings,
decks, and other structures
Extends 30 to 100 feet out from
buildings, decks, and other structures
• Remove all dead plants, grass and weeds.
• Remove dead or dry leaves and pine needles
from your yard, roof and rain gutters.
• Trim trees regularly to keep branches a
minimum of 10 feet from other trees.
• Remove dead branches that hang over your
roof, and keep branches 10 feet away from
your chimney.
• Remove or prune flammable plants and
shrubs near windows.
• Remove vegetation and items that could
catch fire from around and under decks.
• Cut or mow annual grass down to a
maximum height of 4 inches.
• Create a minimum horizontal spacing of
20 feet between shrubs and trees.
• Create a minimum vertical spacing of
6 feet between grass, shrubs and the
lowest branches on a tree.
• Remove fallen leaves, needles, twigs, bark,
cones, and small branches. However, they
may be permitted to a depth of 4 inches if
erosion control is an issue.
• Protect water quality. Do not clear
vegetation near waterways to bare soil.

Excessive clearing can cause soil erosion.

Creating and maintaining defensible space is
essential for increasing your homes's chance
of surviving a wildfire. It's the buffer that
homeowners are required to maintain on their
property between a structure and the plants,
brush and trees or other items surrounding
the structure that could catch fire. This space
is needed to slow the spread of wildfire and
improves the safety of firefighters defending
your home.
30feet 70feet
176 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE September 1-5, 2017, the La Tuna Wildland Fire burned 7,194 acres of rural areas in the vicinities of La Tuna, Tujunga, Sunland, and the cities of Los Angeles, Glendale, and Burbank. image source: KPCC
Diagram of a required property’s “defensible space zones” requiring management of “hazardous vegetation” image source: City of Glendale Fire Department
The Glendale Fire Department separates the 100-foot defensible space area into two zones: Zone 1 begins at the outside wall of a building, a deck, or other structure and extends 30 feet; Zone 2 begins at 30 feet from the building and extends to 100 feet from the building. image source: Glendale Fire Department How can additional vegetation mitigate wildfire risk?
1000 of 1517
Property owners within the High Fire Hazard Area (HFHA) are required to maintain defensible spaces around their property for the safety of the community. The Glendale Fire Department annually inspects properties in the High Fire Hazard Area to ensure that the defensible space standards are met.

The project team has reviewed the Glendale Fire Code
and summarized the points salient to the Verdugo Wash
Visioning. The re-imagined Verdugo Wash landscape
shall avoid a ready fuel supply that could augment the
spread or intensity of a fire but still function to prevent soil erosion and enhance ecology, microclimate, and
aesthetics.

How the “Zone 2” 100 feet of defensible space is designed and how it’s maintained is dependent on adjacent vegetation, topography, and proximity to nearby structures.

There is actually no universal specific standard for
maintaining defensible space that works for every property.

Instead, vegetation design and maintenance should be
intelligently based on the conditions present to achieve the ultimate goal of reduced wildfire risk.

Within the fire hazard zone, the project must initially install, irrigate, and maintain “Defensible Spaces” in congruence with Glendale Fire Code. Specifically:

Permitting
Verdugo Wash modification plans and specifications need be submitted to the City to secure city permits - and the site be subject to inspections - for wash improvements located within very high fire hazard severity zone. Fire officials have discretion over these minimums at all times.

Design Parameters
Landscape plans and specifications shall comply with
Defensible Space parameters including location of design elements and both vegetative and non-vegetative materials selection.

Operations and Maintenance (O+M)
Future O+M planning shall explicitly address Glendale Fire Code to account for time, staff, funding, and any future permitting needed to maintain defensible spaces in the
Wash within the 30-ft and 100-ft defensible space zones.

The final resulting O+M Plan shall be prescriptive for
hazardous vegetation management:

Hazardous Vegetation Management
Shall occur regularly year-round and include:
- Removal of dead foliage, twigs and branches
- Safe disposal of all cut vegetation and refuse
- Soil erosion management
- Keeping roofs free from combustible matter
- Being subject to field inspections by fire official as required Building Construction
Any building construction shall employ materials and
construction methods that confer wildfire exposure
protection with the designated Fire Hazard area, including compliance with applicable Building Codes:

1. California Building Code, Chapter 7A

2. California Residential Code, Section R327

3. California Referenced Standards Code, Chapter 12-7 A !melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 177 Data sources: https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/
showpublisheddocument/58083/637864887721530000 ; https://www.glendaleca. gov/government/departments/fire-department/fire-prevention/vegetationmanagement-and-brush-abatement/defensible-space ; 10 Firefree Steps, https:// www.firefree.org/10steps/ ; Beatty, Russell. “Landscape Design for Fire Safety.” Pacific Horticulture, 17 June 2014, https://www.pacifichorticulture.org/articles/ landscape-design-for-fire-safety/ ; “City of Santa Barbara Fire Prevention Bureau High Fire Hazard Area .” City of Santa Barbara, https://www.santabarbaraca.gov/ civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=225058 ; Detweiler, Amy Jo, and Stephen Fitzgerald. Fire-Resistant Plants for Home Landscapes, Pacific Northwest Extension, Redmond, OR, 2006 ; FHSZ Viewer, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ ; “Fire Resistant Plants for Chelan/Douglas County Washington.” Washington State University, Sept. 2017 ; Kuhns, Michael, and Barbara Daniels. “Firewise Landscaping - Utah.” Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands, https://ffsl.utah.gov/wp-content/ uploads/FirewiseLandscaping07.pdf ; “Landscaping Guidelines for Homes in Fire Hazard Severity Zones.” City of Glendora, https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/ showpublisheddocument/9266/635314295761300000 ; “PlantReferenceGuide.” Ventura County Fire Department, Fire Hazard Reduction Program ; “Preparing Homes for Wildfire.” National Fire Protection Association, https://www.nfpa.org/ Public-Education/Fire-causes-and-risks/Wildfire/Preparing-homes-for-wildfire ; “Professional Practice, Resilient Design: Fire.” American Society of Landscape Architects, https://www.asla.org/fire.aspx ; “Prohibited-Plant-List-By-Hunt-Researchand-Dudek---July-2011.” Hunt Research Corporation and Dudek and Associates, Scott Franklin Consulting Co, July 2011 ; Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5819/glendale.pdf ; (ADD GLENDALE FIRE CODES, 2017 & 2020)
1001 of 1517
178 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE The City of Glendale issued a February 2008 update to the map designating “High Fire Hazard Areas” within Glendale city boundaries. The fire code stipulates the creation of “defensible spaces” in these High Fire Hazard Areas. graphic by !melk with CALFIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones GLENDALE “VERY HIGH SEVERITY ZONE” (VHFHSZ) AREAS
1002 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 179

CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH AND LOW FIRE RESISTANCE VEGETATION High fire-resistant plants
• Leaves contain lots of moisture;
• Less build-up of dead wood or other plant materials
(twigs, leaves, needles, etc.);
• Water-like sap without strong odor;
• Low sap or resin content;
• Many deciduous species.

