Glendale City Council
August 13, 2024

A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings are broadcast live on Glendale TV, viewable on Spectrum Cable, channel 6, and AT&T Uverse, channel 99. Meetings are also streamed live in high definition (HD) on the City webpage, glendaleca.gov/live, on YouTube.com/myglendale, and on Apple TV, Roku, Amazon Fire, iOS and Android devices usinga free app called Cablecast and choosing "Glendale TV" from the menu.

Meetings are also archived on the City Website for viewing anytime at glendaleca.gov/agendas.

Call (818) 548-4013 for program schedules. For public comments and questions during the meeting, call (818) 937-8100. Public comments ona specific agenda item will be taken when that agenda item is discussed. If you have any question about matters on the agenda, or requests for assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

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

Translation services are provided for meetings through the use of bilingual staff for speakers who wish to utilize the service as available. Speakers should state their request by contacting the City Clerk’s office at (818) 548-2090, at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting or as soon as practicable. Please specify the language for which you require translation. The exclusive use of City provided interpreters is not required and persons are welcome to use their own interpreter or speak in their native language.

AUGUST 13, 2024

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION – 1:00 PM
a. Conference with Legal Counsel. Anticipated Litigation - Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9:

Two potential cases
1 TYPED 8/8/2024 4:58:59 PM
08 13 24
CC
b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Claim of State Farm Insurance Co. (Ruiz), Claim No. 24-0209
c. Public Employment - Attorneys
d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Najarian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 24STCP02101
e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case
f. Conference with Real Property Negotiators: City-designated negotiators: Bradley Calvert. Property Location: 116-118 California Street. Negotiating Parties: Aro Agakhanyan. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms of payment for the lease of City-owned property

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA – 6:00 PM
Roll Call
a. Flag Salute: Mayor Elen Asatryan
b. Invocation: Dr. Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c. Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the August 13, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on August 8, 2024, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a. Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, August 20, 2024 b. Remarks by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California to discuss Climate Adaptation Master Plan
c. Reappointment/Appointment to the Boards and Commissions (Brotman, 07/30/24) • Chris Lowery, GWP Commission • Alejandro Parajon, Audit Committee • Daniel Paul, Historic Preservation Commission • Stefan Chraghchian, Planning Commission • Erasto Ongkeko Jr., Building and Fire Board of Appeals d. Reappointment/Appointment to the Boards and Commissions (Gharpetian, 07/30/24) • Hrand Avanessian, GWP Commission • Andre Ordubegian, Transportation and Parking Commission

4. CONSENT ITEMS (Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a. City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 16 and Special City Council and Regular City Council Meetings of July 30, 2024 b. Management Services, re: Audit Committee Annual Report and Internal Audit Work Plan
2 TYPED 8/8/2024 4:58:59 PM
08 13 24
CC

1. Motion to note and file Fiscal Year 2023-24 Audit Committee Annual Report for the period of July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

2. Motion to note and file Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan c. Glendale Water and Power, re: Award of a Contract to SECC Corporation for the Construction of a Fiber Optic Line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and execute a contract with SECC Corporation, in the amount of $401,606 plus a 15% contingency in the amount of $60,241 for the Construction of a Fiber Optic Line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon (Specification No. 3979)

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes)

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES
a. Community Development, re: Ordinance Extending, by an Additional One Year, Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 6011 Prohibiting Issuance of Entitlements and/or Permits for Establishment of New or Replacement Retail Uses Selling Firearms or Ammunition (Kassakhian, 07/16/24) (Moved from July 30, 2024 Council Meeting)

8. ACTION ITEMS
a. City Clerk, re: Consideration of support of state bills recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women

1. Motion providing direction on bills as recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women
b. Public Works, re: Urban Forestry Tree Planting and Maintenance Program Contract Increases

1. Resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to amend contract 8000974 for city tree services, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) increasing the contract amount by $40,560 to $11,618,220 for the purpose of planting 104 trees as part of the reimbursable United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service grant subject to budget approval in FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26, and FY 2026-27

2. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a GreenLatinos Urban and Community Forestry Program Subaward Agreement for City of Glendale’s Canopy Improvement to plant 104 trees and perform a comprehensive Citywide canopy assessment
c. Community Development, re: Project Update- Bicycle Transportation Plan (Continued from July 30, 2024. Public Comment Taken on July 30, 2024; No Additional Public Comment Will Be Taken Unless the Matter Substantially Changes.)

1. Motion providing direction on the update of the Bicycle Transportation Plan

9. HEARINGS
a. Community Development, re: Appeal of a Portion of Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue

1. Motion to Sustain Historic Preservation Commission’s Decision to Approve the Project with All Original Conditions of Approval Imposed by Commission 3 TYPED 8/8/2024 4:58:59 PM
08 13 24
CC

2. Motion to Modify the Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Approve the Project by Removal of Two Conditions of Approval

3. Motion to Modify the Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Approve the Project with Any Alternative Combination of Conditions of Approval

4. Motion to Continue the Appeal, Directing the City Attorney to Draft Findings Reversing the Historic Preservation Commission’s Decision and Denying the Project b. Community Development, re: Ordinance Amending Title 30 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, (Case No. PZC-0010-2024) Relating Generally to Standards and Processes for Drive-through Establishments, and Miscellaneous Zoning Code Clean-Ups

1. Ordinance for Introduction

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION
a. City of Glendale Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Update (Moved from July 30 Council Meeting)

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a. Councilmember Najarian’s request to agendize a discussion of a policy for removing items from the agenda after it has been published (Moved from July 30 Council Meeting)

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes.

Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision.

The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT
4 TYPED 8/8/2024 4:58:59 PM
08 13 24
CC
5 of 704
6 of 704
7 of 704
8 of 704
9 of 704
10 of 704
11 of 704
12 of 704
13 of 704
14 of 704
15 of 704
16 of 704
17 of 704
18 of 704
19 of 704
20 of 704
21 of 704
22 of 704
23 of 704
24 of 704
25 of 704
26 of 704
27 of 704
28 of 704
29 of 704
30 of 704
31 of 704
32 of 704
33 of 704
34 of 704
35 of 704
36 of 704
37 of 704
1 A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor Glendale, CA 91206
JULY 16, 2024
ROLL CALL – All Present

1. CLOSED SESSION – 4:08 p.m.
a. Conference with Real Property Negotiators: City-designated negotiators: Roubik Golanian, Bradley Calvert and Onnig Bulanikian. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms of payment for the acquisition of property Property Location No. 1: 220 and 234-236 North Glendale Avenue and 215-217, 223- 225, 231-231A, and 233-235 North Everett Street
Negotiating Parties: Darrin Greitzer, Darrin Greitzer Trust Property Location No. 2: 309 North Orange Street – MGP XII Glendale Central LLC Property Location No. 3: 332 & 336 North Adams. Negotiating Parties: Adamyan Living Trust
Property Location No. 4: 1000 S. Central Avenue – Aria Investments, LLC b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Harden v. City of Glendale, et al., Alameda County Superior Court Case No. 22STCV32090 c. Public Employment - Attorneys
d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Najarian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 24STCP02101
e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9
Items 1b, 1b, and 1e have been pulled. City Attorney Mike Garcia indicated that action is not anticipated. Council recessed to closed session at 4:10 p.m.

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA – 6:00 PM
Roll Call – All Present
a. Flag Salute: children from employees of the Community and Services and Parks Dept. b. Invocation: Aram Adjemian, Asst. City Clerk
c. Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the July 16, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on July 11, 2024, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a. Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, July 23, 2024 There will be no meeting on July 23. The next meeting will be on July 30, 2024. b. Proclamation designating the month of July as Parks Make Life Better Month Community Services Manager, Gabrielle Goglia
c. Presentation by Glendale Water and Power’s New Interactive Customer Engagement Solution through SmartVX
Yancarlo Alcantara, Senior IT Applications Analyst
Varsenik Avetisian, Public Benefits Charge Coordinator
4A
38 of 704
2 4. CONSENT ITEMS (Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.

Item 4b was pulled off from the agenda.
a. City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 9, 2024 Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
a.
b. Public Works, re: Contract Award for 140 N. Isabel Building (Former Police Building) and Civic Center Parking Garage Stairways Painting Project, per Specification No. 3966

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract with Astro Painting Co., Inc., for the 140 N. Isabel Building and Civic Center Parking Garage Stairways Painting Project in the amount of $61,000, plus a 10% contingency of $6,100
c. Glendale Water and Power, re: Amendments to Existing Four Owner’s Engineer (OE) Professional Services Agreements (PSA)

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the City’s existing PSA, Contract No. 8001332, with Electric Power Engineers, Inc. (EPE), for two years and increase the not-to-exceed amount of the PSA by $500,000 to a new not-to-exceed amount of $1,400,000, and authorizing a subsequent oneyear term extension option if there are remaining funds Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
b.

2. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the City’s existing PSA, Contract No. 8001356, with SEL Engineering Services, Inc. (SEL), for two years and increase the not-to exceed amount of the PSA by $300,000 to a new not-to-exceed amount of $1,200,000, and authorizing a subsequent one-year term extension option if there are remaining fund Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
c.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
39 of 704
3 3. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the City’s existing PSA, Contract No. 8001327, with TRC Engineers, Inc. (TRC), for two years and increase the not-to-exceed amount of the PSA by $600,000 to a new not-to-exceed amount of $1,500,000, and authorizing a subsequent one-year term extension option if there are remaining funds
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
d.
e.

4. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 3 to the City’s existing PSA, Contract No. 8001391, with the Worley Group, Inc. (Worley), for two years and increase the not-to-exceed amount of the PSA by $2,000,000 for a new not-to-exceed amount of $4,000,000, and authorizing a subsequent one-year term extension option if there are remaining funds Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
f.
d. Glendale Water and Power, re: Fiber Business Plan Implementation Support; Amendment of Existing PSA with Magellan Advisors

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and execute a one- year Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with EN Engineering, an Entrust Solutions Group company, for fiber business plan implementation support in the not to exceed amount of $349,530, with options to extend it for three additional one-year terms in an amount not to exceed the annual Glendale Water & Power budget approved by the City Council for said services for each annual extension term Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
g.

2. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and execute Amendment No. 2 to the City’s existing Professional Services Agreement (PSA), Contract No. C106909 with Magellan Advisors to extend the term to December 31, 2024
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None 40 of 704
4 e. Public Works, re: Amendment No. 1 to the to the “Agreement for Business and Multi-Family Solid Waste Collection Services in Zone A” Contract R107070 between the City of Glendale and Southland Disposal Company

1. Resolution 24-130 authorizing Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Business and Multi- Family Solid Waste Collection Service in Zone A between the City of Glendale and Southland Disposal Company (Contract R107070) assignment of the agreement to Southland Environmental Services, Inc.

Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
h.

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS
Police Chief Manny Cid invited the public to the National Night Out Event on Tuesday, August 6. He also invited the public to the Glendale Traffic Townhall on August 21 to be held at the Police Community Room.

Councilmember Kassakhian, together with City Manager Roubik Golanian and Mayor Asatryan, attended the Independent Cities Association Conference in San Diego. Kassakhian asked staff to follow closely SB-9. He spoke about the benefits of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Kassakhian announced the passing of Anna Rundle, Tom O’Shaughnessy, and Dr. Edward Marootkhanian. He asked staff to provide a brief report on the land and street improvements for the property located at 1800-1830 Marion Drive. Kassakhian provided his comments regarding the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.

Councilmember Najarian asked for a discussion on a policy regarding the agendizing and publication of agendas.

Councilmember Gharpetian wished everyone a belated 4th of July celebration. He asked to install lighting on Loraine and Viola. He asked staff to provide a brief report on historic lampposts being repainted and repaired. Gharpetian asked staff to investigate any code violation on a property on Ross St. He asked staff to provide more information regarding the traffic report that council members received.

Gharpetian provided his comments on SB-1818. He stated that he would like to have more enforcement on vehicles parked on bike lanes on North Brand Blvd and to bring back the report as soon as possible regarding the North Brand Demonstration Project.

Mayor Asatryan asked staff to have an advocacy day and collaborate with other cities to support a change in the law on the liability policy for condominium developers. She asked council to adjourn in memory of Alline Helm MerchantDymakkus.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
41 of 704
5 6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes; 5-Speaker Limit) – Per Mayor Policy, This Item Also Permits Speakers Wishing to Speak Under General Oral Communications, Subject to the Three Minute Time Limit. Discussion is Limited to Matters Not on the Agenda.

Tamara Movsesyan

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a. Management Services, re: Consideration of Amendment to City’s Investment Policy to Prohibit Investments of City Funds in or Related to the Republic of Azerbaijan
Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Rafi Manoukian, City Treasurer
Public Comments:

Edgar Mkrtchian
Steven Dadaian
Allan Dish

1. Resolution 24-131 Amending the City’s Investment Policy to Prohibit Investments in or Related to the Republic of Azerbaijan and Conducting a Review of all Funds to Ensure Comporance with these Principles
Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
i.
b. Management Services, re: Consideration of the Removal and Replacement of Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Commissioner Frank Quintero Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Public Comment:

Fernando Roldan

1. Motion Removing Frank Quintero from the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Commission

2. Motion Appointing an Individual to Replace Frank Quintero on the Burbank-GlendalePasadena Airport Authority Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
42 of 704
6 3. Motion to Note and File
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
j.

4. Motion to Direct Staff
c. Management Services, re: External Boards and Commissions and Nominations to Hollywood Burbank Airport Citizen's Advisory Committee
Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
John Takhtalian, Asst. City Manager
Public Comment:

Fernando Roldan

1. Motion appointing Mayor Asatryan to replace Ara Najarian on San Fernando Valley Council of Governments –
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Najarian
Vote as Follows
k.

Motion appointing Asst. City Manager John Takhtalian as an alternate Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Najarian
Vote as Follows
l.

2. Motion directing staff on the nomination process to be utilized to select three individuals to serve on Hollywood Burbank Airport Citizen's Advisory Committee Moved: Brotman Seconded: Najarian
Vote as Follows
m.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Kassakhian, Asatryan
Gharpetian, Najarian
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
43 of 704
7 9. HEARINGS
a. Community Development, re: Extension of Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 6011 Prohibiting Issuance of Entitlements and/or Permits for Establishment of New or Replacement Retail Uses Selling Firearms or Ammunition
The hearing opened at 8:28 p.m. and closed at 8:30 p.m.

Staff Comment:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development

1. Ordinance for Introduction Extending, by an Additional One Year, Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 6011 Prohibiting Issuance of Entitlements and/or Permits for Establishment of New or Replacement Retail Uses Selling Firearms or Ammunition Ordinance Introduced by: Kassakhian

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a. Councilmember Najarian’s Request to Review and Discuss Programs or Partnerships to Address Health and Social Challenges Affecting Men Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows
Public Comments:

Allen Dish
Allen S.
b. Councilmember Brotman’s Request for a Report on Default Walk Phases at Signalized Intersections, Including Cost Implications, a Review of Potential Negative Effects and Possible Locations
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
n.

Public Comment:

Fernando Roldan
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
44 of 704
8 13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes. Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision. The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

Aris Mangasarian
Maro Yacoubian

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT – 9:09 p.m., adjourned in memory of Alline Helm Merchant-Dymakkus Moved: Brotman Seconded: Kassakhian
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
Mayor of the City of Glendale
45 of 704
1 M I N U T E S
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
JULY 30, 2024
The Special Public Meeting of the Glendale City Council convened in the City Hall Council Chambers, in said City, at 3:07 p.m. on the above date, pursuant to a call for such meeting signed by the City Clerk of the City Council, and on file with the City Clerk, a copy of which is as follows:

July 24, 2024
Date
A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING of the City Council is hereby called to meet at 3:00 PM on Tuesday, July 30, 2024, in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor, Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Community Development, re: Update on the General Plan’s Land Use, Mobility, and Environmental Justice Elements
a. Motion accepting the status report on the preparation of the Land Use, Mobility, and Environmental Justice Elements, and proposed update to the General Plan Land Use Map, subject to Council comments thereon

2. Community Development, re: Public Hearing for Stage I Preliminary Design Review Case No. PDR-002684-2023 for the Development of a New 40-unit, 5-story MultiFamily Development with 73 parking spaces and Public Open Space Area on a 14,988 square-foot (SF) lot located at 126-128 South Kenwood Street a. Motion to Approve Stage I Preliminary Design Review

3. City Attorney, re: Appointment of Interim General Manager of Glendale Water & Power
a. Resolution Finding the Position of General Manager of Glendale Water & Power to be Available Due to a Leave of Absence Pursuant to Government Code Section 21221(g) and Appointing Manny Robledo as Acting General Manager of Glendale Water & Power
b. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Glendale Appointing Manny Robledo as Interim General Manager of Glendale Water & Power Pursuant to Government Code Section 21221(h)
Written Notice of said meeting was given, which Notice consisted of a copy of the foregoing Call, and was served on each Member of the Council not joining in the Call, and upon the in said City not less than 24 hours before the time fixed in said Call for said meeting, as follows:

Upon Dan Brotman at 5:00 p.m. July 24, 2024 Glendale, CA Upon Vartan Gharpetian at 5:00 p.m. July 24, 2024 Glendale, CA Upon Ardy Kassakhian at 5:00 p.m. July 24, 2024 Glendale, CA Upon Ara Najarian at 5:00 p.m. July 24, 2024 Glendale, CA Upon Elen Asatryan at 5:00 p.m. July 24, 2024 Glendale, CA Mayor Asatryan called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m. 4A
46 of 704
2 ROLL CALL
- Absent: Kassakhian
- Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Tuesday, July 30, 2024 Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on July 24, 2024, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

1. Community Development, re: Update on the General Plan’s Land Use, Mobility, and Environmental Justice Elements
Presenting:

Amanda Tropiano, De Novo Planning Group
Staff Comments:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Vilia Zemaitaitis, Deputy Director of Community Development Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Public Comments:

Kirsten Bladh
Shane Lee
Jamie Del Rio
Item to be continued to August 13 Meeting.
a. Motion accepting the status report on the preparation of the Land Use, Mobility, and Environmental Justice Elements, and proposed update to the General Plan Land Use Map, subject to Council comments thereon

2. Community Development, re: Public Hearing for Stage I Preliminary Design Review Case No. PDR-002684-2023 for the Development of a New 40-unit, 5-story MultiFamily Development with 73 parking spaces and Public Open Space Area on a 14,988 square-foot (SF) lot located at 126-128 South Kenwood Street The hearing opened at 4:40 p.m. and closed at 5:10 p.m.

Presenting:

Vista Ezzati, Principal Planner
Staff Comment:

Jay Platt, Principal Planner
Public Comments:

Rodney Khan, Developer
Ron Mandalian, Architect
Public Comments:

Shane Lee
Julian Hodge
Kirsten Bladh
Francesca Smith
47 of 704
3 Fernando Roldan
Cathy Jurca
a. Motion to Approve Stage I Preliminary Design Review
Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows
a.

3. City Attorney, re: Appointment of Interim General Manager of Glendale Water & Power Staff Comment:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
a. Resolution 24-132 Finding the Position of General Manager of Glendale Water & Power to be Available Due to a Leave of Absence Pursuant to Government Code Section 21221(g) and Appointing Manny Robledo as Acting General Manager of Glendale Water & Power
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
b.
b. Resolution 24-133 of the City Council of the City of Glendale Appointing Manny Robledo as Interim General Manager of Glendale Water & Power Pursuant to Government Code Section 21221(h)
Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Vote as Follows
c.

ADJOURNMENT – 5:29 p.m.

Moved: Brotman Seconded: Gharpetian
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
Mayor of the City of Glendale
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
48 of 704
1 M I N U T E S

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor Glendale, CA 91206
JULY 30, 2024

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION
a. Conference with Legal Counsel. Anticipated Litigation - Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9:

Two potential cases
b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Claim of State Farm Insurance Co. (Ruiz), Claim No. 24-0209
c. Public Employment - Attorneys
d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Najarian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 24STCP02101
e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9.

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA – 6:07 PM
Roll Call – Absent: Kassakhian
a. Flag Salute: Hwarang Youth Foundation
b. Invocation: Rev. Steve Wiebe, Glendale Presbyterian Church c. Agenda. The Agenda for the July 30, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on July 24, 2024, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a. Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, August 6, 2024 There will be no meeting on August 6 and will resume on August 13, 2024 b. Proclamation Designating July 30, 2024, as Korean Comfort Women Day Chang Y Lee, Korea Glendale Sister City Association
Phyllis Kim, CARE
Monica Jun, Art Exhibit Curator
Donggeon Kim and peers, Hwarang Youth Foundation
c. Proclamation Designating July 2024, as Disability Pride Month Nancy Niebrugge, Campbell Center
Linda Derian and Salpy Poladian, Homenetmen Western USA Regional Executive Board Srbui Ovsepyan and Syuzanna Mejlumyan, Frank D. Lanterman Regional Center

4. CONSENT ITEMS (Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a. City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of July 16, 2024 Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows
4A
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
49 of 704
2 b. Glendale Water and Power, re: Award of a Design-Build Contract for the Chilton/Kenneth Phase I Pipeline Replacement Project (RFP No. 3938)

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and execute a design-build contract with J. De Sigio Construction, Inc. of Baldwin Park, CA, for the Chilton/Kenneth Phase I Pipeline Replacement Project (RFP No. 3938), in the amount of $6,636,490 plus a ten (10) percent contingency of $663,649 Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS
Councilmember Brotman renominated Chris Lowery for the GWP Commission, Alejandro Parajon for the Audit Committee, Daniel Paul for the Historic Preservation Commission, Stefan Chraghchian for the Planning Commission, Regina Joy Alcazar for the Parks, Recreation & Community Services Commission, and nominated JR Ongkeko for the Building and Fire Board of Appeals.

Councilmember Gharpetian nominated Hrand Avanessian for the GWP Commission and Andre Ordubegian for the Transportation and Parking Commission.

Councilmember Najarian was appointed to be the President of the Hollywood Burbank Airport Commission. He provided a brief update on the renovation of the airport. Najarian was invited to go to Paris, France, by the Olympics Committee, City of Los Angeles, and County of Los Angeles to meet with Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and French President Emmanuel Macron and to attend the closing ceremony of Paris Olympics.

Mayor Asatryan looks forward to the completion of the Fremont Park Renovation Project. She asked staff to provide multi-use tables in the park and to have a demonstration garden as an educational tool about native plants. Asatryan asked staff to set up a meeting with small businesses to discuss the permitting processes and to stay up to date on issues that are coming up to council for a vote that will affect them. She had a meeting with each of the Armenian archbishops and Filipino priests and wanted to have an interfaith roundtable to discuss the events that are happening in our community and to bring the different faiths together. Asatryan asked staff to prepare an informational resource packet for Glendale residents who came from Artsakh. She asked staff to look into how the city is also assisting those who are in need and to create partnerships to make sure these projects are not overlooked.

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENT (3-Minutes; 5-Speaker Limit) – Per Mayor Policy, This Item Also Permits Speakers Wishing to Speak Under General Oral Communications, Subject to the Three Minute Time Limit. Discussion is Limited to Matters Not on the Agenda.

Susan Broussalian
Tony Passarella
Mike Mohill
Patrick Murphy
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
50 of 704
3 Maro Yacoubian

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES
a. City Attorney, re: Ordinance 6029 Amending Section 2.36.010 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, Pertaining to Terms of Board Members and Commissioners (Gharpetian, 07/16/24)
Moved: Gharpetian Seconded: Najarian
Vote as Follows
b. Community Development, re: Ordinance 6030 Extending, by an Additional One Year, Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 6011 Prohibiting Issuance of Entitlements and/or Permits for Establishment of New or Replacement Retail Uses Selling Firearms or Ammunition (Kassakhian, 07/16/24)
Staff Comment:

Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Item 7b moved to the August 13 Meeting.

8. ACTION ITEMS
a. Management Services, re: Building Electrification Reach Code Replacement Options
Presenting:

David Jones, Sustainability Officer
Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Public Comments:

Ryan Gardner, Rincon Consultants
Winston Thorne
Cole Bazemore
Kate Unger
Danielle Lemone
Maya Turre
The motion provided by council members did not pass. The item will be continued to the August 13 Council Meeting.

1. Motion directing staff to prepare an alternative reach code to replace Section 4.1(b), subsection 4.106.5 and Section 5.106.13 of the local amendments to the California Energy Code
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
Brotman
Kassakhian
None
51 of 704
4 Agenda out of order. Item 9a is next.
b. Community Development, re: Project Update- Bicycle Transportation Plan Staff Comments:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Presenting:

Sam Frommer, Buro Happold Consultant
Public Comments:

Chris Antoine
Alex Calleros
Shana Bonstin
Susa Broussalian
Andre Ordubegian
David Gish
Jackie Gish
Cole Bazemore
Mike Mohill
Kirsten Bladh
Jan Purdy
Tony Sardo
Henry Astengo
Sam Conrad
Mary Sharp
Donna Libra
Mari Falcone Cantos
Alex Balekian
Cheryl Wales
Corey DeCola
Charlie Campagna
Ina Jean Barger
Dorothy Melendy
Sonia Silva
Ian Kose
Azatowhie Varvarian
Tim Berry
Julia Kobie
Heather Kokorowski
Justice Bishop
Kevork Kurdgohlian
Lisa Cusack
Oliva Ramirez
Paul Rabinov
Grey James
Lynda Beck
Matthew Utsunomiya
Brenna Cancilla
Alexander Thomas
52 of 704
5 Robert Karwasky
Carlo Hakopian
Eli Gathrie
Burt Culver
Matthew Taylor
J Kurt
Dan Bednarski
Ramella Eraghi
Hared Ochoa
Paul Berolzheimer
Weslie Lechner
Andrew Zadouruian
Patrik Parbi Khan Babei
Kyle Bogosian
Patrick Adair
Alek Bartrosouf
Frank Villarreal
Daniel Minshall
Damian Kevitt
Peter Hebert
Alex Amerni
Susie Yankou
Lilya Avagyan
K.B.

Patrick Murphy
Rita Koechowski
Jill Zappia
David Trolango
Vivian Kanchian
Sarkis Terminasian
Don Labresh
Judy Shlegel
David Gallagher
Ana Pabuena-Ruddy
Item to be continued to the August 13 Council Meeting.

1. Motion providing direction on the update of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Item 8c moved to the August 20 Council Meeting.
c. Community Development, re: Initiation of Code Amendments to Title 30 of the Glendale Municipal Code Related to Development Standards for Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units

1. Motion Providing Direction for and Initiating Amendments to Title 30 of the Glendale Municipal Code Related to Development Standards for Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
53 of 704
6 Item 8d moved to the August 13 Council Meeting.
d. Public Works, re: Glendale Beeline Comprehensive Operational Analysis and Integration Study

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a PSA with Dan Boyle & Associates LLC for a Beeline comprehensive operational analysis and integration study in an amount not to exceed $392,139

2. Resolution of appropriation of $150,000 in State Grant and Measure M Local Return funds for the integration study

9. HEARINGS
a. Fire Department, re: Weed abatement charges for FY 2023-2024 The hearing opened at 8:35 p.m. and closed at 8:40 p.m.

Staff Comment:

Roubik Golanian, City Manager

1. Resolution 24-134 confirming weed abatement charges
Moved: Gharpetian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows
The meeting recessed at 8:45 p.m. and reconvened in five minutes.

Item 10a moved to the August 13 Council Meeting.

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION
a. City of Glendale Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Update

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Item 12a moved to the August 13 Council Meeting.

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a. Councilmember Najarian’s request to agendize a discussion of a policy for removing items from the agenda after it has been published

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes. Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision. The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

Aris Mangasarian
Araik Sinanian

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT – 2:20 a.m.

Moved: Najarian Seconded: Brotman
City Clerk of the City of Glendale Mayor of the City of Glendale Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
Kassakhian
None
54 of 704
4b

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Audit Committee Annual Report and Internal Audit Work Plan

1. Motion to note and file Fiscal Year 2023-24 Audit Committee Annual Report for the period of July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

2. Motion to note and file Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 13, 2024 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Each year, the Audit Committee must report its actions and activities to the City Council per Glendale Municipal Code Section 2.82.100 (D). The Audit Committee met four times during Fiscal Year 2023-24 where they were provided with financial updates and internal audit activity reports. Additionally, each year, Internal Audit must prepare an audit work plan based on a risk assessment per Glendale Municipal Code section 2.08.130 (A). This risk-based work plan is used to identify and prioritize high risk areas to select and schedule audits. The Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan was reviewed by the Audit Committee at its July 25, 2024 meeting as required by Glendale Municipal Code section 2.82.100 (B). This Work Plan is comprised of 19 projects. 55 of 704
b 2 4

RECOMMENDATION
Note and file the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Audit Committee Annual Report and the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan.

ANALYSIS
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Audit Committee Annual Report
Each year, the Audit Committee must report its actions and activities to the City Council per Glendale Municipal Code Section 2.82.100 (D). At its July 25, 2024 meeting, the Audit Committee approved its Fiscal Year 2023-24 Report (Exhibit 1), which covers the actions and activities of the Audit Committee for the period of July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. Currently, the Audit Committee is presenting this report to the City Council to satisfy the requirements of the Glendale Municipal Code. The Audit Committee met four times during Fiscal Year 2023-24 where they were provided with financial updates and internal audit activity reports:
• The financial activities completed by the Audit Committee include review of the City’s financial statement audit as of and for the year ending June 30, 2023, examination of the external auditor’s communication on significant audit findings, and review of other financial reports provided by Finance staff.
• The internal audit activities completed by the Audit Committee include review of Fiscal Year 2023-24 Internal Audit Work Plan, review of issued internal audit reports, review of the status of audit follow-up activities including discussion of any audit recommendations not being implemented within two and three years of audit report issuance, and the decision of not implementing an audit recommendation by management.

Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan
Each year, Internal Audit must prepare an audit work plan based on a risk assessment per Glendale Municipal Code section 2.08.130 (A). Internal Audit’s plan of engagements is developed following a risk-based model that includes an annual risk assessment process and a quantitative methodology that assigns a weighted risk value to each potential audit subject area in the City. This risk-based work plan is used to identify and prioritize high risk areas to select and schedule audits. This work plan is a flexible and dynamic document that will be amended throughout the year in response to the changes in risks and priorities. The ongoing risk assessment will be performed through a continuous risk assessment approach and regular communications with management and the Audit Committee.

The risk assessment process includes reviewing and updating potential audit topics through discussions with key management personnel by gathering information on the operating environment on a bi-annual basis. These potential audit topics are evaluated and rated for impact and likelihood in the four risk categories of financial, compliance, strategic and operational. The final risk ranking considers factors such as the City’s 56 of 704
b 3 4
strategic goals and objectives, executive management’s specific concerns, explicit management requests, significant changes in operations, key areas not previously audited, and available staff resources. The plan is reviewed with the City Manager and Audit Committee prior to being presented to City Council.

The Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan (Exhibit 2) was reviewed by the Audit Committee at its July 25, 2024 meeting as required by Glendale Municipal Code section 2.82.100 (B). The Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan is comprised of 19 projects, including one carried-over project, four new and re-selected projects, three recurring projects, and 11 continuous auditing/on-going advisory assignments. In addition, four potential projects are included within this work plan and may be performed due to changes in risks and priorities, or if all the planned audits are completed prior to the next year’s work plan development.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not Applicable

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Not Applicable

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Roubik R. Golanian, City Manager
Prepared by:

Natalie Minami-Valdivia, Principal Internal Auditor
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 - Fiscal Year 2023-24 Audit Committee Annual Report Exhibit 2 - Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Audit Work Plan 57 of 704

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________________, that the Annual Report prepared by the Audit Committee be hereby approved and accepted and is ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:
58 of 704

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________________, that the Annual Internal Audit Work Plan prepared by the Audit Committee be hereby approved and accepted and is ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:
59 of 704
Exhibit 1
60 of 704
61 of 704
City of Glendale
Internal Audit
FY 2025 Proposed Work Plan
Exhibit 2
Ref.# Audit Subject Area Department Audit Type
1 PCI Compliance Audit 3 CTD Compliance
1 Workers' Compensation Disability Settlement Process Audit HRD Contract Compliance 2 Take Home and City Assigned Vehicle Usage Audit MSD Performance 3 Security Assessment Follow-Up Audit ITD Performance
4 PCI Compliance Audit 1 CTD Compliance
5 PCI Compliance Audit 2 CTD Compliance
6 PCI Compliance Audit 3 CTD Compliance
7 Revenue Collection Audit FIN Performance
CA1 User Access Control (AD) ITD Periodic
CA2 Duplicate Payments FIN Periodic
CA3 Procurement Cards FIN Periodic
CA4 Double Dipping between Procurement Cards and Employee Expense Claims FIN Periodic CA5 Physical Access Control PWD Periodic
CA6 User Access Control (APP) ANY As Needed
CR1 Risk Assessment - Vendor Risk Assessment ALL Periodic CR2 Risk Assessment - Overtime ALL Periodic
T1 Energy Risk Management Committee GWP Advisory
T2 Investment Policy Advisory Committee CTD Advisory
T3 PCI Compliance Team CTD Advisory
O1 Public Benefits Program Audit GWP Performance
O2 Disaster Recovery Plan Audit ITD Compliance
O3 Facilities Management Operations - Building Access/Security Audit GPD System O4 Vendor Access Control Audit ITD Performance
Carried-Over Project from FY 2024 to FY 2025
Projects Planned for FY 2025
Continuous and On-Going Advisory Projects
Total Planned Projects for FY 2025: 19
Other Potential Projects:
62 of 704
4c

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Award of Contract to SECC Corporation for the Construction of a Fiber Optic Line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon.

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to enter into and execute a contract with SECC Corporation, in the amount of $401,606 plus a 15% contingency in the amount of $60,241 for the Construction of a Fiber Optic Line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon (Specification No. 3979).

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for August 13, 2024 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 13, 2016, the City Council approved the Fiber Business Plan (Plan) that recommended GWP increase its presence in Glendale’s telecommunications market by creating a new network with a service offering for business customers marketed/sold either directly to the end user customer or indirectly through resellers and other service providers. The service offering will include Dark Fiber, Switched Ethernet, and Direct Internet Access. As part of the Plan, the transport network and fiber connection between City data centers and the Internet hub at One Wilshire building in Los Angeles has been completed. Construction of the fiber optic backbone of the network is complete for the most part, except for a small section crossing the railroad tracks across Sonora Avenue at Air Way. GWP’s goal is to further extend the network by installing a new fiber optic communication line to meet the communication needs of Scholl Canyon Parks and Facilities.

On April 30, 2024, the City Council adopted Specification No. 3979 for the extension of the fiber optic line to the parks and facilities in Scholl Canyon (Project), and authorized the City Clerk to advertise for bids. This new fiber line can be used for providing fiber services to community facilities such as Glenoaks Elementary School, Glenoaks Park, Lower Scholl Canyon Park, Scholl Canyon Ball Fields and the Scholl Canyon Landfill Facilities. The new fiber line can be extended in the future to the City of Pasadena. 63 of 704
c 2 4

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to enter into and execute a contract with SECC Corporation (SECC), in the amount of $401,606 plus a 15% contingency in the amount of $60,241 for the construction of the fiber optic line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon.

ANALYSIS
Currently, the Scholl Canyon area that includes several parks, school and the landfill facility does not have access to fiber optic services from the City. This Project is designed to bring fiber optic services to the larger Scholl Canyon area to meet the communication needs of school, parks, ball fields and the new power generation facility at the Scholl Landfill site. Furthermore, this new communication line can be extended, in the future, to the Mirador Radio Tower in Pasadena which is to the east of the Landfill site to establish a direct fiber optic connection with the City of Pasadena (SchollPasadena Extension).

GWP had tasked one of their Owner’s Engineers, Electrical and Power Engineers (EPE Inc.) to prepare the design and construction plan for installing this proposed Project. EPE Inc. completed the plans and construction package for this Project earlier this year, and they were adopted by the City Council on April 30, 2024, as Specification No. 3979. The proposed Project will use GWP’ s existing infrastructure such as pole lines and underground vaults and conduits to install the fiber optic cable.

The Plan envisages communication line to the new Biogas Renewable Generation Power Plant as well as the Scholl Ball Fields. Furthermore, the design makes provisions for future fiber services to Glenoaks Elementary School, Glenoaks Park, and Lower Scholl Canyon Park. The Owner’s Engineer’s original estimate for this Project was $500,000.

GWP staff issued Specification No. 3979 seeking bids from qualified contractors to install the fiber line extension to Scholl Canyon. The Project was advertised in the local newspaper as well as the industry bid site beaconbid.com. Even though the mandatory pre-bid meeting was attended by three contractors, GWP received only two bids, one from HP Communications for $252,926 and the other from SECC for $401,606. Even though HP Communications was the lowest bidder, their bid was incomplete and non-responsive, and was rejected due to not meeting the requirements of the specifications. HP Communications did not meet the bid requirements since they did not provide any bid bond, any experience details about prior projects completed, or the contractor safety questionnaire.

The bid from SECC for $401,606 is approximately 8% below the Owner’s Engineer’s estimate. Staff recommends awarding the contract to SECC based on their experience completing similar projects for public and private clients such as the City of Ontario, the City of Anaheim, San Bernardino Unified School District, AT&T, Frontier Communications, and Edison Carrier Solutions (ECS). Staff has received excellent feedback about SECC’s work from some of their clients including the City of Ontario and ECS. SECC has been on contract with the City of Ontario for over seven years and has worked on their “OntarioNet” project.
64 of 704
c 3 4

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not Applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed contract with SECC for constructing the fiber optic line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon will cost $401,606 plus 15% contingency of $60,241 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $461,847. The funds for this project have been budgeted in GWP’s capital budget for FY 2024-25. No new appropriation is being requested at this time. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$461,847 GL 43110-5830-GWP-0020
PL E30072
Electric Depreciation
Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 - Class 3 New construction or conversion of small structures, as it proposes to construct a fiber/utility extension to the Parks and Facilities at Scholl Canyon.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not applicable.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Decline to award the contract to SECC Corporation to construct the fiber optic line to the Parks and Facilities at Scholl Canyon, which will adversely impact GWP’ s ability to provide fiber optic services to Scholl Canyon area and to operate and maintain the new generation facility.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Mark Young, General Manager - Glendale Water and Power
Prepared by:

Daniel Scorza, P.E., Assistant General Manager - Electric Varghese George, P.E., Senior Electrical Engineer/Fiber Services Manager Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
None.
65 of 704

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member __________________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale finds that SECC Corporation is the lowest responsive bidder to furnish labor, equipment and materials for the Construction of a Fiber Optic Line to the Parks and Facilities in Scholl Canyon, Specification No. 3979, and that the bid of SECC Corporation is hereby accepted and approved as recommended by the General Manager of Glendale Water & Power in the Report dated August 13, 2024, and that all other bids be, and are, hereby rejected. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to execute a contract with SECC Corporation for a not-to-exceed amount of $401,606 plus a fifteen percent (15%) contingency of $60,241, subject to approval by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
66 of 704
1 ORDINANCE NO. _______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING, BY AN ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR, INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 6011 PROHIBITING ISSUANCE

OF ENTITLEMENTS AND/OR PERMITS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW OR

REPLACEMENT RETAIL USES SELLING FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION

AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the California Constitution, the Glendale City Charter, and the State Planning and Zoning Law (California Government Code Sections 6500, et seq.) broadly empower the City of Glendale ("City") to plan for and regulate the use of land in order to provide for orderly development, the public health, safety and welfare and a balancing of property rights and desires of the community; and WHEREAS, Governments at all levels have a substantial interest in protecting the people from those who acquire guns lawfully or illegally and then use them to commit crimes resulting in injury or death of their victims, or who use them in the commission of other crimes such as robbery, sexual assault or homicide, particularly mass shootings such as those that have occurred since 2017 in Chicago, Illinois; Thousand Oaks, California; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Perryman, Maryland; Bakersfield, California; Cincinnati, Ohio; Annapolis, Maryland; Santa Fe, Texas; Nashville, Tennessee; Parkland, Florida; Melcroft, Pennsylvania; Rancho Tehama, California; Sutherland Springs, Texas; Boulder, Colorado; Edgewood, Maryland; Las Vegas, Nevada; El Paso, Texas; Buffalo, New York; Uvalde, Texas, as well as the many other mass shootings over the past several years; and
WHEREAS, seven (7) retail establishments that are licensed to sell firearms and ammunition currently operate in the City of Glendale [1 per 27,480 residents], while neighboring cities of Pasadena and Los Angeles have three (3) [1 per 47,339 residents] and thirty-six (36) [1 per 110,277 residents], respectively; the City of Glendale has a much higher concentration of firearms/ammunition retailers than these two neighboring cities, second only to the City of Burbank (a city that imposed a similar firearms/ammunition retailer moratorium), that has fourteen (14) retail establishments that are licensed to sell firearms and ammunition [1 per 7,386 residents]; and
WHEREAS under the City’s current zoning regulations retail firearm stores are allowed by-right in the Commercial Districts of C2, C3, CR, and CH zone, and Mixed-Use Districts of IMU and IMU-R, and firearm retailers simply require a business registration certificate and a permit from the Chief of Police, neither of which have a mechanism to impose distancing requirements or other land use conditions related to health and safety; and
67 of 704
2 WHEREAS, many of the commercial zones where existing and future retail firearm stores are located are adjacent to residential neighborhoods and other uses that include amongst other things, schools, child day care facilities, places of public assembly including places of worship, public parks and libraries; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution to make and enforce all local, police, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; and
WHEREAS the City Council finds and declares that it has questions and concerns about the proliferation of this type of land use in the City, adjacent to residential neighborhoods and in proximity to schools, child day care facilities and places of public assembly and seeks to analyze the current regulations and alternative regulations and administrative procedures to ensure the future locations of retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunitions do not detrimentally impact the health, safety and welfare of residential neighborhoods and other, specific uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is necessary for the City staff to study, develop, and propose for review by the Planning Commission and adoption by the City Council regulations within a reasonable time regarding the disallowance of a land use for the retail sales of firearms and ammunition, a conditional use permit requirement for such use, and/or additional land use regulations for the use in the City of Glendale; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that given the potential deleterious effect an otherwise lawful but unregulated business selling ammunition or firearms can have on other incompatible neighboring uses, passage of this extension Interim Urgency Ordinance will provide City staff sufficient time to research this issue and present a comprehensive zoning proposal to help ensure that the establishment of a retail sales use engaged in the sale of firearms or ammunition within the City will not be located as to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that other California cities have adopted zoning ordinances and business regulations that govern the sales of ammunition and firearms, and several municipalities, have adopted moratoria on an urgency basis prohibiting new commercial sales of ammunition or firearms while such ordinances or regulations are studied and considered; and
WHEREAS, in the absence of a moratorium, there is no way to study and consider the appropriate location of retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City, and the nature and extent of health and safety regulations that could be imposed on such businesses due to the nature of the products they sell in relation to neighboring uses, thus impairing the City’s substantial interests in economically sustainable development, health, public safety, vitality, and image of the City; and WHEREAS, maintaining the status quo with respect to retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City by assuring that no applications for developments 68 of 704
3 that contain uses or standards with new or converted retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City are accepted, processed or approved, and no building permits for new or converted retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City are issued while the City conducts a study of such use(s), is consistent with good planning; and
WHEREAS, during the course of the effective date of Ordinance No. 6011, Community Development Department staff have reviewed and analyzed current standards for retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City and, following such study, determined that additional studies are warranted that may require consultation with experts and the retention of various consultants. Until this additional policy study is complete, and any new regulations are adopted, there is a significant risk that some individuals or entities may make investments in and/or obtain approval to develop new gun stores that would soon thereafter be illegal, nonconforming, or subject to an amortization program; and
WHEREAS, during this period of study and process, the City has and will continue to thoroughly study and examine the potential physical, social and environmental impacts of new and existing retail establishments that sell firearms and ammunition in the City, the impact of the current permitted locations/standards, and other land use standards and requirements on such development, including, but not limited to, whether there is a need for additional such establishments in the City or whether such establishments should be subject to the requirement to obtain a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the potential exists that applications for proposed retail uses selling firearms or ammunition that are inconsistent and in conflict with any new development policies, zoning, or revised standards of property development may be filed during the term that the City is studying potential revisions to such uses; and WHEREAS, any approval of new or converted retail uses selling firearms or ammunition in the City has the potential to contravene future revised use, development and entitlement standards and requirements, while such revisions are being studied, which will result in a threat to the health, safety and general welfare of residents in the City; and
WHEREAS, on July 25 and August 15, 2023, the City evaluated the potential environmental effects of adoption of Interim Ordinance No. 6009 temporarily barring new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition in the City of Glendale within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and subsequently, on September 19 and 26, 2023 the City evaluated the potential environmental effects of adoption of Interim Ordinance No. 6011 (extending Interim Ordinance No. 6009 for an additional 10 months and 15 days), and the Council found that the adoption of both ordinances was consistent with classes of projects that do not have a significant effect on the environment and thereby approved a Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), 15307, and 15308, and certified that Interim Ordinance 69 of 704
4 Nos. 6009 and 6011 were exempt from additional environmental review, including from the preparation of an environmental impact report; and
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2023, the City Council, by a fourth-fifths vote, adopted Interim Ordinance No. 6009 imposing a 45-day moratorium on the approval of any new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition in the City; and WHEREAS, on or before September 19, 2023, the City issued a "10-day report" describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions that led to the adoption of Interim Ordinance No. 6009, which date was at least 10 days prior to the expiration of said Ordinance, as required by Government Code Section 65858(d); and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2023 following a duly-noticed public hearing, the City Council, by a fourth-fifths vote, adopted Interim Ordinance No. 6011 extending Interim Ordinance No. 6009 by an additional 10 months and 15 days; and WHEREAS, in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare, it is now necessary for the City to extend Interim Ordinance No. 6011 by an additional one year in order to continue to undertake action to review and revise applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Code (Title 30 of the Glendale Municipal Code) and/or other sections of the Code, in order to provide for the reexamination within a reasonable time, of development and entitlement standards and requirements for new or replacement retail uses selling firearms and ammunition; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 provides that a city council may adopt by a four-fifths vote as an urgency measure an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a general plan or zoning measure that the city is considering or studying, or intends to study within a reasonable time, for 45 days, and may extend such moratorium following notice and public hearing for an additional 10 months and 15 days and then for an additional one year period; and WHEREAS, the moratorium and extension of Interim Ordinance No. 6011 on new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition within the City of Glendale will prevent changes to the existing physical environment within the city, and therefore, will not result in significant environmental impacts under CEQA, which are made in comparison to existing physical conditions (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15125(a) and 15126.2(a)); and
WHEREAS, notice of the date, time and place of the public hearing for this Ordinance to extend Interim Ordinance No. 6011 for an additional one year was given pursuant to Government Code Sections 65090 and 65858, by publication in Glendale News Press on July 6, 2024, and by posting and making available all written materials referenced herein, which notified the public the City would be considering a oneyear extension of the adopted Interim Ordinance No. 6011 imposing a moratorium on all new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition within the City of Glendale. 70 of 704
5 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings.

