258 of 420
City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
96 Table 6 High Vulnerability Scores
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Extreme Heat
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure High Low 5-High
Under-resourced Individuals High Low 5-High
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers High Low 5-High
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities High Low 5-High Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Drought
Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Wildfire
Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 4-High
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities High Medium 4-High Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Buildings and Facilities High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Landslides
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Medium Low 4-High Buildings and Facilities High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation
Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 5-High
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Medium Low 4-High Poor Air Quality
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure High Low 5-High
Under-resourced Individuals High Low 5-High
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers High Low 5-High
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities High Low 5-High Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
259 of 420
References
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 97
7 References
American Psychological Association (APA). (2012). “Fact Sheet:
Health Disparities and Stress”
https://www.apa.org/topics/racism-bias-
discrimination/health-disparities-stress?clearcache=true Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities (APLGU). N.d. “How does a college degree improve graduates’ employment and earnings potential?” https://www.aplu.org/our-work/5-
archived-projects/college-costs-tuition-and-financial-
aid/publicuvalues/publicuvalues-
resources/q3/employment-and-earnings.pdf
Ackerly, David, Andrew Jones, Mark Stacey, Bruce Riordan. (University of California, Berkeley). 2018. San Francisco Bay Area Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: CCCA4-SUM-2018-005.
Ascend Analytics (Ascend). 100% Clean Energy by 2030 Feasibility Study. 2021.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/70260/638145623762470000
Backlund, Peter, Anthony C. Janetos, and David Steven Schimel. The effects of climate change on agriculture, land resources, water resources, and biodiversity in the United States. Vol.
4. US Climate Change Science Program, 2008.
Bedsworth, Louise, et al. Statewide Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research, State of California Energy
Commission, and California Natural Resources Agency,Aug. 2018, www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
11/Statewide_Reports-SUMCCCA4-2018-
013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf.
Bleiweis, Robin, Frye, Jocelyn, and Khattar, Rose. 2021. Women of Color and the Wage Gap.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/women-of-
color-and-the-wage-gap/
C. J. Gabbe & Gregory Pierce (2020): Extreme Heat Vulnerability of Subsidized Housing Residents in California, Housing Policy Debate, DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2020.1768574
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022. Overview Diesel Exhaust & Health.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust- and-health
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023. Combustion Pollutants & Indoor Air Quality.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/combustion-
pollutants-indoor-air-quality
California Air Resources Board (CARB). N.d. South Coast Air Basin Ozone Weight of Evidence Analysis.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
12/Jan_2023_SC_CV_70ppb_Staff_Report_App_B.pdf
California Census 2020. California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. “California Hard-to-Count
Interactive Map”..
https://cacensus.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/ind
ex.html?id=48be59de0ba94a3dacff1c9116df8b37
260 of 420
City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
98 California Department of Conservation (CDOC). 2021. CGS Map Sheet 58: Deep-Seated Landslide Susceptibility.
https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3cdc744bec6
b45c28206e472e8ad0f89#
California Department of Public Health (CDPH). 2014. “Average Daily Maximum Ozone Concentration.”
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Docum
ent%20Library/CHVIs/BRACE_Ozone_801_Narrative.pdf
California Department of Public Health (CDPH). 2020. “Climate Change and Health Vulnerability Indicators for California.” https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/Pages/CC-Health-
Vulnerability-Indicators.aspx
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. Cal-Adapt Local Climate Change Snapshot for Glendale. 2022. https://cal-
adapt.org/tools/local-climate-change-snapshot/. Accessed April 2023.
California Environmental Protection Agency Urban Heat Island Interactive Maps. 2023. https:// calepa.ca.gov/urban-heat- island-interactive-maps/
California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). 2020.
California Adaptation Planning Guide.
https://www.caloes.ca.gov/HazardMitigationSite/Documen
ts/CA-Adaptation-Planning-Guide-FINAL-June-2020-
Accessible.pdf.
California Heat Assessment Tool. https://cal-heat.org/
Census Bureau. (2022). Census Bureau Releases Estimates of Undercount and Overcount in the 2020 Census.
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-
releases/2022/2020-census-estimates-of-undercount-and-
overcount.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2020). Health Implications of Drought.
https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/drought/implications.htm#:~:te xt=Drought%20can%20also%20cause%20long,hygiene%2C
%20and%20food%20and%20nutrition
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). PLACES:
Local Data for Better Health - Place Data. Accessed August 2023. https://data.cdc.gov/500-Cities-Places/PLACES-Local- Data-for-Better-Health-Place-Data-202/epbn-9bv3
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2022). Extreme Heat and Pregnant Women.
https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/extremeheat/heat_and_pre
gnant_women.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2022). Basic Facts about Mold and Dampness. https://www.cdc.gov/
mold/faqs.htm#:~:text=Mold%20will%20grow%20in%20pla
ces,carpet%2C%20fabric%2C%20and%20upholstery
Christmas, Michael. (2021). Humboldt Geographic: Humboldt State University. “California’s Former Sundown Town Faces Up to Racist Legacies”.
https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=1043&context=humboldtgeographic
City of Glendale. 2018. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=489
80. City of Glendale.2010. Census Information.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/our-
city/demographics/census-information
City of Glendale.2023. Income and Poverty.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/co
261 of 420
References
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 99
mmunity-development/planning/services/census-
information-income-and-poverty
City of Glendale.2023. Nature Based Development.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/ma
nagement-services/office-of-sustainability/programs-and- services#Nature%20Based%20Development
City of Glendale. N.d.(a) Parks, Facilities, & Historic Sites. https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/co
mmunity-services-parks/parks-facilities-historic-sites/list-of- parks-facilities-historic-sites.
City of Glendale. N.d.(b) Verdugo Wash.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/co
mmunity-development/planning/plans-for-
mobility/verdugo-wash.
City of Glendale. 2023. Glendale Homeless Count.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/71115/638205459970370000
City of Glendale. 2022. Glendale Water & Power - Wildfire Mitigation Plan.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/68582/638016006890530000
City of Glendale. 2020. Urban Water Management Plan.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/62412
City of Glendale. 2019. Glendale Downtown Specific Plan. https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/50230/636904148989570000
City of Glendale.2023. Glendale Narrows Riverwalk, Phase II. https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/pu
blic-works/projects/glendale-narrows-riverwalk-phase-ii City of Glendale. 2012. Greener Glendale Plan.
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/ma
nagement-services/office-of-sustainability/greener-glendale City of Glendale. 2003. Glendale General Plan - Safety Element. https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/4551/635242148319870000
City of Glendale Water & Power. 2019. Integrated Resource Plan. https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocume
nt/51814/638258694171330000
City of Glendale Projects. 2023. Glendale Water & Power’s Investments in Infrastructure. Accessed September 2023. https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/gle
ndale-water-and-power/projects
Climate Resolve. 2021. Lessons from the Woolsey Fire Report – Lesson 8. https://www.climateresolve.org/lessons-from-
the-woolsey-fire-report/
Collins M., M. Sutherland, L. Bouwer, S.-M. Cheong, T. Frölicher, H.
Jacot Des Combes, M. Koll Roxy, I. Losada, K. McInnes, B.
Ratter, E. Rivera-Arriaga, R.D. Susanto, D. Swingedouw, and L. Tibig. 2019. “Extremes, Abrupt Changes and Managing
Risk.” In: IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/3/2022/03/0 8_SROCC_Ch06_FINAL.pdf
Cooley Heather, Eli Moore, Matthew Heberger, and Lucy Allen. 2012. “Social Vulnerability to Climate Change in California.” 262 of 420
City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
100
https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/social-
vulnerability-climate-change-ca.pdf
Coop, et al. 2020. Wildfire-Driven Forest Conversion in Western North American Landscapes BioScience 70: 659–673.
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the
American Institute of Biological Sciences.
doi:10.1093/biosci/biaa061
Crouch, Angie. 2020. “City of Glendale Apologizes for Its History as a ‘Sundown Town’”. NBC Los Angeles. Accessed September
2023. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/city-of- glendale-apologizes-for-its-history-as-a-sundown-
town/2443011/
Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. “Climate Change and the Health of Socially Vulnerable People.” Accessed September 2023. https://www.epa.gov/climateimpacts/climate-
change-and-health-socially-vulnerable-people
Feinstein Laura, Phurisamban Rapichan, Ford Amanda, Christine Tyler, and Crawford Ayana. 2017. “Drought and Equity in California.” https://pacinst.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/01/PI_DroughtAndEquityInCA_Jan_2
017_Executive_Summary.pdf
FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Agency). A Brief History of the Housing Government-Sponsored Enterprises. N.D.
https://www.fhfaoig.gov/Content/Files/History%20of%20th e%20Government%20Sponsored%20Enterprises.pdf
Flanagan Barry, Gregory Edward, Heitgerd Janet, Lewis Brian. 2011. “A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management.” https://svi.cdc.gov/A%20Social%20Vulnerability%20Index% 20for%20Disaster%20Management.pdf
Gamble & Balbuls. 2016. “The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States.”
https://health2016.globalchange.gov/low/ClimateHealth20 16_09_Populations_small.pdf
GAO (United States Government Accountability Office). Disaster Recovery: School Districts in Socially Vulnerable
Communities Faced Heightened Challenges After Recent
Natural Disasters. January 2022.
<https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104606.pdf>
Glendale News Press. 2023. “Glendale Activates City Cooling Centers to Beat the
Heat”.https://glendalenewspress.outlooknewspapers.com/
2023/07/17/glendale-activates-city-cooling-centers-to-beat- the-heat/
Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center. 2022. Community Health Needs Assessment 2022.
https://www.dignityhealth.org/content/dam/dignity-
health/pdfs/chna/2022-chna/gmhhc-chna-22.pdf
Hall Alex, Neil Berg, and Katharine Reich. (University of California, Los Angeles). 2018. Los Angeles Summary
Report California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
11/Reg%20Report-%20SUM-CCCA4-2018-
007%20LosAngeles_ADA.pdf
Hamerlynck, Erik & Knapp, Alan. (1995). High temperature and light responses of two oaks at the western limit of their
distribution.
Hand S. Michael, Smith W. Jordan, Peterson L. David, Brunswick A.
Nancy, and Brown P. Carol. 2018. “Chapter 10: Effects of Climate Change on Outdoor Recreation.”
263 of 420
References
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 101
https://www.fs.usda.gov/rm/pubs_series/rmrs/gtr/rmrs_gt r375/rmrs_gtr375_316_338.pdf
Herbert, Natalie, et al. 2023. "Improving adaptation to wildfire smoke and extreme heat in frontline communities: Evidence from a community-engaged pilot study in the San Francisco Bay Area." Environmental Research Letters.
Hispanic Access Foundation. Climate Change: Heat & Drought. https://www.hispanicaccess.org/climate-change-heat-
drought
Hoffman, Jeremy S., Vivek Shandas, and Nicholas Pendleton. “The Effects of Historical Housing Policies on Resident Exposure to Intra-Urban Heat: A Study of 108 US Urban Areas.”
Cllimate 8, no. 1. January 2020.
https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/8/1/12/htm
Hsu, Angel, Glen Sheriff, Tirthankar Chakraborty, and Diego Manya. “Disproportionate Exposure to Urban Heat Island Intensity Across Major US Cities”. Nature Communications 12, no. 1. 2721.
Hu, Ming, Kai Zhang, Quynh Camthi Nguyen, Tolga Tasdizen, and Krupali Uplekar Krusche. 2022. "A Multistate Study on
Housing Factors Influential to Heat-Related Illness in the United States" International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health 19, no. 23: 15762.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315762
Huang Kangning, Xia Li, Xiaoping Liu, and Karen C Seto. 2019. “Projecting global urban land expansion and heat island intensification through 2050.”Environmental Research
Letters. Lett. 14 114037.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance
Climate Change Adaptation, a special report of Working
Groups I and II of the IPCC, ed. C. B.
<https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/SREX_F D_SPM_final-2.pdf>.
IPCC. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Sixth Assessment Report. 2021.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/#FullReport.
Kenney WL, Craighead DH, Alexander LM. 2014.“Heat waves, aging, and human cardiovascular health.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000325
LA County Department of Public Health (LA CDPH). N.d. “Extreme heat: What DPH is Doing.”
http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/eh/climatechange/Extrem eHeatDPH.htm#:~:text=The%20urban%20heat%20island%2
0effect,the%20urban%20heat%20island%20effect.
Liu JC, Mickley LJ, Sulprizio MP, Dominici F, Yue X, Ebisu K, Anderson GB, Khan RFA, Bravo MA, Bell ML. 2016. “Particulate Air Pollution from Wildfires in the Western US under Climate Change.” National Library of Medicine. doi:
10.1007/s10584-016-1762-6.
Los Angeles County. 2021. LA County Climate Vulnerability Assessment. https://ceo.lacounty.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2021/10/LA-County-Climate-Vulnerability- Assessment-1.pdf
Los Angeles Times (LA Times). 2023. Worse air quality in L.A. expected during heat wave. Why do high temperatures
cause more smog?
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-07-18/l-a- region-expected-to-see-worse-air-quality-during-heat-
wave-why-do-high-temperatures-lead-to-pollution
264 of 420
City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
102
Lund, Jay, et al. 2018. “Lessons from California’s 2012–2016 Drought.” Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management, vol. 144, no. 10, ascelibrary.org/
doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29WR.1943-5452.0000984.
Méndez M, Flores-Haro G, Zucker L. The (in)visible victims of disaster: Understanding the vulnerability of undocumented Latino/a and indigenous immigrants. Geoforum. 2020
Nov;116:50-62. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.07.007. Epub 2020 Aug 7. PMID: 32834081; PMCID: PMC7413658.
Million Dollar Hood. (2023). LAPD 2012-2017 by Neighborhoods.
Map Room. Accessed September 2023.
https://milliondollarhoods.pre.ss.ucla.edu/test-iframe-2/ Mountains Recreation & Conservation Authority (MRCA). 2023.
Verdugo Mountains Open Space Preserve.
https://mrca.ca.gov/parks/park-listing/verdugo-mountains- open-space-preserve/.
Muggah, R. (2021). Climate Change and Crime in Cities. Igarapé Institute. https://igarape.org.br/wp-
content/uploads/2021/07/Climate-change-and-crime-in-
cities.pdf
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 2019. Framing the Challenge of Urban Flooding in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25381.
Neighborhood Scout. (2023). Safest Glendale Neighborhoods. https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/glendale/crime
Nelson, Robert K, LaDale Winling, Richard Marciano, Nathan Connolly, et al., “Mapping Inequality,” American Panorama, ed. Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers,
https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=14/33.9 73/-118.216&city=los-angeles-ca
Northwestern Institute for Policy Research. 2020. What Drives Native American Poverty? Beth Redbird.
https://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/news/2020/redbird-
what-drives-native-american-poverty.html
Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM). Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-
wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/wildfire-
preparedness/fire-hazard-severity-zones/
Okin, G. S., Dong, C., Willis, K. S., Gillespie, T. W., & MacDonald, G.
M. (2018). The impact of drought on native southern
California vegetation: Remote sensing analysis using
MODIS‐derived time series. Journal of Geophysical
Research: Biogeosciences, 123(6), 1927-1939.
Olenick, Maria et al. 2015. “US veterans and their unique issues:
enhancing health care professional awareness.” Advanced Medical Education Practice. 2015. Accessed September
2023. https:// pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26664252/
Pew Research Center. 2021. “Gender pay gap in U.S. held steady in 2020.” https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2021/05/25/gender-pay-gap-facts/
Plante, C., Anderson C.A. (2017). “Global Warming and Violent Behavior”. Association for Psychological Science. Accessed https:// www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/global-
warming-and-violent-behavior#:~:text=Numerous%20cross-
sectional%20and%20time-
series%20studies%20using%20real-
world%20heat,as%20age%2C%20race%2C%20poverty%2C%
20and%20culture%20of%20honor.
265 of 420
References
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 103
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). 2021. “Spatial variation in the joint effect of extreme heat events and ozone on
respiratory hospitalizations in California.”
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023078118
Ratter-Rieck, J. M., Roden, M., & Herder, C. (2023). Diabetes and climate change: current evidence and implications for
people with diabetes, clinicians and policy stakeholders.
Diabetologia, 66(6), 1003-1015.
Rogers, Tom. Native American Poverty. Opportunity Nation: The Forum for Youth Investment. 2012. Accessed September
2023. https://opportunitynation.org/latest-
news/blog/native-american-poverty/
Rothstein, Richard. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. First Edition. New
York. Liveright Publishing Corporation. 2017.
Samuel A. Markolf, Christopher Hoehne, Andrew Fraser, Mikhail V.
Chester, B. Shane Underwood, Transportation resilience to climate change and extreme weather events – Beyond risk and robustness, Transport Policy, Volume 74, 2019, Pages 174-186, ISSN 0967-070X,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.11.003.
Seneviratne, S.I., Et.al. 2012. “Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment,” In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance
Climate Change Adaptation. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 109-230.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/SREX-
Chap3_FINAL-1.pdf
Simes, Jack, et al. Summary Report: Los Angeles Basin Study. U.S.
Department of the Interior and County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works, Nov. 2016, www.
usbr.gov/watersmart/bsp/docs/fy2017/LABasinStudySumm
aryReport.pdf
South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD).
N.d. About Us. http://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020.
Southern California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG).
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/socaladaptationplanningguide_oct2020_0.pdf
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2021. Local Housing Data for the City of Glendale.
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/glendale-he-0421.pdf?1620797773.
Swain, Daniel L., et al. 2018. “Increasing Precipitation Volatility in Twenty-First-Century California.” Nature Climate Change, vol. 8, pp. 427–33, www.nature.com/articles/ s41558-018- 0140-y.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2022. “The Effects of Climate Change.”
https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
Tree Equity Score. Tree Equity Score Municipality Report for Glendale, CA.
https://www.treeequityscore.org/reports/place/glendale-ca Ullrich, P. A., et al. 2018. “California's Drought of the Future: A Midcentury Recreation of the Exceptional Conditions of
2012–2017.” Earth's Future, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 1568–87, agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018EF00100 7 266 of 420
City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
104
United States Census Bureau. 2020. Decennial Census P1 | Race. https://data.census.gov/table?g=160XX00US0630000&tid=
DECENNIALPL2020.P1
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2020. “Preparing Wildlife for Climate Change: How Far Have We Come?”
https://www.fs.usda.gov/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2021/nrs_2021_led ee_001.pdf
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2002. “The Effects of Urban Trees on Air Quality.”
https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/units/urban/local-
resources/downloads/Tree_Air_Qual.pdf.
United States Department of Energy. Low-Income Energy
Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool.
https://www.energy.gov/scep/slsc/low-income-energy-
affordability-data-lead-tool
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021a. “Criteria Air Pollutants.” https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air- pollutants (accessed February 2021).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021b. “Why Wildfire Smoke is a Health Concern.”
https://www.epa.gov/wildfire-smoke-course/why-wildfire- smoke-health-concern
United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).
2017. Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National
Climate Assessment, Volume. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp,
doi: 10.7930/J0J964J6.
Warren, R. (2022). 2020 American Community Survey: Use with Caution, An Analysis of the Undercount in the 2020 ACS
Data Used to Derive Estimates of the Undocumented
Population. Journal on Migration and Human Security,
10(2), 134–145.
https://doi.org/10.1177/23315024221102327
WelfareInfo.2023. Poverty Rate in Glendale, California. https://www.welfareinfo.org/poverty-
rate/california/glendale/
Westerling, A. L., et al. 2006. “Warming and Earlier Spring Increase Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity.” Science, vol. 313, no. 5789, pp. 940–43, www.science.org/
doi/full/10.1126/science.1128834
267 of 420
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Introduction
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (Kittelson) has prepared an evacuation analysis for the City of Glendale, California in support of the city’s General Plan Safety Element update. The evaluation considers two (2) representative evacuation scenarios and provides the city with estimates of roadway capacity constraints and travel time considerations during evacuations. The analysis helps identify locations where there is a greater potential for traffic congestion and need for additional control measures in the event of an evacuation.
This evacuation evaluation is consistent with requirements outlined in Assembly Bill (AB) 7471 and Senate Bill (SB) 992. These laws require agencies to evaluate the resiliency of their transportation system, the capacity of evacuation routes, and identify key routes for community areas with only one access point.
The memorandum includes the following sections:
◼ Introduction, including legislative requirements and analysis scenarios ◼ Methodology
◼ Evacuation analysis results
◼ Evacuation planning considerations and recommendations.
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Recent California legislation, including Assembly Bill (AB) 747, requires local agencies to review accessibility and evacuation routes when specific elements within the General Plan or other emergency planning documents are completed or updated.
◼ Assembly Bill 747 requires that the Safety Element be reviewed and updated to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. This is a 1 https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20192020/AB747/
2 https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20192020/SB99/
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 505
Oakland, CA 94612
P 510.839.1742
September 23, 2024 Project# 29359
To: Reema Shakra
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
From: Mike Aronson, P.E; Grace Carsky; Poppy Yang
RE: Glendale Safety Element: Evacuation Analysis
Exhibit 3
268 of 420
September 2024 Page 2
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
requirement for all Safety Elements or updates to Hazard Mitigation Plans completed after January 2022.
ROADWAY NETWORK
The City of Glendale is located in the central area of Los Angeles County, California (Figure 1). It is bounded by the cities of Burbank to the west, Pasadena to the east, Los Angeles to the south, and La Cañada Flintridge to the north.
State Routes
State Route 2 (SR-2) is a state highway that runs southeast-northwest through the City of Glendale. It provides access to the city via several interchanges, including those at Colorado Street and Mountain Street. SR-2 transitions from a freeway to an arterial road, known as Glendale Boulevard, as it continues southeast into Los Angeles.
State Route 134 (SR-134) is an east-west freeway that connects Glendale to Pasadena in the east and Burbank in the west. The portion of SR-134 running through Glendale is a fully access-controlled freeway with multiple interchanges, including those at Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue. This route is a major corridor serving both residential neighborhoods and commercial districts within the city.
State Route 210 (SR-210) is an east-west freeway that skirts the northern edge of Glendale. It connects the city to La Cañada Flintridge in the west and Pasadena in the east. SR-210 is fully access-controlled, with interchanges providing access to Glendale, including a freeway-freeway interchange at SR-2.
Local Road Network
There are several arterial and collector roads that complement the state highways and are also likely to be used for evacuation purposes, depending on the evacuation scenario, including but not limited to:
▪ Brand Boulevard
▪ Central Avenue
▪ Colorado Street
▪ Glenoaks Boulevard
▪ Foothill Boulevard
269 of 420
September 2024 Page 3
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 1: Glendale Roadway Network and Evacuation Routes
Source: City of Glendale, Kittelson & Associates, 2024
270 of 420
September 2024 Page 4
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The evacuation analysis considers the following two representative evacuation scenarios:
◼ Wildfire Scenario #1 – Wildfire ignites in the Verdugo Mountains/San Rafael Hills in east Glendale ◼ Landslide Scenario #2 – Landslide occurs in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale These scenarios do not represent every possible emergency that could affect Glendale, but they do represent the highest likelihood emergencies that may stress different parts of the road system. The evacuation scenarios were chosen in discussion with City staff, including Glendale Police Department and Glendale Fire Department, to represent likely emergencies for the Safety Element purposes.
Time Frames
Each evacuation scenario is compared to weekday PM peak hour traffic conditions (between 4PM to 6PM) for two time frames, base year and future year.
BASE YEAR
The base year evaluation is representative of evacuations with existing traffic levels. The available Glendale Travel Demand Model uses a base year of 2021.
FUTURE YEAR
The future year traffic levels include development allowable under the current Glendale General Plan.
Outside of Glendale, the traffic forecasts include travel that would be generated by the 2040 demographic forecasts for the entire region provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for travel forecasting.
271 of 420
September 2024 Page 5
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Methodology
Assumptions regarding travel patterns for evacuees were developed based on recent research. The following sections describe the tools and inputs used for the evacuation analysis.
EVACUATION MODELING
Travel Modeling Tools
The evacuation analysis uses the City of Glendale Travel Demand Model (“travel model”). The current travel model was calibrated and validate for a 2021 base year and includes a 2040 future scenario with 2040 land use forecasts and transportation improvement assumptions.
The travel model represents all land uses in the City of Glendale grouped into transportation analysis zones (TAZs) (Figure 2). The travel model includes a representative roadway network (generally all streets except for local residential streets). Each road segment is coded with functional classification, number of lanes, uncongested speed, and an estimate of the typical hourly capacity. The travel model estimates vehicle trips generated by each land use, distributes the trips to a variety of likely destinations, and assigns each origin-destination pair to the best route. The travel model also assesses congestion and iteratively diverts traffic to alternative routes until congestion is balanced between all available routes.
Affected Areas
The areas that would be affected by each emergency scenario were identified based on the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zones mapping and consultation with Glendale city staff and emergency responders. The affected areas were overlaid with the Glendale TAZs to identify the numbers of people that would need to be evacuated.
Time Period
Transportation activity was modeled for one worst-case time period, based on the weekday PM peak hour (between 4PM to 6PM) when non-evacuation traffic and congestion would be at its highest levels. Peak evacuation traffic was assumed to occur during this period involving the specified area within the city.
272 of 420
∙þ
134
∙þ
2 ∙þ
2 ∙þ
2 ∙þ
134
§¨¦
5 §¨¦
210
§¨¦
5 S p e n c e r S t
Grand Central Ave
S
C
o
l
u
m
b
u
s
A
v
e
el Cino Pl
E A c a c i a A v e
W Cypress St
R
o
y
a
l
B
l v
d
M
o n t e r e y
R d
Sinclair Ave
W
h i ti
n
g
W
o
o
d
s
R
d
W a b a s s o W a y
Alpha Rd
Glorietta Ave
G
e
n
e
v
a
S
t
W Lexington Dr
Altura Ave
New York Ave
Allen Ave
E Palmer Ave
S Orange St
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
C
l
u
b
D
r
B e a u d r y B l v d
Frederick Ave
H
o n o l u l u A v e
B
e
a
u
d
r
y
T
e
r
Maryland Ave
O l m s t e d D r
S Louise St
E California Ave
W Lomita Ave
E Harvard St
Moore St
W o n d e r v i e
w
D
r
Patterson Ave
L
a
u
d
e
r
d
a
l
e
A
v
e
Sunview Dr
5th St
Opechee Way
el Rito Ave
H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
A
v
e
N
P
a
c
i fi
c
A
v
e
E Windsor Rd
N
K
e
n
i
l
w
o
r
t
h
A
v
e
Las Palmas Ave
E Cypress St
Mesa Lila Rd
C i e l i t
o
D
r
Bel Aire Dr
M
e
l
w
o
o
d
D
r
E L e x i n g t o n D r
Rock Glen Ave
Melrose Ave
E Lomita Ave
Pioneer Dr
W Dryden St
Glenwood Rd
G r e e n S t
H o l l i s t e
r
T
e
r
N Isabel St
S
p
a
r
r
B
l
v
d
G
l
e
n
m
o
r
e
B
l
v
d
Los Encinos Ave
N Louise St
Chester St
Tyler St
E D r y d e n
S t
H e a
t h
e
r
R
i d
g
e
D
r
V
a
l
l
e
y
V
i
e
w
R
d
Moreno Dr
N Columbus Ave
V
i
c
k
e
r
s
D
r
H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
W Milford St
Cumberland Rd
Bonita Dr
G
o
l
f
C
l
u
b
D
r
Rimcrest Dr
Lincoln Ave
Boynton St
C
a
m
p
b
e
l
l
S
t
Nolan Ave
S
w
e
e
t
b
r
i
a
r
D
r
W Stocker St
C
a
n
y
o
n
D
r
Los Olivos Ln
M
a
g
i n
n
D
r
1 23
4 7
6 563
5 12
509
8 15
576
559
14 577
511
512 510
568
573
574
569
9 10
16 379
11 565
13 236
22 18
507
17 479
557
19 20
556
579
21 521
23 371
298
39 28
24 25
285
300
283
493
48 5226
496
495
54 27
33 79
30 376
41 76
295
38 296
31 373
29 260
32 51
258
280
279
372
34 37
103
105
35 121
122
36 114
113
104
297
262
203195
42 156
49 198
196160
186
444
53 454644
47 237
375
494
484
485
50 460
401
277
386
340342
339343
17990
83 115
40 43
582
180 187
55 61
58 56
59 63
57 69
62 60
73 72
65 64
75 74
66 71
68 67
70 77
78 80
86 152
81 94
151
150
147
108
106
82 84
110
85 97
116
117 89
88 93
98 144
102
120
101
99 87
92 95
118
123
91107
112
109
141
154
153
149
148
111
96 171
177
168
100
124
119
134
126
125
188
140
135
133
209128
127 226
220
214
217
229
228
129
131
136
130
142
132
138199 225
192
215
213
137
212
224
139
216
175
174
143
146
145
155
162
190157
158
189
191
159
201
202
163
183
166
181
161
164
178
200
185
184
182
193
170
165
167
172
173
176
169
194197
204
232
234
205
206
207
233
208
223
222
211
210
218
227
219
221
231
230
235
506
240
365
308
348
352
238
242
254
321
239
366
391
247
350
241253
472
392
353
274
385
255
335
345
243
377
374
244
245
246337
248
257
370
249
367
355
256
470
354
369
383
250
251338
421
336
344
427
252
349
351
334
580
581
259
278
261
270
268
263
265
324
264
306
305
326
272
266
332 323
267
269
276
275
291
358
271
303
273
318
363
287
304
301
281
282
286
294
288
284
302
293
289
290
292
299
328
329 307
311
309
316
313
314
315
347
310
312330327
333
317331
322
319
325
320
341
346
357
362
360
356
361
364
359
368
378
505
380
381
400
394
384
382
475
467
474
508
489399
390
502
503
477
387
397
388
389
497498
395
490
491
416
480
393
468
437
469
435
466
504
486
417
396398
471
473
501
402
428
422
403 408
434
423
404
465
464
405
415
419
406
407
433
425
409
410
441
442
439
438
424
411
412
413
455
414
431
452
430
429
418
420
426
432
440
436
443
459
445
446
447 451
461
450
458
448
462
463
457
449
456
453
454
476
482
481
478
483
488
487
500
499
492
513
514
520
519
515
516
518
517
522
532
529
523
539
535
538
528
526
536
524
525
550
527
537
530
531
554
553
533
544
555
543
546
534
540
551
545
541
542
552
547
548
549
558
560
561
562
564
575
566
567
572
570
571
578
H:\29\29359 - Glendale Safety Element Update\GIS\Glendale Safety Element Update\Glendale Safety Element Update.aprx Date: 9/23/2024 Roadway Network and Emergency Routes
Glendale Safety Element Update
Glendale, CA
0 1Mile
[
Glendale Traffic Analysis Zones
Glendale City Boundary
273 of 420
September 2024 Page 7
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Number of Evacuation Trips
If a fire occurs during the night, most residents would be home but most employees would not be at their workplace. If a fire occurs during the workday, most employees would be at their workplace but many residents would not be at their homes. The evacuation analysis conservatively assumes that 75 percent of residents and 75 percent of employees would need to evacuate during a fire event.
Depending on the order received, a proportion of residents, employees, and visitors will choose to evacuate. When a zone is assigned an Evacuation Order, it is assumed that 90 percent of residents, employees, and visitors will evacuate and approximately 10 percent will remain behind. The estimated factors are based on survey results from people impacted by prior fires in California in UC Berkeley’s Review of California Wildfire Evacuations from 2017 to 2019.3 Based on vehicle ownership data from the United States Census American Community Survey (ACS)4, there are a weighted average of 1.6 vehicles per household in Glendale. Therefore, the number of evacuating households is multiplied by 1.6 to estimate residential vehicles. Each evacuating employee is assumed to use one vehicle.
Evacuation Destinations
Likely evacuation destinations were identified in consultation with city staff:
◼ Clark Magnet School, Glendale Civic Auditorium, and Glendale High School are used to estimate evacuation trips leaving Glendale towards the north and the south in the base and future years. o For the wildfire scenario, Clark Magnet School and Glendale High School were chosen as evacuation destinations.
o For the landslide scenario, Glendale Civic Auditorium and Glendale High School were chosen as evacuation destinations.
◼ Burbank and Pasadena are also used as evacuation destinations for evacuees leaving Glendale.
The percentage of trips heading for each evacuation destination were assigned based on the location and direction of the evacuation. The majority of trips were typically assigned to the nearest destination within Glendale if the evacuation route would not cross the affected fire or landslide area. However, smaller percentages of trips from each neighborhood were assumed to want to travel in the other directions, particularly if they could reach shelter with family or friends.
3 This assumption is based in knowledge that there is a certain contingent of people who will not evacuate, even when under off icial notice. See Wong, S., Broader, J. and Shaheen, P., 2022. Review of California Wildfire Evacuations from 2017 to 2019 . [online] Escholarship.org. Available at: < https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5w85z07g > 4 U.S. Census Bureau. "Household Size by Vehicles Available." American Community Survey, ACS 5 -Year Estimates Detailed Tables, Table B08201, 2022, https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDT5Y2022.B08201?q=b08201&g=160XX00US0613214&moe=false. Accessed on May 2, 2024.
274 of 420
September 2024 Page 8
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Methodology Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
The distribution of the destinations is not intended to represent a precise distribution of the routes that would be taken during an evacuation.
Roadway Capacity
Traffic congestion, as measured by the demand volume-to-capacity ratio, was modeled using the default average capacities for each roadway. The scenarios conservatively represent conditions without implementation of any evacuation strategies, such as manual traffic control or contraflow lanes, which could increase roadway capacity in one direction versus the other.
Travel Times
The travel model includes formulas which estimate how much travel speeds decrease based on the demand volume versus the capacity and the type of road. These formulas are based on standard travel forecasting practice. Travel times for evacuation trips are estimated by identifying the best route between origins and destinations with the congested speeds and summing the congested travel times on each road segment along the route.
LIMITATIONS
The results of this evaluation are intended to identify potential congested locations during modeled representative evacuation scenarios. These scenarios were developed based on conservative assumptions and modeling techniques that reflect current understanding of evacuation analysis. These scenarios are intended to model a potential range of different evacuation scenarios but not all possible scenarios.
The scenarios represent potential emergencies occurring in portions of the City of Glendale. Actual emergencies may occur at other locations in and around the city and the specific conditions of an emergency evacuation could result in evacuation behavior that diverges from the definitions and assumptions used for this analysis. As a result, the identified scenarios and evacuation constraints represent informed estimates of the most likely potential evacuation scenario footprints and capacity constraints based on available data.
275 of 420
September 2024 Page 9
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuation Analysis Results
Evacuation analysis was conducted for the analysis peak hour (between 4PM to 6PM) for conditions with no evacuation and for the two (2) different evacuation scenarios. The analysis is presented for the base year and future year.
BASE YEAR NO EVACUATION CONDITIONS
The PM peak analysis hour volumes were compared to road capacities for weekday conditions without an emergency evacuation event. These congestion conditions can be compared to the congestion conditions with an evacuation event to determine where additional traffic management may be needed during an emergency.