Low fire-resistant plants
• Plant material (twigs, leaves, needles, etc.)
that is fine, dry, or dead;
• Contain volatile waxes, terpenes, or oils;
• Aromatic leaves;
• Gummy, resinous, or odorous sap;
• Loose or papery bark.
10’
Tree spacing to promote fire resistance
Shrub spacing to promote fire resistance
safer: small groups of shrubs are safer than large
groups
less safe: shrubs are planted in dense clusters, with
less than 15’-0” of space between groups
safer: disconnected tree canopies are safer than
overlapping tree canopies
less safe: scenarios where many trees canopies
overlap can create a more continuous source of fuel
for fire to spread.
1003 of 1517
180 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE tree canopies 15-20’ apart shrub groupings 15-20’ from other shrubs and trees
grasses and perennials kept under
12” height within 30’ of structures
existing roadway buffer planting
trees 10-30’ from
structures
Wildfire Risk Mitigation Planting Design Studies
While a universal specific standard for maintaining defensible space does not exist, the Project Team studied a variety of sources to develop preliminary planting parameters that could be employed to mitigate wildfire risk in the Very High Fire Hazard areas of the City.
1004 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 181 tree canopies 15-20’ apart
grasses and perennials kept under
18” height within 70’ of structures
shrubs 15-20’ apart
trees 10-30’ from
structures
shrubs in groupings 10’
or less in diameter
1005 of 1517
182 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE We heard from many community members - project
proponents, skeptics, and opponents alike! - that the issue of Operations and Maintenance (O+M) including security are a top concern: “let’s not build something that cannot be safely operated or well maintained.”
The Project Team wholeheartedly agrees with this!
Good maintenance plays a vital role in park safety.

The presence of refuse, graffiti/vandalism, poorly maintained pathways, planting, and other design elements can
contribute to a perception of lack of safety. Such “slips” in maintenance can offer the perception, or suggest to users that an area is uncared for and therefore lacks adequate supervision.

If ignored and physical conditions further deteriorate, a cycle of abuse can begin in which legitimate users start to avoid an area, and the space becomes overtaken by inappropriate users and uses.

Appropriate lighting, surveillance, maintenance, robust material choices, and strong design detailing are elements which can help decrease vandalism and inadvertent damage in a public space.

Studies by rails-to-trails conservancy and others have shown that trails and public open spaces themselves don’t generate crime. But these spaces are not immune to it either. Since trails and public open spaces are community focal points, incidents in these spaces can generate a lot of attention.

And concerns about safety, both real and perceived, can keep people away from the trail. These concerns should
be addressed both before and after a trail is built through design, outreach, policing, and programming.

In this section, we:

1. summarize conversations held to date with relevant
stakeholders on these topics;

2. outline the O+M planning process in future design phases;

3. share brief case studies for other public space projects that share characteristics with the Verdugo Wash to gleam lessons, best practices, and demonstrate that corridor public spaces can be safely operated and well maintained.

Operations & Maintenance (O+M) Stakeholders
The following City departments were represented in the
Verdugo Wash Internal Working Stakeholder Group:
• City of Glendale Fire Department
• City of Glendale Police Department
• City of Glendale Parks Department
• City of Glendale Public Works
• City of Glendale Mobility Office
• City of Glendale Sustainability Office
• City of Glendale Community Development Office
Other O+M Stakeholders:
• Los Angeles County Public Works - Flood Control
• City of Glendale Water and Power
• Private Utility Companies
City of Glendale Internal Working Stakeholder Group
A working stakeholder group meeting was formed to discuss early strategies for operations and maintenance of the
re-imagined Verdugo Wash. The following is a summary of those conversations:

General Operations & Emergency Planning
•

•

•
•
Sustainability
•

•

•
•
•

•
•
Follow fire resistant code requirements. Fire-resistant vegetation should be irrigated. Fire marshal to review
construction plans to ensure compliance;
Create operating hours (e.g. scenario: Wash only open
dawn to dusk);
What would the process be to clear & close the wash
when necessary? (e.g. scenario: utilize controlled
access points, city staff to sweep wash at the end of
operating hours and secure access points);
Add emergency call boxes and security cameras,
consider integrating inclement weather alarm system;
Design pathways to accommodate motorcycle access
in the event of emergency;
City bicycle/foot safety patrol preferred though
requires appropriate funding; good visibility from the
street allows for incorporation into existing patrols;
Supports the idea of ambassadors looking over the
wash, if desired by the community;
Incorporate safe lighting levels that are respectful of neighbors;
Separation of pedestrians and cyclists;
Garbage truck clearance not necessary: utilize other
methods for refuse collection.

Prioritize stormwater retention and filtration; consider integrating cistern-collected irrigation system;
Lighting should also be wildlife-friendly/dark-sky
compliant & respectful of neighbors;
Utilize sustainable construction materials and methods
Identify mental health benefits;
Identify environmental health benefits (e.g. carbon
capture, air quality, reduced urban heat island effect); Ensure equitable access;
Integrate ecological education opportunities.

How will the Verdugo Wash be operated and maintained?
1006 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 183 sources: Rails-to-Trails-Is-It-Safe; Project for Public Spaces-1; Park-People-Stationed-Park-Managers; Los Angeles County Public Works (LACPW) Flood Control is currently responsible for operations and management of the Verdugo Wash.

The Project Team met three times with LACPW staff during the Visioning study to discuss existing O+M efforts and what is possible regarding conceptual transformation ideas for the re-imagined Verdugo Wash.