The City Council finds, determines, and declares that:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full.

2. The City’s Community Development Department staff have fully evaluated the potential environmental effects of adoption of this Interim Ordinance temporarily barring new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition within the City of Glendale within the meaning of and pursuant to CEQA, and the City Council finds that this action is consistent with classes of projects that do not have a significant effect on the environment and thereby approves a Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308, and certifies that this Interim Ordinance is exempt from the requirement of further environmental review or the preparation of an environmental document.

3. The City has an overriding interest in planning and regulating land uses and other projects within the City. Implicit in any plan or regulation is the City’s interest in maintaining the quality of urban life and the character of the City’s neighborhoods, as well as maintaining compatibility of uses with surrounding land uses, and promoting economically sustainable development, community health, and perceptions of safety and public image.

4. Without stable, well-planned neighborhoods, areas of the City can quickly deteriorate, with negative consequences to social, environmental, and economic values.

5. The City has adopted a General Plan and various specific plans, to ensure a well-planned and safe community.

6. The City does not have adequate regulations concerning the land use or licensing requirements for the retail sale of firearms and ammunition, allowing this use as a permitted use in several zones, without consideration of location and/or proximity to other affected land uses or other conditions, and subject only to a business registration certificate and a revokable permit for the Retail Sales of Concealable Weapons.

7. Maintaining the status quo zoning regulations has the potential to result in the further proliferation of new or replacement retail uses that sell firearms or ammunition without the proper analysis of any potential impacts to public health, safety, and welfare.

By studying and analyzing local land use regulations for the retail sale of firearms and ammunition during the moratorium, the City will be able to best tailor future regulations to the needs of its community in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare. 71 of 704
6 8. The current regulations have the potential to result in new or replacement gun or ammunition retail stores that can displace other neighborhood-serving retail and service commercial uses from tenant spaces and therefore create a threat to critical commercial corridors and the City’s effort to preserve aesthetically inviting storefronts and pedestrian- friendly retail, restaurants and offices in such spaces, which have historically been the lifeblood of the community and a beacon to visitors.

9. In Suter v. City of Lafayette, 57 Cal. App. 4th 1109 (1997), the California Court of Appeal held that State law authorizes local governments to impose additional licensing requirements on firearms and ammunition dealers.

10. This moratorium is necessary to prevent irreversible issuance of permits, business licenses, and developments that could have a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Without it, the potential exists that establishment of new or replacement commercial operations engaged in the retail sale of firearms or ammunition within the City without addressing appropriate regulation could result in incompatibility of land uses and adverse impacts on residents, businesses and neighborhoods that present a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare.

SECTION 2. Moratorium.

1. There is hereby imposed a one year extension of Interim Ordinance No. 6011, imposing a moratorium that prohibits the establishment of new or replacement stores, shops, establishments or other locations throughout the City that engage in “Firearms, weapon sales”, as defined in Glendale Municipal Code section 30.70.070 [“’Firearms, weapon sales’ means the retail sales of guns, ammunition, and related products and accessories.“] (hereinafter, “New or Replacement Gun Store Project”). For purposes of this moratorium the following definitions apply:
a. “Firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun or other device, designed to be used as a weapon, from which a projectile is expelled through a barrel by the force of an explosion or other form of combustion, or any device which is capable of being altered so as to expel a projectile in such manner.
b. “Ammunition” shall mean any projectile designed to be expelled through the barrel of a firearm by the force of an explosion or other form of combustion.

2. Any application(s) for approval(s) of a New or Replacement Gun Store Project which has been accepted as complete may continue to be processed and reviewed, but shall not be finally approved during the pendency of this moratorium or any extensions thereof.
72 of 704
7 3. Said moratorium shall not apply to any New or Replacement Gun Store Project that has received all land use entitlements prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, and shall not apply to any subsequent approvals or project modifications to a project previously approved by the City.

4. It is the intent of the City Council that any proposal for a New or Replacement Gun Store Project in the City during the period of the moratorium shall be considered inconsistent with this Ordinance and with the City’s land use policies and zoning regulations for all purposes, and by all agencies charged with reviewing any application for such use except as specifically exempted in Section 3 above.

5. City staff is directed to undertake a comprehensive study, as described above, and recommend new or amended policies, Zoning Code amendments, and/or other Code amendments with respect to uses and development of new or replacement retail uses selling firearms or ammunition for consideration by the City Council.

6. Violations of this interim moratorium may be charged as a misdemeanor as set forth in Glendale Municipal Code Section 1.20.010, may be the subject of administrative code enforcement remedies as set forth in Chapter 1.24 of the Glendale Municipal Code, or may be deemed a public nuisance and may be enforced by an action for injunction or civil penalties as provided in the Glendale Municipal Code, or by any other remedy authorized by law.

7. The Glendale City Manager is hereby authorized to direct all City Departments, including the Community Development Department, the Police Department, and City Attorney, to facilitate compliance with the purpose and intent of this Interim Ordinance using the enforcement powers described in the preceding paragraph.

SECTION 3. Urgency.

By the City Council's making the findings and determinations of fact which the Council declares to constitute an urgency for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety or welfare, the City Council hereby declares that this Ordinance is an urgency measure pursuant to City of Glendale Charter Article 6, Section 7 and Government Code Section 65858, which becomes effective immediately upon adoption by an affirmative vote of at least four-fifths (4/5ths) of the members of the City Council.

SECTION 4. Severability.

This Ordinance's provisions are severable. If any portion of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional, that decision does not affect the validity of the Ordinance's remaining portions and the Ordinance's application to other persons and circumstances. The City Council declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance without the invalid or unconstitutional provision.
73 of 704
8 SECTION 5. Adoption and Incorporation.

The findings and information contained in the City Council staff reports dated July 25, 2023, September 19, 2023 and July 16, 2024, are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

SECTION 6. Effectiveness.

This Ordinance shall go into effect upon the expiration of Interim Ordinance No. 6011 and shall be of no further force and effect one year from the expiration date of Interim Ordinance No. 6011, unless otherwise lawfully reenacted or extended by further action of the City Council.

SECTION 7. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify this Ordinance’s adoption and cause the Ordinance to be published in a manner consistent with the requirements of applicable state and local law.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale on the ____ day of ________, 2024.
___________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
74 of 704
9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. _________ was adopted by a 4/5ths vote of the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the _____ day of _________________, 2024, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
___________________________________
City Clerk
75 of 704
8a

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Consideration of support of state bills recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women

1. Motion providing direction on bills as recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for August 13, 2024 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report asks City Council to consider six state bills for support as recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women.
76 of 704
2 8a

RECOMMENDATION
Staff seeks City Council’s direction on support for legislation recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women.

ANALYSIS
As an advisory board to the City Council, one of the functions of the Commission on the Status of Women is policy recommendation. The Commission is committed to being informed about current and impending issues, policies, and legislation relevant to the well-being of women and girls in order to make recommendations of support or opposition on such issues, policies, and legislation to City Council. As part of this function, the Commission monitors legislation on the state and federal levels that impact and affect women and girls, and advises and advocates on these issues.

At this time, the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) is recommending support of six bills to Council for their approval on behalf of the City of Glendale. These bills were recommended based on the CSW’s adopted legislative platform, which reflects the following priorities:

1. Women in the Workplace

2. Women’s Health

3. Women’s Safety

4. Women in the Budget

5. Women in the Military and Military Families

6. Women in Postsecondary Education
For the 2024 year, the State Legislature returned on January 3, 2024 to begin the second year of the two-year legislative session, and had until February 16 to introduce new legislation. For newly-introduced bills, the Legislature had until May 24, 2024 to pass bills out of the house of origin. The Legislature has until August 31, 2024 to pass bills and send them to the Governor for his signature.

On May 13, 2024, the Commission on the Status of Women, voted to recommend support of state bills. The six bills supported and recommended by CSW still pending include:

AB 2295 (Addis) Crimes: Commencement of prosecution.

This bill removes the statute of limitations for criminal cases involving sexual abuse where the victim was a minor at the time of the offense.

Status: Senate Appropriations Committee: Suspense File
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT
AB 2319 (Wilson) California Dignity in Pregnancy and Childbirth Act.

This bill requires all personnel who are regularly assigned to positions where they interact with perinatal patients to receive implicit bias training. The bill is sponsored by 77 of 704
3 8a
the State Attorney General’s Office and supported by the California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls.

Status: Senate Appropriations Committee: Suspense File
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT
AB 2339 (Aguiar-Curry) Medi-Cal: Telehealth.

This bill extends tele-health for reproductive healthcare to Medi-Cal patients.

Status: Senate Floor
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT
AB 2467 (Bauer-Kahan) Health Care Coverage for Menopause.

This bill would require, beginning January 1, 2025, a health care service plan or insurance policy to include coverage for treatment of perimenopause and menopause.

Status: Senate Appropriations Committee: Suspense File
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT
AB 2476 (Bonta) Childcare services: Alternative payment programs.

This bill guarantees payment at the start of the month for childcare services subsidized by CAPP vouchers.

Status: Senate Appropriations Committee: Suspense File
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT
AB 2515 (Papan) Menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

This bill, beginning January 1, 2025, prohibits a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, delivering, holding, or offering for sale any menstrual product that contains PFAS. The Commission supported a substantially similar bill, AB 246, last year. AB 246 was vetoed by the Governor.

Status: Senate Appropriations Committee: Suspense File
CSW Recommendation: SUPPORT

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
There are no stakeholders associated with this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Support of state legislation is not a project under CEQA.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements. 78 of 704
4 8a

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Approve support for the list of bills recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women.

Alternative 2: Provide alternative direction on the list of bills as recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women.

Alternative 3: Consider any alternatives not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Dr. Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
Prepared by:

Dr. Sophia Armen, Administrative Analyst
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Commission on the Status of Women Legislative Tracking Sheet 2024 79 of 704

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________________, that with respect to the state bills recommended by the Commission on the Status of Women, as set forth in the Report to Council dated August 13, 2024, the Council provides direction on the bills as follows:
• AB 2295 (Addis) Crimes: Commencement of prosecution
• AB 2319 (Wilson) California Dignity in Pregnancy and Childbirth Act • AB 2339 (Aguiar-Curry) Medi-Cal: Telehealth
• AB 2467 (Bauer-Kahan) Health Care Coverage for Menopause • AB 2476 (Bonta) Childcare services: Alternative payment programs • AB 2515 (Papan) Menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Abstain:

Absent:
80 of 704
81 of 704
Exhibit 1
Commission on the Status of Women Legislative Tracking Sheet 2024
AB 2295 (Addis, D) Crimes: commencement of prosecution.

Last Amended: 04/25/2024
Summary: Current law generally requires that the prosecution of a felony sex offense be commenced within 10 years after the commission of the offense. Current law requires specified sex offenses that are committed when the victim is under 18 years of age and under certain circumstances, such as rape of a person with a mental disorder or disability or sodomy with force or fear, to be commenced by the victim’s 40th birthday. This bill would allow the prosecution of these specified sex offenses to be commenced on or after the victim’s 40th birthday if specified conditions are met, including, among other things, if the criminal complaint is filed within one year of the date of a report to a California law enforcement agency and there is independent evidence that clearly and convincingly corroborates the victim’s allegation. (Based on 04/25/2024 text)
CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Appropriations: Suspense File
AB 2319 (Wilson, D) California Dignity in Pregnancy and Childbirth Act.

Last Amended: 06/27/2024
Summary: Current law requires the State Department of Public Health to maintain a program of maternal and child health, which may include, among other things, facilitating services directed toward reducing infant mortality and improving the health of mothers and children. Current law requires the Office of Health Equity within the department to serve as a resource for ensuring that programs collect and keep data and information regarding ethnic and racial health statistics, and strategies and programs that address multicultural health issues, including, but not limited to, infant and maternal mortality. Existing law makes legislative findings relating to implicit bias and racial disparities in maternal mortality rates. Current law requires a hospital that provides perinatal care, and an alternative birth center or a primary clinic that provides services as an alternative birth center, to implement an evidence-based implicit bias program, as specified, for all health care providers involved in perinatal care of patients within those facilities. Current law requires the health care provider to complete initial basic training through the program and a refresher course every 2 years thereafter, or on a more frequent basis if deemed necessary by the facility.

CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Appropriations: Suspense File
AB 2339 (Aguiar-Curry, D) Medi-Cal: telehealth.

Summary: Under current law, subject to federal approval, in-person, face-to-face contact is not required under Medi-Cal when covered health care services are provided by video synchronous interaction, asynchronous store and forward, audio-only synchronous interaction, remote patient monitoring, or other permissible virtual communication modalities, when those services and settings meet certain criteria. Current law defines “asynchronous store and forward” as the transmission of a patient’s medical information from an originating site to the health care provider at a distant site. This bill would expand that definition, for purposes of the above-described Medi-Cal provisions, to include asynchronous electronic transmission initiated directly by patients, including through mobile telephone applications. (Based on 02/12/2024 text)
CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Floor
AB 2467 (Bauer-Kahan, D) Health care coverage for menopause.

Last Amended: 06/26/2024
Summary: Would require a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy, except for a specialized contract or policy, that is issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2025, to include coverage for evaluation and treatment options for perimenopause and menopause. The bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer to annually provide clinical care recommendations, as specified, for hormone therapy to all contracted primary care providers who treat individuals with perimenopause and menopause. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (Based on 06/26/2024 text)
82 of 704
CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Appropriations: Suspense File
AB 2476 (Bonta, D) Childcare services: alternative payment programs.

Last Amended: 05/16/2024
Summary: Existing law, the Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Social Services, establishes a system of childcare and development services for children up to 13 years of age. Existing law requires the department to contract with local contracting agencies for alternative payment programs for childcare services to be provided throughout the state. Existing law establishes a payment schedule for those programs. Existing law requires a childcare provider to submit to the alternative payment program a monthly attendance record or invoice, maintained in the unaltered original format in which it was created, for each child who received services. Existing law requires the alternative payment program to reimburse childcare providers based upon specified criteria, including the actual days and hours of attendance for those families with variable schedules. This bill would remove the requirement that alternative payment programs reimburse childcare providers based on specified criteria and the requirement that an invoice be maintained in the unaltered original format in which it was created. The bill would require the department to ensure that childcare providers are reimbursed at the applicable regional market rate ceiling. The bill would also require that, commencing on April 30, 2026, alternative payment programs provide payment to childcare providers prior to the day the childcare begins for the child and require the department to issue guidance for prospective payments to the alternative payment programs that reimburse childcare providers for the provision of state-funded subsidized childcare and development services no later than April 30, 2025. (Based on 05/16/2024 text) CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Appropriations: Suspense File
AB 2515 (Papan, D) Menstrual products: perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

Last Amended: 06/24/2024
Summary: Current law, beginning January 1, 2025, prohibits a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in commerce any cosmetic product that contains intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as defined. This bill would similarly prohibit any person from manufacturing, distributing, selling, or offering for sale in the state any menstrual products that contain regulated PFAS, as defined. The bill would authorize the Department of Toxic Substances Control to adopt guidance or regulations, as specified, for the purposes of implementing and enforcing these provisions. The bill would require the department to issue guidance related to testing for regulated PFAS in menstrual products. The bill would authorize the department to issue a notice of violation of the above provisions under specified circumstances, including that the department has provided the manufacturer written notice of the alleged violation and the manufacturer has failed to respond to the notice and, if mandated by the department, has failed to take corrective or mitigating actions to bring the product into compliance, and would specify when an initial and subsequent violations are deemed to have occurred. The bill would require the department and the manufacturer to post on their internet websites, and the manufacturer to post on their social media accounts, that a notice of violation has been issued, as specified. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable by civil penalties, as specified, and would authorize the Attorney General by request of the department, a city attorney, a county counsel, or a city prosecutor to bring an action to enforce these provisions.

The bill would create, and would require all moneys collected from penalties to be deposited in, the T.A.M.P.O.N. Act Fund. (Based on 06/24/2024 text)
CSW Position: Support
Status: Senate Appropriations: Suspense File
83 of 704
8b

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Urban Forestry Tree Planting and Maintenance Program Contract Increases

1. Resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing the City Manager, or a designee, to amend contract 8000974 for city tree services, with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) increasing the contract amount by $40,560 to $11,618,220 for the purpose of planting 104 trees as part of the reimbursable United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service grant subject to budget approval in FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26, and FY 2026-27.

2. Resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a GreenLatinos Urban and Community Forestry Program Subaward Agreement for City of Glendale’s Canopy Improvement to plant 104 trees and perform a comprehensive Citywide canopy assessment.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for August 13, 2024 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Public Works was awarded a $100,000 grant from the USDA Forest Service for the planting of 104 trees in the southernmost portion of the Glenwood neighborhood. The grant will also provide funding to perform a citywide digital canopy assessment over a three-year period, which will include analysis of landcover and provide a prioritization analysis to reach the cities goal of 25% canopy coverage.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Resolutions to amend the contract with WCA, increasing the contract amount for additional grant activities and to execute an agreement with GreenLatinos as the administering body for the Urban and Community Forest grant. 84 of 704
2 b 8

ANALYSIS
This USDA Forest Service has multiple grant programs funded by the federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA Urban and Community Forestry (UCF) grant program has $1.6 million in available funding for local governments and non-profit organizations for eligible projects. On October 12, 2023, the city was notified of the USDA Forest Service’s intent to award a grant in the amount of $100,000, pending the administration by a national pass-through nonprofit organization, GreenLatinos.

Requirements of the grant stipulate that trees must be planted in the California EPAdefined ‘Disadvantaged Communities’. Public Works selected the tree planting location to focus planting efforts within a portion of the Glenwood neighborhood due to their low canopy coverage and high quantity of vacant planting locations. The selected location is bounded by Glenoaks Boulevard on the south, Pacific Avenue on the east, Grandview Avenue to the west, and Glenwood Road to the north. Once planted, these trees will become part of the standard Public Works annual young tree maintenance program and maintained accordingly.

In addition, the city will obtain a three-year subscription for a digital tree canopy assessment which will include a current canopy assessment, a tree planting prioritization analysis and compare the evolution of canopy coverage from the past to present. This service is commonly used by municipalities to better understand their private and public tree canopy, as well as target future planting projects to reach the city’s 25% canopy coverage goal. Finally, the analysis will include the specific ecosystem benefits of city trees.

Table 1 summarizes the eligible reimbursable grant activities. The grant project does not require matching of funds.

Table 1: IRA Urban Community Forestry (UCF) Grant Costs Activity Unit Cost Quantity Funding Type Total Amount
Trees $390/tree 104 trees Direct $40,560
Tree Canopy
Analysis
N/A 3 year
subscription
Direct $52,591
Outreach Efforts N/A 1,967 letters Direct $4,849
Paid Targeted
Digital Advertising
$100/day 20 days Direct $2,000
Total $100,000
The annual breakdown of direct funded costs and activities are indicated in Table 2.

Table 2: Inflation Reduction Act Grant Costs by Fiscal Year Grant Activity 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027
Tree planting, 24” box size (WCA
unit price $390/tree) $0 $40,560 $0
85 of 704
3 b 8
Tree Canopy Analysis $52,591 $0 $0
Outreach collateral $4,849 $0 $0
Paid targeted digital advertising $1,000 $1,000 $0
Total $58,440 $41,560 $0
If approved, grant activities will begin in September 2024, with the start of the tree canopy analysis. Planting of the trees is anticipated to begin in Fall 2025.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The city will perform specific and enhanced targeted outreach ahead of the tree planting program. Outreach efforts ahead of this tree planting initiative will include the creation of a dedicated project website, direct mailers to all 1,697 households in the community (created with the assistance of our internal Graphics Department), and paid direct social media advertising to run for two 10-day stints. These letters and advertisements will include QR codes linking to the project website, with short descriptions in four languages (Armenian, Korean, Spanish, and English) in efforts to reach all households within the project area. Households with designated vacant tree sites adjacent to their property will have the opportunity to select between two or three designated tree species for the block.

The first 104 responses will receive trees as part of this program. If fewer than 104 responses are received, the city will select any remaining planting sites based on the canopy data assessment. If more than 104 responses are received, the city will forward those planting requests to a separate, existing tree planting program managed by Public Works for planting at a later date. While there are only 104 trees being planted as part of this project, the greater intent is to increase understanding and encourage households outside of these specific planting sites to become interested in receiving or caring for trees.

FISCAL IMPACT
The amendment to the contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. will cost $40,560.This funding was approved as a part of the FY 2024-2025 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time. The City Council approved funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$40,560 GL: 43110-2160-PWD-0020-P0000
PL: PWD01186AG
State Grant Revenue

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This item is considered a ministerial activity and therefore, not subject to CEQA review. 86 of 704
4 b 8

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are listed below, in accordance with the city Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744. (Exhibit 2)

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve the resolutions, which will result in no additional tree planting or canopy assessment, and the cancellation of this grant project.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Daniel Hernandez, Interim Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Loren Klick, Urban Forester
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: GreenLatinos Subaward Grant Agreement
Exhibit 2: Campaign Disclosure
87 of 704
RESOLUTION NO.

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

CALIFORNIA, DISPENSING WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER OR A DESIGNEE TO AMEND THE CONTRACT WITH WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. INCREASING THE AMOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF

MEETING RECOMMENDED TREE PLANTING AND MAINTENANCE GOALS, PRUNING PALM TREES, AND USING GRANT FUNDS.

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2020, following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the City Council approved a resolution dispensing with competitive bidding and authorizing execution of a six-year contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) for $7,056,000 for tree maintenance services; and
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2022, the City Council established a 25% citywide tree canopy goal which will entail significant planting and watering targets over the next planting seasons; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has additional funding available for tree planting due to a grant from the USDA Forest Service; and WHEREAS, the Public Works department strategically uses a combination of inhouse staff and contractual tree trimming services to maintain the urban forest consistent with industry best practices; and
WHEREAS, City personnel do not have the capacity to provide ongoing tree planting, due in part to efforts being focused on responding to resident tree maintenance requests and performing young tree maintenance, and WHEREAS, WCA has demonstrated superior knowledge, qualifications, staffing, project approach, and experience, as well as a lower price; and WHEREAS, West Coast Arborists, Inc. also demonstrated a thorough understanding of important legal and industry issues related to invasive pests, accident reporting and response, and wildlife protection as well as responsive customer service, outreach, and emergency response capabilities; and
WHEREAS, within a City that places great value in its urban forest and faces the unique challenges of a Southern California urban environment, an outside contractor’s corporate philosophy and approach to a project of this size and scope are important factors to consider and difficult factors to quantify; and 88 of 704
WHEREAS, Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Sec. 9 provides an exemption to competitive bidding when the Council determines it is in the best interest of the City to dispense with competitive bidding; and
WHEREAS, given the foregoing findings and facts, it appears that adequate justification exists and it is in the City’s best interest ― upon recommendation of the Director of Public Works ― to (1) dispense with competitive bidding, and (2) authorize the City Manager or a designee to amend the current six-year contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc., to increase the contract amount by $40,560.00 to a new total amount not to exceed $11,618,220.00.

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.

2. The Council hereby dispenses with competitive bidding and authorizes the City Manager or a designee to amend the contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc., increasing the contract amount by $40,560.00 to a new total amount not to exceed $11,618,220.00 subject to budget approval in Fiscal Year 2025-26.

Adopted this day of , 2024.
__________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOC ANGELES ) SS

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, PhD., 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 2024,
by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:
89 of 704
Abstain:
__________________________
City Clerk
90 of 704
RESOLUTION NO.

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

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH

GREENLATINOS FOR THE CITY OF GLENDALE CANOPY IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Glendale is eligible to receive Federal funding for certain community forestry work through the USDA Forest Service and its national passthrough partner, GreenLatinos; WHEREAS, a Subaward Agreement is needed to be executed with GreenLatinos before such funds can be claimed through the GreenLatinos Urban & Community Forestry Program; WHEREAS, the City of Glendale wishes to delegate authorization to execute these agreements and any amendments thereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Glendale, authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute a Subaward Agreement and any amendments thereto with GreenLatinos in order to receive grant funds for the City of Glendale’s Canopy Improvement Project.

APPROVED AND PASSED this day of , 2024.
___________________________
Mayor, City of Glendale
ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, PhD, 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 , 2024, the same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
___________________________
City Clerk 91 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
Exhibit 1
GreenLatinos Urban & Community Forestry Program
Subaward Agreement for City of Glendale’s Canopy
Improvement
This Subaward Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into between GreenLatinos, a nonprofit organization duly incorporated pursuant to the laws of the District of Columbia with principal offices at 1919 14 Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 (“GreenLatinos”) and City of Glendale, with its principal offices at 541 W. Chevy Chase Drive, Glendale, CA 91204 (“Subrecipient”). GreenLatinos and Subrecipient may be collectively referred to as “Parties” or each, individually, as a “Party.”
Contacts: Individuals listed below are authorized to act in their respective areas for matters related to this award. Any revision to key personnel identified in this agreement requires notification by the Subrecipient by email to GreenLatinos within 10 business days.

Principal Subaward Contacts:

Loren Klick
541 W. Chevy Chase Drive, Glendale, CA 91204
Telephone: 818-550-3416
Email: [email protected]
Subaward Financial Contact:

Steve (Min Jun) Kim
141 N. Glendale Avenue, Ste. 346, Glendale, CA 91206
Telephone: 818-551-3044
Email: [email protected]
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 1
92 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
Principal GreenLatinos Contacts:

GreenLatinos Program Contact Subaward Financial Contact Rachna Vas Joe Toolan
1919 14th Street, Suite 700
Boulder, CO 80302
1919 14th Street, Suite 700
Boulder, CO 80302
Telephone: (202) 677-0991
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: (443) 713-9026
Email: [email protected]
Whereas, the originating source of Federal assistance funds for this Agreement is made under the authority of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act, P.L. 95-313 as amended, 16 USC section 2105 and Public Law 117-169, Subtitle D, Section 23003(a). The Federal Assistance Listing (formerly Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance - CFDA) number and name are 10.727, Inflation Reduction Act Urban & Community Forestry Program.

GreenLatinos’ Award Cooperative Agreement (FAIN) number is 24-CA11132544-013, and the originating grant period is December 13, 2023 to November 30, 2028; and
Whereas, the purpose of this Agreement is to outline Parties’ collaborative efforts to develop and implement an urban and community forestry project (“Project”) funded, supported by, and meeting the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service’s Urban and Community Forestry Program guidelines and objectives; and Whereas, Parties aim to support frontline communities in restoring and expanding urban forest canopy in areas with low tree cover, and engaging residents in community forestry, resulting in (1) increased resilience to heat, flood, and storm events; (2) increased wellness and recreational opportunities; and (3) reductions in greenhouse gas and air quality pollutants in frontline communities across Glendale, California representing one census tract (06037301206).

Now, therefore, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 2
93 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

1. TERM. This Agreement shall govern the performance of the Parties for the period [ ] (the “Effective Date”) through November 30, 2027, unless earlier terminated by either party in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (such period of performance, the “Agreement Term”).

2. SCOPE OF WORK AND BUDGET; PRIOR APPROVAL FOR
CHANGES.
a. Scope of Work and Budget. Subrecipient shall, in a
satisfactory manner as determined by GreenLatinos,
perform all activities described in the scope of work as approved by GreenLatinos and attached hereto as
Exhibit A, as may be amended from time to time (the
“Approved Services”) in accordance with the program
budget as approved by GreenLatinos and attached hereto
as Exhibit B, as may be amended from time to time (the
“Approved Budget”).
b. Prior Approval for Changes. Subrecipient may not transfer more than 10% allocated funds among cost categories
within a budgeted program account without the prior
written approval of GreenLatinos nor shall Subrecipient make any changes, directly or indirectly, in program design or in the Approved Services or in the Approved Budget
without the prior written approval of GreenLatinos.

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
a. GreenLatinos. As a national pass-through partner for the USDA Forest Service that subawards funding to
community-based organizations and local government
agencies serving priority communities, GreenLatinos will have administrative and programmatic oversight over the implementation of and compliance with the terms of this Agreement. GreenLatinos is responsible for:
i. Funding and Payment Processing. GreenLatinos will
provide funding for the project in an amount not to
exceed $100,000 USD. Payment(s) are to be made on
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 3
94 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
a reimbursable basis according to the Payment
Schedule shown in Exhibit A Table 1. GreenLatinos
will process invoices quarterly.
ii. Invoices. Invoices are to be submitted through
GreenLatinos’ subrecipient portal.
iii. Project Funds. Project funds are to be expended in accordance with the proposed budget, in accordance
with the terms in this Agreement, and fulfilling the
scope of the final and awarded proposal.
iv.
v.

Monitoring and Reporting. GreenLatinos will
supervise and aggregate semi-annual performance
and quarterly reimbursement reports, and will
provide an online portal for Subrecipient to submit
reports.

Technical Assistance. GreenLatinos may organize
kick-off and close-out convenings, monthly peer
learning calls, and topic-specific webinars on project
design, reporting and financial assistance, and
community engagement. GreenLatinos will provide
case management and some technical assistance.

Requests for technical assistance, supporting project
implementation, shall be submitted through
GreenLatinos subrecipient’ portal.
b. Community Lead. City of Glendale, Unique Entity Identifier UEI: HF16K5BFKGY5, serving as the Community Lead for
Glendale, California, shall have the legal authority to enter into this award, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure proper planning,
management, and completion of the proposed project,
which includes funds sufficient to pay the non-Federal
share of project costs, when applicable. Subrecipient is responsible for:

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 4
95 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
i. Program Participation. Actively participating in
technical assistance activities organized by
GreenLatinos, including but not limited to kick-off
and close-out convenings, monthly peer learning
calls, topic-specific webinars, training on reporting
and financial assistance, and community
engagement, and submission of technical assistance
requests through GreenLatinos’ online portal.

Project Management and Coordination. Completing
Project deliverables during the designated period of
performance, in accordance with program
requirements.
ii.
iii. Finances. Establishing a dedicated account explicitly designated for funds disbursed under this subaward.

Subrecipient is also responsible for submitting
quarterly reimbursement requests tying program
activities to approved budget expenses, to access
grant funding.
iv. Reporting.
1) Quarterly Financial Check-ins and
Reimbursement Reports: Subrecipient shall
submit quarterly reimbursement reports with
reimbursement requests as prescribed by
GreenLatinos throughout the subaward’s
performance period, to be submitted through
GreenLatinos' subrecipient portal. In
accordance with 2 CFR § 200.301, reports must
relate financial data to performance
accomplishments of the federal award.

Quarterly reimbursement reports will be due
on April 10 for Q1 ending on March 31; July 10 for
Q2 ending on June 30; October 10 for Q3
ending on September 30 and January 10 for Q4
ending December 31. There will be informal
quarterly progress check-ins in April and
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 5
96 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
October where reimbursements and
performance accomplishments will be
discussed. Quantitative and qualitative project
accomplishments must be reported to the
USFS Impact Reporting Platform. Late reports
will result in withholding of reimbursement
payments.
2) Semi-annual Reports: Subrecipient shall submit
semi-annual reports as prescribed by
GreenLatinos throughout the subaward’s
performance period, to be submitted through
GreenLatinos' subrecipient portal. In
accordance with 2 CFR § 200.301, reports must
relate financial data to performance
accomplishments of the federal award. Semiannual reports will be due on November 10th for the period of May 1 to October 31 and May
10th for the period of November 1 to April 31.

Quantitative and qualitative project
accomplishments must be reported to the
USFS Impact Reporting Platform. Late reports
will result in withholding of reimbursement
payments.
3)
4)
Ongoing Reporting: Ongoing project reporting
may include providing GreenLatinos and the
USDA with success stories with brief project
descriptions, outcomes, photographs and
testimonials via the USDA Forest Service
reporting system.

Final Deliverables and Report. By February 28,
2028, submitting all substantial products and
outputs, a final reporting form, high resolution
.jpg photographs of project work (by
submitting a photograph Subrecipient
consents to allow GreenLatinos and USDA
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 6
97 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
Forest Service to use those photographs in
communications and reporting and represents
and warrants that Subrecipient has obtained all
necessary consents, permissions or licenses
necessary to permit GreenLatinos and USDA
Forest Service to do so), and a detailed record of
project expenditures, including a comparison of
the original proposed budget to award
expenditures.
v. G eenLatinos Communications. Subrecipient shall
actively communicate their project achievements,
impact, and outcomes with the media. Subrecipients
shall work with GreenLatinos and GreenLatinos’
media consultant to promote their projects to the
media. Clear recognition of USDA's support shall be
included in all press releases, digital, and print media.

Subrecipient shall acknowledge GreenLatinos and
the Forest Service support in any publications,
audiovisuals, and electronic media developed as a
result of this award. Follow direction in USDA
Supplemental 2 CFR 415.2. GreenLatinos may provide
plaques and certificates to all sub-awardees to
acknowledge USDA’s support. If plaques and
certificates are provided, they shall be publicly
displayed. Subrecipients may be asked to present
Project outcomes during a GreenLatinos virtual or in
person meeting, if requested.1

4. AWARD AND ADMINISTRATION; COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS.
a. JUSTICE40. The federal match requirement for this award has been waived under the provision of Public Law 117-169 (Inflation Reduction Act), with the requirement that 100% of 1 This request is subject to GreenLatinos’ communications schedule and is not guaranteed to be made.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 7
98 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
work and funding under this subaward must benefit
disadvantaged communities.
b. Compliance with Prime Award and Subaward. Subrecipient shall perform all activities funded by this Agreement in accordance with: (i) the Notice of Prime Award attached hereto as Exhibit D, including any amendments thereto;
(ii) the Subaward Data attached hereto as Exhibit E,
including any amendments thereto, which provides a
summary of the Federal Subrecipient agreement data that is required by 2 CFR Part 200 – Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards; (iii) the Approved Services attached hereto as Exhibit A; (iv) the Approved Budget attached hereto as Exhibit B, including any amendments thereto; and (v) the applicable additional terms and conditions in Exhibit C (each of (i)-(v) above is hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement). In addition, Subrecipient shall
cooperate fully with GreenLatinos in its efforts to comply with the requirements of the Notice of Prime Award,
including any amendments thereto.
c. Compliance with Applicable Laws. Subrecipient shall
perform all activities funded by this Agreement in
accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, including without limitation laws which regulate the use of funds allocated Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act, P.L. 95- 313 as amended, 16 USC section 2105 and Public Law 117-169, Subtitle D, Section 23003(a). The term “federal, state and local laws” as used in this Agreement shall mean all
applicable statutes, rules, regulations, executive orders, directives or other laws, including all laws as presently in effect and as may be amended or otherwise altered during the Agreement Term, as well as all such laws which may be enacted or otherwise become effective during the
Agreement Term.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 8
99 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
d. Collaborative Arrangements. Where permitted by terms of the award and federal law, Subrecipient may enter into
collaborative arrangements with other organizations to
jointly carry out activities with Forest Service funds
available under this award. Subrecipient must obtain
approval in writing from GreenLatinos before entering into any collaborative arrangements using Forest Service funds.

GreenLatinos will not approve any subaward arrangements between Subrecipient and other organizations.

Collaborative arrangements are to be restricted to
contractual agreements as set forth by the procurement
standards in 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart D.
e.
f.

Disclosures. Subrecipient must promptly disclose to
GreenLatinos all violations of Federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award.

Risk and Receipt of Funding. Subrecipient represents and warrants that, at all times during the Term, it does NOT have active exclusions in the System for Award
Management (sam.gov). Subrecipient’s risk profile must be evaluated in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.332(b) and
deemed favorable, and Subrecipient’s award will be
reported at fsrs.gov in compliance with 2 CFR §170, prior to Subrecipient’s receipt of funds. If the Subrecipient has any active exclusion, it will not be eligible for receipt of funding.

SAM.GOV Requirement: Subrecipient shall maintain
current organizational information and the original Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) provided for this agreement in the System for Award Management (SAM) until receipt of final payment. This requires annual review and updates, when
needed, of organizational information after the initial registration. More frequent review and updates may be
required for changes in organizational information or
agreement term(s). Any change to the original UEI
provided in this agreement will result in termination of this g.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 9
100 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
agreement and de-obligation of any remaining funds. For purposes of this agreement, System for Award
Management (SAM) means the Federal repository into
which an entity must provide information required for the conduct of business as a Cooperative. Additional
information about registration procedures may be found at the SAM Internet site at www.sam.gov.
h. Debarment and Suspension. Subrecipient shall
immediately inform GreenLatinos if they or any of their principals are presently excluded, debarred, or suspended from entering into covered transactions with the federal government according to the terms of 2 CFR Part 180.

Additionally, should Subrecipient or any of their principals receive a transmittal letter or other official federal notice of debarment or suspension, then they shall notify
GreenLatinos without undue delay. This applies whether
the exclusion, debarment, or suspension is voluntary or involuntary. Subrecipient must complete the form AD1048, Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion, Lower Tier Covered Transactions, attached hereto as Exhibit H.
i. Restrictions on Lobbying. If the Subaward amount exceeds $100,000, Subrecipient shall file the certification required by 49 CFR Part 20, “New Restrictions on Lobbying.” The
subrecipient shall certify that it will not and has not used Federally appropriated funds to pay any person or
organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a
member of Congress in connection with obtaining any
federal contract, grant or any other award covered by
31 USC section 1352. Subrecipient shall also disclose the name of any registrant under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 who has made lobbying contacts on its behalf with non-federal funds with respect to that Federal contract, GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 10
101 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
grant or award covered by 31 USC section 1352. Such
disclosures shall be forwarded to GreenLatinos.

Subrecipient shall ensure that any
subcontractors/subconsultants under this Agreement shall certify the same. GreenLatinos is responsible for keeping the certification of Subrecipient, who is in turn responsible for keeping the certification forms of
subcontractors/subconsultants (provided, however, that
nothing in this section shall be construed to permit
Subrecipient to retain or hire
subcontractors/subconsultants without the written
permission of GreenLatinos).
j. Notification. Subrecipient shall notify GreenLatinos within 5 business days of all developments that have a
significant impact on the activities supported under
this award, including but not limited to financial
developments. Also, notification must be given in
case of problems, delays or adverse conditions that
materially impair the ability to meet the objectives of the award. This notification must include a statement
of the action taken or contemplated, and any
assistance needed to resolve the situation.
k.
l.

No Funding of Research and Development. This award is
not for research and development and the cost of
independent research and development, including their
proportionate share of indirect costs, are unallowable.

Members of Congress. Pursuant to 41 USC section 22, no
member of, or delegate to, Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of this award, or benefits that may arise therefrom, either directly or indirectly.

5. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION.
a. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance.

Subrecipient is subject to OMB guidance in subparts A
through F of 2 CFR Part 200, as adopted and supplemented GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 11
102 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
by the USDA in 2 CFR Part 400 and must follow regulations found in 2 CFR 200.331 through 2 CFR 200.333. Electronic copies of the CFRs can be found at: ecfr.gov.
b. Use of Award Funds. Award funds and any interest earned on them shall not be used:
i. To carry out propaganda, or otherwise to attempt to
influence legislation (within the meaning of
section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”)) or as prohibited by OMB
Circular A-122, section 25 regarding lobbying;
To participate or intervene in any political campaign
on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for
public office (within the meaning of section 501(c)(3)
of the Code);
ii.
iii.
iv.

To make any awards to individuals or organizations
(unless pre-approved in writing by GreenLatinos).

No part of the Award funds shall be paid to any
GreenLatinos official, and Awardee acknowledges
that no gifts or services were or will be rendered to
GreenLatinos or any GreenLatinos official in exchange
for this Award.
c. Allowable Expenditures. All expenditures made with funds provided under this subaward must be exclusively for
allowable program expenditures incurred during the
period of this subaward.
d.
e.

Purchase of Equipment. Subrecipient may not use the
funds received under this Agreement for any purchase of equipment.

Single Audit. In accordance with 2 CFR 200 Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit
Requirements, found in section 200.501(a), audit
requirements for federal awards, non-federal entities that expend $750,000 or more in federal awards from all
funding sources during their fiscal year, must agree to have a Single Audit conducted in accordance with
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 12
103 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
section 200.514 Scope of Audit. Further, section 200.512 requires that the final report for such an audit be
completed within nine months of the entity’s fiscal year end. As a condition of this award, the subrecipient will be required to annually certify if their organization has been subject to the Single Audit requirement according to the above citations. If required, the subrecipient will complete any required Single Audit no later than nine months after the end of the entity’s fiscal year, and will send the Single Audit report to GreenLatinos within 10 business days of its completion.
f. Election of De Minimis Rate. For the administration of this subaward, GreenLatinos has elected to use the de minimis indirect cost rate of 10% of modified total direct costs (MTDC) as allowed under 2 CFR § 200.414(f). [Each
Subrecipient will be allowed to use their own federally approved indirect rate, cost allocation plan, or the 10% de minimis rate. OR Subrecipient approved indirect rate is [XX]% of direct costs. OR Subrecipient has chosen to waive recovery of indirect costs related to this Project.]
City of Glendale hereby elects to waive recovery of indirect costs for this project. _______ (Please initial)

6. REPORTING.
a. Financial Status Reporting.
i. Subrecipient is subject to the OMB guidance in
subparts A through F of 2 CFR Part 200, as
adopted and supplemented by the USDA in
2 CFR Part 400 and must follow the regulations
found in 2 CFR 200.331 through 2 CFR 200.333.