Base Year
The PM peak hour (between 4PM to 6PM) modeling for the base year without an evacuation event indicates roadway conditions near or over capacity in the following locations within the City of Glendale (Figure 3):
◼ I-5 west of Glendale (northwest of I-5/SR-134 interchange) ◼ SR-134 between I-5/SR-134 interchange and Concord St
Beyond the city limit, the base year scenario indicates roadway conditions near or over capacity in the following locations:
◼ I-5 going through Burbank, near I-5/SR-134 interchange, and several I-5 ramp locations, e.g. at Los Feliz Blvd and Fletcher Dr
◼ Along SR-210: La Tuna Canyon Rd and Tujunga Canyon Blvd ◼ Along SR-2: N San Fernando Rd (between SR-2 and Hallett Ave), Eagle Rock Blvd and El Paso Dr (between SR-2 and Terrace 49), York Blvd (between SR-2 and N Avenue 54), Colorado Blvd (between SR-2 and College View Ave)
276 of 420
September 2024 Page 10
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 3: Base Year PM Peak Hour Congestion Locations, No Evacuation
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 277 of 420
September 2024 Page 11
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Future Year
The PM peak hour (between 4PM to 6PM) modeling for the future year with the proposed General Plan (Mobility and Land Use Elements) and without an evacuation event forecasts roadway conditions near or over capacity in the following locations within the City of Glendale (Figure 4):
◼ I-5 in west Glendale (northwest of I-5/SR-134 interchange). ◼ SR-134: between the I-5 SR-134 interchange and Concord St, N Central Ave and N Jackson St, Geneva St and N Glendale Ave
◼ Small sections of some roadways:
o San Fernando Rd between S Pacific Ave and W Acacia Ave o W Laurel St between S Central Ave and S Brand Blvd
Beyond the city limit, the future year scenario indicates roadway conditions near or over capacity in the following locations:
◼ I-5 southwest of Glendale, going through Burbank, near I-5/SR interchange, and several I-5 ramp locations, e.g. at Los Feliz Blvd and Fletcher Dr
◼ Along SR-210: La Tuna Canyon Rd and Tujunga Canyon Blvd ◼ Along SR-2: N San Fernando Rd (between SR-2 and Hallett Ave), Eagle Rock Blvd and El Paso Dr (between SR-2 and Terrace 49), York Blvd (between SR-2 and N Avenue 54), Colorado Blvd (between SR-2 and College View Ave)
278 of 420
September 2024 Page 12
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 4: Future Year PM Peak Hour Congestion Locations, No Evacuation
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 279 of 420
September 2024 Page 13
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
SCENARIO 1: WILDFIRE IN EAST GLENDALE
Under this scenario, a fire ignites in the Verdugo Mountains / San Rafael Hills in east Glendale, initiating an evacuation order for communities in the eastern half of Glendale, such as College Hills, Glenoaks Canyon, Rancho San Rafael, and Emerald Isle (Figure 5). Residents and workers are given orders to evacuate to Clark Magnet School or Glendale High School. Table 1 shows the estimated number of households and employees in the affected area by transportation analysis zone (TAZ) as well as the total estimated evacuation trips for this scenario.
Base Year
If an evacuation were to occur due to a wildfire in the Verdugo Mountains, the analysis estimates over- capacity conditions on several roadways in the City as shown in Figure 6. Specifically, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity with the City of Glendale include:
◼ Along I-5: west of Glendale (west of I-5/SR-134 interchange, similar to no evacuation conditions), segments close to SR-134/SR-2 interchange
◼ Along SR-210: Lowell Ave (between SR-210 and Foothill Blvd), Pennsylvania Ave (between SR-210 and Los Olivos Ln), New York Ave (between Foothill Blvd and Santa Carlotta St) ◼ SR-134 between I-5/SR-134 interchange and Concord St (similar to no evacuation conditions) ◼ Along SR-2 between Camino San Rafael and SR-134
Beyond the city limit, the base year scenario estimates congestion in the following locations:
◼ I-5 going through Burbank, near I-5/SR interchange, and several I-5 ramp locations, e.g. at Los Feliz Blvd and Fletcher Dr
◼ Additional length of I-5 west of Glendale
◼ Along SR-210: La Tuna Canyon Rd and Tujunga Canyon Blvd ◼ Along SR-2: N San Fernando Rd (between SR-2 and Hallett Ave), Eagle Rock Blvd and El Paso Dr (between SR-2 and Terrace 49), York Blvd (between SR-2 and N Avenue 54), Colorado Blvd (between SR-2 and College View Ave)
◼ Additional length of roadways southeast of Glendale connecting to SR-134 and SR-2. ◼ Linda Vista Ave between SR-134 and SR-210
◼ Chevy Chase Dr and Highland Dr connecting to SR-210 northwest of Glendale
280 of 420
September 2024 Page 14
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 5: Evacuating Area, Wildfire Scenario
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2024
281 of 420
September 2024 Page 15
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 1: Affected Population and Peak Hour Evacuation Trips, Scenario 1 in East Glendale Wildfire Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
6 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E026 394 85 494 394 85 494
7 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E017 410 0 454 410 0 455
9 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E038 171 25 202 171 28 204
10 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 4 79 57 5 81 59
11 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E026 0 3,704 2,500 0 3,708 2,503
13 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E026 519 44 605 519 45 605
15 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E017 380 33 443 383 31 445
16 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E038 421 17 465 421 17 465
17 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 244 4,593 3,364 244 4,594 3,364
26 Q1585 98 0 68 98 0 68
48 Q1585 58 9 67 58 9 67
49 Q1585 134 25 109 134 27 111
50 Q1585 333 319 556 333 329 563
52 Q1585 195 29 222 195 30 222
53 Q1585 73 0 51 73 0 51
282 of 420
September 2024 Page 16
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
136 Q1585 34 112 99 34 114 100
195 Q1585 68 117 127 68 121 129
203 Q1585 40 128 114 40 131 116
213 Q1585 133 194 268 133 192 267
229 Q1585 65 57 106 65 59 107
234 Q1585 501 302 716 501 300 714
379 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E038 351 7 384 351 7 383
380 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E038 0 84 57 0 83 56
386 Q1585 165 30 174 165 32 176
389 Q1585 101 120 191 101 118 190
390 Q1585 220 0 205 220 0 205
395 Q1585 241 108 296 241 109 296
399 Q1585 170 0 159 170 0 159
401 Q1585 95 29 85 95 36 89
444 Q1585 99 147 169 99 147 169
451 Q1585 101 106 166 101 103 164
283 of 420
September 2024 Page 17
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
459 Q1585 148 40 164 148 40 165
460 Q1585 92 30 84 92 29 83
461 Q1585 129 169 235 129 166 233
463 Q1585 89 172 198 89 172 198
476 Q1585 411 107 445 411 106 445
477 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 262 61 324 264 63 327
478 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 81 0 87 81 0 87
479 Q1585 441 36 474 441 36 474
480 Q1585 344 0 335 344 0 335
481 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 146 77 209 146 76 209
482 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 78 0 85 78 0 85
483 Q1585 225 50 261 225 51 262
484 Q1585 133 36 162 133 36 161
485 Q1585 251 35 283 251 37 285
486 Q1585 92 22 116 92 24 117
487 Q1585 173 28 193 173 27 192
284 of 420
September 2024 Page 18
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
488 Q1585 203 25 222 203 26 222
489 Q1585 158 0 147 158 0 147
490 Q1585 116 0 118 116 0 117
491 Q1585 129 0 131 130 0 132
492 Q1585 82 73 132 82 75 133
493 Q1585 177 215 328 177 216 328
494 Q1585 175 131 265 175 132 266
495 Q1585 152 34 164 153 34 165
496 Q1585 87 126 145 87 124 144
497 Q1585 282 0 285 282 0 285
498 Q1585 160 0 149 160 0 149
499 Q1585 63 72 112 63 74 114
500 Q1585 257 0 259 257 0 259
501 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E038 43 23 62 43 25 64
502 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 178 257 366 178 256 366
503 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E042 34 0 37 34 0 37
285 of 420
September 2024 Page 19
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
503 Q1585 34 0 37 34 0 37
504 Q1585 84 0 91 84 0 91
558 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E030 245 0 359 246 0 361
559 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E018 533 1 781 533 0 780
560 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E030 120 0 176 120 0 176
561 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E040 74 0 107 73 0 107
562 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E029 328 24 496 328 125 564
563 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E027 90 0 100 90 0 100
564 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E041 134 0 196 134 0 196
565 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E044 0 158 107 0 159 107
566 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E039 51 0 75 53 0 77
567 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E028 348 0 510 348 0 510
568 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E040 32 0 47 33 0 48
569 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E044 289 0 417 290 0 419
570 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E039 230 0 336 230 0 336
571 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E044 193 0 278 193 0 278
286 of 420
September 2024 Page 20
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
572 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E040 80 0 117 83 0 122
573 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E040 150 39 246 150 39 246
574 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E043 268 60 426 268 60 427
575 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E027 202 0 296 202 0 296
576 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E018 0 0 0 0 0 0
577 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E018 0 1,450 979 0 1,519 1,025
824 Q1177 471 747 1,150 526 646 1,157
826 Q1177 699 1,000 1,636 752 876 1,624
827 Q1177 350 1,530 1,514 377 1,343 1,425
Source: City of Glendale Travel Demand Model ; Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2024 287 of 420
September 2024 Page 21
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 6: Congestion Locations, Wildfire Scenario, Base Year
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 288 of 420
September 2024 Page 22
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Future Year
With peak evacuation from a wildfire in the Verdugo Mountains in the future year, the analysis predicts over-capacity conditions on several roadways in the city as shown in Figure 7. In addition to the locations listed for the base year, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity with the City of Glendale include:
◼ All I-5 segments in the west of Glendale
◼ Segments in parallel to I-5 in the northwest of Glendale: W Kenneth Rd, Glenwood Rd, 5th St, W Glenoaks Blvd, San Fernando Rd, Grand Central Ave, Flower St ◼ SR-134: between I-5/SR-134 interchange and Concord St, N Central Ave and N Jackson St, Geneva St and N Glendale Ave (similar to no evacuation conditions) ◼ Scattered segments, e.g. San Fernando Rd between S Pacific Ave and W Acacia Ave, W Laurel St between S Central Ave and S Brand Blvd (similar to no evacuation conditions) ◼ Along SR-2 between Camino San Rafael and SR-134
Beyond the city limit, the future year scenario indicates congestion in the following locations:
◼ I-5 going through Burbank, near I-5/SR interchange, and several I-5 ramp locations, e.g. at Los Feliz Blvd and Fletcher Dr
◼ Additional length of I-5 west of Glendale
◼ Along SR-210: La Tuna Canyon Rd and Tujunga Canyon Blvd ◼ Along SR-2: N San Fernando Rd (between SR-2 and Hallett Ave), Eagle Rock Blvd and El Paso Dr (between SR-2 and Terrace 49), York Blvd (between SR-2 and N Avenue 54), Colorado Blvd (between SR-2 and College View Ave)
◼ Additional length of roadways southeast of Glendale connecting to SR-134 and SR-2: Atwater Ave, N San Fernando Rd, Fletcher Dr
◼ Linda Vista Ave between SR-134 and SR-210
◼ Chevy Chase Dr and Highland Dr connecting to SR-210 northeast of Glendale
Travel Times
Travel times between Glendale neighborhoods and various evacuation destinations are listed in Table 2 With base year traffic levels, an evacuation event would add up to 30 minutes to the time to reach the Clark Magnet School, up to 36 minutes to reach safety in Pasadena, and up to 21 minutes to Glendale High School. With future year traffic levels, an evacuation event would add up to 40 minutes to the time to the Clark Magnet School, up to 40 minutes to Pasadena, and up to 25 minutes to Glendale High School.
289 of 420
September 2024 Page 23
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 7: Congestion Locations, Scenario 1 Verdugo Mountains Wildfire, Future Year
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 290 of 420
September 2024 Page 24
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 2: Travel Times (Minutes), Scenario 1 East Glendale Wildfire Origin and Destination
Base Year No
Evacuation
Base Year
Scenario 1
Future Year No
Evacuation
Future Year
Scenario 1
From Montecito Park
To Clark Magnet School 7.6 10.4 8.0 20.2
To Glendale High School 6.9 9.3 6.9 12.5
East towards Pasadena 17.9 19.3 21.4 23.5
From Emerald Isle
To Clark Magnet School 12.7 23.2 13.0 37.7
To Glendale High School 9.5 17.0 9.5 25.3
East towards Pasadena 16.4 25.8 19.8 34.3
From Chevy Chase
To Clark Magnet School 11.7 19.8 12.0 34.1
To Glendale High School 8.2 14.3 8.5 22.7
East towards Pasadena 15.4 22.4 18.8 30.7
From Woodbury
To Clark Magnet School 11.0 13.8 11.5 23.7
To Glendale High School 3.2 4.8 3.2 7.9
East towards Pasadena 19.0 20.3 22.5 24.6
From Glenoaks Canyon
To Clark Magnet School 13.0 29.9 13.5 39.7
To Glendale High School 4.8 21.1 4.8 23.3
East towards Pasadena 20.8 36.0 24.3 40.2
Source: Kittelson & Associates using City of Glendale Travel Demand Model , 2024
291 of 420
September 2024 Page 25
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
SCENARIO 2: LANDSLIDE IN NORTH GLENDALE
Under this scenario, a landslide occurs in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale, which is presumed to necessitate the evacuation order for people in north Glendale (Figure 8). Residents and workers are given orders to evacuate to Glendale Civic Auditorium or Glendale High School. Table 3 shows the number of households and employees in the affected area as well as the total estimated evacuation trips for this scenario.
Base Year
With peak evacuation from a landslide in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale in the base year, the analysis indicates over-capacity conditions on several roadways in the city as shown in Figure 9.
Specifically, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity include within the City of Glendale include:
◼ I-5 west of Glendale (west of I-5/SR-134 interchange). ◼ SR-134 between I-5/SR-134 interchange and Concord St
◼ SR-2 north of SR-134
◼ Segments in the east of Glendale in parallel to SR2, including N Verdugo Rd, Camino San Rafael, Royal Blvd, and E Chevy Chase Dr.
◼ Segments in the north of Glendale connecting to SR-210, including Lowell Ave, Boston Ave, Dunsmore Ave, New York Ave, Pennsylvania Ave, Ramsdell Ave, Honolulu Ave, Montrose Ave, and La Crescenta Ave
Beyond the city limit, the base year scenario indicates congestion in the following locations:
◼ I-5 going through Burbank, near I-5/SR-134 interchange, and several I-5 ramp locations, e.g. at Los Feliz Blvd and Fletcher Dr
◼ Along SR-210: La Tuna Canyon Rd
◼ Some segments of SR-2 to the southeast of Glendale
◼ Along SR-2: N San Fernando Rd (between SR-2 and Hallett Ave), Eagle Rock Blvd and El Paso Dr (between SR-2 and Terrace 49), York Blvd (between SR-2 and N Avenue 54), Colorado Blvd (between SR-2 and College View Ave)
◼ Linda Vista Ave between SR-134 and SR-210
◼ Chevy Chase Dr and Highland Dr connecting to SR-210 northeast of Glendale
292 of 420
September 2024 Page 26
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 8: Evacuating Area, Scenario 2 Landslide in North Glendale
Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2024
293 of 420
September 2024 Page 27
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 3: Affected Population and Peak Hour Evacuation Trips, Scenario 2 Landslide Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
522 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 142 0 211 314 0 212
523 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E003 144 202 349 316 202 349
524 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E003 150 175 341 331 172 339
525 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E003 146 55 255 322 55 255
526 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 211 0 313 463 0 313
527 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E005 209 113 366 430 110 364
528 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E001 45 0 67 100 0 67
529 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 188 0 279 413 0 279
531 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 143 42 241 315 42 241
532 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 46 10 75 102 10 76
533 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E007 105 2 147 216 1 147
534 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E005 230 0 317 471 0 318
535 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E003 95 0 141 209 0 141
536 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E005 224 0 310 460 0 310
537 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E007 0 19 13 0 19 13
294 of 420
September 2024 Page 28
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
538 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E005 90 205 262 183 201 259
539 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E002 187 0 277 411 0 277
540 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E006 304 53 447 610 53 447
543 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E006 137 62 232 283 63 233
544 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E007 120 0 166 246 0 166
545 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E007 166 21 244 340 21 244
546 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E007 219 48 332 443 49 332
549 Community 306 4 408 600 4 408
550 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E004 113 65 212 250 63 211
551 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E006 222 96 370 454 106 378
552 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E004 262 192 518 577 193 519
553 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E004 81 175 238 178 175 238
554 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E004 210 0 311 462 0 312
555 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E006 134 64 228 274 65 229
557 US-CA-XLA-GLN-E001 23 26 51 51 26 52
780 Community 258 403 614 570 413 663
295 of 420
September 2024 Page 29
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
781 Community 129 133 262 288 137 286
782 Community 193 1,588 1,328 426 1,617 1,379
783 Community 275 399 634 736 387 758
784 Community 206 265 453 551 259 547
785 Community 138 132 273 372 129 338
786 Mountain 272 1,660 1,490 548 1,604 1,452
787 Mountain 276 222 524 582 232 549
788 Mountain 183 443 548 387 461 572
789 Alabama 91 882 720 194 917 750
790 Alabama 276 222 524 582 230 548
791 Mountain 564 440 1,065 1,298 449 1,179
792 Mountain 188 721 742 432 734 787
793 Henrietta/Briggterrace 196 45 321 431 45 321
794 Henrietta/Teasley 228 45 368 767 45 548
795 Henrietta/Teasley 228 67 383 767 67 563
796 Henrietta/Teasley 342 67 552 1,145 67 818
296 of 420
September 2024 Page 30
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuating
TAZ Evacuation Zones
Base Year
Households
Base Year
Employment
Base Year
Evacuation
Trips
Future
Households
Future
Employment
Future
Evacuation
Trips
806 Community 123 215 293 248 208 307
807 Community 372 543 815 752 528 864
808 Community 372 107 521 752 104 577
809 Community 371 456 756 750 445 806
810 Community 372 107 521 752 104 577
811 Community 247 451 602 498 440 633
812 Community 372 107 521 752 104 577
813 Community 247 215 443 498 208 476
Source: City of Glendale Travel Demand Model ; Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2024
297 of 420
September 2024 Page 31
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 9: Congestion Locations, Scenario 2 Landslide in North Glendale, Base Year
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 298 of 420
September 2024 Page 32
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Future Year
With peak evacuation from a landslide in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale in the future year, the analysis predicts over-capacity conditions on several roadways in the city as shown in Figure 10. Most congestion locations would be the same as those identified for the base year. In addition to the locations listed for the base year, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity within the City of Glendale include:
◼ Scattered segments, e.g. San Fernando Rd between S Pacific Ave and W Acacia Ave, E Garfield Ave and E Acacia Ave between S Adam St and S Chevy Chase Dr. ◼ N Glendale Ave (between SR-134 and E Doran St) connecting to SR-134 ◼ Santa Carlotta St/Orange Ave between Dunsmore Ave and Pennsylvania Ave in the east of Glendale
Beyond the city limit, the future year scenario indicates congestion in the following locations:
◼ Glendale Blvd and Hyperion Ave to the southwest of Glendale, connecting to I-5 ◼ Yosemite Dr between Townsend Ave and N Figueroa St
◼ Additional length of segments north of SR-210, including Palm Dr, Ocean View Blvd, and Los Amigo St
Travel Times
Travel times between Glendale neighborhoods and various evacuation destinations are listed in Table 2 With base year traffic levels, an evacuation event would add up to 70 minutes to the time to reach the Glendale Civic Auditorium, up to 70 minutes to reach safety in Pasadena, and up to 79 minutes to Glendale High School. With future year traffic levels, an evacuation event would add up to 99 minutes to the time from north Glendale to the Glendale Civic Auditorium, up to 121 minutes to Pasadena, and up to 110 minutes to Glendale High School.
299 of 420
September 2024 Page 33
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 10: Congestion Locations, Scenario 2 Landslide in North Glendale, Future Year
Source: Kittelson & Associates using Glendale travel model, 2024 300 of 420
September 2024 Page 34
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Analysis Results Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 4: Travel Times (Minutes), Scenario 2 Landslide
Origin and Destination
Base Year No
Evacuation
Base Year
Scenario 2
Future Year
No
Evacuation
Future Year
Scenario 2
From Crescenta Highlands N
To Glendale Civic Auditorium 10.3 69.9 10.5 99.0
To Glendale High School 12.2 78.9 12.5 109.6
East towards Pasadena 19.5 70.3 23.1 121.1
From Dunsmore Park
To Glendale Civic Auditorium 9.0 68.7 9.2 97.8
To Glendale High School 11.0 77.7 11.2 108.5
East towards Pasadena 18.2 69.1 21.8 120.0
From Crescenta Highlands S
To Glendale Civic Auditorium 8.6 66.0 8.7 94.2
To Glendale High School 10.5 75.0 10.7 104.8
East towards Pasadena 17.8 66.4 21.3 116.3
From Honolulu Avenue
To Glendale Civic Auditorium 8.4 58.3 8.5 84.1
To Glendale High School 10.3 67.3 10.4 94.7
East towards Pasadena 17.5 58.7 21.0 106.2
Source: Kittelson & Associates using City of Glendale Travel Demand Model , 2024
301 of 420
September 2024 Page 35
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Evacuation Planning Considerations
This section describes evacuation projects and strategies that may be considered to improve the capacity and resilience of the city’s roadway network to support future evacuation events. The projects and strategies were identified based on previous congestion and evacuation studies, review of recent evacuation efforts, and effective evacuation planning practices identified by US Department of Transportation (USDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The strategies are organized into five categories:
1. Roadway Management
2. Communications
3. Vulnerable Populations
4. Public Education
5. Resource Management
ROADWAY MANAGEMENT
This section includes infrastructure-related strategies that will aid in improving the capacity of the evacuation roadway network, which can be a challenging element in a successful evacuation. For each infrastructure-related treatment, it is necessary to consider downstream capacity limitations and identify if those limits nullify the potential benefits of the treatment as well as other competing roadway design needs to serve other functions and goals. Table 5 outlines each of these strategies and provides a brief description of the strategy and desired outcomes.
Of these strategies, the most effective for increasing evacuation capacity would be those that involve manual control of traffic combined with contra flow operations that allow evacuation on both inbound and outbound lanes of streets, combined with maintaining clear passages for emergency vehicles.
302 of 420
September 2024 Page 36
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 5: Roadway and Intersection Capacity and Resilience Related Strategies Strategy Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Limited/unlimited
contra flow on
unlimited access
arterials
Establish temporary control points to temporarily close inbound travel lanes on selected unlimited access
arterials (such as parkways and boulevards) to allow
outbound traffic to utilize these lanes during
evacuation.
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering),
Glendale
Police
Department
Closure of inbound
lanes on selected
roads
Establish temporary control points to close inbound
lanes on selected roadways utilized for evacuation
routes to prevent drivers on these routes from entering the city while evacuation is underway.
Glendale
Police
Department,
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering)
Restrict left-turn
movements
Establish temporary control points to minimize left-turn movements along evacuation routes and on roads
leading to evacuation routes.
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering),
Glendale
Police
Department
Stage tow trucks Consider how to stage tow trucks at bottleneck locations along evacuation routes to help detect and
clear minor crashes and maintain traffic flows.
Glendale
Police
Department,
Glendale
Public Works
(Fleet Services)
Adjust signal timing Increase the green time and/or progression band for through movements leading out of an evacuation zone.
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering)
Signal operation
during power outage
Install signal battery backups in case signal operations need to be maintained during a power outage. Consider
using channeling devices, static signs, and coning
strategies to manage intersection flow during power
outage if the signals lack power.
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering)
Additional access
routes
Identify and communicate with communities that have
one or two access points. Prioritize adding additional
access to communities which are currently served by
only one or two access points.
Glendale
Public Works
(Engineering)
303 of 420
September 2024 Page 37
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Strategy Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Public Transit Develop transportation solutions such as the use of a bus system for evacuating individuals with special needs (such as those with mobility limitations).
Glendale
Public Works
(Transit),
Glendale
Beeline Transit
Traffic control points Establish traffic control points (i.e., locations along designated evacuation routes with emergency
management personnel) to maintain a greater degree
of evacuation management. These locations could
enhance the efficiency of an evacuation, reduce public
confusion, and allow increased operational flexibility
during an evacuation.
Glendale
Police
Department
Vegetation
clearing/management
Maintain evacuation roadways and shoulders to clear
them of trees, vegetation, and debris that would block
travel lanes and shoulders for evacuating and
emergency operation vehicles.
Glendale
Public Works
(Maintenance
Services),
Glendale Fire
Department
304 of 420
September 2024 Page 38
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
COMMUNICATIONS
This section describes communication strategies that address how information may be shared among agencies, organizations, and the general public for evacuations. During an emergency evacuation event, two types of communication take place: (1) communication among entities involved in the management of response, and (2) communication between the City and the general public. Table 6 outlines each of these strategies and provides a brief description of the strategy and desired outcomes.
Table 6. Communication Strategies for Evacuations
Strategy Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Establish and
maintain
communications
Strengthen and maintain communication among
coordinating emergency event agencies. This could be
achieved through systems such as the Public
Information Emergency System and Emergency Satellite
Communications.
Glendale Fire
Department,
Glendale
Communications
Manager
Variable/Dynamic
Message Signage
Use variable message board equipment and targeted
installation of permanent dynamic message signs on
evacuation routes to improve communication and
reduce public confusion.
Glendale Public
Works
(Maintenance
Services)
Public Posts and
Flyers
Post signs and flyers in public places, such as
businesses, community centers, and parks, with
instructions on where to go in an evacuation and key
evacuation information. Signs and flyers should be
posted in multiple languages.
Glendale Public
Works
(Maintenance
Services),
Community
Services and
Parks
Traffic Control
Center
Implement a traffic control center which would have up
to the minute reports on traffic patterns and can
communicate directly with emergency officers via
broadcast media, social media, and other emergency
communications channels (e.g., Everbridge, Genesis) to
let drivers know about roadway congestion and
conditions and direct them to alternate routes.
Glendale Public
Works
(Engineering),
Glendale
Communications
Manager,
Glendale IT
Department
Traffic
counters/CCTV
cameras
Install traffic counters and/or CCTV cameras on
freeways, which can help assess traffic flow, volume of vehicles evacuating, and monitor incidents during
emergency evacuation events.
Caltrans currently has two cameras in the proximity of
Glendale Public
Works
(Engineering)
305 of 420
September 2024 Page 39
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Strategy Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Glendale: SR-2 at Colorado Street and SR-134 at
Glendale Avenue.
306 of 420
September 2024 Page 40
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS
This section identifies strategies specifically for evacuation of vulnerable populations.5 The city can use demographic data and U.S. Census data to identify vulnerable population locations and communities. City staff and emergency response teams may work with specialized organizations such as hospitals, medical associations, public service organizations, public health staff, and other providers or community groups to identify and locate relevant population segments and the types of assistance needed. Public awareness and messaging of programs and resources to help vulnerable populations needs to be communicated ahead of time. Table 7 outlines considerations by need.
Table 7: Additional Steps for Evacuation of Vulnerable Populations Special Need Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Visually
impaired
May be reluctant to leave familiar surroundings when the request for evacuation comes from a stranger. People who are blind or partially sighted may have to depend on their guide dogs and/or others to lead them to safety.
Partner with neighboring cities/private/non-profit agencies to provide adequate paratransit services for those who
need assistance in an evacuation.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
Hearing
impaired
May need additional evacuation warning resources. Include visual aids such as pictures or maps to reinforce key
messages during evacuations. Continue to provide written updates via communication channels, such as Everbridge
and Genesis, and on social media channels.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
Mobility
impaired
May need special assistance such as paratransit. Partner with neighboring cities/private/non-profit agencies to
provide adequate paratransit services for those who need assistance in an evacuation.
Community
Engagement
Response Team,
Beeline Transit
People without
vehicles
Emphasize the importance of carpooling with neighbors or other community members. Provide information on transit routes and transit stops. Identify areas that would benefit from a carpooling program (e.g., communities with limited ingress/egress). Coordinate with neighbors, local
businesses, and local transit to identify volunteers for carpooling at the local level. For businesses or commercial centers, identify if there are commercial vehicles (e.g., delivery trucks) that can be used for evacuation of people or supplies.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
5 Using Highways for No-Notice Evacuations: Five Planning Considerations, FHWA, Accessed August 2022. 307 of 420
September 2024 Page 41
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Special Need Recommendations
Responsible
Department
Non-English-
speaking
persons
Provide bilingual or multilingual materials to support
communication with non-English speaking populations
during evacuation. Communications should be created in
English, Armenian, Spanish, Tagalog, and Korean.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
People with
medical
conditions
Communicate in advance the location and availability of hospitals or facilities with emergency/life-sustaining
medical equipment that residents can go to during an
evacuation. Identify the transportation mode of transfers to other facilities, based on the criticality of patients/clients and type of health needs.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
Unhoused
(Homeless)
population
Arrange for food, shelter, and transportation for unhoused (homeless) population. Offer age-appropriate emergency
and evacuation information to homeless children.
Community
Engagement
Response Team
308 of 420
September 2024 Page 42
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Evacuation Planning Considerations Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
Sharing information is a critical element to help educate the general public on how to prepare in advance for an evacuation. The public education strategies the city may consider include:
◼ Defining the meaning of different types of evacuation orders; ◼ Sharing how evacuation orders are declared and communicated to the public; ◼ Providing information on preparations to carry out in advance (such as emergency “go” kits or family evacuation plans);
◼ Conducting a public affair campaign(s) to distribute easy-to-read evacuation maps with alternate routes;
◼ Providing information on available transportation options, including for vulnerable populations; and ◼ Providing information on evacuation shelters and support services offered during evacuation. ◼ Providing regular emergency preparedness trainings in multiple languages at convenient, accessible locations.
◼ Building capacity of resilience hubs, CBOs, and other community groups to support community- based disaster preparedness efforts through direct or passthrough funding, grant writing support, information sharing, etc.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Evacuations are resource-intensive events that require significant personnel, facilities, and equipment to implement successfully. The City should determine what resources are available as well as what resources will be needed for staff to perform their responsibilities during an evacuation successfully, which can include the following:
◼ Clarity on staff roles and expertise available, including number of staff available to help people evacuate from homes and other buildings
◼ Facilities available (e.g., traffic operations center, shelters, etc.); ◼ Available information systems to support the evacuation (e.g., ITS, computer networks, ancillary hardware such as cameras, road sensor loops, etc.);
◼ Communication systems (e.g., landline, mobile phones, radio system, email, sirens); ◼ Vehicles/transports (e.g., staff transport, tow trucks, transit vehicles, heavy equipment); and, ◼ Miscellaneous materials to support implementation of evacuation strategies (e.g., traffic cones, channeling devices, static signs).
If critical resource gaps are identified, the City may look to work with other evacuation entities to determine additional resources and needs. The City may also work with private sector entities to expand the resource base. For example, utilities companies may keep cell and internet services running in vulnerable communities during public safety power shutoffs. Private service companies such as ambulance operators and towing companies can provide additional assets during evacuation. These companies can clarify what is expected of them during a potential evacuation event to ensure their services are available, when needed.
309 of 420
September 2024 Page 43
City of Glendale Safety Element Update - Evacuation Analysis Next Steps Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Next Steps
This memorandum describes the results of the evacuation analysis as well as evacuation planning considerations and strategies to help improve the capacity and resilience of the City of Glendale’s roadway network to support future evacuation events. This information will be used to frame supportive policies for the Safety Element update. These strategies and policies can be used to identify potential evacuation resiliency improvements throughout the city. 310 of 420
Exhibit 4 – Outline of Amendments
2025 SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE
Note: Underlines refer to new text additions to the Element, while strikeouts are deletions. The hierarchy is Goals, then Policies (to implement the Goals) and then Programs (specific actions to implement the Policies). For this outline, the titles of Goals and Policies are bolded and bulleted with a square, while Programs are not bolded and are bulleted with a circle.
• CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
o Inclusion of State legislation and new Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment references and requirements, as well as certain definitions
• CHAPTER 2 – REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
o Minor updates to applicable programs, inclusion of legislative summaries for Fire Regulations and Emergency Evacuation subsection, and new subsection on Climate Change, as required by State Law
• CHAPTER 3 – GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
o 3.1 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS
NEW Policy 2-2: Slope stability monitoring near evacuation routes. The City shall consider monitoring slope stability in areas adjacent to designated evacuation routes and critical facilities to minimize increasing risk of landslides due to climate-change related increases in wildfires and extreme precipitation events. (CCVA)
Program 2-2.1: The City shall consider establishing a regular inspection and maintenance cycle for existing physical landslide and debris flow defenses, including inspections prior to heavy rain events and post- wildfire events. (CCVA)
Program 2-2.2: The City shall consider implementing the following strategies to address increasing vulnerabilities associated with debris flow and landslides: upgrading and improving drainage capacity, reconstructing retaining walls, installing netting and vegetation, avoiding clear cutting, and stabilizing the soil after tree clearing, such as with compost and mulch. (CCVA)
Program 2-2.3 The City shall consider identifying locations where slopes should be actively monitored and installing landslide monitoring equipment especially in landslide susceptible areas near evacuation routes and critical assets to detect any changes in local hillside hydrologic conditions. (CCVA) o 3.2 FLOODING HAZARDS
Updates on Flood Hazards – Local Conditions Section
Add new programs:
Program 3-1.5: The City shall upgrade stormwater systems on City- owned properties and rights-of-way to limit flooding from extreme precipitation events while also improving water filtration and quality.
Deployment of such strategies such as green infrastructure (bioswales) shall 311 of 420
be prioritized in high socially vulnerable census tracts in alignment with the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). (CAAP)
Program 3-1.6: The City shall contact the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to discuss implementing flood mitigation measures to mitigate increased flood risk along the Verdugo Wash, in particular in the Henderson Canyon segment which is the northernmost 2.5 mile area of the Verdugo Wash.
o 3.3 FIRE HAZARDS
Updates on Fire Hazards – Overview and Local Conditions Sections, including descriptions of Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZs), Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZs) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs) Delete: Program 4-1.4: The City shall evaluate options for a secondary public access to Glenoaks Canyon.
Add new programs:
Program 4-1.9: The City shall ensure that road standards meet the needs for emergency access and that access roads are not restricted by parked cars. (CAL FIRE)
Program 4-1.10 The City shall coordinate with telecommunication service entities, and the Los Angeles County Cable and
Telecommunications Office to fire-harden communications. (Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
Program 4-1.11 The City shall ensure that adequate equipment, staffing, training, and resources are provided to the Glendale Fire Department to meet current and future projected service demands and fire protection needs. Review new developments in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones to ensure that adequate fire protection provisions are in place, including fire flow and emergency vehicle access. (CAL FIRE) Update policy:
Policy 4-2 The City shall require that all new development in areas with a high fire hazard incorporate fire resistant landscaping and other fire hazard reduction techniques into the project design in order to reduce the fire hazard. New Development. The City shall require fire protection plans for all new developments and discourage new residential development within Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, where feasible. Ensure fire protection plans include risk analysis, consideration of increased wildfire hazards due to climate change, fire response capabilities, fire safety requirements, fuel management, mitigation measures and design requirements, and wildfire education maintenance and limitations. Limit new development in areas with single access points in and adjacent to steeply sloped terrain (greater than 40 percent slope) that would result in significant and unavoidable impacts relating to rapid wildfire spread. (CAL FIRE, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
312 of 420
Delete: Program 4-2.6: The City shall evaluate the feasibility of requiring development plans to be submitted in electronic format in addition to paper copies in order to facilitate the review and storage of plans. Add new programs:
o Program 4-2.8 The City shall require that new subdivision tract maps for thirty or more lots provide adequate access (ingress, egress) and a minimum of two roadways with widths and lengths in compliance with the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s State Minimum Fire Safe Regulations Article 2, Subsection 1273. (Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
o Program 4-2.9: Whenever feasible, the City shall locate new essential public facilities, including health care facilities, emergency shelters, and fire stations, outside Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. (CAL FIRE) Add new policies and programs:
NEW Policy 4-3 Redevelopment. The City shall require that, after a large fire, redevelopment of a damaged property in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone complies with the requirements of construction in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and includes adequate provisions for emergency access, vegetation management, and firefighting, in compliance with current fire codes. (CAL FIRE) NEW Policy 4-4 Existing Non-Conforming Development. The City shall minimize risks to existing development by identifying existing non-conforming development that does not meet local and state contemporary fire safety standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative hazard, and require all new development to meet or exceed the City of Glendale Vegetation Management Program (VMP) Defensible Space Guidelines and the California Code of Regulations, State Responsibility Areas Fire Safe Regulations. (State Responsibility Areas Fire Safe Regulations), (City of Glendale Vegetation Management Program Defensible Space Guidelines). (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 4-5 Water Supply. The City shall evaluate the City’s fire suppression capacity and future water supply availability, as part of the next Glendale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, which is updated every 5 years. (CAL FIRE) o Program 4-5.1 The City shall coordinate with Glendale Water & Power and other water districts as appropriate to support the provision of adequate water throughout the City and provision of adequate water storage to meet future peak fire demands during times of peak domestic demand.
