Agenda packet, first session — Glendale City Council, April 1, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

City

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

Amazon

Fire,

iOS

and
Android

devices

using

free

app

called

Cablecast

and

choosing

"Glendale

TV"

from

the

menu.

Meetings

are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)

548-4013

for

program

schedules.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the
meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public

comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that
agenda

item

discussed.

you

have

any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for
assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

The

City

Clerk’

office

should

notified

72 hours

(three
business

days)

soon

practicable

for

requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and
Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are
received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this

meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review
in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

72 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting

soon

as
practicable.

Please

specify

the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City
provided

interpreters

not

required

and

persons

are

welcome

use

their

own

interpreter

speak
in their native language.

APRIL 1, 2025

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION
– 1:00 PM ( To Commence at 2:00 PM)
a.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Najarian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 24STCP02101; Claim of Najarian, No. 25-0009 b.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Sanchez v. City of Glendale,

1 TYPED 3/28/2025 4:33:25 PM
04 01 25
CC

L.A.S.C. Case No. 23GDCV00701
c.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Godinez v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 23GDCV00684
d.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Central BWB LLC v. City of Glendale et al., L.A.S.C. Case No. 25STCP01018
e.

Public Employment – Attorneys
f.

Conference with Real Property Negotiators: City-designated negotiators: Roubik Golanian, Bradley Calvert, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian Van Muyden, Mark Berry and Onnig Bulanikian. Property Location: 220 and 234-236 North Glendale Avenue and 215-217, 223-225, 231-231A, and 233-235 North Everett Street. Negotiating Parties:

Gateways Hospital and Mental Health Center. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms of payment for the acquisition of property g.

Conference with Real Property Negotiators. 135-190 West Glenoaks Blvd. (APNs:
5644-013-905, 907, 914, 915, 917, 919, 921, 923, 924, 929, 930, 934, 935, and 936) and the landscaped public right-of-way of approximately 18,878 square feet located between Glenoaks Boulevard and the Verdugo Wash between Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue, all commonly referred to as the “Verdugo Wash/Glenoaks ROW Parcels.” Negotiating parties: Kam Sang Company, Inc.. Agency negotiators attending the closed session are: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Michael J.

Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, Bradley Calvert, and Mark Berry. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms for the sale of City-owned property h.

Conference with Real Property Negotiators: City-designated negotiators: Roubik Golanian, John Takhtalian, Michael J. Garcia, Gillian van Muyden, and Daniel Hernandez. Property Location: 1745 Gardena Ave. Negotiating Parties: Silverglen Properties, LLC. Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms of payment for the acquisition of property
i.

Conference with Real Property Negotiators: City-designated negotiator: Bradley Calvert. Negotiating Party: Events at Eden. Property: 1401 N. Verdugo Road.

Instructions to the negotiator(s) will concern the price and terms of payment for the lease of the City-owned Civic Auditorium

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
– 6:00 PM
Roll Call
a.

Flag Salute: Mayor Elen Asatryan
b.

Invocation: Dr. Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c.

Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the April 1, 2025 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on March 28, 2025, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a.

Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, April 8, 2025 b.

Proclamation Designating April 2025, as Armenian Heritage Month c.

Proclamation Designating the week of April 7-13, 2025, as Food Waste Prevention Week
d.

Proclamation Designating April 6-12, 2025, as National Library Week

2 TYPED 3/28/2025 4:33:25 PM
04 01 25
CC

4. CONSENT ITEMS
(Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a.

City Clerk, re: Minute of the Special City Council Meeting of March 18, 2025 b.

Community Services and Parks, re:

No-Cost Extension to the Agreements between
the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, City of Glendale and L.A. Care, and City of Glendale and Ascencia, for the Shelter Plus Care Rental Assistance Program funded by the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP)

1. Motion approving a no-cost extension to the existing Agreements between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, and City of Glendale and L.A. Care, from December 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025, for the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program

2. Motion approving a no-cost extension to the existing Sub-recipient Agreements, (8002255 and 8002406) between the City of Glendale and Ascencia for services provided under the Shelter Plus Care Rental Assistance Program, funded by Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program
c.

Community Development, re:

Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Armenian
Fairytale’s Annual Concert

1. Motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Armenian Fairytale’s Annual Concert in December 2025
d.

Community Development, re:

Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Horizon TV’s
Celebration of Armenian Independence Day with Gohar Hovhannisyan

1. Motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Horizon TV’s concert with Gohar Hovannisyan on May 29, 2025 e.

Community Services and Parks, re:

Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s
Request for Approval to be the America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area

1. Motion to approve submission of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s request to the Governor of California for approval to be the America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area for four years beginning July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2029
f.