All subawards $30,000 or more must be
reported at fsrs.gov in compliance with
ii.
2 CFR 170. See Attachment for full text.
iii. All financial and programmatic records and
supporting documents pertinent to this award
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 13
104 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
must be kept for a period of three years from
the date of submission of the final financial
statement report including expenditures from
this award, per federal regulations. These
records may be subject to an audit by the
federal donor agency, GreenLatinos and/or their
representatives. All records are to be
maintained for the additional duration
necessary to complete an audit and/or resolve
all questions concerning expenditures, unless
approval has been provided from GreenLatinos
to dispose of records.
iv.
v.

If any litigation, claim or audit is started before
the expiration of the three-year period, the
records shall be retained until litigation, claims
or audit findings involving the records has been
resolved.

Subrecipient is expected to take reasonable
care that systems are in place to ensure funds
expended under this award are used for the
purposes described in the subaward and can be
properly accounted for.
b. Program Performance Reports. The subrecipient shall
perform all actions identified and funded in
application/modification narratives within the
performance period identified in award and submit
Programmatic Reporting as set forth in the Award
Agreement.

7. INSURANCE.
a. Insurance. Subrecipient shall maintain all the following insurance coverage during the period of this subaward:
i. General Liability and Property Damage. With respect
to all operations performed under this Agreement,
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 14
105 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
Subrecipient shall carry general liability insurance
having all major divisions of coverage including, but
not limited to: Premises - Operations, Products and
Completed Operations, Personal Injury Liability,
Contractual Liability. The policy shall be on an
occurrence form and limits shall not be less than:
$1,000,000 Each Occurrence, $2,000,000 General
Aggregate, $1,000,000 Products/Completed
Operations Aggregate, and $1,000,000 Personal and
Advertising Injury.
ii. Automotive Liability. The Party shall carry automotive liability insurance covering all motor vehicles,
including hired and non-owned coverage, used in
connection with the Agreement. Limits of coverage
shall not be less than $500,000 combined single limit.

If performance of this Agreement involves
construction, or the transport of persons or
hazardous materials, limits of coverage shall not be
less than $1,000,000 combined single limit. If the
Party does not own or operate motor vehicles, they
must apply for an Automotive Liability Waiver
through GreenLatinos. Should the Party obtain or
begin operating a vehicle they must obtain liability
insurance meeting the requirements above.
iii. Workers Compensation. With respect to all
operations performed, the Party shall carry workers’
compensation insurance in accordance with the laws
of the state in which the Subrecipient is performing
work under this subaward. Subrecipient must
provide written Proof of Insurance to GreenLatinos
within 30 days of the effective date of this Agreement
and annually as requested. If Subrecipient is selfinsured, the Subrecipient must provide written documentation verifying self-insured status. Proper
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 15
106 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
documentation will override stated insurance
requirements.

8. INDEMNIFICATION. Subrecipient shall defend and hold
GreenLatinos, its employees, officers, directors, agents and representatives harmless from any and all costs, losses, damages, liabilities, expenses, demands, and judgments, including court costs and attorney’s fees, which they may suffer arising from any act or omission or neglect of Subrecipient, its employees, officers, directors, agents or representatives, or anyone else for whose acts Subrecipient may be responsible, in the performance of
Subrecipient’s obligations under this Agreement. This provision shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any or no reason.

9. COMMUNICATIONS AND USE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
a. Use of GreenLatinos and Forest Service Insignias. Grantor must submit and receive approval in writing from an
individual authorized by the GreenLatinos and Forest
Service to consent on their behalf on all requests to use the Forest Service and GreenLatinos insignias on any published media, such as a webpage, printed publication, or
audiovisual production.
b. GreenLatinos and Forest Service Acknowledged in
Publications, Audiovisuals, and Electronic Media.

Subrecipient shall acknowledge GreenLatinos and Forest
Service support in any publications, audiovisuals, and
electronic media developed as a result of this award,
following direction in USDA Supplemental 2 CFR 415.2.

Public announcements of the Award may be made by the
Subrecipient, GreenLatinos, and the Forest Service. Any related press release, media alert, website posting, or other publication about the Program or the Award made by
Subrecipient must acknowledge the Forest Service and
GreenLatinos support. All public announcements must be
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 16
107 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
submitted to GreenLatinos for approval at least two weeks prior to publication.
c. Use of Subrecipient Insignia. Subrecipient hereby
authorizes GreenLatinos to include its insignia in
mutually agreed-upon advertising copy, solely in
connection with this Agreement, subject to prior
review and approval of such use by Subrecipient
which shall not be unreasonably withheld.
d. Copyright and Ownership. No reports, maps, or other
documents produced in whole or in part under this
Agreement shall be the subject of an application for
copyright by or on behalf of Subrecipient. Ownership
of all designs, reports, drawings, studies, estimates,
models, computations, and other related items
(“Work Product”) prepared under this Agreement
shall vest in GreenLatinos upon payment to the
Subrecipient for all Services and Deliverables
rendered herein through the date of the expiration or
termination of this Agreement. Subrecipient hereby
assigns to GreenLatinos all right, title and interest in any Work Product.

10. TERMINATION.
a. By GreenLatinos. This subaward may be terminated, in whole or in part pursuant to 2 CFR 200.340. GreenLatinos may, by giving written notice to Subrecipient, terminate this Agreement without penalty in whole or in part for
cause, which shall include, without limitation: (i) failure for any reason of Subrecipient to fulfill timely and properly any of its obligations under this Agreement, including failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement;
(ii) Subrecipient’s default, breach or any intervening
casualty which poses an immediate threat to life, health or safety; (iii) Subrecipient’s breach of its representations, warranties and certifications contained in this Agreement; GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 17
108 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
(iv) the suspension or debarment or determination that
Subrecipient or any of its principals are ineligible to participate in federal assistance awards or contracts;
(v) Subrecipient’s failure to maintain the insurance
coverage in the form and/or amounts required by
GreenLatinos pursuant to this Agreement; (vi) the
submission by Subrecipient to the Forest Service or
GreenLatinos of reports that are incorrect or incomplete in any material respect; (vii) ineffective or improper use by Subrecipient of funds received under this Agreement;
(viii) suspension, termination, in whole or in part of, or absence or reduction of appropriations for, grants or
reimbursements to GreenLatinos; (ix) the necessity for
termination and/or amendment of this Agreement so as to make any terms of this Agreement consistent with federal, state or local laws; (x) fraudulent activities on the part of Subrecipient; and (xi) the filing of bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution by or with respect to Subrecipient.

GreenLatinos may also terminate this Agreement in whole or in part without cause upon 30 days’ written notice to Subrecipient.
b. By Subrecipient. If Subrecipient is unable or unwilling to comply with any additional conditions or requirements
which may arise as a result of changes in or additions to any federal, state or local laws after the commencement of the Agreement Term, including without limitation those
applied by the Forest Service in their grants and
reimbursements to GreenLatinos, and which thereby
become applicable to Subrecipient during the Agreement
Term, Subrecipient shall terminate this Agreement by
giving written notice to GreenLatinos. The effective date of such notice of termination shall be no earlier than 30 days from the date of the notice.
c. Liability for Default. Whether or not this Agreement is terminated, Subrecipient shall be liable to GreenLatinos for GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 18
109 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
damages sustained by GreenLatinos by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by Subrecipient and GreenLatinos shall be liable to Subrecipient for any direct damages sustained by Subrecipient by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by GreenLatinos. This shall include, without limitation, liability of Subrecipient for the disallowance by the Forest Service of the reimbursement of charges submitted by
GreenLatinos for services provided by Subrecipient under this Agreement where the disallowance is in any way
attributable to Subrecipient, including the provision or maintenance by Subrecipient of inadequate or erroneous
records or billing documentation of services provided. If any such reimbursement of charges is disallowed as a
result of an audit by the Forest Service of Subrecipient or GreenLatinos, the amount disallowed must be paid by
Subrecipient to GreenLatinos from funds other than those provided by GreenLatinos under this Agreement. Under no circumstances will GreenLatinos be liable to Subrecipient for any indirect damages.

11. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
a.
b.
c.

Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the
laws of the District of Columbia without giving effect to the conflicts of laws provisions thereof.

Integration. This Agreement supersedes all oral
agreements, negotiations and representations between the parties pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement.

Severability. In the event that any portion of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable, such portions shall not limit or otherwise modify or affect any other portion of this
Agreement.
d. Waiver of Breach. The waiver by either party of any breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach by the other party of the same or of different provisions.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 19
110 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
e. Binding Effect; Assignment. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, every covenant, term, and provision of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the
benefit of the parties and their respective and permitted successors, transferees and assigns. Subrecipient shall not assign, subcontract or transfer any of its rights,
responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement
without GreenLatinos’s prior written consent, which
GreenLatinos may withhold in its sole discretion. Any
attempted assignment, subcontract, or transfer of this
Agreement in violation of this Section shall be void. Should Subrecipient assign, subcontract or transfer any of its rights, responsibilities or obligations hereunder with such consent from GreenLatinos, Subrecipient and the party to which it proposes to assign or subcontract its
responsibilities or services hereunder must enter into a written agreement that is consistent with this Agreement and the various requirements specified hereunder and that is approved by GreenLatinos prior to its execution.

Notices. Notices given by GreenLatinos or Subrecipient will be sufficient only if in writing and mailed or transmitted electronically by e-mail or through the reporting system directly, to the points of contact and addresses specified in Exhibit A: Scope of Services. Notices will be effective when delivered, or on the effective date of the notice, whichever is later.
f.
g. Modifications. Subrecipient may request scope of work or budget modifications in alignment with their original scope of work, any changes will be made by mutual consent and requested according to Notices above. Modifications must be approved prior to the date when these modifications will be implemented. GreenLatinos reserves the right to deny modifications, which compromise the original scope of
work or were not approved prior to commencement.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 20
111 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos also reserves the right to deny payment for modifications that were not previously approved.

Subawardee. Subrecipient will act as a subawardee in the performance of the Services under this Agreement.

Accordingly, Subrecipient shall be responsible for the terms described in 2 CFR 200.

Disputes. In the event of any issue of controversy
under this Agreement, the Parties may pursue
Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures to
voluntarily resolve those issues provided that
GreenLatinos shall have the right to, and be
h.
i.
permitted to, seek and obtain injunctive relief from a
court of competent jurisdiction. If GreenLatinos and
Subrecipient agree to arbitrate any controversy or
claim arising out of this Agreement; any such
arbitration shall be fully and finally resolved in
binding arbitration in a proceeding brought in
accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules
of the American Arbitration Association before a
single arbitrator. The arbitration proceedings shall
be confidential. The arbitrator shall not have the
authority to modify or change any of the terms of
this Agreement. The arbitrator’s award shall be final
and binding upon GreenLatinos and Subrecipient,
and judgment upon the award may be entered in
any court of competent jurisdiction in any state of
the United States or country or application may be
made to such court for a judicial acceptance of the
award and an enforcement as the law of such
jurisdiction may require or allow. The arbitrator may
require the losing party thereto, as determined by
the arbitrator, to bear the costs and fees incurred in
any such arbitration.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 21
112 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
This Subaward Agreement shall become effective upon the signatures of authorized representatives of both Parties. An electronic copy shall be deemed an original signature.

Signature Date
Mark Magaña, Executive Director
GreenLatinos
Signature Date
Roubik Golanian, City Manager
City of Glendale
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 22
113 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

APPENDIX
Exhibit A: Scope of Services
Exhibit B: Program Budget
Exhibit C: Additional Terms and Conditions
Exhibit D: Notice of Prime Award
Exhibit E: Subaward Data
Exhibit F: Whistleblower Notice
Exhibit G: 2 CFR Part 170
Exhibit H: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion Lower Tier Covered Transactions
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 23
114 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
GreenLatinos USDA IRA Urban & Community Forestry Program Attachment A: Scope of Work for City of Glendale
Glendale Canopy Improvement
I. Project Participants & Primary Points of Contact
a. Community Lead: City of Glendale
b. Mailing Address: 541 W. Chevy Chase Drive, Glendale, CA 91204 c. Project Director (City/Organization Point of Contact): Loren Klick, Urban Forester, 818-550-3416, [email protected]
d. Program Manager/Assistant: N/A
e. Finance Point of Contact: Steve Kim, Accountant II, 818-551-3044, [email protected]
f. Cross Departmental Participants: N/A
g. External Partners: N/A
II. Project Background
a. Project Title: Glendale Canopy Improvement
b. Project Description: Plant 104 trees in a disadvantaged community, reach out to all 1,967 households (per most recent census data) and assess citywide canopy coverage to target current and future planting projects to meet City goals regarding reforestation.
c. Total Funding: $100,000
d. Budget Period: July 1, 2024 – November 30, 2027
e. Period of Performance: July 1, 2024 – November 30, 2027 f. Priority Census Tracts Served: 06037301206
115 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
III. Project Scope: Deliverables, Timeline, Reporting and Payment Schedule
Project reports, due dates, and reimbursements are scheduled below.

GreenLatinos will make quarterly reimbursements over the course of this project, in accordance with satisfactory progress reports.

Schedule of Quarterly Financial Reimbursement Reports
Quarterly financial reimbursement reports will be due as follows:

Performance Period Due Date to
GreenLatinos
Q1: 1/1 – 3/31 4/10
7/10
10/10
1/10
Q2: 4/1 – 6/30
Q3: 7/1 – 9/30
Q4: 10/1 – 12/31
Schedule of Semi-Annual Program Reports
Semi-Annual program reports will be due as follows:

Performance Period Due Date to
GreenLatinos
Semi-Annual Report 1: 5/1 – 10/31
Semi-Annual Report 2: 11/1 – 4/30
11/10
5/10
116 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
IV. Signatures
This Scope of Work shall become effective upon the signatures of authorized representatives of both Parties. A facsimile transmission or electronic copy shall be deemed an original signature.

Signature
Signature
Date
Date
Mark Magaña, Executive Director
GreenLatinos
Roubik Golanian, City Manager
City of Glendale
117 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027

APPENDIX
Please download the budget and budget narrative that you completed, or, entered directly into Salesforce, and attach these documents, along with a detailed project narrative, to this signed Scope of Work. Please sign and submit all these documents to GreenLatinos as a full package.

A complete Scope of Work package must include the following:

1. Completed and signed Scope of Work (this document)

2. Detailed Project Narrative

3. Budget (Excel form or downloaded from Salesforce)
See attached.

4. Budget Narrative (Microsoft Word document or downloaded from Salesforce)
See attached.

The final, approved Scope of Work package will then be attached to the Grant Agreement and submitted to you for signature. 118 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
Project narrative – Glendale Canopy Improvement
The City of Glendale has a longstanding commitment to urban forestry, dating back to the City Beautiful movement. In 1962, Glendale’s Public Works Director surveyed our City streets and found 39,233 street trees. The City’s digital tree inventory indicates a current street tree population of 43,071. This consistency is a point of pride in the community, particularly with City leadership. And yet, any cursory review of recent urban forestry literature indicates Glendale (and the larger Los Angeles metro area) has lost a significant quantity of trees over the last decade, and that fact is obvious on the ground, particularly in locations where residents do not typically request new trees.

Glendale is beginning a 10-year program to reforest targeted areas where canopy is lacking, particularly areas closest to the urban core, highways, and arterial roads. In fact, our inventory tells us 8,082 potentially viable street tree locations are vacant – 18.8% of the total viable planted and non-planted sites! Glendale’s City Council has requested Public Works assess each census tract for City tree planting, and wherever possible, plant trees to increase the canopy coverage to 25% in these individual census tracts. In 2022, the City adopted a Citywide tree canopy coverage goal of 25%. We lack the tools to effectively perform this task, which is the main goal the project would address.

The project’s investment will be able to change this – by using data to plant suitable trees more effectively in viable locations, particularly in disadvantaged census tracts, starting with a single disadvantaged community but reaching citywide in time.

The project seeks to use data to understand its urban forest resource more fully to better target planting programs and associated outreach. This will enable the City to better understand the benefits of its forest resources, as well as be more cost-effective in terms of planting locations. The City’s Public Works Department will retain an urban forestry software consultant to utilize their software to assess current canopy coverage and benefits, potential planting locations, and the impact of potential planting programs, including the project’s proposed tree planting component, as well as additional relevant analyses. This will enable Public Works to determine existing canopy coverage, plantable spaces, and potential future canopy coverage. Public Works will then review its existing Community Forest Management Plan and 119 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
current 10-year planting plan, to update as needed in relation to tree planting strategy, based on the data received, following this project.

The second aspect of the project is a tree planting component of 104 trees in census tract 06037301206, which is a wholly disadvantaged area in Glendale.

This tract, located just north of the City’s downtown urban core, is an overburdened and underserved part of our community, but it was outside of recently awarded state-level urban forestry grants, despite the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) indicating the area is in the 93rd percentile for PM2.5, 97th percentile for proximity to superfund sites, 94th percentile for proximity to hazardous waste facilities, and 94th percentile for wastewater discharge. Additionally, the area is in the 93rd percentile for limited English speaking households and in the 81st percentile for the unemployment rate. Tree site selection will be informed by the outreach program described below.

Following tree planting, the trees will be watered weekly during a three-year establishment period, as part of standard City tree maintenance. In addition, all newly planted trees are inspected at least once annually for young tree maintenance by City arborists. This consists of an inspection, adding mulch, minor structural pruning as needed, and restaking as needed.

As part of the tree planting, the City will perform more targeted outreach ahead of the program. Typically, the City sends a letter giving general information about trees, their benefits, and the City and granted planting program. In this case, the City will create a project website, send direct mailers to all 1,697 households in the community, and run two 10-day stints of social media advertising to promote interest and attention and encourage community participation. These letters and advertisements will include QR codes linking to the project website, with short descriptions in four languages (Armenian, Korean, Spanish, and English) so the project can reach the limited English-speaking households.

Households with vacant tree sites adjacent to their property will have the opportunity to select between two designated tree species for the block. The first 104 responses will receive trees as part of this program. If fewer than 104 responses are received, the City will select any remaining planting sites based on the canopy data assessment. If more than 104 responses are received, the City will plant additional trees at a later date under separate, existing tree planting programs.
120 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/30/2027
While there are only 104 trees being planted as part of this project, the intent is to increase understanding and encourage households outside of the planting sites to be interested in receiving or caring for trees under existing City programs in the future. The City will use data from this pilot outreach project to inform future planting projects.

The project also aligns with the Ten-Year Urban and Community Forestry Action Plan (2016-2026), specifically Goal 5 to Improve Urban and Community Forest Management, Maintenance, and Stewardship. The data sets from this project will improve urban and community forest management, assist the City in developing comprehensive programs, and especially help promote the better use of technology and tools in urban forestry
Likewise, the California State Forest Action Plan is also aligned, specifically National Priority 3: Enhance Public Benefits from Trees, Forests, and Rangelands, and the California Topic 3: Urban Forestry. Goal 3.1 is to promote urban tree planting to improve air quality and energy conservation, while the California Topic 7 (Climate Change) goal 7.1 is in part to protect and enhance the capacity of California’s forests to sequester carbon through expanding forest areas through tree planting.
121 of 704
Appendix - Capability & Capacity
Glendale’s street trees are maintained by the City’s Public Works Department.

Generally, trees are maintained on a rolling 6-year cycle, with strict guidelines as set forth in the City’s Community Forest Management Plan in terms of pruning and removal policies. Public Works’ Forestry Section consists of eight International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborists. Tree species are selected based on a number of factors to ensure the right tree is selected for the right place, and species must be suited to current and expected climate. Any tree removed in a given year is replaced during the following planting season, per recent City Council direction, including any trees planted as part of this project.

The project will be supervised by Loren Klick, the City’s Urban Forester, within the City’s Public Works Department. Loren is a certified arborist, with the Municipal and Utility specializations. He also holds a Masters of Public Administration and has previously successfully administered California state grants, and supervised and reported on federal grants related to AmeriCorps urban and community forestry programs. He will select tree planting locations and species, as well as monitor project outcomes and assess project outcomes. The tree planting will be performed by the City contractor, West Coast Arborists, Inc., whose contract runs through the grant period. West Coast Arborists, Inc., was established in 1972 and has won contract awards with the City of Glendale for over 20 years running. Planting is supervised by an ISA Certified Arborist, and trees must pass an inspection performed by one of the City’s seven other staff Certified Arborists. These arborists are supervised by Artemio Albarran, who also holds the arborist certification, as well as over 20 years of experience with the City and its planting programs.

Watering services will be performed by a mix of adjacent property owners, City staff, and primarily West Coast Arborists, with City arborists inspecting the work. Annual young tree maintenance will be performed by City arborists to ensure good tree structure and long-term health. Subsequent to the fifth year of young tree maintenance, the tree will be placed on the City’s rolling, 6-year routine maintenance cycle.
122 of 704
Glendale, CA Census Tracts Served with IRA UCF Funding
Census Tract(s) Identified as Identified as Identified In EJ Screen (listing top 5 environmental and socioeconomic and/or Census
Block(s)
DAC in
CEJST?
DAC in EPA
IRA tool?
indicators)
06037301206
060373012061
Yes Yes Yes
Yes 97% ozone
95% superfund proximity
95% hazardous waste proximity
94% limited English speaking proficiency
90% unemployment
060373012062
060373012063
060373012064
Yes
Yes
Yes
97% superfund proximity
97% ozone
96% hazardous waste proximity
91% lead paint
90% wastewater discharge
98% superfund proximity
97% ozone
96% hazardous waste
92% over age 64
91% limited english speaking households
97% ozone
95% superfund proximity
95% hazardous waste proximity
94% limited English speaking households
89% traffic proximity
The census block groups described are located entirely within the CEJST census tract identified, and project activities will occur throughout all tracts. The additional detail is included to provide justification for the specific social and environmental burdens this community faces.
123 of 704
124 of 704
125 of 704
126 of 704
127 of 704
128 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT B

PROGRAM BUDGET
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 28
129 of 704
Urban & Community Forestry Program
Operations: Urban & Community Forestry Program
Budget Summary
Urban & Community Forestry Program Budget Summary
Unique Entity Identifier: HF16K5BFKGY5 Example. GL #192394 Organization Name: City of Glendale, CA Example. City of Trees, CA On this summary worksheet, please fill in ONLY your unique entity identifier, and your organization name. Then, proceed to worksheets A. through G. 2 CFR 200: Link Here Please also reference GreenLatinos' USDA Urban & Community Forestry Grant Budget Guidance.

Year 1 (7/1/24-6/30/25) Year 2 (7/1/25-6/30/26) Year 3 (7/1/26-6/30/27) Year 4 (7/1/27-11/30/27) Subtotal Category Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
A. Personnel
B. Fringe
C. Travel
D. Supplies
E. Contractual
G. Other Direct Costs
Total Direct Charges
H. Indirect Charges
Total Project Costs
$0 $0
$0.00
$40,560.00
$1,000.00
$41,560.00
$0 $0 $0
$4,849.00
$52,591.00
$1,000.00
$58,440.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$4,849.00
$93,151.00
$2,000.00
$100,000.00
$0.00
$58,440.00 $41,560.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100,000.00
130 of 704
A. Personnel
Please use this worksheet to articulate staff effort and related costs, to be charged to GreenLatinos' USDA Urban & Community Forestry grant award to your municipality or organization. Only include salaried staff and their respective efforts; contract positions are to be detailed on worksheetE. Contractual, and organizational expenses on employee benefits are to be detailed in worksheet B. Fringe. Please also include a percentage used to calculate annual cost of living adjustments for salaried staff. If the cost of living adjustment included is higher than the U.S. long term average of 3.28%, please include a justification below. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Year 1 (7/1/24-6/30/25) Year 2 (7/1/25-6/30/26) Year 3 (7/1/26-6/30/27) Year 4 (7/1/27-11/30/27) Salary Effort Total
Position Role Name Subtotal
Salary Effort Total Salary Effort Total Salary Effort Total Signatory, will supervise
program staff and inform
program vision
Example. Executive Director (5% of 1
FTE) Ana Ramirez $125,000
$100,000
5% $6,250 $125,000 5% $6,250 $125,000 5% $6,250 $52,083 5% $2,604 $21,354 Justin
Gomes
Example. Program Director (1 FTE) Manage program activities 100% $100,000 $0
$103,000
$0
100%
0%
$103,000
$0
$106,090
$0
100%
0%
$106,090 $45,530 100% $45,530
$0
$354,620
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
All
Years:

Federal Request Year 1 Total: $0 Year 2 Total: $0 Year 3 Total: $0 $0 $0 Year 3 Total:

Cost of Living Adjustment
Example. Cost of Living Adjustment 3.00%
Justification
Example. Our collective bargaining agreement ensures a 3.00% COLA for all salaried staff through 2030. 131 of 704
B. Fringe
Please use this worksheet to articulate your municipality or organization's fringe rate. Only include percentages of salary for designated benefits. You are welcome to add or delete benefit categories as needed (e.g. FICA/Medicare, State Unemployment, Retirement Contirbution, Health Insurance, Worker's Compensation, etc.), but do make sure the total rate is representative of the sum of all categories when complete. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Year 1 (7/1/24- Year 2 (7/1/25- Year 3 (7/1/26- Year 4 (7/1/27- Position Name Subtotal 6/30/25)
$9,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0
6/30/26)
$9,270.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0
6/30/27)
$9,548.10
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0
11/30/27)
$4,097.73
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0
Example. Program Director (1 FTE) Ana Ramirez $31,915.83 $0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Federal Request
Fringe Category Rate
Example. FICA/Medicare
Example. State unemployment
Example. Total

7.00%

2.00%

9.00%
FICA/Medicare
State unemployment
Retirement contribution
Health insurance
Workers compensation
Total 0.00%
132 of 704
C. Travel
IRS Guidance:

Link Here
GSA Guidance:

Please use this worksheet to articulate your municipality or organization's intended project-related travel. Examples of project travel include site visits, community engagement events, etc. Examples of basis for estimating costs are past trips, travel quotes, etc. Only travel that is directly associated with this award should be included. Beginning on Jan. 1, 2024, the standard mileage reimbursement rate for privately owned vehicles driven for business use will be 67 cents per mile. Please see IRS and GSA guidance (right) for more information. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Link Here
Year 1 (7/1/24- Year 2 (7/1/25- Year 3 (7/1/26- Year 4 (7/1/27- Item Justification & Basis Subtotal 6/30/25) 6/30/26) 6/30/27) 11/30/27)
Example. Flights for 10 staff to annual
convenings
$500/flight/staff, per travel agency quote
(attached). Assumed 3% inflation
$5,000.00 $5,150.00 $5,304.50 $5,463.64 $20,918.14
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Federal Request $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
133 of 704
D. Supplies
For the purposes of this award, supplies are generally defined as items with an acquisition cost less than $5,000 and a useful life expectancy of less than one year. Supplies are generally consumed during the project's period of performance. Unit cost of supplies should be less than $5,000. If supply items and costs are ambiguous, contact your GreenLatinos or USDA representative for more detail, or review guidance in 2 CFR 200. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Year 1 (7/1/24-
6/30/25)
Year 2 (7/1/25-
6/30/26)
Year 3 (7/1/26-
6/30/27)
Year 4 (7/1/27-
11/30/27)
Item Justification & Basis Subtotal
Example. 10 wireless walkie-talkies for community volunteer leads to maintain safety and communication across large project plot, during surveying and tree planting
Catalog price $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00
simplex color impression on 8.5x11" digital stock 100% PCR (letter) simplex black impression on 8.5x11" digital stock 100% PCR (form) simplex color impression on 24lb. white wove #10 envelope 100% PCR simplex color impression on 24lb. white wove #9 envelope 100% PCR document layout setup / mail merge processing @ $85.00 per hour folding + inserting 2 sheets + return envelope @ $25.00 per hour Presorted First Class postage @ $0.586 ea.
1,967.00 quantity
1,967.00 quantity
1,967.00 quantity
1,967.00 quantity
@
@
@
@
$ 85
$ 25
@
@
$ 0.25
$ 0.05
$ 0.40
$ 0.40
=
=
=
=
$ 491.75
$ 98.35
$786.80
$786.80
$491.75
$98.35
$491.75
$98.35
$786.80
$786.80
$127.50
$50.00
$786.80
$786.80
$127.50
$50.00
$1,152.66
$1,258.88
$96.26

1.5 quantity
2 quantity
@
@
= $85
= $50
1,967.00 quantity
1,967.00 quantity
cost of $96.26
$ 0.59
$ 0.64
=
=
$ 1,152.66
$ 1,258.88
$1,152.66
$1,258.88
$96.26
First Class pre-paid return postage @ $0.64 ea.

Language translations of materials
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Federal Request $4,849.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,849.00
134 of 704
E. Contractual
Please use this worksheet to articulate your municipality or organization's intended project-related contracts, what they are intended to do, and the basis for detailed costs. Examples of basis for estimating costs are past contract expenditures, contractor quotes, etc. Please list all contractors supplying commercial supplies or services used to support your project. For each Contractor with total project costs of $250,000, a quote must be provided. Lobbying, advertising, fundraising, and investment management fees are not allowable contract expenditures. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Year 1 (7/1/24- Year 2 (7/1/25- Year 3 (7/1/26- Year 4 (7/1/27- Item Justification Subtotal 6/30/25) 6/30/26) 6/30/27) 11/30/27)
Example. ABC Organization, to support
community outreach to low-income
Costs are estimated at
$1,000/community meeting*3 each
year, 3% inflation
$3,000.00 $3,090.00 $3,182.70 $1,092.73 $10,365.43
residents via 3 community meetings
Example. XYZ Corporation, to provide tree Costs are estimated at $100/hr*15 hrs*52wks annually, per quote
maintenance services each year of
performance period
$78,000.00
$52,591.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$78,000.00
$0.00
$33,000.00
$0.00
$267,000.00
CANOPY analysis software inclusive of
Citywide analysis of: plantable space, land
cover and accuracy, UTC analysis with
canopy change over time, planting
Quote from vendor $52,591.00
prioritization analysis, ecosystem benefit
analysis, and reporting and data delivery.

Contractor to provide tree planting
services. Inclusive of nursery stock
selection, transport, site preparation,
planting, staking, initial watering, and
mulching planting basin.

Costs per contract terms are $390 per
24" box tree planting. $390*104 =
$40,560
$0.00 $40,560.00 $0.00 $0.00 $40,560.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Federal Request $52,591.00 135 of 704 $40,560.00 $0.00 $0.00 $93,151.00 F. Other Direct Costs
Please use this worksheet to articulate any other direct costs anticipated to be incurred by your municipality or organization's intended project, and their basis. Other direct costs are expenses that are directly related to a project but do not fit into the other major cost categories. Examples may include use of office space and meeting or conference facilities; participant support costs and participation stipends; insurance and indemnification, subawards, etc. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Year 1 (7/1/24-
6/30/25)
Year 2 (7/1/25-
6/30/26)
Year 3 (7/1/26-
6/30/27)
Year 4 (7/1/27-
11/30/27)
Item Justification Subtotal
Example. Stipends for residents attending
community meetings, central to
GreenCollective's participatory
governance strategy
Estimate based on
$50/hr*2.5hr/month*12 months*15
residents each year
$22,500.00
$1,000.00
$22,500.00
$1,000.00
$22,500.00 $9,375.00 $76,875.00
Paid targeted advertising (e.g., such as
Meta advertising through Facebook,
Instagram, Messenger) within project
area linking to City website with project
information and a contact form, as part of
City's outreach and engagement efforts
to encourage community participation.
$1000 per 10 days, two 10-day
periods
$0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Federal Request $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 136 of 704
G. Indirect Costs
Please use this worksheet to articulate your municipality or organization's intended project-related indirect cost rate, and how it is calculated. A federally approved indirect rate agreement is required if reimbursement of indirect costs will be requested. If an indirect rate has been approved or negotiated with a federal government agency, you may elect to use that rate below. Please fill in the rate and submit a copy of your latest Negotiated Indirect Cost Agreement (NICRA). Please check one of the options below and provide requested information.

Please note, the indirect cost rate is applied to modified total costs as specified in the USDA's indirect cost guidance (right). As a result, indirect costs will not represent the same percentage of your total budget as the rate listed. Please reach out to your GreenLatinos representative if you have any questions. ONLY fill light green cells, the rest will autopopulate.

Indirect Cost
Guidance:

Link Here
Cost Rate Justification & Basis Rate Applied To:

An indirect rate has been approved or
negotiated with a federal government
agency. A copy or link to the latest
Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement
Example. Organization-specific NICRA 25.00% Salaries
(NICRA) is included with this application. The
An indirect rate has been approved or
negotiated with a federal government
agency. A copy or link to the latest
Organization-specific NICRA 0.00% MTDC
Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement
(NICRA) is included with this application. The
indirect cost rate to be used is:

Link or Attestation to NICRA Required: Submitted
137 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Budget narrative – Glendale Canopy Improvement
While the project will utilize City personnel and associated fringe benefits as described in the Project Narrative, these normally matching funds are intended to be waived. As such, this document will only cost out and narrate federal funding for contracted work.

Contractual:

Tree planting: Based on existing contract rates, the City estimates planting 104 new 24” box trees. This is inclusive of procurement, planting of the tree, installation of stake system, mulch and trunk guard, as well as weekly watering services for thirty days after planting.
$390 x 104 trees = $40,560
Canopy data: The City intends to obtain a software subscription to assess tree canopy coverage in the City, from the recent past, present, and expected future, to better understand its current planting project and better understand expected project outcomes. This should be inclusive of the following: plantable space assessment, land cover and accuracy assessment, urban tree canopy assessment and change analysis, tree planting prioritization analysis, and ecosystem benefit analysis.

The City estimates $52,591 for 3-year subscription for these services based on recent vendor quotes. These services are wholly separate and in addition to existing City inventory database, which does not offer any of the listed services.

Supplies: The City’s Graphics Department reviewed the proposal and provided an estimate for the necessary materials and labor to mail 1,967 twopage letters, with pre-paid return envelopes and required postage.

Additionally, translation and labor costs are included. 138 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Simplex color impression on 8.5x11" digital stock 100% PCR (letter):
1,967.00 quantity @ $0.25 = $ 491.75
Simplex black impression on 8.5x11" digital stock 100% PCR (form):
1,967.00 quantity @ $0.05 = $ 98.35
Simplex color impression on 24lb. white wove #10 envelope 100% PCR:
1,967.00 quantity @ $0.40 = $786.80
Simplex color impression on 24lb. white wove #9 envelope 100% PCR:
1,967.00 quantity @ $0.40 = $786.80
Document layout setup / mail merge processing @$85.00 per hour, 1.5 hours @ $ 85 per hour = $127.50
Folding + inserting 2 sheets + return envelope @ $25.00 per hour, 2 hours @ $25 = $50.00
Presorted First Class postage @ $0.586 ea., 1,967.00 quantity @ $0.59 = $ 1,152.66
First Class pre-paid return postage @ $0.64 ea. 1,967.00 quantity @$

0.64 = $ 1,258.88
Language translations of materials cost of $96.26
Total: $4,849.00
Other:

City staff will run two 10-day targeted ads as part of its outreach efforts to promote interest and community participation in the planting project for disadvantaged communities. These ads will be on Meta products (Instagram, Facebook, Messenger) and the total cost will be $2,000. $100/day, 10 days x 2 campaigns = $2,000
139 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT C

ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. NONDISCRIMINATION STATEMENT – PRINTED, ELECTRONIC, OR AUDIOVISUAL MATERIAL. Subrecipient shall include the following statement, in full, in any printed, audiovisual material, or electronic media for public distribution developed or printed with any federal funding:

In accordance with federal law and U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, this institution is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, and reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Program information may be made available in languages other than English. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program
information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, and American Sign Language) should contact the responsible state or local Agency that administers the program or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, a complainant should complete a Form AD-3027, USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which can be obtained online at
https://www.ocio.usda.gov/document/ad-3027, from any USDA office, by calling (866) 632-9992, or by writing a letter addressed to USDA. The letter must contain the complainant’s name, address, telephone number, and a written description of the alleged discriminatory action in sufficient detail to inform the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights about the nature and date of an alleged civil rights violation. The completed AD-3027 form or letter must be submitted to USDA by: (1) Mail: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) Fax:
(833) 256-1665 or (202) 690-7442; or (3) Email:

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 29
140 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
[email protected]. If the material is too small to permit the full Non-Discrimination Statement to be included, the material will, at a minimum, include the alternative statement:
“This institution is an equal opportunity provider.”

2. TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS.
a. Provisions applicable to a Recipient that is a private entity:
i. Subrecipient and its employees, may not:
1) Engage in severe forms of trafficking in
persons during the period of time that the
award is in effect;
2)
3)
Procure a commercial sex act during the
period of time that the award is in effect; or
Use forced labor in the performance of the
award or subawards under the award.
ii. This award may be unilaterally terminated,
without penalty, if a Subrecipient that is a private
entity:
1) Is determined to have violated a prohibition in
paragraph a.1 of this award term; or
Has an employee who is determined by the
agency official authorized to terminate the
award to have violated a prohibition in
paragraph a.1 of this award term through
conduct that is either:
2)
(a) Associated with performance under this award;
or
(b) Imputed to you or the Subrecipient
using the standards and due process
for imputing the conduct of an
individual to an organization that are
provided in 2 CFR part 180, “OMB
Guidelines to Agencies on
Government wide Debarment and
Suspension (Nonprocurement).”
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 30
141 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
b. Provision applicable to a Recipient other than a private entity: This award may be unilaterally terminated,
without penalty, if a Subrecipient that is a private entity:
i. Is determined to have violated an applicable
prohibition in paragraph a.1 of this award term; or
Has an employee who is determined by the agency
official authorized to terminate the award to have
violated an applicable prohibition in paragraph a.1 of
this award term through conduct that is either:
ii.
1)
2)
Associated with performance under this award; or
Imputed to the subrecipient using the
standards and due process for imputing
the conduct of an individual to an
organization that are provided 2 CFR part
180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on
Government wide Debarment and
Suspension (Nonprocurement).”
c. Provisions applicable to any Subrecipient:
i. You must inform GreenLatinos and the Forest Service
immediately of any information you receive from any
source alleging a violation of a prohibition in paragraph a.1 of this award term.
ii. The right to terminate unilaterally that is described in paragraph a.2 or b of this section:
1) Implements section 106(g) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), as amended (22 USC
§ 7104(g)), and
2) Is in addition to all other remedies for noncompliance available under this award.
d. Definitions. For purposes of this award term:
i. “Employee” means either:
1) An individual employed by Subrecipient who
is engaged in the performance of the project
or program under this award, or
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 31
142 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
2) Another person engaged in the performance of the
project or program under this award and not
compensated by you including, but not limited to, a
volunteer or individual whose services are
contributed by a third party as an in-kind
contribution toward cost sharing or matching
requirements.
ii. “Forced labor” means labor obtained by any of the
following methods: the recruitment, harboring,
transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or
coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary
servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.
iii. ”Private entity”
1) Means any entity other than a state, local
government, Indian tribe, or foreign public
entity, as those terms are defined in 2
CFR 175.25.
2) Includes:
(a) A nonprofit organization, including
any nonprofit institution of higher
education, hospital, or tribal
organization other than one included
in the definition of Indian tribe at
2 CFR 175.25(b).
(b) A for-profit organization.
iv. “Severe forms of trafficking in persons,” “commercial sex act,” and “coercion” have the meanings given at section 103 of the TVPA, as amended (22 USC § 7102).

3. PROHIBITION AGAINST USING FUNDS WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS.
a. Subrecipient may not require its employees, contractors, or Subrecipients seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign or comply with internal confidentiality agreements or GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 32
143 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting them from lawfully reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a
designated investigative or law enforcement representative of a federal department or agency authorized to receive such information.
b.
c.
d.

Subrecipient must notify its employees, contractors, or subrecipients that the prohibitions and restrictions of any internal confidentiality agreements inconsistent with
paragraph 1 of this award provision are no longer in effect.

The prohibition in paragraph 1 of this award provision does not contravene requirements applicable to any other form issued by a federal department or agency governing the
nondisclosure of classified information.

If GreenLatinos or the Government determines that the
Subrecipient is not in compliance with this award provision, it;
i. Will prohibit the Subrecipient’s use of funds under this award in accordance with sections 743, 744 of Division E of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, (Pub. L. 114-113) or any successor provision of law; and
ii. May pursue other remedies available for the Subrecipient’s material failure to comply with award terms and conditions.

4. 5.

ELIGIBLE WORKERS. Subrecipient shall ensure that all employees complete the I-9 form to certify that they are eligible for lawful employment under the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 USC § 1324(a)). Subrecipient shall comply with regulations regarding certification and retention of the completed forms. These requirements also apply to any contract or supplemental instruments awarded under this award.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. Public access to award or
agreement records must not be limited, except when such records must be kept confidential and would have been exempted from disclosure pursuant to Freedom of Information regulations (5 USC GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 33
144 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
§ 552). Requests for research data are subject to 2 CFR 315(e). Public access to culturally sensitive data and information of Federallyrecognized Tribes may also be explicitly limited by P.L. 110-234, Title VIII Subtitle B § 8106 (2009 Farm Bill).

6. 7.

PATRIOT ACT. Subrecipient agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of the USA Patriot Act and Executive Order 13224, and all subsequently enacted legislation, executive orders, or regulations, designed to prevent any Award funds from being used in support of terrorism or a terrorist organization.

PROMOTING FREE SPEECH AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. As a recipient of USDA financial assistance, grantees (including Subrecipient) will comply with the following:
a.
b.
c.

Do not discriminate against applicants for sub-grants on the basis of their religious character.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 16.3(a), Rights of Religious Organizations.

Statutory and national policy requirements, including those prohibiting discrimination and those described in Executive Order 13798 promoting free speech and religious freedom, 2 CFR 200.300.

8. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO
SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT. Cooperators (including Subrecipient) are responsible for compliance with the prohibition on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment identified in 2 CFR 200.216. See Public Law 115-232, Section 889 for additional information. In accordance with 2 CFR 200.216, grantees (including Subrecipient) are prohibited from obligating or expending loan or grant funds for covered telecommunications equipment or services to:
a. Procure or obtain, extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain;
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 34
145 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
b.
c.

Enter into a contract (or extend or renew a contract) to procure; or
Obtain the equipment, services or systems.

9. DRUG FREE WORKPLACE
A. Subawardee agree(s) that it will publish a drug-free workplace statement and provide a copy to each employee who will be engaged in the performance of any
project/program that receives federal funding. The
statement must:
a. Tell the employees that the unlawful manufacture,
distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a
controlled substance is prohibited in its workplace;
b. Specify the actions subawardee will take against
employees for violating that prohibition; and
c. Let each employee know that, as a condition of
employment under any award, the employee:
i. Shall abide by the terms of the statement, and
ii. Shall notify subawardee in writing if they are
convicted for a violation of a criminal drug
statute occurring in the workplace, and shall do
so no more than 5 calendar days after the
conviction.

B. Subawardee agree(s) that it will establish an ongoing drugfree awareness program to inform employees about a. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
b. The established policy of maintaining a drug-free
workplace;
c. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and
employee assistance programs; and
d. The penalties that you may impose upon them for
drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace.

C. Without the GreenLatinos Case Manager’s expressed
written approval, the policy statement and program must be in place as soon as possible, no later than the 30 days GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 35
146 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
after the effective date of this instrument, or the completion date of this subaward, whichever occurs first.