Explore the feasibility of providing on-site water supply and storage to augment ordinary supplies that may be lost during a wildfire. (CAL FIRE, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
o Program 4-5.2 The City shall require all new developments to have adequate water supply to meet fire suppression needs and comply with applicable fire flow requirements. (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 4-6 Electrical Undergrounding. The City shall implement an aggressive electrical undergrounding plan with a focus on critical evacuation 313 of 420
roadways and areas with the highest wildfire risk. (Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
NEW Policy 4-7 Defensible Space. The City shall require all properties in the City to implement precautionary measures to create defensible space in compliance with regulations set forth in Senate Bill 63, Assembly Bill 3074, and Glendale Fire Department defensible space standards and guidelines. The City shall continue annual brush inspections, require public and private properties in the City to maintain a fire break around structures. by removing brush and flammable vegetation surrounding the property, maintain an ember resistant zone around structures located in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, continuing annual brush inspections, maintaining any tree adjacent to or overhanging any building free of dead or dying wood, and maintaining roofs free of leaves, needles, or other dead vegetation growth. (CAL FIRE, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance) o Program 4-7.1 The City shall enforce development and maintenance of buffer zones and defensible space by requiring the removal of brush and flammable vegetation surrounding public and private properties and the upkeep of an ember resistant zone around structures located in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. The City shall also require public and private properties to maintain any tree adjacent to or overhanging any building free of dead or dying wood, and maintaining roofs free of leaves, needles, or other dead vegetation growth. preventing vegetation to encounter structures and offering assistance to residential and commercial property owners to build defensible spaces that are retained over time.s and to ensure that access roads are not blocked by parked vehicles. (CAL FIRE, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
o Program 4-7.2 The City shall encourage residents to plant and maintain drought-resistant, fire-resistant landscape species to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion in areas adjacent to canyons and develop stringent site design and maintenance standards for areas with high fire hazard or soil erosion potential. (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 4-8 Emergency Plan. The City Shall review and update the Emergency Operations Plan and evacuation protocols every two years as recommended by CESA and Cal OES, if feasible, regularly to consider current community emergency evacuation needs in response to wildfires, including in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 4-9 Educational Awareness. The City shall educate residents on fire hazard reduction strategies to employ on their properties, focusing on the most vulnerable populations such as older adults, individuals with disabilities, non- English speaking residents, and individuals with chronic health conditions. (CAL FIRE)
Program 4-9.1 The City shall host educational workshops for property owners on defensible space, home hardening, and vegetation management based upon the most up-to-date science and State guidelines to reduce wildfire risk. Target education of most up-to-date evacuation routes to at-risk 314 of 420
populations including older adults and individuals with chronic health conditions. (CAL FIRE, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance) Program 4-9.2: The City shall conduct studies to determine whether improvements are needed in the areas of public education and fire prevention. (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 4-10 Partnerships. The City shall regularly review and update mutual aid agreements between surrounding City Fire Departments and the Glendale Fire Department to reflect new developments, population trends in the City, station staffing/equipment, and fire behavior shifts due to climate change.
Ensure protections and response for all areas are adequately covered by the appropriate updates. (CAL FIRE)
o 3.4 CLIMATE CHANGE
New Overview and Local Conditions Summaries Section, including descriptions of Greenhouse Gases (GHG), Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA, Appendix B), Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect, social and physical vulnerabilities. New goal, policies and programs for Climate Change:
o NEW Goal 5. Reduce social and physical vulnerabilities resulting from the increasing risks of climate change
NEW Policy 5-1: Cooling Infrastructure. The City shall, where feasible, install shade trees and cool pavement, expand the functionality and availability of cooling centers, and distribute low-cost cooling resources to reduce the impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality on climate vulnerable populations. (CAAP) Program 5-1.1 The City shall explore incorporating strategies to reduce the urban heat island effect during City repaving projects. (CAAP) Program 5-1.2 The City work to implement a tree planning program to prioritize planting trees in high social sensitivity census tracts with the lowest tree equity score, along safe routes to school and near bus stops, as detailed in the City’s Community Forest Management Plan. (CAAP) Program 5-1.3 The City shall, where feasible, expand the functionality and availability of cooling centers to address a greater variety of needs as resilience centers facilitating health, food, medical, and emergency services during poor air quality events caused by climate hazards such as extreme heat events or wildfire. (CAAP)
Program 5-1.4 The City shall consider implementing a program to purchase and deploy a lending library of air purifiers and cooling devices in partnership with local community organizations and trusted community leaders, targeting high social sensitivity census tracts. (CAAP) NEW Policy 5-2: Building Resilience. The City shall amend the building code to increase the resiliency of existing and new buildings so as to protect residents from the impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality. (CAAP) Program 5-2.1 The City shall consider amending the building code to require CALGreen Tier 2 Voluntary Standards Section A5.106.11.2 for cool roofs 315 of 420
and Section A5.106.7.2 for cool walls by the next California Building Codes (CBC) update cycle. (CAAP)
Program 5-2.2 The City shall amend the building code to require indoor cooling in new multi-family buildings, monitoring the California Department of Public Health guidance regarding indoor cooling which will inform the next CBC update (CBC) cycle. (CAAP)
Program 5-2.3 The City shall consider amending the building code to require all newly installed HVAC units for existing buildings to have two-way air condition unit capability to provide heating and cooling by the next CBC update cycle. (CAAP)
NEW Policy 5-3: Access to Public Information. The City shall promote increased multi-lingual access to informational resources and emergency alert systems to raise awareness of and limit climate change impacts. (CAAP) Program 5-3.1 The City shall offer engaging year-round community events with educational resources at resilience centers, providing the community with free access to multi-lingual information, resources, and support to effectively prepare for and recover from poor air quality days, extreme weather events and other disasters, while making the resilience centers recognized fixtures in the community (CAAP).
Program 5-3.2 The City shall conduct emergency alert notifications in English, Spanish, Armenian, and Korean and distribute information about Emergency Alert Program (Everbridge) sign-up in areas of highest risk, including areas of high social sensitivity. The City shall remove procedural equity barriers from the sign-up program. (CAAP)
Program 5-3.3 The City shall, every five years, reassess which languages are spoken jointly by 5% or more of the Glendale community and expand emergency alert translations to additional languages as needed, consistent with Assembly Bill 1638. (CAAP; AB 1638)
Program 5-3.4 The City shall provide online information for preparing homes and businesses for extreme weather events, such as resources on what to have at home in an emergency kit. (CAAP)
NEW Policy 5-4 Water Management. The City shall incorporate, where feasible, extended drought climate projections in water management planning and offer solutions to reduce water use and improve water quality through Glendale Water & Power while offering educational services to the community. (CAAP) Program 5-4.1: The City shall, upon the next update to the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), review the historical record to identify the longest recorded drought and consider a similar drought length in the UWMP analysis. (CAAP)
Program 5-4.2 The City shall, where feasible, expand Glendale Water and Power programs to increase leakage detection systems and repairs; drought tolerant landscaping; low-flow fixtures, fitting, and appliances; greywater capture and reuse; leakage repairs; and financing and technical 316 of 420
resources to subsidize costs to landlords and low-income households. (CAAP)
Program 5-4.3 The City shall, where feasible, implement a program to conduct an energy/water nexus study to inform the City’s future public water rate structure and to directly assist low-income households with high utility burdens during water rate structure changes to avoid inequitable outcomes. (CAAP)
o 3.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Minor updates to Overview and Local Conditions Summaries Addition of new policy titles; no other changes
o 3.6 TERRORISM, CIVIL DISTURBANCE AND CRIME
Updates to the Overview – California State Threat Assessment System (CAL STAS) and minor updates to the Local Conditions Summaries
Addition of new policy titles; no other changes
o 3.7 DANGEROUS ANIMALS AND PLANTS
Very minor updates to the Overview and Local Conditions Summaries Addition of new policy titles and clarification for composting programs; no other changes
o 3.8 DISASTER PREPAREDNESS, RECOVERY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE Updates to the Overview and the Local Conditions Summaries regarding evacuation and emergency response routes, including single access for residential developments, as well as evacuation analyses for two scenarios. New policies and programs:
o NEW Program 9-1.11 The City shall provide accurate documentation required for cost recovery efforts from federal, state, and other agencies in the event of a disaster or emergency. This includes providing a plan for rapid resumption of impacted businesses and community services. (CAL FIRE)
NEW Policy 9-2: Plan Updates. The City shall review and update as necessary the Glendale Emergency Plan with every update to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to evaluate evacuation route capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. (AB 747)
NEW Policy 9-3: Evacuation Communications. The City shall strengthen and maintain evacuation communication protocols among local agencies and organizations involved in the management of emergency response, and the communication between the City and the general public during an emergency. o Program 9-3.1: The City shall implement the communications-related strategies identified in the Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) to address how information may be shared in preparation for, during and after emergency events. Such strategies include:
• This City shall consider using systems such as public information emergency systems and emergency satellite communications to 317 of 420
improve communications, such as those outlined in the FEMA NIMS Guidance for Public Information Officers. (AB 747) • The City shall use variable message board equipment and targeted installation of permanent dynamic message signs on evacuation routes to improve communication and reduce public confusion. (AB 747)
• The City shall implement a traffic control center which would have up to the minute reports on traffic patterns and can communicate directly with emergency officers via broadcast media, social media, and other emergency communications channels (e.g., Everbridge, Genesis) to let drivers know about roadway congestion and conditions and direct them to alternate routes. (AB 747) • The City shall consider installing new traffic counters and/or CCTV cameras on freeways, which can further help assess traffic flow, volume of vehicles evacuating, and monitor incidents during emergency evacuation events. Caltrans currently has two cameras in the proximity of Glendale: SR-2 at Colorado Street and SR-134 at Glendale Avenue. (AB 747)
• The City shall post signs and flyers in public places, such as businesses, community centers, and parks, with instructions on where to go in an evacuation and key evacuation information.
Signs and flyers should be posted in multiple languages. (AB 747) o Program 9-3.2 The City shall increase redundancy in emergency evacuation communication systems in the event of an electric outage through a variety of measures, including back-up power for telecommunication towers and other critical facilities, distributing information via radio channels, promoting ownership of hand cranked radios, and other means. Regularly test alert systems for potential evacuation scenarios. (Attorney General Wildfire Guidance)
NEW Policy 9-4: Vulnerable Populations. The City shall implement additional steps and resources for the successful evacuation of vulnerable populations, including those who are visually impaired, hearing impaired, mobility impaired, people without vehicles, non-English speaking persons, people with medical conditions, and unhoused populations. (AB 747)
o Program 9-4.1: The City shall implement the strategies identified in the Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) for evacuation of vulnerable populations. Such strategies include:
• The City shall ensure that evacuation information is provided for the hearing impaired that may include additional visual aids such as pictures or maps, and signage with larger fonts, as well as written updates via communication and social media channels. (AB 747)
• The City shall partner with neighboring cities/private/non-profit agencies to provide adequate paratransit services for those who 318 of 420
need assistance in an evacuation, especially for those visually and mobility impaired. (AB 747)
• The City shall emphasize the importance of carpooling with neighbors or community members and provide information on transit routes and transit stops, especially to those individuals without vehicles. The City shall also identify areas that would benefit from a carpooling program (e.g. communities with limited ingress/egress) and coordinate with neighbors, local businesses, and local transit to identify volunteers for carpooling and vehicle sharing at the community level. (AB 747)
• The City shall provide bilingual or multilingual materials to support communication with non-English speaking populations during evacuation. Communications should be created in English, Armenian, Spanish, Tagalog, and Korean. (AB 747)
• The City shall communicate in advance the location and availability of hospitals or facilities with emergency/life-sustaining medical equipment that residents, especially those with medical conditions, can go to during an evacuation and identify the transportation mode of transfers to other facilities, based on the criticality of patients/clients and type of health needs. (AB 747)
• The City shall arrange for food, shelter, and transportation for unhoused populations, offering age-appropriate emergency and evacuation information to homeless children. (AB 747)
NEW Policy 9.5 Traffic Management. In the event of an emergency requiring evacuation, traffic management strategies to increase evacuation capacity and efficiency shall be implemented (AB 747):
o Program 9-5.1: The City shall implement the roadway and intersection capacity, and resilience related strategies identified in the Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) to maximize the capacity of the evacuation roadway network. Such strategies include:
• Establish temporary control points to temporarily close inbound travel lanes on select unlimited access arterials (such as parkways and boulevards) to allow outbound traffic to utilize these lanes during evacuation. (AB 747)
• Establish temporary control points to close inbound lanes on selected roadways utilized for evacuation routes to prevent drivers on these routes from entering the City while evacuation is underway. (AB 747)
• Install signal battery backups in case signal operations need to be maintained during a power outage. Consider using channeling devices, static signs, and coning strategies to manage intersection flow during power outage if the signals lack power. (AB 747) • Identify and communicate with communities that have one or two access points. Prioritize adding additional access to communities 319 of 420
which are currently served by only one or two access points. (AB 747)
• Develop transportation solutions such as the use of a bus system for evacuating individuals with special needs (such as those with mobility limitations). (AB 747)
• Establish traffic control points (i.e., locations along designated evacuation routes with emergency management personnel) to maintain a greater degree of evacuation management. These locations could enhance the efficiency of an evacuation, reduce public confusion, and allow increased operational flexibility during an evacuation. (AB 747)
• Maintain evacuation roadways and shoulders to clear them of trees, vegetation, and debris that would block travel lanes and shoulders for evacuating and emergency operation vehicles. (AB 747)
o NEW Program 9-5.2 Single Access Neighborhoods. The City shall implement strategies to improve emergency access for Glendale’s single access neighborhoods (CAL FIRE, SB 99, Attorney General Wildfire Guidance). Such strategies shall include:
• The City shall identify alternative plans for evacuation depending upon the location and dynamics of the emergency and consider conducting traffic modeling to quantify travel times under various likely scenarios. Consider the adequacy of emergency access under a range of emergency scenarios, including proximity to existing fire services and the capacity of existing services. (CAL FIRE, SB 99)
• The City shall encourage residents to take only one or two vehicles (based on household size) to reduce the number of evacuating vehicles. The City shall offer offsite parking facilities to safely store secondary vehicles in advance of an emergency event. (CAL FIRE, SB 99)
• The City shall implement early evacuations under high-risk conditions for vulnerable communities with limited egress routes, including single-access neighborhoods. (CAL FIRE, SB 99) The City shall conduct regular evacuation trainings to educate residents on how to prepare to be without electricity for three days or more and how to shut off domestic gas supply in cases of emergency including training for single-access community homeowner associations and residents. (CAL FIRE, SB 99)
320 of 420
TABLES
Table-1 Hazard Assessment of Critical Facilities and Schools in Glendale - no changes Table-2 Potential Shelters In and Near the City of Glendale – minor additions and updates Table-3 Program Implementation Schedule – updates to/for added/deleted Programs, Responsible Divisions, Potential Funding, Priority and Time Frame entries
EXHIBITS
Exhibits – Plates:
2003 Safety Element:
• P late P-1 Summary of Hazards Map (showing Seismic and Geological Hazards) • Plate P-2 Summary of Hazards Map (showing Dam Inundation Areas and Fire Hazard Areas)
• Plate P-3 Emergency Response Map
2025 Safety Element Update:
• Plate P-1 Seismic and Geological Hazards - no change to information • Plate P-2 Dam Inundation Zones (only) – Fire Hazard Areas now shown in separate Plate • Plate P-3 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities – Replacing previous P-3 Emergency Response Route Plate with updated Fire Hazards Area Map • Plate P-4 Single Access Neighborhoods – NEW Plate
• Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route – Previously Plate P-3, with updated information
321 of 420
General Plan Safety Element Assessment
Board of Forestry and Fire Protection
City of Glendale 2024
Exhibit 5
322 of 420
Contents
Purpose and Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...1 Methodology for Review and Recommendations ................................ ................................ ................................ .2 General Plan Safety Element Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 3 Background Information Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 3 Goals, Policies, Objectives, and Feasible Implementation Measures ................................ ............................... 5 Section 1 Avoiding or minimizing the wildfire hazards associated with new uses of land .............................. 5 Section 2 Develop adequate infrastructure if a new development is located in SRAs or VHFHSZs. ................ 6 Section 3 Working cooperatively with public agencies responsible for fire protection. ................................ .7 Sample Safety Element Recommendations ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 A. Maps, Plans and Historical Information ................................ ................................ ................................ ....8 B. Land Use................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 8 C. Fuel Modification ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....8 D. Access ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 9 E. Fire Protection ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 9 Fire Hazard Planning in Other Elements of the General Plan ................................ ................................ ............... 10 Land Use Element ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 10 Housing Element ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 10 Open Space and Conservation Elements ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 10 Circulation Element ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 323 of 420
1 * https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/Final_6.26.15.pdf
Purpose and Backg round
Upon the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1, 2014, the safety element is required to be reviewed and updated as necessary to address the risk of fire for land classified as state responsibility areas and land classified as very high fire hazard severity zone s. (Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (g)(3).)
The safety element is required to include:
• Fire hazard severity zone maps available from the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. • Any historical data on wildfires available from local agencies or a reference to where the data can be found.
• Information about wildfire hazard areas that may be available from the United States Geological Survey.
• The general location and distribution of existing and planned uses of land in very high fire hazard severity zones (VHFHSZs) and in state responsibility areas (SRAs), including structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities. The location and distribution of planned uses of land shall not require defensible space compliance measures required by state law or local ordinance to occur on publicly owned land s or open space designations of homeowner associations. • The local, state, and federal agencies with responsibility for fire protection, including special districts and local offices of emer gency services. (Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (g)(3)(A).) Based on that information, the safety element shall include goals, policies, and objectives that protect the community from the unreasonable risk of wildfire . (Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (g)(3)(B).) To carry out those goals, policies, and objectives, feasible implementation measures shall be included in the safety element, which include but are not limited to:
• Avoiding or minimizing the wildfire hazards associated with new uses of land. • Locating, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of high fire risk areas, including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities, or identi fying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in the SRA or VHFHSZ. • Designing adequate infrastructure if a new development is located in the SRA or VHFHSZ , including safe access for emergency response vehicles, visible street signs, and water supplies for structural fire suppression.
• Working cooperatively with public agencies with res ponsibility for fire protection . (Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (g)(3)(C).)
The safety element shall also attach or reference any fire safety plans or other documents adopted by the city or county that fulfill the goals and objectives or contains the information required above . (Gov.
Code, § 65302 , subd. (g)(3)(D).) This might include Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, Unit Fire Plans, Community Wildfire Protection Plans, or other plans.
There are several reference documents developed by state agencies to assist local jurisdictions in updating their safety elements to include wildfire safety. The Fire Hazard Planning , General Plan Technical Advice Series from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), referenced in Government Code section 65302, subdivision (g)(3) and available at 1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 322-2318
The Technical Advice Series is also available from the OPR website (Technical Advice Series link ).* The Technical Advice Series provides policy guidance, information resources, and fire hazard planning examples from around California that shall be considered by local jurisdictions when reviewing the safety element of its general plan .
The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (Board) utilizes this Safety Element Assessment in the Board’s review of safety elements under Government Code section 65302.5. At least 90 days prior to the adoption or amendment of their safety element, counties that contain SRAs and cities or counties that contain VHFHSZs shall submit their safety element to the Board. (Gov. Code, § 65302.5, subd. (b).) The Board shall review the safety element and respond to the city or county with its findings regarding the uses of land and policies in SRAs or VHFHSZs that will protect life, property, and natural resources from 324 of 420
2 unreasonable risks associated with wild fires, and the methods and strategies for wildfire risk reduction and prevention within SRAs or VHFHSZs. (Gov. Code, § 65302.5, subd. (b)(3).) The CAL FIRE Land Use Planning team provides expert fire protection assistance to loc al jurisdictions statewide. Fire captains are available to work with cities and counties to revise their safety elements and enhance their strategic fire protection planning.
Methodology for Review and Recommendations
Utilizing staff from the CAL FIRE Land Use Planning team, t he Board has established a standardized method to review the safety element of general plan s. The methodology in cludes 1) reviewing the safety element for the requirements in Government Code section 65302, subdivision (g)(3)(A),
2) examining the safety element for goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures that mitigate the wildfire risk in the planning area ( Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (g)(3)(B) & (C)), and 3) making recommendations for methods and strategies that would reduce the risk of wildfires (Gov.
Code, § 65302.5, subd. (b)(3)(B)).
The safety element will be evaluated against the attached Assessment , which contains questions to determine if a safety element meets the fire safety planning requirements outlined in Government Code, section 65302. The reviewer will answer whether or not a submitted safety element addresses the required information, and will recommend changes to the safety eleme nt that will reduce the wildfire risk in the planning area. These recommended changes may come from the list of sample goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures that is included in this document after the Assessment, or may be based on the reviewer’s knowledge of the jurisdi ction in question and their specific wildfire risk. By answering the questions in the Assessment, the reviewer will determine if the jurisdiction’s safety element has adequately addressed and mitigated their wildfire risk. If it hasn’t, any specific recommendations from the reviewer will assist the jurisdiction in revising the safety element so that it does.
Once completed, the Assessment should provide clear guidance to a city or county regarding any areas of deficiency in the safety element as well as specific goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures the Board recommends adopting in order to mitigate or reduce the wildfire threat in the planning area.
325 of 420
3 General Plan Safety Element Assessment
Jurisdiction: Glendale Notes: Final Review CAL FIRE Unit: Date Received:11/4/24 County: Los Angeles County LUPP Reviewer: Jose Quintana UNIT CONTACT: Date Reviewed: 12/23/24
BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The safety element must contain specific background information about fire hazards in each jurisdiction.
Instructions for this table: Indicate whether the safety element includes the specified information. If YES, indicate in the comments where that informati on can be found; if NO, provide recommendations to the jurisdiction regarding how best to include that information in their revised safety element.
Required Information Yes or No Comments and Recommendations Are Fire Hazard Severity Zones Identified?
CAL FIRE or Locally Adopted Maps
YES SE, pg. 59, Plate-3 – Wildfire Hazard Severity
Zones and Critical Facilities
Appendix A TBR pg. 4-8, Plate 4-2
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
pg.76 Figure 10. Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones in
Glendale
Is historical data on wildfires or a reference to where the data can be found, and information about wildfire hazard areas that may be available from the United States
Geological Survey, included?
YES Appendix A TBR pg.4-5, Plate 4-1 Wildland Fire
Susceptibility in the Glendale Area
Has the general location and distribution of existing and planned uses of land in very high fire hazard severity
zones (VHFHSZs) and in state responsibility areas
(SRAs), including structures, roads, utilities, and
essential public facilities, been identified?
YES SE, pg. 59, Plate-3 – Wildfire Hazard Severity
Zones and Critical Facilities
SE, pg. 41 Exhibits Table 1 Hazard Assessment of
Critical Facilities
Have local, state, and federal agencies with responsibility for fire protection, including special districts and local offices of emergency services, been identified?
YES Appendix A TBR pg.4-29,30 Policy 4.3.1 Automatic
and Mutual Aid Agreements
Are other fire protection plans, such as Community
Wildfire Protection Plans, Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, CAL FIRE Unit or Contract County Fire Plans, referenced or incorporated into the Safety Element?
Yes SE, pg. 3 Section 1.1 Legal Requirements Link
to City of Glendale LHMP
Are residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes
identified?
YES SE, pg. 60 Plate P-4– Single-Access
Neighborhoods
Recommend referencing Gov Code 65302(g)(5)
326 of 420
4 Required Information Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
SE, pg.8 Fire Regulations and Emergency
Evacuation
Have evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and
viability under a range of emergency scenarios been
identified?
YES SE, pg. 37
Recommend referencing Gov Code GC
65302.15(a)
Appendix C Evacuation Analysis
Is there any other information in the Safety Element regarding fire hazards in SRAs or VHFHSZs? N/A
327 of 420
5 Goals, Policies, Objectives, and Feasible Implementation Measures The safety element must contain a set of goals, policies, and objectives based on the above information to protect the commun ity from unreasonable risk of wildfire and implementation measures to accomplish those stated goals, policies, and objectives.
Instructions for this table: Critically examine the submitted safety element and determine if it is adequate to address the j urisdiction’s unique fire hazard. Answer YES or NO appropriately for each question below. If the recommendation is irrelevant or un related to the jurisdiction’s fire hazard, answer N/A. For NO, provide information in the Comments/Recommendations section to help the jurisdiction incorporate that change into their safety element revision. This information may utilize example recommendations from Sample Safety Element Recommendations and Fire Hazard Planning in Other Elements of the General Plan below, may indicate how high of a priority this recommendation is for a jurisdiction, or may include other jurisdiction -specific information or recommendations.
Section 1 Avoiding or minimizing the wildfire hazards associated with new uses of land Questions Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
Does local ordinance require development standards that meet or exceed title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7,
subchapter 2, articles 1 -5 (commencing with section
1270) (SRA Fire Safe Regulations) and title 14, CCR,
division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3
(commencing with section 1299.01) ( Fire Hazard
Reduction Around Buildings and Structures
Regulations) for SRAs and/or VHFHSZs?
YES SE, pg. 22 Policy 4-2
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.4
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.7
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.1
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.2
Are there goals and policies to avoid or minimize new
residential development in VHFHSZs?
YES SE, pg. 22 Policy 4-2
Has fire safe design been incorporated into future
development requirements?
YES
SE, pg. 22 Policy 4-2
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.1
Are new essential public facilities located outside high fire risk areas, such as VHFHSZs, when feasible?
YES SE, pg. 23 Program 4-2.9
Are there plans or actions identified to mitigate existing non-conforming development to contemporary fire safe
standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative
hazard?
YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-4 Existing Non-Conforming
Development
Does the plan include policies to evaluate re -
development after a large fire?
YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-3 Redevelopment
Is fuel modification around homes and subdivisions
required for new development in SRA s or VHFHSZs?
YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-7 Defensible Space
SE, pg. 23 Program 4-7.1
SE, pg. 23 Program 4-7.2
Are fire protection plans required for new development in VHFHSZs?
YES SE pg. 22 Policy 4-2 New Development
328 of 420
6 Questions Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
Does the plan address long term maintenance of fire
hazard reduction projects, including community fire
breaks and private road and public road clearance?
YES Appendix A TBR, pg. 4-12,15 Policy 4.1.3.2
Vegetation Management
SE, pg. 23 Program 4-7.1
Is there adequate access (ingress, egress) to new
development in VHFHSZs?
YES SE, pg. 22 Program 4-1.11
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-2.8
SE, pg. 22 Policy 4-2 New Development
Are minimum standards for evacuation of residential
areas in VHFHSZs defined?
YES SE, pg. 24 Policy 4-8 Emergency Plan
SE,pg 24 Program 4-8.1
If areas exist with inadequate access/evacuation routes, are they identified? Are mitigation measures or
improvement plans identified?
YES SE, pg. 60 Plate P-4– Single-Access
Neighborhoods
SE, pg.7 Fire Regulations and Emergency
Evacuation
Are there policies or programs promoting public outreach about defensible space or evacuation routes? Are there
specific plans to reach at -risk populations?
YES SE, pg. 24 Policy 4-9 Educational Awareness
SE, pg. 24 Program 4-9.1
Does the plan identify future water supply for fire
suppression needs?
YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-5 Water Supply
Does new development have adequate fire protection? YES SE, pg. 22 Policy 4-2 New Development Section 2 Develop adequate infrastructure if a new development is located in SRAs or VHFHSZs.
Does the plan identify adequate infrastructure for new
development related to:
Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
Water supply and fire flow?
YES SE, pg. 21 Program 4-1.1
SE, pg. 22 Program 4-1.11
SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-5 Water Supply
Location of anticipated water supply? YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-5 Water Supply SE, pg. 23 Program 4-5.1
Maintenance and long-term integrity of water supplies? Yes SE, pg. 23 Program 4-1.1 SE, pg 23 Program 4-1.12
Evacuation and emergency vehicle access? YES SE, pg. 21 Program 4-1.11 SE, pg. 24 Policy 4-8 Emergency Plan
Fuel modification and defensible space? YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-3 Redevelopment SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-4 Existing Non-Confirming
329 of 420
7 Does the plan identify adequate infrastructure for new development related to:
Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-7 Defensible Space
SE, pg. 23 Program 4-7.1
Vegetation clearance maintenance on public and private
roads?
YES SE, pg. 23 Policy 4-7 Defensible Space
Visible home and street addressing and signage? YES SE, pg. 39 Program 9-3.1 Community fire breaks? Is there a discussion of how
those fire breaks will be maintained?
YES Appendix A TBR, pg. 4-12,15 Policy 4.1.3.2
Vegetation Management
SE, pg. 23 Program 4-7.1
Section 3 Working cooperatively with public agencies responsible for fire protection.
Question Yes or No Comments and Recommendations
Is there a map or description of existing emergency
service facilities and areas lacking service, specifically noting any areas in SRAs or VHFHSZs?
YES SE, pg. 59, Plate-3 – Wildfire Hazard Severity
Zones and Critical Facilities
SE, pg. 43 Exhibits Table 1 Hazard Assessment of
Critical Facilities
Does the plan include an assessment and projection of
future emergency service needs?
YES SE, pg. 5-69, Plate-3 – Wildfire Hazard Severity
Zones and Critical Facilities
SE, pg. 21 Program 4-1.11
Are goals or standards for emergency services training
described?
Yes
SE, pg. 21 Program 4-1.11
Does the plan outline inter-agency preparedness
coordination and mutual aid multi -agency agreements?
YES Appendix A TBR, pg. 4-29,30 Automatic and Mutual
Aid Agreements
330 of 420
8 Sample Safety Element Recommendations
These are examples of specific policies, objectives, or implementation measures that may be used to meet the intent of Government Code sections 65302, subdivision (g)(3) and 65302.5, subdivision (b). Safety element reviewers may make recommendations that are not included here.
A. MAPS, PLANS AND HISTORICAL INFORMATION
1. Include or reference CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps or locally adopted wildfire hazard zones.
2. Include or reference the location of historical information on wildfires in the planning area.
3. Include a map or description of the location of existing and planned land uses in SRAs and VHFHSZs, particularly habitable structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities.
4. Identify or reference a fire plan that is relevant to the geographic scope of the general plan, including the Unit/Contract C ounty Fire Plan, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and any applicable Community Wildfire Protection Plans.
5. Align the goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures for fire hazard mitigation in the safety element with thos e in existing fire plans, or make plans to update fire plans to match the safety element.
6. Create a fire plan for the planning area.
B. LAND USE
1. Develop fire safe development codes to use as standards for fire protection for new development in SRAs or VHFHSZs that meet or exceed the statewide minimums in the SRA Fire Safe Regulations.
2. Adopt and have certified by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection local ordinances which meet or exceed the minimum state wide standards in the SRA Fire Safe Regulations.
3. Identify existing development that do not meet or exceed the SRA Fire Safe Regulations or certified local ordinances.
4. Develop mitigation measures for existing development that does not meet or exceed the SRA Fire Safe Regulations or certified local ordinances or identify a policy to do so.
C. FUEL MODIFICATION
1. Develop a policy to communicate vegetation clearance requirements to seasonal, absent, or vacation rental owners.
2. Identify a policy for the ongoing maintenance of vegetation clearance on public and private roads.
3. Include fuel breaks in the layout/siting of subdivisions.
4. Identify a policy for the ongoing maintenance of existing or proposed fuel breaks.
5. Identify and/or map existing development that does not conform to current state and/or locally adopted fire safety standards for access, water supply and fire flow, signing, and vegetation clearance in SRAs or VHFHSZs.
6. Identify plans and actions for existing non -conforming development to be improved or mitigated to meet current state and/or locally adopted fire safety standards for access, water supply and fire flow, signing, and vegetation clearance. 331 of 420
9 D. ACCESS
1. Develop a policy that approval of parcel maps and tentative maps in SRAs or VHFHSZs is conditional based on meeting the SRA F ire Safe Regulations and the Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations, particularly those regarding road standards for ingress, egress, and fire equipment access. (See Gov. Code, § 66474.02.)
2. Develop a policy that development will be prioritized in areas with an adequate road network and associated infrastructure.
3. Identify multi -family housing, group homes, or other community housing in SRAs or VHFHSZs and develop a policy to create evacuation or shelt er in place plans.
4. Include a policy to develop pre-plans for fire risk areas that address civilian evacuation and to effectively communicate those plans.
5. Identify road networks in SRAs or VHFHSZs that do not meet title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 2 a nd 3 (commencing with section 1273.00) or certified local ordinance and develop a policy to examine possible mitigations.
E. FIRE PROTECTION
1. Develop a policy that development will be prioritized in areas with adequate water supply infrastructure.
2. Plan for the ongoing maintenance and long -term integrity of planned and existing water supply infrastructure.
3. Map existing emergency service facilities and note any areas lacking service, especially in SRAs or VHFHSZs.
4. Project future emergency service needs for the planned land uses.
5. Include information about emergency service trainings or standards and plans to meet or maintain them.
6. Include information about inter -agency preparedness coordination or mutual aid agreements.
332 of 420
10 Fire Hazard Planning in Other Elements of the General Plan When updating the General Plan, here are some ways to incorporate fire hazard planning into other elements. Wildfire safety is best accomplished by holistic, strategic fire planning that takes advantage of opportunities to align priorities and implementation measures within and acro ss plans.
LAND USE ELEMENT
Goals and policies include mitigation of fire hazard for future development or limit development in very high fire hazard sev erity zones.
Disclose wildland urban-interface hazards, including fire hazard severity zones, and/or other vulnerable areas as determined by CAL FIRE or local fir e agency.
Design and locate new development to provide adequate infrastructure for the safe ingress of emergency response vehicles and simultaneously allow citizen egress during emergencies.
Describe or map any Firewise Communities or other fire safe communities as determined by the National Fire Protection Associa tion, Fire Safe Council, or other organization.
HOUSING ELEMENT
Incorporation of current fire safe building codes.
Identify and mitigate substandard fire safe housing and neighborhoods relative to fire hazard severity zones.
Consider diverse occupancies and their effects on wildfire protection (group housing, seasonal populations, transit -dependent, etc).
OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENTS
Identify critical natural resource values relative to fire hazard severity zones.
Include resource management activities to enhance protection of open space and natural resource values.