City Attorney, re:

Findings and Conditions of Approval of DRB Case No. PDR 002532-2023 located at 1000 Sandringham Drive for the construction of a new 2- story, 5,067 square-foot (SF) single-family dwelling with an attached 3-car garage on a vacant 31,290 SF lot located in the R1R, FAR District III Zone

1. Motion to sustain the Design REview Board’s decision of April 25, 2024, to approve the project with conditions
g.

Public Works, re: Vacation of the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130) Vacation Case No. 188V

1. Resolution Ordering the Vacation

2. Resolution Adopting Plan No. 12-242

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS

3 TYPED 3/28/2025 4:33:25 PM
04 01 25
CC

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

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a.

CIty Attorney re: Discussion of the Current Mayoral Selection Policy Set Forth in Glendale Municipal Code Section 2.04.020 and its Application to the Upcoming Mayoral Selection on April 15, 2025

9. HEARINGS
a.

Community Development, re: Adoption of
Glendale General Plan's 2025 Safety
Element Update

1. Resolution to adopt the 2025 Safety Element Update and California Environmental Quality Act Exemption findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and15301(b)

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS

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

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

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

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT

4 TYPED 3/28/2025 4:33:25 PM
04 01 25
CC

1 M I N U T E S
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
MARCH 18, 2025 AT 3:00 P.M.

The Special Public Meeting of the Glendale City Council convened in the City Chambers, in said City, at 3:52 p.m., on the above date, pursuant to a call for such meeting signed by the City Clerk of the City Council, and on file with the City Clerk, a copy of which is as follows:

March 14, 2025
Date
Written Notice of said meeting was given, which Notice consisted of a copy of the foregoing Call, and was served on each Member of the Council not joining in the Call, and upon the in said City not less than 24 hours before the time fixed in said Call for said meeting, as follows:

Upon Dan Brotman at 5:00 p.m. March 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Vartan Gharpetian at 5:00 p.m. March 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Ardy Kassakhian at 5:00 p.m. March 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Ara Najarian at 5:00 p.m. March 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Elen Asatryan at 5:00 p.m. March 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Mayor Asatryan called the meeting to order at 3:52 P.M.

ROLL CALL
- All Present
- Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Tuesday, March 18, 2025 Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on March 14, 2025, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING of the City Council is hereby called to meet at 3:00 PM on Tuesday, March 18, 2025, in the Council Chamber, 613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor, Glendale, CA 91206 to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1. Community Development, re: Community Development Draft 3-5 Year Action Plan Presenting:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Staff Comments:

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

Beth Brooks
5 of 420

2 a. Motion to provide direction regarding potential initiatives and programs to be included in the Community Development Department's 3-5 Year Action Plan ADJOURNMENT: 5:15 P.M.

Moved: Brotman Seconded: Kassakhian
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
Mayor of the City of Glendale
6 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: No-Cost Extension to the Agreements between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, City of Glendale and L.A. Care, and City of Glendale and Ascencia, for the Shelter Plus Care Rental Assistance Program funded by the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP).
1) Council Motion approving a no-cost extension to the existing Agreements between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, and City of Glendale and L.A. Care, from December 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025, for the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program.
2) Council Motion approving a no-cost extension to the existing Sub-recipient Agreements, (8002255 and 8002406) between the City of Glendale and Ascencia for services provided under the Shelter Plus Care Rental Assistance Program, funded by Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale received $441,114 in Housing and Homeless Incentive Program (HHIP) funds from L.A. Care and Health Net, LLC to support homelessness prevention, housing retention, and healthcare services for Medi-Cal recipients. A total of $391,114 was allocated to Ascencia, a local non-profit agency, with prior Council approval, to provide intensive case management to 45 chronically homeless households in the City’s Shelter Plus Care (SPC) Rental Assistance Program. The remaining $50,000 was kept in-house to cover staff salaries for Homeless Management Information System (HMIS).

While the funding for this grant began in January of 2023, certain positions funded by HHIP were not filled until August 2023, resulting in unspent funds totaling $284,439.83, with a contract expiration date of December 31, 2024. As a result, Ascencia has requested a no-cost extension to the existing contract, along with a budget modification in order to fully utilize the HHIP funding by August 31, 2025, which with Health Net, LLC and L.A.

Care are agreeable.
7 of 420

24b
5 9
0 7

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council pass the Motions to extend the existing Agreements between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, City of Glendale and L.A. Care, and City of Glendale and Ascencia to August 31, 2025.