D. Subawardee agrees to immediately notify the GreenLatinos Case Manager if an employee is convicted of a drug
violation in the workplace. The notification must be in writing, identify the employee’s position title, the award number of each award on which the employee worked. The
notification must be sent to the Case Manager within 10 calendar days after subawardee learns of the conviction.

E. Within 30 calendar days of learning about an employee’s conviction, GreenLatinos must either
a. Take appropriate personnel action against the
employee, up to and including termination, consistent
with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 (29 USC 794), as amended, or
b. Require the employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program
approved for these purposes by a Federal, State or
local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate
agency.

10. TEXT MESSAGING WHILE DRIVING
In accordance with Executive Order (EO) 13513, “Federal Leadership on Reducing Text Messaging While Driving,” any and all text messaging by Federal employees is banned: a) while driving a Government owned vehicle (GOV) or driving a privately owned vehicle (POV) while on official Government business; or b) using any electronic equipment supplied by the Government when driving any vehicle at any time. All Cooperators, their Employees, Volunteers, and Contractors are encouraged to adopt and enforce policies that ban text messaging when driving company owned, leased or rented vehicles, POVs or GOVs when driving while on official Government business or when performing any work for or on behalf of the Government.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 36
147 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT D

NOTICE OF PRIME AWARD
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 37
148 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 38
149 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 39
150 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 40
151 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 41
152 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 42
153 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 43
154 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 44
155 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 45
156 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 46
157 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 47
158 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 48
159 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 49
160 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 50
161 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 51
162 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 52
163 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 53
164 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 54
165 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 55
166 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT E

SUBAWARD DATA
(i) Subrecipient Name City of Glendale
(ii) HF16K5BFKGY5
(iii)
Subrecipient Unique Entity Identifier:

Federal Award Identification Number
(FAIN):
24-CA-11132544-013
(iv)
(v)
Federal Award Date of Award to the
Recipient by the Federal Agency:
10/12/2023
Subaward Period of Performance Start
Date:
[ ]
(vi) Subaward Period of Performance End
Date:
11/30/2027
(vii) Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by $100,000
this Action by the Pass-Through Entity to
the Subrecipient:
(viii) Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated $100,000 to the Subrecipient by the Pass-Through
Entity Including the Current Obligation:
(ix)
(x)
Total Amount of the Federal Award
Committed to the Subrecipient by the
Pass-Through Entity:
$100,000
Federal Award Project Description: The City of Glendale's Department of Public Works will plant trees in a Disadvantaged
Community, and retain a vendor to assess
canopy coverage to target current and future
planting projects to meet City goals regarding
reforestation. The Project will enable the City to
plan its future planting projects with a
significantly improved understanding of the
future result, inclusive of benefits to its residents,
and to ensure the highest benefits are achieved.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 56
167 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT F

WHISTLEBLOWER NOTICE
Whistleblowers perform an important service to USDA and the public when they come forward with what they reasonably believe to be evidence of wrongdoing. They should never be subject to reprisal for doing so. Federal law protects federal employees as well as personal services contractors and employees of federal contractors, subcontractors, grantees, and subgrantees against reprisal for whistleblowing. USDA bears the responsibility to ensure that nothing in a non-disclosure agreement which a contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee requires their employees to sign should be interpreted as limiting their ability to provide information to the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
41 USC section 4712 requires the head of each executive agency to ensure that its contractors inform their workers in writing of the rights and remedies under the statute. Accordingly, it is illegal for a personal services contractor or an employee of a federal contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee to be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against for making a protected whistleblower disclosure. In this context, these categories of individuals are whistleblowers who disclose information that the individual reasonably believes is evidence of one of the following:
○
○
○
○
○
Gross mismanagement of a federal contract or grant;
A gross waste of federal funds;
An abuse of authority relating to a federal contract or grant; A substantial and specific danger to public health or safety; or A violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a federal contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant.

To be protected under 41 USC section 4712, the disclosure must be made to one of the following:
○ A Member of Congress, or a representative of a committee of Congress;
○ The OIG;
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 57
168 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
○
○
The Government Accountability Office (GAO);
A Federal employee responsible for contract or grant oversight or management at USDA;
○ An otherwise authorized official at USDA or other law enforcement agency;
○
○
A court or grand jury; or
A management official or other employee of the contractor, subcontractor, or grantee who has the responsibility to investigate, discover, or address misconduct.

Under 41 USC section4712, personal services contractors as well as employees of contractors, subcontractors, grantees, or subgrantees may file a complaint with OIG, who will investigate the matter unless they determine that the complaint is frivolous, fails to allege a violation of the prohibition against whistleblower reprisal, or has been addressed in another proceeding.

OIG’s investigation is then presented to the head of executive agency who evaluates the facts of the investigation and can order the contractor, subcontractor, grantee, or subgrantee to take remedial action, such as reinstatement or back pay.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 3.903, Whistleblower Protections for Contractor Employees, Policy, prohibits government contractors from retaliating against a contract worker for making a protected disclosure related to the contract. FAR Subpart 3.909-1 prohibits the Government from using funds for a contract with an entity that requires its employees or subcontractors to sign internal confidentiality statements prohibiting or restricting disclosures of fraud, waste, or abuse to designated persons. This prohibition does not contravene agreements pertaining to classified information. The regulation also requires contracting officers to insert FAR clause 52.203-17, Contractor Employee Whistleblower Rights and Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights, in all solicitations and contracts that exceed the Simplified Acquisition Threshold as defined in FAR Subpart 3.908. This clause requires notification to contractor employees that they are subject to the whistleblower rights and remedies referenced in 41 USC section 4712.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 58
169 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
In order to make a complaint alleging any of the violations mentioned above, one should complete the OIG Hotline form located at:
https://www.usda.gov/oig/hotline. For additional information, they may also visit the WPC’s webpage at: https://www.usda.gov/
oig/wpc or they may directly contact the WPC at [email protected].

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 59
170 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT G
2 CFR PART 170

1. Reporting Subawards and Executive Compensation.
a. Reporting of First-Tier Subawards.
i. Applicability. Unless you are exempt as provided in paragraph d. of this award term, you must report each action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in federal funds for a subaward to a non-federal entity or Federal agency (see definitions in paragraph e. of this award term).
ii. Where and When to Report.
1) The non-federal entity or federal agency must
report each obligating action described in
paragraph a.1. of this award term to
http://www.fsrs.gov.
2) For subaward information, report no later than the
end of the month following the month in which
the obligation was made. (For example, if the
obligation was made on November 7, 2010, the
obligation must be reported by no later than
December 31, 2010.)
iii. What to Report. You must report the information about each obligating action that the submission instructions posted at http://www.fsrs.gov specify.
b. Reporting Total Compensation of Recipient Executives for Non-Federal Entities.
i. Applicability and What to Report. You must report total compensation for each of your five most highly compensated executives for the preceding completed fiscal year, if
1) The total federal funding authorized to date under
this federal award equals or exceeds $30,000 as
defined in 2 CFR 170.320;
2) in the preceding fiscal year, you received
(a) 80% or more of your annual gross revenues from
Federal procurement contracts (and
subcontracts) and Federal financial assistance
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 60
171 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
subject to the Transparency Act, as defined at 2
CFR 170.320 (and subawards), and
(b) $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues
from federal procurement contracts (and
subcontracts) and federal financial assistance
subject to the Transparency Act, as defined at
2 CFR 170.320 (and subawards); and,
3) The public does not have access to information
about the compensation of the executives through
periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 USC
§ 78m(a), 78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if the public
has access to the compensation information, see
the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission total
compensation filings at
http://www.sec.gov/answers/
execomp.htm.)
ii. Where and When to Report. You must report executive total compensation described in paragraph b.1. of this award term:
1) As part of your registration profile at
https://www.sam.gov.
2) By the end of the month following the month in
which this award is made, and annually thereafter.
c. Reporting of Total Compensation of Subrecipient Executives. i. Applicability and What to Report. Unless you are exempt as provided in paragraph d. of this award term, for each first-tier non-federal entity Subrecipient under this award, you shall report the names and total compensation of each of the
Subrecipient’s five most highly compensated executives for the Subrecipient’s preceding completed fiscal year, if
1) in the Subrecipient’s preceding fiscal year, the
Subrecipient received
(a) 80% or more of its annual gross revenues from
federal procurement contracts (and
subcontracts) and federal financial assistance
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 61
172 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
subject to the Transparency Act, as defined at 2
CFR 170.320 (and subawards) and,
$25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues
from federal procurement contracts (and
subcontracts), and federal financial assistance
subject to the Transparency Act (and
subawards); and
(b)
2) The public does not have access to information
about the compensation of the executives through
periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 USC
§ 78m(a), 78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if the public
has access to the compensation information, see
the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission total
compensation filings at
http://www.sec.gov/answers/
execomp.htm.)
ii. Where and When to Report. You must report subrecipient executive total compensation described in paragraph c.1. of this award term:
1) To the recipient.
2) By the end of the month following the month
during which you make the subaward. For
example, if a subaward is obligated on any date
during the month of October of a given year (i.e.,
between October 1 and 31), you must report any
required compensation information of the
Subrecipient by November 30 of that year.
d.
e.

Exemptions. If, in the previous tax year, you had gross income, from all sources, under $300,000, you are exempt from the requirements to report:
i. Subawards, and
ii. The total compensation of the five most highly compensated executives of any subrecipient.

Definitions. For purposes of this award term:

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 62
173 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
i. “Federal Agency” means a Federal agency as defined at 5 USC section 551(1) and further clarified by 5 USC section 552(f). “Non-Federal Entity” means all of the following, as defined in 2 CFR part 25:
ii.
1) A governmental organization, which is a state, local government, or Indian tribe;
2)
3)
4)
A foreign public entity;
A domestic or foreign nonprofit organization; and,
A domestic or foreign for-profit organization
iii.
iv.
“Executive” means officers, managing partners, or any other employees in management positions.
“Subaward”:
1) This term means a legal instrument to provide
support for the performance of any portion of the
substantive project or program for which you
received this award and that you as the recipient
award to an eligible subrecipient.
2)
3)
The term does not include your procurement of
property and services needed to carry out the
project or program (for further explanation, see 2
CFR 200.331).

A subaward may be provided through any legal
agreement, including an agreement that you or a
subrecipient considers a contract.
v. “Subrecipient” means a non-federal entity or federal agency that:
1) Receives a subaward from you (the recipient)
under this award; and
2) Is accountable to you for the use of the federal
funds provided by the subaward.
vi. Total compensation means the cash and noncash dollar value earned by the executive during the recipient’s or subrecipient’s preceding fiscal year and includes the following (for more information see 17 CFR 229.402(c)(2)).

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 63
174 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018

EXHIBIT H

CERTIFICATION REGARDING DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION, INELIGIBILITY

AND VOLUNTARY EXCLUSION LOWER TIER COVERED TRANSACTIONS OMB No. 0505-0027
Date: 09/30/2025
Expiration
Certification Regarding
Debarment, Suspension,
Ineligibility and Voluntary
Exclusion Lower Tier Covered
Transactions
The following statement is made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC § 552a, as amended). This certification is required by the regulations implementing Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, and 2 CFR sections 180.300, 180.335, Participants’ responsibilities. The regulations were amended and published on August 31, 2005, in 70 Fed. Reg. 51865-51880. Copies of the regulations may be obtained by contacting the Department of Agriculture agency offering the proposed covered transaction.

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 0505- 0027. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The provisions of appropriate criminal or civil fraud, privacy, and other statutes may be applicable to the information provided.

GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 64
175 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
(Read instructions on page two before completing certification.) A. The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this proposal, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency;
B. Where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal.

ORGANIZATION NAME
City of Glendale

PR/AWARD NUMBER OR

PROJECT NAME
HF16K5BFKGY5

NAME(S) AND TITLE(S) OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE(S)
Roubik Golanian

SIGNATURE DATE
In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs).

Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 65
176 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected].

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Instructions for Certification
(1)
(2)
By signing and submitting this form, the prospective lower tier participant is providing the certification set out on page 1 in accordance with these instructions.

The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the prospective lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the federal
government, the department or agency with which this
transaction originated may pursue available remedies,
including suspension or debarment.
(3)
(4)
The prospective lower tier participant must provide immediate written notice to the person(s) to which this proposal is submitted if at any time the prospective lower tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances.

The terms “covered transaction,” “debarred,” “suspended,” “ineligible,” “lower tier covered transaction,” “participant,” GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 66
177 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
“person,” “primary covered transaction,” “principal,” “proposal,” and “voluntarily excluded,” as used in this clause, have the meanings set out in the Definitions and Coverage sections of the rules implementing Executive Order 12549, at 2 CFR Parts 180 and 417. You may contact the Department or agency to which this proposal is being submitted for assistance in obtaining a copy of those regulations.
(5) The prospective lower tier participant agrees by submitting this form that, should the proposed covered transaction be entered into, it may not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by the Department or agency with which this transaction originated.
(6)
(7)
The prospective lower tier participant further agrees by submitting this form that it will include this clause titled “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions,” without modification, in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions.

A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a
certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that is not debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency by which it determines the eligibility of its principals. Each participant may, but is not required to, check the General Services Administration’s System for Award Management Exclusions database.
(8) Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 67
178 of 704
City of Glendale
Project Amount: $100,000
Project Completion Date: 11/ 30/ 2027
Project Number: 00000018
which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the
ordinary course of business dealings.
(9) Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 5 of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment.

Form AD-1048 (REV 12/22)
GreenLatinos: 1919 14th Street, Suite 700, Boulder, CO 80302 | https://www.greenlatinos.org/ Email: [email protected] 68
179 of 704
City of Glendale

DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE
The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and subsequently amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 and Ordinance No. 5885, which became effective on November 3, 2016 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A contractor* (including a subcontractor**ꢀʊꢁZKR KDV D FRQWUDFW ZLWK WKH &LW\ RI *OHQGDOHꢁꢂ³&LW\´ꢀꢃꢁ the Successor Agency (“SA”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, SAꢃꢁRU +$ʊꢁIURP PDNLQJ D FRQWULEXWLRQ WR D &LW\ &Runcil member, SA member, HA member, &LW\ &OHUNꢃꢁRU &LW\ 7UHDVXUHU; and (2) Council members, SA members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract with a person who has provided a campaign contribution.

The Ordinance applies to a contractor whose contract requires the City Council’s, SA’s, or HA’s approval. A contract with the City, S$ꢃꢁRU +$ LV NQRZQ DV D ³&LW\ Contract.” The Ordinance also applies to a subcontractor who has a subcontract through a City Contract. The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, SA, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and the subcontractor(s) ZRUNLQJ under the City Contract.

A contractor must provide the information listed below when:
x The City Contract is subject to City Council approval; or A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:
x The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
x A combination or series of City Contracts totaling $50,000 or more is subject x A combination or series of subcontracts, for the same or different projects, to Council approval. have an aggregate value of $25,000 or more.

Information that must be disclosed: Ɣ Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) Ɣ Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
Ɣ Chief Operating Officer
Ɣ Chief Financial Officer
Ɣ Chairperson
Ɣ All members of the Board of Directors
Ɣ All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization Ɣ Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
City
West Coast Arborists, Inc.

Full Name
2200 E. Via Burton, Anaheim, CA 92806
Title Business Address State Zip
N/A Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President 2200 E. Via Burton Anaheim Anaheim
Anaheim
CA
CA
CA
92806
92806
92806
Patrick Mahonoey
Richard Mahoney
Rose Epperson
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
2200 E. Via Burton
2200 E. Via Burton
N/A
Patrick Mahoney, Richard Mahoney, Rose Epperson More than 10% interest owner 2200 E. Via Burton Anaheim CA 92806 * “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, SA, or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s 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. 180 of 704
Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address
City

NONE TO BE USED
Full Name
N/A
Title Business Address State Zip
Chairperson
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
N/A More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that KDV HQWHUHG LQWR D FRQWUDFW IRU WKH SHUIRUPDQFH RI DOO RU D SRUWLRQ RI WKH ZRUN XQGHUWDNHQ XQGHU DQ 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 person’s, entity’s, or organization’s 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: N/A
Title Business Address City State Zip
N/A

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named X Contractor Subcontractor:
x , DFNQRZOHGJH WKDW I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substituteʊ or if I select additionalʊ architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and x I hereby certify that:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
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. 2 In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages.

Executed on:

Signature:

August 7 , 20 24 , at: Anaheim , California.

Print Full Name: Patrick Mahoney, President
Address: 2200 E. Via Burton, Anaheim, CA 92806
Phone Number: 714-991-1900 E-mail Address: [email protected] Rev. 11/8/17
181 of 704
1 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Project Update- Bicycle Transportation Plan

1. Motion providing direction on the update of the Bicycle Transportation Plan.

CITY COUNCIL ACTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council initiated the update of the Citywide Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) in February 2022, with a vision to shape the next two decades of safe, convenient, and inviting biking infrastructure in Glendale.

Engaging the public through an interactive online map and significant outreach events, as well as input from the city staff and Buro Happold Consulting Engineers technical team, Project Development Team (PDT), Planning Commission (PC), Sustainability Commission (SC), and Transportation and Parking Commission (TPC), resulted in the development of a well-connected citywide proposed Bikelane Network. In this report, staff presents an update on the progress of the BTP development, and requests further input and direction from the City Council on the proposed Bikelane Network (Exhibit 1), implementation phasing (Exhibits 2 & 3), cost estimate (Exhibit 4), and policy recommendation (Exhibit 5). The overarching goal for the BTP is to establish an all-ages, all-abilities Bikelane Network for the entirety of Glendale.

Item Type: Action Item
Approved for July 30, 2024 calendar
182 of 704
2 RECOMMENDATION:

Provide direction on the update on the Bicycle Transportation Plan.

ANALYSIS:

On February 15, 2022, City Council awarded a contract to Buro Happold Consulting Engineers, Inc., to update to Bicycle Transportation Plan. The purpose of the updated BTP is to address components of a complete system including infrastructure, community outreach, and evaluation of policy and infrastructure improvements that will ensure greater success of the city’s multi-modal infrastructure.

The BTP update has been informed by plans that have been newly adopted and those that are still in progress, including the recently adopted Citywide Pedestrian Plan, the West Glendale Sustainable Transportation, the Verdugo Wash Visioning, and the Metro NOHO Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project. The BTP also includes new insights and ideas in today’s context as well as interventions developed in active transportation planning at the regional and state levels. The BTP seeks to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, both of which are important Council priorities.

The following aspects (tasks) have been assessed and included in the updated BTP:
• Identifying viable bicycle and pedestrian corridors, linking to the city’s existing mobility policy and plan structure, including the Citywide Pedestrian Plan, Safe Healthy Streets Plan and West Glendale Sustainable Transportation, Safe Routes to School, and Citywide Safety Education Plan.
• Assessing intersections and corridors with high bicycle collision rates, as well as identifying intersections with high bicycle and pedestrian volumes. • Targeting improvements and developments of bicycle infrastructure, which provides safety and connectivity in Glendale’s multimodal system. • Creating a coordinated and targeted community outreach strategy throughout the update of the plan development, including coordination with any ongoing city education and safety programs, so that each effort informs the others. • Ensuring equity and that disadvantaged communities fully share in BTP program benefits; and
• Incorporating policy and infrastructure recommendations based on field work assessments, best practices in active transportation, and feedback received from the community and technical team.

Project Goals:
• Safety: Create a bike network that feels safe and encourages people to ride.

Decrease frequency and severity of crashes while increasing biking overall. 183 of 704
3 • Connectivity: Create a connected bike network across the city that links major destinations to primary bike corridors.
• Accessibility: Create an all-ages, all-abilities bike network that is easy and enjoyable to use.
• Equity: Prioritize bike infrastructure in areas of equity concern. • Implementable: Create a plan that is ambitious yet implementable, phased to meet current and future challenges.
• Public Health: Increase public health by encouraging active transportation. • Environment: Reduce single occupancy vehicle trips for local trips.

Progress to Date
The BTP project team presented the proposed draft of the Bikelane Network to the Project Development Team on September 21, 2023 and January 10, 2024, Transportation and Parking Commission on November 21, 2023, the Sustainability Commission on December 06, 2023, and Council on January 9, 2024. Subsequently, adjustments were made based on the feedback to formulate the recommended Bikelane Network along with a comprehensive 20-year phasing plan. This phasing plan is delineated into four distinct phases, reflecting the project's priorities concerning safety, connectivity, community input, trip potential, trade-offs, social equity, and geographic equity. Staff then presented both the bike lane network and project phasing to the Project Development Team on March 11, 2024, Planning Commission and Sustainability Commission on March 6, 2024, and the Traffic and Parking Commission on March 25, 2024 for final comments, input, and recommendations. All the comments and questions from the commissions are attached in (Exhibit 6).

Also included in the report is a cost estimate and policy recommendations for the Bicycle Transportation Plan 20-year implementation plan. The final steps in this process, after receiving the comments and recommendations from the Council, include undertaking a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis, initiating a 30-day public comment period, and ultimately presenting the finalized draft plan to the City Council for consideration of its adoption in early summer 2024.

Proposed Bikelane Network Recommendation:

Technical Analysis
Developing the proposed Bikelane Network recommendations was a careful process that combined analysis of existing conditions, extensive public feedback, and input from staff, the Project Development Team, Commissions, and the City Council. The goals for the project were established through outreach with the public and the PDT, with the greatest priorities being to create a safe, connected, and all-ages, all-abilities network. Other priorities include incorporating public feedback and developing an implementable network. With project priorities in mind, the project team established two network 184 of 704
4 principles: “spiderwebs” (i.e., connections between neighborhoods) and connected neighborhoods (i.e., connections within neighborhoods). An analysis was then conducted to combine the crash and destinations data with public input on where people would like to bike. This analysis produced the first proposed draft network. Using guidance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Caltrans, and the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), a facility type was selected for each corridor based on three primary factors: road typology, vehicle volume, and speed limit. The facility selected for each corridor maximizes safety and connectivity for cyclists.

The proposed bike network went through a rigorous drafting process that involved key stakeholders throughout. The project team developed Draft #1 in August 2023, based on the technical analysis, including the crash analysis, public outreach, and connecting key destinations and neighborhoods. The complimentary network principles of “spiderwebs” and “connected neighborhoods” were used to develop this first draft. “Spiderweb” offers a centralized network of bicycle routes supporting short, all-purpose trips which are fed by direct routes that support longer-distance trips. “Connected neighborhoods” create smaller neighborhood networks of facilities which are connected by longer-distance “distributor routes.”
Draft #1 was reviewed by city staff in the Community Development Department (CDD) and Public Works Department (PWD) and was modified to create Draft #2 in August 2023. The second draft was then presented to the Project Development Team (PDT) and edited based on their feedback to create Draft #3 in October 2023. This third draft was presented to the public at open houses and online through the webmap, to the Transportation and Parking Commission, and Sustainability Commission. Based on the feedback gathered during this critical phase, Draft #4 was created in December 2023 and presented to City Council for comments. Finally, based on the comments from City Council, Draft #5 was created in January 2024. This final version was then used for the phasing and costing analysis.

Facility Definitions
• Class I Multi-Use Path: An off-street facility with exclusive space for bicyclists and pedestrians, with minimal crossings by vehicle traffic. 185 of 704
5 • Class II Bike Lane: A conventional striped bike lane denoted by pavement markings. • Class II Climbing Lane: A striped bike lane in the uphill direction that provides separation between bicyclists and vehicles for bicyclists ascending steep hills. • Class III Bike Routes: Signed bike routes on low-stress streets that use a shared lane, designated through shared lane markings and signage.
• Class III Bike Boulevard: Low-stress, marked bikeways located on low-volume, lowspeed local streets that operate as shared streets. These require traffic-calming features such as neighborhood traffic circles, chicanes, and traffic diverters to maintain low vehicle speeds and volumes.
• Class IV Protected Bike Lane: Bike lanes that are physically separated from vehicle traffic and parking lanes using vertical and horizontal features, such as bollards, planters, barriers, and parked vehicles. Exhibit 7 illustrates facility types.

These recommendations are the culmination of almost two years of analysis, public outreach, and collaboration between project team members, city staff, the public, stakeholders, Commissions, and City Council. Exhibit 1 illustrates the draft proposed Bikelane Network recommendations.

Proposed Bikelane Network Mileage:

Facility Type Proposed Miles
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.3
Class IV Protected Bike Lane 46.7
Class II Bike Lane 13.2
Class II Climbing Lane 3.5
Class III Bike Boulevard 24.9
Class III Bike Route 1.6
Total 90.3
Crash Analysis
The crash analysis utilizes data on bicycle involved crashes from California’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and Glendale Police Department and reflects requested changes from both city staff and the PDT, including expanding the date range from 5 to 10 years from 2012 to 2021 to better understand pre- and postpandemic trends. Property Damage only crashes were also included in the analysis after comments from the PDT.

Overall, the data on Exhibit 8 shows crashes involving cyclists declining over the analysis period. Compared to Pasadena and LA County, Glendale has lower crash rates.

The crash analysis also highlighted corridors with a greater safety concern. These corridors tend to be the wider arterials through downtown that carry large volumes of traffic during rush hour and have higher speeds when not congested. These include 186 of 704
6 segments of Glenoaks Blvd., South Brand Blvd., Colorado St., Broadway, South Glendale Ave., North Glendale Ave., Verdugo Rd., Pacific Ave., San Fernando Rd., South Central Ave., and Chevy Chase Dr.

The crash analysis, along with an analysis on equity, demographics, trip demand, PDT recommendations, public input and survey results informed the proposed draft Bikelane network.

Project Phasing
A phasing plan was developed for the final proposed network using the project goals to establish a ranking criterion, mixed with a deep understanding of local needs, priorities, and geography. (Exhibit 2)
Given that Glendale does not have an existing connected bike network, it was important to build key corridors in the first phase to create connected neighborhoods. Phase 1 are those key corridors, which are drawn from our network principles of “spiderwebs” and “connected neighborhoods.” The projects in the subsequent phases were selected based on their connectivity to prior phase(s), geographic equity, and weighted score among seven criteria listed below. Adjustments were made to ensure that the project phasing created a safe, connected, and buildable network.

Using the project goals, six ranking criteria were developed and confirmed with the PDT, Commissions, and the City Council. The criteria, ranked by priority, are:

1. Safety: Crash density, based on the crash analysis conducted.

2. Connectivity: Connected to key destinations, based on the destinations analysis conducted.

3. Community Support: Received support in online survey, web map, or in person events.

4. Trip Potential: Serves an area with a high concentration of short trips, based on the trip potential analysis conducted.

5. Trade-Offs: Requires a lane reconfiguration (i.e., a moving or parking lane is reallocated as a bike facility). Trade-offs on arterials were given a lower score than trade-offs on minor streets.

6. Social Equity: Serves an area of equity concern, as defined by the California Healthy Places Index.

A seventh criteria of geographic equity was used to evenly distribute projects between phases.

Geographic Equity: This criterion does not have an associated score. It was used to distribute projects evenly throughout Glendale for each phase. The four zones are shown in the map below and Exhibit 3:
187 of 704
7 Criteria 1 through 6 were assigned a weight based on overall project priorities based on feedback from stakeholders and policy makers. The distribution of weight is listed below, with safety ranking highest:

Criteria Ranking Weight
Safety 6 28.6%
Connectivity 5 23.8%
Community
Support
4 19.0%
Trip Potential 3 14.3%
Trade-Offs 2 9.5%
Social Equity 1 4.8%
Total 100%
The proposed bike network was divided into individual projects based on corridor and facility type. Each project was then assigned a score for metrics 1 through 6 and adjusted to account for weighting listed above. It should be noted, the final weighted scores were not the only factor used to determine phasing. Connectivity to prior phase(s) and geographic equity impacted ultimate rankings, with further adjustments to balance phasing lane miles and project complexity. For example, La Crescenta Avenue received 188 of 704
8 a weighted score of 53% but was included in Phase 1 because it is an already planned project.

The proposed network is divided into four phases. Each phase is estimated to take five years, totaling 20 years to complete all improvements.

Cost Estimate
The cost estimates provided in this report represent planning-level assessments intended to provide an initial understanding of project expenses. These estimates serve as a foundation for individual bikeway projects, with further refinement expected during subsequent design phases. Cost estimates do not necessarily include the full cost of the associated capital project as bike projects are done in conjunction with larger repaving or reconfiguration projects. These estimates do not include the costs of items such as sidewalk ADA upgrades or full repaving.

Table 1 illustrates the rounded per mile cost estimates for different facility types in the Glendale Bike Plan are as follows:

Table 2 outlines the rounded cost estimates by phase:

These estimates are detailed in Exhibit 4 of the memo provided by consultant Buro Happold.
189 of 704
9 STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Outreach was conducted in two phases to provide the public with a tangible framework to ensure the most valuable feedback. During the first phase of the project, which established existing conditions and set project goals, the project team participated in a variety of public outreach events. Outreach was primarily focused on understanding how the community bikes or perceives biking in Glendale, and engage the public in the planning process. The team participated in seven events for the first phase of outreach in 2023:

1. April 22: City Earth Day Fair, Pacific Community Center & Park

2. April 27: Earth Day Celebration, Glendale Community College

3. April 27: Shaping the Future of Energy, Central Library

4. May 17: Bike to Workday

5. June 10: Mayor Bike Ride & Americana at Brand outreach event

6. June 22: Go Glendale Bike Safety 101 Workshop

7. June 24: Bike Safety Day, Pacific Park
During the seven events, attendees completed a survey, shared their opinions on interactive boards, and provided their contact information for further engagement. The survey was available online in English, Armenian, Spanish, and Korean and asked 17 questions about biking, safety, trip types, priorities, and demographics. Over 400 community members responsed to the survey.

Overarching themes from the survey and outreach events were that people wanted safe, connected, and useable bike infrastructure. Alongside the public events and survey, the BTP updates and progress were shared online on the City website and through nonprofit organizations’ websites such as Walk Bike Glendale and Go Glendale.

Additionally, details about the plan and outreach efforts were disseminated via enewsletters from the Office of Sustainability, Community Services and Parks, Economic Development, and Walk Bike Glendale. Similarly, physical flyers were distributed to key locations, including bike shops, the Glendale YMCA, all City libraries, and during the Riverwalk Workday event.

Dates of the second phase of outreach for proposed Bikelane Network in 2023:

1. October 21: Glendale Annual Fall Festival, Pacific Community Center & Park

2. October 27: Youth & Student Workshop, Glendale Community College

3. November 8: Teen Workshop for 13- to 18-year-olds, Central Library

4. November 11: BTP Open House, Spar Heights Community Center

5. November 12: BTP Open House at the Adult Recreation Center The second phase of outreach allowed the public to view the comments received from phase one in a visual format. Attendees of these events had the ability to comment both digitally and physically on display boards.
190 of 704
10 This second phase garnered greater interaction by the public as it demonstrated a map of the proposed Bikelane Network.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
N/A

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. Note and file the report and provide further direction and refinement to the proposed Bicycle Transportation Plan.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Arezoo Kamali, Planning Associate
Fred Zohrehvand, Principal Mobility Planner
Approved by:

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

Exhibit 1: City of Glendale Proposed Bikelane Network
Exhibit 2: City of Glendale Proposed Network Phase 1 to 4 Exhibit 3: City of Glendale Geographic Areas
Exhibit 4: Cost Estimate
Exhibit 5: Policy Recommendation
Exhibit 6: TPC, SC, and PC Comments and Recommendations Exhibit 7: Facility Definitions
Exhibit 8: Crash Analysis Findings
191 of 704
MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded by Council
Member , that with respect to the Report to the City Council dated July 30, 2024 pertaining to the Update on the Bicycle Transportation Plan, the City Council directs staff as to the Bikelane Network, implementation phasing, cost estimate and policy recommendations as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain
192 of 704
City of Glendale
Proposed Bike Network
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
EXHIBIT 1
193 of 704

PACIFIC AVE

HONOLULU AVE

PENNSYLVANIA AVE NEW YORK AVE

LA CRESCENTA AVE

ACACIA AVE

WILSON AVE

CENTRAL AVE

BRAND BLVD

ADAMS ST

CHEVY CHASE DR

KENNETH RD

VICTORY SONORA AVE
BLVD

FLOWER ST PELANCONI AVE

GLENOAKS BLVD

PALMER AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 1 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Current Phase
March 2024
EXHIBIT 2
194 of 704

GRANDVIEW AVE

BOSTON AV

SAN FERNANDO BLVD

RAMSDELL AVE

ROSEMONT AVE

VERDUGO BLVD

ROSELAWN AVE

LAS PALMAS AVE

VERDUGO RD

STOCKER ST

WESTERN AVE

HAZEL ST

FAIRMONT AVE

HIGHLAND AVE

LEXINGTON DR

LOUISE ST

COLUMBUS AVE

MAPLE ST

DORAN ST

ADAMS ST

MONTEREY RD

ROCK GLEN AVE

LOWELL AV FOOTHILL BLVD

MONTROSE AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

MAYFIELD AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 2 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Current Phase
March 2024 195 of 704

OPECHEE WAY

GLORIETTA AVE

KENILWORTH AVE

CONCORD STPACIFIC AVEORANGE ST

HIGHLAND AVE

GLENWOOD RD

ALLEN AVE
CAÑADA BLVD

GLENOAKS BLVD

COLORADO ST

HARVARD ST

STOCKER ST

GOODE AVE

LOS FELIZ RD

SAN FERNANDO RD

CERRITOS AVE

CENTRAL AVE

GLENDALE AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 3 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Current Phase
March 2024 196 of 704

MOUNTAIN ST

CUMBERLAND RD

ETHEL ST

DAVIS AVE

LAKE ST

JACKSON ST

BRAND BLVD

CEDAR ST

BRAND BLVD

CHEVY CHASE DR

ALAMEDA AVE

BROADVIEW DR

LINCOLN AVE HARVARD ST

PALMER AVE

MARKRIDGE RD

MOUNTAIN ST

MONTEREY RD

VALLEY VIEW RD

GLENOAKS BLVD

EAST CALIFORNIA AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 4 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Current Phase
March 2024 197 of 704

PACIFIC AVE

BRAND BLVD

HONOLULU AVE

PENNSYLVANIA AVE NEW YORK AVE

LA CRESCENTA AVE

ACACIA AVE

WILSON AVE

CENTRAL AVE

ADAMS ST

CHEVY CHASE DR

KENNETH RD

SONORA AVE

VICTORY BLVD

FLOWER ST PELANCONI AVE

GLENOAKS BLVD

PALMER AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 1 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 miles
198 of 704

GRANDVIEW AVE

BOSTON AV

SAN FERNANDO BLVD

RAMSDELL AVE

ROSEMONT AVE

VERDUGO BLVD

ROSELAWN AVE

LAS PALMAS AVE

VERDUGO RD

STOCKER ST

WESTERN AVE

HAZEL ST

FAIRMONT AVE

HIGHLAND AVE

LEXINGTON DR

COLUMBUS AVELOUISE ST

MAPLE ST

DORAN ST

ADAMS ST

MONTEREY RD

ROCK GLEN AVE

LOWELL AV FOOTHILL BLVD

MONTROSE AVE

DUNSMORE AVE

MAYFIELD AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 2 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 miles
199 of 704

OPECHEE WAY

GLORIETTA AVE

KENILWORTH AVE

CONCORD ST

PACIFIC AVE

ORANGE ST

HIGHLAND AVE

GLENWOOD RD

ALLEN AVE
CAÑADA BLVD

GLENOAKS BLVD

COLORADO ST

HARVARD ST

STOCKER ST

GOODE AVE

LOS FELIZ RD

SAN FERNANDO RD

CERRITOS AVE

CENTRAL AVE

GLENDALE AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 3 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 miles
200 of 704

MOUNTAIN ST

CUMBERLAND RD

ETHEL ST

DAVIS AVE

LAKE ST

BRAND BLVD

JACKSON ST

CEDAR ST

BRAND BLVD

CHEVY CHASE DR

ALAMEDA AVE

BROADVIEW DR

LINCOLN AVE

HARVARD ST

PALMER AVE

MARKRIDGE RD

MOUNTAIN ST

MONTEREY RD

VALLEY VIEW RD

GLENOAKS BLVD

EAST CALIFORNIA AVE
Length (Miles)
Propose Facility Type 1 2 3 4 Total
Class I Multi-Use Path 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Class IV Protected Multi-Use Path 17.1 14.0 10.0 5.7 46.7 Class III Bike Blvd 1.7 12.9 3.8 6.5 24.9
Class III Bike Route 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.6
Class II Bike Lane 4.7 1.9 1.4 5.4 13.2
Class II Climbing 1.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.5
Total 25.0 31.2 16.0 18.0 90.3
City of Glendale
Proposed Network
Phase 4 of 4
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Bridges & Entrances
Exist. Bike-Ped Access
Glendale-LA Garden River
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 miles
201 of 704
City of Glendale
Geographic Areas
North
Glendale
Central
Glendale
West
Glendale
South
Glendale
Existing Network
Existing Bike Facility
Planned Projects
Verdugo Wash
Metro BRT
Proposed Network
Class I Shared Use
Class II
Class II Climbing
Class III Route
Class III Bike Blvd
Class IV Protected
March 2024
EXHIBIT 3
202 of 704
Memorandum
To City of Glendale Date April 24, 2024
From Buro Happold Job no 0051385
Copied to
Subject Glendale Bike Plan Final Phasing and Cost Estimate 1 Introduction
The attached cost estimates are planning-level costs that reflect a high-level estimation of the project costs. Each estimation represents a starting point for separate bikeway projects and are expected to be further refined as projects move through design stages. Cost estimates do not necessarily include the full cost of the associated capital project since bike projects are done with larger repaving or reconfiguration projects that often include full street paving and ADA upgrades. The estimated costs do not encompass these associated non-bike improvements, making them subject to change based on future developments.

For all facility types except Class I and Class III bike routes, high- and low-cost estimates are provided to identify a range of potential project costs. The differences account for ranges in treatment considerations, with high-cost estimates typically reflecting additional facility design features and roadway improvements such as full or partial repaving of the roadway.

Total estimated project costs of the proposed 20-year network are shown in Table 3. The high proportion of Class IV protected bikeways in the proposed network (52% of the network by mileage) results in a safer and more inviting network that also costs more on a per-mile basis. The estimated costs also do not reflect locations where complementary improvements are already partially existing, such as speed hump and cushions and traffic circles, which may result in costs lower than estimated for those Class III bike boulevard corridors. 2 Methodology & Data Sources
Opinions of probable cost were developed by identifying major pay items and establishing rough quantities to determine a rough order of magnitude cost. Contingencies are included to cover items that are undefined or are typically unknown early in the planning phase of a project. Unit costs are based on 2023 dollars and were assigned based on historical cost data from the Caltrans Contract Cost Data. Unit costs were determined through recent bids provided by the City of Glendale1 and through Caltrans Cost Data, and are noted within the Master Unit Costs table.

Cost opinions do not include easement and right-of-way acquisition; permitting; surveying, geotechnical investigation, environmental documentation, special site remediation, escalation, or the cost for ongoing maintenance. A general cost has been assigned to certain general categories such as utility relocations; however, these costs can vary widely depending on the exact details and nature of the work. The overall cost opinions are intended to be general and used only for planning purposes. TDG Engineering, Inc. makes no guarantees or 1 San Fernando Road Beautification Project; La Crescenta Ave Rehabilitation Project; North Brand Complete Street Demonstration Project; Palmer Ave and Green Street Rehabilitation Project; Fiscal Year 2023 Slurry Seal and Crack Seal Program EXHIBIT 4
203 of 704

BURO HAPPOLD
warranties regarding the cost estimate herein. Construction costs will vary based on the ultimate project scope, actual site conditions and constraints, schedule, and economic conditions at the time of construction.

Actual costs may vary based on project scope and current market conditions. Caltrans maintains historical cost indices and forecast at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/design/pjs/index.html Assumptions for each facility type are documented in the cost estimates, creating an estimated cost per mile of that facility treatment. Those costs were then applied to proposed project lengths. For proposed Class II climbing lanes, typical Class II bike lane costs were applied, as the costs involved in striping removal are approximately the same, and the cost difference of the downhill striping is expected to be offset by the addition of required shared lane markings.

2.1 Soft Costs and Contingencies
As applicable, contingencies for construction, environmental impacts, drainage, utilities, and design are assumed.

Contingencies that vary facility type to facility type are based upon our experience with the complexities of implementing them. Costs associated with outreach and engagement activities that occur during project design phases are incorporated into Engineering and Design Costs.

Soft costs are described below in Table 1.

Table 1 Contingency Costs, by percent of Construction Costs Contingency Percentage
Engineering and Design Costs, Outreach 25%
Mobilization 5%
Traffic Control 5%
Construction Management 10%
Construction Cost Contingency 20%
Utility Contingency 5%
Drainage Contingency 5%
Environmental Contingency 5%
3 Cost Estimates
For Class III bike boulevards, Class II bike lanes, and Class IV protected lanes, separate low and high costs are provided to account for variations in potential treatments and details of implementation, such as repaving.

Class III Bike Routes and Class I Shared Use Paths make up a small portion of the network by mileage and have a more limited range in possible treatment designs. As such, both of those facility types received a single cost estimate.

3.1 Explanation of Low Cost
For low end costs, the below details per facility broadly include:
- Class III Bike Boulevard: Speed humps, bikeway directional signage and speed hump signage, shared lane markings, and road lane striping
- Class II Bike Lane: Removal of existing roadway striping, installation of bike lane striping, installation of green conflict marking striping at intersections
204 of 704

BURO HAPPOLD
- Class IV Protected Bike Lane: Bike detection loops, installation of bicycle traffic signals, curb ramps and crosswalk striping at signalized intersections, signage, traffic and buffer striping, green conflict markings at intersections, and K-71 bollards

3.2 Explanation of High Cost
Estimated high-end costs reflect implementation of additional facility design considerations and roadway improvements, as well as items such as paving. High-end cost estimations, by facility include:
- Class III Bike Boulevard: All improvements identified under low-cost, as well as installation of landscaped traffic circles at regular intervals and upgraded curb ramps at intersections with traffic circles - Class II Bike Lane: Roadway repaving, all improvements identified under low cost save for the removal of existing roadway striping
- Class IV Bike Lane: Installation of concrete curb buffer, partial roadway repaving for bike lanes and within the sawcut boundaries for the installation of the concrete buffer, and all improvements under low cost save for bollards

3.3 Unit Cost by Facility Type
Table 2 Proposed Network Per Mile Estimates
Facility Type
Rounded Per Mile Cost Estimate
(2023)
Low Cost High Cost
Class I $ 9,000,000
Class II $ 710,000 $ 3,330,000
Class III - Bike Route $ 470,000
Class III - Bike Boulevard $ 880,000 $ 1,770,000
Class IV $ 2,590,000 $ 9,170,000

3.4 Total Cost by Phase
Table 3 Cost Estimates by Phase
Phase
Rounded Cost Estimate
(2023)
Low Cost High Cost
1 $ 50,232,000 $ 180,219,000
2 $ 53,160,000 $ 166,800,000
3 $ 30,750,000 $ 103,470,000
4 $ 24,418,000 $ 81,451,000
Total $ 158,560,000 $ 531,940,000

3.5 Comparison with Public Works Estimates
Additional estimates provided by Department of Public Works (PW) detail probable costs based on road classification and Pavement Condition Index (PCI) records as of Winter 2024. Ranges provided vary by pavement condition, with better condition (over 74) resulting in lower estimates. Where condition was especially poor 205 of 704

BURO HAPPOLD
(below 40), further investigation was noted and no estimate provided. A 10% contingency for design and planning soft costs and a 10% contingency for operations and maintenance costs were requested.

These estimates vary from the BTP estimates as they reflect the assumption of bicycle facility implementation as part of a larger capital project. The PW estimates include non-bicycle related treatments including full road repaving and ADA upgrades (sidewalks and curb ramps). Whereas the BTP estimates reflect the incremental cost of the bicycle facility. Overall, the PW approach is more expansive, assigning the full capital expense to the bicycle facility, whereas the BTP approach only incorporates some of these treatments. The PW costs do not specify what treatment types, such as Class IV bike lane separator or Class III bike boulevard traffic calming treatments, are integrated into their assumptions.