Integrate open space into fire safety planning and effectiveness.
Mitigation for unique pest, disease and other forest health issues leading to hazardous situations.
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Provide adequate access to very high fire hazard severity zones.
Develop standards for evacuation of residential areas in very high fire hazard severity zones.
Incorporate a policy that provides for a fuel reduction maintenance program along roadways. 333 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
w w w. r in co n co nsu ltan ts. co m
General Plan Safety Element Update – Engagement Activity Summary
Activity Overview
The City of Glendale, supported by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) organized a booth at two community events: Earth Day and Fire Service Day. The booths included a variety of engaging activities including a raffle and a children’s table. Rincon designed a set of materials to solicit input from the Glendale community on the City’s General Plan Safety Element Update (Safety Element Update) and the policies and programs being considered for inclusion. Materials were also intended to alert the community to similar parallel and supportive planning efforts, including the Climat e Action and Adaptation Plan, as well as updates to additional General Plan elements.
Community members had the option to participate in the engagement process through several avenues:
• A population and demographics survey, collecting information on zip code, residence and work status in Glendale, and language spoken.
• A sign-up sheet for Everbridge to receive project updates. • The “bucket and token” activity, in which participants received three tokens and were asked to vote for three solutions they prioritized in three categories: urban heat, fire hazards, and emergency evacuations.
• An Environmental Justice (EJ) survey produced by De Novo Planning Group to inform the EJ Element Update.
• A raffle to win a prize (tickets were distributed upon completion of activities) for participating in the planning process.
• A children’s coloring table, featuring prompts such as “What do you do on a hot summer day to cool down?” and “What comes to mind when you think of safety?” Figure 1 Activity Booth
Exhibit 7
334 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
2 The Rincon Team supported City staff in attending two pop -up events by preparing approach, organizing logistics, and developing materials. The schedule, location, and staffing of the events can be found in the table below. In total, over 120 community members stopped by the booths.
Table 1 Schedule, Location, and Staffing of Pop-Up Events Date and Time Event Name/Location
Saturday, April 20, 2024 11AM-3PM Earth Day
Verdugo Park
Saturday, May 11, 2024 9AM-2PM Fire Service Day
Fire Station 21
Figure 2 Rincon Earth Day Booth Team with City Staff and Laura Friedman 335 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
3 Activity Results
Earth Day
Sign-In Sheet and Population Survey
Participants were asked to fill in a sign -in sheet to receive project updates. Names and email addresses were provided by 42 participants. In addition, participants were asked to fill out a demographic population survey. Responses to the survey are recorded in Tables 2, 3, and 4 below.
Table 2 Earth Day Population Survey: Zip Code
Zip Code # of Participants
91202 1
91203 3
91204 3
91205 5
91206 2
91207 2
91208 6
91209 0
91210 0
91214 5
91221 0
91222 0
91224 0
91225 0
91226 0
Table 3 Earth Day Population Survey: Glendale Residence/Work Status Glendale Residence/Work Status # of Participants
I am a homeowner 15
I am a renter 14
I work in Glendale 8
I do not live or work in Glendale 7
Table 4 Earth Day Population Survey: Primary Language
Primary Language # of Participants
English 18
Armenian 5
Spanish 3
Korean 1
Tagalog 0
Other 0
336 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
4 Bucket and Token Activity
Responses to the Bucket and Token Activity can be found below. The most popular climate solutions that participants voted for include:
• Urban heat: “Installing shade structures at bus stops” • Fire Hazard: “Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements” • Emergency Evacuation: “Early evacuation warnings”
Table 5 Earth Day Bucket and Token Activity: Climate Solutions for Urban heat, Fire Hazards, and Emergency Evacuations
Climate Solution Tokens
Reduce energy bills for lower-income households 12
Install more cool pavements to reflect sun’s energy 15
Plant and maintain shade trees along streets 9
Install shade structure at bus stops 23
Increase shade and water activities at parks 8
Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements 21
Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces 11 Early evacuation warnings 12
Free transportation assistance for elderly and mobility-impaired 11 Emergency notifications in multiple languages 9
Note: Not every participant in the “bucket and token” activity received a raffle ticket as some opted out of the raffle.
Therefore, totals may not reflect raffle ticket totals.
Respondents also provided input via an additional comments board, presenting the community with two additional questions. The questions and community responses are recorded below:
What other climate issues are of concern to you?
• Flooded streets
• Cars, traffic, and clean air
What additional strategies would help you to be more prepared for climate change? • Tree planting
• Reduce number of vehicles on roads
• Protect more vulnerable communities
• Street trash pick-up
• More green spaces
• Less cars, more bike lanes and public transit
• Continually educate people on protected trees and how to properly trim all trees. If a protected tree is removed, replace with another protected tree.
• More incentives for EVs
• Soil regeneration
• Storm-water capture
337 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
5 Figure 3 Earth Day Activity Participants
Raffle
There were a total of 53 that participated in the raffle. 338 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
6 Fire Service Day
Sign-In Sheet and Population Data
Participants were asked to fill in a sign-in sheet for project updates featuring name and email. Names and email addresses were provided by 38 participants. In addition, participants were asked to fill out a demographic population survey. Responses to the survey are recorded in Tables 6, 7, and 8 below.
Figure 4 Rincon Service Day Booth Team with City Staff
339 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
7 Table 6 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Zip Code
Zip Code # of Participants
91202 5
91203 10
91204 7
91205 5
91206 7
91207 2
91208 1
91209 0
91210 1
91214 4
91221 0
91222 0
91224 0
91225 0
91226 0
Table 7 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Glendale Residence/Work Status Glendale Residence/Work Status # of Participants
I am a homeowner 20
I am a renter 25
I work in Glendale 18
I do not live or work in Glendale 22
Table 8 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Primary Language Primary Language # of Participants
English 31
Armenian 16
Spanish 8
Korean 4
Tagalog 0
Other 1
Bucket and Token Activity
Responses to the Bucket and Token Activity can be found below. The most popular climate solutions that participants voted for include:
• Urban heat: “Installing shade structures at bus stops” • Fire hazard: “Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces” • Emergency Evacuation: “Early evacuation warnings”
340 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
8 Table 9 Fire Service Day Bucket and Token Activity: Climate Solutions for Urban heat, Fire Hazards, and Emergency Evacuations
Climate Solutions Tokens
Reduce energy bills for lower-income households 11
Install more cool pavements to reflect sun’s energy 16
Plant and maintain shade trees along streets 6
Install shade structure at bus stops 20
Increase shade and water activities at parks 7
Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements 18
Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces 36 Early evacuation warnings 25
Free transportation assistance for elderly and mobility-impaired 12 Emergency notifications in multiple languages 12
Note: Not every participant in the “bucket and token” activity received a raffle ticket as some opted out of the raffle.
Therefore, totals may not reflect raffle ticket totals.
Respondents also provided input via an additional comments board, presenting the community with two additional questions. The questions and community responses are recorded below:
What other climate issues are of concern to you?
• Flooding
• Heat
• Tree roots
• Climate refugees
What additional strategies would help you to be more prepared for climate change? • Traffic reduction
• Fire proof paint research (when living in or near brush area) • Swimming and other activities for north Glendale
• Objective standards for defensible design for wildfire • Education about Valley Fever- coccidioidomycosis
Raffle
There were a total of 70 participants in the raffle.
341 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
9 Figure 5 Fire Service Day Activity Participants
342 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
w w w. r in co n co nsu ltan ts. co m
General Plan Safety Element Update – Engagement Activity Summary
Activity Overview
The City of Glendale, supported by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) organized a booth at two community events: Earth Day and Fire Service Day. The booths included a variety of engaging activities including a raffle and a children’s table. Rincon designed a set of materials to solicit input from the Glendale community on the City’s General Plan Safety Element Update (Safety Element Update) and the policies and programs being considered for inclusion. Materials were also intended to alert the community to similar parallel and supportive planning efforts, including the Climat e Action and Adaptation Plan, as well as updates to additional General Plan elements.
Community members had the option to participate in the engagement process through several avenues:
• A population and demographics survey, collecting information on zip code, residence and work status in Glendale, and language spoken.
• A sign-up sheet for Everbridge to receive project updates. • The “bucket and token” activity, in which participants received three tokens and were asked to vote for three solutions they prioritized in three categories: urban heat, fire hazards, and emergency evacuations.
• An Environmental Justice (EJ) survey produced by De Novo Planning Group to inform the EJ Element Update.
• A raffle to win a prize (tickets were distributed upon completion of activities) for participating in the planning process.
• A children’s coloring table, featuring prompts such as “What do you do on a hot summer day to cool down?” and “What comes to mind when you think of safety?” Figure 1 Activity Booth
Exhibit 7
343 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
2 The Rincon Team supported City staff in attending two pop -up events by preparing approach, organizing logistics, and developing materials. The schedule, location, and staffing of the events can be found in the table below. In total, over 120 community members stopped by the booths.
Table 1 Schedule, Location, and Staffing of Pop-Up Events Date and Time Event Name/Location
Saturday, April 20, 2024 11AM-3PM Earth Day
Verdugo Park
Saturday, May 11, 2024 9AM-2PM Fire Service Day
Fire Station 21
Figure 2 Rincon Earth Day Booth Team with City Staff and Laura Friedman 344 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
3 Activity Results
Earth Day
Sign-In Sheet and Population Survey
Participants were asked to fill in a sign -in sheet to receive project updates. Names and email addresses were provided by 42 participants. In addition, participants were asked to fill out a demographic population survey. Responses to the survey are recorded in Tables 2, 3, and 4 below.
Table 2 Earth Day Population Survey: Zip Code
Zip Code # of Participants
91202 1
91203 3
91204 3
91205 5
91206 2
91207 2
91208 6
91209 0
91210 0
91214 5
91221 0
91222 0
91224 0
91225 0
91226 0
Table 3 Earth Day Population Survey: Glendale Residence/Work Status Glendale Residence/Work Status # of Participants
I am a homeowner 15
I am a renter 14
I work in Glendale 8
I do not live or work in Glendale 7
Table 4 Earth Day Population Survey: Primary Language
Primary Language # of Participants
English 18
Armenian 5
Spanish 3
Korean 1
Tagalog 0
Other 0
345 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
4 Bucket and Token Activity
Responses to the Bucket and Token Activity can be found below. The most popular climate solutions that participants voted for include:
• Urban heat: “Installing shade structures at bus stops” • Fire Hazard: “Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements” • Emergency Evacuation: “Early evacuation warnings”
Table 5 Earth Day Bucket and Token Activity: Climate Solutions for Urban heat, Fire Hazards, and Emergency Evacuations
Climate Solution Tokens
Reduce energy bills for lower-income households 12
Install more cool pavements to reflect sun’s energy 15
Plant and maintain shade trees along streets 9
Install shade structure at bus stops 23
Increase shade and water activities at parks 8
Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements 21
Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces 11 Early evacuation warnings 12
Free transportation assistance for elderly and mobility-impaired 11 Emergency notifications in multiple languages 9
Note: Not every participant in the “bucket and token” activity received a raffle ticket as some opted out of the raffle.
Therefore, totals may not reflect raffle ticket totals.
Respondents also provided input via an additional comments board, presenting the community with two additional questions. The questions and community responses are recorded below:
What other climate issues are of concern to you?
• Flooded streets
• Cars, traffic, and clean air
What additional strategies would help you to be more prepared for climate change? • Tree planting
• Reduce number of vehicles on roads
• Protect more vulnerable communities
• Street trash pick-up
• More green spaces
• Less cars, more bike lanes and public transit
• Continually educate people on protected trees and how to properly trim all trees. If a protected tree is removed, replace with another protected tree.
• More incentives for EVs
• Soil regeneration
• Storm-water capture
346 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
5 Figure 3 Earth Day Activity Participants
Raffle
There were a total of 53 that participated in the raffle. 347 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
6 Fire Service Day
Sign-In Sheet and Population Data
Participants were asked to fill in a sign-in sheet for project updates featuring name and email. Names and email addresses were provided by 38 participants. In addition, participants were asked to fill out a demographic population survey. Responses to the survey are recorded in Tables 6, 7, and 8 below.
Figure 4 Rincon Service Day Booth Team with City Staff
348 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
7 Table 6 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Zip Code
Zip Code # of Participants
91202 5
91203 10
91204 7
91205 5
91206 7
91207 2
91208 1
91209 0
91210 1
91214 4
91221 0
91222 0
91224 0
91225 0
91226 0
Table 7 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Glendale Residence/Work Status Glendale Residence/Work Status # of Participants
I am a homeowner 20
I am a renter 25
I work in Glendale 18
I do not live or work in Glendale 22
Table 8 Fire Service Day Population Survey: Primary Language Primary Language # of Participants
English 31
Armenian 16
Spanish 8
Korean 4
Tagalog 0
Other 1
Bucket and Token Activity
Responses to the Bucket and Token Activity can be found below. The most popular climate solutions that participants voted for include:
• Urban heat: “Installing shade structures at bus stops” • Fire hazard: “Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces” • Emergency Evacuation: “Early evacuation warnings”
349 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
8 Table 9 Fire Service Day Bucket and Token Activity: Climate Solutions for Urban heat, Fire Hazards, and Emergency Evacuations
Climate Solutions Tokens
Reduce energy bills for lower-income households 11
Install more cool pavements to reflect sun’s energy 16
Plant and maintain shade trees along streets 6
Install shade structure at bus stops 20
Increase shade and water activities at parks 7
Assistance with vegetation clearance requirements 18
Education awareness workshops around defensible spaces 36 Early evacuation warnings 25
Free transportation assistance for elderly and mobility-impaired 12 Emergency notifications in multiple languages 12
Note: Not every participant in the “bucket and token” activity received a raffle ticket as some opted out of the raffle.
Therefore, totals may not reflect raffle ticket totals.
Respondents also provided input via an additional comments board, presenting the community with two additional questions. The questions and community responses are recorded below:
What other climate issues are of concern to you?
• Flooding
• Heat
• Tree roots
• Climate refugees
What additional strategies would help you to be more prepared for climate change? • Traffic reduction
• Fire proof paint research (when living in or near brush area) • Swimming and other activities for north Glendale
• Objective standards for defensible design for wildfire • Education about Valley Fever- coccidioidomycosis
Raffle
There were a total of 70 participants in the raffle.
350 of 420
Community Engagement Summary
9 Figure 5 Fire Service Day Activity Participants
351 of 420
From: Bridging the Borders
To: Zemaitaitis, Vilia
Subject: Re: Glendale"s Safety Element Updates for Review and Comment by December 18th Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2024 7:29:50 AM
Attachments: glendaleca_logo.png
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Hello Ms. Zemaitaitis,
My name is Araik Sinanian, and I am the founder of Bridging the Borders, a local organization focused on community safety, equity, and advocacy, particularly for Glendale’s Armenian-American community and other underrepresented voices. Our mission is to amplify issues impacting our city and foster engagement through education and outreach.
Thank you for sharing the updates regarding Glendale’s Land Use and Mobility Elements, the new Environmental Justice Element, and the revisions to the Safety Element. We are eager to support these vital initiatives that aim to create a safer and more inclusive Glendale.
As a local organization, we are particularly interested in:
• Environmental Justice Element: Addressing mobility and resource disparities impacting Glendale’s diverse population, especially vulnerable groups.
• Safety Element Updates: Strengthening climate resilience and evacuation measures for populations most affected by climate change.
We plan to attend the December 9 scoping meeting and will submit comments on the Safety Element by the December 18 deadline. Please let us know if there are social media materials we can share to increase public awareness and engagement.
Thank you for your work on these initiatives. We look forward to Exhibit 8
352 of 420
collaborating to ensure all Glendale residents benefit from these plans.
Best regards,
Araik Sinanian
--
In solidarity,
Araik Sinanian
Founder, Bridging the Borders
Social: @BridgingtheBorders
Office: 818-237-3887
Tax ID:
86-2180020
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 7:01 PM Zemaitaitis, Vilia <[email protected]> wrote:
In compliance with recent State legislation, the City is revising its Safety Element to include updated information on natural hazards such as wildfires and floods, as well as evacuation and emergency preparedness and response. Recent State Law also mandates the Safety Element to identify how these and other hazards in Glendale are exacerbated by climate change, and what populations, locations, and community features are particularly vulnerable to climate hazards and changing climate conditions. These updates are reflected in the Draft Safety Element that is now available for public review on the City’s General Plan - Safety Element webpage: Safety Element (click here)
and on the GlendalePlan.com webpage:
Safety Element (click here). Note: Underlining indicates new text to the 2003 Safety Element and strikethrough indicates deleted text.
Public comments on the Safety Element Public Draft will be accepted until December 18, 2024 at 5:00 p.m.
Please email comments to [email protected] (you are welcome to copy me as well - [email protected]).
Once public comments and feedback have been received, City staff and the consultant will coordinate with the required State agencies to obtain their approval of the Draft Safety Element. The revised Safety Element will then be presented to the Planning Commission and subsequently to City Council for adoption in Spring 2025.
For questions, please contact me or Teresa Santilena, Principal Planner, at (818) 548-2140. 353 of 420
Thank you.
Vilia Zemaitaitis | Deputy Dir. Of Cmty Dev/ Long Range Planning Community Development
633 E. Broadway, Room 103, Glendale, CA 91206
P: +1 (818) 937-8154
| M: +1 (747) 488-6779
[email protected] | GlendaleCA.gov | Follow us! 354 of 420
From: Hermelinda Martinez
To: Zemaitaitis, Vilia
Subject: Glendale Safety
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2024 5:04:56 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
Dear Mr. Zemaitaitis,
Climate change is an extreme issue not
only in our community but also in our state. The city continues to build apartments that people can’t afford and cause more pollution with traffic. Even if they are being built, they lack greenery and that should be an important part of our city, especially for us living near Griffith Park. If trees are being removed, they need to be replaced with trees that are fire-resistant like deciduous trees, succulents and native plants. These trees shed their leaves annually and are generally more fire-resistant than evergreens. Examples include maple, polar, and cherry.
To
avoid litter in the streets we need to have high-rise beds with invasive plants that do not require much water the rain should suffice, because litter on the street causes fires due to the high rise of homelessness, and they try to keep warm, so they use the trash in dumpsters. Also to avoid wasting money in cleaning tagging high-rise beds in alleys will prevent tagging, and that profit can be used to encourage community gardening, cleaner parks, and smoking in certain areas should be outlawed. They flick the cigarettes and with dry leaves they cause fire. Greenery should be taught in all schools, it will help keep kids busy from social media, and they need to be part of their community so they can learn the importance of taking care of it. Now in days nobody knows how to get their hands dirty but expect it. Kids need structure and this is a good way to start at all ages and prevent mental illness, cleaning streets, parking our rivers, and taking trail classes.
There are
many empty lots, and we need organic stores, plant businesses should be invited to utilize those areas for healthier living. We must remember it is also good for mental health. Final thought or advice from a community member we need you all city workers and city officials to walk the streets, talk to your neighbors, and educate them. They need it to be encouraged by officials and you will see how that has a very positive effect on people and makes them feel valued so they get encouraged, educate why green bins are essential. If I must remind my neighbors constantly to stop putting trash in the green bins you can as well as representatives of our community do the same.
Sincerely,
Linda Martinez
355 of 420
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
FROM: City of Glendale, Planning Department
633 E. Broadway, Room 103
Glendale, CA 91206-4386
Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
Business Filings and Registration Section, Room 2001
12400 Imperial Highway
Norwalk, CA 90650
Project Tile: General Plan Safety Element 2025 Update – Case No. PGPA2119840 Project Location - Specific: Citywide
Project Applicant: City of Glendale
Project Location - City: Glendale Project Location - County: Los Angeles Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project:
In compliance with recent State legislation (SB 1035, SB 1241, SB 99, AB 747, and AB 1409), the City is revising its 2003 Safety Element to include updated information on natural hazards such as wildfires and floods, as well as evacuation and emergency preparedness and response. The 2025 Update also addresses recent State Law (SB 379) requiring the Safety Element to identify how these and other hazards in Glendale are exacerbated by climate change, and what populations, locations, and community features are particularly vulnerable to climate hazards and changing climate conditions. The 2025 Update includes two new appendices: a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (Appendix B) and an Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C).
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Glendale Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Glendale Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Class 1, Section 15301 (b) and (f) Statutory Exemptions. State code number: Section 15060 (c) (2) Reasons why project is exempt:
In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed General Plan Safety Element update has been determined to be an exempt project pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) in that the proposed amendments, which are primarily limited to policy modifications and updates in compliance with Government Code Section 65302(g)(1) through (g)(9) related to climate change, evacuations and wildfire risks, are not anticipated to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, nor will the proposed changes have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15382, "significant effect on the environment" means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An
economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant." The proposed Safety Element update is in compliance with current State General Plan requirements, will not substantially affect, potentially substantially affect, or change the City's land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic resources as all potential changes have been thoroughly considered, and will act to protect the environment by minimizing the potential spread of wildfire or any other natural disasters.
Exhibit 9
356 of 420
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
Updates to the Safety Element update include programs aimed at reducing the loss of life, injury, private property damage, infrastructure damage, economic losses, social dislocation, and other impacts resulting from fire and/or landslide hazards. These programs include the installation of traffic signal pre-emption devices for fire response at critical intersections, the installation of signal battery backups to maintain signal operations during power outages, the installation of traffic counters and/or CCTV cameras on freeways, and the installation of netting and vegetation to stabilize hillside slopes with landslide potential. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (b) and (f), the proposed actions involve minor alterations to "Existing Facilities", specifically, publicly owned utilities used to provide electric power, natural gas, sewerage, or other public utilities. The actions also involve minor alterations to "Existing Facilities" for the addition of safety or health protection devices, either during construction or in conjunction with existing structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, including navigational devices.
The Safety Element update is further anticipated to result in the reduction of potential short -and long-term community risks resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, and other related hazards. The Project is exempt f rom CEQA for the reasons outlined in the State CEQA Guideline sections cited above.
Lead Agency Contact Person: Vilia Zemaitaitis Area Code/Telephone/Extension: (818) 548-2140 If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No Signature: Date: Title:
Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR:
Signed by Applicant
357 of 420
CITY OF GLENDALE
SAFETY ELEMENT
Insert Date Adopted
358 of 420
Glendale Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft 2003 City Council
Frank Quintero, Mayor
Gus Gomez Rafi Manoukian
Dave Weaver Bob Yousefian
2003 Planning Commission
Aspet Davidian, Chair
Gary Gero Bob Lemke
Leonard Manoukian Richard Ramirez
2003 City Administration
James E. Starbird, City Manager
Robert McFall, Assistant City Manager
2003 Division Administration
Elaine Wilkerson, Director of Planning
Hassan Haghani, Planning Administrator
Carmen Lukassian, Office Services Supervisor
2003 Safety Element Team
Project Management: Jeff Hamilton, Senior Planner
Kathy Duarte, Planner
Consultant: Tania Gonzalez, Earth Consultants International, Inc. 2003 City Staff
Police Department: Lt. Mark Distaso; Sgt. Sam Hopper
Fire Department: Christopher Gray, Fire Chief; Battalion Chief Mike Haney; Doug Nickles, Urban Fire Forester; Ronald Gulli, Fire Captain/Emergency Services Coordinator; Jeffrey Halpert, Fire Protection Engineer; Vasken Demirjian, Environmental Management Coordinator Glendale Water and Power: Martin Nixt, Principal Civil Engineer Public Works: Lucien Le Blanc, City Engineer; Alice I. Stoner, Asst. City Engineer; Samuel Adarme, Senior Civil Engineer; Chris Chew, Civil Engineer II; William A’Hearn, GIS Analyst; Jan Bear, Deputy Building Official
359 of 420
Glendale Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft 2025 City Council
Elen Asatryan, Mayor
Ara Najarian, Ardy Kassakhian, Dan Brotman, Vartan Gharpetian 2025 Planning Commission
Stefen Chraghchian, Chair
Edith Fuentes, Chang Lee, Henrik Nazarian, Vacant
2025 City Administration
Roubik Golanian, City Manager
John Takhtalian, Assistant City Manager
2025 Division Administration
Bradley Calvert, AICP, Community Development
2025 Safety Element Team
Project Management: David Jones, Sustainability Officer; Vilia Zemaitaitis, AICP, Deputy Director of Long Range Planning; Teresa Santilena, AICP, Principal Planner; Dennis Joe, Senior Planner Consultant: Reema Shakra, AICP, Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2025 City Staff
Community Development: Ara Sargsyan, Building Official; Fred Zohrehvand, Principal Mobility Planner Police Department: Lt. Christopher Spencer, Lt. Sean Riley Fire Department: Battalion Chief Brian Julian; Tommy Nicola, Fire Captain Paramedic/Emergency Services Coordinator; Jovan Diaz, Fire Marshal
Glendale Water and Power: Leo Chan, Sr. Civil Engineer
Public Works: Sarkis Oganesyan, City Engineer; Pastor Casanova, Principal Traffic Engineer
360 of 420
Glendale Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Updated 2003 | 2025 Draft RESOLUTION NO. _______________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
THE SAFETY AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NOS. 2003-01 AND 2003-02)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Glendale has conducted a noticed public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.68.130 and Chapter 30.16 of the Glendale Municipal Code, and Section 65356 and Chapter 3, Title 7 of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received and accepted proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -01, consisting of a replacement of the existing Safety and Seismic Safety Elements with a new Safety Element that combines the features of the earlier elements; an d proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -02, consisting of minor revisions to the Open Space and Conservation Element to maintain consistency with the new Safety Element; and
WHEREAS, the Council has adopted a resolution certifying that Negative Declaration No. 2003 -09 was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Glendale held a noticed public hearing on General Plan Amendment Nos. 2003-01 and 2003-02; and
WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered all materials and exhibits of current record relative to General Plan Amendment Nos. 2003-01 and 2003-02; and
WHEREAS, the Council has found the subject General Plan Amendments to promote and protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare of the community as a whole.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Glendale that General Plan Amendment Nos. 2003 -01 and 2003 -02 are hereby approved and adopted a nd the 2003 Safety Element, along with the 2003 revisions to the Open Space and Conservation Element, shall be made a part of the City of Glendale’s Comprehensive General Plan.
This resolution shall become effective 30 days after the date of adoption.
Adopted this ______ day of -----_________________ , 2003.
Mayor
361 of 420
Glendale Safety Element
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Amended 2003 | Updated 2025 Draft | i
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
1.1 Legal Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Purpose and Content ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Limitations .................................................................................................................................... 1-2 CHAPTER 2 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... 4
2.1 California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act ............................................................... 2-14
2.2 California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ................................................................................... 2-24
2.3 Real Estate Disclosure Requirements ....................................................................................... 2-24
2.4 California Environmental Quality Act ......................................................................................... 2-24
2.5 California Building Code ............................................................................................................. 2-24
2.6 Unreinforced Masonry Law ........................................................................................................ 2-25
2.7 National Flood Insurance Act and Flood Disaster Protection Act .............................................. 2-25
2.8 Fire Regulations and Emergency Evacuation ............................................................................ 2-35
2.9 Standardized Emergency Management System Law ................................................................ 2-35
2.10 Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) ........................................ 2-35
2.11 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program ................................................................................. 2-35
2.12 Climate Change .............................................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER 3 GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS ...................................................... 8
3.1 Seismic and Geologic Hazards .................................................................................................. 3-18
3.1.1 Important Terms and Concepts Overview ......................................................................... 3-18
3.1.2 Local Conditions ................................................................................................................. 3-29
3.1.3 Goals, Policies and Programs .............................................................................................. 3-4 GOAL S-1 Seismic Hazards ............................................................................................................... 10 GOAL S-2 Geologic Hazards ............................................................................................................. 13
3.2 Flooding Hazards ..................................................................................................................... 3-614
3.2.1 Important Terms and Concepts Overview ....................................................................... 3-614
3.2.2 Local Conditions ............................................................................................................... 3-714
3.2.2 Goals, Policies and Programs .............................................................................................. 3-8 GOAL S-3 Flooding Hazards ............................................................................................................. 16
3.3 Fire Hazards ............................................................................................................................. 3-816
3.3.1 Important Terms and ConceptsOverview ........................................................................ 3-816
3.3.2 Local Conditions ............................................................................................................... 3-917
3.3.2 Goals, Policies and Programs ............................................................................................ 3-11 GOAL S-4 Fire Hazard ....................................................................................................................... 20
3.4 Climate Change ............................................................................................................................ 21 362 of 420
Glendale Safety Element
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Amended 2003 | Updated 2025 Draft | ii
3.4.1 Important Terms and Concepts Overview ............................................................................ 23
3.4.2 Local Conditions .................................................................................................................... 23 GOAL S-5 Climate Change ................................................................................................................ 26
3. 45 Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................................................3-1227
3.4.1 Important Terms and Concepts Overview .....................................................................3-1228
3.4.2 Local Conditions .............................................................................................................3-1328
3.4.2 Goals, Policies and Programs ............................................................................................ 3-13 GOAL S-6 Hazardous Materials......................................................................................................... 29
3.53.6 Terrorism, Civil Disturbance and Crime .................................................................................3-1430
3.5.1 Important Terms and ConceptsOverview ......................................................................3-1430
3.5.2 Local Conditions .............................................................................................................3-1530
3.5.2 Goals, Policies and Programs ............................................................................................ 3-15 GOAL S-7 Terrorism, Civil Disturbance, and Crime .......................................................................... 31
3.63.7 Dangerous Animals and Plants ..............................................................................................3-1632
3.6.1 Important Terms and ConceptsOverview ......................................................................3-1632
3.6.2 Local Conditions .............................................................................................................3-1632
3.6.2 Goals, Policies and Programs ............................................................................................ 3-17 GOAL S-8 Dangerous Animals and Plants ........................................................................................ 32
3.73.8 Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency Response ..............................................3-1733
3.7.1 Important Terms and ConceptsOverview ......................................................................3-1733
3.7.2 Local Conditions .............................................................................................................3-1834
3.7.2 Goals, Policies and Programs ............................................................................................ 3-19 GOAL S-9 Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency Response ........................................ 37
EXHIBITS
Table-1 Hazard Assessment of Critical Facilities and Schools in Glendale .................................. E-i40 Table-2 Potential Shelters In and Near the City of Glendale ....................................................... E-iii42 Table-3 Program Implementation Schedule ................................................................................. E-iv44 Plate P-1 Summary of Hazards Maps (I)Seismic Hazards ................................................................... 51 Plate P-2 Summary of Hazards Map (II) Dam Inundation Zones ......................................................... 52 Plate P-3 Emergency Response Map (III) Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities ....... 53 Plate P-4 Single Access Neighborhoods .............................................................................................. 54 Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route ................................................................................................ 55
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Technical Background Report
363 of 420
Glendale Safety Element
Safety Element | Adopted 1976 | Amended 2003 | Updated 2025 Draft | iii Appendix B: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
Appendix C: Evacuation Analysis
364 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –1 | March 2025 Draft
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Legal Requirements
The City of Glendale has updated the Safety Element of its General Plan in conformance with State law. As required by Section 65302(g) of the California Government Code, every local government is required to maintain a comprehensive Safety Element that ad -dresses a variety of natural and man -made hazards and that provides goals and policies aimed at reducing the risk associated with these hazards exposure to these hazards and increasing preparedness.
The Safety and Seismic Safety Elements first became mandatory parts of the General Plan in 1975, when the California Legislature adopted Senate Bill 271 (Chapter 1104). This legislation required cities and counties to adopt General Plan policies relating to, at a minimum, fire safety, flooding and geologic hazards.
The City of Glendale responded to this legislation by adopting its first Safety and Seismic Safety Elements in 1976. In 1984, the Legislature adopted Assembly Bill 2038 (Chapter 1009) that expanded the list of mandatory issues that were to be evaluated in the Safety Element, with emphasis on seismic issues, and combined the previously separate Safety and Seismic Safety Elements into a single document. In 2015, the legislature adopted Senate Bill 379 requiring Safety Elements to incorporate climate adaptation and resilience strategies. New requirements to consider evacuation and emergency access were adopted pursuant to Assembly Bill 747 and Senate Bill 99 in 2019 and Assembly Bill 1409 in 2021 .
The 2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for the City of Glendale planning area was developed in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) and followed FEMA’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan guidance. The LHMP incorporates a process where hazards are identified and profiled, the people and facilities at risk are analyzed, and mitigation actions are developed to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. The implementation of these mitigation actions, which include both short and long -term strategies, involve planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities.
1.2 Purpose and Content
Originally adopted in 1976, amended in 2003, and updated in 2025, the Safety Element The document before you has been prepared to update and replace the original 1976 document. This new document still focuses on fire, earthquakes, flooding, and other geologic hazards, but it also addresses other safety -related issues, that the City of Glendale considers important, as required by State law. The ultimate objective of the Safety Element is to improve the safety of the City of Glendale, through the protection of areas with hazards and resource constraints; safe guardingsafeguarding services and existing infrastructure, and in the process make the City more sustainable resilient and prosperous.
The Safety Element serves the following functions:
• Provides an assessment of the natural and man-made hazards in the City, including, but not limited to, earthquakes, landslides, fire, flood, dam inundation, hazardous materials incidents, terrorism, and vector control , and considers the impacts of climate hazards including extreme heat, extended drought, and worsening air quality. A more in-depth analysis of each of these hazards is provided in the Technical Background Report (Appendix A). and the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA) (Appendix B). Important terms and concepts related to each of these topic areas are marked with bold text and defined throughout the Safety Element document. • Provides a framework by which safety considerations are introduced into the land use planning process and the redevelopment process.
• Strengthens the City’s existing municipal codes and provides guidelines that the City can use during the project review and permitting process to identify and mitigate hazards for new development and redevelopment. Future development and redevelopment should always consider the incorporation of measures aimed at reducing these hazards to acceptable levels. • Provides policies directed at identifying and reducing hazards in existing development; and • Strengthens earthquake, flood, fire, and hazardous materials preparedness planning and provides post-disaster reconstruction policies specific to the City of Glendale. • Incorporates findings from the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessmen t* to assess the impacts of climate change specific to the City. The Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment * evaluates how 365 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –2 | March 2025 Draft
climate change may impact community members and physical assets including natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services in Glendale and informs the development of resilience goals, policies, and programs. *Rincon Consultants, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Rincon") prepares vulnerability assessments that evaluate climate change hazards, including wildfire, based on numerous sources, including third party consultants, State and Federal mapping resources, a nd various software modeling programs that are considered industry standard best practices. The vulnerability assessment prepared for this Safety Element evaluated wildfire hazards based on CAL FIRE’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Wildfire is unpredictable, a nd the specific conditions of wildfire could result in fire behavior that diverges from the assumptions used in this analysis. There is no guarantee that wildfire behavior and specific treatment to avoid such behavior will follow or prevent wildfire impacts. Rincon is not responsible for any damage to life or property that might occur based on the results of the vulnerability analyses herein, and any accompanying recommendations.
To that end, the Safety Element describes the natural conditions that pose a hazard, but most importantly, it presents goals, policies, and programs that if implemented can substa ntially reduce the risk impact these hazards pose to the City of Glendale and its residents. Each of these terms and components of the Element is explained further below:
• Risk is defined as the outcome of the interaction between a hazard and the elements of the community, such as population, buildings, and infrastructure that are vulnerable to such an impact. [In simpler terms, Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability.]
• Goals are statements that describe the City’s purpose and direction in reducing its natural hazards.
