Date Published: April 11, 2024
PUBLIC NOTICE
CITY OF GLENDALE
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
The Community Development Department, after having conducted an Initial Study, has prepared a Negative Declaration for the following project:
Project Description:
The project includes the Action Plan for the proposed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Programs for the City of Glendale.
Project Title: Fiscal Year 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs
Project Location: Citywide, Glendale, Los Angeles County
Project Applicant: City of Glendale
Community Services & Parks Department
613 E. Broadway, Room 120
Glendale, CA 91206
The Proposed Negative Declaration and all documents referenced therein are available for review in the Community Development Department, Planning Division office, Room 103 of the Municipal Services Building, 633 East Broadway, Glendale, California 91206-4386 and on the Planning Division website http://www.glendaleca.gov/environmental. For information on the proposed project and any upcoming public hearings and/or meetings please contact Maggie Kavarian in the Community Services & Parks Department at (818) 548-3715 or [email protected].
Written comments may be submitted to the Community Development Department, Planning Division office, at the address listed above for a period of 20 days after publication of this notice.
Proposed Negative Declaration Comment Period: April 11, 2024, to May 1, 2024
PROPOSED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME Programs
The following Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Guidelines and Procedures of the City of Glendale.
Project Title/Common Name: FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME Programs Project Location: Glendale, Los Angeles County, California: Glendale is located northeast of downtown Los Angeles. It is bounded by the cities of Burbank, Pasadena, La Canada Flintridge and the Los Angeles communities of Tujunga, Eagle Rock, and Los Feliz.
Project Description: Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department for the fiscal year 2024-2025 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), and HOME programs.
Project Type: Private Project Public Project
Project Applicant: Maggie Kavarian, Senior Community Services Supervisor City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department 141 N. Glendale Avenue, Room 202
Glendale, CA 91206
Findings: The Director of the Community Development, on April 11, 2024, after considering an Initial Study prepared by the Planning Division, found that the above referenced project would not have a significant effect on the environment and instructed that a Negative Declaration be prepared.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Attachments: Initial Study Checklist
Contact Person: Erik Krause, Deputy Director of Community Development City of Glendale, Community Development Department
633 East Broadway, Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206-4386
Tel: (818) 548-8157
Fax: (818) 240-0392
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 2
This page left intentionally blank.
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
FY 2023-2024 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 3
1. Project Title: FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Programs
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Glendale Community Development Department
Planning Division
633 East Broadway, Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Erik Krause, Deputy Director of Community Development
Tel: (818) 937-8156
Fax: (818) 240-0392
4. Project Location: Glendale, Los Angeles County, California: Glendale is located northeast of downtown Los Angeles. It is bounded by the cities of Burbank, Pasadena, La Canada Flintridge and the Los Angeles communities of Tujunga, Eagle Rock and Los Feliz.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Maggie Kavarian, Senior Community Services Supervisor
City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department 141 N. Glendale Avenue, Room 202
Glendale, CA 91206
6. General Plan Designation: N/A
7. Zoning: N/A
8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to, later phases of the project, and any secondary support or off-site features necessary for its implementation.)
Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Services and Parks Department for the fiscal year 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME programs. See attached Action Plan for full description.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The projects are located throughout the City of Glendale, and as such the surrounding uses vary depending on location.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement).
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 4
11. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards / Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect ( 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and ( 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature of Director of Community Development or his or her designee authorizing the release of environmental document for public review and comment.
4/11/2024
Director of Community Development: Date:
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 5
A. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section
21099, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
3. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
X
4. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
Comments to Sections A(1), (2), (3), and (4):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on aesthetics as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand.
As such, these programs would not adversely affect scenic vistas, damage scenic resources, degrade the visual character of any sites or create substantial light or glare.
Potential aesthetic impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project - specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
B. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as updated) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 6
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
X
2. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
3. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
X
4. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X
5. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
Comments to Sections B(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5):
The City of Glendale does not contain any agricultural resources or lands currently zoned for agricultural uses; instead, Glendale is an urbanized area with a mixture of commercial, residential and industrial uses. Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs would not have a negative impact on agricultural resources because there is no “prime farmland,” “unique farmland” or “farmland of statewide importance” that could be converted to non-agricultural use; no existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts; and no farmland that could be converted to non-agricultural use. There is no existing zoning of forest land or timberland in the City of Glendale. No forest land could be converted to non-forest use under the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
C. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
2. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X
3. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? X
4. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 7
Comments to Sections C(1), (2), (3), and (4):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on air quality as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect air quality.
Potential air quality impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project - specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
2. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
3. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X
4. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
X
5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
X
6. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Comments to Sections D(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on biological resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect biological resources.
Potential impacts on biological resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 8
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
X
2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
X
3. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? X
Comments to Sections E(1), (2), and (3):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on cultural resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect cultural resources.