ANALYSIS
The City of Glendale received $441,114 in Housing and Homelessness Incentive (HHIP) Program from Health Net, LLC and L.A. Care to provide supportive services, housing and healthcare services to those experiencing homelessness or at the risk for a 24-month period, starting January 1, 2023. These funds are being used to assist individuals currently experiencing homelessness or at-risk in the City’s Shelter Plus Care (SPC) Rental Assistance Program, funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

SPC follows the “Supportive Housing” model, which integrates housing and supportive services. The rental assistance is funded by the HUD Continuum of Care Program (CoC) and provides rental subsidy for 45 units (total 59 chronically homeless households) in the City. SPC prioritizes placement for chronically homeless individuals when new vacancies occur or if there are turnover units. The project participants receive supportive services to promote self-sufficiency and stabilize their housing tenure.

With prior approval from City Council on June 13, 2023, the City entered into a sub- recipient Agreement with Ascencia to continue providing intensive case management services for participants in the SPC Program, such as assistance with housing funding and building relationships with landlords, chronic disease management, and help with addressing mental health or substance abuse treatment. The Program is experiencing an aging population, which requires ongoing case management and community support.

With the use of these funds, Ascencia is required to develop individual case plans to meet the needs of each client and determine housing stability. The HHIP funds also serve as matching funds for the SPC Program, as required by HUD.

Although the total of $391,114 funding was available as of January 2023, Ascencia did not fill critical positions until August 2023, resulting in low expenditure rate. To date, Ascencia has spent a total of $106,674.17, leaving a balance of $284,439.83. In order to fully utilize the HHIP funds, Ascencia is requesting a no-cost extension to the existing contracts between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, and City of Glendale and L.A. Care, through August 31, 2025. Health Net, LLC and L.A. Care are agreeable to the request.

City staff will continue to work with Ascencia to ensure timely expenditures and reporting of the HHIP program in order to close out the grant by August 31, 2025.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
8 of 420

34b
5 9
0 7
The targeted participants are homeless populations in the City of Glendale including single adults experiencing homelessness; families; individuals with disabilities, physical and mental health issues, substance use disorders and social service needs.

For new vacancies, potential clients will be screened through the Glendale Outreach Program, Glendale Coordinated Entry Systems (CES). HHIP will provide funding for staff who will utilize best practices to engage and link individuals experiencing homelessness or those at risk residing on the streets with housing and supportive services.

City staff and representatives from the Managed Care Plans (MCPs) provided a presentation to the CoC Board on September 13, 2022, and the presentation and the HHIP investment plan is posted on the Homeless Services homepage for public comment and feedback.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with extending the agreements. The HHIP funds were appropriated as part of the FY2024-2025 budget process; therefore, no appropriation is requested at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4) as it creates a government funding mechanism or constitutes other government fiscal activities which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
NA

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve the no cost extension to the Agreements between the City of Glendale, Health Net LLC, L.A. Care and Ascencia from December 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks Prepared by:

Arsine Isayan, Homeless Programs Manager
9 of 420

44b
5 9
0 7
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
N/A
10 of 420

MOTION
Moved by Council Member _______________________, seconded by Council Member ____________________________, that, with respect to the Report of the Director of Community Services & Parks to the City Council dated April 1, 2025, the City Council hereby approves a no-cost extension to the existing Agreements between the City of Glendale and Health Net, LLC, and City of Glendale and L.A. Care, extending the term of each from December 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025, for the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
11 of 420

MOTION
Moved by Council Member _______________________, seconded by Council Member ____________________________, that, with respect to the Report of the Director of Community Services & Parks to the City Council dated April 1, 2025, the City Council hereby approves a no-cost extension to the existing Sub-recipient Agreements (8002255 and 8002406) between the City of Glendale and Ascencia, extending the term from December 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025, for services provided under the Shelter Plus Care (SPC) Rental Assistance Program, funded by the Housing and Homeless Incentive (HHIP) Program.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
12 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Armenian Fairytale’s Annual Concert

1. Council motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Armenian Fairytale’s Annual Concert in December 2025

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Armenian Fairytales, or known in the community as Hekiatne Kanchum, is requesting use of one of the City’s 12 annual rent-free dates at the Alex Theatre to sponsor their Annual Concert in December 2025. This request would represent the seventh community sponsorship request for the 2025 calendar year. Three additional dates are currently reserved for City use.
13 of 420

24c
5 9
1 8

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction for utilization of one rent-free date at the Alex Theatre.