They are the desired condition that the City would like to achieve. • Policies are guidelines that can be implemented to reduce the City’s risk exposure to hazards and maximize the community’s emergency preparedness. These are statements that address specific concerns of long-term planning importance to the community. • Programs are the specific actions that the City has committed to implement over a given number of years to reduce its hazards. They are specific implementation measures selected to maintain or improve public safety, and to satisfy the objectives of the policies and goals. Where appropriate, the agency or City department responsible for implementation and monitoring of each of these programs is identified.
Whether related to natural or man -made hazards or disaster preparedness, the Safety Element goals are guided by the City’s desire and responsibility to:
• Minimize fatalities and injuries;
• Minimize the burden on public and emergency response resources (police, fire, medical, etc.); • Minimize public and private costs for cleanup, repair and recovery; and • Minimize long -term impacts caused by displaced households, business disruption, and reduced fiscal resources (with a consequent tax burden).
Specific hazards of concern to Glendale include earthquakes, landslides and mudflows, dam or reservoir failure, wildland and structural fire, storm flooding, contamination of soil and groundwater resources by hazardous materials, terrorism, civil unrest , and crime, and climate change hazards. These hazards can impact the City’s entire City, and in particular, vulnerable populations, physical and natural assets, and critical facilities, residents, workers, and visitors , and could cause the disruption of critical (hospitals, schools, fire stations) and essential (water, gas, sewage, electricity, communications) facilities. Critical facilities provide essential services to the public, are otherwise necessary to preserve the welfare and quality of life in the City, or fulfill important public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions. The City’s critical facilities have been identified in the Glendale CCVA. Each of these hazards, and others of lesser impact, is described further in the following pages; for a more detailed description of each of these conditions, refer to the accompanying Technical Background Report (Appendix A) and the CCVA (Appendix B). 366 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –3 | March 2025 Draft
1.3 Limitations
Safety Elements are by scope and definition, provisional. Although the ultimate goal of these documents does not change much over time, the information, tools and techniques available to assess the community’s risk exposure to various types of hazards are continuously evolving. Policies and programs are established within a framework that identifies timelines and priorities. As the more critical goals are achieved, emphasis is shifted to new priorities. Most of the data, relationships and processes that affect a community are spatial in nature, and multi -variant. As a result, manipulation of the data and assessment of the risk can be quite complex. Increasingly, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are being used for this purpose, and Glendale has already embraced the use of GIS-based mapping is utilized to describe the relationship of the hazards to the assets in Glendale. By using relevant data on the existing built environment, this report illustrates the potential risksimpacts to the community and the infrastructure of the cCity. The hardware and software available to manage the City’s risk using GIS will only get better with time.
The Safety Element provides a general evaluation of potential hazards on a City-wide basis. The identification and assessment of the hazards described in this document are based on literature and sources available at the time that this Element was prepared. Site -specific studies were not conducted specifically for this study.
For effective emergency preparedness and response, communities need to know in advance what are the potentially hazardous conditions specific to their area. A major part of this effort requires mapping of the vulnerable areas in the community. This is covered in the Technical Background Report (Appendix A) to the Safety Element. For example, the Technical Report identifies the fault zones that cross the City, areas of potential landslides and unstable slopes, areas susceptible to fire and flooding hazards, and areas where most hazardous materials in the Cit y are being used, stored or generated. However, the hazard maps that serve as the basis for the Technical Background Report (Appendix A) are by necessity generalized ; the boundaries between hazard zones should not be interpreted as precisely defined. In addition, the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment ( CCVA) (Appendix B) includes maps and infographics that highlight climate hazards including extreme heat , drought, wildfire, landslides, stormwater flooding and extreme precipitation, poor air quality, and social vulnerability. This document and the accompanying illustrations are to be used for general land use planning purposes only, such as in land use decisions. This Element should not be used for site -specific studies, but rather, it should be used to identify areas where det ailed site - investigations should be required for new developments or for redevelopments.
Computer simulations that estimate loss of life and damage to buildings and infrastructure (such as HAZUS, the software used for this study) are still in their infancy, but already have proven to be of value in help to designing and prioritizeing appropriate mitigation plans. The results of these models, however, are estimates only, and this should not be forgotten. It is the magnitude, rather than the specific value, of the results that is significant (an earthquake that results in about 4,000 casualties is clearly more severe an event than one that causes about 150 casualties). Once this information is known, appropriate measures can be taken to reduce the hazard and to prepare for and respond to the estimated level of damage. These are the topics covered in this Policy DocumentElement.
It is acknowledged that sometimes policies and programs designed to reduce specific hazards may come in conflict with individuals’ rights in their properties. Whenever possible, the mitigation measures included herein will be conducted without violating the property owners’ rights to modify or improve their investments, along with preserving the aesthetic or natural conditions of the area through minimal modifications. However, when these goals are in conflict, protection of life and property should and will take precedence. 367 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –4 | March 2025 Draft
Chapter 2 Regulatory Environment
There are several Federal and State programs and regulations pertaining to public safety that provide the legal framework to Safety Elements of the General Plan. These programs provide the minimum guidelines and criteria that must be complied with – individual jurisdictions can choose to go beyond the Federal or State requirements and implement more stringent regulations. Some of the specific plans and programs that apply to the City of Glendale are discussed briefly below. This is not intended to be an all-inclusive list. For a more detailed description of the programs described below, refer to the Technical Background Report (Appendix A). For information regarding additional Federal, State and City regulations, refer to the Federal and State Codes of Regulations, and the City of Glendale Municipal Codes (all of these can be found on the world wide web, using various search engines).
2.1 California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was signed into law in 1972 and amended in 2023 in Assembly Bill 1046. with iIts primary purpose is being to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the location of structures for human occupancy across the trace of an active fault. The Act requires the State Geologist to delineate “Earthquake Fault Zones” along faults that are “sufficiently active” and “well defined.” The Act dictates that cities and counties withhold development permits for projects within an Earthquake Fault Zone within their jurisdiction until geologic investigations demonstrate that t he projects are not threatened by surface d isplacements from future faulting. Projects include all land divisions and most structures for human occupancy. State law exempts single-family wood-frame and steel-frame dwellings that are less than three stories and are not part of a development of four units or more. However, local agencies can be more restrictive than the State.
2.2 California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The goal of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 is to minimize loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The act addresses non -surface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including strong ground shaking, liquefaction and se ismically induced landslides. The State agency charged with implementation of the Act is the California Geological Survey (CGS). The CGS prepares and provides local governments with seismic hazard zone maps that identify areas susceptible to amplified shaking, liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and other ground failures. The seismic hazard zones delineated by the CGS are referred to as “zones of required investigation,” because site -specific geological hazard investigations are required for construction projects located within these areas.
2.3 Real Estate Disclosure Requirements
Pursuant to the Natural Hazards Disclosure Act, since June 1, 1998, sellers of real property and their agents are required to provide prospective buyers with a “Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement” when the property being sold lies within one or more State -mapped hazard areas, such as within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or a Seismic Hazard Zone.
2.4 California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was passed in 1970 to insureensure that local governmental agencies consider and review the environmental impacts of development projects within their jurisdictions. CEQA requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared for projects that may have significant effects on the environment. EIRs are required to identify geologic and seismic hazards, and to recommend potential mitigation measures, giving the local agency the authority to regulate priva te development projects in the early stages of planning. Wildfire riskexposure is also considered in EIRs with an analysis of impacts on urban development.
2.5 California Building Code
Title 24 Building Standards Code, as adopted by the Division of the State Architect , includes Tthe California Building Code (CBC), which is included in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, provides “minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, health, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location and maintenance of all buildings and structures and certain equipment.” These documents are historically updated every three years. The most 368 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –5 | March 2025 Draft
recent version of the CBC is the 2001 editionwas published in 2022, based on the International Building Code (IBC)1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code . The City of Glendale has adopted the 20 2201 CBC edition with local amendments.
2.6 Unreinforced Masonry Law
The Unreinforced Masonry Law of 1986 requires all cities and counties in Seismic Zone 4 (CBC, 1998) to identify hazardous unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings in their jurisdictions. Seismic hazard zones are regulatory zones established by the Department of Conservation and the California Geological Survey that encompasses areas that may be at higher risk during earthquakes due to weak soil or rock beneath the area or property.1 Much of the western and eastern portions of the city , near mountainous terrain, are located in seismic hazard zones and are at risk to liquefaction and landslide. 2 Thus, oOwners of such buildings must be notified of the potential earthquake hazard, and mitigation must be performed. The mitigation method, which may include retrofitting or demolition, is left to the local jurisdiction. URMs in Glendale have been identified and catalogued in accordance with Chapter 58 of the City Glendale Building Code. As of 200224, of the 703 URM buildings identified in the City, only 2 had not yet been retrofitted or demolished.
2.7 National Flood Insurance Act and Flood Disaster Protection Act The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is mandated by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 to evaluate flood hazards and provide Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM’s) for local and regional planners to promote sound land use and floodplain development.
Further, the Flood Disaster Protection Act requires owners of all structures in identified Special Flood Hazard Areas to purchase and maintain flood insurance as a condition of receiving Federal or federa lly related financial assistance, such as mortgage loans from federally insured lending institutions. The National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 further strengthened the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by providing a grant program for State an d community flood mitigation projects. The act also established a system (Community Rating System - CRS) for crediting communities that implement measures to protect the natural and beneficial functions of their floodplains, as well as managing the erosion hazard. The City of Glendale has participated in the NFIP since 1984 (City ID No. – 065030). The latest ; however, there are no FIRM maps for the City were created in 2008, and Glendale is not currently has been identified as an eligible and future participating community listed in FEMA’s list of CRS of cities.3
2.8 Fire Regulations and Emergency Evacuation
Assembly Bill 337 (the Bates Bill, adopted September 29, 1992) was passed as a direct result of the great loss of lives and homes in the Oakland Hills “Tunnel Fire” of 1991. The Bates Bill Process is used to identify Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZs). Under Assembly Bill 3819, passed in 1994 (AB 3819 – Willie Brown), “Class A” roofing, minimum clearances of 30 feet around structures, and other fire defense improvements are required in VHFHSZs.
Assembly Bill 6 (AB6) requires that fire hazard areas be disclosed in real estate transactions. Civil Code Section 1103(c)(6) also requires real estate sellers to inform prospective buyers whether or not a property is located within a wildland area that could contain substantial fire risks and hazards.
Public Resources Code Section 4290 requires minimum statewide fire safety standards pertaining to:
• Road standards for fire equipment access;
• Standards for signs identifying streets, roads, and buildings; • Minimum private water supply reserves for emergency fire use; and • Fuel breaks and greenbelts.
1 California Department of Conservation (CDC). 2024. California Seismic Hazard Zones. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/sh/seismic-hazard-zones#:~:text=Hazard%20Zone%E2%80%8B%3F- ,%E2%80%8B,fail%20during%20strong%20ground%20shaking. (accessed October 2024) 2 California Department of Conservation (CDC). 2024. EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazard Zones Application. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp (accessed October 2024) 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2024. Community Rating System. https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/community-rating-system#participating. 369 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –6 | March 2025 Draft
Wildland fire areas are also subject to Public Resources Code Sections 4291 through 4299, which require property owners in such areas to conduct maintenance in order to reduce the fire danger. The City of Glendale uses the California Fire Code with amendments and several other fire ordinances to further reduce the City’s vulnerability to structural and wildland fires.
Assembly Bill 3065 (passed in 2004) requires that the draft Safety Element be submitted to the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and local agencies that provide fire protection at least 90 days prior to the local adoption of the Safety Element.
Senate Bill 1241 (passed in 2014) requires the Safety Element to be reviewed and updated to address the risk of fire for land classified as state responsibility areas . The review must consider the suggestions from the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) most recent publication of “Fire Hazard Planning, General Plan Technical Advice Series.” Policies and implementation programs in alignment with the Attorney General’s wildfire mitigation measures must be included in the Safety Element update.
Senate Bill 1035 (passed in 2018) requires the Safety Element to be reviewed at minimum once every eight years and revised as necessary to identify new information relating to flood and fire hazards and climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or county that was not available during the previous revision of the Safety Element.
Assembly Bill 747 (passed in 2019) and requires the Safety Element to address evacuation routes related to identified fire and geologic hazards. As of 2020, Senate Bill 99 requires that the Safety Element will be updated to identify residential developments in any hazard area that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes. To support these evacuation bills, LCI established the Evacuation Planning Technical Advisory (TA) to guide cities and counties as they update their general plan Safety Element in accordance with evacuation requirements.
2.9 Standardized Emergency Management System Law
The Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) is described by the Petris Bill (SB 1841 ) and is contained in Chapter 1 of Division 2 of Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations . It requires all jurisdictions within the State of California to participate in the establishment of a standardized statewide emergency management system. The California Emergency Services Act, section 8568 , states that “the State Emergency Plan shall be in effect in each political subdivision of the State, and the governi ng body of each political subdivision shall take such action as may be necessary to carry out the provision thereof.” The act provides the basic authorities for conducting emergency operations following the proclamations of emergencies by the Governor or appropriate local authority, such as a City Manager. The City of Glendale has a comprehensive Emergency Plan in accordance with SEMS.
2.10 Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) The primary purpose of the Federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) is to inform communities and citizens of chemical hazards in their areas. Sections 311 and 312 of the EPCRA require businesses to report to state and local agencies the locations and quantities of chemicals stored on- site. Section 313 of the EPCRA requires manufacturers to report the release to the environment of any of more than 600 designated toxic chemicals. These reports help communities prepare to respond to c hemical spills and similar emergencies. In the City of Glendale, businesses that use, store or generate any amount of hazardous materials are required to provide the Fire department with an inventory of the hazardous materials that they use. This helps the Fire Department identify the appropriate actions to take in the event of a significant or threatened significant release of a hazardous material.
EPCRA mandates that Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports be made public. The TRI is a database that contains information on toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported annually by certain industry groups as well as federal facilities. This inventory was established in 1986 under the EPCRA and expanded by the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990.
2.11 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program
As indicated previously, hazardous materials are extensively legislated by the Federal, State and City governments. The City of Glendale requires all businesses that handle any amount of hazardous materials to submit an inventory of the hazardous materials that they manage to the Glendale Fire Department. This exceeds Federal and State requirements.
370 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –7 | March 2025 Draft
In 1986, Congress passed the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Title III of this legislation requires that each community establish a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC). This committee is responsible for developing an emergency plan that outlines steps to prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies in that community.
Several California statutes require the emergency notification of a hazardous chemical release. These include: Health and Safety Codes §25270.7, §25270.8 and §25507; Vehicle Code §23112.5; Public Utilities Code §7673; Government Codes §51018, §8670.25.5(a); Water Codes §13271 and §13272; and California Labor Code §6409.1(b)10. The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enfo rcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65, and §9030 of the California Labor Code also has specific reporting requirements.
The Environmental Management Center (EMC) is a facility run by the Glendale Fire Department’s Hazardous Materials Section that is tasked with administering a household hazardous waste collection plan for the City of Glendale in accordance with the California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939).
The EMC is located at 780 Flower Street. Established in 1986, this section provides a centralized program for regulating and controlling the use and disposal of hazardous substances in the City. The program added a broad range of activities, including regulating underground storage of hazardous mater ials, disclosure of inventories of hazardous materials in businesses, planning for hazardous material emergencies, and enforcement of regulations to related hazardous material management .
2.12 Climate Change
Recent amendments to CA Government Code, section 65302(g)(4) require municipalities to address climate change adaptation and resilience strategies within the Safety Element, essentially requiring cities to actively plan for an address the impacts of climate change within their jurisdictions.
Government Code section 65302(g)(4)(A) requires a vulnerability assessment that identifies climate change impacts. This requirement is met by the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan ( LHMP) Risk Assessment, which evaluates cli mate impacts including wildfire, flooding, extreme heat and sea level rise. Data for these calculations is taken from Cal -Adapt tool and other local data sources, as required by Government Code section 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii). Future updates to the LHMP will co ntinue to expand on this knowledge, br inging in additional information from the Cal-Adapt tool and California Adaptation Planning guide. In addition, there are several other documents that detail vulnerability in Glendale, including the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). This document serves as additional local data sources in keeping with California Government Code section 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(III) and (IV).
Government Code section 65302(g)(4)(B) directs cities to create a set of adaptation goals, policies and objectives to adapt to the impacts of climate change . This requirement is met by the inclusion of Chapter 3, Goals S-3, S-4, and S -5, which detail the goals and policies related to flooding hazards, fire hazards, and climate change.
Government Code section 65302(g)(4)(C) requires municipalities to create a set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals, policies and objectives that relate to climate change. This Element has been updated to include a section on implementation programs, most of which were developed through related planning efforts. The program list in Chapter 4 details the City’s approach to building on the existing mitigation measures discussed above to better address climate change. 371 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –8 | March 2025 Draft
Chapter 3 Goals, Policies and Programs
3.1 Seismic and Geologic Hazards
3.1.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTSOVERVIEW
A break or fracture between blocks of rock is called a fault. Sudden, differential movement on a fault causes an earthquake. The strain energy released during an earthquake makes the earth vibrate and shake.
Scientists typically use moment magnitude to measure the size of an earthquake, which is based on the amount of energy released and is directly proportional to the area of the fault that ruptured. Earthquake damage is typically measured relative to an intensity scale. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale describes the observable effects that an earthquake has on structures and people.
The State of California considers a fault active, and therefore capable of generating earthquakes in the future, if it has moved at least once in the last about 11,000 years. Some faults generate an earthquake every few tens to hundreds of years, while others only break once only in thousands of years. Faults with shorter recurrence intervals (time between earthquakes) have higher slip rates and are generally considered to pose a greater seismic hazard. In sSouthern California, the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults have the highest recurrence intervals and are therefore considered to have a higher probability of causing an earthquake in the future. The seismic risk posed by a fault is also dependent on when a fault broke last – a fault with a recurrence interval of five thousand years that has not caused an earthquake in as many years may be near the end of its strain accumulation cycle, and may therefore have a higher probability of rupturing than a fault that just caused an earthquake. If a fault breaks to the ground surface, primary ground rupture occurs. This typically results in a relatively small percentage of the total damage in an earthquake, but structures sitting directly on top of the ruptured fault can be damaged extensively.
Earthquake-induced strong ground shaking causes most of the earthquake damage. Damage to structures is usually caused by strong horizontal ground acceleration, which is measured as a percentage of g, the acceleration of gravity.
The degree of shaking depends on several factors, including earthquake size; location; depth of the focus; orientation and movement of the seismic waves ( source effects); the type of sediments or rocks that the seismic waves travel through ( path effects); and the interaction between the structures and the sediments or rocks at a specific site ( site effects). Strong ground shaking can also trigger the destructive secondary effects of liquefaction and slope failure (landslides). Liquefaction occurs in soft, saturated sediments – when the ground shakes, the water that fills the pores increases in pressure, causing the soil to lose strength and behave as a liquid.
Most of the loss of life and injuries that occur during an earthquake are related to the collapse of buildings and structures, or people being struck by falling objects within buildings. Several types of buildings are known to perform poorly in earthquakes and are therefore considered hazardous. FEMA (1985) defines a hazardous building as “any inadequately earthquake resistant building, located in a seismically active area, that presents a potential for life loss or serious injury when a damaging earthquak e occurs.” Some potentially hazardous buildings include unreinforced masonry (URM), soft -stories (tuck -under-parking), tilt -ups, pre -1960 wood frame buildings that are not tied to their foundation or with URM chimneys, and pre -cast concrete buildings.
Slope failure does not need to be triggered by an
earthquake. Some of the most significant factors that
contribute to slope failure include slope height and
steepness, shear strength and orientation of weak
layers in the underlying geologic units, and pore
water pressures. Man-made modifications to a slope
and stream erosion and down-cutting can also cause
a slope to become unstable and fail. Intense
precipitation events, or long periods of sustained
rainfall, can saturate the soils even on a gentle slope, with the potential for the soils, and the underlying
slope, to become unstable. If, in response to gravity,
the saturated soils move down slope, they can form
mudflows or debris flows . Mudflows can cause
372 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –9 | March 2025 Draft
extensive damage to structures in their path. Damaging debris flows also often occur on slopes that were burnt recently because there are few roots holding down the soil and the surface is covered with ash and other debris.
Although not sudden and catastrophic, there are other potential geological hazards that if not recognized and mitigated properly, can cause extensive damage to structures. These hazards are specific to the soils that act as a foundation to buildings and infrastructure and include collapsible and expansive soils. Collapsible soils undergo a rearrangement of their grains, and a loss of cementation, resulting in substantial and rapid settlement under relatively low loads. Expansive soils are fine -grained soils with variable amounts of clay minerals that can undergo significant volumetric changes as a result of changes in moisture content. The upward pressures induced by the swelling can have significant harmful effects upon structures and other surface improvements.
Radon gas is a colorless, odorless radioactive gas that forms when naturally occurring radon in the bedrock or soils breaks down. Radon gas can pose a long -term health hazard if it is allowed to collect at high concentrations in structures where people can be exposed to it for long periods of time. There are no immediate symptoms associated with radon gas exposure, but people exposed to elevated concentrations of radon gas over long periods of time can have a higher probability of developing lung cancer. It is estimated that between approximately 7,000 and 30,000 people in the United States die every year due to lung cancer as a result to exposure to radon gas.
3.1.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The City of Glendale is located at the boundary between two of sSouthern California’s geomorphic provinces, in an area that is being compressed by geological forces associated with movement on the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Growth of the San Gabriel Mountains in response to earthquakes on the Sierra Madre fault is the most obvious result of this compression. Other manifestations of this plate boundary include a broad zone of faulting that extends from offshore sSouthern California inland to the Mojave Desert, and the regular occurrence of earthquakes. Movement of these plates is also causing this portion of Los Angeles basin to rotate clockwise. To accommodate this rotation, several of the faults in the area move laterally, typically with one block moving to the left relative to the other (left-lateral strike-slip).
In the Glendale area, the main faults include the Sierra Madre, the Verdugo and the Raymond faults (see Plate P-1). The Sierra Madre fault is a reverse fault that extends across the northern portion of the City, at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. A portion of the Sierra Madre fault extending through Glendale is zoned under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, so geological evaluations to locate the fault are mandated by State law if developments or re-developments amounting to more than 50 percent of the value of the structure are proposed within this zone. The eastern end of the Sierra Madre fault has not been zoned by the State, but it is recommended herein that geologic studies modeled after the Alquist-Priolo requirements be obligatory for this portion of the fault.
The Verdugo fault, which extends across the central portion of the City, is thought to be a left -lateral strike- slip fault, similar to the Raymond fault, which is located immediately south of the City. The trace of the Verdugo fault has been mostly obscured by development, except at two locations, at Brand Park in Glendale and at Palm Park in Burbank. Geologic studies to locate the fault at both of these parks have been inconclusive. Therefore, it is proposed that geological studies to evaluate the potential for surface fault rupture should be required for the Ve rdugo fault only for certain types of development, such as critical facilities.
Similarly, geological investigations of the Sycamore Canyon, Hollywood and York Boulevard faults should also be required. For specific information about these requirements, refer to Section 3.1.3 below.
A worst-case scenario earthquake (maximum magnitude) for Glendale would involve rupture of the Verdugo fault, given that this fault lies directly below extensively developed portions of the City. Both the Sierra Madre and Raymond faults can also cause earthquakes that have the potential to severely impact the City. Several other faults farther away have the potential to generate earthquakes that would be felt in Glendale, but these do not need toare unlikely to cause pose a severe threat to property or huma n lifeany damage. in the City, especially if Glendale prepares for the worst-case (Verdugo fault) event. For example, the San Andreas fault has the highest probability of causing an earthquake in sSouthern California in the near future, but this fault is sufficiently far from Glendale that ground shaking expected in Glendale as a result of this earthquake is not expected to be any stronger than shaking as a result of earthquakes on faults closer to t he City. While building collapse may not be a large risk of the San Andreas rupture, there may be risk of damage to existing 373 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –10 | March 2025 Draft
water infrastructure and roads that could make getting food, water, and medical supplies into the City more difficult.
Given that the City of Glendale is almost completely built out, the reduction of earthquake losses depends primarily on the prudent retrofitting of existing structures. Glendale has identified and catalogued all known703 URM buildings in the City in accordance with Chapter 58 of the City Building and Safety Code, and as of 20022024, only 2 URMs had not yet been retrofitted or demolished. This program has reduced significantly reduced the City’s seismic vulnerability; however, other potentially hazardous bui ldings in the City would be identified and retrofitted to reduce even further its vulnerability to strong ground shaking.
Shallow ground water levels (< 50 feet from the ground surface) occur or have occurred historically only in some portions of the City, generally along the Los Angeles River drainage in the southwestern portion of the City, and in the lower reaches of some of the canyons. Shallow ground water has also been reported in the Verdugo Wash area north of the Verdugo fault. Seasonal fluctuations in groundwater levels, and the introduction of residential irrigation requires that site -specific investigations be compl eted to support these generalizations in areas mapped as potentially susceptible to liquefaction (see Plate P-1). Some areas of the City may also be susceptible to seismically induced settlement. Sites near the base of the San Gabriel and Verdugo Mountains, at the valley margins, may be particularly vulnerable as a result of differential settlement at the bedrock-alluvial contact.
The City’s hillsides are vulnerable to slope instability due primarily to the fractured, crushed and weathered condition of the bedrock, and the steep terrain (see Plate P-1). Over steepened slopes along the large drainage channels are also locally susceptible to slope instability. The probability of large bedrock landslides occurring is relatively low; therefore, the source of potential losses due to slope instability arises primarily from the occurrence of smaller slope failures in the form of small slides, slumps, soil slips, debris flows and rockfalls. The initiation of such failures is generally tied to a prec eding event, such as wildfire, heavy winter storms, seismic activity, or man’s activities.
There have been four cases of landslides t hat resulted in property damage in Glendale since 1962: San Gabriel Mountains, San Rafael Hills, and Verdugo Mountains . Glendale is expected to experience an increased probability of landslides due to more frequent and severe wildfires and precipitation events .
Landslides pose a threat to communities as Glendale may experience an increase in soil erosion as well as property damage.
Some of the geologic units in the Glendale area may have fine -grained components that are moderately to highly expansive, typically along faults and fracture zones, where the bedrock has been ground to a fine - grained, plastic material. Fine -grained sediments may also occur along the southern portion of the City, in the distal (farthest from the source) portions of the alluvial fans. These fine-grained units may not be present at the surface but may be exposed during grading for construction.
The Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Geological Survey have mapped Los Angeles County, California as having a moderate potential for radon gas. However, the EPA warns that structures with elevated levels of radon gas have been found in areas ma pped as having a low or moderate potential for radon gas. Therefore, the EPA recommends that all homes be tested for radon gas regardless of geographic location. If a home tests with elevated levels of radon gas, there are several mitigation measures that can be taken to reduce these concentrations to more acceptable levels, although reducing radon gas levels to less than 2 picoCuries per liter (pCi/L) is difficult.
3.1.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-1 Seismic Hazards
Goal 1. Reduce the loss of life, injury, private property damage, infrastructure damage, economic losses and social dislocation and other impacts resulting from seismic hazards.
Policy 1-1 Building readiness for earthquakes. The City shall ensure that new buildings are designed to address earthquake hazards and shall promote the improvement of existing structures to enhance their safety in the event of an earthquake.
374 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –11 | March 2025 Draft
Program 1-1.1 The City shall adopt and enforce the latest version of Title 24 of the California Code of Regul ations (California Building Code) with local amendments, including near - source seismic conditions.
Program 1-1.2: The City shall maintain knowledgeable staff that can identify structural deficiencies in buildings and offer information to building owners on effective structural reinforcement options.
Program 1-1.3: The City shall encourage owners of potentially hazardous buildings, whether identified by the State or other governmental entity, to implement seismic safety improvements on those buildings.
Program 1-1.4: The City shall cooperate with the Glendale Unified School District and the Glendale Community College District, as requested, to assist their efforts to improve the structural safety of their buildings.
Policy 1-2: Local Fault Hazard Management. The City shall enforce the provisions of the Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, with additional local provisions.
Program 1-2.1: The City shall require geological studies as part of development proposals in the Fault Hazard Management Zones shown on Plate P -1. The studies shall be conducted by State -certified engineering geologists following the guidelines published by the California Geological Survey (Note 49). The City shall require a State-certified engineering geologist or registered civil engineer, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation, to review the study at the applicant’s expense. The review shall determine the adequacy of the hazard evaluation and proposed mitigation measures and determine whether the requirements o f State law are satisfied, as described in Note 49: Guidelines for Evaluating the Hazard of Surface Fault Rupture by the California Geological Survey, incorporated herein by reference.
Program 1-2.2: The City shall require geological studies as part of development proposals for critical facilities if such facilities are proposed within the Fault Hazard Management Zones of the Verdugo, Mt. Lukens, Hollywood and Sycamore Canyon faults as s hown on Plate P -1. The studies shall be conducted in accordance with the California Geological Survey guidelines for surface fault rupture evaluations (Note 49). The City shall require a State-certified engineering geologist having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation to review the study at the applicant’s expense. The review shall determine the adequacy of the hazard evaluation and proposed mitigation measures and determine whether the requirements of State law are satisfied in accordance wit h Note 49: Guidelines for Evaluating the Hazard of Surface Fault Rupture, by the California Geological Survey.
Program 1-2.3: The City shall require liquefaction assessment studies as part of development proposals in areas identified by the California Geological Survey as susceptible to liquefaction (see Plate P-1). The studies shall be conducted in accordance with the California Geological Survey’s Special Publication 117: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, and the Southern California Earthquake Center’s (1999) procedures to implement Special Publication 117 – Liquefaction Hazards (both documents incorporated herein by reference). On sites shown to be susceptible to liquefaction, the City shall require the implementation of mitigation measures designed to reduce this hazard to an acceptable level. The City shall require a State -certified engineering geologist or registered civil engineer, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation, to review the study at t he applicant’s expense. The review shall determine the adequacy of the hazard evaluation and proposed mitigation measures and determine whether the requirements of State law are satisfied, as described in Special Publication 117 by the California Geological Survey.
375 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –12 | March 2025 Draft
Programs 1-2.4: The City shall require slope stability analyses as part of development proposals in areas identified by the California Geological Survey as susceptible to earthquake - induced landsliding (see Plate P -1). The studies shall be conducted in acc ordance with the California Geological Survey’s Special Publication 117: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, and the Southern California Earthquake Center’s (2002) guidelines for evaluating and mitigating landslide hazards in California. On sites shown to be susceptible to earthquake-induced slope instability, the City shall require the implementation of mitigation measures designed to reduce this hazard to an acceptable level. The City shall require a State -certified engineering geologist or registered civil engineer, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation, to review the study at the applicant’s expense. The review shall determine the adequacy of the hazard evaluation and proposed mitigation measures and determine whether the requirements of State law are satisfied, as described in the California Geological Survey’s Special Publication 117.
Policy 1-3: Public Essential Structures and Critical Facilities. The City shall ensure to the fullest extent possible that, in the event of a major earthquake, essential structures and critical facilities will remain safe and operational. Essential Critical facilities include hospitals, police stations, fire stations, emergency operation centers (as shown on Plate 1 -4 of the Appendix A: Technical Background Report), communication centers, generators and substations, reservoirs and “lifeline” infrastructure (as defined in Section 1.8.3 of the Appendix A: Technical Background Report). The vulnerability of some of these critical facilities is summarized in Table 1 (at the end of this document).
Program 1-3.1: The City shall review the seismic vulnerability of essentialcritical facilities and “lifelines” in the Alquist -Priolo fault zones and other Fault Hazard Management Zones, and Zones and make structural changes to those sections of lifelines that cross fault hazard zones that, based on the vulnerability assessment are not anticipated to perform well during an earthquake. Retrofit of these facilities shall be prioritized.
Program 1-3.2: The City shall replace the piping and fittings in those City-owned water tanks that are not currently fitted with flexible, earthquake-resistant joints.
Program 1-3.3: The City shall conduct, in cooperation with the State Office of Dam Safety, an annual review of the dams and water storage facilities in the City. The City shall follow the State’s requests in response to these annual reviews.
Policy 1-4: Application of Seismic and Geological Data to Private Development . The City shall ensure that current seismic and geologic knowledge and State -certified professional review are incorporated into the design, planning and construction stages of a project, and that site - specific data are applied to each project.
Program 1-4.1: The City shall develop and make available to the public the State’sa list of all available registered engineering geologi sts and soils engineers from the State Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists State-certified engineering geologists and registered civil engineers, having competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation and mitigation , to review, at the applicant’s expense, all geologic and geotechnical reports, including fault studies, for proposed development or redevelopment, and to review grading operations.
Program 1-4.2: The City shall partner with State Board certified geologists or soils engineers to provide the State with updated information on faults, landslide hazards, liquefaction, etc., as such data are generated by project-specific studies. The City shall work with the State to update the seismic hazards maps produced by the State that are relevant to the City.
Policy 1-5: Public information regarding seismic and geological hazards The City shall ensure that all residents and business owners in the City have public access to information regarding seismic and geologic hazards.
376 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –13 | March 2025 Draft
Program 1-5.1: The City shall regularly review the technical data on public safety and seismic safety for use in the planning process and undertake revisions or updates to the Safety Element as needed. This includes replacing maps with updated maps obtained from the State of California.
Program 1-5.2: The City shall develop a web -based system to communicate information about seismic and geologic hazards to the public, and describe strategies that people can implement at home and the work placeworkplace to reduce economic losses and improve personal safety.
Program 1-5.3: The City shall promote earthquake preparedness with publications available in various languages spoken in the community.
Program 1-5.4: The City shall provide its residents with information about the hazards posed by radon gas, with emphasis on published sources and resources available on this subject.
GOAL S-2 Geologic Hazards
Goal 2. Reduce the loss of life, injury, private property damage, infrastructure damage, economic losses and social dislocation and other impacts resulting from geologic hazards.
Policy 2-1: Development in geologically hazardous areas. The City shall avoid development in areas of known slope instability or high landslide risk when possible and will encourage require that developments on sloping ground use design and construction techniques appropriate for those areas.
Program 2-1.1: The City shall require geological and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards as part of the environmental and development review process. The City will not issue permits for development or redevelopment until assured that all potential geologic hazards have been mitigated.
Program 2-1.2: The City shall require preliminary geological investigations of tract sites by State - registered geotechnical engineers and certified engineering geologists (in accordance with the California Building Code and the City of Glendale’s Grading, Fills and Excavations Code – City Code 15.12).
Program 2-1.3: In those areas of Glendale susceptible to slope instability, the City shall require geotechnical investigations that include engineering analyses of slope stability, provide surface and subsurface drainage specifications, and provide detailed design for fill placement and excavation.
Program 2-1.4: The City shall discourage any grading beyond that which is necessary to create adequate and safe building areas. The City shall conduct regular inspection of grading operations to maximize site safety and compatibility with community character.
Program 2-1.5: The City shall prohibit grading that is inconsistent with the Grading Ordinance. The City shall encourage the use of varied slope ratios on manufactured slopes to reduce the visual impact of grading.
Program 2-1.6: The City shall prohibit reconstruction of structures meant for human habitation that were damaged or destroyed by failed slopes unless the applicant can prove that the remedial measures proposed will improve the unstable slope conditions such that the site is suitable for development.
Policy 2-2: Slope stability monitoring near evacuation routes . The City shall consider monitor ing slope stability in areas adjacent to designated evacuation routes and critical facilities to minimize increasing risk of landslides due to climate-change related increases in wildfires and extreme precipitation events.