Potential impacts on cultural resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
F. ENERGY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
2. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
Comments to Sections F(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on energy as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect energy consumption or obstruct with state of local energy plans.
Potential impacts on energy could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project- specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 9
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
2. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
3. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
X
4. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as
updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X
5. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
X
6. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X
Comments to Sections F(1)(i)(ii)(iii)(iv), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with geology and soils as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect geology and soils.
Potential impacts associated with geology and soils could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 10
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
2. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Comments to Sections H(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with greenhouse gases as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not result in direct or indirect im pacts related to the generation of greenhouse gases or conflict with applicable plans.
Potential impacts associated with greenhouse gases could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
2. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X
3. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
4. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
X
5. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
X
6. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
7. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
X
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 11
Comments to Sections I(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with hazards and hazardous materials as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect hazards and hazardous materials.
Potential impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface of groundwater quality?
X
2. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
X
3. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
4. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
5. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
Comments to Sections J(1), (2), (3)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (4) and (5):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with hydrology and water quality as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect hydrology and water quality.
Potential impacts associated with hydrology and water quality could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 12
would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
K. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Physically divide an established community? X
2. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
Comments to Sections K(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with land use and planning as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. Most of the programs are included in the City’s updated Housing Element adopted in December 2022. As such, these programs would not adversely affect land use and planning.
Potential impacts associated with land use and planning could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
L. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
2. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Comments to Sections L(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with the availability of know mineral resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect mineral resources.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 13
Potential impacts associated with the availability of know mineral resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
M. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
2. G eneration of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X
3. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
Comments to Sections M(1), (2) and (3):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with noise as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect noise.
Potential impacts associated with noise could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
N. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
2. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 14
Comments to Sections N(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with population and housing as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect population and housing.
Potential impacts associated with population and housing could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
O. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Comments to Sections O(1)(a),(b), (c), (d) and (e):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associated with public services as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect public services.
Potential impacts associated with public services could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 15
P. RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
2. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
Comments to Sections P(1) and (2):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on recreational facilities as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect recreational uses.
Conversely, the proposed programs included in the action plan would help to relieve existing pressure on the recreational facilities by providing after school programs away from park sites.
Potential impacts on recreational facilities could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Q. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Conflict with program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X
2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
4. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Comments to Sections Q(1), (2), (3) and (4):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on transportation as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand.
As such, these programs would not adversely affect transportation.
Potential impacts associated with transportation could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 16
evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
R. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined
in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as
either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape
that is geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape, sacred place,
or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in the
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.
X
Comments to Sections R(1)(i) and (ii):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on tribal cultural resources as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect tribal cultural resources .
Potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 17
S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
2. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
3. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
4. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
5. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
Comments to Sections S(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact on utilities and service systems as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect utilities and service systems.
Potential impacts on utilities and service systems could result from capital and neigh borhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project-specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
T. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
2. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
3. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel, breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 18
If located in or near state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
4. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Comments to Sections T(1), (2), (3) and (4):
Implementation of the action plan prepared for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to have a negative impact associate with wildfires as most of the projects involve public social service programs that do not propose physical changes to the existing built environment. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs would not adversely affect wildfires.
Potential wildfire impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project - specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
U. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. Does the project have the potential to substantial
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
X
2. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
X
3. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
Comments to Sections U(1), (2) and (3):
Implementation of the action plan for the FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG and HOME programs is not anticipated to degrade biological resources or the overall quality of the natural environment; eliminate important historic or prehistoric resources; have environmental effects causing substantial adverse effects on humans; or have cumulatively considerable impacts. In addition, the majority represent a continuation of existing programs that are not proposed to expand. As such, these programs are not considered cumulatively considerable.
Potential cumulative impacts could result from capital and neighborhood improvement projects that are also part of the action plan. However, these projects would be evaluated in subsequent project - specific environmental review under CEQA when specific project data becomes available.
APRIL 2024
FY 2024-2025 CDBG, ESG AND HOME PROGRAMS PAGE 19
13. Earlier Analyses
None
14. Project References Used to Prepare Initial Study Checklist One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by reference, and are available for review in the Planning Division Office, 633 E. Broadway, Rm. 103, Glendale, CA 91206- 4386. Items used are referred to by number on the Initial Study Checklist.
1. Proposed Action Plan prepared by the City of Glendale Community Development and Housing Department for the fiscal year 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), and HOME programs.
2. The City of Glendale’s General Plan, “Open Space and Conservation Element,” as amended.
3. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, Los Angeles County Important Farmland 2010 (September 2011).
4. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42 (Revised 1997, Supplements 1 and 2 added 1999).
5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning (May 2005).
6. City of Glendale, General Plan, “Safety Element” (2003).
7. California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State of California General Plan Guidelines (2017).
8. City of Glendale Municipal Code, as amended.