As shown in Table 4, the greatest differences occur in treatments where full or partial repaving is not integrated (Class II low costs and both Class III – Bike Boulevard costs). It should be noted that exact comparisons between costs may be misleading given the range of assumptions covered in PW capital project costs.

Table 4 Public Works Estimates Comparison (Cost per Mile) Facility Type Local Roads –
PW Estimate
Arterial and
Collector Roads –
PW Estimate
BTP Cost
Estimates
Class I Not provided Not provided $ 9,000,000
Class II $3,000,000 -
$4,800,000
$4,800,000 -
$7,200,000
$710,000-
$3,330,000
Class III - Bike
Route Not provided Not provided $470,000
Class III - Bike
Boulevard
$1,800,000 -
$3,600,000
$3,600,000 -
$6,000,000
$880,000 -
$1,770,00
Class IV $4,200,000 -
$6,000,000
$6,000,000 -
$8,400,000
$2,590,000 -
$9,170,000
4 Appendix
See attached table.
206 of 704
Street Name From To Proposed Facility Zone Phase
Centerline
Length
(Miles)
Low Cost
(2023)
High Cost
(2023)
Weighted
Score
Phase 1
PACIFIC AV Glenoaks Blvd Kenneth Rd class ii Central Glendale 1 0.72 520,000 $ 2,400,000 $ 92% KENNETH RD Grandview Ave Sonora Ave class iii blvd Central Glendale 1 0.11 100,000 $ 200,000 $ 86% KENNETH RD Western Glendale City Limits Brand Blvd class ii Central Glendale 1 2.33 1,660,000 $ 7,760,000 $ 75% HONOLULU AV Verdugo Rd Las Palmas class iii blvd North Glendale 1 0.39 350,000 $ 700,000 $ 88% HONOLULU AV Las Palmas Boston Ave class iv protected North Glendale 1 2.18 5,650,000 $ 20,000,000 $ 69% PENNSYLVANIA AV Honolulu Ave Montrose Ave class iv protected North Glendale 1 0.31 810,000 $ 2,850,000 $ 59% NEW YORK AV Honolulu Ave Markridge Rd class ii climbing North Glendale 1 1.55 1,110,000 $ 5,170,000 $ 58% LA CRESCENTA AV Verdugo Rd Honolulu Ave class iv protected North Glendale 1 1.26 3,270,000 $ 11,560,000 $ 53% NEW YORK AV Verdugo Wash Honolulu Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 1 0.22 200,000 $ 390,000 $ 51% LA CRESCENTA AV Montrose Ave Honolulu Ave class ii North Glendale 1 0.31 230,000 $ 1,040,000 $ 29% ACACIA AV Chevy Chase Dr Verdugo Rd class iv protected South Glendale 1 0.36 940,000 $ 3,310,000 $ 93% WILSON AV San Fernando Rd Eastern Glendale Border class iv protected South Glendale 1 2.57 6,660,000 $ 23,570,000 $ 91% BRAND BLVD Glenoaks Blvd Mountain St class iv protected South Glendale 1 0.52 1,322,000 $ 4,679,000 $ 91% CENTRAL AV Glenoaks Blvd San Fernando Rd class iv protected South Glendale 1 2.26 5,860,000 $ 20,730,000 $ 90% ADAMS ST Chevy Chase Dr - Colorado St Wilson Ave - Doran St class iii blvd South Glendale 1 1.03 910,000 $ 1,830,000 $ 85% ADAMS ST Colorado St Wilson Ave class ii South Glendale 1 0.38 270,000 $ 1,270,000 $ 81% CHEVY CHASE DR Western Glendale City Limits Tyler St class iv protected South Glendale 1 1.51 3,920,000 $ 13,850,000 $ 79% PALMER AV Adams St Adams St class ii South Glendale 1 0.01 10,000 $ 40,000 $ 74% GLENOAKS BLVD Western Glendale Limits Geneva St class iv protected West Glendale 1 3.36 8,710,000 $ 30,820,000 $ 88% SONORA AV Glenoaks Blvd Kenneth Rd class ii West Glendale 1 0.43 300,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 86% SONORA AV Southern Glendale border Glenoaks Blvd class iv protected West Glendale 1 0.88 2,280,000 $ 8,070,000 $ 62% VICTORY BLVD Western Glendale Border Riverside Dr class iv protected West Glendale 1 0.58 1,510,000 $ 5,320,000 $ 51% FLOWER ST Fairmont Ave Allen Ave class iv protected West Glendale 1 1.27 3,290,000 $ 11,650,000 $ 45% PELANCONI AV San Fernando Rd Glenoaks Blvd class ii West Glendale 1 0.25 180,000 $ 840,000 $ 28% FLOWER ST San Fernando Rd Fairmont Ave class ii West Glendale 1 0.23 170,000 $ 770,000 $ 26% 207 of 704
Street Name From To Proposed Facility Zone Phase
Centerline
Length
(Miles)
Low Cost
(2023)
High Cost
(2023)
Weighted
Score
Phase 2
VERDUGO RD Glendale Ave Honolulu Ave class iv protected Central Glendale 2 3.00 7,770,000 $ 27,510,000 $ 79% GRANDVIEW AV Kenneth Rd Mountain St class iii blvd Central Glendale 2 0.55 490,000 $ 980,000 $ 63% GRANDVIEW AV Glenaoks Blvd Kenneth Rd class ii Central Glendale 2 0.53 380,000 $ 1,770,000 $ 62% MOUNTAIN ST Western Glendale Border Grandview class iii blvd Central Glendale 2 1.28 1,130,000 $ 2,270,000 $ 58% HIGHLAND AV Glenwood Rd Mountain St class iii blvd Central Glendale 2 0.72 640,000 $ 1,280,000 $ 51% MONTEREY RD Naranja Dr Verdugo Rd class iii blvd Central Glendale 2 0.13 120,000 $ 240,000 $ 44% GALER PL 134 Freeway Monterey Rd class iii route Central Glendale 2 0.04 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 27% VERDUGO BLVD Honolulu Ave Eastern Glendale Border class iv protected North Glendale 2 0.60 1,530,000 $ 5,420,000 $ 78% FOOTHILL BLVD Western Glendale Limits Eastern Glendale Border class iv protected North Glendale 2 1.25 3,240,000 $ 11,470,000 $ 76% RAMSDELL AV Montrose Ave La Crescenta Ave class ii climbing North Glendale 2 0.31 230,000 $ 1,040,000 $ 61% DUNSMORE AV Honolulu Ave Markridge Rd class ii climbing North Glendale 2 1.47 1,050,000 $ 4,900,000 $ 58% MONTROSE AV Pennsylvania Ave Roselawn Ave class iv protected North Glendale 2 0.97 2,520,000 $ 8,900,000 $ 54% ROSEMONT AV Sycamore Ave Montrose Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.35 310,000 $ 620,000 $ 52% LOWELL AV Honolulu Ave Mayfield Ave class ii climbing North Glendale 2 0.16 120,000 $ 540,000 $ 49% LAS PALMAS AV La Crescenta Ave Honolulu Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.52 460,000 $ 930,000 $ 49% ROSELAWN AV La Crescenta Ave Sycamore Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.39 350,000 $ 700,000 $ 49% MARKRIDGE RD New York Ave Boston Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.50 440,000 $ 890,000 $ 46% MAYFIELD AV Lowell Ave Boston Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.32 290,000 $ 570,000 $ 27% BOSTON AV Honolulu Ave Mayfield Ave class iii blvd North Glendale 2 0.19 170,000 $ 340,000 $ 23% COLUMBUS AV Chevy Chase Dr 134 Freeway class iii blvd South Glendale 2 1.55 1,370,000 $ 2,750,000 $ 92% SAN FERNANDO RD Grandview Ave Colorado St class iv protected South Glendale 2 1.53 3,970,000 $ 14,040,000 $ 89% VERDUGO RD Southern Glendale Border Mountain St class iv protected South Glendale 2 2.15 5,570,000 $ 19,720,000 $ 88% SAN FERNANDO RD Colorado St Southern Glendale Border class iv protected South Glendale 2 1.90 4,930,000 $ 17,430,000 $ 87% DORAN ST Concord St - Brand Blvd Maryland Ave - Naranja Dr class iii blvd South Glendale 2 1.57 1,390,000 $ 2,780,000 $ 82% LEXINGTON DR Central Ave Maryland Ave class iv protected South Glendale 2 0.24 630,000 $ 2,210,000 $ 78% LEXINGTON DR Kennilworth Dr - Central Ave Maryland Ave - Verdugo Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 2 1.49 1,320,000 $ 2,640,000 $ 74% LOUISE ST Glenoaks Blvd Maple St class iii blvd South Glendale 2 1.36 1,200,000 $ 2,410,000 $ 73% MAPLE ST Pacific Ave Verdugo Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 2 1.77 1,560,000 $ 3,140,000 $ 73% DORAN ST Central Ave - Maryland Concord St - San Fernando Rd class iv protected South Glendale 2 0.48 1,250,000 $ 4,410,000 $ 67% ADAMS ST Chevy Chase Blvd Southern Glendale Border class ii South Glendale 2 0.59 420,000 $ 1,970,000 $ 61% ROCK GLEN AV Lincoln Ave Verdugo Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 2 0.23 210,000 $ 410,000 $ 57% FAIRMONT AV Flower St Concord St class iv protected West Glendale 2 0.75 1,950,000 $ 6,880,000 $ 69% STOCKER ST Brand Blvd Pacific Ave class ii West Glendale 2 0.57 410,000 $ 1,900,000 $ 66% WESTERN AV Victory Blvd Riverside Dr class ii West Glendale 2 0.17 130,000 $ 570,000 $ 53% WESTERN AV Glenoaks Blvd San Fernando Rd/Victory Blvd class iv protected West Glendale 2 0.64 1,660,000 $ 5,870,000 $ 48% WESTERN AV San Fernando Rd Flower St class i West Glendale 2 0.28 2,520,000 $ 2,520,000 $ 44% GRANDVIEW AV Flower St Glenoaks Blvd class iv protected West Glendale 2 0.51 1,330,000 $ 4,680,000 $ 33% HAZEL ST 5 Freeway Flower St class iii route West Glendale 2 0.16 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 23% 208 of 704
Street Name From To Proposed Facility Zone Phase
Centerline
Length
(Miles)
Low Cost
(2023)
High Cost
(2023)
Weighted
Score
Phase 3
STOCKER ST Rossmont Ave Brand Blvd class iii blvd Central Glendale 3 0.78 690,000 $ 1,390,000 $ 80% CANADA BLVD Verdugo Rd Verdugo Rd class iv protected Central Glendale 3 1.72 4,460,000 $ 15,780,000 $ 76% ALLEN AV Glenoaks Blvd Mountain St class iii blvd Central Glendale 3 0.96 840,000 $ 1,690,000 $ 70% OPECHEE WAY Verdugo Ct Verdugo Rd class iii route Central Glendale 3 0.43 210,000 $ 210,000 $ 54% GLENOAKS BLVD Ethel St Verdugo Rd class iv protected Central Glendale 3 0.32 830,000 $ 2,940,000 $ 44% GLENOAKS BLVD Geneva St Ethel St class iii blvd Central Glendale 3 0.36 320,000 $ 640,000 $ 39% GLORIETTA AV Canada Blvd Verdugo Rd class iii route Central Glendale 3 0.20 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 23% GLENDALE AV Colorado St Verdugo Rd class iv protected South Glendale 3 1.52 3,940,000 $ 13,940,000 $ 91% PACIFIC AV Colorado St Glenoaks Blvd class iv protected South Glendale 3 1.17 3,040,000 $ 10,730,000 $ 91% COLORADO ST San Fernando Rd Eastern Glendale City Limits class iv protected South Glendale 3 2.34 6,070,000 $ 21,460,000 $ 90% GLENDALE AV Colorado St San Fernando Rd class iv protected South Glendale 3 1.40 3,630,000 $ 12,840,000 $ 87% HARVARD ST Glendale Ave Adams St class iii blvd South Glendale 3 0.36 320,000 $ 640,000 $ 80% PACIFIC AV Elk Ave San Fernando Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 3 0.32 290,000 $ 570,000 $ 79% ORANGE ST Doran St Broadway class iv protected South Glendale 3 0.57 1,480,000 $ 5,230,000 $ 75% LOS FELIZ RD Gardena Ave Glendale Ave class iv protected South Glendale 3 0.47 1,220,000 $ 4,310,000 $ 72% CENTRAL AV Glendale Transportation Center San Fernando Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 3 0.15 140,000 $ 270,000 $ 68% PACIFIC AV Colorado St Elk Ave class ii South Glendale 3 0.06 50,000 $ 200,000 $ 64% CERRITOS AV San Fernando Rd Glendale Ave class ii South Glendale 3 0.21 150,000 $ 670,000 $ 63% CONCORD ST Broadway Glenoaks Blvd class ii South Glendale 3 0.91 650,000 $ 3,040,000 $ 60% CERRITOS AV Glendale Transportation Center San Fernando Rd class iii blvd South Glendale 3 0.13 120,000 $ 240,000 $ 58% KENILWORTH AV South St Concord St class iii blvd West Glendale 3 0.12 110,000 $ 220,000 $ 74% KENILWORTH AV South St Glenoaks Blvd class iii blvd West Glendale 3 0.23 210,000 $ 410,000 $ 74% CONCORD ST Glenoaks Blvd Glenwood class iii blvd West Glendale 3 0.37 330,000 $ 660,000 $ 67% GLENWOOD RD Virginia Ave School St class iii route West Glendale 3 0.24 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 67% GLENWOOD RD Pacific Ave Virginia Ave class ii West Glendale 3 0.20 150,000 $ 670,000 $ 63% GOODE AV Brand Blvd Central Ave class iv protected West Glendale 3 0.17 450,000 $ 1,560,000 $ 48% HIGHLAND AV Glenoaks Blvd San Fernando Rd class iv protected West Glendale 3 0.32 830,000 $ 2,940,000 $ 31% 209 of 704
Street Name From To Proposed Facility Zone Phase
Centerline
Length
(Miles)
Low Cost
(2023)
High Cost
(2023)
Weighted
Score
Phase 4
BRAND BLVD Mountain St Kenneth Rd class iii route Central Glendale 4 0.30 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 82% GLENOAKS BLVD Verdugo Rd Arcade Place class ii Central Glendale 4 1.84 1,310,000 $ 6,130,000 $ 79% CHEVY CHASE DR Solway St Eastern Glendale Border class ii Central Glendale 4 2.69 1,910,000 $ 8,960,000 $ 72% JACKSON ST Doran St Glenoaks Blvd class iv protected Central Glendale 4 0.25 650,000 $ 2,300,000 $ 68% MOUNTAIN ST Ethel St Verdugo Rd class iii route Central Glendale 4 0.12 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 65% MONTEREY RD Jackson St Naranja Dr class iv protected Central Glendale 4 0.64 1,660,000 $ 5,870,000 $ 62% ETHEL ST Glenoaks Blvd Mountain St class iii blvd Central Glendale 4 0.59 520,000 $ 1,050,000 $ 55% VALLEY VIEW RD Cumberland Rd Kenneth Rd class iii blvd Central Glendale 4 0.13 120,000 $ 240,000 $ 51% ALAMEDA AV Bel Aire Dr Glenoaks Blvd class iii blvd Central Glendale 4 0.64 570,000 $ 1,140,000 $ 46% CUMBERLAND RD Valley View Rd Highland Ave class iii blvd Central Glendale 4 0.66 590,000 $ 1,170,000 $ 27% ROSSMOYNE AV Dryden St Stocker St class iii route Central Glendale 4 0.09 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 21% ROSSMOYNE AV Dryden St Ethel St class iii blvd Central Glendale 4 0.06 60,000 $ 110,000 $ 21% BROADVIEW DR Roselawn Ave Verdugo Rd class iii blvd North Glendale 4 0.57 510,000 $ 1,010,000 $ 62% CALIFORNIA AV Brand Blvd - Isabel St Glendale Ave - Cedar St class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.43 380,000 $ 770,000 $ 93% CALIFORNIA AV Isabel St Glendale Ave class ii South Glendale 4 0.18 130,000 $ 600,000 $ 93% BRAND BLVD Colorado St Glenoaks Blvd class iv protected South Glendale 4 1.16 3,008,000 $ 10,641,000 $ 91% CHEVY CHASE DR Acacia Ave Solway St class iv protected South Glendale 4 2.11 5,470,000 $ 19,350,000 $ 89% BRAND BLVD Southern Glendale City Limits Colorado St class iv protected South Glendale 4 1.50 3,890,000 $ 13,760,000 $ 87% JACKSON ST California Ave Broadway class ii South Glendale 4 0.25 180,000 $ 840,000 $ 86% JACKSON ST Harvard St Stocker St class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.83 740,000 $ 1,470,000 $ 79% LINCOLN AV Rock Glen Ave Colorado St class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.17 150,000 $ 310,000 $ 77% HARVARD ST Brand Blvd Glendale Ave class ii South Glendale 4 0.40 290,000 $ 1,340,000 $ 77% PALMER AV Glendale Ave Adams St class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.56 500,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 76% CEDAR ST Lexington Dr Colorado St class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.64 570,000 $ 1,140,000 $ 61% GARDENA AV Central Ave Cerritos Ave class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.14 130,000 $ 250,000 $ 51% GARDENA AV Los Feliz Boulevard Central Ave class iii blvd South Glendale 4 0.14 130,000 $ 250,000 $ 46% LAKE ST Western Glendale Border Davis Ave class iii blvd West Glendale 4 0.76 670,000 $ 1,350,000 $ 29% DAVIS AV Garden St Lake St class iii blvd West Glendale 4 0.13 120,000 $ 240,000 $ 26% 210 of 704
E X H I B I T 5

BIKE SUPPORTIVE

POLICIES AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
COPYRIGHT © 1976-2021 BURO HAPPOLD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 23 211 of 704
Bike Supportive policies and
Recommendations

1. 2.

3. 4.

Regularly collect data on bicycling in Glendale
Maintain updated bicycle network map and information
Provide convenient and accessible bicycle parking throughout Glendale Incorporate bicycle facilities in new developments through zoning requirements

5. Pilot active transportation projects to gauge impact and build support

6. Incorporate bicycle network implementation and maintenance into regular road repairs

7. 8.

Conduct education outreach campaigns
Lower speed limits

9. End penalties for bicycle safety measures

10. Prohbit vehicles from turning right on red lights in areas with high bicycle and pedestrian traffic

11. Adopt guidelines for reconfiguring traffic lanes in the General Plan Circulation Element

12. Improve bicycle safety at intersections
COPYRIGHT © 1976-2021 BURO HAPPOLD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 24 212 of 704
213 of 704
214 of 704
215 of 704
216 of 704
217 of 704
218 of 704
219 of 704
220 of 704
221 of 704
222 of 704
223 of 704
224 of 704
General Comments
• Concerned about the lack of inclusivity for bicyclist for people with disabili�es, elderly, and children. Commute doesn’t seem a logical when the majority of residents are motorists. • Is there a cost es�mate for the construc�on, opera�ons, and maintenance of the proposed network?
o The dra� cost es�mate is undergoing internal city review and will be presented to City Council once veted.
• There was a series of comments/ques�ons about the post cards sent out related to a current street project and how best to involve the public in these types of projects. o Commissioner asked if it was possible to see all outreach materials before they are sent out.
• How does AI and self-driving vehicles affect this plan? o The regulatory regime will shape the adop�on of self-driving cars. However, regardless that technology, this is a plan to make it safe and enjoyable to bike all over Glendale for all ages and abili�es.
• When was the Circula�on Element last updated?
o In 1998. It is being updated now.

Suppor�ng Infrastructure and Policies
• Asked for clarifica�on on how bike ac�vated traffic signals work and how they compare to pedestrian signals.
• Comment that does not agree with legalizing sidewalk riding in business districts. • Comment that motorized vehicles and e-mobility should be prohibited from using the sidewalk. • Do peer ci�es or other jurisdic�ons allow sidewalk riding? Is there safety data to indicate the poten�al impacts on pedestrians?
o There is not consistently good data on crashes that occur on sidewalks between pedestrians and cyclists. The sample size is very small and the data is uneven. Pasadena and Glendale have no reported crashes, and Los Angeles has six such crashes in the past five years. In general, ped-bike crashes resul�ng in injury are rare across the region and vehicles pose the greatest threat to pedestrians and cyclists. • Comment that people ride on sidewalks because Glendale does not have a safe, in-street network. Lacking a safe place to ride in the street means some people who have to ride may ride on the sidewalk. There should be a compromise where sidewalk riding is allowable if there isn’t a dedicated bike lane on the street.
• Anything about bicycle licensing in the plan?
o No, this is not part of the bike plan. Licensing people to ride bikes creates a large barrier to biking and is not a common practice.
• Comment on how reducing speed limits could impact traffic. • Comment that an education campaign is needed to teach rights and responsibilities of the roadway to all road users.
• Comment expressing concern about prohibiting right turns on red. • Can the city collect data on bike parking in private buildings, especially new buildings.

EXHIBIT 6
225 of 704
Opera�ons and Maintenance
• How will bike lanes be maintained? Will special staff be required to maintain them? Lane Reconfigura�on
• What can be learned from the redesign of Figueroa Street in Los Angeles? o The street redesign has resulted in a 11% decrease in vehicle volumes and a decrease in average speed and speeding. Bicycle traffic decreased by 4% and pedestrian traffic increased by 8%. Ac�ve modes on the corridor increased from 17% to 24% a�er the redesign.
• Have you spoken with emergency services (PD and FD) about the plan? o No, we have been coordina�ng with Public Works and the public commissions.

Network and Phasing
• Which of these projects are included in the CIP?
o The project team is working with Public Works to align Phase I with the CIP. In general, projects that can happen sooner than the assigned phase due to funding or capital projects, should be advanced.
• Can we see streets that are losing lanes a map of high and low volume streets? o A map of poten�al trade-offs has been produced along with miles of street type. • Comment sugges�ng that public engagement be weighted lower in the Weighted Score. • Can the railroad right of way along San Fernando be used for bike infrastructure? o Caltrans has reserved that land for high speed rail.
• Is there a poten�al to upgrade some of our exis�ng bike routes into bike boulevards? o Based on feedback from previous mee�ngs we have looked at these corridors and upgraded them where feasible.
• Comment that the bike facility on Honolulu should con�nue west under the freeway to connect directly to La Tuna Canyon Road.
• Include Glendale and Chevy Chase in Phase I in coordina�on with the CIP. • How were the geographic areas determined for the geographic equity map? o West Glendale aligns with the West Glendale Plan. South Glendale is everything south of the Ventura Freeway. North Glendale is everything north of where N Verdugo Road and La Crescenta Avenue split. And Central Glendale is everything else.

Crash Analysis
• How do you consider fault data in the crash analysis? 226 of 704
o The SWITRS parties data does collect fault data, however there are a few factors that complicate how that data is collected and interpreted. The main ones are police biases and presence or lack of bike infrastructure. For example, a bicyclist may feel more comfortable riding in ways technically illegal and be cited for it, especially where there is no bike facility.
• Is there a regional or national standard for crash density and rates, and how does Glendale compare?
o There is no such standard. The purpose of the crash analysis is to identify unsafe corridors in Glendale relative to the city itself. The information can also be used to identify other corridors that do not yet have high concentrations of crashes but share similar characteristics.
• Is the crash methodology used, including the crash density, a national standard. o There is no national standard for how to conduct a crash analysis. The important thing to take away from the crash analysis is to identify high crash corridors in Glendale. Based on feedback from the PDT, we expanded the analysis to include 10 years of data and property only crashes (PDO). Typical methodologies use only 5 years of data and injury involved crashes only.
• Relative to Los Angeles, Glendale appears to have safer streets. o The point of the crash analysis is to identify unsafe streets and look for solutions to improve safety and save lives. Data from other jurisdictions is not used to say, we are doing better, but rather to understand if the city’s trends are normal or irregular. In this case, the trend is similar to that of Los Angeles.
• Why in the crash analysis are they called Draft Safety Corridors? o To align with the language of AB43.
227 of 704
EXHIBIT 7
Bike Lane Types
Class I Multi-Use
Path
Class IV Protected
Bike Lane
Class II Bike Lane Class II Climbing
Lane
Class III Bike
Boulevard
Class III Bike Routes
An off-street facility with Bike lanes that are A conventional striped bike lane denoted by
pavement markings.

A striped bike lane in
the uphill direction that
provides separation
between bicyclists and
vehicles for bicyclists
ascending steep hills.

Low-stress, marked
bikeways located on
low-volume, low-speed
local streets that
Signed bike routes on
low-stress streets that
use a shared lane,
designated through
shared lane markings
and signage.
exclusive space for
bicyclists and
physically separated
from vehicle traffic and
parking lanes using
vertical and horizontal
features, such as
pedestrians, with
minimal crossings by
vehicle traffic.
operate as shared
streets. These require
traffic calming features
such as neighborhood
traffic circles, chicanes,
and traffic diverters to
maintain low vehicle
speeds and volumes.
bollards, planters, and
parked vehicles.

COPYRIGHT © 1976-2021 BURO HAPPOLD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 9 228 of 704
EXHIBIT 8
CRASH ANALYSIS – FINDINGS
Glendale Bicycle Plan Update
October 11, 2023
The below document outlines findings from the crash analysis portion of the Existing Conditions subtask of the Glendale Bicycle Plan Update. The crash analysis utilizes data on bicycle crashes from California’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and reflects requested changes to the Crash Analysis methodology.

Incorporating these changes, this analysis utilizes bicycle-involved crashes within the City of Glendale within a ten-year period between 2012 and 2021 and considers all bicycle crashes inclusive of property damage-only (PDO) crashes. Bicycle-involved crashes that took place on a state highway within Glendale have been excluded.

Summary Crash Statistics
The below section presents descriptive data derived from the last ten years of available data from bicycle crashes in the City of Glendale. The descriptive data also notes crashes included from the overall dataset that resulted in fatalities or severe injuries (killed or severely injured, or KSI). 229 of 704
2 General Crash Descriptions
Figure 1. Glendale Bicycle Crashes by Year (2012 – 2021) 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Other Crashes KSI Crashes
230 of 704
3 Figure 2. Bicycle Injury and Fatal Crashes Comparison by Year (2012 – 2021) Table 1. Bicycle Crashes by Year1
(excluding PDO crashes)
Total
Bicycle
Crashes
%
Crashes
# of KSI
Crashes % of KSI Injury and Fatal Crashes / 100,000 residents Glendale Pasadena LA County
2012 68 15% 2 10% 27.4 65.1 49.9
2013 61 14% 3 15% 29.8 68.5 46.5
2014 54 12% 4 20% 26.0 76.9 43.7
2015 53 12% 1 5% 21.7 51.1 41.2
2016 53 12% 3 15% 22.0 45.1 37.2
2017 48 11% 6 30% 22.3 45.8 35.6
2018 30 7% 1 5% 13.4 29.7 34.9
2019 32 7% 0 0% 15.6 43.3 33.1
1 The first column of each table lists total bicycle-involved crashes, including those resulting in fatalities or severe injuries (KSI). The KSI columns record the number of KSI crashes (20 total over ten years), and the percent of KSI crashes by year out of that separate total. 0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Glendale Injury and Fatal Crashes
LA County Injury and Fatal Crashes
Glendale LA County
231 of 704
4 2020 25 6% 0 0% 11.7 32.4 24.9
2021 21 5% 0 0% 10.4 39.8 18.4
Grand
Total 445 100% 20 100%
Bicycle crashes in Glendale have declined in the past ten years, from a peak in 2012 at the beginning of the observed period. The most number of severe injuries occurred in 2017. The decrease in overall bicycle-involved crashes in this period follows broader regional trends, as shown in Figure 2. KSI crashes in Glendale peaked in 2017, and none have been recorded in the last three years of the observed period.

The chart also shows rates of bicycle crashes resulting in injury or fatality per 100,000 residents, comparing to Pasadena and broader LA County. PDO crashes were excluded for comparison purposes. Pasadena, a peer city with similar land uses and approximately a third fewer people, also experienced a similar drop in crashes. While a multitude of factors likely influenced this trend, American Community Survey data does show bicycle commuting falling significantly in this period, suggesting fewer people were biking overall. When comparing by population, Glendale has fewer bicycle crashes per 100,000 people than LA County or Pasadena throughout this period.

It should be noted, however, that the data is not normalized by exposure and ridership, and data collected during 2020 and 2021 may be affected by changes in travel patterns brought upon by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additional factors such as land use, availability of bicycle facilities, and demographic composition also likely influence exposure and ridership rates.

Table 2. Bicycle Crash Severity
Crash Severity # Crashes % Crashes
Property Damage Only 50 11%
Complaint of Pain 165 37%
Other Visible Injury 210 47%
Severe 18 4%
Fatal 2 0.4%
Grand Total 445 100%
Two fatal crashes and 18 crashes resulting in severe injuries took place in City of Glendale streets between 2012 and 2020. Only 11 percent of crashes in Glendale were property damage only, and nearly half resulted in a visible injury. By comparison, Pasadena had a similar distribution of severe and fatal crashes over this period, while LA County as a whole saw higher rates of severe and fatal crashes. 232 of 704
5 Table 3. COVID-19 and Crash Injury Comparison
Year KSI Visible
Injury
Complaint of
Pain PDO Total Crashes
Pre-COVID-19 Total 1 30 27 4 62
2018 1 15 12 2 30
2019 0 15 15 2 32
COVID-19 Total 0 26 17 3 46
2020 0 13 10 2 25
2021 0 13 7 1 21
The incidence of bicycle-involved crashes within Glendale slowed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to the two preceding years, the total number of crashes fell by approximately 25 percent. Crashes causing complaints of pain fell by nearly a third. While there was only one crash resulting in a severe injury in 2018, no crashes caused fatalities or severe injuries during the pandemic. Causes for the sharp reduction during the pandemic likely have multiple complex causes, possibly owing to a combination of changes in commuting behaviors and modes.

Figure 3. Bicycle Crashes by Time of Day
More than half of all crashes, including KSI crashes, occurred during the daytime, between 8:00 am and 4:00 pm.

Notably, nearly a third of crashes occurred in the early evening hours, between 4:00 pm and 8:00 pm, when conditions are darker or becoming darker. KSI crashes followed these trends, with 90 percent taking place during the day or early evening.
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
12 - 4 AM 4 - 8 AM 8 AM - 12 PM 12 PM - 4 PM 4 PM - 8 PM 8 PM - 12 AM Total Crashes KSI Crashes
233 of 704
6 Crash Behaviors
Table 4. Most Common Vehicle Code Violation Categories
Violation Category # Crashes % Crashes # of
KSI % of KSI
Wrong Side of Road 98 22% 2 10%
Automobile Right of Way 88 20% 3 15%
Improper Turning 75 17% 2 10%
Other Hazardous Violation 47 11% 2 10%
Traffic Signals and Signs 38 9% 4 20%
Unsafe Speed 31 7% 3 15%
Table 4 shows the six most common vehicle code violation categories cited in the crash data. As this is a selection of most common factors, the table does not total to 445 crashes. These violations include “Wrong Side of the Road,” “Automobile Right of Way,” and “Improper Turning.” The first refers to a vehicle operating on the wrong side of the street or bicyclists not riding as far right as practicable as required by law, while the second includes violations where road users fail to yield properly, such as failing to yield to others when making turns or entering the roadway. “Improper Turning” refers to unsafe turning practices by road users.

Notably, while “Traffic Signals and Signs” and “Unsafe Speed” are cited for only 9 and 7 percent of all crashes respectively, they comprise 20 and 15 percent of KSI crashes. “Unsafe Speed” includes instances where a person was driving or riding at a speed considered “unreasonable,” which includes exceeding the speed limit, while “Traffic Signals and Signs” includes violations such as failing to come to a complete stop at stop signs and red lights. Responding officers to these crashes under these common violation categories found both drivers and bicyclists commonly at fault.

Table 5. Crashes by Collision Type
Collision Type # Crashes % Crashes # of KSI % of KSI
Head-On 15 3% 1 5%
Sideswipe 77 17% 0 0%
Rear End 37 8% 4 20%
Broadside 244 55% 8 40%
Hit Object 4 1% 0 0%
Overturned 3 1% 0 0%
Vehicle/Pedestrian 16 4% 1 5%
Other/Not Recorded 49 11% 6 30%
234 of 704
7 Grand Total 445 100% 20 100%
Table 5 details the distribution of crashes by their collision type, or how the collision physically occurred. Many collisions in this period were broadsides, in which a bicyclist and motorist collided at a right angle. This also contributed to a plurality of KSI crashes, suggesting that conditions relating to broadside crashes may include those that frequently yield more severe crash outcomes, such as higher speeds.

Table 6. Alcohol Involved Crashes
Alcohol
Involved? # Crashes % Crashes # of KSI % of KSI
Yes 26 6% 4 20%
No 419 94% 16 80%
445 100% 20 100%
Table 6 depicts the influence of alcohol in bicycle-involved crashes. Six percent of all crashes involved alcohol, but 20 percent of all KSI crashes involved at least one party being under the influence of alcohol.

Environmental Factors
Table 7. Collision by Lighting Condition
Lighting Condition # Crashes % Crashes # of KSI % of KSI Daylight 348 78% 15 75%
Dusk - Dawn 12 3% 0 0%
Dark - Street Lights 78 18% 4 20%
Dark - No Street Lights 3 1% 1 5%
Not Stated 4 1% 0 0%
Grand Total 445 100% 20 100%
As most crashes took place during the day, daylight lighting is the most common condition. However, almost a fifth of crashes took place during the dark under streetlights. This pattern is shared by KSI crashes as well. 235 of 704
8 Table 8. Collisions by Location in Street
Crash Location # Crashes % Crashes # of KSI % of KSI
At street segment 127 29% 6 30%
At intersection 318 71% 14 70%
Grand Total 445 100% 20 100%
More than a third of bicycle collisions took place at intersections, which, when combined with the above rates of right-of-way and turning vehicle violations, may support a high need for intersection safety improvements.

Bicycle Crash Party Descriptions
Table 9. Bicyclists by Race
Bicyclist Race Count
Not stated 253
White 94
Hispanic 72
Asian 11
Black 9
Other 6
Total 445
Note: Table 9 documents the race of bicyclist parties involved in crashes, as is presented in the SWITRS crash data. For more than half of people involved in a crash, no race was provided.

Additional work may be done to separate racial makeup of crash victims from other parties involved; however, the large number of missing entries may not yield data that is easily comparable to other trends or conditions.

Table 10. Bicyclist Victims by Age
Ages Number of
Victims Percent of Victims Number of KSI Victims
Percent of
KSI Victims
7-14 35 8% 1 5%
236 of 704
9 15-19 61 14% 0 0%
20-24 46 10% 0 0%
25-29 56 13% 4 20%
30-34 51 11% 1 5%
35-39 26 6% 1 5%
40-44 29 7% 2 10%
45-49 28 6% 3 15%
50-54 31 7% 3 15%
55-59 32 7% 3 15%
60-64 14 3% 0 0%
65-69 13 3% 0 0%
70 and Above 12 3% 1 5%
Unknown 11 2% 1 5%
Total 445 100% 20 100%
Figure 4. Bicycle Crash Victims by Age Range2
2 For summary purposes, age ranges are not presented in equal intervals. 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
7-19 20-34 35-49 50-64 65 and above
Number of Victims Number of KSI Victims
237 of 704
10 More than 50 percent of crash victims were 34 or younger, and more than a third were between the ages of 20 and 34.

Table 11. Collision Victims by Gender
Gender Total Crashes Percent of Total
Crashes KSI Crashes Percent of KSI Crashes
Female 55 12% 3 15%
Male 385 87% 17 85%
Unknown 5 1% 0 0%
Grand Total 445 100% 20 100%
238 of 704
11 Bicycle Crash Density
The below map shown in Figure 5 demonstrates the density of bicycle-involved crashes within the City of Glendale. As with the above summary statistics, this analysis uses 2012-2021 crash data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Record System.

Methodology
Based on these trends, several Safety Corridors have been identified. The analysis uses the Sliding Windows methodology to understand crashes throughout the street network, identifying segments with the highest crash density, weighted by crash severity. The analysis is done by determining the number and severity of crashes in a half-mile “window” on a roadway and shifting that window along the roadway 1/10 mile at a time. Crashes are weighted by severity, and individual street segments receive a score. Following input from the Project Development Team, crashes resulting in only property damage were included in the analysis. To preserve the balance in segment scoring by severity, weights were adjusted to five points for KSI crashes, two points for all other injuries, and one point for PDO crashes.

The below findings present the results of the Sliding Windows analysis of historical crash data with functional classifications, with some cleaning conducted to remove segments double-counted at intersection crashes. The list comprises the highest-scoring segments, as well as several additional streets that included consistent clusters of crashes. The Sliding Windows results may be further modified based on additional considerations, such as ground truthing lane width, intersection conditions on high-scoring segments, and stakeholder input.

Initial Findings
The below Safety Corridors are largely major arterials that connect major destinations, neighborhoods, and commercial areas in downtown and central Glendale. Several arterials, such as Glenoaks Blvd and Brand Blvd, are key connections to Burbank and Los Angeles, respectively. Several corridors that cross SR-134 north-south appear in the list: these are often where access across the highway is restricted to major streets. No streets in northern Glendale appeared in the list, as fewer crashes occurred there.

The inclusion of additional years of bicycle crash data, as well as PDO crashes, within the analysis, surfaced several additional low and medium crash density segments, several of which are along residential streets. These include Columbus Ave and Riverdale Dr in southwestern Glendale, as well as E Chevy Chase Dr and E Glenoaks Blvd as they pass beneath the 2 Freeway in eastern Glendale.

Highest-scoring streets generally include wide thoroughfares with four-to-six lanes and no bicycling infrastructure.

Some, such as Pacific Ave and Broadway, include sharrow markings on the outer lanes to signify bicycling routes.

Glenoaks Blvd, which is six lanes wide with a planted median, does include a striped, Class II bike lane adjacent to parking lanes. Central Ave features Class II bike lanes as well, though these end to the north of the highest scoring segment (Broadway to Chevy Chase Dr).

Table 12. Draft Safety Corridors

CORRIDOR FROM TO
GLENOAKS BLVD Allen Ave Brand Blvd
S BRAND BLVD Los Feliz Rd Glenoaks Blvd
COLORADO ST Pacific Ave Brand Blvd
239 of 704
12 BROADWAY San Fernando Rd Chevy Chase Dr
S GLENDALE AVE San Fernando Rd Chestnut St

N GLENDALE AVE/

VERDUGO RD
Broadway Mountain St
PACIFIC AVE Broadway Glenwood Rd
SAN FERNANDO RD Central Ave SR-134
S CENTRAL AVE Broadway Chevy Chase Dr
CHEVY CHASE DR Windsor Rd Broadway
240 of 704
13 Figure 5. Revised Bicycle Crash Density and Bicycle Crashes (2012 – 2021) 241 of 704
1 9a

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Appeal Case No. PAPP-003276-2024 – Public Hearing on Appeal of a Portion of Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No.

PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue.

1. Motion to Sustain Historic Preservation Commission’s Decision to Approve the Project with All Original Conditions of Approval Imposed by Commission;

2. Motion to Modify the Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Approve the Project by Removal of Two Conditions of Approval;

3. Motion to Modify the Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Approve the Project with Any Alternative Combination of Conditions of Approval;

4. Motion to Continue the Appeal, Directing the City Attorney to Draft Findings Reversing the Historic Preservation Commission’s Decision and Denying the Project.

COUNCIL ACTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This hearing is an appeal of a decision made by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) on April 18, 2024, to conditionally approve Design Review Case No. PDR003119-2024 for the project located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue (“HPC Decision”). The existing two-story Spanish Colonial Revival style single-family house contains 2,413 square-foot (SF), was built in 1927, and is a contributor to the Rossmoyne Historic District. The HPC approved the project with five conditions for a 1,012 SF two-story rear addition, a 377 SF addition to the rear of the existing detached two-car garage, and a new detached patio cover in the rear yard that includes a 62 SF restroom (“Project”).

In this case, the appellant is the property owner and is requesting the removal of two of the HPC-imposed conditions of the Project approval related to the enclosure of the existing second-floor balcony at the front façade, and the replacement of certain existing wood windows. Specifically, HPC did not approve the enclosure of the balcony with new windows to create a “sun porch” and did not approve the removal of twelve wood windows located at the front (east) façade and the portions of the two side facades (north and south) closest to the street. The Commission did approve fiberglass windows for the more street-distant openings at the side facades and throughout the rear addition. HPC Item Type: Public Hearing
Approved for August 13, 2024 calendar
242 of 704
2 9a
also, as part of the balcony condition, did not approve removing several decorative attic vents, which the applicant has agreed to keep and are not part of this appeal.

The owner has agreed to revise the proposal to address the remaining three conditions related to the style and material of new driveway, the texture of the new stucco, and a size reduction for the detached patio cover.

The appellant is requesting that the City Council modify the HPC Decision approving the Project by eliminating or modifying two of the conditions of approval for the Project as noted above. The appellant contends that in rendering its decision to approve the Project with conditions, HPC violated specific provisions of law, exceeded its authority by virtue of any of the provisions of law, failed to fulfill its mandatory duty, refused to hear or consider certain facts before rendering its decision, and that the evidence before the board was insufficient or inadequate to support its decision. The appellant also claims to have new evidence of material facts not previously presented, which if considered should change the act, determination or ruling. The appellant’s concerns related to the HPC conditions of approval to maintain the second-floor balcony facing the street and preserving the existing visible wood windows are related to safety and security.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council sustain the HPC Decision to approve Design Review Case No. PDR003119-2024 with all of the original HPC-imposed conditions based on all of the evidence, reasoning and findings of the HPC articulated at the April 18, 2024, hearing and set forth in the HPC’s Record of Decision for the project, dated April 18, 2024 and included as Exhibit 4.

ANALYSIS
This is an appeal of the HPC’s April 18, 2024, decision to approve the Project at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue that involves two-story additions, window replacements, a garage addition, and a new detached accessory structure.

GENERAL INFORMATION
Appellant: Lermont Akopyan
Status of Appellant: Property Owner of 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue Project Applicant: Edgar Markosyan, ArcStem Inc (Project Designer) Requested Action:

The appellant is requesting that the City Council modify the HPC Decision to approve Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 by eliminating conditions related to the second-floor balcony and existing windows. (Exhibit 9).

Legal Description: Portion of Lot 8, Block 21, Rossmoyne Tract APN: 5646-002-008
243 of 704
3 9a
Zone: R1 (Low Density Residential), Floor Area Ratio District II Rossmoyne Historic District Overlay Zone
Land Use Element: Low Density
Site Description:

The Project site is a 10,920 SF, irregularly shaped interior lot with frontage on Rossmoyne Avenue. Originally developed in 1927, the site currently features a two-story, 2,413 SF single-family dwelling with a 363 SF detached, two-car garage. In 1977 a 238 SF 2-story addition was approved at the rear. The Project site is accessed via an existing driveway along Rossmoyne Avenue that will be maintained. The subject property is a contributor to Rossmoyne Historic District. It retains many of its original characterdefining features and maintains high historic integrity.

RELEVANT PROJECT HISTORY
March 22, 2024 – Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 was submitted by the Project applicant, Edgar Markosyan, for the proposed 2-story addition.

April 18, 2024 –Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 was presented to the HPC with a staff recommendation to approve the Project with conditions. The HPC voted unanimously (4-0) to approve the Project with five conditions (Exhibit 4):

1. The second-floor balcony shall not be enclosed.

2. The existing decorative gable vents shall be retained.

3. The damaged “Hollywood” driveway must be either repaired or replaced in kind using either a grass or gravel center and side strips. The existing front walkway is not original but can be retained due to its unobtrusive visual character. The concrete paving at the porte-cochere and rear portions of the driveway shall be retained or, if damaged, replaced in kind and must be consistent extending past the porte-cochere.