Program 2-2.1: The City shall consider establishing a regular inspection and maintenance cycle for existing physical landslide and debris flow defenses, including inspections prior to heavy rain events and post-wildfire events.
377 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –14 | March 2025 Draft
Program 2-2.2: The City shall consider implementing the following strategies to address increasing vulnerabilities associated with debris flow and landslides : upgrading and improving drainage capacity, reconstructing retaining walls, installing netting and vegetation, avoiding clear cutting, and stabilizing the soil after tree clearing, such as with compost and mulch.
Program 2-2.3 The City shall consider identifying locations where slopes should be actively monitored and installing landslide monitoring equipment especially in landslide susceptible areas near evacuation routes and critical assets to detect any changes in local hillside hydrologic conditions.
3.2 Flooding Hazards
3.2.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTSOVERVIEW
Rain in sSouthern California is generally a welcomed event – it cleans the air, makes our hills and mountains green, and provides water for drinking and recreation. Intense or prolonged rainfall, however, can cause problems in areas where man haspeople have encroached onto the floodplain, modified the landscape and built structures in areas meant to convey excess water during floods. Communities may experience overflowing river channels, flooded streets and basements, mudflows and debris flows at the mouths of canyons, and other similar conditions that can cause extensive damage to property, injuries, and, in some cases, loss of life.
In developed areas, extensive impervious surfaces
(such as pavement, buildings, and concrete walkways)
cause most precipitation to be collected as runoff.
Storm drain systems are typically designed to safely
carry the runoff through the area without ponding or
flooding. However, plugged or partially obstructed
storm drain inlets can significantly reduce the ability of the storm drain system to collect and convey the water.
Regular inspection and maintenance of the storm drain
system is required to remove any obstructing debris.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) defines the “ base flood” or “100-year flood”
as a flood that has a 1 -percent or greater chance of
being equaled or exceeded during any given year. A
base flood has a 26 -percent chance of occurring
during a 30 -year period, generally the length of most home mortgages. However, the recurrence interval represents the long-term average period between floods of a specific magnitude; rare floods could occur at short intervals or even within the same year.
Seismically induced inundation refers to flooding that results when water retention structures (such as dams) fail due to an earthquake. Dams greater than 25 feet in height or reservoirs with more than 50 acre - feet in storage capacity are required to have inundation maps that show the potential flood limits in the event that the dam is breached catastrophically. Inundation maps are prepared for emergency preparedness planning, and in no way reflect the structural integrity or safety of the dam in question.
3.2.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
While Glendale is not within the 100 -year or 500-year FEMA floodplain zone, the City is at risk of flooding during extreme precipitation events. In the case of atmospheric rivers, the stormwater drainage system may be overwhelmed and increase flood vulnerability in Glendale. The Verdugo Wash is the main flood control channel stream in the City, separating Glendale into quadrants . The Verdugo Wash flows defined by the southeast to south -flowing stream, and cut sting through the a rising block of similar bedrock that we now refer to as the Verdugo Mountains on the west, and the San Rafael Hills on the east. Once it clears the Verdugo Mountains, the Verdugo Wash veers west -southwest and eventually drains into the Los Angeles River near the intersection of t he Golden State ( I-5) and Ventura ( SR-134) Freeways. The Verdugo Wash and several of its tributaries have been confined to man-made channels since the late 1930s. In most years, this system carries little water, with peak discharges typically less than 500 cubic feet per second (cfs). 378 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –15 | March 2025 Draft
Records indicate however , that about once every decade , that the area experiences a severe wet winter s, and Verdugo Wash then carries peak flows exceeding 1,00051,480 cfs.4 Due to climate change, some segments of the Verdugo Wash will experience an increase in peak flood flows as described later in this section.
Historical records show that historical peak discharges in the Glendale area have occurred most often between November and March, indicating that future flooding in the City is most likely to occur in the winter months. Storm events can generate debris flows in the upper reaches of the watershed, at and near the base of the San Gabriel Mountains, and at the base of the Verdugo Hills. This is more likely to happen in wet years in areas recently burned by wildfires. Debris flooding has occurred previously in many of the canyons near the Glendale area. For example, the worst storm recorded in the area occurred in 1934, following a wildfire burn in the same area that had occurred two months earlier. As a result of these two events, the storm waters carried large amounts of debris. Roads were choked, bridges were washed out, several people died, and erosion and sedimentation damaged property. The Verdugo Wash was constructed in response to this flood event.
Post-wildfire debris and associated landslides can increase the vulnerability of critical facilities such as schools, fire and police stations, and water pump stations. Debris flows can block waterways, and stormwater drains which can cause roads to flood and obstruct roadways, especially following wildfires. Therefore, with increased extreme precipitation and wildfire events, Glendale may experience increased debris flow . The Glendale Water & Power ( GWP) Wildfire Mitigation Plan outlines procedures for vegetation management, wildfire power safety shutoffs, and other activities to reduce infrastructure vulnerabilities. Implementing policies to manage increased debris due to climate change hazards can reduce vulnerability to critical facilities and increase overall resilience.
A study of Verdugo Wash conducted in 1978 for the Los Angeles Department of Public Works shows that the channel could accommodate the estimated peak flows everywhere, except in the area immediately north of where Verdugo Wash joins the Los Angeles River. Two recent studies were conducted to better understand the current needs and conditions of the Verdugo Wash. In 2015, the US Army Corps of Engineers developed a review plan to analyze repair needs for the Verdugo Wash. Another study, the 2022 Verdugo Wash Visioning report, models the capacity of the Verdugo Wash with considerations around future climate change projections. The impacts of climate change will increase the risk of flooding due to an increase in peak flows along the Verdugo Wash. Flow rates vary through different segments of the Verdugo Wash range from 9,665 cfs to 51,480 cfs. The modeling indicates that in the Henderson Canyon segment, which is the northern most 2.5 mile area of the Verdugo Wash, there could be an overflow. In fact, this area is known to flood regularly during winter storms dating back to the 1978 study . In the southern segment of the Verdugo Wash, peak flows will overflow at the Confluence segment. Nevertheless, in 1979, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) determined that, “for all practical purposes no part of the community would be inundated by the base flood. . .”, and therefore, that the entire community would be classified as Zone C (area of minimal flood hazards where the purchase of flood insurance i s not mandatory). In 1984, FEMA again informed the City that no Special Flood Hazard Areas were present within the corporate limits of the City at that time, and thus that the City was placed in Zone D, which has no mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements. As a result, there are no flood insurance rate maps for the City of Glendale, and Glendale is not listed in FEMA’s Community Rating System. In 2008, FEMA prepared Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and the City of Glendale was placed in Zone D. Glendale is a future participant of FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) as part of the National Flood Program. With over 1,500 communities participating nationwide, the CRS is a voluntary incentive program encourag ing community floodplain management practices beyond the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
There are seven five dams in the Glendale area , Brand Park, Diedrich Reservoir, Glenoaks 968 Reservoir, Chevy Chase 1290, and East Glorietta, that are large enough that the State requires that inundation maps for these facilities be available, plus several other debris basins , such as the Oakmont Debris Basin at the northerly end of the Verdugo Wash and Brand Debris Basin Dam Number CA 01152, which areis not owned nor operated by the City (owned by Los Angeles County of Public Works ). that are not subject to State regulations because they are too small . All of the larger structures are more than 50 years old and were therefore most likely not designed to withstand the strong ground shaking that the area is thought capable of experiencing given the several nearby seismic sources. Diederich Reservoir and Brand Park Dam are located within the Fault Hazard Management Zone for the Verdugo fault, and possibly just north of the fault trace.
4 Verdugo Wash. 2022. Verdugo Wash Vision Report. https://www.verdugowash.com/ (accessed October 2024). 379 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –16 | March 2025 Draft
East Glorietta Dam is located in an area thought to be susceptible to liquefaction. The 10th Tenth and Western 5-004 dam, also known as the Western Reservoir, is located near, but south of the Verdugo fault. Glenoaks Dam968 ReserviorReservoir is located in an area where several not inactive faults have been mapped; however, secondary faulting in response to movement on other faults could occur in the area. In addition to the dams, there are 12 potable and 4 recycled 13 steel water storage tanks in the City. Three of these tanks are located within the fault hazard management zone for the Sierra Madre fault. Most, but not all, of these tanks are fitted with flexible joints that can accommodate some of the lateral and vertical mo vements associated with an earthquake.
Climate change may cause areas throughout Glendale to experience more frequent stormwater flooding.
Stormwater systems may be overwhelmed more frequently as more extreme rain events occur, causing localized flooding which could impact properties and leave roads temporarily unusable. Areas with high amounts of impermeable surfaces and those adjacent to drainage systems are prone to stormwater flooding during periods of heavy rainfall.
Flooding can occur because of overwhelmed stormwater systems. When an influx of stormwater exceeds a drainage system’s capacity to infiltrate water into the soil or to carry it away, localized stormwater flooding can occur. Urban landscapes tend to be built with impermeable surfaces that do not allow much water to infiltrate the ground and this increases the amount of runoff that must be channeled in storm drainage systems and carried elsewhere. Most urban drainage infrastructure was not built to manage stormwater flows from the increased precipitation events that are occurring and will occur more frequently with climate change and can be costly to retrofit. As a result, the costs and impact of urban flooding are expected to increase as precipitation patterns become more extreme due to climate change.
Flooding impacts directly create physical damage from inundation while also increasing risks to the community. Flooding can lead to cascading risks due to loss of power, wastewater management issues, pollution and hazardous materials carried by stormwater, and overwhelm ed storm drainage infrastructure, exacerbating public health concerns. Road closures and power outages will cause disruptions to commuters and to residential and commercial development.
3.2.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-3 Flooding Hazards
Goal 3. Reduce the loss of life, injury , private property damage, infrastructure damage, economic losses, and social dislocation and other impacts resulting from flooding hazards.
Policy 3-1: Flood Control Measures . The City shall investigate the potential for future flooding in the area and will encourage the adoption of flood -control measures in low -lying areas of alluvial fans, along major channels, and down-gradient of large reservoirs and water tanks.
Program 3-1.1: The City shall participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.
Program 3-1.2: The City shall discourage additions to, or the reconstruction of, critical facilities if such facilities are located in dam or reservoir inundation pathways (shown on Plate P-2) unless it can be demonstrated that the proposed project and any occupants will be protected from dam or reservoir failure.
Program 3-1.3: The City shall evaluate the potential impacts to the flood control system during the environmental review process for new buildings or building additions. Hydrological studies to assess the impacts shall be required if determined necessary b y the City.
Potential impacts shall be fully mitigated.
Program 3-1.4: The City shall maintain City -owned storm drain facilities , consistent with the City’s Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution and the Safe, Clean Water Program , to prevent the accumulation of debris or other obstructions that would hamper the effectiveness of the system during rainy days.
Program 3-1.5: The City shall upgrade stormwater systems on City-owned properties and rights -of- way to limit flooding from extreme precipitation events while also improving water 380 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –17 | March 2025 Draft
filtration and quality. Deployment of such strategies such a s green infrastructure (bioswales shall be prioritized in high socially vulnerable census tracts.
Program 3-1.6: The City shall contact the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to discuss implementing flood mitigation measures to mitigate any increased flood risk along the Verdugo Wash.
3.3 Fire Hazards
3.3.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTSOVERVIEW
Since the 1970s, several different methods to map
the wildfire hazard of an area have been
developed. Many of these methods rely on a point
system that considers the type and amount of
vegetation, termed fuel loading , slope gradient,
weather, dwelling density, access, level of service
provided by the local fire department, and past fire
history of an area in determining its fire hazard.
Areas with a high fire hazard at the urban-wildland
interface have to follow, at a minimum, the model
ordinance adopted by the California Fire Marshal,
but individual jurisdictions can have more stringent
requirements. These requirements include
vegetation management practices to create a
defensible space around structures ( defensible
space is a zone of thinned vegetation that helps
slow the rate and intensity of a fire and provides space for fire-fighters to set up to suppress the fire and save the threatened structures), fire-resistive building materials, and minimum access road criteria.
More people than ever now live and play in or at the urban-wildlandwildland-urban interface, an area with a high fire hazard, especially if large amounts of combustible vegetation have been allowed to accumulate over time as a result of the fuel management practices common during a large part of the 20th Century. If a wildfire spreads onto the built environment, multiple structural ignitions can develop in a short period of time due to wind transport of brands or cinders. Fires at the urban-wildland interface can be particularly dangerous and complex, posing a severe threat to public and firefighter safety, and causing devastating losses of both life and property. This has happened at several high -profile fires at the urban-wildland interface in the last 15 years (e.g., the Palisades Fire in 2025, the Eaton Fire in 2025, the 2020 August Complex in the Humboldt area, the Dixie Fire 2021 in the Butte -Pulmas County area, and the 2017 Santa
Barbara fire.the 1990 College Hills Fire, the 1990 Paint fire in Santa Barbara, the 1991 Oakland-Berkeley Tunnel fire, and the 1993 Laguna Beach fire). The worstA notable fire in the City’s history was the College Hills fire of June 1990, which burned 100 acres and destroyed 64 homes in the
foothills of the San Rafael Hills. More recent fires have occurred in cCity limits burning 1,629 acres in the 2000s (161,582 acres burned in total) and 399 acres in the 2010s (7,051 acres burned in total).
Unlike wildfires at the urban-wildland interface, which appear to be increasing in number and dollar loss, the number of structural fires in the developed portions of cities has decreased over time, in great part due to the use of fire-resistive building m aterials and internal fire sprinklers, smoke detectors and fire alarms, and the faster response by better trained fire-fighters with better equipment. Nevertheless, earthquakes can generate structural fires that have the potential to severely tax the local fire suppression agencies, especially if the water supply system is impaired due to damage to the water reservoirs and/or water mains. 381 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –18 | March 2025 Draft
3.3.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The portions of the San Rafael Hills and the Verdugo and San Gabriel Mountains within City limits are mapped as having a high fire hazard due to the steep topography of the area, the presence of flammable vegetation, and limited access (see Plate P-2 Plate P-). In fact, Glendale’s Fire Department places nearly two-thirds of the City in the high fire hazard area. The historical record supports this mapping: since the late 1800s, the entire northern two -thirds of the City ha sve burned at least once. The Glendale climate often contributes to the likelihood of fires risk. Dried out vegetation from the hot summer months is exposed to Santa Ana wind conditions in the fall. Such winds become extremely erratic when combined with winds generated from burning vegetation and can stress fire-fighting resources and reduce fire-fighting success. In addition, large mountainous areas in Glendale contain rough topography which not only facilitates the spread of fire, but also impedes or hind ers responding fire-fighting personnel and equipment. Traffic congestion in the urban areas and long travel distances and narrow, winding roads in the hillsides and mountains also can hinder fire department response to the urban -wildland interface areas. These are as have a history of fires, with some areas experiencing a wildland fire at least once a decade. Residents in all of these areas need to recognizemust be informed that they live in a hazardous area, and that they are responsible for maintaining their properties. This includes, but is not limited to, establishing a fire -resistant landscape consistent with Glendale’s 1993 Hillside Management Plan, and building with f ire-resistant materials in accordance with Glendale’s Building and Safety Code. In addition, the Fire Zone Management Guidelines recommends using the Hillside Management Plan’s two suggested plant palettes around flammable structures with certain buffer requirements. This is especially critical in some of the older, pre -fire planning developments in the mountainous, high-fire hazard areas where access is limited by narrow roads with no secondary outlet and steep grades, which hamper the Fire Department’s response.
To reduce the wildland fire hazard, especially at the urban-wildlandwildland-urban interface, the City of Glendale has adopted an aggressive fuel modification ordinance that requires property owners to maintain a defensible space around their properties. The Fire Department conducts annual inspections of residences and lots in the City to ensure compliance with the fuel modification ordinance, and issues notices of violation where appropriate. Glendale should continue to require property owners to conduct m aintenance on their properties to reduce the fire danger in accordance with the City’s Building and Fire Safety Code s.
Fire hazards could also result in direct and indirect impacts on power delivery to Glendale community members. There are three overhead transmission lines owned and operated by GWP that pass through the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZs) in north Glendale. GWP engages in several programs to reduce the impacts associated with potential power disruption due to wildfire events. According to the GWP Wildfire Prevention Mitigation Plan, GWP has a Public Safety Shutoff Events program that involves providing 24–48-hour advanced notice, as well as more immediate shutoff notifications to limit the potential of triggering a wildfire and to avoid damaging electrical infrastructure from peak demand periods. Since wildfires are most often triggered by vegetation coming into direct contact with electric utilities, GWP also maintains a Vegetation Management Plan to reduce fuel load that can contribute to fire spread (City of Glendale 2022).
In addition, impacts anywhere along those transmission lines outside of Glendale c ould also cause issues within Glendale if enough capacity is not available locally to meet demand.
Several major earthquake -generating faults within the City of Glendale could trigger multiple fires (such as from downed electrical lines or broken gas mains), disrupt life-line services (water supply) and trigger other geologic hazards, such as landslides or rock –falls, which could block roads and hinder disaster emergency response. In addition, freeways, railways, and pipelines within the City of Glendale intro -duce significant fire and other risks for which the City must respond. Earthquake -induced fires pose a risk in the developed, downtown areas of the City, the result of downed electric lines, broken gas mains, and tipped -over appliances. Loss estimation models conducted for this studyin 2003 indicate that earthquakes on the Sierra Madre, Verdugo, Raymond and Hollywood faults have the potential to cause significant fire-after-earthquake losses in the City of Glendale. Multiple ignitions over a broad area of the City can tax the local Fire Department, especially if the water reservoirs or water mains are also damaged during the earthquake.
Most development in Glendale occurs in the flatlands, where the predominant housing type is multiple-family units (apartments and condominiums) that have special fire protection needs. To that end, City ordinances re-quire all of mid-rise and high-rise buildings to have fire and life safety systems in place, including automatic fire sprinklers and smoke detectors. The specific construction requirements are contained in the Glendale Build-ing and Safety Code (Volume I, Section 715 which deals with construction requirements in fire hazard areas, and Volume VI, which pertains to fire and life-safety requirements). 382 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –19 | March 2025 Draft
The Glendale Fire Department (GFD) is responsible for fire suppression in the City. Nine fire stations are strategically located throughout the City to provide the level of service that has gained the GFD an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of 1, the highest rating possible (at this time, only 44 329 communities in the United States have been awarded an ISO rating of 1). The GFD responds to more than 90 percent of the emergency calls within 6 minutes of receiving the call at dispatch. The City of Glen dale has adopted ordinances that exceed the minimum State requirements for fire hazard abatement. These ordinances include the requirement that all new roofs and re-roofs amounting to more than 25 percent of the original roof area to be done in Class A roo fing materials. The Class A roof -covering ordinance first applied only to structures within the high fire hazard area but is now enforced Citywide. Since 1989, the City has also required internal fire sprinklers in all new residential one- and two-family structures. Most of the City-adopted ordinances have become effective years ahead of the rest of California, setting an example for other communities
A twenty- year Glendale incident history (1983-2002) shows that the number of incidents reports has nearly doubled during this time periodfrom 11,000 calls in 2003 to 22,000 calls in 2023, reflective of the population growth experienced. The number of medical emergencies compared to fire calls has increased over time and represent nearly 80 percent of all Fire Department incident calls. If the number of medical emergency responses continue to increase (which is likely, considering the aging population), and this is found to have an impact on the availability of fire-fighting personnel and equipment, it may be prudent to add another rescue ambulance and support squad vehicle and increase staffing at the fire station in the area of the City with the highest rate of medical incidents.In addition to vegetation management to reduce the fire hazard, the City of Glendale has adopted several ordinances that require the use of fire -resistant construction materials that protect structures from fire damageMost of the City-adopted ordinances have become effective years ahead of the rest of California, setting an example for other communities, and are also more stringent than California Fire Code requirements. These include Class A roof coverings for all new roofs and re -roofs amounting to more than 25 percent of the original roof area, and fire sprinklers in all new one- and two-family structureThe Class A roof-covering ordinance first applied only to structures within the high fire hazard area, but is now enforced CitywIn 1988, Glendale passed an ordinance requiring automatic fire sprinklers in existing structures four stories or more in height, and since 1989, the City has required i nternal fire sprinklers in all new residential one-and two-family structures.
The GFD has several proactive programs in place to reduce the fire hazard in the City. It participates in the plan review of nearly all buildings, discretionary approvals, and other development (both public and private).
This review ensures that all new pr ojects have Fire Department “master planning” incorporated in their design. The Fire Department has full - time fire investigators that work closely with the Police Department, and it participates in several educational programs. This includes Fire Departme nt personnel assigned full - time to public education, contracting with a private professional acting company to perform fire safety plays . scheduled so as to reach every elementary-age school child in the City on an annual basis, and other similar types of educational activities. The Jr. Fire Program aims to engage with children in elementary school to teach the importance of fire safety and emergency preparedness. The program hosts an annual picnic with games and prizes for students that participate in an essay and drawing contest within the Glendale Unified School District and other youth groups.
In regards to emergency response, the
Glendale Fire Department requires EMT-D
(Emergency Medical Technician -
Defibrillator) certification of all of its
firefighters and Ambulance Operators and
requires at least one member on each
apparatus be EMT-P (Paramedic) certified.
The Glendale Fire Department has mutual
aid agreements with the larger surrounding
agencies of Los Angeles City Fire
Department and Los Angeles County Fire
Department. Additionally , the Department
has a joint powers agreement with
Pasadena and Burbank to dispatch through
the Verdugo Joint Fire Communications Center for which covers Fire Departments for 13 cities including the Hollywood Burbank Airport. The Verdugo Joint Fire Communications Center coordinates emergency calls for the cities of Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena, South Pasadena, Arcadia, Alhambra, Sierra Madre, San Gabriel, 383 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –20 | March 2025 Draft
San Marino, Monterey Park, Montebello, West Covina and the Hollywood Burbank Airport. The Department has several interdepartmental agreements that ensure cooperation for emergency response (for example, Fire has an agreement with the Glendale Water and Power Department for automatic dispatch upon second alarm). It has automatic aid agreemen ts with the adjacent cities of Burbank, Pasadena, and Los Angeles, and the County of Los Angeles. Also, it is partly to an agreement that authorizes calls for emergency response to be dispatched through the Verdugo Joint Fire Communications Center, which coordinates 33 49 different stations in the region, which includes stations from Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena, San Marino, South Pasadena, Monrovia, Arcadia, Sierra Madre and San Gabriel. The City of Glendale activity participates in the Standardized Statewide Emergency Management System (SEMS).
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped the most up to date Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) throughout California (as may be amended by CAL FIRE in the future). The FHSZ maps are developed using a science-based and field-tested model that assigns a hazard score based on the factors that influence fire likelihood and fire behavior. Many factors are considered such as fire history, existing and potential fuel (natural vegetation), predicted flame length, blowing embers, terrain, and typical fire weather for the area. There are three levels of hazard in the State Responsibility Areas: moderate, high, and very high. FHSZs are identified for local government jurisdictions in areas known as Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). The City of Glendale is responsible for fire protection within these LRA areas.
The large amounts of open space and w ildland make Glendale susceptible to brush fires year -round. The proximity of native vegetation and the climate of the region contribute to sections of the City having Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZs), as illustrated in Plate-3, which shows the most up to date VHFHSZs.
Critical facilities are facilities in either the public or private sector that provide essential products and services to the public, are otherwise necessary to preserve the welfare and quality of life in the City, or fulfills important public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions . The City’s critical facilities include schools, fire stations, police stations, transportation systems, libraries, parks, City Hall, hospitals, and utility systems. According to Plate P-3, there are 2 libraries, 5 fire stations, 1 police station, 1 landfill , 1 hospital, 8 schools, 1 water treatment plant, 23 Potable/Recycled Water Pump Stations, 20 parks , and transmission lines located in the most up to date VHFHSZs.
The frequency, area, and severity of wildfires have increased significantly within Los Angeles County over the past two decades. Wildfire events are a product of temperature increases , precipitation declines, and high wind events, which compound to create wildfire prone conditions. Glendale has a history of wildfires in the past 50 years and due to climate change, projected annual wildfire probability is expected to increase by 30 percent by mid-century. Wildfires may lower water quality, cause power delivery disruption and property damage, increase habitat loss, and strain emergency services . In addition, communities may experience impacts on public health, air quality decline, fatal and non-fatal injuries, and income loss due to high exposures to wildfire smoke. Wildfires that burn within City limits can pose a significant threat to community members and can burn homes.
Policies and programs herein are consistent with the requirements of California Government Code Section 65302(g) and are based on the Attorney General’s Wildfire Guidance, CAL FIRE’s General Plan Safety Element Assessment, and recommendations from CAL FIRE and the California State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. Rincon did not develop original policies to mitigate wildfire.
3.3.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-4 Fire Hazard
Goal 4. Reduce the loss of life, injury, private property damage, infrastructure damage, economic losses and social dislocation and other impacts resulting from fire hazards..
Policy 4-1: Fire Service and Response . The City shall ensure to the extent possible that fire services, such as fire equipment, infrastructure, and response times, are adequate for all areas of the City.
Program 4-1.1: The City shall conduct annual fire flow tests, especially in areas of high fire hazard, and shall implement water system improvements for hydrants and fire flow.
Program 4-1.2: The City shall prepare periodic Fire Station location and Resource studies. 384 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –21 | March 2025 Draft
Program 4-1.3: The City shall ensure that road standards meet the needs for emergency access.
Program 4 -1.4:The City shall evaluate options for a secondary public access to Glenoaks Cany
Program 4-1.45: The City shall improve emergency access for areas currently below standard.
Program 4-1.56: The City shall install traffic signal preemption devices for fire response at critical intersections.
Program 4-1.67: The City shall evaluate the impact of traffic calming measures on emergency response times.
Program 4-1.78: The City shall monitor and identify current trends (including population and settlement patterns, incident trends, and changes in the economic, social and/ or cultural makeup of the community) that may impact the City’s ability to provide adequate emergency services.
Program 4-1.89: The City shall conduct studies to determine whether improvements are needed in the areas of public education and fire prevention.
Program 4-1.9: The City shall ensure that road standards meet the needs for emergency access and that access roads are not restricted by parked cars.
Program 4-1.10 The City shall coordinate with telecommunication service entities, and the Los Angeles County Cable and Telecommunications Office to fire -harden communications.
Program 4-1.11 The City shall ensure that adequate equipment, staffing, training, and resources are provided to the Glendale Fire Department to meet current and future projected service demands and fire protection needs. Review new developments in the most up to date VHFHSZs to ensure that adequate fire protection provisions are in place, including fire flow and emergency vehicle access.
Policy 4-2 The City shall require that all new development in areas with a high fire hazard incorporate fire resistant landscaping and other fire hazard reduction techniques into the project design in order to reduce the fire hazard. New Development. The City shall require fire protection plans for all new developments and discourage new residential development within the most up to date VHFHSZs, where feasible. Ensure fire protection plans include risk analysis, consideration of increased wildfire hazards due to climate change, fire response capabilities, fire safety requirements, fuel management, mitigation measures and design requirements, and wildfire education maintenance and limitations. Limit new development in areas with single access points in and adjacent to steeply sloped terrain (greater than 40 percent slope) that would result in significant and unavoidable impacts relating to rapid wildfire spread.
Program 4-2.1: The City shall encourage residents to plant and maintain drought -resistant, fire - resistant landscape species to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion in areas adjacent to canyons, and develop stringent site design and maintenance standards for areas with high fire hazard or soil erosion potential.
Program 4-2.2: The City shall enforce the Weed Abatement Program in high fire hazard areas.
Program 4-2.3: Fuel management plans shall be required for all new development in areas subject to wildfire.
Program 4-2.4: The City shall enforce the Uniform Fire Code and Municipal Fire Code Amendments for new construction in fire hazard areas, including the use of sprinklers in residential structures.
Program 4-2.5: The City shall consider fire safety issues during revisions to the Zoning Ordinance.
Program 4-2.6: The City shall evaluate the feasibility of requiring development plans to be submitted in electronic format in addition to paper copies in order to facilitate the review and storage of plans.
385 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –22 | March 2025 Draft
Program 4-2.76: The City shall develop a program for monitoring and enforcing environmental mitigation measures or conditions of approval applied to projects.
Program 4-2.87: The City shall enforce a Class A Roofing ordinance or better for residential and commercial developments. Residents with existing wood -shingle or unrated roofing materials shall be encouraged to upgrade to fire resistive building materials, including fire resistive eaves and awnings.
Program 4-2.8 The City shall require that new subdivision tract maps for thirty or more lots provide adequate access (ingress, egress) and a minimum of two roadways with widths and lengths in compliance with the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s State Minimum Fire Safe Regulations Article 2, Subsection 1273, as may be amended.
Program 4-2.9: Whenever feasible, the City shall locate new essential public facilities, including health care facilities, emergency shelters, and fire stations, outside VHFHSZs.
Policy 4-3 Redevelopment. The City shall require that, after a large fire, redevelopment of a damaged property in a VHFHSZ complies with the requirements of construction and includes adequate provisions for emergency access, vegetation management, and firefighting, in compliance with current fire codes.
Policy 4-4 Existing Non -Conforming Development . The City shall m inimize risks to existing development by identifying existing non-conforming development that does not meet local and state contemporary fire safe ty standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative hazard and require all new development to meet or exceed the City of Glendale Vegetation Management Program (VMP) Defensible Space Guidelines and the California Code of Regulations, State Responsibility Areas Fire Safe Regulations.
Policy 4-5 Water Supply. The City shall evaluate the City’s fire suppression capacity and future water supply availability, as part of the next and most up to date Glendale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, which is updated every 5 years.
Program 4-5.1 The City shall coordinate with Glendale Water & Power and other water districts as appropriate to support the provision of adequate water throughout the City and provision of adequate water storage to meet future peak fire demands during times of peak dome stic demand. Explore the feasibility of providing on -site water supply and storage to augment ordinary supplies that may be lost during a wildfire.
Program 4-5.2 The City shall require all new developments to have adequate water supply to meet fire suppression needs and comply with applicable and most up to date fire flow requirements.
Policy 4-6 Electrical Undergrounding. The City shall implement an aggressive electrical undergrounding plan with a focus on critical evacuation roadways and areas with the highest wildfire risk, identified in the most up to date VHFHSZs.
Policy 4-7 Defensible Space. The City shall require all properties in the City to implement precautionary measures to create defensible space in compliance with the most up to date regulations set forth in Senate Bill 63, Assembly Bill 3074, and Glendale Fire Department defensible space standards and guidelines. The City shall continue annual brush inspections and require public and private properties in the City to maintain a fire break around structures.
Program 4-7.1 The City shall enforce development and maintenance of buffer zones and defensible space by requiring the removal of brush and flammable vegetation surrounding public and private properties and the upkeep of an ember resistant zone around structures located in the most up to date VHFHSZs. The City shall also require public and private properties to maintain any tree adjacent to or overhanging any building free of dead or dying wood, and maintaining roofs free of leaves, needles, or other dead vegetation growth.
386 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –23 | March 2025 Draft
Program 4-7.2 The City shall encourage residents to plant and maintain drought -resistant, fire - resistant landscape species to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion in areas adjacent to canyons and develop stringent site design and maintenance standards for areas with the most up to date high fire hazard or soil erosion potential.
Policy 4-8 Emergency Plan. The City Shall r eview and update the Emergency Operations Plan and evacuation protocols every two years as recommended by CESA and Cal OES , if feasible, to consider current community emergency evacuation needs in response to wildfires , including in the most up to date VHFHSZs.
Policy 4-9 Educational Awareness. The City shall educate residents on the most up to date fire hazard reduction strategies to employ on their properties, focusing on the most vulnerable populations such as older adults, individuals with disabilities, non -English speaking residents, and individuals with chronic health conditions.
Program 4-9.1 The City shall host educational workshops for property owners on defensible space, home hardening, and vegetation management based upon the most up -to-date science and State guidelines to reduce wildfire risk. Target education of most up-to- date evacuation routes to at -risk populations including older adults and individuals with chronic health conditions.
Program 4-9.2: The City shall conduct studies to determine whether improvements are needed in the areas of public education and fire prevention.
Policy 4-10 Partnerships. The City shall regularly review and update mutual aid agreements between surrounding City Fire Departments and the Glendale Fire Department to reflect new developments, population trends in the City, station staffing/equipment, and fire behavior shifts due to climate change. Ensure protections and response for all areas are adequately covered by the appropriate updates.
3.4 Climate Change
3.4.1 OVERVIEW
The Safety Element includes the impacts of climate change in the City of Glendale, as required by Government Code Section 65302(g). Climate change is caused by the release of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) into the atmosphere, which traps heat near the Earth’s surface raising global average temperatures in what is referred to as the “ greenhouse effect.” This increase in average temperatures across the globe affects sea level rise, precipitation patterns, the severity of wildfires, the prevalence of extreme heat events, water supply, and ocean temperatures and chemistry ( NASA 2022). According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), GHGs are now higher than they have been in the past 400,000 years, raising carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 410 parts per million in the last 150 years ( IPCC 2021). The dramatic increase in GHGs is attributed to human activities beginning with the industrial revolution in the 1800s, which represented a shift from an agrarian (e.g., cultivation of land) and handicraft -based economy to one dominated by industry and machine manufacturing (NASA 2022).
The IPCC has established various GHG emissions scenarios to communicate impacts to climate indicators including the rate of average temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise by mid and end of the century.
These climate indicators will determine future impacts to climate hazards including extreme heat, drought, wildfire, landslides, extreme precipitation and stormwater flooding, and air quality. These emissions scenarios are referred to as Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) . Two of these RCPs are commonly used to compare possible futures and were selected for the City’s 202 4 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, consistent with guidance from the California Government Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) California Adaptation Planning Guide. The two scenarios used for the climate vulnerability assessment are RCP 4.5 which represents a “ medium emissions” scenario, and RCP 8.5 which represents a “high emissions” scenario.
387 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –24 | March 2025 Draft
3.4.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The City prepared a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (Appendix B), consistent with Government Code Section 65302(g) and as amended by SB 379, which assesses how the communities and assets in Glendale are v ulnerable to climate change . Two types of vulnerabilities are identified: social and physical vulnerabilities. Climate impacts in Glendale vary geographically based on exposure, socio -economic characteristics, and physical conditions in various parts of the City ,. The following section provides an overview of key findings from the Glendale Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment.
Social vulnerability is the likelihood of community members to experience adverse impacts of climate change due to existing health conditions, historical marginalization, or limited access to critical resources .
Impacts include disproportionate death, injury, loss, or disruption of livelihood. Some notable vulnerable populations in Glendale that are disproportionately susceptible to climate change impacts are i ndividuals diagnosed with high blood pressure (28%), Black, Indigenous, People o f Color (BIPOC) (23%), seniors (18%), limited or non -English speakers (11%), outdoor workers (8%), and people who use active transportation (9%). Vulnerable populations are concentrated in southwest, central, and south Glendale.
These areas have the lowest tree equity score indicating there is a deficiency in the distribution of trees for a community to experience climate benefits . The most under -resourced communities such as low-income households and, BIPOC communities are disproportionately impacted by extreme heat because of factors such as the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. UHI occurs when natural land cover is replaced with hard surfaces such as pavement, buildings, and other surfaces that absorb heat. This can increase energy costs, air pollution, and heat-related illness.5 Historical redlining, a discriminatory zoning practice that exacerbated racial segregation, has also left a legacy of unhealthy conditions in under-resourced communities making them more susceptible to climate impact such as extreme heat. According to the vulnerability assessment, the highest concern for social vulnerability is increased extreme heat and poor air quality.