A critical path item for the transformation of the Verdugo Wash is securing permits from LACPW, which will require a prescriptive, 3-year minimum, O+M plan with verified funding source.

Other public agency and private utility companies have
pipes and lines running along or crossing the Wash include:
• Los Angeles Department of Water & Power • Glendale Water and Power • Southern California Edison (SCE) • Southern California Gas (SCG) • other private utilities (e.g. internet) In future design phases, a Civil Engineer would map the locations, owners, right-of-ways, and required clearances for all Verdugo Wash-related utilities (electrical, gas, phone, internet, storm, potable, sanitary, other).

The Civil Engineer would conduct meetings with municipal and private utilities staff to verify information and
understand project opportunities and constraints, and would coordinate a utility plan with the design team that detailed required utility modifications.

O+M Planning Process
In future design phases, it is strongly recommended that the Project Team include a specialized Operations &
Maintenance consultant who is expert in estimating the
personnel, time, funding and equipment required to maintain proposed design options.

The O+M Consultant’s role would involve developing options and recommendations for:
- securing the Wash (like fencing, other barriers, and access points);
- monitoring the Wash (via security cameras, emergency
call boxes, alert system to warn users and managers of
inclement weather);
- work closely with relevant stakeholders (e.g. City of Glendale Parks Dept) to manage O+M expectations
including discussions of whether O+M will be in-house and/ or contracted;
- provide estimate of staff time, equipment, and annual funding required to upkeep various design options;
- develop O+M management structure, financing, & funding sources.

This consultant would develop Operations and Maintenance strategies to integrate within the development of the
overall Masterplan. In addition, the O+M Consultant
would also author an O+M manual with an outline of
O+M responsibilities between Glendale and LACPW with
estimated costs, which is required for the permitting process with the County.
1007 of 1517
184 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Project Summary
elevated rails-to-trails project in very parks-poor region of the city; 2.7 miles long with 4 anchor parks; 12 access points Capital Funding
initial opening 2015 for $95M total: $50M federal; $20M private donations; $5 million from the City of Chicago. $20M more needed for improvements including two parks
Annual Operating Budget
not yet known
Operating Hours
6am-11pm every day
Physical Security
no gates or locks to prevent entry after hours
Monitoring
Multiple cameras at every access ramp and at locations
where the trail bends obscuring line-of-sight; regular 911 call boxes
O+M Stakeholders & Roles
Chicago Park District: Responsible for maintaining/
coordinating trail security
Chicago Police Dept: Provides two officers on bikes during the day and into evening past closing time; adjusts as
needed. Local police beats contribute occasional foot
patrols.

Department of Cultural and Natural Resources: Manages & maintains landscape; provides administration/management of contracts for refuse collection and enhanced maintenance regimes.

Trust for Public Land: Project Manager
Lessons Learned

1. Initial set of trash cans overflowed after opening weekend prompting the Parks Dept to add more. Lesson: adapt
management as needed.

2. Some crime has been reported along the trail. However, 606 project as been credited with reducing area crime
overall. A study comparing crime rates in surrounding
Chicago neighborhoods in 2011 with crime rates in 2015
after the opening of the 606 showed that crime rates had fallen faster in neighborhoods around the project site than in other neighborhoods nearby. Study authors theorized
that the reduction of crime was a result in increased area lighting, higher foot traffic, and community programming which are keeping trail visible and active. Lesson: Invest in community programming and safety elements; involve
police in early planning efforts.

3. Public urination has been as issue since there are
no restrooms along the trail. Lesson: Invest in public
restrooms.

4. Due to success of the project, area rents are rising rapidly putting pressure on lower-income families. City of Chicago sponsors loan program that provides area homeowners up
to $25,000 in a zero interest loan to make home repairs in return for staying there. A portion of the loan is forgiven each month the owner stays in the home. Lesson: city
to maintain project leader role in lieu of hiring parksspecific non-profit; sponsor corridor housing study to evaluate economic opportunities and address possible
gentrification.

5. Elevated condition of the former railway has led to visual privacy conflicts with adjacent residents. Lesson: study and address possible privacy conflicts.

6. Skateboarders use the 606 at night (site cannot be
secured) Lesson: Ensure security after hours.

7. Some Verdugo Wash neighbors are concerned about
project attracting crime. Local 606 neighbors living much larger city with significantly higher baseline crime rates than Glendale were also initially concerned about possible crime spikes. Lesson: Invest in safety. Address in early planning stages though implementation and secure future funding
sources/commitments.

O+M case studies
Police and trail users converse on the 606 Trail. Patrol presence is very effective strategy for maintaining
corridor safety. Image source: DNA Info
The following case studies are intended to serve
as benchmarks, offer insights to guide preliminary
approaches to O+M, and communicate how the O+M
planning process supports sustainable design.

The 606 Trail
Chicago, IL
page sources: Chicago Tribune; Vibrant Cities Lab; NC
State Univ; DNA Info; Better Gov; Chicago Park District 1008 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 185 In future design phases, a specialized Operations & Maintenance Consultant would be tasked to coordinate with the Verdugo Wash design team, and project stakeholders, to analyze design options, craft O+M strategies, estimate O+M costs, and write a prescriptive O+M manual, etc.

Project Summary
30ft ht elevated railway-to-pedestrian parkway project; 1.45 miles long; 13 access points (5 are ADA);
Capital Funding
Completed 2014 for $187M total; $65M raised by Friends of the High Line non-profit; $35M from major private donations; Annual Operating Budget
$3M; funded by endowment & private fundraising
Operating Hours
changes seasonally
7am-10pm every day fall-spring
7am-11pm every day summer
Physical Security
elevated structure; access points are locked after hours Monitoring
Abundance of cameras along the High Line; as of 2011,
city assigned 11 patrol officers, seven other eyes-and-ears workers to the 3-acre High Line. Parks enforcement patrol officers walk the High Line during the day.

O+M Stakeholders & Roles
NYC Parks: owns the park
Friends of the High Line (FHL non-profit conservancy):
operate park under license agreement with NYC Parks; raises funds from private and public sources each year to cover operating costs.