ANALYSIS
As part of the Management Agreement, Evnsong (formerly SAS) agreed to provide the City with 12 annual days of Theatre use, free of facility rental charge. In addition to events hosted by the City, the City may sponsor community groups, who meet the minimum criteria and receive City Council approval, by providing them use of one of these 12 dates. The facility rental fee is waived by the Theatre for these groups, but all other costs associated with the use of the Theatre are to be paid for by the group requesting the sponsorship.

This is the seventh request received from a community group for the 2025 calendar year. The first five community groups which have received a City day are:

1. Los Angeles Youth Orchestra (May 31, 2025)

2. Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary with artist Gevorg Chakmanyan (April 3, 2025)

3. Wild Honey (May 24, 2025)

4. Center for Armenian Arts Benefit Concert (April 30, 2025)

5. Sister Cities Event (March 6, 2025)

6. Horizon TV concert to celebrate Armenian Independence Day (May 29, 2025) *presented concurrently on April 1 agenda

7. Armenian Fairytales (December 2025) *current request Staff and the Alex anticipate the City will use the Theatre for reoccurring events and are cognizant not to bring forward community events which would surpass the number of allocated dates considering these anticipated date uses. The Council may direct staff to set aside additional dates for anticipated events in addition to the three below:

1. Armenian Genocide Commemoration Event

2. Glendale Tech Week

3. Women’s Equity Day
This request comes from Armenian Fairytales, a non-profit organization and after school program which has been serving the Glendale community for 30 years. Their mission is to provide children of all ages an opportunity to experience musical theatre and to stay close to their heritage, including old time stories and history of Armenian culture in the Armenian language.

Throughout the year, Armenian Fairytales has acting, vocal lessons, and dance classes to prepare for the annual holiday shows held every December at the Alex Theatre.

Pre-pandemic, most shows sold out the Theatre. Post-pandemic, audiences have reduced to 900-1,000, but still surpass the requirements to request the sponsorship.

This is the first request from Armenian Fairytales for 2025, however the organization received a sponsored date from the City in 2024.
14 of 420

34c
5 9
1 8

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Marketing for the event will take place through the organization’s base, and all regular Alex Theatre ticket marketing outlets.

Details for those interested in requesting sponsorships can be found on the City website at: glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community-development/cdd- administration/alex-theatre-sponsorship and the Alex Theatre website at:
https://www.thealex.com/sponsorship

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs to the City of Glendale for sponsoring this event.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
CEQA does not apply to projects where the lead agency determines "with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.) § 15061(b)(3). Here, the action involves hosting a show within a built environment. There is no possibility that the action of hosting continued shows within the Theatre may have a significant effect on the environment.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not approve utilization of one of twelve of the City days at the Alex Theatre.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
15 of 420

cc_04012025_motion_4c1.pdf

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _______________________, seconded by Council Member _______________________, that the City Council approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for the Armenian Fairytale’s Annual Concert in December 2025, as described in the April 1, 2025 staff report from the Director of Community Development.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
16 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Horizon TV’s Celebration of Armenian Independence Day with Gohar Hovhannisyan

1. Council motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Horizon TV’s concert with Gohar Hovannisyan on May 29, 2025

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Horizon TV is requesting use of one of the City’s 12 annual rent-free dates at the Alex Theatre to sponsor a concert in celebration of Armenian Independence Day on May 29, 2025. This request would represent the sixth community sponsorship request for the 2025 calendar year. Three additional dates are currently reserved for City use. 17 of 420

24d
5 9
1 9

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction for utilization of one rent-free date at the Alex Theatre.

This is the sixth request from a community group for the 2025 calendar year. Five community groups which have received a City day are:

1. Los Angeles Youth Orchestra (May 31, 2025)

2. Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary with artist Gevorg Chakmanyan (April 3, 2025)

3. Wild Honey (May 24, 2025)

4. Center for Armenian Arts Benefit Concert (April 30, 2025)

5. Sister Cities Event (March 6, 2025)

6. Current request by Horizon TV (May 29, 2025)
Staff and the Alex anticipate the City will use the Theatre for reoccurring events and are cognizant not to bring forward community events which would surpass the number of allocated dates considering these anticipated date uses. The Council may direct staff to set aside additional dates for anticipated events in addition to the three below:

1. Armenian Genocide Commemoration Event

2. Glendale Tech Week

3. Women’s Equity Day
Horizon Armenian TV is requesting City sponsorship through the use of a City day for a concert with Gohar Hovhannisyan on Sunday, May 29th, to celebrate the multiple historical events of May. The concert, comprised of traditional Armenian folk music, will serve as an homage to what Armenians call the “Triple Holiday” on May 9, also referred to as the “Victory and Peace Day,” and the anniversary of the First Republic of Armenia's independence on May 28, 1918, celebrated as “Republic Day.” This event is seeking to gather under one roof multicultural Glendale resident and raise awareness about the Armenian cause.