Physical vulnerability is the susceptibility and limitations of physical infrastructure in the context of climate hazards and extreme events. Climate change has the capacity to harm physical infrastructure and disrupt services or restrict accessibility. Glendale can experience adverse effects from climate change with damages to natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services. Physical vulnerabilities for infrastructure and critical assets include exposure to wildfire and post -wildfire landslides while natural and recreational resources are vulnerable to extreme heat, wildfire, drought, and poor air quality.
Robust infrastructure is a crucial element in enhancing Glendale’s resilience and examining the vulnerability of critical infrastructure will offer insight on how climate change will impact them.
An increase in extreme heat events can increase the probability of heat-related illnesses such as heat stroke, heart attack, dehydration, and respiratory issues .6 Days over 97.6 degrees are expected to increase by 32 days by the end of the century and occur during a wider range of months from February to December with a 16 day increase by mid-century. This will impact grid reliability and cause possible power outages, increase water scarcity, and strain ambulance services. An increase in extreme heat days will impact vulnerable populations who will experience a higher fre quency of public health risks such as dehydration, heat stroke, increased mortality rate, heart disease and increase in vector -borne diseases. Extreme heat is expected to also increase social adversities such as income loss especially outdoor workers who might be unable to access their workplace during extreme heat days.
UHI occurs in developed areas that experience hotter days and typically impact BIPO C communities and under-invested communities. Densely developed neighborhoods experience higher temperatures while greenspaces with vegetated areas more effectively absorb heat and stay cooler. Glendale will experience the most intense UHI effect in southwest neighborhoods along I-5 and the northeast neighborhoods along I- 210. Glendale’s most populated urban areas will likely experience the highest UHI effects . Heat inequity is the dispropor tionate distribution of heat -related hazards that impact socially vulnerable and BIPOC communities and will create compounding impacts on vulnerability due to existing problems around lack of access to green open spaces as a result of Glendale’s history of redlining.
Compounding housing issues can exacerbate climate impacts for vulnerable populations. The lack of affordable housing in Glendale increases overcrowding and contributes to susceptibility of heat -related
5 “Reduce Urban Heat Island Effect.” United States Environmental Protection Agency. January 22, 2024. https://epa.gov/green-infrastructure/reduce-urban-heat-island- effect#:~:text=%22Urban%20heat%20islands%22%20occur%20when,heat-related%20illness%20and%20mortality. 6 Nature. Rapid increase in the risk of heat-related mortality. 2023. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40599-x (accessed October 2024)
388 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –25 | March 2025 Draft
illnesses for those in overcrowded housing. In addition, housing quali ty such as age and roof condition can impact health risks associated with extreme heat. For example, low quality housing such as poorly insulated homes can strain the electricity grid causing power outages and households may temporarily lose access to their air conditioning, fans, and refr igeration. This can lead to heat-related illnesses which can increase hospital visits and fatalities. In Glendale, 58 percent of renter households spend 30 percent or more of their income on housing costs, compared to 55 percent regionally. Additionally, 36 percent of renter households in Glendale spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing cost, compared to 29 percent regionally. 7 These households are considered severely cost burdened and are therefore at a disproportionately higher risk towards climate change as they m ay likely not have access to air conditioning, insultation, and other infrastructural protections against climate hazards..
As a result, vulnerable communities in Glendale face higher heat-related public health risks as they may be under-resourced, have high outdoor exposure, face societal barriers, and/or have a chronic health condition.
Extreme heat risks include heat stress, heat stroke, and dehydration, which c an lead to death. Increased temperatures can also worsen asthma, cardiovascular disease, certain disabilities, and other respiratory and cardiovascular conditions leading to increased emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and fatalities.
Air quality degradation is expected to increase in Glendale due to climate driven increases in dust, smog, smoke, and decreases in natural filtrations . Increased temperature leads to dry, dusty conditions also associated with drought (Hall et al. 2018). Increases in dust conditions increase exposure to particulate matter, including PM10 (particulates less than 10 microns in diameter). PM10 can cause increased respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, premature death, and reduced visibility. These adverse he alth effects have been reported primarily in infants and children, and seniors with preexisting heart or lung diseases.
Increases in ambient temperature can lead to higher rates of smog also referred to as ozone (03). Groups most sensitive to O3 include children, the elderly, people with respiratory disorders, and people who exercise strenuously outdoors. Depending on the level of exposure, ozone can inflame and damage the airways; make the lungs more susceptible to infection; and aggravate lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis. Ground -level ozone increases with ambient temperatures and will be experienced at higher rates due to climate change leading to raised cardiovascular and respiratory morbidity and mortality rates. Ground-level ozone has also been shown to have particularly disproportionate adverse impacts on populations experiencing homelessness and lower median income.
Precipitation variability, fewer natural filtrations, and long periods of dry spells lead to less reliable air quality for the entire region. Urban vegetation can directly affect air quality , as large healthy trees remove more pollution than younger, smaller trees. Rising temperatures could increase mortality for large healthy trees which would lower the ability for urban vegetation to reduce air pollutants, therefore increasing pollutant exposure to vulnerable populations.
Temperature, severe wildfire conditions, and the area burned by wildfires have all increased throughout the state and are expected to continue to increase. Wildfire smoke is comprised of a mixture of hazardous air pollutants that are the principal threat to public health and are estimated to contribute to approximately 18 percent of the total PM 2.5 atmospheric emissions in the US. Short -term exposures to PM 2.5 (up to 24-hours duration) has been associated with premature mortality, increased hospital admissions for heart or lung causes, acute and chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, emergency room visits, respiratory symptoms, and restricted activity days. These adverse health effects have been reported primarily in infants and children, and seniors with preexisting heart or lung diseases.
The populations most vulnerable to the impacts of poor quality are those who are under -resourced, individuals with high outdoor exposure, and individuals with chronic health conditions. The CCVA identifies high social vulnerability areas in Glendale located in north Glendale along I-210, and in south and southwest Glendale. These areas are considered vulnerable due to the higher presence of lower-income and working class residents. Vulnerable populations such as people facing homelessness, outdoor workers, and people with chronic health conditions are expected to be most vulnerable to the potential impacts of extreme heat.
Populations that are under -resourced and do not have access to air filtration systems may experience respiratory issues leading to injuries or death. Individuals who face societal barriers, such as undocumented people, may not have access to medical services or evacuation centers. Outdoor workers, individuals using
7 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Local Housing Data for the City of Glendale. 2021. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/glendale-he-0421.pdf?1620797773 (accessed October 2024) 389 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –26 | March 2025 Draft
active transportation, and people experiencing homelessness may become injured from smoke inhalation and poor air quality.
Projected annual average dry spell duration will increase to 144 days by the end of the century and 139 days by mid-century. This will result in vegetative stress, water scarcity, habitat loss, and strained water system which will consequently affect food security, air quality decline, respiratory illness, and more disease .
Increased temperatures will reduce the water supply which will result in tree loss . Additionally, vulnerable populations such as those experiencing homelessness may have decreased access to water.
GOAL S-5 Climate Change
Goal 5. Reduce social and physical vulnerabilities resulting from the increasing risks of climate change
Policy 5-1: Cooling Infrastructure. The City shall, where feasible, install shade trees and cool pavement, expand the functionality and availability of cooling centers , and distribute low -cost cooling resources to reduce the impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality on climate vulnerable populations.
Program 5-1.1 The City shall explore incorporating strategies to reduce the urban heat island effect during City repaving projects.
Program 5-1.2 The City shall work to implement a tree planting program to prioritize planting trees in high social sensitivity census tracts with the lowest tree equity score, along safe routes to school and near bus stops, as detailed in the City’s Community Forest Management Plan.
Program 5-1.3 The City shall , w here feasible, expand the functionality and availability of cooling centers to address a greater variety of needs as resilience centers facilitating health, food, medical, and emergency services during poor air quality events caused by climate hazards such as extreme heat events or wildfire.
Program 5-1.4 The City shall consider implementing a program to purchase and deploy a lending library of air purifiers and cooling devices in partnership with local community organizations and trusted community leaders, targeting high social sensitivity census tracts.
Policy 5-2: Building Resilience. The City shall amend the building code to increase the resiliency of existing and new buildings so as to protect residents from the impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality.
Program 5-2.1 The City shall consider amending the building code to require CALGreen Tier 2 Voluntary Standards Section A5.106.11.2 for cool roofs a nd Section A5.106.7.2 for cool walls by the next California Building Codes (CBC) update cycle.
Program 5-2.2 The City shall amend the building code to require indoor cooling in new multi -family buildings, monitoring the California Department of Public Health guidance regarding indoor cooling which will inform the next CBC update (CBC) cycle.
Program 5-2.3 The City shall consider amending the building co de to require all newly installed HVAC units for existing buildings to have two -way air condition unit capability to provide heating and cooling by the next CBC update cycle.
Policy 5-3: Access to Public Information . The City shall p romote increased multi-lingual access to informational resources and emergency alert systems to raise awareness of and limit climate change impacts
Program 5-3.1 The City shall offer engaging year -round community events with educational resources at resilience centers, providing the community with free access to multi - lingual information, resources, and support to effectively prepare for and recover from poor air quality days, extreme weather events and other disasters, while making the resilience centers recognized fixtures in the community. 390 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –27 | March 2025 Draft
Program 5-3.2 The City shall conduct emergency alert notifications in English, Spanish, Armenian, and Korean and distribute information about Emergency Alert Program (Everbridge) sign-up in areas of highest exposure and potential impacts , including areas of high social sensitivity. The City shall r emove procedural equity barriers from the sign -up program.
Program 5-3.3 The City shall, every five years, reassess which languages are spoken jointly by 5% or more of the Glendale community and expand emergency alert translations to additional languages as needed, consistent with Assembly Bill 1638.
Program 5-3.4 The City shall provide online information for preparing homes and businesses for extreme weather events, such as resources on what to have at home in an emergency kit.
Policy 5-4 Water Management. The City shall incorporate, where feasible, extended drought climate projections in water management planning and offer solutions to reduce water us e and improve water quality through Glendale Water & Power while offering educational services to the community.
Program 5-4.1: The City shall, upon the next update to the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), review the historical record to identify the longest recorded drought and consider a similar drought length in the UWMP analysis.
Program 5-4.2 The City shall, where feasible, expand Glendale Water and Power programs to increase leakage detection systems and repairs; drought tolerant landscaping; low - flow fixtures, fitting, and appliances; greywater capture and reuse; leakage repairs; and financing and technical resources to subsidize costs to landlords and low-income households.
Program 5-4.3 The City shall , where feasible, implement a program to conduct an energy/water nexus study to inform the City’s future public water rate structure and to directly assist low-income households with high utility burdens during water rate structure changes to avoid inequitable outcomes.
3.45 Hazardous Materials
3.54.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS OVERVIEW
The unhealthful effects of certain chemicals and substances have led to extensive regulation of hazardous materials. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines a hazardous waste as a substance that 1) may cause or
significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious, irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness; and 2) that poses a substantial present or potential future hazard to human health or the environment when it is improperly treated, stored, tran sported, disposed of or otherwise managed.
Hazardous waste is also ignitable, corrosive, or reactive (explosive) (U.S. EPA 40 CFR 260.10). A material may also be classified as a hazardous material if it contains defined amounts of toxic chemicals. The EPA has developed a list of specific hazardous wastes that are in the forms of solids, semi -solids, liquids, and gases.
The State of California defines hazardous materials as substances that are toxic, ignitable or flammable, reactive, and corrosive. The State also defines an extremely hazardous material as a substance that shows high acute or chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity (causes cancer), bioaccumulative properties (accumulates in the body’s tissues), persistence in the environment, or is water reactive. 391 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –28 | March 2025 Draft
Hazardous materials are extensively regulated by Federal, State and City laws, and new regulations are constantly being developed as we learn more about the impact these substances have on human health and the environment. It is not the intent of the Safety Element to discuss or even list all of the regulations currently in effect to reduce the impacts of hazardous materials, as these will change or will be added to with time. The three main sources of information on hazardous materials management as they p ertain to the City of Glendale are: 1) the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2) the California Environmental Protection Agency’s (Cal EPA) Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) California Department of Health Services (DHS), and 3) the City of Glendale Fire Department.
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. To that end, the EPA requires that the levels of five major air pollutants be measured on a daily basis. These Air Quality Indexes are reported daily in the local news media serving metropolitan areas with populations exceeding 200,000. Air Quality Indexes are reported using a numerical value between 0 and 500 that corresponds to a health descriptor like “g ood” or “unhealthful.” The local agency responsible for monitoring and enforcing air quality is the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
The EPA’s National Primary Drinking Water Standard protects drinking water quality by limiting the levels of specific contaminants that are known to occur or have the potential to occur in water and can adversely affect public health. The EPA and the California Environmental Protection Agency’s (Cal EPA) Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)State Water Resources Control Board California Department of Health Services (DHS) set the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for specific contaminants in ground water. These contaminants include organic and inorganic chemicals (minerals), substances that are known to cause cancer (carcinogens), radionuclides (such as uranium and radon), and microbial contaminants. Water purveyors are required to test their water for these contaminants on a fixed schedule, and report their results to the DHS.
Leaking underground storage tanks (UST’s) have been recognized since the early 1980s as the primary cause of groundwater contamination by gasoline compounds and solvents. In California, regulations aimed at protecting against UST leaks have been in place since 1983.
California’s program is more stringent than the Federal program, requiring that all tanks be double walled, and prohibiting gasoline delivery to non -compliant tanks. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has been designated the lead regulatory agency in the development of UST regulations and policy.
The SWRCB maintains an inventory of leaking underground storage tanks in a statewide database.
3.54.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
There are five 53 large-quantity and more than 250 348 small-quantity generators of hazardous materials in the City, as of October 2024. The distribution of these sites in the City is shown on Plate 5-1 of the Technical Background Report (Appendix A). There are also eight facilities listed in the Toxics Release Inventory that are known to have released hazardous materials of concern into the air – the EPA monitors these facilities closely to reduce the potential of future emissions at concentrations above the acceptable limits. Given these numbers, it is impres sive that the actual number of unauthorized releases of hazardous materials into the environment is fairly small, as documented in the Federal and State databases reviewed. Of 55 under-ground storage tank leaks, only one is known to have impacted a potable groundwater source.Of the 57 underground storage tank sites with a total of 141 active petroleum systems and 9 active hazardous substance systems, there have been no tank leaks since 2003. The rest have either impacted soil only, or non -potable sources of water.
Some of the significant hazardous sites are located within or adjacent to a liquefaction susceptible area, or in an unstable slope area, and two of the sites are located within or adjacent to a dam inundation area. None of the significant hazardous sites i dentified in the City are located in or adjacent to a high fire hazard area.
Given that all of Glendale is susceptible to high to very high ground motions as a result of an earthquake on either the Verdugo, Sierra Madre or Raymond fault, all hazardous mate rials sites should provide for, at a minimum, secondary containment of hazardous substances, including segregation of reactive chemicals, in accordance with the most recent California Fire Code and City of Glen-dale Fire Code amendments.
Some hazardous materials sites are located within 1/2-mile of schools. Significant Hazardous Materials sites should be required to prepare Risk Management Plans (RMPs) that identify the procedures by which the sur- rounding critical facilities will be evacuated, should it become necessary during an accidental release of hazardous materials. Alternatively, the schools in the immediate vicinity of the significant hazardous materials 392 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –29 | March 2025 Draft
sites should consider implementing, as part of their School Safety Plans mandated by Senate Bill 187 (the Safe School Act of 1997), procedures for evacuation should a chemical spill occur in the area.
The City of Glendale’s Environmental Management Center (EMC) is charged with the responsibility of conducting compliance inspections for facilities in the City that handle hazardous material, generate or treat a hazardous waste and/or operate an underground storage tank. All new installations of underground storage tanks require an inspection, along with the removal of the old tanks. The EMC coordinates hazardous material planning and appropriate response efforts with cCity departments, as well as local, and State agencies. The Office of Emergency Services for Glendale is tasked with coordinating the City’s disaster operations . The goal of these agencies is to improve public and private sector readiness, and to mitigate local impacts resulting from natural or technological emergencies. Both agencies are branches The EMC is part of the Glendale Fire Department that deals with the planning for and response to the natural and technological disasters in the City of Glendale. The EMC is also tasked with administering a household hazardous waste collection plan for the City of Glendale in accordance with the California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). The EMC is located at 780 Flower Street.
3.4.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-6 Hazardous Materials
Goal 56. Reduce threats to the public health and safety, and to the environment, from hazardous materials.
Policy 56-1: Limiting exposure of hazardous materials and waste . The City shall strive to reduce the potential for residents, workers, and visitors to Glendale to being exposed to hazardous materials and wastes.
Program 56-1.1: The City shall enforce the California Environmental Protection Agency’s seven Unified Program elements including the disclosure laws that require all users, producers, and transporters of hazardous materials and wastes to clearly identify the materials that they store, use or transport, and to notify the appropriate City, County, State and Federal agencies in the event of a violation.
Program 56-1.2: The City shall identify City roadways along which hazardous materials are routinely transported. If critical facilities, such as schools, hospitals, child care centers or other facilities with special evacuation needs are located along these routes, the City shall notify the operators of these facilities that they are near such routes. The City shall work with the operators of these facilities to assist them with the preparation of evacuation plans.
Program 56-1.3: The City shall evaluate the potential impacts related to hazardous materials during the environmental review process for new buildings or businesses where the production, use, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous materials is proposed.
Potential impacts shall be fully mitigated.
Policy 56-1.4: Incident response . The City shall maintain the capability of responding to hazardous materials incidents in the City and along the sections of freeways that extend across the City.
This includes maintaining cooperation agreements with adjacent jurisdictions and continuing to coordinate with regional providers of emergency services.
Policy 56-1.5: Reduction or elimination of hazardous materials . The City shall encourage residents and businesses to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials. This includes encouraging residents to buy toxic substances in only the amount needed to do the job, or better yet, to use safer non-toxic alternate products that do not pose a threat to the environment.
Program 56-1.6: The City shall support the operation of recycling centers that take hazardous substances, such as paint, paint thinner, used waste oil, etc.
Program 56-1.7: The City shall review the future direction of the City’s Certified Unified Program Agency (provided by the City’s Fire Department) to determine the best use of the agency’s resources (including but not limited to review of existing and proposed 393 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –30 | March 2025 Draft
facilities, monitoring trends in the use of types and quantities of hazardous materials, enforcing cleanup and mitigation measures, and public education efforts).
Program 56-1.8: The City shall coordinate hazardous materials regulation with other agencies. The Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan is incorporated herein by reference and shall be used by the City as a guide to hazardous waste management efforts.
3.65 Terrorism, Civil Disturbance and Crime
3.65.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS OVERVIEW
Terrorism is defined as the “use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, especially as a political weapon or policy.” Terrorists often use or threaten to use nuclear, biological or chemical substances to cause as much damage as possible in an area or to a group of people. These are referred to as Weapons of Mass Destruction , or (WMDs).
Few terrorist incidents have actually occurred on American soil, but since the 9/11/01 incidents in New York and Washington, D.C., Terrorism remains a serious threat to government operations, community members, and critical infrastructureconcern regarding terrorist acts in the United States has increased . Since the early 1990s, the Federal and State governments have established programs and protocol aimed at planning for and dealing with terrorist acts. In 2004, t The State of California created the California State Threat Assessment System (CAL STAS) as an integral component of the State’s Homeland Security Strategy to identify, track, assess, and analyze homeland security threats. has prepared and published as an addendum to the State Emergency Plan a document entitled California Terrorism Response Plan. This document identifies and describes how the State and local governments are to plan for and respond to terrorism incidents. The tasks and responsibilities of emergency management are based on two terms: Crisis Management and Consequence Management. Crisis Management refers to the response to people committing an act of terrorism. Consequence Management refers to the response to the potential or actual effects of terrorism. According t o the California Terrorism Response Plan (2001), local government has primary responsibility for responding to an incident for the purpose of protecting public health and safety (Consequence Management). All response to terrorism incidents needs to be cond ucted in accordance with the State’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The Federal government is responsible for the law enforcement aspects of a terrorism incident that relate to identifying, apprehending and neutralizing the terrorists and their weapons (Crisis Management). These tasks are handled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), with assistance from other agencies as necessary. Consequence management support at the federal level is provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The STAS is a collaborati ve effort between federal, state, local, and tribal public safety agencies to share resources, expertise, and information to detect criminal and terrorist activity. The STAS produces and disseminates timely and actionable threat information for government leaders and policymakers, private sector partners, a nd the broader public safety and national intelligence communities to support decisions, properly allocate resources, and mitigate threats.
Civil disturbances typically develop in response to an unpopular policy or act issued or made by the group in power, either the policy makers, or those that enforce these procedures, such as the police. Civil disturbances can also develop in response to pe rceived or real racial or social inequality, and deep -seated political or religious differences. Civil disturbances can include minor infractions, such as disturbing the peace or assembling illegally, to major offenses such as looting, robbery and possessi on of stolen property, assault, arson, brandishing of weapons, and even murder. These incidents are generally handled at the local level, with assistance from adjacent jurisdictions as needed. In the event of a large -scale mass demonstration, rioting or other violent acts, the National Guard may mobilize to aid the local law -enforcement agencies.
3.65.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The risk of terrorist attacks occurring in Glendale is considered low but not impossible since California can be considered an attractive terrorist target, and therefore, by association, Glendale can be considered at risk.
The Police Department maintains a confidential list of assets in the City that are considered potential terrorist and/or civil disturbance targets, and is vigilant about any unusual or suspicious activities in and around these areas.
394 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –31 | March 2025 Draft
The Fire and Police Departments are responsible for
responding to terrorist attacks and civil disturbances.
The Police Department has several programs
specifically designed to deal with crowd control issues, and more recently terrorist activities. Several other
regional and State organizations and programs are
responsible for planning for and responding to civil
unrest and terrorist activities. The City of Glendale is one of the few communities in the area to receive
specialized training and equipment to respond to
terrorism, including incidents involving WMDs.
Glendale has incorporated terrorism scenarios into the
City’s Emergency R esponse Plan and into training
exercises.
The City of Glendale has one of the lowest crime rates for cities with populations exceeding 100,000. The Police Department indicates that property crimes in Glendale far outnumber crimes against persons. The data also show that as in other commerce centers, white-collar crimes, such as fraud and identity theft, have increased in the last few years in Glendale. Like many diverse communities, Glendale experiences a presence of culturally based organized crime. Changes in the frequency, pattern, or type of cr ime are addressed by the Police Department. For example, the street -gang situation in Glendale is addressed on a daily basis, primarily by the Gang UnitSpecial Enforcement Detail. The Police Department utilizes a variety of programs and affirmative policing, forming partnerships with community groups, businesses, schools and other government agencies, to fight crime. The community as a whole has a zero tolerance for criminal activity.
3.5.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-7 Terrorism, Civil Disturbance, and Crime
Goal 67. Increase the City’s capability to effectively re spond to acts of terrorism or civil disturbance, and to reduce criminal activity.
Policy 67-1: Response to terrorist and civil disturbances . The City shall develop and implement programs intended to save lives, prevent injury and reduce property damage during and following a terrorist attack or civil unrest incident.
Program 67-1.1: The City shall regularly review and update as necessary the confidential list of potential terrorist targets in the City.
Program 67-1.2: The City shall study ways to minimize collateral damage in the areas surrounding the confidential list of potential targets.
Program 67-1.3: The City shall study potential access problems along major routes such as Brand Boulevard, San Fernando Road and Verdugo Boulevard in the event of an attack or civil unrest, and shall provide recommendations to manage traffic through these areas in the event of a disaster.
Program 67-1.4: The City shall identify potential, strategically located staging sites near high -risk assets from which emergency response personnel, including mutual aid forces, can be deployed quickly and efficiently.
Program 67-1.5: The City shall continue to conduct emergency disaster response exercises that utilize credible crime, terrorism and natural disaster scenarios.
Program 67-1.6: The City shall continue to prepare and implement measures to protect essential City facilities and infrastructure from criminal or terrorist attack, including cyber attack.
Program 67-1.7: The City shall regularly review the Police Department’s level of training and contingency plans to ensure that the Department is responsive to any changes in the City’s profile (such as changes in demographics or types of businesses) that may increase the risk of terrorist attacks.
395 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –32 | March 2025 Draft
Program 67-1.8: The City shall annually review plans to respond to a large-scale criminal event, such as a terrorist incident. Such plans shall consider topics such as identification of potential targets, risk reduction strategies, minimization of collateral damage and coordination with other agencies.
Policy 67-2: Crime reduction programs. The City shall undertake programs aimed specifically at reducing crime.
Program 67-2.1: The City shall continue to monitor and regularly study crime statistics to look for trends or shifts in population, economics or social conditions that would engender increased crime.
Program 67-2.2: The City shall continue to educate the public about crime watch, neighborhood watch and other similar programs.
3.67 Dangerous Animals and Plants
3.67.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS OVERVIEW
Wild animal – human interaction appears to be increasing in California, in part as a result of man’s people’s increased encroachment onto the progressively smaller “islands” of undeveloped terrain left in the region.
This also means that animal density in these undeveloped areas has increased, with the resultant increased competition for food resources. Most often, this interaction consists of casual sightings of animals from a distance, but some animals have actually adapted to their urban surroundings and become accustomed to eating pet food, trash, and even pets. Some animals are carriers of disease.
There are several plants that can be poisonous if touched or eaten. While this is not a major health concern, sensitive individuals, especially infants, need to be protected from the potential harmful effects. There are innumerable lists of poisonous plants available in books and on the web. It is difficult to address all potential dangerous plants, but some of the more common ones are listed in the accompanying Technical Background Report (Appendix A).
3.67.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
Coyotes are common in the Glendale area. Studies of
these coyotes show that they have adapted well to the
urban environment partly because people are used to
leaving food out for them. The San Gabriel Mountains
are habitat for mountain lions and black bear s. These
animals tend to avoid humans, although bears are also
opportunistic and have learned to look for food in
dumpsters and other areas frequented by people.
Actions that people can take if they encounter a
mountain lion or black bear are similar: make yourself look as big as possible; shout; throw rocks or sticks you can reach without bending over; take aggressive action.
Deer and smaller animals like raccoons, ground
squirrels, rabbits, bats and rats can carry diseases that can be transmitted to domestic animals and people, either through direct contact, or through the bites of fleas and ticks. Some of these conditions include rabies (through direct contact, such as a bite, from the infected animal), and plague (carried by infected fleas that live on squirrels, rats, rabbits, and even domestic animals).
Mice and other rodents can also carry the virus that causes hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, a flu -like condition that can cause pulmonary distress in some individuals. Mosquitoes are also the carriers of viruses that can cause encephalitis or meningitis, such as West Nile encephalitis. People affected by all of these conditions have been reported in California in the last few years, although these are generally isolated cases.
The Centers for Disease Prevention and Control keep track of outbreaks or incidents of these diseases throughout the United States, and provide detailed information about each of these conditions at their web page.
396 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –33 | March 2025 Draft
Other potentially dangerous animals in the area include rattlesnakes, bees and wasps, and black widow spiders. Los Angeles County, including Glendale, is on the watch list for Africanized Honey Bee (AHB) infestation, although it is not considered a serious threat at this time. Several Salmonella incidences linked to reptiles, such as iguanas and turtles, have been reported in Los Angeles County.
The City of Glendale contracts with the Pasadena Humane Society (PHS) for animal control. The Glendale Police Department administers the contract. PHS provides to citizens, at nominal fees, humane traps that can be used to trap small animals. The PHS also deals with feral cats and stray dogs. The Arcadia District Office of the County of Los Angeles Agricultural Commissioner / Weights and Measures Department and the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District provide vector control services for Glendale (a vector is an organism that serves as carrier from one host to another of disease -producing bacteria, fungi, worms, or viruses).
3.6.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-8 Dangerous Animals and Plants
Goal 78. Reduce the risks to the public related to wild animals and poisonous or dangerous plants.
Policy 78-1: Public Information. The City shall provide information to the public about the risks associated with wild animals and dangerous or poisonous plants.
Program 78-1.1: The City shall make information available to the public (for example, with pamphlets or using the City’s web site) summarizing the ways to avoid dangerous wild animals and actions that can be taken in the event of an encounter with such animals.
Program 78-1.2: The City shall make information available to the public, such as pamphlets or information on the City’s web site, summarizing the ways to avoid dangerous plants and first-aid measures that can be taken in the event of exposure to or ingestion of such plants.
Policy 78-2: Interaction Prevention of Dangerous Wildlife Interaction. The City shall assist the public in their efforts to reduce interactions with wild animals and dangerous or poisonous plants.
Program 78-2.1: The City, at the discretion of the Director of Public Works, shall provide residents with trash receptacles that are difficult for animals to knock over or open.
Program 78-2.2: The City shall work with the Park Rangers to monitor sightings of mountain lions and black bears in and adjacent to City limits, and shall post this information at the entrance to trailheads in the areas where sightings have been made in the past year.
Program 78-2.3: The City shall encourage residents that who wish to compost in their properties to use enclosed composting bins as part of the City’s edible food recovery program and organics procurement program required by SB 1383.
Program 78-2.4: The City shall encourage residents to have their pets vaccinated for rabies and provide information about the benefits of flea control as a method for preventing the spread of dangerous diseases.
Program 78-2.5: The City shall monitor for unusual numbers of dead rodents or birds and notify appropriate County agencies if such an event occurs.
Program 78-2.6: The City shall monitor for coyote sightings and work with appropriate agencies to eliminate or relocate aggressive coyotes as necessary.
3.87 Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency Response
3.87.1 IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS OVERVIEW
Planning issues pertaining to emergency response, disaster preparedness, and disaster recovery require an assessment of the hazards, identification of functions and resources to handle short -term response, and development of recovery procedures. Earthquakes pose the greatest challenge because they occur with little 397 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –34 | March 2025 Draft
or no warning, and can set into motion a number of linked events. In the immediate aftermath of a major earthquake, numerous decisions need to be made. These decisions include the orderly evacuation and sheltering of displaced individuals and families, the search for and rescue of victims, and the suspension and resumption of critical services such as utilities and transportation routes. Effective emergency response hinges on an accurate assessment of the disaster to identify those areas that need the most assistance, and reliance on pre-determined strategies that allow emergency personnel to make the best possible decisions given the circumstances.
Evacuation routes are used to guide residents and visitors from dangerous areas to safer locations. or to transport emergency responders. Evacuation routes and bomb shelters are a legacy of the 1950s and 1960s when communities prepared for the evacuation of their entire population if necessary as a result of a nuclear war. In the last two decades, however, there has been a shift toward sustainability, with communities emphasizing the need to be self -sufficient after an emergency. There are, nevertheless, certain types of disasters that require the mobilization (evacuation) of a segment of the population from a hazardous or potentially hazardous area to a safer area. This would be the case, for example in the event of a wildfire threatening residences at the urban-wildland interface, the inundation of the area directly down gradient from a breached dam, or the area downwind from a facility that releases a toxic chemical into the air. All of these events require the immediate evacuation of high occupancy and dependent facilities (immobile populatio ns) to safer areas that may or may not be near to the impacted area. Evacuated individuals may be able to come back home or to their place of business within 24 to 48 hours of the disaster. In the event of an earthquake, displaced individuals or households generally prefer to take shelter in a facility or park as close to home as possible. Evacuation need not be immediate following the earthquake, but the length of time that displaced people may need to remain in emergency shelters can be expected to last several days, until they can return home or find more permanent locations with relatives, friends or elsewhere.
Disaster response routes are roads that can best move emergency services and supplies to where they are needed the most immediately following a major disaster. Therefore, disaster routes should be kept clear of non-essential traffic and debris following an earthquake or another di saster. The public needs to stay off disaster response routes until allowed to do sotravel on them by the local police.
In Glendale’s commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of all residents, the City will continue to foster its collaborative approach among police, fire and city departments to effectively prevent, mitigate and recover from disasters necessitating emergency evacuations. Special attention will be given to areas with unique needs and c oncerns, ensuring that vulnerable populations receive tailored support and resources during such events. By enhancing communication, planning, and training, we aim to cre ate a resilient community capable of responding swiftly and effectively to emergencies, safeguarding the lives of all citizens.
3.87.2 LOCAL CONDITIONS
The Emergency Operating Center (EOC) for
Glendale is tasked with coordinating the City’s
disaster operations. The EOC is activated
whenever there is a need to coordinate the
emergency response of City departments,
government agencies and volunteer groups in
response to emergencies, disasters or other
significant events. It is activated upon order from
the City Manager's office or by certain other
designated City officials. The City’s Emergency
Plan establishes the responsibilities of the City’s
emergency response personnel and the framework
by which the City will respond to and receive
emergency mutual aid from other local
governments and County, State and Federal
agencies. The Emergency Plan is updated annually and City personnel train with it annually in exercises ranging from tabletop discussions to full-scale exercises involving dozens of personnel in the field supported by the activation of the City’s EOC. The level of EOC staffing will vary with the specific emergency situation.
The data suggest that the City of Glendale is at risk of experiencing a near -source earthquake given its proximity to three active seismic sources. The City has already taken several actions that have reduced its vulnerability to earthquake -induced strong ground shaking, but additional work can be done. The City’s 398 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –35 | March 2025 Draft
Emergency Plan establishes the responsibilities of the City’s emergency response personnel and the framework by which the City will respond to and receive emergency mutual aid from other local governments and County, State and Federal agencies. The Emergency Plan is updated annually and City personnel train with it annually in exercises ranging from tabletop discussions to full -scale exercises involving dozens of personnel in the field supported by the activation of the City’s Emergency Operations Center.
It is important to remember that during large -scale disasters, such as an earthquake, several emergencies may have to be addressed simultaneously, and that emergency resources from neighboring communities and jurisdictions may not be available for some tim e after the disaster. In fact, other neighboring cities may fare worse than Glendale to the same disaster, and Glendale may have to respond to incidents not only within its corporate boundaries, but may be called on to assist other nearby communities. Self -sufficiency, both by City Divisions and the residents, is an important component of a community’s preparedness.
Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route Plate P-3 shows the evacuation emergency response routes through the City of Glendale . shown on the 2022 County of Los Angeles Safety Element (Leighton, 1990). These evacuation emergency response routes are , together with the proposed City emergency disaster response routes, the main thoroughfares through the City to be used by emergency response services during an emergency. If the situation warrants the evacuation of an area, these roadways serve as evacuation routes. Plate P -5 also shows Otherwise, all of these roads should be considered disaster response routes. There are significant differences in thesebetween evacuation routes and dis aster routes concepts that need to be understood by everybody.
Evacuation routes are used to relocate residents and visitors from a hazardous or potentially hazardous area to a safer area. Given that evacuation activities are controlled by particular situations, selection of the most appropriate evacuation route for a particular disaster generally requires some improvisation. Nevertheless, identifying the routes through the City that provide for the most direct access in and out of a given area helps to speed the process during an actual emergency. Road blockage of the evacuation and disaster routes should be prevented at all times.
Disaster routes serve as thoroughfares primarily for the movement of emergency response vehicles and access to critical facilities. Disaster routes are identified in Figure 12.6 of the 2022 County of Los Angeles Safety Element. 8 These are typically wide roads or major arterial routes that allow for cross -town traffic.