FHL & NYC Dept of Parks: work together on park
maintenance
Community volunteers: assist with plant maintenance
Lessons Learned

1. Space is highly controlled space, so virtually no crime.

Trespassing is rare and usually somebody dropping in
from an adjacent building. Parks patrol officers issued 362 citations in 2011 for “quality-of-life” infractions typically for drinking, occasionally for prohibited items like dogs or bicycles. NYC Police Commissioner attributes high park
safety to its highly controlled access. He also quotes high visitorship (~3M visitors annually) and security cameras that both make illegitimate uses uncomfortable. Lesson:
control access, fund patrol officers, invest in design & programming to attract routine use.

2. Three public restrooms available. Tight, urban location required temporary O+M facilities initially; Lesson: plan for permanent facilities.

3. Effective public-private partnership supports maintenance needs. Lesson: explore public-private partnership.

Key O+M Consultant Role
During planning/design phases, a consultant was hired
to study High Line O+M. This consultant determined
operations/maintenance challenges and provided long-term management solutions. Challenges included: delivering
materials to the elevated railway itself; restrictions on vehicle type, the complex horticultural plantings, and lack of space for traditional storage yard and construction equipment.

The Consultant identified comprehensive maintenance
needs, defined daily operating costs based on maintenance staff requirements, proposed specific administrative, security and programming staff positions, designed temporary
maintenance and administrative facilities and identified specialized service equipment, and developed an O+M
Manual that helped define the public/private partnership that currently operates the High Line, helping prepare the Client transition from “development” mode to operating
mode.

High Line’s ecologically complex plantings require
nuanced gardening approach. Image source: High Line
Blog
The High Line
New York City, NY
page sources: thehighline.org; NYT High Line Low Crime, Gothamist, NYT $20M Gift, NYC Parks
1009 of 1517
186 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Project Summary
Active FEMA Floodway project integrating multi-use
trail system and parks; 2.3 miles long; 160 acres. Anchor park along 53-mile trail system. “Buffalo Bayou Park is infrastructure you can live with.”
Capital Funding
2015 for $53M (majority privately funded)
Annual Operating Budget
$6.6M annual operating budget (2020) - sustained by
Downtown Tax Increment Finance Zone, the Houston First
Corporation, and the Houston Parks board. Security is
publicly funded. (confirm if $6.6M is for park or for wider trail system.)
Operating Hours
6am-11pm every day in lit areas / dawn to dusk in unlit areas.

Physical Security
Park porous on all edges - no gates or locks to prevent entry after hours
Monitoring
There are 24 hour patrols of weekend security, and a
hired guard who provides security from 4pm to 6am on
weeknights.

O+M Stakeholders & Roles
Buffalo Bayou Partnership (non-profit): responsible for O+M Volunteers & community service workers: support
conservation and O+M efforts by removing weeds/invasive species, planting native wildflowers, and trash pick-up and silt removal after heavy rains.

Houston Police Dept: Patrol trails and parks
Lessons Learned

1. Dog parks, sand volleyball courts, and other active program zones have successfully deterred criminal behaviors in these areas. Some crime like robbery has occurred within the wider Buffalo Bayou Trail system; events typically occur under bridges and other areas with limited visibility or not quickly accessible by the main road. Lesson: invest in community programming. Provide clear lines of sight, place extra
security cameras in obscured areas and emergency
phone call boxes along the corridor. Fund patrols during operating hours.

2. Overall trail system is difficult to navigate for users.

Lesson: invest in clear maps, signage and wayfinding.

3. Emergency first responders have difficulty locating people along the trail. Lesson: Integrate location markers along the corridor to help users communicate their location
during an emergency. Police and first responders should be trained on how to access and use the data.

4. Buffalo Bayou Partnership has been effective in hosting event-based programming that attracts routine use and
helps community engage more deeply with the landscape
(e.g. environmental education). Lesson: consider
partnerships

5. Buffalo Bayou Partnership has been successful in inviting thousands of volunteers annually to support O+M and
conservation efforts, which builds community ownership.

Lesson: consider community participation
Buffalo Bayou Park
Houston, TX
page sources: Houston-News-BBP-Security;
BuffaloBayou.org; Buffalo-Bayou-Partnership-O+M,
BuffaloBayou-2020-Annual-Report; Buffalo-Bayou-Crime
O+M case studies
The non-profit Buffalo Bayou Partnership invites
community volunteers to participate in park
conservation efforts. Image source: Buffalo Bayou
Partnership
1010 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold THE VISION FOR VERDUGO WASH: COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS 187 Project Summary
22-mile rails-to-trails loop
Capital Funding
unknown
Annual Operating Budget
unknown
Operating Hours
24 hours every day
Physical Security
Park porous on all edges - no gates or locks to prevent entry Monitoring
Path Force Unit patrols 10am-1am - primarily bike patrols, but also on foot, off-road motorcycles, and all-terrain vehicles.

O+M Stakeholders & Roles
Atlanta BeltLine Inc: capital project development lead
City of Atlanta: responsible for O+M
Atlanta Department of Public Works: maintains trail lights Trees Atlanta: local non-profit organization prunes trees/ clears invasive growth
Atlanta Police Dept & Atlanta Police Foundation: responsible for security
Lessons Learned

1. Many partnerships for funding and operation including various city and state agencies and non-profits share capital and operating costs. Lesson: Involve stakeholders early and seek partnerships.

2. Design follows environmental design crime prevention principles. Lesson: integrate safety-enhancing design
principles

3. High level of safety features throughout trail. GA Dept of Transportation funded lighting installation & security camera upgrades. Bridges well lit and security cameras present throughout trail and adjacent parks. Trail features milemarker locating system enabling fast emergency response times. Lesson: integrate safety features

4. High level of daily police patrols enabled by $1.8 million grant from the US Dept of Justice COPS program for military veterans. Lesson: Develop potential grant list and hold city staff/consultant time to apply

5. Conflicts between mobility users occur when fast bikers & skateboarders; and motorized scooters, which are prohibited, collide with pedestrians. Lesson: Invest in good etiquette signage, clear pavement delineations (and separation
when possible) for various modes, and consider
enforcement operations.

6. The BeltLine is considered safe during the day and very kid-friendly. As Atlanta suffers from relatively high base crime rate per capita, violent crimes have infrequently occurred on the trail, typically at night after patrols have left and when victims have been alone. Lesson: high visitorship and visible patrols maintain public safety during the day.