Gohar Hovhannisyan’s concert will be held from 7:00pm to 10:00pm and will be recorded and broadcasted on Horizon Armenian TV and on all of Horizon’s social media platforms to a combined following of 100k. Discounted tickets will be available for senior citizens and a portion of the proceeds will be donated to a charity, nonprofit organization, or a scholarship fund.

Horizon Armenian TV is the first and longest-running Armenian television broadcast in 18 of 420

34d
5 9
1 9
the United States. In addition to covering Armenian news, Horizon provides unique content for viewers, including informative programs on Armenian culture and heritage, education, pop culture, lifestyle, and entertainment.

This is the first request from Horizon for 2025, however the organization received two sponsored dates from the City in 2023.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Marketing for the event will take place through the organization’s base, and all regular Alex Theatre ticket marketing outlets.

Details for those interested in requesting sponsorships can be found on the City website at: glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community-development/cdd- administration/alex-theatre-sponsorship. And the Alex Theatre website at:
https://www.thealex.com/sponsorship

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs to the City of Glendale for sponsoring this event.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not approve utilization of one of twelve of the City days at the Alex.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
19 of 420

44d
5 9
1 9

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
20 of 420

cc_04012025_motion_4d1.pdf

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _______________________, seconded by Council Member _______________________, that the City Council approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Horizon TV’s concert with Gohar Hovannisyan on May 29, 2025, as described in the April 1, 2025 staff report from the Director of Community Development.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
21 of 420

4e
25-87671

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s Request for Approval to be the America’s Job Center of California SM Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB) has a long-standing history of delivering services as the Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services provider, via the Verdugo Jobs Center (VJC), for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area, which consists of the Cities of Glendale, Burbank and La Cañada Flintridge. The VWDB is seeking approval to be the America’s Job Center of California Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider for a four-year period. The VWDB has submitted previous career services applications for the period of 2017-2021 and for the period of 2021-2025. This would be the VWDB’s third application to continue to administer Career Services for a new period of July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2029. Without an approved application, the VWDB would have to conduct a competitive bidding process for Career Services impacting the current operations at the VJC.
22 of 420

4e2
25-87671
5 9
2 8

RECOMMENDATION
That City Council approve the submission of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s request to be America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area, which allows for the VJC to continue to deliver job services.

ANALYSIS
The Verdugo Consortium is a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) comprised of the Cities of Glendale, Burbank, and La Cañada Flintridge. The Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB) is the planning and policy body for the Consortium. Its purpose is to provide employment and training programs within the three cities and to allocate and award Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funds toward its goals. Through the JPA, the City of Glendale has responsibility for the administration of all Consortium activities, including approval of federal WIOA requirements, such as the submission of the Career Services application, which allows local areas to provide Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services directly instead of awarding a contract through a competitive bid process.

The WIOA allows Local Boards to have the option of providing Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services themselves with the agreement of the Chief Elected Official and the Governor and with successful approval of the Career Services Application.

On February 14, 2017, and March 2, 2021, the City Council approved submission of the VWDB’s Career Services Application to continue providing career services. This would be the VWDB’s third request for approval to submit a Career Services Application Request. Without submission and approval of this application, the VWDB will be required to procure its career services and contract a new provider by July 1, 2025.

On February 12, 2025, the VWDB reviewed this application at its public board meeting.

The VWDB emphasized that procurement is a costly administrative process that redirects resources from serving participants during this challenging economic time. Further, many of our participants are from vulnerable populations such as people with disabilities, public assistance recipients, homeless individuals, English Language Learners, and veterans, and consistent service delivery is critical to meet their employment needs in a timely manner. Transitioning caseloads from the VJC to a different organization may result in a disruption of services to our participants. The VWDB also noted that the VJC has a long history of excellent performance that does not justify the risk in selecting a new provider.

This performance was recognized by the California Workforce Development Board when it granted the VWDB its High Performing Board designation in 2023, which required that the local board demonstrate that it has exceeded performance toward State-imposed measures. In addition, VJC staff are City employees, allowing the administrative entity to monitor performance and finances closely. VJC staff are also subject to and to internal and external audits. Finally, the VWDB noted the long-term partnerships established and maintained by the VJC to provide participants all the services they need to achieve their educational and career goals. These successful partnerships are the result of the many years of working together and cannot easily be replaced. 23 of 420

4e3
25-87671
5 9
2 8
These factors led to the VWDB’s decision to submit a Career Services application to the Governor of California to be the Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area. If approved, the Career Services Application will be valid for another four years from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2029.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Career Services application is a federal requirement for workforce boards that seek to provide Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services in their area. As such it was discussed at a public workforce board meeting on February 12, 2025, held at the Verdugo Jobs Center which allowed stakeholders to participate and comment on this item.