Notice that all fire stations in the City are located along or immediately adjacent to one of these disaster response routes. Immediate emergency clearance (for exam ple of debris associated with an earthquake) and road/bridge repairs for short -term emergency operations are emphasized along disaster routes. When these roadways are being used for disaster response, the general public needs to stay off these roads until told otherwise by the Police Department or the appropriate City agency managing the disaster response operationsEOC. Specific actions warranted along these disaster response and evacuation routes include the following:
Mitigation measures that prevent earthquake-induced slope failures from blocking these roads should be implemented. This is especially significant for Glenoaks Boulevard, since it provides the only source of access in and out for this area of Glendale, and to a lesser degree for East Chevy Chase Drive, both in the San Rafael Hills.
Improvement of those disaster response routes with inadequate widths to support the mobilization of fire engines and other emergency response vehicles.
Mitigation and/or setback of structures or buildings that could potentially block the public right -of-way along these routes , whe re fea sible. This includes cornices, parapets, or other overhangs that if collapsed, would impact traffic on these roads.
Development of specific plans for traffic control contingencies during major disasters, considering both evacuation and disaster response options.
The disaster routes identified divide the City into sections. Potential shelter locations have been identified within each of these sections. These shelter locations are shown on Plate P- and on Table 2. Residents and visitors in need of shelter following a disaster are encouraged to report first to the shelter closest to them.
8 County of Los Angeles. 2022. Safety Element. https://planning.lacounty.gov/long-range-planning/general- plan/general-plan-elements/
399 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –36 | March 2025 Draft
If that shelter is full, closed, or otherwise unavailable, then residents would be referred to the next closest open shelter. These facilities are to serve as staging and communication areas for emergency response personnel, and City officials and relief o rganizations managing the emergency recovery efforts. Residents should be aware of the disaster routes and emergency shelters in their neighborhood, and the actions to take in the event of a disaster, including how to be self-sufficient for at least 72 hours after a disaster. Equipment caches with supplies can be maintained at several of the shelter locations identified in Table 2 so that they are immediately available during an emergency.
LCI’s technical advisory document on Fire Hazard Planning mandates that cities and counties must identify and consider residential developments with less than two evacuation routes located in any hazard zone in the Safety Element. Single access points of entry and exit were identified for Glendale in compliance with SB 99 and LCI’s requirements (see Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route). This analysis took a conservative approach and assessed all Glendale residential developments for single access entry and exit points, as most of the City is in at least one of four hazard zones: seismic, flood, fire, and landslides.
The process to identify the residential developments that have less than two routes that can be used for emergency evacuation in Glendale included:
1. Identifying residential neighborhoods based on residential land use designations consistent with the Glendale General Plan Land Use Designations Map.
2. Road classifications (local street, major arterial, minor arterial, urban collectors, freeway, and other) were used to identify areas where 30 or more parcels/units had a single entry/exit point within high, medium high, medium, moderate, and low residential zoning as well as mixed use and additional residential zoning (residential open space and restricted residential).
The number of assessor parcel number boundaries adjacent to a marked road were counted . .
In low density residential land use areas with single family homes, the number of parcels with driveway access to the street were counted and included as a single entry/exit neighborhood if there were 30 or more units serviced by the local road. The 30 or more units threshold is consistent with the California Public Resources Code Section 4290.5 which defines subdivision as an existing residential development of more than 30 dwelling units .
3. Medium and high-density land use areas were evaluated using the same methodology of 30 or more dwelling units.
Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route map identifies multiple residential developments in Glendale with a single access point of entry/exit. There are single access neighborhoods located throughout Glendale, including in the Chevy Chase mountains , Verdugo Mountains, and near Deukmejian Wilderness Park. The Chevy Chase and Verdugo Mountain areas are within VHFHSZs with existing evacuation plans as determined by the City. Single access points, particularly in Fire Hazard Severity Zones, can make emergency evacuations problematic during an emergency, such as a wildfire. Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route map also illustrates the major evacuation routes within Glendale.
Consistent with AB 747, the City prepared an evacuation analysis (Appendix C) that considers two representative evacuation scenarios and provides the City with estimates of roadway capacity constraints and travel time considerations during evacuations. The analysis helps identify locations where there is a greater potential for traffic congestion and need for additional control measures in the event of an evacuation.
The evacuation analysis considers the following two representative evacuation scenarios:
• Wildfire (Scenario #1) - Wildfire ignites in the Verdugo Mountains/San Rafael Hills in east Glendale • Landslide (Scenario #2) – Landslide occurs in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale The evacuation analysis uses the City of Glendale Travel Demand Model (“travel model”). The current travel model was calibrated and validated for a 2021 base year and includes a 2040 future scenario with 2040 land use forecasts and transportation improvement assumptions. The travel model represents all land uses in the City grouped into transportation analysis zones. The areas that would be affected by each evacuation scenario were identified based on the CAL FIRE’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones mapping and City of Glendale staff and emergency responders. The affected areas were overlaid with the Glendale transportation analysis zones to identify the number of people that would need to be evacuated under each evacuation scenario.
Transportation activity was modeled fo r one worst-case time period, based on the weekday PM peak hour 400 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –37 | March 2025 Draft
(between 4PM to 6PM) when non -evacuation traffic and congestion would be at its highest levels . This analysis was developed based on conservative assumptions and modeling techniques that reflect current understanding of evacuation analysis.
A summary of the results of this analysis is provided below.
Wildfire (Scenario #1)
• Base Year : If an evacuation were to occur due to a wildfire in the Verdugo Mountains, the analysis estimates over-capacity conditions on several roadways in the City . Specifically, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity with the City of Glendale can be found in Appendix C, Figure 6.
• Future Year: With peak evacuation from a wildfire in the Verdugo Mountains in the future year, the analysis predicts over -capacity conditions on several roadways in the City. In addition to the locations listed for the base year, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity with the City of Glendale can be found in Appendix C, Figure 7.
Landslide (Scenario #2)
• Base Year: With peak evacuation from a landslide in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale in the base year, the analysis indicates over -capacity conditions on several roadways in the City. Specifically, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity within the City of Glendale can be found in Appendix C, Figure 9.
• Future Year: With peak evacuation from a landslide in the San Gabriel Mountains in north Glendale in the future year, the analysis predicts over -capacity conditions on several roadways in the City. Most congestion locations would be the same as those identified for the base year. In addition to the locations listed for the base year, the roadways where demand volumes are projected to be at or exceed road capacity within the City of Glendale can be found in Appendix C, Figure 10.
Reference Appendix C for more information on the methodology and assumptions used for the evacuation analysis and more detailed results.
3.7.3 Goals, Policies and Programs
GOAL S-9 Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency Response Goal 8 9. Maintain a high level of emergency preparedness.
Policy 89-1: Emergency Response. The City shall prepare for emergency response and recovery from natural and urban disasters, especially wildfires and earthquake hazards.
Program 89-1.1: The City shall update disaster preparedness and recovery plans as necessary , including the Glendale Emergency Plan with every update to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to evaluate evacuation route capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios . Such plans shall be prepared in accordance with regional, State and Federal regulations and guidelines.
Program 89-1.2: The City shall maintain and update the City’s emergency response organization s consisting of representatives from all City departments, local quasi -governmental agencies, private businesses, citizens, and other community partners involved in critical and/or community-wide services.
Program 89-1.3: The City shall maintain mutual aid agreements with other agencies and develop partnerships with other emergency relief organizations.
Program 89-1.4: The City shall establish traffic control contingency plans for disaster routes..
Program 89-1.5: The City shall make information available to the public (for example, with pamphlets or using the City’s web site) about steps they can take to increase their level of disaster preparedness such as the need for storing supplies to increase self-reliance in the aftermath of a disaster.
401 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –38 | March 2025 Draft
Program 89-1.6: The City shall promote the development of evacuation plans in high -rise buildings, immobile population centers, businesses that use hazardous substances, and in other critical facilities. The evacuation procedures should be designed to be carried out without aid from the City’s emergency response resources. Ensure that new development has sufficient fire protection, police, and emergency medical services available by reviewing development proposals to determine impacts on emergency services and ensure developments meet appropriate safety standards.
Program 89-1.7: The City shall compile and maintain information about facilities with special risks, hazards and needs that may require specialized response.
Program 89-1.8: The City shall participate in emergency preparedness exercises.
Program 89-1.9: The City shall inventory equipment available, including battery -powered and mobile generators, cranes, bulldozers, concrete saws, large ladders, personal protective gear (including respirators, gloves, and protective clothing), medical equipment and supplies, tents and other facilities that can be used for temporary shelter and as makeshift emergency medical centers.
Program 9-1.10 The City shall assess existing City buildings, including those for first responders and critical service providers , to determine retrofits needed for long -term resilience to climate change-affected hazards including wildfires.
Program 9-1.11 The City shall provide accurate documentation required for cost recovery efforts from federal, state, and other agencies in the event of a disaster or emergency . This includes providing a plan for rapid resumption of impacted businesses and community services.
Policy 9-2: Plan Updates. The City shall review and update as necessary the Glendale Emergency Plan with every update to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to evaluate evacuation route capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios.
Policy 9-3: Evacuation Communications. The City shall strengthen and maintain evacuation communication protocols among local agencies and organizations involved in the management of emergency response , and the communication between the City and the general public during an emergency.
Program 9-3.1: The City shall implement the communications-related strategies identified in the Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) to address how information may be shared in preparation for, during and after emergency events. Such strategies include:
• This City shall consider using s ystems such as public information emergency systems and emergency satellite communications to improve communications , such as those outlined in the FEMA NIMS Guidance for Public Information Officers.
• The City shall use variable message board equipment and targeted installation of permanent dynamic message signs on evacuation routes to improve communication and reduce public confusion.
• The City shall implement a traffic control center which would have up to the minute reports on traffic patterns and can communicate directly with emergency officers via broadcast media, social media, and other emergency communications channels (e.g., Everbridge, Genesis) to let driv ers know about roadway congestion and conditions and direct them to alternate routes. • The City shall consider installing new traffic counters and/or CCTV cameras on freeways, which can further help assess traffic flow, volume of vehicles evacuating, and monitor incidents during emergency evacuation events. Caltrans currently has two cameras in the proximity of Glendale: SR-2 at Colorado Street and SR-134 at Glendale Avenue.
• The City shall post signs and flyers in public places, such as businesses, community centers, and parks, with instructions on where to go in an evacuation 402 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –39 | March 2025 Draft
and key evacuation information. Signs and flyers should be posted in multiple languages.
Program 9-3.2 The City shall increase redundancy in emergency evacuation communication systems in the event of an electric outage through a variety of measures, including back-up power for telecommunication towers and other critical facilities, distributing information via radio channels, promoting ownership of hand cranked radios, and other means. Regularly test alert systems for potential evacuation scenarios.
Policy 9-4: Vulnerable Populations. The Cit y shall implement additional steps and resources for the successful evacuation of vulnerable populations, including those who are visually impaired, hearing impaired, mobility impaired, people without vehicles, non-English speaking persons, people with medical conditions, and unhoused populations.
Program 9-4.1: The City shall implement the strategies identified in the Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) for evacuation of vulnerable populations. Such strategies include:
• The City shall ensure that evacuation information is provided for the hearing impaired that may include additional visual aids such as pictures or maps , and signage with larger fonts , as well as written updates via communication and social media channels.
• The City shall partner with neighboring cities/private/non -profit agencies to provide adequate p aratransit services for those who need assistance in an evacuation, especially for those visually and mobility impaired. • The City shall emphasize the importance of carpooling with neighbors or community members and provide information on transit routes and transit stops, especially to those individuals without vehicles. The City shall also identify areas that would benefit from a carpooling program (e.g. communities with limited ingress/egress) and coordinate with neighbors, local businesses, and local transit to identify volunteers for carpooling and vehicle sharing at the community level.
• The City shall provide bilingual or multilingual materials to support communication with non -English speaking populations during evacuation.
Communications should be created in English, Armenian, Spanish, Tagalog, and Korean.
• The City shall communicate in advance the location and availability of hospitals or facilities w ith emergency/life -sustaining medical equipment that residents , especially those with medical conditions, can go to during an evacuation and identify the transportation mode of transfers to other facilities, based on the criticality of patients/clients and type of health needs. • The City shall arrange for food, shelter, and transportation for unhoused populations, offering age-appropriate emergency and evacuation information to homeless children.
Policy 9.5 Traffic Management. In the event of an emergency requiring evacuation, traffic management strategies to increase evacuation capacity and efficiency shall be implemented:
Program 9-5.1: The City shall implement the roadway and intersection capacity and resilience related strategies identified in the Evacuation Analys is (Appendix C) to maximize the capacity of the evacuation roadway network. Such strategies include:
• Establish temporary control points to temporarily close inbound travel lanes on select unlimited access arterials (such as parkways and boulevards) to allow outbound traffic to utilize these lanes during evacuation. • Establish temporary control points to close inbound lanes on selected roadways utilized for evacuation routes to prevent drivers on these routes from entering the City while evacuation is underway.
403 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –40 | March 2025 Draft
• Install signal battery backups in case signal operations need to be maintained during a power outage. Consider using channeling devices, static signs, and coning strategies to manage intersection flow during power outage if the signals lack power.
• Identify and communicate with communities that have one or two access points.
Prioritize adding additional access to communities which are currently served by only one or two access points.
• Develop transportation solutions such as the use of a bus system for evacuating individuals with special needs (such as those with mobility limitations). • Establish traffic control points (i.e., locations along designated evacuation routes with emergency management personnel) to maintain a greater degree of evacuation management. These locations could enhance the efficiency of an evacuation, reduce public confusion, and allow increased operational flexibility during an evacuation.
• Maintain evacuation roadways and shoulders to clear them of trees, vegetation, and debris that would block travel lanes and shoulders for evacuating and emergency operation vehicles.
Program 9-5.2 Single Access Neighborhoods. The City shall implement strategies to improve emergency access for Glendale’s single access neighborhoods. Such strategies shall include:
• The City shall i dentify alternative plans for evacuation depending upon the location and dynamics of the emergency and consider conducting traffic modeling to quantify travel times under various likely scenarios. Consider the adequacy of emergency access under a range of emergency scenarios, including proximity to existing fire services and the capacity of existing services. • The City shall e ncourage residents to take only one or two vehicles (based on household size) to reduce the number of evacuating vehicles. The City shall offer offsite parking facilities to safely store secondary vehicles in advance of an emergency event.
• The City shall implement earl y evacuations for vulnerable com munities with limited egress routes, including single-access neighborhoods. • The City shall conduct regular evacuation trainings to educate residents on how to prepare to be without electricity for three days or more and how to shut off domestic gas supply in cases of emergency including training for single-access community homeowner associations and residents.
404 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –41 | March 2025 Draft
EXHIBITS
Table-1 Hazard Assessment of Critical Facilities and Schools in Glendale (based on their location relative to hazards described in the Appendix A: Technical Background Report only--Site Specific Studies Recommended)
ID Critical Facilities
Strong Shaking1
Surface Rupture
Liquefaction
Landsliding
Slope Instability
Wildfire Susceptibility
Flooding
Dam Inundation
Hazardous Listings
1 Emergency Operations Center
2 Glendale Police Station
3 LA County Sheriff Station
Fire Stations
4 Fire Station 21
5 Fire Station 22
6 Fire Station 23
7 Fire Station 24
8 Fire Station 25
9 Fire Station 26
10 Fire Station 27
11 Fire Station 28
12 Fire Station 29
Hospitals
13 Verdugo Hills Hospital
14 Adventist Medical Center
15 Glendale Memorial Hospital
Schools
16 Glendale Community College
17 Montrose Campus of Glendale College
18 R.D. White Elementary
19 John Marshall Elementary
20 John Muir Elementary
21 Horace Mann Elementary
22 Thomas Edison Elementary
23 Columbus Elementary
24 Mark Keppel Elementary
25 Thomas Jefferson Elementary
26 Balboa Elementary
27 Hoover High School
28 Eleanor Toll Middle School
29 Benjamin Franklin Elementary
30 Allan F. Daily High School
31 Theodore Roosevelt Middle School
32 Glendale High School H
33 Woodrow Wilson Middle School
34 Glenoaks Elementary
35 Verdugo Woodlands Elementary
405 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –42 | March 2025 Draft
ID Critical Facilities
Strong Shaking1
Surface Rupture
Liquefaction
Landsliding
Slope Instability
Wildfire Susceptibility
Flooding
Dam Inundation
Hazardous Listings
36 John Fremont Elementary
37 Lincoln Elementary
38 Dunsmore Elementary H
39 Clark Magnet High School H
40 Cerritos Elementary
41 Valley View Elementary
42 Glendale Career College
43 La Crescenta Elementary
44 Monte Vista Elementary
45 Mountain Avenue Elementary
46 Rosemont Avenue Middle School
47 Crescenta Valley High School
High Risk to Critical Facility --facility is located in, or within ½ mile, of a census tract containing 31 or more hazardous waste listings.
Moderate Risk to Critical Facility--facility is located in, or within ½ mile, of a census tract containing 11 to 30 hazardous waste listings.
1 The entire Glendale area can experience strong seismic shaking as a result of an earthquake on the Sierra Madre, Verdugo, Raymon d or Hollywood faults. Based on the HAZUS analyses, Glendale High School is anticipated to experience at least moderate damage as a result of any of the four earthquake scenarios mentioned above. The schools in the northern portion of the district, near the Sierra Madre fault, are also anticipated to suffer at least moderate damage as a result of the maximum magnitude earthquake on the Sierra Madre fault. The schools that, according to the HAZUS analyses, are more likely to perform poorly during a near-source earthquake are identified with an “H”. 406 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –43 | March 2025 Draft
Table-2 Potential Shelters In and Near the City of Glendale (for the location of the shelter closest to you, refer to Plate P-)
Address Buildings
Building
Capacity
Phone
Number*
Number
on Map
Parks and Facilities
1 Adult Recreation Center 210 E. Colorado
Street
Yes 75 818-548-
3775
2 Brand Park Studios 1601 W. Mountain
Street
Yes 40 818-548-
3782
3 Civic Auditorium 1401 N. Verdugo
Road
Yes 600 818-548-
2147
Clark Community Center 4747 New York
Avenue L.C.
Yes 150 548-4068
4 Crescenta Valley County Park 3901 Dunsmore
Avenue L.C.
Yes 40 No Phone
5 Fremont Park 600 W. Hahn Avenue No
No Phone
6 Glendale Armory 220 E. Colorado
Street
Yes 250 No Phone
7 Glenoaks Park 2531 E. Glenoaks
Blvd.
Yes 40 No Phone
8 Griffith Manor Park 1551 Flower Street Yes 25 No Phone 9 Maple Park 820 E. Maple Street Yes 130 818-548-
3785
10 Pacific Park 501 S. Pacific
Avenue
No
No Phone
11 Scholl Canyon Ballfields 3200 E. Glenoaks
Blvd.
No
No Phone
12 Scholl Canyon Park 2849 E. Glenoaks
Blvd.
No
No Phone
13 Sparr Heights Senior Center 1613 Glencoe Way Yes 40 818-548- 2187
14 Verdugo Park 1621 Cañada Blvd. No
No Phone
Schools and Colleges
15 Glendale Community College 1500 N. Verdugo
Road
Yes
818-240-
1000
16 Montrose Campus of Glendale College
Glendale Community College Garfield
Campus
1122 E. Garfield
Avenue
Yes
818-240-
1000 (ext.
5678)
17 R.D. White Elementary 744 E. Doran Street Yes
818-241-
2164
18 John Marshall Elementary 1201 E. Broadway Yes
818-242-
6834
19 Thomas Edison Elementary 440 W. Lomita
Avenue
Yes
818-241-
1807
20 Balboa Elementary 1844 Bel Aire Drive Yes
818-241-
1801
21 Hoover High School 651 Glenwood Road Yes
818-242-
6801
22 Allan F. Daily High School 220 N. Kenwood Yes
818-247-
4805
23 Crescenta Valley High School 4400 Ramsdell Yes
818-249-
407 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –44 | March 2025 Draft
Address Buildings
Building
Capacity
Phone
Number*
Avenue 5871
24 Glendale High School 1440 E. Broadway Yes 818-242-
3161
25 Anderson W. Clark Magnet High School 4747 New York Ave Yes 818-248- 8324
408 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –45 | March 2025 Draft
Table-3 Program Implementation Schedule
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
1-1.1 Adopt Building Code
Amendments
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-
goingEvery
3 years
1-1.2 Hire and train staff
knowledgeable on the Building
Codes
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
1-1.3 Encourage seismic
improvements
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
1-1.4 Cooperate with G.U.S.D. to
improve the structural safety of
their buildings
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
1-2.1 Require geological studies for
projects in identified hazards
zones
Public Works/Engineering,
Community
Development/Building &
Safety and Planning
N/A High On-going
1-2.2 Require geological studies for
critical facilities projects in the
hazards zones of the Verdugo,
Lukens, Hollywood and
Sycamore Canyon faults
Public Works/Engineering,
Community
Development/Building &
Safety and Planning
N/A High On-going
1-2.3 Require liquefaction
assessment studies
Public Works/Engineering,
Planning
N/A High On-going
1-2.4 Require slope stability
analyses
Public Works/Engineering,
Planning
N/A High On-going
1-3.1 Review seismic vulnerability of
essential facilities
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A Moderate 3 years
1-3.2 Replace piping and fittings in
City-owned water tanks
Glendale Water & Power GWP Budget High 1 year
1-3.3 Annual review of dams and
water storage facilities
Glendale Water & Power GWP Budget High On-going
1-4.1 Develop and make available to
public a list of State certified
geologists and soils engineers
Public Works/Engineering PW Budget Moderate 1 year
1-4.2 Provide State with updated
information on seismic
hazards
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
PW Budget High On-going
1-5.1 Update Safety Element as
needed
Community
Development/Planning
General Fund Moderate As Needed
1-5.2 Develop web-based
information for public
regarding seismic hazards and
safety strategies
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
PW and CDD
Budget
Moderate 1 year
1-5.3 Promote earthquake
preparedness through
publications in various
languages
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
PW and CDD
Budget
Moderate 1 year
1-5.4 Provide information about
radon gas hazards
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety
PW CDD
Budget
Low 3 years
409 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –46 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
2-1.1 Require geological and
geotechnical investigations in
areas of potential hazard
Public Works/Engineering,
Community Development/
Building & Safety and
Planning
N/A High On-going
2-1.2 Require preliminary geological
investigations of tract sites
Public Works/Engineering,
Community Development/
Building & Safety and
Planning
N/A High On-going
2-1.3 Require geotechnical
investigation in areas
susceptible to slope instability
Public Works/Engineering,
Community Development/
Building & Safety and
Planning
N/A High On-going
2-1.4 Discourage unnecessary
grading. Inspect grading
operations to ensure safety.
Public Works/Engineering,
Community Development/
Building & Safety and
Planning
N/A High On-going
2-1.5 Prohibit grading that is
inconsistent with the Grading
Ordinance
Public Works/Engineering,
Community Development/
Building & Safety and
Planning
N/A High On-going
2-1.6 Prohibit reconstruction of
structures meant for human
habitation that were destroyed
by failed slopes
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety and Planning
N/A High On-going
2-2.1 Consider Eestablishing a
regular inspection and
maintenance cycle for existing
physical landslide and debris
flow defenses
Public Works,
Community Development
(Building & Safety)
PW and CDD
Budget
Moderate
On-going
2-2.2 Consider Iimplementing
strategies to address
increasing vulnerabilities
associated with debris flow
and landslides
Public Works,
Community Development
(Building & Safety)
PW and CDD
Budget
Moderate 3-years
2-2.3 Consider iIdentifying locations
where slopes should be
actively monitored and install
landslide monitoring
equipment
Public Works,
Community Development
(Building & Safety)
PW and CDD
Budget
Moderate 2 years
Flooding Hazards
3-1.1 Participate in National Flood
Insurance Program
Public Works/Engineering N/A Moderate On-going
3-1.2 Discourage reconstruction of
critical facilities if located in
inundation pathways
Public Works/Engineering N/A High On-going
3-1.3 Fully mitigate potential impacts
to flood control system by new
development
Public Works/Engineering N/A High On-going
3-1.4 Maintain City-owned storm
drain facilities
Public Works/Engineering PW Budget High On-going
3-1.5 Upgrade stormwater systems
on City-owned properties and
rights-of-way to limit flooding
from extreme precipitation
events
Public Works/Engineering PW Budget High On-going
410 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –47 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
3-1.6 Implement flood mitigation
measures to mitigate
increased flood risk due to
climate change along the
Verdugo Wash
Public Works/Engineering PW Budget High On-going
Fire Hazards
4-1.1 Conduct annual fire flow tests Fire N/A Moderate On-going 4-1.2 Prepare periodic Fire Station
location and Resource studies
Fire N/A Moderate As needed
4-1.3 Road standards shall meet
needs for emergency access
Fire,/ Planning/Public
Works/Engineering
N/A Moderate On-going
4-
1.45 Improve emergency access for
areas below standards
Fire, Public Work N/A Moderate As needed
4-
1.56 Install signal preemption
devices at critical intersections
Fire, Public
Works/Transportation
Unknown Moderate Under study
4-
1.67 Evaluate impact of traffic
calming devices on
emergency response times
Fire, Public
Works/Transportation
N/A Moderate On-going
4-
1.78 Monitor and identify current
trends that may impact
emergency services
Fire, Police N/A Moderate As needed
On-going
4-
1.89 Determine if improvements are
needed in public education
and fire prevention
Fire N/A Low On-going
4-1.9 Ensure that road standards
meet the needs for emergency
access
Public Works/Engineering N/A High On-going
4-
1.10 Coordinate with
telecommunication service
entities to fire-harden
communications
Public Works/Engineering
N/A High 2 years
4-
1.11 Ensure that adequate
equipment, staffing, training,
and resources are provided to
meet current and future
projected service demands
and fire protection needs
Fire Fire Budget High On-going
4-2.1 Encourage planting and
maintenance of fire-resistant
landscaping
Fire, Community
Development/Planning
N/A Moderate On-going
4-2.2 Enforce Weed Abatement
Program in high fire hazard
areas
Fire Currently
Budgeted
High On-going
4-2.3 Require fuel management
plans for new development
Fire N/A Moderate As needed
4-2.4 Enforce the Uniform Fire Code
and Municipal Fire Code
Amendments
Fire Currently
Budgeted
High On-going
4-2.5 Consider fire safety issues
when making revisions to the
Zoning Ordinance
Community
Development/Planning,/
Fire
N/A Moderate As needed
4-
2.76 Develop program to monitor
and enforce mitigation
measures and conditions of
approval applied to projects
Community
Development/Planning
N/A Moderate 1 year
411 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –48 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
4-
2.87 Enforce Class A roofing and
encourage upgrading existing
wood roofs
Public WorksCommunity
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
4-2.8 Require that new subdivision
tracts with 30 or more lots
provide adequate access and
a minimum of two roadways
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety and Planning
N/A High On-going
4-2.9 Locate new essential public
facilities outside Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones
Public Works, GWP N/A High On-going
4-5.1 Support the provision of
adequate water and water
storage to meet future peak
fire demands
GWP, Fire GWP Budget High On-going
4-5.2 Require all new developments
to have adequate water supply
to meet fire suppression needs
GWP, Fire N/A High On-going
4-7.1 Require development and
maintenance of buffer zones
and defensible space
Fire, Public Works,
Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
4-7.2 Encourage residents to
maintain drought and fire-
resistant landscapes
Public Works, Community
Development
N/A High On-going
4-9.1 Host educational workshops
for property owners on
defensible space, home
hardening, and vegetation
management
Fire Fire Budget Moderate On-going
4-9.2 Conduct studies to determine
whether improvements are
needed in the areas of public
education and fire prevention
Fire Fire Budget Moderate On-going
Climate Change
5-1.1 Explore incorporating
strategies to reduce urban
heat island effect during City
repaving
Public Works N/A Moderate 4 to 6 years
5-1.2 Implement tree-planting
program in high priority areas
Public Works PW Budget High 2 years
5-1.3 Expand functionality and
availability of cooling centers
during poor air quality events
Public Works, Community
Services and Parks, Fire
Department
State grants High 2 years
5-1.4 Consider deploying a lending
library of air purifiers and
cooling devices targeting high
social sensitivity census tracts
Glendale Library Arts and
Culture, Community
Development/Planning
State grants Moderate 4 to 6 years
5-2.1 Consider amending the
building code to require cool
roofing and cool walls by next
CBC update cycle
Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High 2 years
5-2.2 Amend building code to
require indoor cooling in new
multi-family buildings, per DPH
guidance
Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High 2 years
5-2.3 Consider amending building Community N/A High 2 years 412 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –49 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
code to require all newly
installed HVAC units for
existing buildings to have two-
way air conditioning unit
capability
Development/Building &
Safety
5-3.1 Offer year-round educational
resources in multiple
languages for emergency
preparedness and recovery
best practices
Fire Department,
Community Services and
Parks, Glendale Library
Arts and Culture
State grants Moderate 4 to 6 years
5-3.2 Conduct emergency alert
notifications in English,
Spanish, Armenian, and
Korean
Information Technology,
Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
N/A High Ongoing
5-3.3 Every five years, reassess
which languages are spoken in
the Glendale community and
expand emergency alert
translations
Information Technology,
Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
N/A High On-going
5-3.4 Provide online information for
preparing homes and
businesses for extreme
weather events
Office of Sustainability,
Community Services and
Parks, City Manager
N/A Moderate 4 to 6 years
5-4.1 Upon the next update to the
Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP), consider the
longest recorded drought
GWP GWP budget High Ongoing
5-4.2 Expand Glendale Water and
Power programs to reduce
water use
GWP GWP budget Moderate 4 to 6 years
5-4.3 Implement a program to
conduct an energy/water
nexus study
GWP GWP budget High Ongoing
Hazardous Materials
65-
1.1 Enforce the 7 Unified Program
elements related to hazardous
materials
Fire/Hazardous Materials Permit Fees High On-going
65-
1.2 Identify roadways used to
transport hazardous materials
and critical facilities near such
routes
Fire/Hazardous Materials Area Plan High 2 years
65-
1.3 Evaluate hazardous materials
during environmental review
process for new buildings
Community
Development/Planning,
/Fire/Hazardous Materials
Plan check/
permit fees
High On-going
65-
1.4 Maintain ability to respond to
hazardous materials incidents
in the Ccity
Fire/Hazardous Materials General Fund/
EMC/EOC
High On-going
65-
1.5 Encourage public to eliminate
or reduce use of hazardous
materials
Fire/Hazardous Materials Disposal fee/
State grants
High On-going
65-
1.6 Continue to support recycling
centers
Fire/Hazardous Materials Disposal fee/
State grants
Moderate On-going
65-
1.7 Review direction of City’s
Certified Unified Program
Agency
Fire/Hazardous Materials EMC Budget Moderate On-going
65-
1.8 Coordinate hazardous
materials regulation with other
agencies
Fire/Hazardous Materials N/A Moderate On-going
413 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –50 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
Terrorism, Civil Disturbance and Crime
67-
1.1 Review and update
confidential list of potential
targets in the City
Police/SPE Working Group N/A High On-going
76-
1.2 Study ways to minimize
collateral damage to potential
targets
Police/SPE Working Group N/A High On-going
76-
1.3 Study access problems of
major routes in the event of an
attack or civil unrest
Police/SPE Working Group N/A High 2 years
Ongoing
76-
1.4 Identify staging sites near high
risk assets
Fire, /Police N/A Moderate 1 year
On-going
76-
1.5 Conduct emergency disaster
response exercises
Fire, /Police N/A High On-going
76-
1.6 Protect essential City facilities
from attack
Police,/ GWP, / Fire,
Information Technology
N/A High On-going
76-
1.7 Review Police training and
plans for dealing with terrorist
attacks
Police Grants High On-going
76-
1.8 Annually review plans to
respond to a large-scale
incident, such as a terrorist
incident
Police/SPE Working Group N/A High On-going
76-
2.1 Monitor crime statistics to look
for trends
Police N/A High On-going
76-
2.2 Educate the public about
neighborhood watch and
similar programs
Police COPS Grants Moderate On-going
Dangerous Animal & Plant Hazards
87-
1.1 Make information available to
the public in regards to
hazardous animals
Parks and Recreation Grants High On-going
87-
1.2 Make information available to
the public in regards to
dangerous plants
Parks and Recreation Grants High On-going
87-
2.1 Provide residents with animal-
proof trash receptacles
Public Works/Maintenance
Services
Parks/PW
Grants
Low 5 years
87-
2.2 Work with Forest Rangers to
monitor wild animal sightings
and publicize information
Parks and Recreation/City
PIO
N/A Low On-going
87-
2.3 Encourage residents to use
enclosed composting bins
Parks and Recreation/PW
Integrated Waste Mgmt.
PW Integrated
Waste Mgmt.
Grants
Low On-going
87-
2.4 Encourage residents to have
pets vaccinated and publicize
the benefits of flea control
City Clerk N/A Low On-going
87-
2.5 Look for and report unusual
numbers of dead rodents or
birds
Parks and Recreation N/A High On-going
87-
2.6 Monitor coyote population and
relocate aggressive coyotes
Parks and Recreation Parks Moderate On-going
Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency PreparednessResponse 98-
1.1 Update preparedness and
recovery plans
All City Divisions N/A High On-going
89-
1.2 Maintain and update
participants in the City’s
Fire, //Police N/A High On-going
414 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –51 | March 2025 Draft
No. Program Responsible Division
Potential
Funding Priority
Time
Frame
(years)
emergency response
organization
98-
1.3 Maintain mutual aid
agreements with other
agencies
Fire,/ Police N/A High On-going
89-
1.4 Establish traffic control plans
for disaster routes
Police N/A Moderate 2 years
On-going
89-
1.5 Publicize information about
disaster preparedness
Fire/EOC N/A Low
High
1 year
On-going
98-
1.6 Promote development of
evacuation plans in high-rise
buildings, immobile population
centers, businesses that use
hazardous substances and in
other critical facilities.
Fire N/A Moderate 3 years
On-going
98-
1.7 Compile and maintain
information about facilities that
may require specialized
response.
Fire/Police/GWP/Public
Works
N/A Moderate On-going
98-
1.8 Continue to participate in
emergency preparedness
exercises
All City Divisions N/A Moderate On-going
98-
1.9 Inventory equipment needed
for emergency preparedness
Fire/EOC/Police/Public
Works/GWP/Finance--
Logistics
N/A High 1 year
On-going
9-
1.10 Assess existing City buildings,
to determine retrofits needed
for long-term resilience to
climate change-affected
hazards
Public Works, Community
Development/Building &
Safety
N/A High On-going
9-
1.11 Provide accurate
documentation for cost
recovery efforts from federal,
state and other agencies in the
event of disaster.
All City Divisions N/A High As needed
9-2.1 Implement communication-
related strategies in the
Evacuation Analysis
(Appendix C)
Public Works, Police, Fire,
Information Technology,
City Management
N/A High On-going
9-2.2 Increase redundancy in
emergency evacuation
communication systems
Information Technology,
Fire, Public Works
N/A High On-going
9-3.1 Implement strategies for
evacuation of vulnerable
populations in Evacuation
Analysis (Appendix C)
CSP, City Management
(Public Information),
N/A High On-going
9-5.1 Implement roadway and
intersection capacity and
resilience-related strategies in
Evacuation Analysis
(Appendix C)
Public Works, Police N/A High On-going
9-5.2 Implement strategies to
improve emergency access for
single-access neighborhoods
Public Works, Police N/A High On-going
415 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –52 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-1 Seismic Hazards
416 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –53 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-2 Dam Inundation Zones
417 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –54 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-3 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities
418 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –55 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-4 Single Access Neighborhoods
419 of 420
Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –56 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route
420 of 420