4. The following existing wood windows, as shown on Drawing Sheet A-05 in the project plan that was reviewed by HPC, shall be retained: Windows 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 19.New windows shall be limited to the addition and less visible portions of the side facades.

5. Stucco must be smooth with appropriate textures for Spanish Colonial Revival and not flat smooth stucco.

6. Applicant shall work with staff to reduce the size of the covered patio and attached bathroom for Zoning code compliance.

May 03, 2023 – The appellant submitted their appeal of the HPC’s approval – Case No.

PAPP-003276-2024 (Exhibit 9).

SUMMARY OF HPC’S DISCUSSION OF CASE NO. PDR-003119-2024 ON APRIL 18, 2024
Generally, the HPC were in favor of the Project and discussion of the Project was limited. 244 of 704 4 9a
• Four HPC members were present at the April 18, 2023 meeting at which the Project was discussed. Commissioner Paul was absent.
• Commissioner Doom supported preserving the “Hollywood” driveway. • Commissioner Jurca indicated that staff’s recommended conditions were important to preserve the qualities that makes the home a district contributor and agreed with Commissioner Doom that the existing “Hollywood” driveway was an important character defining feature that should be preserved and suggested the option to replace the existing brick center strip with grass. She also felt strongly about retaining the existing original wood windows at the front façade and prominent areas of the side facades as they are essential character-defining features of the property. Finally, she supported keeping the existing open front balcony and decorative vents because they are also character-defining features of the property.
• Commissioner Head indicated that he agreed with all the comments made by other Commissioners and that the existing driveway, many of the original wood windows, and balcony all be preserved to maintain these character defining features.
• Chair Cragnotti preferred to have the existing bricks replaced with grass on the driveway, commented that the enclosing of the balcony is not emblematic of the style historically. He also echoed the concerns of other Commissioners regarding the preservation of the original wood windows.
• All four commissioners supported the rear addition, the addition to the garage, and the rear yard patio cover, with the latter receiving a condition to reduce its size to ensure Zoning Code compliance.
• Staff received eight letters of opposition from the public prior to the hearing and four members of the public provided testimony at the hearing in opposition to the Project. The concerns from the members of the public were in regard to the incompatibility of the rear addition’s massing and the preservation of the historical defining features of the existing house. A copy of the comment letters are attached as Exhibit 8.
• Following review of the staff report and attachments, including the submitted correspondence, and having heard all testimony at the public hearing, Commissioner Jurca made a motion to approve the Project with conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Head. The Record of Decision is attached as Exhibit 4.

SUMMARY OF THE APPELLANT’S BASIS FOR APPEAL AND STAFF RESPONSES In the appeal application, the appellant contends that the conditions of approval imposed by the HPC violated specific provisions of law and exceeded its authority by virtue of any 245 of 704 5 9a
of the provisions of law, that it failed to fulfill its mandatory duty and refused to hear or consider certain facts before rendering its decision, that the evidence before it was insufficient or inadequate to support its decision, and that the appellant has new evidence of material facts not previously presented, which if considered should change the act, determination, or ruling. Below is a summary of the statements made by the appellant in their appeal application (Exhibit 9), as well as staff’s responses to the claims.

The appellant contends that the HPC violated the law because it failed to address building code requirements related to balconies and windows.

The appellant has made a general statement that the existing balconies and windows do not meet building code requirements. Additionally, the appellant does not cite any specific provisions of law with their response to the question, nor provide any further detail or explanation. As it relates to this application, the HPC acts as the design review authority and their purview in rendering a decision is related to the design of a project, including conformance with the Historic District Design Guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and the Comprehensive Design Guidelines.

The City’s Building Official has authority over the California Building Code (CBC), and it is not within the purview of the HPC. In addition, because the subject property is a contributor to a designated historic district, it is mandatory that the provisions of the California Historical Building Code (CHBC) be applied in reviewing the project. Building permit application(s) for this project would be subject to the Building Code’s California Residential Code (CRC) which does not require existing nonconforming structures to be brought up to current code standards, which would include the second-floor balcony and existing wood windows. Under the provisions of the CBC, only the proposed changes to this project would be subject to the current building code requirements. Since the regulations of CBC and CHBC are outside of the Commission’s purview and because the CBC does not require the balcony height or windows to be brought into conformance, the HPC did not violate the law.

The appellant contends that the HPC exceeded its authority by virtue of any of the provisions of the law because its concern was based on preserving the aesthetics of the front façade and not considering the safety and code requirements.

This is a general statement with no other specific information or evidence included with the appeal. Staff’s response to this contention is addressed in the section above.

The appellant contends that the HPC failed to fulfill a mandatory duty when it failed to address the safety impacts of the existing balcony, alleged to be below the height required by California Building Code, and the windows, alleged to be in a hazardous location and allegedly required to be replaced with tempered glass windows.

The HPC did not fail to fulfill a mandatory duty when they approved the Project with conditions. As noted above, the HPC does not have authority over b=Building Code requirements; that authority lies with the City’s Building Official. Moreover, the CBC does 246 of 704 6 9a
not require existing nonconforming dwellings to be brought to current code standards.

The authority of the HPC for this Project is to act as the design review authority and their purview in rendering a decision is related to the Project design’s conformance with the Historic District Design Guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and the Comprehensive Design Guidelines.

The appellant contends that the HPC refused to hear or consider certain facts before rendering its decision because there was no consideration for safety requirements, security issues, or noise concerns regarding the existing balcony and windows.

Prior to rendering its decision, the HPC takes into consideration all public comments, including written and oral testimony from the applicant, owner and members of the public. Requirements relating to life safety, structural safety, and provisions of minimum standards to safeguard life or limb and health by regulating and controlling design, construction, quality of materials, and maintenance of all buildings and structures are subject to CBC, along with CHBC since the subject property is historic. As noted above, the HPC does not have authority over the Building Code requirements; that lies with the City’s Building Official. Moreover, the CBC/CHBC does not require existing nonconforming dwellings to be brought to current code standards. The authority of HPC for this Project is to act as the design review authority and their purview in rendering a decision is related to the Project’s design conformance with the Historic District Design Guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and the Comprehensive Design Guidelines. As it relates to noise concerns, HPC did not find the noise-reduction argument presented at the hearing for replacing the existing windows compelling on this residential street. With regard to the energy efficiency of the proposed double-paned windows, the Commission indicated that other methods could be employed to increase energy efficiency while preserving the existing wood windows.

The appellant contends that the HPC had insufficient or inadequate evidence to supports its decision.

This is a general statement with no other specific information or evidence included with the appeal. Staff’s response to this contention is addressed in the sections above.

The appellant contends to have new evidence and a new understanding of the Building Code, in addition to a new discovery that the front facing balcony has previously been altered, all of which the appellant claims are facts not previously presented, which if considered should change the act, determination or ruling.

The codes cited by the appellant are not applicable to the project. The balcony alteration claims is based on speculation that the roof above the front balcony is not original to the design of the home based on the roof configuration. This information was discussed with the appellant during the preliminary design review phase with staff, included in the staff report (see Exhibit 3, pg. 8), and discussed during the HPC hearing on April 18, 2024, and the consideration does not change the act, determination, or ruling of the HPC’s decision regarding the enclosure of the balcony.
247 of 704
7 9a
Under the “Statement of additional facts related to the appeal” section, the appellant references California Code of Regulations (“CCR”), Title 8, Section 3209 Standard Guardrails.

The appellant’s appeal references CCR, Title 8, Section 3209 and states that this section requires certain minimum guardrail heights and other requirements related to windows.

This is a general statement, and the regulation is not applicable to this Project. (See Exhibit 9 and attached referenced CCR section). The California Code of Regulations are established by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR), which serves to protect and improve the health, safety, and economic well-being of wage earners and helps their employers comply with state labor laws. The DIR administers and enforces laws governing wages, hours and breaks, overtime, retaliation, workplace safety and health, apprenticeship training programs, and medical care and other benefits for injured workers. Accordingly, the CCR section cited by the appellant does not apply to single-family development; rather, the regulation is applicable to occupational safety and health standards in the workplace. Additionally, the DIR does not administer or enforce the CBC that contains general building design and construction requirements related to fire and life safety, structural safety, and access compliance. In addition, both staff and the Commission indicated to the owner that the addition of a secondary railing at the balcony wall could be accomplished in a manner that would address the safety concerns, while being designed in a manner that would not affect the overall historic character of the property.

SUMMARY
Based on the analysis of the appeal and the reasoning above, staff recommends that the City Council sustain the HPC’s decision to approve the Project with all of the original HPC-imposed conditions. The Commissioners considered not only the site planning, but also the Project’s massing, scale, height, setback, landscaping, window placement, use of materials and colors and other architectural design elements and historically character defining features in determining compatibility. The Project, as conditioned, was determined by a unanimous vote (4-yes, 0-no) of the HPC to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and consistent with the City’s Historic Design Guidelines.

The basis of the HPC’s decision (the Record of Decision, Exhibit 4) includes the following:

Site Planning: The proposed site planning is appropriate to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
• Overall, the site planning is appropriate with the two-story addition appropriately setback from the interior property lines. The expanded garage footprint, new covered patio and accessory buildings will be located at the rear behind the existing house.

The property will remain accessible from Rossmoyne Avenue and the main entrance will remain as-is.
• The placement of the addition at the rear façade is in keeping with the recommendations of the Historic District Design Guidelines. 248 of 704 8 9a
• The existing detached two-car garage will be extended towards the rear in a manner that will not be visible from the street and with the overall design being preserved. • The existing landscaping is proposed to remain and the partially enclosed patio at the rear, new swimming pool, and garage extension creates a courtyard landscape that complements the Spanish Colonial Revival style of the house.

Mass and Scale: The proposed mass and scale is appropriate to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
• The immediate neighborhood surrounding the subject property features one- and two-story homes. The existing residence is two stories and the applicant’s proposal to expand the existing two-story house is consistent with the neighborhood and the existing conditions of the site.
• At the first floor, the addition is proposed to be built in line with the existing walls.

The new two-story addition at the rear portion of the house will extend towards the north. The massing will be broken up using recessed building forms, with the second-floor setback approximately 1 foot from the first floor along the east and west facades. A new shed roof is also proposed that visually breaks up the massing of the first and second floor addition.
• The addition will feature gabled roof forms that match the existing single-family residence and the use of a 4:12 roof pitch is consistent throughout.

Design and Detailing: The proposed design and detailing is appropriate to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
• The proposed addition will be in keeping with the existing design and details including the use of red mission clay tiles, exposed rafter tails, decorative vents, smooth stucco with a color that matches the existing house, and aluminum gutters and downspouts in bronze
• The condition to retain wood windows: 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19; and having the new windows be limited to the addition and less visible portions of the side facades will preserve the design and detailing of the existing home. • The condition to retain the front balcony and the decorative vents will preserve the original design and detailing.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Code requires public notice when the Council considers approval of entitlements such as design review. Staff has published all required notices and has mailed copies of the notice to all property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project. A public notice has also been posted on-site.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. 249 of 704 9 9a

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Staff has conducted environmental review and has concluded that the Project is exempt from any further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it meets the requirements of the Class 1 “Existing Facilities” exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is a minor addition to an existing building, and of the Class 31 “Historic Restoration or Rehabilitation” exemption pursuant to Section 15331 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the Project meets the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

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

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Sustain the HPC decision to approve the Project with all original HPCimposed conditions.

Alternative 2: Modify the HPC decision to approve the Project by eliminating or modifying two of the original HPC-imposed conditions related to the second-floor balcony and windows, as requested by the appellant.

Alternative 3: Modify the HPC decision to approve the Project by adding additional Council-imposed conditions and/or modifying or eliminating any other original HPC-imposed conditions.

Alternative 4: Continue the Appeal and direct the City Attorney to return with draft findings reversing the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision and denying the Project.

Alternative 3: Any other alternative for the Appeal not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Eric Ji, Planning Associate
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
250 of 704
10 9a

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Location Map
Exhibit 2: Photos of Existing Property
Exhibit 3: HPC Staff Report and Reduced Plans for Current Desing Review Application (PDR-003119-2024) from April 18, 2024
Exhibit 4: HPC Record of Decision for Current Design Review Application (PDR-003119- 2024) from April 18, 2024
Exhibit 5: Neighborhood Survey
Exhibit 6: Interdepartmental Comments
Exhibit 7: DPR Survey Form
Exhibit 8: Correspondence
Exhibit 9: Notice of Appeal of HPC’s Decision to City Council and California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 3209 Standard Guardrails
Exhibit 10: Campaign Disclosure
251 of 704
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _____________________________, seconded by Council Member _________________________, that upon review and consideration of all documents, materials and exhibits relative to Appeal Case No. PAPP-003276-2024, the appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue (“Design Review Case”), and after having conducted a public hearing on said appeal pursuant to the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, and receiving testimony, the City Council of the City of Glendale, California, based upon all of the evidence in the record, hereby SUSTAINS the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to APPROVE the Design Review Case with all of the original HPC-imposed condition(s)/consideration(s), based on the findings and conclusions set forth in the August 13, 2024 staff report from the Director of Community Development, including any attachments thereto. Further, the Council hereby adopts, and incorporates herein by this reference, the analysis, findings, conclusions and condition(s)/consideration(s) of the Historic Preservation Commission in its Record of Decision dated April 18, 2024 (Exhibit 4 to the staff report to Council).

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
252 of 704
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _____________________________, seconded by Council Member _________________________, that upon review and consideration of all documents, materials and exhibits relative to Appeal Case No. PAPP-003276-2024, the appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue (“Design Review Case”), and after having conducted a public hearing on said appeal pursuant to the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, and receiving testimony, the City Council of the City of Glendale, California, based upon all of the evidence in the record, hereby MODIFIES the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to APPROVE the Design Review Case by eliminating the following conditions of approval contained in the Historic Preservation Commission’s Record of Decision dated April 18, 2024 (Exhibit 4 to the staff report to Council):
• 1. The second-floor balcony shall not be enclosed.
• 4. The following existing wood windows, as shown on Drawing Sheet A-05 in the project plan that was reviewed by HPC, shall be retained: Windows 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19. New windows shall be limited to the addition and less visible portions of the side facades.

Except for the above eliminated conditions, all of the remaining original HPC-imposed condition(s)/consideration(s) shall remain. As to the conditions(s)/consideration(s) remaining, the Council hereby adopts, and incorporates herein by this reference, the analysis, findings and conclusions of the Historic Preservation Commission in its Record of Decision dated April 18, 2024 (Exhibit 4 to the staff report to Council).

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
253 of 704
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _____________________________, seconded by Council Member _________________________, that upon review and consideration of all documents, materials and exhibits relative to Appeal Case No. PAPP-003276-2024, the appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue (“Design Review Case”), and after having conducted a public hearing on said appeal pursuant to the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, and receiving testimony, the City Council of the City of Glendale, California, based upon all of the evidence in the record, hereby MODIFIES the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to APPROVE the Design Review Case in the following manner:
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________.

As to any conditions(s)/consideration(s) originally imposed by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Council hereby adopts, and incorporates herein by this reference, the analysis, findings and conclusions of the Historic Preservation Commission in its Record of Decision dated April 18, 2024 (Exhibit 4 to the staff report to Council).

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
254 of 704
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _____________________________, seconded by Council Member _________________________, that upon review and consideration of all documents, materials and exhibits relative to Appeal Case No. PAPP-003276-2024, the appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s Conditional Approval of Design Review Case No. PDR-003119-2024 for the Property Located at 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue (“Design Review Case”), and after having conducted a public hearing on said appeal pursuant to the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, and receiving testimony, the City Council of the City of Glendale, California, based upon all of the evidence in the record, hereby REVERSES the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision and DENIES the Design Review Case. The City Council hereby continues this matter for two weeks until the August 27, 2024 City Council meeting, without further public notice, and directs the City Attorney to prepare written findings in support of denying the Design Review Case.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
255 of 704
R1R -II
R1-II
R1-II HD
100
20 263.57
104.55
17 0. 3
40 2. 6
90 1. 5
103.45
44 6. 3

18. 48
05 120
112.23

24. 18
74 05
50 05
60 55

60.30 156.74
20 60
10 45 4. 8

06. 81
05 44 6. 3
176.46
17 1. 9
113.63
215.34

51. 02
60 137.09
35 9. 8
50 2. 3
60 05

03. 40
25 69 8. 0
47 4. 9
40 8. 8

2.66 50 2. 3
150.80
10 60
60 16 9. 5
153.57

39.81 150.67
223.76
24 55
40 42 6. 7
11 50
100 1. 0
75 88 1. 5
70 55. 87

0. 0
70 76 5. 8
60 44 6. 3
40 80
7 71.90
65 57
100.39
143.42
131.72
78 8.

38.46 67
124 5. 8
25 44 2. 1
52 1. 1
19 1. 7
78 1. 6
05 5. 52 3

48.51 80
08 57
130
18 106.30
15 7. 4
24 1. 7
05 05
211 71.
11 . 5 85
05 33 3. 1
20 90
131.53

47.41 85
60 8 .7 13
36 19 .
50 4. 3
4 45

22. 7 14
50 2. 4

72. 50
05 45 6. 2
125.48
60 40 5. 7

21. 68
130

30.53 120
80 05
55 14 5. 2
147.30

05. 42
07 39 2. 2
50 2. 7
57 . 17 67
13 90
30 8. 3

13.82 45
132.71
55 9. 8
50 28 4. 4
209.28
78 1. 6
110
150.81

4. 71 9
05 50
05 378 7. 3
30 6. 1
56 127 6. 1
110.64
05 60
80 35 7. 9
155 7. 7
20 50 0. 8
37 0. 4
50 120

29.32 63 2. 2
60 42 6. 1
120
41 3. 8
97 6. 4
60 4. 85 2
7 15 80.
19 6. 1

14.66 133.90
66 7. 8
50 3. 7
05 60
11 7 6. 5
84 8. 1
80 67.
05 31.42
85 16 1 9. 0
130
40 23 2. 0

45. 59
29 33

17.28 99
68 120
128.80
117 2. 7
55 33 3. 8
3 . 64 2
63 0. 6
72 3. 4

75.64 123 2. 1
129.36
119.44
61 78.65
38 3. 2
138.03
103.87

72. 05
109 6. 3
50 131

66.32 30
05 14 .5 3

37.56 20 5. 0
80 50 9. 1

45.37 60
127 3. 9

76.32 50

40.82 78.75
54 50
158.18
112.57
48 0. 7
52 1. 0
13 4. 4
67 67.

5. 52
60 153.94
59 9. 9
95 31.17
25 209.12
05 146.69
40 05
74 1. 8
50 2. 3
5 16.06
49 72. 05
05 04
4 27 9. 0
50 05
150.12

31.42 70 5. 8
51 72

72. 05
54 193.47
44 6. 3
135.20
50 26 0. 6
140.40
15 05
14 5. 71
94 1. 4
151.13
230 4. 3
110
75 4 7
22 36
130
148.77
07 78 1. 6
06 44 6. 3
47 4. 8
110.45
39 110
1 85.82
64 8. 9
05 28
62 1. 3
25 120.60
45 5. 8
1 85
80 155
08 138.89 0
40 06
20 35 4. 6
55 124.89
55 163 1. 5
50 112.79
61 05
37 70

31.67 44

46.60 05

36.06 17 2. 7
40 5. 7
190.13
06 15

47.41 123.63
48 8.
44 6. 3
74 60
.69
80 05
59 9. 8
130.32
129.8
3 26 0. 5
110.79
05 30

7. 78 4
46 109.82
05 130
11 1. 9
59 9. 9
136.60
06 05
90 112 9. 9
130

13.46 80
05 145.60

41.86 70
28 80
05 20
1 39
25 32
11 16
1221
14 1 001
13 4
14 1224
17 1320
4021
12 41
6 . M B. 1
1 23 5
5 7
1 33 6
21 1318
1230
3 31 42
7 8
5 31
92 18
31 90
52 26
37 1214
28 9
60 31 71
5 1 23 2
1228
8 23
939
10 36
22 949
31 1300
0221
1016
D
10 31
33 BLK. 28
8 2
1 240
36 30
9121
OL
RE OT
OF
. M . B 109 ~ 6 7-
20 4
ST LO
4 29
1319
1224
0321
1110
1000
0021
8 50
6 10
1229
31 51
1 2 1 1
1307
5021
8 1
35 1306
1225
4 31
6 29
7 10
1 12
11 251
1009
DON
JOSE
130
27 6121
31 91
9 33
2 8021
1315
31 00
1312

NI S LA AO

RD VI E
5121

ROSSMOYNE
1010
5021
31 02
4 1315

OR SSMOYNE
'A'
9 9021
8 12
3 1311
26 7
40 23
9 251
15 35
121 9
1220
9 1006
50 31
03 42
31 4221
1308
06 1301
9 2121
7 11
2 28

OY MSS EN
50 4
37 15
1320
40 LK B 30 .
6 1 33 2
021 4
9 42
19 6
17 1114
123 2
L.S.M. 320A
1241
1121
958
31 26
30 1237
6 BLK. 17
32 30
1 03 6
31 12
8 . M . B 109 ~ 6 7-
31 92
130
33 7
41 7
1314
13 1121
1225
ROSSM
943
40 23
50 34
1217
BLK 22 .
16 EVI RD
27 N BLE I Y PARK 1023
24 31 51
1 121 0
1206
12 M
O
U
N
TA
NI
31 12
6 5
7221
1 03 9
18 BLK. 18
0221
OD
21 1245
1 13 6
25 24
22 1015
1 23 1
1020
LOT
0121
1200 19
38 5221
1310
950
10 OSS R

MO NY E
13 1233
5 9021
S
C
A
L
E
50 0 50 100 150 2
5 Feet 42.18
62 8. 3

7.46 90
123.92
84 8. 1
126.69

0. 54 2
11 7

37.57 16.33
113.40

19.55 50.07
. 7 4 08

47.54 13 4. 5 5
54 50.38
114.12
41 . 5 73
109.82
50 33.88
7 .7 02
101.02
21 0

50.07 2. 711 7
6 5. 0
80 135.18

62.33 01 0

5. 74 0

2. 85 8

20.05 44 0. 8
05 8. 74 7
. 72 82
12 135.97
24 10 . 0 01

34.73 001
05 03
22 1 79.
05 54
60 94 29.
54 . 021 61
116.21
05 100.39
126.41

87. 0 12 . 4 85
109.10

1. 14 0
57 54

0. 33 2
109.75
116.20

5. 61 7 . 37 35
18 0. 48 7
40 15 1 5. 8
10 3. 9

37.33 113.95

31.78 33 64.

33.93 0 . 4 2 8

05. 74

21. 86
81 5. 9
135.97
55 0. 06 8
39 2. 2
717. 6
132.77
54 53.77

50.07 1. 20 1 6
107.17

80. 06
55 0. 06 8
54 0. 06 8
54 2 8 . 33
05 2. 24 4

29.94 31. 06
05 27.71

0. 54 2
4 5
142.40
54 . 021 61
135.18

33.82 54
54 01
84 8. 1
08 67.
54 54
54 54.89

50.07 79 2. 4

49.76 54
54 54
117 2. 7

70. 18
125.31
. 264 3

54.74 . 121 11

41.80 90 1 79.
54 54

69. 53

71.11 61
5 120
54 54

50.07 70 9. 8
147.37
05 134.08

0. 54 2
54 134.73
14 .5 3

27.52 96.90
122.54

50.07 123.09
0 126 3. 2

30.37 211
139 68.

13.45 76. 52

5. 25
01 8. 5 1
54 511 70.
50 2
54 121.15

49.63 134.08
128.08
0 10
38 1 35.
45 07.

50.38 50.02

22. 99

31.24 56. 82 05
100.54
05 54

76.31 54
100

29.02 34.47

24.92 53
. 711 25

1. 06 7
09 5. 71

35.95 05
22 26.54
85 154 7. 3
142.50
54 54
6 54
63 50.03
11 4. 7 4
125
05 40.57
94 .
05 55
05 4. 4
138.89
08 13 . 9 25
54 54

0. 26 8
80 54
071. 1
132.31

9. 32 0
130.90

68. 12
108.79 61
125 4. 3
54 16 7. 4
54 29

68.67 28
. 021 61

0. 54 2 . 54 20
13 6. 2 6
104.31
54 40.58
021
36 35.50
01 5
55 5
54 30.37
9 135
. 75 01
100

0. 06 8

23.78 05

24.10 40

30.9 32.82

1. 45 9

66. 82
31 71

EL EL B ST RUH
KR PA
15 7
1231
917
647
10 4
20 . M B.
33 6
4321
4421
50 46
948
31 21
653
B. M 109 . 6-7 ~
31 90
50 48
654
45 661
657
40 13
121 7
11 944
9421
RE
Y
121 6
STREET
7 31 71
52 958
663
51 52
668
50 EB
1 240
9121
OF
662
ST LO
4 34
1230
69 . B. M
17 ~ 72 -
ALL
E
Y
17 6
06 05
948
31 40
8 940
1225
900
18 4
921
644
ROSS
M
O
YNE
2021
3 6
5 651
12 3

AC MR NE
RD EVI
664
421 5
918
1251
52 12 42
221 7
911
12 8421
940
S
1421
1321
9 5021
660
0321
OC DR
AVO
OSS R
OM YNE
31 2
945
1 7
667
2 642
2 1251
5 944
31 81
9 31 61
021 1
935
49 32
14 927
8 3121
0421
649
9 901
1 648
M
B. . 76 ~ 92 - 93
31 01
10 3221
652
915
421 8
BLK 30 .
40 ROSSM
OYNE
1 42
. KL 1 B 2
6 BELLE UH ST R

LLS I H
OPES L
74 655
646
19 11
942
31 31
DRIVE
8 8
656
666
9 8321
2521
1121
40 221 6
31 80 951
50 645
OF
643
6 31
948
2121
2221
31 51
63 905
35 0521
4 50
BLK. 15
658
1239
938
6 STREET
941
~ 69 . B. M 72 - 71
47 321 5
M.B. 76 ~ 92 - 93
7021

MRAC NE

VI RD E
659
641
1243
9321
665
LOTS
7 950

VA ENUE
ROSSM
OYNE
5 500 FT RAD.
1239ROSSMOYNE
EXHIBIT 1
256 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
257 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
258 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
259 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
260 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
261 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
262 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
263 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
264 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
265 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
266 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
267 of 704
EXHIBIT 2
268 of 704
EXHIBIT 3

CITY OF GLENDALE, CA
DESIGN REVIEW STAFF REPORT – SINGLE FAMILY
April 18, 2024 1239 Rossmoyne Avenue, CA 91207
Decision Date Address
Historic Preservation Commission 5646-002-008
Review Type APN
PDR-003119-2024 Edgar Markosyan, ArcSTEM Inc.

Case Number Applicant
Eric Ji Ani Malkhasyan
Case Planner Owner
Project Summary
The applicant is proposing a two-story addition at the rear façade and the enclosure of a balcony at the front façade. A total of 489 square feet (SF) will be added to the first floor and 599 SF at the second floor. The two-story single family house was built in 1927 and contains 2,413 SF. The 10,920 SF lot is zoned R1-HD (Floor Area District II). The project also includes a 377 SF addition to the existing detached two-car garage, a new detached covered patio, and a 62 SF detached accessory building. The property is identified as a contributor to the Rossmoyne Historic District.

Environmental Review
The project is exempt from CEQA review as a Class 1 “Existing Facilities” exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is a minor addition to an existing building. It is also exempt as a Class 31 “Historic Restoration or Rehabilitation" pursuant to Section 15331 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the project, if approved by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), will remain a contributor to the North Cumberland Heights Historic District.

Existing Property/Background
The project site is a 10,920 SF, irregularly shaped interior lot with frontage on Rossmoyne Avenue. Originally developed in 1927, the site currently features a two-story, 2,413 SF single-family dwelling with a 363 SF detached, two-car garage. In 1977 a 238 SF 2-story addition was approved at the rear. The project site is accessed via an existing driveway along Rossmoyne Avenue that will be maintained.

The subject property is a contributor to Rossmoyne Historic District. It retains many of its original character-defining features and maintains high historic integrity. 269 of 704
Staff Recommendation
Approve with Conditions
________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT 3
Last Date Reviewed / Decision
First time submittal for final review.

Zone: RI FAR District: II
Although this design review does not convey final zoning approval, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the applicable Codes and no inconsistencies have been identified.

Active/Pending Permits and Approvals
None.

Site Slope and Grading
None proposed.

Neighborhood Survey
Average of Range of Properties
within 300 linear feet
of subject property
Properties within 300
linear feet of subject
property
Subject Property
Proposal
Lot size
Setback
7,557 SF
28’
5,760 – 12,288 SF
20’ – 57’
10,920 SF
25’-10”
House size
Floor Area Ratio
2,272 SF
30%
1,569 SF – 3,283 SF
25% - 26%
3,603 SF
33%
1-2 1 – 2 2-stories
Number of stories (6 one-story houses,
11 two-story houses)

DESIGN ANALYSIS
________________________________________________________________________ Site Planning
Are the following items satisfactory and compatible with the project site and surrounding area?
Building Location
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Setbacks of buildings on site
܆ Prevailing setbacks on the street
տ Building and decks follow topography
Garage Location and Driveway
܆ yes ܆ n/a ܈ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Predominant pattern on block
2 270 of 704
܈
տ Permeable paving material
Compatible with primary structure EXHIBIT 3
տ Decorative paving
The pavers for the driveway and front walkway are not appropriate to the style and period of the house. The existing “Hollywood” driveway is damaged but should be either repaired or replaced in kind to maintain the early appearance of the house.

Landscape Design
܆ yes ܈ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Complementary to building design
տ Maintains existing trees when possible
տ Maximizes permeable surfaces
܆ Appropriately sized and located
Walls and Fences
܆ yes ܈ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Appropriate style/color/material
տ Perimeter walls treated at both sides
տ Retaining walls minimized
տ Appropriately sized and located
Determination of Compatibility: Site Planning
The proposed site planning is appropriate, as modified by any proposed conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
 Overall, the site planning is appropriate with the two-story addition appropriately setback from the interior property lines. The expanded garage footprint, new covered patio and accessory buildings will be located at the rear behind the existing house. The property will remain accessible from Rossmoyne Avenue and the main entrance will remain as-is.
 The placement of the addition at the rear façade is in keeping with the recommendations of the Historic District Design Guidelines.  The existing detached two-car garage will be extended towards the rear to accommodate the zoning code required third parking space. The addition will not be visible from the street and the garage form, location and overall design will be preserved.
 The existing landscaping is proposed to remain and the partially enclosed patio at the rear, new swimming pool, and garage extension creates a courtyard landscape that complements the Spanish Colonial Revival style of the house 3 271 of 704
__________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT 3 Massing and Scale
Are the following items satisfactory and compatible with the project site and surrounding area?
Building Relates to its Surrounding Context
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Appropriate proportions and transitions
܆ Relates to predominant pattern
܆ Impact of larger building minimized
Building Relates to Existing Topography
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Form and profile follow topography
տ Alteration of existing land form minimized
տ Retaining walls terrace with slope
Consistent Architectural Concept
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Concept governs massing and height
Scale and Proportion
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Scale and proportion fit context
܆ Articulation avoids overbearing forms
܆ Appropriate solid/void relationships
տ Entry and major features well located
܆ Avoids sense of monumentality
Roof Forms
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Roof reinforces design concept
܆ Configuration appropriate to context
Determination of Compatibility: Mass and Scale
The proposed massing and scale are appropriate, as modified by any proposed conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
 The immediate neighborhood surrounding the subject property features one- and two- story homes. The existing residence is two stories and the applicant’s proposal 4 272 of 704
EXHIBIT 3
to expand the existing two-story house is consistent with the neighborhood and existing conditions of the site.
 At the first floor, the addition is proposed to be built in line with the existing walls.

The new two-story addition at the rear portion of the house will extend towards the north. The massing will be broken up using recessed building forms, with the second-floor setback approximately 1 foot from the first floor along the east and west facades. A new shed roof is also proposed that visually breaks up the massing of the first and second floor addition.
 The addition will feature gabled roof forms that match the existing single-family residence and the use of a 4:12 roof pitch is consistent throughout. ___________________________________________________________________ Design and Detailing
Are the following items satisfactory and compatible with the project site and surrounding area?
Overall Design and Detailing
܆ yes ܆ n/a ܈ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܈ Consistent architectural concept
܆ Proportions appropriate to project and surrounding neighborhood ܆ Appropriate solid/void relationships
The project plan proposes the enclosure of the existing second story balcony facing Rossmoyne Avenue to create a sunroom. As this area appears to have originally been an uncovered terrace, with a tile-clad roof added at a later date, its further modification to create a feature that was never part of this house does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or the district design guidelines and this portion of the project should not be approved. The plan also proposes the covering of the existing decorative vents on the front and side wall. Staff is recommending a condition that the enclosure of the second-floor balcony be omitted and the vents be retained.

Entryway
܆ yes ܈ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Well integrated into design
տ Avoids sense of monumentality
տ Design provides appropriate focal point
܆ Doors appropriate to design
Windows
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܈ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Appropriate to overall design
܆ Placement appropriate to style
܆ Recessed in wall, when appropriate
The proposed aluminum-clad wood windows may be appropriate for replacing the existing wood windows but the drawings to not provide enough information to determine how closely they replicate the appearance of the existing. Alternatively, the Commission may consider requiring that the existing wood windows at the front, and 5 273 of 704
EXHIBIT 3
portions of the side, façade be retained and the proposed windows be used only at more distant side façade openings and at the addition.

Privacy
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Consideration of views from “public” rooms and balconies/decks տ Avoid windows facing adjacent windows
Finish Materials and Color
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Textures and colors reinforce design
տ High-quality, especially facing the street
܆ Respect articulation and façade hierarchy
տ Wrap corners and terminate appropriately
Paving Materials
܆ yes ܆ n/a ܈ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Decorative material at entries/driveways
܆ Permeable paving when possible
܆ Material and color related to design
As noted above, the proposed pavers at the driveway and front walkway are not appropriate.

Lighting, Equipment, Trash, and Drainage
܆ yes ܆ n/a ܈ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
܆ Light fixtures appropriately located/avoid spillover and over-lit facades ܆ Light fixture design appropriate to project
܆ Equipment screened and well located
տ Trash storage out of public view
܆ Downspouts appropriately located
܈ Vents, utility connections integrated with design, avoid primary facades The project plan proposes to cover the existing decorative vents on the front and side wall visible from Rossmoyne Avenue. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to omit this from the scope and preserve these character defining features when they are visible from the street.

Ancillary Structures
܈ yes ܆ n/a ܆ no
If “no” select from below and explain:
տ Design consistent with primary structure
տ Design and materials of gates complement primary structure 6 274 of 704
Determination of Compatibility: Design and Detailing EXHIBIT 3 The proposed design and detailing are appropriate, as modified by any proposed conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
 The proposed addition will be in keeping with the existing design and details including the use of red mission clay tiles, exposed rafter tails, decorative vents, smooth stucco in with a color that matches the existing house, and aluminum gutters and downspouts in bronze.
 The new windows will be bronze, aluminum-clad wood with a block frame installation and external grids. A condition is recommended calling for dimensioned drawings of the existing windows to allow staff to verify that the proposed will closely match the existing.
 Staff recommends an added condition to delete the front façade balcony enclosure unless the Commission finds that this work could mitigate the awkward appearance of the existing, likely non-original, roof structure above the balcony. Staff also recommends that the existing decorative gable vents be retained. ________________________________________________________________________________ Glendale Historic District Design Guidelines and Rehabilitation Standards Analysis Glendale Historic District Design Guidelines Analysis
Staff believes that the proposed project can meet the Historic District Design Guidelines if the recommended conditions are imposed. With regard to the two-story rear addition, the Massing & Additions section for Spanish Colonial Revival style properties suggests that the addition is appropriately located at the rear of the property and away from the primary façade. The asymmetrical rear volumes, gabled roof forms, and exposed rafter tails are in keeping with the existing house. The guidelines support staff’s recommendation that the existing front balcony not be enclosed, going so far as to say that balconies that have been enclosed should be restored back to their open state. Depending on the Commission’s decision regarding the proposed windows, staff will ensure that windows at all locations will match the existing wood windows as closely as possible.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation Analysis Staff believes the proposed work can comply with the Rehabilitation Standards if the recommended conditions are imposed, as follows:

1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.  The property was developed as a single-family residence and will remain a singlefamily residence.

2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
 If the recommended conditions are approved, the proposed changes at the front balcony and gable vents will be deleted from the proposal and the character of the front façade will be retained. If the Commission choses to call for the existing wood windows to be retained at specific locations, this standard will be better met. 7 275 of 704
EXHIBIT 3

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.

Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.  The addition will be a straightforward design and will read as an addition because of the offset side walls. Enclosing the front balcony would violate this standard by adding a conjectural feature; staff’s recommendation to not approve the enclosure design would avoid this.

4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.  It appears that the roof structures at the front entry and the second floor balcony are not original and staff believes they have not acquired significance over the years.

They were, however, in place when the historic district survey consultant determined the property to be a contributor, so their presence does not diminish the overall historic character of the property.

5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved.
 If the recommended conditions are approved, staff believes that the property’s character-defining features will largely be retained at a level that allows for ongoing contributing status if the historic district is approved.

6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials.

Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
 Keeping the wood windows at the front and partial side elevations will help better meet this standard.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
 Not applicable.

8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.  Not applicable.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.  The construction of the two-story addition will not cause any character-defining features or materials that characterize the property to be destroyed or removed. The existing massing will obviously be altered and the addition will be visible when viewed from the side. The second-floor offset of the addition will allow the original rear corners of the house to remain exposed and provide a subtle marker indicating the addition is not an original feature of the property. 8 276 of 704
EXHIBIT 3

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
 The single-family residence could be returned to its original size and shape in the future. The two-story addition at the rear could be removed and, with the reconstruction of the rear facade, the existing condition could be restored. ________________________________________________________________________ Recommendation / Draft Record of Decision
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends Approval with Conditions. This determination is based on the implementation of the following recommended conditions:

Conditions

1. The enclosure of the second-floor balcony and removal of the existing decorative vents should be omitted from the proposal.

2. The proposed driveway and front walkway pavers are not appropriate to the style and period of the house. The damaged “Hollywood” driveway should be either repaired or replaced in kind. The existing front walkway is not original but can be retained due to its unobtrusive visual character.

3. Provide additional information, including dimensioned drawings of the existing windows for staff verification regarding the closeness of their appearance. The Commission may also consider requiring that the wood windows at the front façade and side facades that are closer to the street be retained, and that the new windows be limited to the addition and less visible portions of the side facades. ________________________________________________________________________ Attachments

1. Submitted Plans

2. Photos of Existing Property

3. Location Map

4. Neighborhood Survey

5. DPR Survey Form
9 277 of 704

GENERAL NOTES PROJECT RENDERING / VICINITY MAP

10. WATER HEATERS LOCATED IN ATTICS, CEILING ASSEMBLIES AND RAISED FLOOR ASSEMBLIES SHALL SHOW A WATER-TIGHT CORROSION RESISTANT MINIMUM 1 ½”
DEEP PAN UNDER THE WATER HEATER WITH A MINIMUM ¾ INCH DRAIN TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. (CPC 507.5) 11. WATER CLOSET SHALL BE LOCATED IN A SPACE NOT LESS THAN 30” IN WIDTH (15” ON EACH SIDE) AND 24” MINIMUM CLEARANCE IN FRONT. (CPC 402.5) 12. INDICATE ON THE PLANS THAT THE MAXIMUM HOT WATER

TEMPERATURE DISCHARGING FROM A
BATHTUB OR WHIRLPOOL BATHTUB FILLER SHALL NOT EXCEED 120 DEGREES F. (CPC 408.3) 13. PROVIDE ANTI-SIPHON VALVES ON ALL HOSE BIBS. (CPC 603.5.7) 14. FLOOR DRAINS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A TRAP PRIMER. (CPC 1007) 15. CLEARLY LABEL ON THE PLANS THE MAXIMUM WATER FLOW RATES PER THE (CGBSC 4.303.1): • WATER CLOSETS: 1.28GPF • URINALS: .125GPF • KITCHEN FAUCETS: 1.8GPM @ 60PSI • THEY MUST BE RATED FOR DIRECT INSULATION CONTACT (IC). • THEY MUST BE CERTIFIED AS AIRTIGHT (AT) CONSTRUCTION. • THEY MUST HAVE A SEALED GASKET OR CAULKING BETWEEN

THE HOUSING AND CEILING TO
PREVENT FLOW OF HEATED OR COOLED AIR OUT OF LIVING AREAS AND INTO THE CEILING CAVITY. • THEY MAY NOT CONTAIN A SCREW BASE SOCKETS

LEGAL DESCRIPTIO
N
• THEY SHALL CONTAIN A JA8 COMPLIANT LIGHT SOURCE 5. IN BATHROOMS, GARAGES, LAUNDRY ROOMS, AND UTILITY ROOMS, AT LEAST ON LUMINAIRE IN

EACH OF THESE SPACES SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY A VACANCY

SENSOR OR OCCUPANT SENSOR
PROVIDED THE OCCUPANT SENSOR IS INITIALLY PROGRAMMED LIKE A VACANCY SENSOR (MANUAL-ON OPERATION). (150.0(K)2I) 6. JOINT APPENDIX A (JA8) CERTIFIED LAMPS SHALL BE CONSIDERED HIGH EFFICACY. JA8 COMPLIANT LIGHT SOURCES SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY A VACANCY SENSOR OR DIMMER. (EXCEPTION: <70SF CLOSETS AND HALLWAY) (150.0(K)2K) 7. UNDER-CABINET LIGHTING SHALL BE SWITCHED SEPARATELY FROM OTHER LIGHTING SYSTEMS. (150.0(K)2L) 8. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY, BE CONTROLLED BY A MANUAL ON/OFF SWITCH AND HAVE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CONTROLS (THE MANUAL SWITCH SHALL NOT OVERRIDE THE AUTOMATIC CONTROL DEVICE): (150.0(K)3A)

1. PROVIDE EACH BEDROOM, BASEMENT, AND HABITABLE ATTICS WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE EXTERIOR WINDOW WITH A 44” MAXIMUM CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT, 5.7 SQ. FT. MINIMUM CLEAR OPENABLE AREA (MINIMUM 5.0 SQ. FT. AT GRADE FLOOR OPENINGS), 24” MINIMUM CLEAR OPENABLE HEIGHT AND 20” MINIMUM CLEAR WIDTH, OR AN OPENABLE EXTERIOR EXIT DOOR. (CRC R310.2.1 AND CRC R310.2.2) WINDOW WELLS, LADDERS, AND STEPS SHALL COMPLY WITH CRC R310.2.3. BARS, GRILLES, COVERS, ANDS SCREENS SHALL BE RELEASABLE OR REMOVABLE FROM THE INSIDE WITHOUT THE USE OF A KEY, TOOL, SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE, OR FORCE GREATER THAN 15LBS TO OPERATE THE EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENINGS. (CRC R310.4) PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS & MODULES SHALL NOT BE BELOW AN EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENING WITHIN 36”. (R324.6.2.2) 2. EACH BATHROOM CONTAINING A BATHTUB, SHOWER OR TUB/SHOWER COMBINATION SHALL BE MECHANICALLY VENTILATED WITH ENERGY STAR APPROVED EQUIPMENT (MINIMUM 50CFM) WITH AN INTEGRAL HUMIDISTAT INSTALLED. (CRC R303.3.1) 3. PROVIDE ATTIC CROSS VENTILATION: 1/150 OF ATTIC AREA OR 1/300 WITH AT LEAST 40% BUT NOT MORE THAN 50% OF VENTS ARE A MAXIMUM 3 FT. BELOW THE RIDGE OR HIGHEST SPACE IN THE ATTIC AND THE BALANCE IS PROVIDED IN THE LOWER THIRD OF THE ATTIC SPACE (NOT LIMITED TO EAVES OR CORNICE VENTS). AS AN ALTERNATIVE IN CLIMATE ZONE 16 (TRUCKEE REGION), THE NET AREA MAY BE REDUCED TO 1/300 WHEN A CLASS I OR II VAPOR BARRIER IS

INSTALLED ON THE WARM-IN-WINTER SIDE OF
THE CEILING. BAFFLES ARE REQUIRED AT VENTS FOR INSULATION. PROVIDE MINIMUM OF 1” INCH OF AIR SPACE BETWEEN INSULATION AND ROOF SHEATHING.