Securing the Wash and regular patrols can reduce crime
risk after hours.

7. Due to the massive surge in interest in BeltLine adjacent properties, property prices have increased pricing of
such properties, especially in low-income neighborhoods.

Developers have been transforming them into luxury
living and pricing out former residents. Atlanta Beltline Inc has funded only a small fraction of 5,600 promised
affordable housing units. Homes values within a half-mile of the BeltLine have increased 18-27% 2011-2015, leading to protests against gentrification. Lesson: Sponsor corridor housing study to evaluate economic opportunities and
address possible gentrification.

Atlanta BeltLine
Atlanta, GA
page sources: BeltLine.org-Pathway-Force; AtlantaMagazine; BeltLine-Security-Upgrades; BeltLineStrategic-Report Atlanta BeltLine bike police serve as ambassadors for
visitors and patrol every day from 10am-1am. Image
source: Atlanta Magazine
1011 of 1517
188 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE

1012 of 1517
appendix A.
baseline
hydrology
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 189
1013 of 1517
190 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1014 of 1517
The Verdugo Wash is entirely located within the City of Glendale and is a 9.4-mile-long engineered channel and a tributary of the Los Angeles River. The Verdugo Wash was originally a natural riverbed before the engineered concrete channel was constructed in the 1930s by Los Angeles
County to improve the conveyance of flooding from the
Verdugo catchment into the Los Angeles River.

Based on an assessment of satellite topography for the
Glendale area, the natural Verdugo Wash catchment has
a total area of just over 21 square miles. The figure below shows the narrow, urbanized catchment alongside the lower reaches of the Wash and the catchment picking up runoff from the Verdugo Mountains, Crescenta Highlands and the non-urban areas of Angeles National Forest. Some areas
outside of the natural catchment drain into the wash via subsurface drainage networks.

Figure 2-1: Verdugo Wash catchment area ©BuroHappold
Heading upstream from the confluence with the Los Angeles River just northeast of Griffith Park, the channel extends northeast through heavily urbanized areas in the lower
catchment, then north between the Verdugo Mountains and the San Rafael Hills and then it moves northwest along the eastern edge of the Verdugo Mountains. This upper part of the catchment is steeper and rockier with partial vegetation cover. The upper extremity of the channel is just south of Interstate 210 in the Crescenta Valley.

The Verdugo Wash Debris Basin Dam is the only part of the channel the Verdugo Wash that is “soft bottomed” or not lined in concrete. The basin has an approximate length of 0.3 miles and represents 3.2% of the total length of the Verdugo Wash.
appendix A
baseline hydrology
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 191

VERDUGO WASH TRACE

CATCHMENT AREA
2 miles 1
/
2 1
/
4 1 mile
1015 of 1517
Most of the constructed channel is rectangular in cross section, with varying widths from approximately 17 feet in the north in Crescenta Valley, to 89 feet to the south where it connects to the Los Angeles River.

Immediately downstream of the Verdugo Wash Debris Basin Dam, the channel has a trapezoidal cross section with an average bottom width of 22 feet and a top width of 73 feet.

The trapezoidal channel represents approximately 9.5% of the entire length of the Verdugo Wash and passes through the Oakmont Country Club Golf Course.

Along the channel there are six access ramps to the channel and five tributaries are identified as feeding into the Verdugo Wash, as can be seen in Figure 2 3. These have been
considered when developing a potential top bank multimodal facility.

A HEC-RAS model developed by USACE has been provided
to the project team from LACFCD. This provides peak
flood flows and flood depths in the Verdugo Wash for the 1:100-year event, which is a key design constraint. The USACE HEC-RAS report provides information on the crosssection channel width and depth, as well as the calculated flow depths for the 1:100-year event. The Verdugo Wash
Visioning team has used this information to identify sections of the wash which may be suitable for intervention.

To ensure that the any interventions do not increase the risk of flooding to neighboring properties and surrounding areas, an assessment of the required freeboard has been undertaken.

Freeboard Classification
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
website provides two definitions of freeboard.
a. An additional amount of height above the Base Flood
Elevation used as a factor of safety (e.g., 2 feet above the Base Flood) in determining the level at which a structure’s lowest floor must be elevated or flood-proofed to be in accordance with state or community floodplain management regulations.
b. Freeboard is a factor of safety usually expressed in feet above a flood level for purposes of floodplain management. “Freeboard” tends to compensate for the many unknown
factors that could contribute to flood heights greater than the height calculated for a selected size flood and floodway conditions, such as wave action, bridge openings, and
the hydrological effect of urbanization of the watershed.

Freeboard is not required by National Flood Insurance
Program standards, but communities are encouraged to
adopt at least a 1-ft freeboard to account for the one-foot rise built into the concept of designating a floodway and the encroachment requirements where floodways have not been designated. Freeboard results in significantly lower flood insurance rates due to lower flood risk.

Seeing as there is no clear guidance on what freeboard to adopt for the Verdugo Wash, the design team has used the 2 feet FEMA guidance (as suggested in point (a) above) for freeboard classifications of the existing wash. Any areas with less than 2-ft available freeboard are considered unsuitable for structural interventions. It should also be emphasized that structural interventions within the channel will reduce the available freeboard in comparison with the baseline assessment.

An analysis has been carried out using the levels provided from the USACE flood model to assess the available
freeboard within the channel, presented in the forthcoming section “Opportunities & Constraints.”
Climate Change
To ensure that any proposals within the Verdugo Wash are resilient and equipped to deal with a changing future, it is recommended to apply a climate change allowance. An
article published in Nature by Polade et. al. (2017), titled “Precipitation in a warming world: Assessing the projected hydro-climate changes in California and other Mediterranean climate regions,” estimates the expected percentage
increase in precipitation intensity to be approximately 20% for the events above the 99th percentile for California. This can be seen in Figure 2-4.

Buro Happold therefore recommends applying a 20% climate change allowance to the 1 in 100-year event to represent the design flood event (DFE) for the future condition. This allowance will address the predicted increase in precipitation intensity and the associated uplift in water levels within the channel. This climate change allowance is in addition to the recommended 2 feet freeboard, which represents a buffer for safety and uncertainty.