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

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5), as it constitutes an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment; thus, it is not subject to CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(3).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Onnig Bulanikian, Director of Community Services & Parks Prepared by:

Judith Velasco, Workforce Development Administrator
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Minutes of the meeting of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board, February 12, 2025.

Exhibit 2: VWDB Career Services Application
24 of 420

4e4
25-87671
5 9
2 8
25 of 420

MOTION
Moved by Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , that the Council of the
City of Glendale hereby approves the submission of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board’s request to the Governor of California for approval to be the America’s Job Center of California SM Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area for four years, beginning July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2029.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
26 of 420

VERDUGO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

FULL BOARD MEETING MINUTES
2/12/2025
9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

VWDB Full Board Minutes 2/12/2025 Page 1 of 3
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ara Aslanian, Sonya Kay Blake, Vicki Brannock, Alexis Carter, Marisol Espinoza, Nick Hacopian, Mary
Hamzoian, Pamela Marcello, Iskra Martinez, Michael
Ritterbrown, Veronica Romero, Soua Vang, Terry Walker
MEMBERS ABSENT: Greg Astorian, Luiza Balyan, Jose Barba, Onnig Bulanikian, Steve Kaplan, Debbie Kukta, Stephanie
O’Keefe

COMMUNITY &

OTHER AGENCY
REPRESENTATIVES:

Monica Casas, Eliza Dzhaneryan, Karine Grigoryan
STAFF PRESENT: Diana Montecino, MaryAnn Pranke, Judith Velasco, Melissa Younesian
CALL TO ORDER: 9:05 am by Chair Ara Aslanian

I. Introductions
A. Chair Ara Aslanian welcomed the members of the board and attendees to meeting.

B. Mr. Aslanian took a moment to acknowledge those affected by the wildfires and the people who lost their homes and jobs.

II. Minutes of September 25, 2025
A. Minutes presented and reviewed. MOTION: Terry Walker 2nd: Marisol Espinoza Action: APPROVED

III. Action Items
A. Approval to accept additional funds from the Lo s Angeles County Department of Economic Opportunity for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 in the amount of $35,600 for Youth@Work Program and to award additional funding to Glendale Youth Alliance in the amount of $32,929 for a total contract amount of $462,500 to provide youth employment services

B. Approval to enter into contract with Biocom Institute California in an amount not to exceed $40,000 in Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act funds to provide career exploration and professional fellowships to eligible participants interested in Life Science careers for the period of October 1, 2024 to October 31, 2025

C. Approval to enter into contract with Los Angeles Mission College for Early Childhood Education customized training for employers in an amount not to exceed $67,560 and for classroom training programs listed in the State of California’s Eligible Training Provider List in an amount not to exceed $62,440, for a total contract amount not to exceed $130,000 from January 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026

D. Approval of the certification of the comprehensive Verdugo Jobs Center and the affiliate Job Connect in Burbank as required by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014

E. Approval to Authorize the Release of a Requ est for Proposal soliciting services to utilize Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act fundi ng for In-School Youth and Out-of-School Youth, Los Angeles County Youth@Work, Student Training and Employment Program, and other grant youth funds for a three-year period: July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2028 Exhibit 1
27 of 420

VERDUGO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

FULL BOARD MEETING MINUTES
2/12/2025
9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

VWDB Full Board Minutes 2/12/2025 Page 2 of 3

F. Approval to release the Verdugo Workfor ce Development Board’s Local Workforce Development Plan 2025-2028 for public review and comment

G. Approval of the submission of the Career Servi ces Application to the Governor of California, California Workforce Development Board, and the State of California Employment Development Department requesting the Verdugo Workforce Development Board to be the America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM Adult and Dislocated Worker Car eer Services Provider for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area for the period of July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2029

H. Approval of the submission of the Local Ar ea Subsequent Designation and Local Board Recertification Application to the Governor of California, California Workforce Development Board, and the State of California Employment Development Department requesting the Verdugo Workforce Development Board to be a local workfo rce area and board for the period of July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2027

I. Approval to accept $850,000 of Workforce In novation and Opportunity Act Governor’s Discretionary 25% Additional Assistance Gr ant to continue implementing a regional biotechnology technician industry-valued credential, and to enter into contract with Los Angeles Mission College for $123,200, Biocom Institute for $200,000, Consultant Bloom Strategies Solutions LLC for $60,000, Communication Consul tant for $12,500 and a Strategic Planning Consultant for $20,000

MOTION FOR CONSENT ITEM A – I Motion: Mary Hamzoian 2nd: Alexis Carter Abstain: Vicki Brannock

IV. Director’s Report
A. Executive Director Judith Velasco provided an overview of VWDB activities and the required processes and certifications that need to be completed this program year to remain compliant with the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). Ms. Velasco also presented a brief summary of the Local Workforce Development Plan (Local Plan).