Tract: ROSSMOYNELot: 8 Block: 21

ZONING -------------------------------------
---------------R1- II - HD
• LAVATORY FAUCETS: 1.2GPM @ 60PSI • SHOWERHEADS: 1.8GPM

MECHANICAL

TYPE OF DWELLING ---------------------
-------------------- VB

STORIES -------------------------------------
---------------------- 2
APN # ---------------------------------------
------ 5646-002-008

LOT AREA ----------------------------------
------ 10,920.0 SQ. FT.

1. ALL NEWLY INSTALLED GAS FIREPLACES SHALL BE DIRECT VENT AND SEALED-COMBUSTION TYPE. (CMC 912.2) 2. ANY INSTALLED WOOD STOVE OR PELLET STOVE SHALL MEET THE U.S. EPA NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE

STANDARD EMISSION LIMITS AND SHALL HAVE A PERMANENT LABEL CERTIFYING EMISSION LIMITS. 3. TOP CHIMNEY MUST EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 2 FT. ABOVE ANY PART OF THE BUILDING WITHIN 10 FT. (CMC 802.5.4) 4. FIREPLACES SHALL HAVE CLOSABLE METAL OR GLASS DOORS, HAVE COMBUSTION AIR INTAKE DRAWN FROM THE OUTSIDE AND HAVE A READILY ACCESSIBLE FLUE DAMPENER CONTROL. CONTINUOUS BURNING PILOT LIGHTS ARE PROHIBITED. (CEC 150.0(E)) 5. PROVIDE COMBUSTION AIR FOR ALL GAS FIRED APPLIANCES PER CMC CHAPTER 7. 6. GAS VENTS PASSING THROUGH AN INSULATED ASSEMBLY SHALL HAVE A METAL INSULATION SHIELD A MINIMUM 2” ABOVE INSULATION. (CMC 509.6.2.7) 7. GAS WATER HEATER AND FURNACE ARE NOT ALLOWED IN AREAS OPENING INTO BATHROOMS, CLOSETS OR BEDROOMS UNLESS INSTALLED IN A CLOSET EQUIPPED WITH A LISTED GASKETED DOOR ASSEMBLY AND A LISTED SELF-CLOSING DEVICE WITH ALL COMBUSTION AIR OBTAINED FROM THE OUTDOORS. (CPC 504) 8. ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT ON ROOFS WITH OVER 4/12 SLOPE SHALL HAVE A LEVEL 30”X30” WORKING PLATFORM. (CMC 304.2) 9. EXHAUST OPENINGS TERMINATING TO THE OUTDOORS SHALL BE COVERED WITH A CORROSION RESISTANT SCREEN ¼”-1/2” IN OPENING SIZE (NOT REQUIRED FOR CLOTHES DRYERS). (CMC 502.1) 10. VENT DRYER TO OUTSIDE OF BUILDING (NOT TO UNDER-FLOOR AREA). VENT LENGTH SHALL BE 14 FT. MAXIMUM. SHALL TERMINATE A MINIMUM OF 3’ FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND ANY OPENING INTO THE BUILDING. (CMC 504.4.2) 11. ENVIRONMENTAL AIR DUCTS SHALL NOT TERMINATE LESS THAN 3’ TO A PROPERTY LINE, 10’ TO A
FORCED AIR INLET, 3’ TO OPENINGS INTO THE BUILDING AND SHALL NOT DISCHARGE ON TO A PUBLIC WAY. (CMC 502.2.1) 12. PROVIDE MINIMUM 100 SQUARE INCHES MAKE-UP AIR FOR CLOTHES DRYERS INSTALLED IN CLOSETS. (CMC 504.4.1(1)) 13. HEATING SYSTEM IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN 68 DEGREES AT 3 FT. ABOVE FLOOR LEVEL AND 2FT FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS. (CRC R303.10) • PHOTO-CONTROL AND MOTION
SENSOR
• PHOTO-CONTROL AND AUTOMATIC

TIME SWITCH CONTROL
• ASTRONOMICAL TIME CLOCK CONTROL TURNING LIGHTS OFF DURING THE DAY

9. ALL HIGH EFFICACY LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE CERTIFIED AS “HIGH-EFFICACY” LIGHT FIXTURES BY
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE HOMEOWNER WITH A LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE GIVING THE LAMPS USED IN THE LUMINAIRES INSTALLED. (10-103(B))

11. THE NUMBER OF BLANK ELECTRICAL BOXES MORE THAN 5 FEET ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR SHALL NOT BE GREATER THAN THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. THESE ELECTRICAL BOXES MUST BE SERVED BY A DIMMER, VACANCY SENSOR, OR FAN SPEED CONTROL. (150(K)1B) 12. PROVIDE A GASKET/ INSULATION ON ALL INTERIOR ATTIC/UNDER-FLOOR ACCESSES. (110.7) 13. PROVIDE VERIFICATION ON THE PLANS HOW THE BUILDING WILL MEET THE MINIMUM VENTILATION AND ACCEPTABLE INDOOR AIR QUALITY REQUIREMENTS PER ASHRAE STANDARD 62.2. WINDOW OPERATION IS NOT A PERMISSIBLE METHOD OF PROVIDING THE WHOLE BUILDING VENTILATION AIRFLOW REQUIRED. THIS IS SUBJECT TO HERS TESTING. THE FOLLOWING LABEL MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE FAN SWITCH: “TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM LEVELS OF OUTSIDE AIR VENTILATION REQUIRED FOR GOOD HEALTH, THE FAN CONTROL SHOULD BE ON AT ALL TIMES WHEN THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED, UNLESS THERE IS SEVERE OUTDOOR AIR CONTAMINATION.” (CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE 150.0(O)) A MINIMUM 100 CFM INDOOR AIR QUALITY FAN IS REQUIRED IN THE KITCHEN AND SHALL BE HERS VERIFIED.
(E)
LEVEL 1 (E)
LEVEL 2 (E)
TOTAL
1,335.38
SQ.FT. +1,077.62 SQ.FT. 2,413.0 SQ.

FT.
(CRC R806) 4. ENCLOSED RAFTER SPACES SHALL HAVE A 1-INCH CLEAR CROSS VENTILATION. (PROPERLY SIZED RAFTERS FOR INSULATION) (CRC R806.3) 5. UNDER FLOOR CROSS VENTILATION: MINIMUM 1.0 SQ. FT. FOR EACH 150 SQ. FT. OF UNDER FLOOR AREA. WHEN A CLASS 1 VAPOR RETARDER IS INSTALLED ON THE GROUND SURFACE THE MINIMUM AREA OF VENTILATION MAY BE LIMITED TO 1SQ.FT FOR EACH 1,500 SQUARE FEET OF UNDER-FLOOR SPACE. ONE VENTILATION OPENING SHALL BE WITHIN THREE (3) FEET OF EACH CORNER OF THE BUILDING (CRC R408.1). UNVENTED CRAWL SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH CRC R408.3. UNVENTED CRAWL SPACE ADDED OPTION FOR DEHUMIDIFICATION OF 70 PINTS MOISTURE (E)
LEVEL 1
1,335.38
SQ.FT. (N) LEVEL 1 ADDITION +489.0 SQ.FT. (N) LEVEL 1
TOTAL
1,824.38
SQ.FT. PER DAY PER 1,000 SF TO REQUIREMENT FOR EXEMPTION. (R408.3) 6. EXTERIOR BALCONIES AND ELEVATED WALKING SURFACES EXPOSED TO WATER, WHERE STRUCTURAL FRAMING IS PROTECTED BY AN IMPERVIOUS MOISTURE BARRIER REQUIRE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS WITH MANUFACTURER’S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS (R106.1.5). MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BEFORE CONCEALING BARRIER. (R109.1.5.3) 7. ENCLOSED FRAMING IN EXTERIOR BALCONIES AND ELEVATED WALKING SURFACES EXPOSED TO RAIN, SNOW OR DRAINAGE FROM IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH CROSSVENTILATION AREA OF AT LEAST 1/150. (R317.1.6) 8. PROVIDE LANDINGS AND A PORCH LIGHT AT ALL EXTERIOR DOORS. LANDINGS ARE TO BE MINIMUM 3 FT DEEP X WIDTH OF DOOR. LANDINGS AT REQUIRED EGRESS DOORS MAY STEP DOWN A MAXIMUM OF 7.75 INCHES WHEN THE DOOR DOES NOT SWING OVER THE
LANDING AND 1.5 INCHES WHEN DOOR SWINGS ONTO THE LANDING. OTHER THAN REQUIRED EXTERIOR EXIT DOORS MAY HAVE A THRESHOLD OF 7.75 INCHES MAXIMUM; A LANDING IS NOT REQUIRED IF A STAIR WITH TWO OR FEWER RISERS

IS LOCATED ON THE EXTERIOR SIDE AND THE DOOR DOES NOT
SWING OVER THE STAIRWAY. (CRC R311.3-R311.3.2)
(E)
LEVEL 2
1,077.62
SQ.FT. +598.54 SQ.FT. 1,676.16
SQ.FT.

WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) 1. EXTERIOR WALL COVERINGS SHALL BE NONCOMBUSTIBLE, IGNITION RESISTANT, HEAVY TIMBER, LOG WALL OR FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION. (CRC R337.7) (N) LEVEL 2 ADDITION
(N) LEVEL 2
TOTAL

2. EXTERIOR WALL COVERINGS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE
FOUNDATION TO THE ROOF AND TERMINATE AT 2 INCH NOMINAL SOLID BLOCKING BETWEEN RAFTERS AND OVERHANGS. (CRC R337.7.3.2) 3. OPEN/ENCLOSED ROOF EAVES AND SOFFITS, EXTERIOR PORCH CEILINGS, FLOOR PROJECTIONS, UNDERFLOOR AREAS AND UNDERSIDES OF APPENDAGES TO COMPLY WITH IGNITION RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS. (CRC R337.5-9) 4. SPACES CREATED BETWEEN ROOF COVERINGS AND ROOF DECKING SHALL BE FIRE STOPPED BY APPROVED MATERIALS OR HAVE ONE LAYER OF MINIMUM 72LB MINERAL SURFACED NONPERFORATED CAP SHEET COMPLYING WITH ASTM D 3909. (CRC R337.5.2) 5. INDICATE ON THE PLANS WHERE VALLEY FLASHING IS INSTALLED,

THE FLASHING SHALL BE NOT LESS
THAN 26AWG AND INSTALLED OVER NOT LESS THAN ONE LAYER OF MINIMUM 72LB MINERAL SURFACED NON-PERFORATED CAP SHEET COMPLYING WITH ASTM D 3909 AND AT LEAST 36 INCHES WIDE RUNNING THE FULL LENGTH. (CRC R337.5.3) 6. ATTIC GABLE AND EAVES ABOVE 12FT AND UNDER-FLOOR VENTILATION SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH

FULLY COVERED METAL WIRE MESH, VENTS, OR OTHER MATERIALS THAT HAVE A MINIMUM 1/16
INCH AND MAXIMUM 1/8 INCH OPENINGS, NON-COMBUSTIBLE AND CORROSION RESISTANT. ALL OTHER EAVE VENTS SHALL BE LISTED/APPROVED TO RESIST THE INTRUSION OF FLAME AND BURNING EMBERS. (CRC R337.6) 7. INDICATE ON PLANS EXTERIOR GLAZING SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF ONE-TEMPERED PANE, GLASS BLOCK, HAVE A FIRE RESISTIVE RATING OF 20 MINUTES OR BE TESTED TO MEET PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS OF SFM STANDARD 12-7A-2. (CRC R337.8.2) 8. OPERABLE SKYLIGHTS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY A NONCOMBUSTIBLE MESH SCREEN 1/8” MAX OPENINGS (R337.8.2.2

9. EXTERIOR DOORS INCLUDING GARAGE DOORS SHALL BE NONCOMBUSTIBLE, IGNITION RESISTANT MATERIAL, MINIMUM 1 3/8 INCH SOLID CORE, MINIMUM 20 MINUTE

FIRE RESISTIVE RATING OR

SHALL BE TESTED TO MEET THE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS OF SFM STANDARD 12-7A-1. (CRC R337.8.3) 10. GARAGE DOOR PERIMETER GAP MAXIMUM 1/8”. METAL

FLASHING, JAMB AND
HEADER OVERLAP, AND WEATHER-STRIPPING MEETING SECTION REQUIREMENTS ARE PERMITTED. (R337.8.4) (N) SFD
TOTAL
3,500.54
SQ.FT.

14. WOOD BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED IN A NEW OR EXISTING PROJECT THAT IS NOT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: • A PELLET-FUELED WOOD BURNING HEATER.

MAX FAR ALLOWED ---------------------
--------- 4,092.0 SQ. FT. MAX LOT COVERAGE -------------------- -------- 4,368.0 SQ.FT.

LANDSCAPE REQ. -------------------------
-------- 4,368.0 SQ.FT.
• A U.S. EPA PHASE II CERTIFIED WOOD BURNING HEATER. 9. MEZZANINES SHALL NOT BE GREATER THAN 1/3 OF THE STORY UNLESS FIRE SPRINKLERS ARE INSTALLED THEN THE AREA CAN BE ½ OF THE STORY. (R325.3) 10. THE FOLLOWING WINDOWS SHALL BE FULLY TEMPERED: (CRC R308.4) • SLIDING/SWINGING GLASS DOORS • AN APPLIANCE OR FIREPLACE DETERMINED TO MEET THE U.S. EPA PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSION STANDARD OF LESS THAN 7.5 GRAMS PER HOUR FOR A NON- CATALYTIC WOOD FIRED APPLIANCE OR 4.1 GRAMS PER HOUR FOR A CATALYTIC WOOD FIRED APPLIANCE AND IS APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE APCO. • GLAZING IN WALLS AND ENCLOSURES FACING HOT TUBS, SPAS, WHIRLPOOLS, SAUNAS, STEAM ROOMS, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS AND SWIMMING POOLS WHERE THE GLAZING IS LESS THAN 60 INCHES ABOVE THE STANDING SURFACE WITHIN THE COMPARTMENT AND WITHIN 60 INCHES HORIZONTALLY OF THE WATER’S EDGE (CRC R308.4.5) • GLAZING WITHIN A 24” ARC OF A DOOR THAT IS LESS THAN 60 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR. SAFETY GLAZING REQUIRED ON A WALL LESS THAN 180 DEGREES FROM THE PLANE OF THE DOOR IN A CLOSED POSITION AND WITHIN 24” OF HINGE SIDE OF AN IN-SWING DOOR. (R308.4.2) • GLAZING WHERE THE EXPOSED AREA IS GREATER THAN 9SQ.FT, BOTTOM IS LESS THAN 18 IN. AND AT LEAST 36 IN. ABOVE THE FLOOR, AND ADJACENT TO A WALKING SURFACE • WITHIN 60IN. OF THE BOTTOM TREAD OF A STAIRWAY AND LESS THAN 36IN. ABOVE THE LANDING
• GLAZING IN GUARDS AND RAILINGS
TITLE 24
ENERGY (E) GARAGE: (E) PORTE COCHERE: (E) PORCH:
363.0 SQ.FT. DETACHED (EXEMPT) 189.0 SQ.FT. 136.25 SQ.FT.

1. ALL DUCTS IN CONDITIONED SPACES MUST INCLUDE R-4.2 INSULATION. (150.1(C)9) MINI4. ROOF CONSTRUCTION AND COVERINGS SHALL COMPLY WITH CRC CHAPTERS 8, 9 AND LOCAL ORDINANCE. ALL ROOFING SHALL BE TESTED/LISTED CLASS A MINIMUM. 5. ASPHALT SHINGLES WITH SLOPED ROOFS 2/12 TO <4/12 SHALL HAVE TWO LAYERS OF UNDERLAYMENT APPLIED PER CRC R905.2.2. (E) PAVED AREA: (E)

LANDSCAPE
AREA:
4,550.0 SQ.FT. 6,370.0 SQ.FT. > 4,368.0 SQ.FT.

GARAGE AND CARPORT 1. GARAGE SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM THE DWELLING UNIT & ATTIC AREA BY ½ INCH GYPSUM BOARD APPLIED TO THE GARAGE SIDE. GARAGE BENEATH HABITABLE ROOMS SHALL BE SEPARATED BY NOT LESS THAN 5/8” TYPE X GYPSUM BOARD. STRUCTURE SUPPORTING

FLOOR/CEILING
ASSEMBLIES USED FOR REQUIRED SEPARATIONS SHALL HAVE ½” GYPSUM BOARD INSTALLED MINIMUM. DOOR OPENINGS FROM THE GARAGE TO THE DWELLING SHALL BE SOLID WOOD/STEEL DOORS OR HONEYCOMB STEEL DOORS NOT LESS THAN 1 3/8” THICK OR A 20-MINUTE RATED FIRE DOOR. DOORS SHALL BE SELF-CLOSING & SELF-LATCHING. NO OPENINGS DIRECTLY INTO A SLEEPING ROOM FROM THE GARAGE. WHEN THE DWELLING AND GARAGE HAS FIRE

SPRINKLERS INSTALLED PER
R309.6 AND R313, DOORS INTO THE DWELLING UNIT FROM THE GARAGE ONLY NEED TO BE SELFCLOSING AND SELF-LATCHING. (CRC R302.5.1 & T-R302.6) 2. DUCTS PENETRATING THE GARAGE TO DWELLING SEPARATION SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 26 GAUGE WITH NO OPENINGS INTO THE GARAGE. (CRC R302.5.2) 3. PENETRATIONS THROUGH THE GARAGE TO DWELLING SEPARATION WALL (OTHER THAN DUCTS AS LISTED ABOVE) SHALL BE FIRE-BLOCKED PER CRC SECTION R302.11, ITEM #4. 4. GARAGE AND CARPORT FLOOR SURFACES SHALL BE NON- COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL AND SLOPE TO DRAIN TOWARDS THE GARAGE DOOR OPENING. (CRC R309.1) 5. APPLIANCES AND RECEPTACLES INSTALLED IN GARAGE GENERATING A GLOW, SPARK OR FLAME SHALL BE LOCATED 18” ABOVE FLOOR UNLESS IT IS LISTED AS FLAMMABLE VAPOR IGNITION RESISTANT. (CMC 305.1) PROVIDE PROTECTIVE POST OR OTHER IMPACT BARRIER FROM VEHICLES. (CMC 305.1.1) 6. APPLIANCES IN PRIVATE GARAGES AND CARPORTS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF 6FT ABOVE THE FLOOR UNLESS THEY ARE PROTECTED FROM VEHICULAR IMPACT. (CBC 406.2.9.3) STAIRWAYS & RAMPS 1. STAIR LANDINGS REQUIRED EVERY 12’7” OF VERTICAL RISE. (CRC R311.7.3) 2. EXTERIOR STAIR STRINGERS MUST BE NATURALLY RESISTANT TO DECAY OR PRESSURE TREATED. (CRC R317.1) 3. RISE SHALL BE MAXIMUM 7.75”; RUN SHALL BE 10” MINIMUM; HEADROOM 6’-8” MINIMUM; WIDTH 36” MINIMUM, 31.5” BETWEEN A HANDRAIL ON ONE SIDE AND 27” WITH HANDRAILS ON TWO SIDES. VARIATION BETWEEN RISER HEIGHTS 3/8” MAXIMUM. A NOSING NOT LESS THAN .75 INCHES BUT NOT MORE THAN 1.25 INCHES SHALL BE PROVIDED ON STAIRWAYS WITH SOLID RISERS WHERE THE TREAD DEPTH IS LESS THAN 11 INCHES. THE

LEADING EDGE OF TREADS
SHALL PROJECT NOT MORE THAN 1.25 INCHES BEYOND THE TREAD BELOW. OPEN RISERS ARE PERMITTED, PROVIDED THE OPENING BETWEEN THE TREADS DOES NOT PERMIT THE PASSAGE OF A 4” SPHERE. (OPENINGS ARE NOT LIMITED WHEN THE STAIR HAS A RISE OF 30” OR LESS). (CRC R311.7) 4. STAIRWAYS WITH 4 OR MORE RISERS SHALL HAVE A HANDRAIL ON ONE SIDE 34” TO 38” ABOVE THE TREAD NOSING. CIRCULAR HANDRAILS SHALL HAVE AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF 1.25”-2”; IF NOT CIRCULAR, IT SHALL HAVE A PERIMETER DIMENSION OF 4”-6.25” WITH A MAXIMUM CROSSSECTIONAL DIMENSION OF 2.25”. SEE R311.7.8.3 ITEM# 2 FOR TYPE II HANDRAILS WITH A
PARAMETER OVER 6.25”. A MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF 1.5” SHALL BE MAINTAINED FROM THE WALL OR OTHER SURFACE. HANDRAILS SHALL BE RETURNED, TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS, OR SAFETY TERMINALS. (CRC R311.7.8.2) 5. GUARDS SHALL BE 42” MINIMUM HEIGHT (UNLESS ACTING AS A HANDRAIL/GUARD FOR A STAIRWAY; THE GUARD HEIGHT MAY BE 34”-38” IN HEIGHT), WITH OPENINGS LESS THAN 4” INCHES CLEAR (GUARDS ON THE OPEN SIDES OF STAIRS MAY HAVE 4 3/8” OPENINGS). (CRC R312) 6. PROVIDE LANDINGS AT THE TOP/BOTTOM OF THE STAIRWAY THE WIDTH OF THE STAIRWAY. THE DEPTH OF THE LANDING SHALL BE 36” MINIMUM. (SEE CRC R311.7.6 FOR EXCEPTIONS). 7. USABLE SPACES UNDERNEATH ENCLOSED/UNENCLOSED STAIRWAYS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY A MINIMUM OF ½” GYPSUM BOARD. (CRC R302.7) 8. RAMPS SERVING THE EGRESS DOOR SHALL HAVE A SLOPE OF NOT MORE THAN 1 UNIT VERTICAL IN 12 UNITS HORIZONTAL (8.3-PERCENT SLOPE). ALL OTHER RAMPS SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 1 UNIT VERTICAL IN 8 UNITS HORIZONTAL (12.5-PERCENT SLOPE). EXCEPTION: WHERE IT IS TECHNICALLY INFEASIBLE TO COMPLY BECAUSE OF SITE CONSTRAINTS, RAMPS SHALL HAVE A SLOPE OF NOT MORE THAN 1 UNIT VERTICAL IN 8 UNITS HORIZONTAL (12.5- PERCENT SLOPE) (CRC R311.8.1). PROVIDE 3’X3’ LANDINGS AT THE TOP AND BOTTOM OF RAMPS, WHERE DOORS OPEN ONTO RAMPS, AND WHERE RAMPS CHANGE DIRECTIONS. (CRC R311.8.2) DECKS (N) PAVED AREA: (N)

LANDSCAPE
AREA: (N) ADDITION:
5,315.0
SQ.FT. • GLAZING ADJACENT TO STAIRWAYS, LANDINGS, AND RAMPS WITHIN 36IN. HORIZONTALLY OF THE WALKING SURFACE LESS THAN 36IN. ABOVE THE WALKING

SURFACE

FOUNDATIONS & CONCRETE SLABS
5,605 > 4,368.0 SQ.FT. 1,087.54
SQ.FT. 540.0 SQ.FT.

1. SLOPE DRAINAGE 6” WITHIN THE FIRST 10FT. FROM THE
FOUNDATION WALL. IF PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTIONS OR
LOT LINES PROHIBIT THE 10FT DISTANCE, A 2-5 PERCENT SLOPE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO AN

APPROVED ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF DIVERTING THE WATER AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION. IMPERVIOUS
SURFACES SHALL ALSO BE SLOPED A MINIMUM OF 2 PERCENT FOR 10FT AWAY FROM STRUCTURES TO AN APPROVED DRAINAGE WAY. (CRC R401.3) 2. FOOTINGS SHALL EXTEND AT LEAST 12 INCHES INTO THE UNDISTURBED GROUND SURFACE. (CRC R403.1.4) UNLESS ERECTED ON SOLID ROCK, TO PROTECT AGAINST

FROST AND FREEZING, THE MINIMUM
FOUNDATION DEPTH IS 18 INCHES BELOW GRADE IF BETWEEN 4,000- 7,000 FOOT ELEVATION AND 24 INCHES BELOW GRADE FOR 7,000 FOOT ELEVATION AND ABOVE. EXCEPTION: INTERIOR FOOTINGS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES BELOW GRADE. (L-V 3.14) 3. STEPPED FOOTINGS SHALL BE USED WHEN SLOPE OF FOOTING BOTTOM IS GREATER THAN 1 IN 10 (V: H). STEP FOOTING DETAIL SHALL BE SHOWN ON BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND FOUNDATION PLAN. (CRC R403.1.5) 4. CONCRETE SLABS: 3 ½” MINIMUM (CRC R506.1). SLABS UNDER

LIVING AREAS AND GARAGES
SHALL BE REINFORCED WITH WIRE 6” X 6”, 10 GAUGE X 10 GAUGE WELDED MESH OR EQUIVALENT STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND 4” THICKNESS OF 3/8 MINIMUM GRAVEL UNDER THE CONCRETE SLAB.

SEPARATE FROM SOIL WITH A 6 MIL POLYETHYLENE VAPOR RETARDER WITH JOINTS LAPPED NOT LESS THAN 6 INCHES IN LIVING AREAS. A CAPILLARY BREAK SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN A VAPOR RETARDER IS REQUIRED. 5. PROVIDE AN 18” X 24” UNDER-FLOOR ACCESS, UNOBSTRUCTED BY PIPES OR DUCTS AND WITHIN 5’ OF EACH UNDER-FLOOR PLUMBING CLEANOUT AND NOT LOCATED UNDER A DOOR TO THE RESIDENCE, IS REQUIRED. PROVIDE A SOLID COVER OR SCREEN. (CRC 408.4 & CPC 707.9) 6. MINIMUM SILL BOLTING: ½” ANCHOR BOLTS OR APPROVED ANCHORS AT 6 FT. O.C. MAXIMUM FOR ONE-STORY. (CRC R403.1.6) USE ANCHOR BOLTS AT 4 FT. O.C. MAXIMUM FOR THREE STORY CONSTRUCTION. EMBED BOLTS 7” MINIMUM. THE ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE PLACED IN

THE MIDDLE
THIRD OF THE WIDTH OF THE PLATE. LOCATE END BOLTS NOT LESS THAN 7 BOLT DIAMETERS, NOR MORE THAN 12” FROM ENDS OF SILL MEMBERS. IN SDC D0 AND ABOVE: PROVIDE 3”X3”X0.229 PLATE WASHERS ON EACH BOLT AT BRACED OR SHEAR WALL

LOCATIONS, STANDARD CUT WASHERS
SHALL BE PERMITTED FOR ANCHOR BOLTS NOT LOCATED IN BRACED/SHEAR WALL LINES. (CRC R403.1.6.1 & R602.11.1) (N) COVERED PATIO: 11. THE WALKING SURFACE MATERIAL OF DECKS, PORCHES, BALCONIES AND STAIRS WITHIN 10FT OF GRADE LEVEL SHALL BE IGNITION RESISTANT MATERIAL, EXTERIOR FIRE-RETARDANT TREATED WOOD OR NONCOMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL. (CRC R337.9) (N) ATTACHED OUTDOOR BATHROOM: 62 SQ.FT. (N) GARAGE ADDITION: 377.0 SQ.FT. TOTAL GARAGE IS 740 SF (700 SF EXEMPT) GREEN BUILDING 1. PROJECTS WHICH DISTURB LESS THAN ONE ACRE OF SOIL AND ARE NOT PART OF A LARGER COMMON

PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH IN TOTAL DISTURBS ONE ACRE OR MORE, SHALL MANAGE

STORM WATER DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING MEASURES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED TO PREVENT FLOODING OF ADJACENT PROPERTY, PREVENT EROSION AND RETAIN SOIL RUNOFF ON THE SITE (CGBSC 4.106.2): • RETENTION BASINS OF SUFFICIENT SIZE SHALL BE UTILIZED TO RETAIN STORM WATER ON SITE • WHERE STORM WATER IS CONVEYED TO A PUBLIC DRAINAGE

SYSTEM, COLLECTION POINT, GUTTER, OR
SIMILAR DISPOSAL METHOD, WATER SHALL BE FILTERED BY USE OF A BARRIER SYSTEM, WATTLE OR OTHER METHOD APPROVED BY THE ENFORCING AGENCY. 2. ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION WITH ATTACHED PRIVATE GARAGES SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING STATIONS (CGBSC 4.106.4): 3. INSTALL A MINIMUM 1-INCH CONDUIT CAPABLE OF SUPPLYING A 208/240V BRANCH CIRCUIT TO A SUITABLE BOX LOCATION FOR EV CHARGING. THE OTHER END

SHALL TERMINATE TO THE MAIN
SERVICE AND/OR SUBPANEL. 4. THE MAIN PANEL AND/OR SUBPANEL SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO INSTALL A 40-AMPERE DEDICATED BRANCH CIRCUIT. THE DEDICATED OVERCURRENT PROTECTION SPACE SHALL BE LABELED “EV CAPABLE”. 5. MULTIPLE SHOWER HEADS SERVING A SINGLE SHOWER SHALL HAVE A COMBINED FLOW RATE OF 1.8 GPM OR THE SHOWER SHALL BE DESIGNED TO ALLOW ONLY ONE SHOWER OUTLET TO BE IN OPERATION AT A TIME. (CGBSC 4.303.1.3.2) 6. RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH AN AGGREGATE LANDSCAPE AREA EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 500

SQUARE FEET SHALL COMPLY WITH EITHER A LOCAL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE OR THE CURRENT CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES’ MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (MWELO), WHICHEVER IS MORE STRINGENT. AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM CONTROLLERS

INSTALLED AT TIME OF FINAL INSPECTION SHALL HAVE WEATHER OR

SOIL BASED CONTROLLERS AND/OR WEATHER BASED CONTROLLERS WITH RAIN SENSORS. SOIL MOISTURE BASED CONTROLLERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE RAIN SENSOR INPUT. (CGBSC 4.304) 7. RECYCLE AND/OR REUSE A MINIMUM OF 65 PERCENT OF NONHAZARDOUS CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE. (CGBSC 4.408.2)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NEW FAR: 2,413.0 SQ.FT.+1,087.54 SQ.FT.+40 SQ.FT. (FROM GARAGE)+62 SQ.FT. (OUTDOOR BATHROOM) = 3,602.54 SQ. FT. NEW LOT COVERAGE: (N) 1,087.54 SQ.FT. ADDITION TO (E) 2,413.0 SQ.FT. TWO STORY SFD. (N) 377 SQ.FT. ADDTION TO (E) 363.0 SQ.FT. GARGE (N) 540 SQ.FT. COVERED PATIO WITH 62 SQ.FT. ATTACHED BATHROOM AND (N) 648 SF POOL AND SPA (E)
LEVEL 1
1335.38
SQ.FT. +489.00
SQ.FT. +136.25
SQ.FT. +189.00
SQ.FT. +363.00
SQ.FT. +377.00
SQ.FT. +540.00
SQ.FT.
(N) LEVEL 1 ADDITION (E) PORCH (E) PORTE COCHERE (E) GARAGE (N) GARAGE ADDITION (N) COVERED PATIO (N) ATTACHED OUTDOOR BATHROOM +62.00 SQ.FT. TOTAL (N) LOT COVERAGE =3,764.63 SQ.FT. ANNOTATION SYMBOLS CLEARANCES AND TREATMENT FOR WOOD FRAMING

1. WEATHER EXPOSED GLU-LAM, BEAMS AND POSTS SHALL BE PRESSURE TREATED OR SHALL BE WOOD OF NATURAL RESISTANCE TO DECAY (CRC R317.1.3 & 5) (E) BUILDING HEIGHT ----------------
----------------- 22' - 8"

TWO STORY WINDOW
TAG
DOOR
TAG
1t
1t
S

2. COLUMNS EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER OR IN BASEMENTS WHEN
SUPPORTED ON CONCRETE PIER OR METAL PEDESTALS SHALL BE PRESSURE TREATED OR NATURAL RESISTANCE TO DECAY UNLESS THE PIER/PEDESTALS PROJECT 1” ABOVE CONCRETE OR 6” ABOVE EARTH AND THE EARTH IS COVERED BY AN APPROVED IMPERVIOUS MOISTURE BARRIER. (CRC R317.1.4 EXC. 1) 3. COLUMNS IN ENCLOSED CRAWL SPACES OR UNEXCAVATED AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PERIPHERY OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE PRESSURE TREATED OR NATURAL RESISTANCE TO DECAY UNLESS THE COLUMN IS SUPPORTED BY A CONCRETE PIER OR METAL PEDESTAL OF A HEIGHT 8” OR MORE AND THE EARTH IS COVERED BY AN IMPERVIOUS MOISTURE BARRIER. (CRC R317.1.4 EXC. 2) 4. DECK POSTS SUPPORTED BY CONCRETE PIERS OR METAL PEDESTALS PROJECTING NOT LESS THAN 1” ABOVE A CONCRETE FLOOR OR 6” ABOVE EXPOSED EARTH. (CRC R317.1.4 EXC. 3) FLOORS 1. UNDER-FLOOR AREAS WITH STORAGE, FUEL-FIRED EQUIPMENT OR ELECTRIC-POWERED EQUIPMENT WITH LESS THAN 2X10 SOLID JOISTS SHALL BE PROTECTED ON THE UNDERSIDE BY HALF-INCH SHEETROCK OR A SPRINKLER SYSTEM. (R302.13

2. BALCONIES MUST BE DESIGNED FOR A MINIMUM LIVE LOAD OF 60LBS PER SQUARE FOOT. (CRC TR301.5) WALLS 1. POSITIVE CONNECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO ENSURE AGAINST UPLIFT AND LATERAL DISPLACEMENT. (CRC R502.9 & CBC 2304.10.7) 2. ALL FASTENERS USED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIDING & INTO PRESSURE TREATED LUMBER SHALL BE OF A CORROSION RESISTANT TYPE. (CRC R317.3) 3. FIRE-BLOCK IN CONCEALED SPACES OF STUD WALLS/PARTITIONS, VERTICALLY AT CEILING/FLOOR LEVELS, & HORIZONTALLY AT 10FT. INTERVALS. FIRE-BLOCK AT SOFFITS, DROP CEILINGS/SIMILAR LOCATIONS & IN CONCEALED SPACES AT THE TOP/BOTTOM OF STAIR STRINGERS. (CRC R302.11) 4. PROVIDE APPROVED BUILDING PAPER UNDER THE BUILDING SIDING AND APPROVED FLASHING AT EXTERIOR OPENINGS. (CRC R703.2) SPECIFY A MINIMUM OF 2 LAYERS OF GRADE D PAPER UNDER STUCCO AND 2 LAYERS OF 15LB FELT (OR EQUIVALENT) UNDER STONE VENEER. 5. STUCCO SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM CLEARANCE TO EARTH OF 4 INCHES AND 2 INCHES TO PAVED SURFACES WITH AN APPROVED WEEP SCREED. (CRC R703.7.2.1) MASONRY STONE VENEER SHALL BE FLASHED BENEATH THE FIRST COURSE OF MASONRY AND PROVIDED WITH WEEP HOLES IMMEDIATELY ABOVE THE FLASHING. (CRC R703.8.5 AND R703.8.6)

REVISION CLOUD / REVISION
NUMBER

8. (CLEARLY NOTE ON THE PLANS) AT TIME OF FINAL INSPECTION, A 1 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL, COMPACT DISC, ETC SHALL BE PROVIDED CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING: (CGBSC 4.410) • DIRECTIONS THAT MANUAL SHALL REMAIN ONSITE FOR THE LIFE OF THE BUILDING • OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR EQUIPMENT, APPLIANCES, ROOF/YARD DRAINAGE, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, ETC. • INFORMATION FROM LOCAL UTILITY, WATER AND WASTE RECOVERY PROVIDERS • PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND CARPOOL OPTIONS • MATERIAL REGARDING IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING HUMIDITY LEVELS BETWEEN 30-60 PERCENT
(N) BUILDING HEIGHT ----------------
----------------- 22' - 8"

TWO STORY

PROJECT
TITLE:

SPRINKLER
: NO

N ADDITI ON/ ALTERAT
ION

ARCHITECTURAL NORTH /

TRUE NORTH
SMOKE DETECTOR / CO2 COMBO
• INFORMATION REGARDING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES • STATE SOLAR ENERGY INCENTIVE PROGRAM INFORMATION • A COPY OF ANY REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTION VERIFICATIONS THAT WERE REQUIRED (IF ANY) 9. THE PROJECT SHALL MEET MINIMUM POLLUTANT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADHESIVES, SEALANTS, CAULKS, PAINTS, CARPET, RESILIENT FLOORING SYSTEMS, ETC. (CGBSC 4.504) 10. DUCT OPENINGS RELATED TO HVAC SYSTEMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TAPE, PLASTIC, SHEET METAL OR OTHER METHODS TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF WATER, DUST AND DEBRIS WHICH MAY ENTER THE SYSTEM. (CGBSC 4.504.1)

EXHAUST FAN ENERGY

STAR WITH HUMIDISTAT DUCKED TO

TERMINATE

OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING
#34. 50 CFM
Ref F
1 The
drawings
and

1. GUARDS ARE REQUIRED IF DECK OR FLOOR IS OVER 30” ABOVE GRADE, MINIMUM 42” HIGH, WITH OPENINGS LESS THAN 4” (CRC R312). GUARDRAILS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND DETAILED FOR LATERAL FORCES ACCORDING TO CRC TABLE 301.5.

ELEVATION
SYMBOL specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the

KITCHEN EXHAUST

PROPERTY
LINE

2. PROVIDE DECK LATERAL LOAD CONNECTIONS AT EACH END OF THE DECK AND AT DECK INTERSECTIONS PER CRC R507.9.2. SPECIFY CONNECTORS WITH A MINIMUM ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN CAPACITY OF 1,500LBS AND INSTALL WITH 24” OF THE END OF THE DECK. 750LB RATED DEVICES ARE ALLOWED (DTT1Z AS EXAMPLE) IF LOCATED AT 4 POINTS ALONG THE DECK. 3. POSTS/COLUMNS SHALL BE RETRAINED AT THE BOTTOM END TO PREVENT LATERAL DISPLACEMENT; CLEARLY SHOW APPROVED POST BASES, STRAPS, ETC TO ACHIEVE THIS PER CRC R407.3

4. JOISTS, GIRDERS, STRUCTURAL BLOCKING AND SUPPORT POSTS

SHALL BE WOOD OF NATURAL RESISTANCE

TO DECAY OR PRESSURE-TREATED LUMBER WHEN EXPOSED TO THE

APPLICABLE CODES
1 1
KE A10
1 SHEET

NUMBER DRAWING
NUMBER

ELEVATION

INDICATOIN
1 property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written

PL SHEET
LIST
Ref 2022 CBC, 2022 CPC, 2022 CMC, 2022 CEC, 2022 CEnC, 2023 CGSBC, and 2023 GBSC (Glendale Building Code) WEATHER. (CRC R317.1.3) ELECTRICAL Sheet Number Sheet Name ROO F Nam
e Elevati
on
LEVEL

INIDCATOR

LEVEL NAME

ELEVATION HEIGHT

1. NO ELECTRICAL PANELS IN CLOSETS OF BATHROOMS. MAINTAIN A CLEARANCE OF 36” INCHES IN FRONT OF PANELS, 30” WIDE OR WIDTH OF EQUIPMENT AND 6’-6” HIGH FOR HEADROOM. (CEC 110.26) 2. PROVIDE A MINIMUM 3 LUG INTERSYSTEM BONDING BUSBAR AT THE MAIN ELECTRICAL SERVICE. (CEC 250.94) 3. ALL AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR OPENERS THAT ARE INSTALLED IN A RESIDENCE SHALL HAVE A BATTERY BACKUP FUNCTION THAT IS DESIGNED TO OPERATE WHEN ACTIVATED BECAUSE OF AN ELECTRICAL OUTAGE. (CBC 406.2.1) 4. A CONCRETE-ENCASED ELECTRODE (UFER) CONSISTING OF 20’ OF REBAR OR #4 COPPER WIRE PLACED IN THE BOTTOM OF A FOOTING IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. (CEC 250.52(A) (3)) BOND ALL METAL GAS AND WATER PIPES TO GROUND. ALL GROUND CLAMPS SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE AND OF AN APPROVED TYPE. (CEC 250.104) 5. ALL 15/20 AMPERE RECEPTACLES INSTALLED PER CEC 210.52 SHALL BE LISTED TAMPER-RESISTANT RECEPTACLES. (CEC 406.12) 6. ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS SUPPLYING 15/20 AMPERE OUTLETS IN

FAMILY ROOMS, DINING ROOMS,

LIVING ROOMS, PARLORS, LIBRARIES, DENS, BEDROOMS,

SUNROOMS, RECREATION ROOMS, CLOSETS, HALLWAYS, KITCHENS, LAUNDRY ROOM OR SIMILAR ROOMS/AREAS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY A LISTED COMBINATION TYPE ARC-FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER. (CEC 210.12) 7. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ONE 20A CIRCUIT TO BE USED FOR THE LAUNDRY RECEPTACLE. (CEC 210.11(C)(2)) PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ONE 20A CIRCUIT FOR BATHROOM RECEPTACLE OUTLETS. (CEC 210.11(C)(3) 8. PROVIDE AT LEAST 1 OUTLET IN BASEMENTS, GARAGES, LAUNDRY ROOMS, DECKS, BALCONIES, PORCHES AND WITHIN 3’ OF THE OUTSIDE OF EACH BATHROOM BASIN. (CEC 210.52 (D), (F) & (G)) 9. FURNACES INSTALLED IN ATTICS AND CRAWL SPACES SHALL HAVE AN ACCESS PLATFORM (CATWALK IN ATTICS), LIGHT SWITCH AND RECEPTACLE IN THE SPACE. PROVIDE A SERVICE RECEPTACLE FOR THE FURNACE. (CEC 210.63) 10. ALL DWELLINGS MUST HAVE ONE EXTERIOR OUTLET AT THE FRONT AND THE BACK OF THE DWELLING. (CEC 210.52(E)) 11. GARAGE RECEPTACLES SHALL NOT SERVE OUTLETS OUTSIDE THE GARAGE. EXCEPTION: GARAGE CIRCUIT MAY SERVE READILY ACCESSIBLE OUTDOOR RECEPTACLE OUTLETS. ((CEC 210.11 (C)(4)) A MINIMUM OF 1 RECEPTACLE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR EACH CAR SPACE. (210.52(G) (1)) 12. AT LEAST ONE WALL SWITCHED LIGHTING OUTLET OR FIXTURE SHALL BE INSTALLED IN EVERY HABITABLE ROOM, BATHROOM, HALLWAYS, STAIRWAYS, ATTACHED GARAGES AND DETACHED GARAGES WITH ELECTRICAL POWER, EQUIPMENT SPACES (ATTICS, BASEMENTS, ETC). (CEC 210.70) 13. KITCHENS, DINING ROOMS, PANTRIES, BREAKFAST NOOKS, AND SIMILAR AREAS MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF TWO 20A CIRCUITS. KITCHEN, PANTRY, BREAKFAST NOOKS, DINING ROOMS, WORK

SURFACES AND SIMILAR AREAS COUNTER OUTLETS MUST BE
INSTALLED IN EVERY COUNTER SPACE 12” INCHES OR WIDER, NOT GREATER THAN 4’ O.C., WITHIN 24” INCHES OF THE END OF ANY COUNTER SPACE AND NOT HIGHER THAN 20” ABOVE COUNTER. (CEC 210.52 (C)) ISLAND COUNTER SPACES SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 1 RECEPTACLE OUTLET UNLESS A RANGE TOP OR SINK IS INSTALLED THAN 2 RECEPTACLES MAY BE REQUIRED. 1 RECEPTACLE IS REQUIRED FOR PENINSULAR COUNTER SPACES. RECEPTACLES SHALL BE LOCATED BEHIND KITCHEN SINKS IF THE COUNTER AREA DEPTH BEHIND THE SINK IS MORE THAN 12” FOR STRAIGHT COUNTERS AND 18” FOR CORNER INSTALLATIONS. (CEC FIGURE 210.52(C)(1)) 14. RECEPTACLES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT 12’ O.C. MAXIMUM IN WALLS STARTING AT 6’ MAXIMUM FROM THE WALL END. WALLS LONGER THAN TWO FEET SHALL HAVE A RECEPTACLE. HALLWAY WALLS LONGER THAN 10 FT SHALL HAVE A RECEPTACLE IN HALLWAYS. (CEC 210.52(A)) 15. RECEPTACLES SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED WITHIN OR DIRECTLY OVER A BATHTUB OR SHOWER STALL. (CEC 406.9(C) LIGHT PENDANTS, CEILING FANS, LIGHTING TRACKS, ETC SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 3FT HORIZONTALLY AND 8FT VERTICALLY ABOVE A SHOWER AND/OR BATHTUB THRESHOLD. (CEC 410.10(D)) ROO
F
100'

1. ROOF SHEATHING CAN ONLY CANTILEVER 9 INCHES BEYOND A GABLE END WALL UNLESS SUPPORTED BY OVERHANG FRAMING. (R802.5.2.1) 2. PROVIDE A MINIMUM 22” X 30” ACCESS OPENING TO ATTIC (CRC R807); MAY BE REQUIRED TO BE 30”X30” TO REMOVE THE LARGEST PIECE OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT PER THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE. 3. ROOF DRAINS/GUTTERS REQUIRED TO BE INSTALLED PER THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE WITH LEAF/ DEBRIS PROTECTION ALSO INSTALLED. • OUTSIDE OF EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF BEDROOMS • ON EVERY LEVEL OF A DWELLING UNIT INCLUDING BASEMENTS • ALTERATIONS, REPAIRS, OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING 1,000 DOLLARS (MAY BE BATTERY OPERATED) 19. SMOKE ALARMS SHALL BE INSTALLED (CRC (R314): • IN EACH ROOM USED FOR SLEEPING PURPOSES. • OUTSIDE OF EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF BEDROOMS. • IN EACH STORY, INCLUDING BASEMENTS. 20. AT THE TOP OF STAIRWAYS BETWEEN HABITABLE FLOORS WHERE AN INTERVENING

DOOR OR OBSTRUCTION PREVENTS SMOKE FROM REACHING THE
SMOKE DETECTOR. 21. SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED WITHIN 20FT HORIZONTALLY OF COOKING APPLIANCES AND NO CLOSER THAN 3FT TO MECHANICAL REGISTERS, CEILING FANS AND BATHROOM DOORS WITH A BATHTUB OR SHOWER UNLESS THIS WOULD PREVENT PLACEMENT OF A SMOKE DETECTOR (314.3(4)). 22. ALTERATIONS, REPAIRS, OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING 1,000 DOLLARS. (MAY BE BATTERY OPERATED.) 23. ALL SMOKE AND CARBON-MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL BE HARDWIRED WITH A BATTERY BACKUP (SMOKE ALARMS SHALL HAVE A 10-YEAR SEALED BATTERY). (CRC R314.4 & R315.1.2) 24. SMOKE DETECTORS WITHIN 10 FEET TO 20 FEET OF THE STOVE

SHALL BE IONIZATION
TYPE WITH ALARM SILENCING SWITCH. CRC R314.3.3.