Figure 2-2 top: The Verdugo Wash downstream close to its connection to the LA River; bottom: the wash immediately south of the debris basin where the only trapezoidal section condition exists.
192 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1016 of 1517
Figure 2-3: Access and Tributaries to the Verdugo Wash channel ©BuroHappold Figure 2-4: CMIP5 multi-model ensemble average changes in winter precipitation (a) frequency and (b) intensity average in different percentile categories over the Mediterranean-climate grids. source: Polade et. al. (2017), p.4 !melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 193
Access ra
Tributary
Verdugo
Catchme

VERDUGO WASH TRACE

CATCHMENT AREA

ACCESS RAMP

TRIBUTARY
1017 of 1517
Figure 2-5: Typical sections throughout Verdugo Wash ©BuroHappold Prototypical Areas Of Study
To provide an understanding of the channel capacity for the DFE, 1 in 100-year return period plus 20% climate change allowance with a 2 feet freeboard applied, representative cross sections from the USACE model report have been
assessed.

Six typical segments have been identified within the
Verdugo Wash; the Debris Dam Basin is excluded from this assessment. See Figure 2-5 for an overview of the sections and their approximate associated length.

The following section provides and overview of the capacity within the identified six stretches, as well as an example cross section from the USACE model (1 in 100-year return period) based on a River Station within the given section.

A site photo from the approximate location has also been included to provide more of an understanding of the channel within that stretch of the Verdugo Wash.

The flow, velocity and water depth are presented both for the 1 in 100-year event, as well as the DFE, which includes 20% climate change allowance. The cross-section area
(CSA) percentage filled has also been calculated for the 1 in 100-year event. A similar exercise has been carried out for the DFE to understand the potential increase in water level because of climate change. At this preliminary stage, the velocity has been assumed to be unchanged to give
an upper estimate of the likely increase in depth. When calculating the CSA utilized in the DFE, the calculation approach has been revised so that 100% does not refer to the top of bank condition (like the 1 in 100-year calculation based on the USACE) but includes the recommended
allowance for 2 feet freeboard.
194 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Henderson Canyon

2.5-mile stretch
Golf Course

0.8-mile stretch
Glorietta Tennis Park

0.4-mile stretch
Glendale Community College

3.3-mile stretch
Concord Street

1.2-mile stretch
Confluence area

0.2-mile stretch
1018 of 1517
Calculations based on information extracted directly from the USACE model.

Calculations include 20% uplift in design flows for climate change and 2 feet freeboard.

The resultant CSA % is based on the area remaining following subtraction of the freeboard area.

Henderson Canyon segment (RS 4570)
Golf Course segment (RS 25979.37)
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 195
1 RS 4570 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 9,665 cf/s 11,598 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 39.34 ft/s 39.34 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 5.6 ft 6.7 ft
CSA Filled (%) 70% 110%
1 2
RS 25979.37 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 18,000 cf/s 21,600 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 53.22 ft/s 53.22 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 6.5 ft 7.8 ft
CSA Filled (%) 65% 90%
1 2
2 WS DESIGN DISCHARGE

GROUNDWATER

BANK STATION

CRIT DESIGN DISCHARGE
1019 of 1517
196 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE Glendale Community College segment (RS 16400)
Glorietta Tennis Park segment (RS 24755.26)
RS 24755.26 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 34,600 cf/s 41,520 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 59.77 ft/s 59.77 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 13.2 ft 15.8 ft
CSA Filled (%) 70% 95%
1 2
RS 16400 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 37,350 cf/s 44,820 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 55.57 ft/s 55.57 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 7.6 ft 9.2 ft
CSA Filled (%) 55% 75%
1 2
1020 of 1517
Calculations based on information extracted directly from the USACE model.

Calculations include 20% uplift in design flows for climate change and 2 feet freeboard.

The resultant CSA % is based on the area remaining following subtraction of the freeboard area. !melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 197
Concord Street segment (RS 2847.55)
Confluence segment (RS 1291.30)
RS 2847.55 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 42,900 cf/s 51,480 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 51.64 ft/s 51.64 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 9.4 ft 11.33 ft
CSA Filled (%) 65% 90%
1 2
1 2
RS 1291.3 1:100 DFE (20% CC + 2ft)
Flow (cf/s) 42,900 cf/s 51,480 cf/s
Velocity (fs) 52.35 ft/s 52.35 ft/s
Water Depth (ft) 9.3 ft 11.17 ft
CSA Filled (%) 95% 140%
1 2

WS DESIGN DISCHARGE

GROUNDWATER

BANK STATION

CRIT DESIGN DISCHARGE
1021 of 1517
Hydrology Constraints
Two factors represent the major constraints for development within the Verdugo Wash from a hydrological perspective:
(1) the limited freeboard available within the channel; and (2) the high velocities for the higher order events, such as the 1-in-100-year event.

Limited Freeboard
Limited freeboard means that interventions within the
channel must be developed either above the water level or designed so that they can be inundated for the design flood event.

Additionally, in sections of the existing channel where the capacity is already close to the “maximum” for the
1-in-100-year event, there is not much space available for interventions within the channel, as hydrological capacity must be retained.

The base available freeboard (not including any
contingencies) within the existing Verdugo Wash flood
channel is depicted in Figure 2-11.

As already presented in the initial analysis of the Verdugo Wash, there exists very little if no right-of-way along the channel. With properties, residences, streets, parks, etc built up so close to the Verdugo Wash channel, and the
constraints associated with the retention of the hydrologic function of the channel, the capacity of the channel directly influences the typology and feasibility of any intervention.

As such, interventions will need to be strategically and specifically located to discrete sections of the Verdugo Wash. Furthermore, with any intervention, it must be
demonstrated that there is sufficient hydrologic capacity accommodated.
198 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1022 of 1517
Figure 2-11: Freeboard classification based on the USACE model for the 1 in 100-year event ©BuroHappold !melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 199
0 mile 1
/
2 1
/
4 < 2 FT
< 2 FT

FREEBOARD CLASSIFICATION

BRIDGES & CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS

BRIDGES

CHANNEL CROSS SECTION
2 FT - 3.5 FT
2 FT - 3.5 FT

3.5 FT - 5 FT

3.5 FT - 5 FT
> 5 FT
> 5 FT
1023 of 1517
Hydrological Velocities
The velocities for the 1-in-100-year event have also been analyzed and presented visually, based on the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) model. This information is depicted in Figure 2-12.