1. Los Angeles County and Los Angeles City Wo rkforce Development Boards will receive Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (W IOA) funds to assist workers who were impacted by the wildfires. The Verdugo Jobs Center (VJC) will co-enroll participants as needed.

2. The VWDB can look forward to adding members to the Executive Committee (two business members and one education member). The next scheduled board retreat for November 12, 2025.
a. Two additional business members and two labor representative are needed to meet board composition requirements and remain in co mpliance with WIOA. Board members are encouraged to reach out to Ms. Velasco if they have any recommendations.

3. This year the VWDB will need to procure an America’s Job Center of California (AJCC) Operator, submit a Career Services Provide r application and Board Recertification application, and release its Local Workforce Development Plan, all required processes under WIOA.
a. Ms. Velasco clarified that most of the data found in the Local Plan is from the 2023 US Census Bureau, which is self-reported data.
i. Mary Hamzoian stated that she can provid e the actual numbers in the labor force for the City of Burbank since the numbers that appear in the Local Plan pertain to the residents only and does not include all pe ople who work in Burbank regardless of 28 of 420

VERDUGO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD

FULL BOARD MEETING MINUTES
2/12/2025
9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

VWDB Full Board Minutes 2/12/2025 Page 3 of 3
residency. VWDB staff member MaryAnn Pr anke explained that the Labor Force as defined by Bureau of Labor Statistics and used by US Census, only refers to residents. ii. Sonya Kay Blake stated that it is interesting that the plan does not call for prior metric performances to demonstrate effectiveness. Ms. Velasco confirmed this information and stated that the VWDB must address specific questions as required by the California State Workforce Board.

V. Other Business and Announcements
A. The next VWDB meeting will be held in person on Wednesday, April 9, 2025.

VI. Public Comments: None

VII. Adjournment: 9:55 am
29 of 420

Exhibit 2
Request for Approval
America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM
Adult and Dislocated Worker
Career Services Provider
Local Workforce Development Board
Verdugo Workforce Development Board
Local Workforce Development Area
Verdugo Workforce Development Area
30 of 420

Page 2 of 22 ends

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) allows Local Workforce Development Boards (Local Board) to be an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider with the agreement of the Chief Elected Official (CEO) and the Governor.

This application will serve as the Local Board’s or administrative entity’s request for Governor Approval to be an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider within a Local Workforce Development Area (Local Area) under WIOA. The application must be submitted to the California Workforce Development Board (CWDB) by March 1, 2025, through the following method:

Email [email protected]
Subject line Career Services Provider Application
If the CWDB determines the request is incomplete, it will either be returned or held until the necessary documentation is submitted. Please contact your Regional Advisor for technical assistance or questions related to completing and submitting this request.

Judith Velasco
Contact Person
(818) 937-8031
Contact Person’s Phone Number
2/28/2025
Date of Submission
Verdugo Workforce Development Board
Name of Local Board
1255 S. Central Ave.

Mailing Address
Glendale, CA 91204
City, State, Zip
31 of 420

Page 3 of 22 ends

Request for Approval
Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider

Local Chief Elected Official Statement
A Local Board or administrative entity that seeks approval to be an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider within an America’s Job Center of CaliforniaSM must provide a statement from the local CEO indicating his/her request as well as responses to the following questions.

Please provide responses to the following items on a separate document:

1. What factors guided the Local Board’s or administrative entity’s decision to submit this application to be an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider within the Local Area?
The Verdugo Workforce Development Board (VWDB) has provided Adult and Dislocated Worker career services for more than 35 years through its Verdugo Jobs Center (VJC), as such, the VWDB considered several factors in making its decision to submit this request for approval to remain the Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider within the Verdugo Workforce Development Area (VWDA) without a competitive bid process.

Historically, the VWDA’s environmental landscape has driven the VWDB to strategically plan and implement its workforce development system to address the unique needs of the community .

This is a fundamental factor which has guided the local board to submit the application to be the Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider within the local area.