LOT
TIE A- 00 COVER SHEET STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND DETAILS FULLY CONFORM

TO ALL APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE AND CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE.

A-01
A- 01.1
A-02

SCHEDULES

WINDOW ELEVATIONS

SITE PLAN
consent of the
ARCSTEM. VIEW
TITLE
VIEW
NAME
VIEW
SCALE
View Name 1/8" = 1'-0"
1 Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
A- 02.1
A-03
A- 03.1
A-04
A- 04.1
A- 04.2
A- 04.3
A- 04.4
A- 04.5
A-05

SITE SURVEY ROOF / POOL PLAN(S) ROOF DEMO PLAN(S)
(E) FLOOR PLAN(S) DEMO PLAN
(E) FLOOR PLAN(S) DEMO PLAN

SIM DETAIL VIEW

REFERANCE

VIEW NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER
1 A10 1

25. ALL 15/20 AMPERE RECEPTACLES IN WET LOCATIONS SHALL HAVE IN-USE (BUBBLE) COVERS INSTALLED. ALL RECEPTACLES IN WET LOCATIONS SHALL ALSO BE LISTED WEATHER-RESISTANT TYPE. (CEC 406.9(B)(1)) discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.

SECTION
VIEW
NUMBER
SHEET
NUMBER
SIM 1 (N) FLOOR PLAN
(N) FLOOR PLAN
PLUMBI NG1. UNDERFLOOR CLEANOUTS SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN 5’ FROM AN UNDERFLOOR ACCESS, ACCESS DOOR OR TRAP DOOR. (CPC 707.9) 2. ABS PIPING SHALL NOT BE EXPOSED TO DIRECT SUNLIGHT UNLESS PROTECTED BY WATER BASED SYNTHETIC LATEX PAINTS. (CPC 312.13) 3. PVC PIPING SHALL NOT BE EXPOSED TO DIRECT SUNLIGHT UNLESS PROTECTED BY WATER BASED SYNTHETIC LATEX PAINT, .04” THICK WRAP OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED FROM UV DEGRADATION. (CPC 312.14) 4. UNDERGROUND WATER SUPPLY LINES SHALL HAVE A 14 AWG BLUE TRACER WIRE. (CPC 604.10.1) A10 1
(E) ELEVATIONS
(E) ELEVATIONS DEMO
(N) ELEVATIONS

DRAWING NOTES
ROOM
TAG
ROOM
NAME
ROOM
SQUARE

FOOTAGE
A- 05.1
A-06
101 PAGE 150 TITLE: SF

5. THE ADJACENT SPACE NEXT TO SHOWERS WITHOUT
THRESHOLDS SHALL BE CONSIDERED A “WET
LOCATION” WHEN USING THE CRC, CBC, AND THE CEC. (CPC 408.5) A- 07
A- 08
A- 09
A- 10

COLORED ELEVATIONS

SECTIONS

TYP DETAILS

COLORED MATERIAL BOARD

COLORED SITE PLAN

RENDERED PERSPECTIVES

RENDERED PERSPECTIVES

PHOTOGRAPHS

6. SHOWER COMPARTMENTS, REGARDLESS OF SHAPE, SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM FINISHED INTERIOR OF 1024 SQUARE INCHES (32” BY 32”) AND SHALL ALSO BE CAPABLE OF ENCOMPASSING A 30” CIRCLE. THE REQUIRED AREA AND DIMENSIONS SHALL BE MEASURED AT A HEIGHT EQUAL TO THE TOP OF THE THRESHOLD AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED TO A POINT OF NOT LESS THAN 70” ABOVE THE SHOWER DRAIN OUTLET. (CPC 408.6) PROVIDE CURTAIN ROD OR DOOR A MINIMUM OF 22” IN WIDTH. (CPC 408.5) SHOWERS AND TUBS WITH SHOWERS REQUIRE A NONABSORBENT SURFACE UP TO 6’ ABOVE THE FLOOR. (CRC R307.2) MINIMUM SHOWER RECEPTOR SLOPE IS 1/8” PER FOOT. (408.5) 7. SHOW LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE WATER HEATER ON PLANS. PROVIDE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE WITH DRAIN TO OUTSIDE FOR WATER HEATER. (CPC 504.6) PROVIDE SEISMIC STRAPPING IN THE UPPER & LOWER THIRD OF THE WATER HEATER A MINIMUM OF 4” ABOVE CONTROLS. (CPC 507.2) THE WATER HEATER SHALL BE OF AN INSTANTANEOUS TYPE OR THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE PROVIDED (NEW CONSTRUCTION ONLY) (CEC 150(N)):

1. 2.

DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS.

FIGURED DIMENSIONS TAKE PREFERENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS RELATED TO

THE WORK AND NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH EITHER

FABRICATION OR
INSTALLATION OF THE WORK.

COVER 0 SHEET GRID
LINES GRID A-11 NAME A-12
A- 12.1
A-13
Proje
ct
Numb
er:

3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY SHOULD EXISTING CONDITIONS PROHIBIT EXECUTION OF THE DESIGN INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS. ANY ADDITIONAL WORK,

INCLUDING DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL RESULTING FROM THE

FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT, WILL BE AT THE
CONTRACTOR’S EXPENSE.

STROM DRAIN FLOW WITH 2% SLOPE

STORM DRAIN
FLOW

DIRECTION
00000
99 • A 120V RECEPTACLES PROVIDED WITHIN 3FT
• A CATEGORY III OR IV VENT, OR A STRAIGHT (WITHOUT BENDS)

TYPE B VENT
• CONDENSATE DRAIN THAT IS NO MORE THAN 2 INCHES HIGHER

THAN THE BASE OF THE WATER
HEATER
• GAS SUPPLY LINE WITH A MINIMUM 200,000 BTU/HR DEDICATED CAPACITY FOR THE WATER HEATER
• A DEDICATED 120/240, 3 WIRE CIRCUIT WITH 10AWG WIRE TO A RECEPTACLE OUTLET WITHIN 3’ OF THE WATER HEATER. THE UNUSED CONDUCTOR SHALL BE ELECTRICALLY ISOLATED AND HAVE A RESERVED CIRCUIT BREAKER SPACE. BOTH ENDS OF THE CONDUCTOR SHALL BE LABELED “SPARE” AND BE ELECTRICALLY ISOLATED. A RESERVE

SINGLE-POLE CIRCUIT BREAKER SPACE NEAR THIS CIRCUIT LABELED “FUTURE 240V USE.” (CEC 150.0(N)) 8. DOMESTIC HOT WATER LINES SHALL BE INSULATED. INSULATION SHALL BE THE THICKNESS OF THE PIPE DIAMETER UP TO 2” IN SIZE AND MINIMUM 2” THICKNESS FOR PIPES LARGER THAN 2” IN DIAMETER. (CPC 609.11) 9. A 3-INCH GRAVITY DRAIN SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE LOW POINT OF THE SPACE, INSTALLED WHICH PROVIDES 1/4-INCH PER FOOT GRADE AND TERMINATE AT AN EXTERIOR POINT OF THE BUILDING PROTECTED FROM BLOCKAGE. THE OPENING SHALL BE SCREENED WITH A CORROSIONRESISTANT WIRE MESH WITH MESH OPENINGS OF 1/4-INCH IN DIMENSION.

LENGTHS OF THE GRAVITY DRAINS OVER 10 FEET IN LENGTH SHALL BE FIRST APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. (L-V 8.8)

16. ALL LIGHTING/FAN FIXTURES LOCATED IN WET OR DAMP
LOCATIONS SHALL BE RATED FOR THE APPLICATION. (CEC 410.10) 03/19/2 024
Auth
or
Dat
e: 17. GFCI OUTLETS ARE REQUIRED: FOR ALL KITCHEN RECEPTACLES THAT ARE DESIGNED TO SERVE COUNTERTOP SURFACES, DISHWASHERS, BATHROOMS, IN UNDERFLOOR SPACES OR BELOW GRADE LEVEL, IN UNFINISHED BASEMENTS, CRAWL SPACE LIGHTING OUTLETS, IN EXTERIOR OUTLETS, WITHIN 6’ OF A LAUNDRY/UTILITY/WET BAR SINKS, LAUNDRY AREAS, AND IN ALL GARAGE OUTLETS INCLUDING OUTLETS DEDICATED TO A SINGLE DEVICE OR GARAGE DOOR OPENER. (CEC 210.8) 18. CARBON-MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN DWELLING UNITS WITH FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES OR WITH ATTACHED GARAGES (CRC R315): MUM HEATING AND COOLING FILTER RATINGS SHALL BE MRV 13 (150.0(M)12) 2. ISOLATION WATER VALVES REQUIRED FOR INSTANTANEOUS WATER HEATERS 6.8KBTU/HR AND ABOVE. VALVES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON BOTH COLD AND HOT WATER LINES. EACH VALVE WILL NEED A HOSE BIB OR OTHER FITTING ALLOWING FOR FLUSHING THE WATER HEATER WHEN THE VALVES ARE CLOSED. (CEC 110.3(C)6)

REVISI ONSREFERANCES / PERMIT NUMBER / CASE NUMBER
Drawn
By: 4.

5. IN THE EVENT OF A CONFLICT OR DISCREPANCIES IN THE DRAWINGS, THE PRIORITY OF INTERPRETATION SHALL BE:

SCHEDULES, NOTES, LARGE SCALE DRAWINGS (IE: DETAILS), SMALL SCALE DRAWINGS (IE: FLOOR PLANS, ELEVATIONS). ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENT OVER ALL OTHER DRAWINGS UNLESS NOTICE IS GIVEN BY THE ARCHITECT.

THE ORDER OF PRECEDENCE SHALL BE: ARCHITECTURAL,
STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL.

Checked
By: Chec
ker A- 00

3. ALL LUMINAIRES MUST BE HIGH EFFICACY (150.0(K)1A) • LUMINARIES RECESSED IN INSULATED CEILINGS MUST MEET FIVE REQUIREMENTS (150.0(K) 1C):
278 of 704

WINDOW SCHEDULE
Operation
Keep Existi
ngSill &
Tem
p
ere
d Efficient Glass
Window within
18" of floor or 40" of door
Wind
owNumb
er
Existing Width
x Height
Phas
eCreat ed
Existi
ngMateri al
Visible fromthe streetExter nal Build New Sill &FrameExisting / New Edge DetailEner gy
Fire Hazard Zone New Width x Height Quant ity New Material New Frame Type Grid (SDL) Frame Bedro
om
1 2
3 4
5 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
24" x 36"
24" x 72"
24" x 72"
18" x 54"
18" x 54"
42" x 72"
18" x 36"
39" x 54"
24" x 54"
24" x 54"
36" x 72"
42" x 54"
12" x 24"
12" x 24"
44" x 44"
14" x 34"
36" x 84"

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

REMOV ED
Existi
ng
1 WOO DALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD
YES Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Single_Left Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Single_Left Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Double Window-Single-Hung Window-Casement- Double
Window-Casement- Single_Left Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Double Window-Casement- Double
Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Single_Left Window-Casement- Double Window-Single-Hung

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NEW
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
N/A

STUC COYES
Existi YES NO
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ng
1 1
1 1
2 2
2 2
1 1
2 1
1 2
4 1
1 1
1 1
2 WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
WOO D
YES
YES
NO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
NO YE
NO S
CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

NO CHANGE

REMOV ED
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YE
YE S
S
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YE
YES
S
YES

YES REMOV ED N/

REMOV A
ED

REMOV ED

NO CHANGE
N/A
N/A
YES
N/A
N/A
Window48" x 36" x 18" Arch-Head
REMOVED Window-Bay-Casement58" x 45_Degree_Angle BLOCK FRAME 48"
36" x 48"
44" x 31"
42" x 48"

REMOV ED

REMOV ED

REMOV ED

REMOV ED
NO
NO
Window- Casement-Triple Window- Casement- Double
Window-Single- Hung

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME
N/
NO A
NO
N/A
YES Window- Casement- Double Grand total: 32 WINDOW SCHEDULE (N) WINDOWS Tem p
ere
d
Wind
owNumb
er
New Width x HeightExisti
ngMateri al
Visible fromthe streetExternal Keep Existing Sill & Build New Sill & Existing / New EdgeEner gy
Window Phase within 18" of Created Quant ity New Material Operati on New Frame Type Grid (SDL) Fram
e
Fram
e
Deta il Bedro
om
Efficient Glass Fire Hazard Zone
floor or 40" of door
5 6
18" x 54"
18" x 48"
18" x 48"
39" x 54"
42" x 48"
24" x 48"
77" x 48"
117" x 48"
18" x 36"
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
1 1
1 3
5 1
1 1
1 ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD

ALUMINU CLAD W/ WOOD
NO
NO
Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Single_Left Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Double Window-Casement- Double
Window-Casement- Single_Right Window-Casement- Double
Window-Casement- Triple

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME

BLOCK FRAME
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES

STUC COYE
S
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO

STUC CO
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
YE
S
7 NO
NO
NO
NEW
YES 10
24 25
26 27
28 YE
NE S
W
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
Window-CasementGrand Single_Left
total: 15 NOTE:ALL NEW WINDOWS VISIBLE FROM STREET TO BE MADE OF STYLE AS EXISTING.

PROJECT
TITLE: DOOR SCHEDULE ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
Type Mark Typ
e
Cou nt Fami ly Widt hHeig ht
6' - 8"
Phase Created
Existing Existing Existing
Phase Demolished Tempered
1 2
3 40" x 80"
30" x 80"
34" x 80"
32" x 84"
30" x 80"
60" x 80"
51" x 80"
33" x 80"
30" x 80"
32" x 80"
24" x 80"
138" x 84"
36" x 80"
36" x 80"
30" x 80"
28" x 80"
68" x 80"
178" x 84"
32" x 72"
48" x 80"
72" x 80"
30" x 72"
168" x 96"
48" x 96"
96" x 90"
144" x 96"
30" x 80"
68" x 82"
68" x 82"
60" x 82"
72" x 84"
32" x 84"
32" x 96"
1 6
1 9
2 1
1 1
1 1
5 1
1 1
1 7
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 1
2 2
2 1
3 40x80Arched_Wood_amp_Iron_ Entry_Door_11390 Single-Flush3' - 4" None New Constructio
n
None
2' - 6"
2' - 10"
2' - 8"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
2' - 6"
2' - 8"
2' - 0"
0' - 0"
3' - 0"
3' - 0"
2' - 6"
2' - 4"
5' - 8"
14' - 10"
2' - 8"
4' - 0"
6' - 0"
2' - 6"
14' - 0"
4' - 0"
8' - 0"
0' - 0"
2' - 6"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
6' - 0"
2' - 8"
2' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
7' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
0' - 0"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
7' - 0"
6' - 0"
6' - 8"
6' - 8"
6' - 0"
8' - 0"
8' - 0"
7' - 6"
0' - 0"
6' - 8"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
0' - 0"
7' - 0"
7' - 0"
8' - 0"
Single- Flush
O UTSIDE INSID E The
drawings
and
3 4
5 Single- Flush
Door- Opening
New Constructio
n
Existing Existing
Non
e specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
None
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
None
MIN.3" REC Door-Opening ESSED ARCHED quarter Door-Opening ARCHED quarter Door-Opening ARCHED quarter Door-Interior-Single- Full Glass-Wood Single-Flush
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
6 7
8 Existi
ngExisti
ngExisti
ng
8 9
New Constructio
n
Existing Existing
Single- Flush
Door- Opening
10 11
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 25
26 27
28 29
O PENINGA RC HED Q UA RTERARC Door-Exterior-Single-Entry-Half HED Flat Glass-Wood_Clad Door-Exterior-Single-Entry-Half Flat Glass-Wood_Clad Door-Exterior-Single-Entry-Half Flat Glass-Wood_Clad Single-Flush Existing New Constructio
n
Existing
consent of the
Non ARCSTEM.
e WINDOW SECTION 1/2" = 1'-0"
OPENIN GS1/2" = 1'-0"
Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
None
1 2
Existi
ngExisti
ngExisti
ng
Door-Double- Sliding Door-Garage- Flush_Panel Door-Interior-Single-Full Glass- Wood Door-Interior-Double-Sliding- 2_Panel-Wood Door-Interior-Double-Sliding- 2_Panel-Wood Door-Interior-Single-Full Glass- Wood Door-French-PlyGem_Mira- Quad_Inswing Door-Interior-Double-Full Glass- Wood Door-Interior-Double-Sliding-1 Panel-Wood Without Trip Door-Opening Door-Interior-Single-Full Glass- Wood SINGLE LINE Door-Opening ARCHED quarter
Door-Interior-Double-Full Glass- Wood
Door-Interior-Single-Full Glass- Wood
Single-Flush
Existi
ngExisti
ngExisti
ngExisti
ng
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
None
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM. New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
Existing
Non
e
Non
e
PAGE
TITLE: None
None
New Constructio
n
None
None
Existi
ng SC HED ULES New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
New Constructio
n
Non
e Proje
ct
Numb
er:

Non
e
Non
e
00000
99 Grand total: 63 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By:

Checked
By: Chec ker A- 01
279 of 704
2' - 0" 3' - 6" 3' - 0"
2' - 0"3' - 6"
2' - 0"
3/ 4" 0' - 2"
0' - 9"
3/ 4" 0' - 2"
0' - 9"
3/ 4" 0' - 2" 3/ 4" 0' - 2" 3/ 4" 0' - 2"3/ 4" 0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 2"
0' - 0' - 2" 8" 0' - 9"
0' - 8" 0' - 6"
# 2&3 # 8 # 11&12 # 13 # 14
# 1
3' - 0"
2' - 0" 0' - 2" 6' - 5" 9' - 9"

PROJECT
TITLE: ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
The
drawings
and
specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
1' - 0" 3/ 4" 1' - 0" 0' - 2" 3/ 4" 0' - 2" 3/ 4" 0' - 2"3/ 4" 0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 2"0' - 2" 0' - 2" 0' - 11" 0' - 11"
0' - 11" 0' - 9" # 19 # 25 NEW # 26 NEW # 27 NEW
consent of the
ARCSTEM.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
WINDOW ELEVATIONS 3/4" = 1'-0"
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.

NOTE:SPECS FOR ALL WINDOWS EXSITING AND NEW WINDOW TRI M - 2" ALL AROUND WINDOW SA SH - TOP AND SIDES 2", 3"ATTHE BOTTOM M UNTIN WIDTH 3/4", WINDOW SILL 1" PAGE TITLE:

WINDO W
ELEVA
Proje TIO NS
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By:

Checked
By: Chec Aker 01. 1
280 of 704
(E) LANDSC APE
(E) 225 SF PATIO
TO BE

DEM OLISH ED (E) LANDSC APE
(E) O LIVE TREES

TO BE REM OVED
(E) 675 SF PAVED
A REA
(E) LANDSC APE (E) DINAM ITE TREE
TO BE REM OVED (E) 2,413 SF
2 STO RY
SFD
(E) PEC AN TREE
(E) LEV EL 1
1,335.38 SF
(E) LANDSC APE
(E) LANDSC APE
(E) LANDSC APE
(E) 363 SF
2 CAR GARAGE (E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE
420 SF PAVED
(E) DRIVEWA Y
450 SF PAVED
(E) DRIVEWA Y
(E) LANDSC APE

PROJECT
TITLE: ADDITI O N/ A LTERA TION (E) LANDSC APE
The
drawings
and
specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the

BUILDING FO O TPRINT (N) POOL/ SPA BUILDING FO O BUILDING FO O TPRINT TPRINT 2ND FLO OR property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
(E) LANDSC APE
618 SF PAVED
A REA
(N) 62 SF

OUTDO OR

BATHRO O M
365 SF TO BE PAVED W/ BELG A RD MO NTEC ITO

PA V ERS
(N) 1,087 SF ADDITIO N TO
2,413 SF
(N) 540 SF C O VERED PATIO consent of the
ARCSTEM.
(E) LANDSC APE (N) 598.54 SF
2ND FLOOR

ADDITIO N
Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
2 STO RYSFD
(N)SO LAR

DEDIC ATED
A REA
(E) PEC AN TREE (N) LEV EL 1
1,824.38 SF
BUILDING FO O TPRINT discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.
(N) 489 SF
1 ST FLOOR

ADDITIO N
(E) LANDSC APE
(E) LANDSC APE
PAGE
TITLE:

BUILDING FO O TPRINT 2ND FLO OR
(N) 377 SF GARAGE ADDTION
(E) 363 SF
2 CAR GARAGE
SITE PLAN 420 SF PAV ED
(E) DRIVEWAY

TO BE REPAVED W/

BELG A RD MO NTEC ITO

PA V ERS
(E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE
450 SF PAV ED
(E) DRIVEWAY

TO BE REPAVED W/

BELG A RD MO NTEC ITO

PA V ERS

NEW ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING
Proje
ct
Numb
er:

LEG END 00000
99 BUILD IN G FO O TPRINT

STO RM DRAIN FLO W

N EW ADDITIO N
(E) LANDSC APE Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By:

Checked
By: Chec SO LAR DEDIC ker ATED A REA
PAVED A REA A- 02

LANDSC APED A REA
281 of 704

PROJECT
TITLE: ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
The
drawings
and
specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
consent of the
ARCSTEM.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.

PAGE
TITLE:

SITE SURVEY
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By:

Checked
By: Chec Aker 02. 1
282 of 704
18' - 4"
(N) 0' - TRELLIS 10"
0' - 10"0' - 10"0' - 10" 12' - 2" 7' - 6" 11' - 0" 6' - 3" 4" / 1'-0" 4" / 1'-0" BALC 4" / 1'- ONY 0"
4" / 1'- 0" 15' - 7"
4" / 1'- 0" 14" X 6" SO FFIT
VENT
(N) CLAY BA RREL ROOF TO
4" / 1'- MATCH EXISTIN G
0"

ATTIC VENT
(SEE SPEC 4" / 1'- S) 0"
4" / 1'- 0"
( E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF (N)SOLAR DEDIC ATED
A REA
(N) 1,096 SF ADDITIO
N TO
(E) 2,413 SF
2 STO RY
(E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE(E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE ( E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF (E)ASPHALT M EM BRANE SFD (E) 2,413 SF
2 STO RY
SFD
(N) ASPHALT M EM BRANE

TO MATCH EXISTING
(E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF (E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF
( E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF(E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF
(E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF(E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF (E) 12"X12" FACE

VENT ( E) CLAY BA RREL ROOF
(E) CLAY BA
4" / 1'- RREL ROOF
0"
4" / 1'- 0" 4" / 1'- 0"
4" / 1'- 0"
1' - 0"

PROJECT
TITLE: ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
(E) 12"X12" FACE
VENT
12' - 2" 14' - 5" 25' - 11" 1' - 0" 12' - 2" 14' - 5"25' - 11"1' - 0" 1 ROOF PLAN (N) 2 The
drawings
and
ROOF PLAN (E) 3/16" = 1'- 0"
3/16" = 1'-0" 1 A- 10 specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written

ROOF MATERIAL SPECS
ATTIC VENTILA TION CALC: PRO PERTY LINE V EREA CLAY ROOF TILE COLOR:CARIBBEA N SROOFTILE RED Specs TO TAL VENTILA TED A TTIC A REA:1,610.0 SQ.FT.
1,610.0 SQ .FT. / 150 = 10.7 SQ .FT. OR 1,540.8 SQ SPA NISH .IN. VENTILATIO N REQ UIRED SLENG TH:

WIDTH:

19.5 "11"
PRO V IDED: 862.5 SQ .IN. A TTIC V ENTS
792.0 SQ .IN. SO FFIT VENTS
TOTAL VENTILATION PRO VIDED 2,016 SQ.IN.
consent of the
ARCSTEM. WEIG HT: 7.8 LBS.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
CLASSA ASPHALT M EM BRANE VENTILA TIO N SPEC S:

A TTIC: SPA 4" / 1'- 0" 4" / 1'- 0" O'HAGIN BA RREL ROOF VENTS NFVA: 86.25 SQ .IN. (N) 62 SF

OUTDO OR

BATHRO O M
SO FFIT: 12"X12" FACE VENTS 288.0 SQ .IN. 14"X6" SO FFIT SC REENS 504.0 SQ .IN. discrepenc ies to
(N) CLAY BA RREL ROOF TO MATCH EXISTIN G ARCST
EM.
(N) POOL
PAGE
TITLE: (N) 540 SF

O PEN PA TIO
4" / 1'- 0" 4" / 1'- 0" ROOF/ POOL PLA N(S) BA JA
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By: 31' - 6" Checked
By: Chec ker
ROOF PLAN PATIO (N) 3/16" = 1'-0"
3 A- 03
283 of 704
12' - 2" 7' - 6" 11' - 0" 6' - 3"
15' - 7"

BALCO NY NOTA ROOF BALCO NY NOTA ROOF
571.32 SQ .FT. DEM O LITIO N OF (E) ROOF AREA571.32 SQ .FT. DEM O LITIO N OF (E) ROOF AREA (E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE (E) 2,413 SF
2 STO RY
SFD
(E)1599.6 SQ.FT.TOTA L ROOF AREA
(E) 1360.25 SFPO RCH

PROJECT
TITLE:
12' - 2" 14' - 5" 25' - 11" 1' - 0" ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
The
drawings
and
ROOF DEMO PLAN (E) 3/16" = 1'-0"ROOF DEMO PLAN DIAGRAM (E) 3/16" = 1'-0" specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
1 2
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
consent of the
ARCSTEM.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.

PAGE
TITLE:

ROOF DEMO

PLA N(S)
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By:

Checked
By: Chec Aker 03. 1
284 of 704
A- 05
2 7' - 10" 11' - 0" 5' - 8" 15' - 10"
4' - 6"
23 17' - 0"
3' - 9" 5' - 3" 2' - 0" 8' - 6"
1' - 2" 8' - 4" 6' - 4"
(E)363 2 CAR SF
GARAGE
LAUND 24
RY
LANDIN G 9
1 1/2" MAX 12 14 . 1
1/2" MAX
. PL 1 2
22 BATHRO O M 1 10
BREA KFA ST A REA 11
21 13' - 4" 9
4 15 2
9' - 1"9' - 1" 10 FAMILY 13 13 ROOM 4' - 4"
18' - 2" 10' - 10"
1 A- 05 GARAGE PLAN (E) 1/4" = 1'-0"
LANDIN G KITC 2
HEN 20 PA NTRY
10 (E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE
8 4 9 2 13 6"
9 5 A- 05
4 C LO SET C LO
LANDIN SET 13' - G
8"
LANDIN G 2

PROJECT
TITLE:

DINING ROOM 6 7 6"
25 UP ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
24 5
(E) 4 FIREPLACE The
drawings
and
8 8 LIVING ROOM specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
23' - 6" property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
1 (E) 136.25 SFPO RCH 24 1 3 2
19 consent of the
ARCSTEM.
3 Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
13' - 11"
5' - 2"
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.
4' - 11" 5' - 4" 4' - 6" 8' - 4" 4' - 3" 4' - 3" 3' - 4" 4' - 0" 3' - 9" 40' - 1"
PAGE
TITLE: 3
( E) FLO OR

PLA N(S)
A- 05 A-05.1 3
WA LL LEGEND Proje
ct 00000
99 Numb
LEVEL 1 @ er: FLOOR (E) 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTIN G WA LLS

N EW WA LLS
1 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
(E) FLOOR A REA 1,335.38 SF
Drawn
By: DEM O LISHED WA LLS
1 HR FIRE RATED WALL
Checked
By: Chec ker 12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION A- 04
285 of 704
7' - 10" 10' - 9" 6' - 3" 15' - 7"

DEM O CA LCULA TIONS
DEMO: 68.6 LINEA R FT TO BE DEM O LISHED
REM AIN: 99.16 LINEA R FT TO REM AIN
TO TAL EXISTIN G WA LLS: 167.76 FT
23 3' - 9" 5' - 3" 2' - 0"
1' - 2" 8' - 4" 6' - 4"

LAUND RY
LANDIN G 9
1 12 14 1/2" MAX
. 1
1/2" MAX
.
22 BATHRO O M 1 10
BREA KFA ST A REA 21
13' - 4" 9
4 2
10 FAMILY 13 13 ROOM
10' - 10"
LANDIN G KITC HEN 20 PA NTRY
10 (E) 189 SF PORTE COCHERE
8 4 9 2 13 6"
9 5 C LO SET C LO

LANDIN SET
13' - G
8"
LANDIN G 2

PROJECT
TITLE:

DINING ROOM 6 7 6"

ADDITI O N/
25 UP
24 A LTERA
5 TION
(E) 4 FIREPLACE The
drawings
and
8 8 LIVING ROOM specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
23' - 6" property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
1 (E) 136.25 SFPO RCH 24 1 3 2
19 consent of the
ARCSTEM. 3
Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
13' - 11"
15' - 5"
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.
4' - 6" 8' - 4" 4' - 3" 4' - 3" 3' - 4" 4' - 0" 3' - 9" PAGE
TITLE:

DEM O PLA N
WA LL LEGEND LEVEL 1 @ FLOOR (E) DEMO 1/4" = 1'-0"
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
1 00000 EXISTIN G 99 WA LLS Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
N EW WA LLS Drawn
By: DEM O LISHED WA LLS Checked
By: 1 HR FIRE RATED WALL
Chec ker 12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION
A- 04. 1
286 of 704
A- 05
2 7' - 10" 6' - 11" 6' - 11" 3' - 6" 15' - 2"
17 19

BALC ONY
17 24
BEDRO O M 2 LANDIN G
13' - 18
4"
1 A- 05

BATHRO O
LANDIN M 2
G 10' -
13 10" 3' - 3" 4' - 7" 18
18 18
C LO 9
SET
2 17 C LO A- SET 05
4 11 7' - 2" 2
9 PROJECT
TITLE:
18 BEDRO O 9 2 13
M 1 ADDITI O N/ 14 A LTERA TION 11 17' - 1" C LO SET C LO SET The
drawings
and
13 14 specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
13 16 15

M A STER BEDRO O M
14' - 3" property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
(E) BALC ONY

TO BE C O NVERTED

IN TO SUNRO O M
16 12 13
consent of the
ARCSTEM.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
7' - 3" 7' - 6" 10' - 6"
40' - 4"
7' - 5" 7' - 8"
discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM.

PAGE
TITLE: 3
( E) FLO OR

PLA N(S)
A- 05
Proje
ct
Numb
er:

WA LL LEGEND
00000
99 EXISTIN G WA LLS
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Dat
e: N EW WA LLS Drawn
DEM O LISHED By:

WA LLS Checked
By: Chec LEVEL 2 @ ker FLOOR 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 HR FIRE RATED WALL 1
A- 04. 2
12" CONCRETE
(E) FLOOR A REA FOUNDATION
1,077.62 SF
287 of 704

DEM O CA LCULA TIONS
DEMO: 44.33 LINEA R FT TO BE DEM O LISHED
REM AIN: 112.58 LINEA R FT TO REM AIN
TO TAL EXISTING WA LLS:156.91 FT
7' - 6" 14' - 6" 6' - 11" 11' - 5"
7' - 6" 7' - 3" 6' - 11" 3' - 6" 15' - 2"
17 19

BALC ONY
17 24
BEDRO O M 2 LANDIN G
13' - 18
4"

BATHRO O
LANDIN M 2
G 10' -
13 10" 3' - 3" 4' - 7" 18
18 18
C LO 9
SET
2 PROJECT
TITLE: 17 C LO SET ADDITI O N/
11 7' - 2" 2
9 A LTERA TION
18 BEDRO O 9 2 13
M 1
14 The
drawings
and
11 17' - 1" specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the

C LO SET C LO SET
property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
13 14 13 16 15

M A STER BEDRO O M
14' - 3"
consent of the
ARCSTEM. (E) BALC ONY

TO BE C O NVERTED

IN TO SUNRO O M
16 Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
12 13
discrepenc
ies to ARCST
EM. 7' - 3" 7' - 6" 10' - 6"
40' - 4"
7' - 5" 7' - 8"
PAGE
TITLE: 1
A- 10 DEM O PLA N
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR By:
(E) DEMO 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 Checked
By: Chec Aker 04. 3
288 of 704
1 A- 06
2 A- 07
2 A- 08
40' - 4"
16' - 0"
6' - 6" 13' - 8" 13' - 8" 6' - 6"
1' - 7" P
L
(N)PO ST (N)O PEN PATIO
22' - 6"
24 24
20 1
1/2" MAX
.
1 10
A- 11
2' - 01 2" 7
10' - 0" 15' - 3" 23' - 11"
(N) FAMILY (N)KITC S ROOM HEN KE
24 3
4' - 2"
5' - 9" 5' - 6 9" 10
(N)377 SF ADDITION TO 21 (E)363 SF
2 CAR GARAGE 29 TO ADD 1 ADDTIO NAL PA RKIN G
TO TAL 740.0 SF
10' -
(N)C LO 10" 5 SET P (N) PLAY ROOM L 7' - 9" 10 S 26

HALLW AY
25 PROJECT
TITLE: S
1 1
A- 07
A- 06

ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
29 A- 07
A- 06
4 4
(N) DINING
PORTE
(E) 189 SF ROOM
COCHERE F (N) POWDER 28 1 2 24 S
2' - 0" 2' - 0" 29 13' - 8" The
drawings
and
specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
0" 1' - 3"
25 23
3 6' - 11" A- 08 property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
24 26 11 S
23' - 6" 4
(E) 15
(E) LIVING FIREPLACE ROOM consent of the
ARCSTEM. 9' - 1"
9' - 8 8 1" Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
4' - 4"18' - 2"
(E) 136.25 SF PO RCH 1
GARAGE PLAN (N) 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 3 2
24 2
19 (N) GARAGE ADDITION 377.0 SF discrepenc
ies to
3 ARCST
EM. DN
PAGE
4' - TITLE: 11" 5' - 2" 5' - 4" 4' - 6" 8' - 4" 4' - 3" 4' - 3" 3' - 7" 3' - 9" 3' - 9" (N) FLOOR PLA N
14' - 6" 25' - 11"
3 1
A- 06 A- 10 Proje
ct 00000
99 WA LL LEGEND Numb
er:

Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
EXISTIN G WA LLS Drawn
By: N EW WA LLS DEM O LISHED WA LLS Checked
By: Chec ker LEVEL 1 @ FLOOR (N) 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 HR FIRE RATED WALL 1
A- 04. 4
12" CONCRETE
(N) FLOOR ADDITIO FOUNDATION N 489.0 SF
289 of 704
1 A- 06
2 A- 07
2 A- 08
38' - 4" 2 A- 06
5 A- 07
5 A- 5' - 08
6" 5' - 3" 4' - 5" 3' - 7" 4' - 5" 4' - 5" 5' - 3" 5' - 6" 24 24
9' - 6"1' - 1"7' - 4"1' - 1"9' - 6"
3' - 16' - 0"
9' - 4"
10" (N)
(N)BA TH 2 BALCONY

DRO P CEILING
F
8' - 6"
(N) WALK IN C F LO SET DRO P CEILING
8' - 6"
1' - 3" 3' - 0" 27 27
S
3 OUTDO
OR

BATHRO O M
8 F
8' - 4" 9' - 10" (N) BEDRO O M 2 DROP CEILING
8' - 6" 4' - 0" PO
(N)C LO STS
SET DN 1' -
14' - 0"
0" 22
S
3 S 3
4 HALLW AY ADRO P 08 CEILING
8' - 6"
8' - F 10
2" 10' - 10" 7' - 8" F
9' - 4"
1' -
0' - 4"
5" 25 (N) M A STER BA TH

DROP CEILING
8' - 6"
PO STS
(N)BA TH 1 DRO P CEILING
8' - 6"
(N)C LO SET DRO P CEILING
8' - 6"
1 1
A- 07
A- 06

S PROJECT
TITLE: A- 07
A- 06
4 4
(E)PO RTE
COCHE RE 3 3 ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
9' - 6"9' - 6"9' - 6" 2' - 9" 7' - 10" 1' - 10" 4' - 8" 30' - 0" S 3 S
17' - 1" 2' - 0" PATIO PLAN (N) 1/4" = 1'-0"
2 3 3 3 6 6
A- 07
The
drawings
and
3 (E) BEDRO O M 1

V A ULTED CEILING
(N) BATHRO O M 62.0 SF
specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
A- S S
08 A- 06 14
11 property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
22x30 ATTIC

ACCES S
6' - 9" 14' - 3" 14 (N) LAUNDRY DRO P CEILING
8' - 6" (E) MASTER BEDROO M
V A ULTED CEILING consent of the
ARCSTEM.

Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
26 (N)SUNRO S O M 28
12 13
7' - 3" 7' - 2"
14' - 5" 27 discrepenc
ies to ARCST
EM.
5' - 6" 5' - 3" 7' - 5"
25' - 11"
7' - 8"
PAGE
TITLE:
(N) FLOOR
PLA N
3 1
A- 06 A- 10
Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
99 Dat
e:
03/ 19/ 2024
Auth
or
Drawn
By: LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR (N) 1/4" = 1'-0"
Checked
By: 1 Chec ker
(N) FLOOR ADDITIO N 598.0 SF
A- 04. 5
290 of 704
RIDGE HEIGHT22' - 8"
(E) CLAY S TILE ROOF
LEVEL 2 CEILING19' -
18 18 18 18 0" 12 11 19
(E)STUC C O LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR 11' - 2" LEVEL 1 CEILING10' - 2" (E) GARAGE 9
10 10
(E)STUC C O (E)STUC C 24 24 O 24
11 (E)STUC C O
LEVEL 1 @ FLOOR 1' - GROUND 2" LEVEL0' - 0"
EAST 3/16" = 1'-0"
1 (E) FACE VENT (E) CLAY S TILE ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT22' - 8" LEVEL 2 CEILING19' - 0" P L
(E)STUC C O P
L
17 11 13' - 11" 24
(E) CLAY S TILE ROOF (E)STUC C O LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR 11' - 2" LEVEL 1 CEILING10' - 2" 23 5' - 0" 9 12 22 (E) PO RTE COCHERE 14 8
3 (E)STUC C O LEVEL 1 @ FLOOR 1' - GROUND 2" LEVEL0' - 0" NORTH 3/16" = 1'-0"
2 PROJECT
TITLE: ADDITIO N/

A LTERA TION
(E) CLAY S TILE ROOF (E) FACE VENT RIDGE HEIGHT22' - 8" LEVEL 2 CEILING19' - 0" The
drawings
and
P
L
16 15 specifications
and designs
represented
hereby are
and shall remain
the
P
L 14 13 13' - 11" property of the

ARCSTEM,
and no part
thereof shall
be used or
reproduced
for any purpose
other
than the
specified project
for which they
have been
prepared and
developed
without the
written
(E) PO RTE COCHER (E)STUC C O (E) CLAY S TILE ROOF LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR 11' - 2" (E) AWNING

TO BE REMO VED
LEVEL 1 CEILING10' - 2" 5' - 1
0" consent of the
ARCSTEM. 8 8 19 3 2 (E)STUC C 15 O Written
dimensions
shall
have precedence
over
scaled
dimensions. The
Contractor
shall verify
and be
responsiible for
all dimensions
and
conditions on
the jobsite
and report any
3 (E)FRONT G ATE LEVEL 1 @ FLOOR 1' - 2"

TO BE REMO VED
GROUND LEVEL0' - 0"
SOUTH 3/16" = 1'-0"
3 discrepenc
ies to
ARCSTEM. (E) CLAY S TILE ROOF (E) FACE VENT RIDGE HEIGHT 22' - 8"
(E) CLAY S TILE ROOF
LEVEL 2 CEILING
19' - 0"
PAGE
TITLE:
(E) ELEVA TIO NS
17 (E)STUC C 14 O 16
(E) PO RTE (E)STUC C COCHERE O (E) CLAY S TILE ROOF LEVEL 2 @ FLOOR 11' - 2"
(E) CLAY S TILE ROOF Proje
ct
Numb
er:
00000
LEVEL 1 99