As can be seen from the Figure, high velocities are modeled for the entirety of the channel, in the downstream sections.

In these sections, the velocities are in excess of 50-feet per second (or 35 miles per hour).

This fast-moving water represents a risk to any people or animals in the Verdugo Wash for the higher order return periods, and it must therefore be assured that a flood
warning and evacuation plan is implemented to ensure that the appropriate evacuation is undertaken, and that - should portions of the Wash become accessible as a community
park - the channel is closed off to the public prior to significant precipitation events.

These velocities also have implications for the types of interventions for consideration.

Cycling pathways on platforms and any planting within the Verdugo Wash, for example, would have to be designed
and constructed in such a way to be able to withstand the modeled velocities, and ensure that debris is not transported downstream causing potential issues with the capacity.

Anticipatory Planning
The implications of climate change and the associated
operation and maintenance (O&M) constitute further
considerations for the future planning of the Verdugo Wash.

The future almost certainly holds an increase in precipitation intensity, which will inevitably further reduce the available capacity within the Verdugo Wash.

Thus, with any design scenario, it is recommended to plan for an additional 20% capacity to serve as a climate change allowance. With this contingency, any design scenario for the Verdugo Wash would take into account not only the
multi-benefit public space aspect but also seek to preserve hydrologic function.

Additional options to reduce the impact of climate change are further explored in the “Mitigation” section (on the following spread).

The primary function of the Verdugo Wash is to convey
stormwater and to do so, O&M is required. The condition of the channel itself and its concrete walls and bottom must be accessible to inspection, and repair, if required. It is also important that debris does not get trapped and accumulate within the channel. (The existing Debris Basin Dam, for example, is found to collect sediments and its information has been sought from the LACFD on the type of materials and frequency of removal.)
200 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1024 of 1517
Figure 2-12: Velocity classification based on the USACE model for the 1-in-100-year event ©BuroHappold !melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 201
0 mile 1
/
2 1
/
4 CHANNEL CROSS SECTION VELOCITIES
< 20 FT/SEC
20 - 35 FT/SEC
35 - 50 FT/SEC
> 50 FT/SEC
1025 of 1517
Hydrology Opportunities
A key guiding principle is to maintain the hydrologic function of the channel, but there are opportunities to better utilize this extensive piece of stormwater infrastructure. In areas with capacity, structural interventions can be implemented to provide and improve the ecological conditions, connectivity through cycle and pedestrian paths, as well as public
realm. Based on the restrictions represented by the major constraints, limited freeboard, and high velocities, a ‘point by point’ intervention strategy can be developed seeking to maximize connectivity. The sections of the channel with the most freeboard available represent the areas with the greatest opportunities for structural interventions within the channel.

The Debris Basin Dam is one location, for example, that would serve as a good candidate for both ecological and civic enhancement. The Debris Basin Dam is understood to have limited implications for the “higher order” flood events.

In addition, for more frequent return periods water can be slowed down in this particular location (instead of rapidly being transported downstream). This thereby creates
opportunities for a range of vegetation / plant species.

Additionally, the Debris Basin Dam is prime area to consider groundwater recharge. Recharging groundwater aquifers
in arid environments, which often have insufficient
water resources available to meet potable and nonpotable demands, may help the overall natural water balance.

A water supply assessment for City of Glendale found that 68% of the City’s water is imported. Though the amount of potential groundwater recharge would be limited due to the infrequency and velocities of the higher order events, any groundwater recharge could contribute to larger offsets of urban water use.

Another - albeit more significant - idea for consideration is to somehow increase the capacity of the channel. This can be done through modifications to the various “profiles” or “cross-sections” where feasible. These are physical
alterations to the profile of the channel itself - such as extending the walls or transforming the trapezoidal sections into rectangular profiles, in order to affect the baseline water level. This is explored further in the table on the following page.

Figure 2-13: Debris Basin Dam photos from the Project Team’s site visit in April 2021. 202 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1026 of 1517
Hydrology Mitigation
The following is a collection of potential mitigation strategies that can be implemented to address modifications to the hydrological performance of the Verdugo Wash.

In addition to these ideas, there are opportunities outside of the actual Verdugo Wash channel (and therefore outside of the scope area) that can affect the capacity of the channel.

Such ideas will be explored in a future phase.

Installment of
screen protection
against gardens
alongside the
Verdugo Wash.

Wider stormwater
management
outside of the
Verdugo Wash site
boundary
Extend the walls of
the Verdugo Wash
channel vertically
by building new
walls on top of the
existing top of
bank.

Change of channel
cross-section
Groundwater
recharge
Reduces the worries and hesitations
neighbors along the Verdugo Wash have
expressed in terms of their privacy and
safety being reduced as a result of the
project.

Reducing the overland flows through
sustainable drainage systems, such
as infiltration basins, green roofs, rain
gardens, and permeable pavements.

A wider green infrastructure approach
to stormwater in Glendale can reduce
the flows in the Verdugo Wash and
thereby adjust for the flows resulting
from the increase predicted in rainfall
intensity because of climate change.

As a result, the existing utilization of
the channel can be maintained in the
future. Consider opportunities within the
tributaries feeding the Verdugo Wash,
like Dunsmore Canyon, which could also
function as key ecological connections.

This could increase the capacity of
the channel and allow for further
interventions within the wash, while
maintaining the hydraulic capacity.

By changing the trapezoidal sections
of the channel to a rectangular crosssection, the water level is drastically reduced. This allows for interventions
within the channel. Having tiered
sections could also provide public
realm along the Verdugo Wash while
maintaining the hydraulic functioning of
the channel.

By providing infiltration of stormwater
along the wash there would be benefits
in terms of groundwater recharge, which
can be used to meet water demands.

Reduces the worries and hesitations
neighbors along the Verdugo Wash
have expressed in terms of their
privacy and safety being reduced as a
result of the project.

Having the financial resourcing
and locating areas suitable for
intervention. From the perspective of
the Verdugo Wash, the timelines of
future interventions and quantified
assessments of green infrastructure
in the catchment would have to
be considered if it is intended to
compensate for the effect of climate
change in the channel.

This would further close off the
channel and would add more concrete
to the existing channel, rather than
representing a re-naturalization
process. Potential issues with the
existing design life of the wash and the
structural integrity of the added walls.

Understood to represent expensive
work which would have to be agreed
with the Golf Course, as this is where
the trapezoidal sections are located.

Changes to the cross sections would
have to happen during a time of year
where larger precipitation events will
not/ are very unlikely to occur.

The amount of infiltrated stormwater
is understood to represent a small
volume for the larger order events,
where there are capacity issues in
terms of interventions within the
Verdugo Wash.

This would be most relevant in sections
of the Verdugo Wash where residential
houses and garden are located just
adjacent to the wash, such as the more
urbanized downstream sections.

This would be considered suitable in
the upstream sections of the Verdugo
catchment as more space is available
for the implementation of green
infrastructure. This does however
come with a host of benefits and would
be beneficial also in more densely
urban areas as it improves ecological
conditions, reduces urban heat island
effect, and increases amenity.

This would be most relevant in sections
where there is limited freeboard available,
such as sections upstream of the Debris
Basin Dam.

This could be relevant in the section of
the Verdugo Wash going through the
Golf Course, just downstream of the
Debris Basin Dam.

This would be suitable in areas that are
permeable, such as the Debris Basin
Dam. Other parks and open areas in close
proximity to the Verdugo Wash could also
be investigated, but that would contain
conveying flood water out of the channel.

ITEM BENEFITS POTENTIAL ISSUES SUITABLE LOCATIONS
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGY 203
1027 of 1517
204 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE 1028 of 1517
appendix B.
mobility considerations
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX B: MOBILITY 205
1029 of 1517
206 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT DRAFT CITY OF GLENDALE 1030 of 1517
The story of the Verdugo Wash has always been about
movement.

Water told the first story - finding the route of least resistance. Precipitation running down the Verdugo and San Gabriel Mountains collected in the former Verdugo Creek and was funneled between the Verdugo Mountains and San
Rafael Hills through the Verdugo Canyon before washing
across the alluvial plains to join the LA River.

Beyond the flow of water, we can understand the Verdugo Wash in terms of rail infrastructure, which hugged the
contours of the nearby mountains to connect riders to
stations in Montrose, La Crescenta, La Canada, and Tujunga.

The popularity of the automobile tells today’s story best.

Looking to traverse up from south Glendale and avoiding the highway - which is a necessity for those on foot and bike - one follows the roadways of Glenoaks, Verdugo, La Canada, and La Crescenta. This set of similar paths, intuited from the natural landscape’s rich topography, is so basic we no longer register it.

However, the opportunity to transform the Verdugo Wash
into a vibrant, accessible, and interconnected pedestrian and cycling spine is a very attainable future narrative.

Such a corridor would entirely transform connectivity for Glendalians, serving those seeking active alternatives for purposes like health, climate, financial, recreation, and necessity.

Aligning with the City of Glendale’s goals of increasing multimodal transportation options for its residents, the Verdugo Wash’s positioning and contribution to surrounding networks would provide monumental potential for a future multimodal mobility corridor while providing public park space for Glendale’s residents. The associated benefits would be numerous, including aspects of economy, public health, and safety. Strategically positioned entry points would greatly improve the Wash’s visitation for recreational and functional trips, would encourage an active lifestyle, seamlessly
connect commuters to major transit hubs, and provide a safe alternative for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Figure 1-1 left: Existing cycling times from downtown; and right: projected cycling times from downtown, anticipating additional entrances and the use of cycling paths in the Verdugo Wash. Per the legend, the darker the color, the faster the cycle time ©BuroHappold appendix B
mobility considerations
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX B: MOBILITY 207
5 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
15 MINUTES
20 MINUTES
25 MINUTES
30 MINUTES
1031 of 1517
208 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE P 8 SAN GABRIEL AVE ( EXISTING)
P1: Boston Avenue (existing access point) P2: Dunsmore Avenue (existing access point) P5: Whiting Woods Road looking north (existing access point) P6: Oakendale Place (potential access point) P9: San Gabriel Avenue (existing access point) P10: Glorietta Tennis Park (potential access point) P13: Oak Knoll Road (potential wildlife access point) P14: Verdugo Woodlands Elementary School (potential access point) In-depth analysis of key destinations, land uses, mobility network, apparent site constraints, and distances rationalized for pedestrians and bicyclists resulted in the following set of access points candidates. The Project Team recommends this set of candidates be further studied and discussed together with the community and relevant stakeholders.
access point candidate study
1032 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX B: MOBILITY 209
P 7 BASIN ( EXISTING)
P 11 WABASSO WAY (POTENTIAL)
P 15 LOT 30 (EXISTING)
P3: New York Avenue looking north (proposed access point) P4: Eagle Canyon Channel (potential wildlife access point) P7: Shirlyjean Street looking north (existing access point) P8: Basin (existing access point) P11: Fern Lane / El Rito Avenue (potential access point) P12: Wabasso Way (potential access point) P15: Verdugo Park (potential access point) P16: Lot 30 (existing access point) 1033 of 1517
210 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE P 19 BONNIE ACADEMY (EXISTING)
P17: E Glenoaks Boulevard Bridge looking east-northeast (potential access point)
P21: First German United Methodist Church (existing access point) P18: Geneva Street & Monterey Road looking west
(potential access point)
P25: San Fernando Road (potential access point)
P22: Fremont Park (potential access point)
access point candidate study
1034 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX B: MOBILITY 211
P 21 CONCORD ST(POTENTIAL)
P19: N. Brand Boulevard (potential access point) P20: N. Pacific Avenue (potential access point) P24: Estelle Ave (potential access point) P23: Concord Street (potential access point) 1035 of 1517
212 THE VERDUGO WASH VISIONING STUDY • FINAL REPORT CITY OF GLENDALE P1: Boston Avenue
P1: Boston Avenue (existing access point)
to verdugo
mountain trail
heads
access point candidate study
1036 of 1517
!melk+BuroHappold APPENDIX B: MOBILITY 213
wash bank can
accommodate
wildlife movement
ramps provide
potential access
points for wildlife

COMMERCIAL