A comprehensive analysis is completed and reviewed every four years in conjunction with the development of the Local Workforce Development Plan, and every two years along with the modification of the local plan. Analyzing the barriers that residents of the VWDA experience such as unemployment rates, poverty levels, educational gaps, and English language limitations, supports the creation of innovative programs developed by the VJC to specifically address these barriers. The local area also focuses on the im pact of the layoffs and closures occurring in the VWDA and on the local economy. As a long-time provider of services, the VJC is the most qualified to continue meeting the needs of our tri-city community.

The VWDA is small in comparison to the other six Local Boards that comprise the Los Angeles Basin Regional Planning Unit (LABRPU), with a population of 309,343 as of 20 23 and 49,621 businesses as of 2019. While our VWDA is small, our economy is unlike any other region in the state with its mix of highly specialized industry niches. The VWDB has historically assumed the leadership role in the region in targeting and obtaining funding and resources related to regional 32 of 420

Page 4 of 22 ends

sector initiatives that include key regional partners from industry, education, community organizations and labor, among others. The fact that the VWDB has been awarded more than 100 competitive grants in the past dozen years with many of them being regional grants, is strong testimony to the role as well as the fact that education partners in the region rely on the VWDB to lead efforts for specific sector funding opportunities.

For instance, the VWDB has initiated and led the most significant industry training initiatives in the region. The VWDB partnered with three early childhood care employers: Pacific Clinics, Families Forward, and Bright Minds, and launched a training program to address the shortage of Early Childhood Education (ECE) teacher aides. This program targeted English language learners and low-income individuals who were primarily, recipients of public assistance. The business led partnership designed a customized training program that combined classroom training provided by Los Angeles Mission College (LAMC) and 150 hours of work experience (WEX) at the employer worksites provided by the VJC. Upon completion of the training, participants were hired by one of the employers. To date, the partnership has increased by two additional employers: Foothill Families and Volunteers of America.

The short -term vocational training offered by LAMC, but paid by VWDB was designed by the employers and consisted of the required six units to qualify as a teacher aide. These six units are comprised of two courses which students complete: Infant and Toddler Development, and Child, Family and Community. LAMC provides students with program on-boarding, tutoring, counseling and support throughout the customized training which is over 16 weeks. Prior to completion, the students begin their paid work-based learning for 150 hours which is required to be permanently hired by their employer. The 150 hours of work -based learning is completed with one of the partner employers dedicated to interviewing and hiring the students. Currently, the VJC is working on the second cohort of this project alongside the businesses and community college.

The VWDB was also awarded a State Apprenticeship Expansion, Equity, and Innovation (SAEEI) grant t hrough the Division of Apprenticeship Standards in partnership with Early Care & Education Pathways to Success (ECEPTS), a project of The Tides Center. ECEPTS is a non -profit organization administered by the Tides Center and dedicated to implementing apprenticeships to expand the number of Early Childho od Education (ECE) teachers and teacher aides which in turn, expand the childcare and ECE opportunities for ch ildren of our communities. While the SAEEI is a statewide project, the VWDB and VJC staff have worked with ECEPTS over the past two years to design apprenticeship programs that can be implemented in the Verdugo Region and partnered with this organization to serve as the administrative and passthrough entity for the SAEEI grant.

While the VWDB takes the leadership role, convening the industry leaders and partners, it is the talent of the VJC professional staff who implement the programs, assess, prepare, case manage and place the specialized workforce. Any career service provider for the VWDA must have the same extensive knowledge of our economic landscape as well as our industry niches in order to effectively serve our businesses and job seekers.

33 of 420

Page 5 of 22 ends

Demonstrating its leadership with sector initiatives, the VWDB was approached by neighboring community colleges and Grifols Biologicals to coordinate the first business led, designed industry- valued credential for the BioTechnology Technician occupation. The VWDB was awarded a Workforce Accelerator Fund 7.0 grant and partnered with six additional companies to design the credential including: Gilead, Amgen, Takeda, Prolacta, Neutrogena and Kite, along with Biology instructors from Los Angeles Valley College and Los Angeles Mission College. The BioTech Team worked together to design the assessment instrument to measure the competencies of graduates from any BioScience program in the Los Angeles Basin. Any graduate that earns a 70% score or higher, earn s a digital badge/credential and an interview with one of the seven companies. These companies are at the forefront of developing therapeutics and vaccines for the COVID-19, making this project a priority for the VWDB. The project was fully launched in March of 20 22 and added Biocom California Institute , an industry association representing 150 BioScience businesses in the Los Angeles Basin , as a partner . A BioPharma, WIOA Additional Assistance Grant was awarded by the State of California Employment Development Department (EDD) and the partners branded the project as The Biocom Technician Certification (BioTC). This project continues to be led by business with Prolacta currently in the leader position.

Due to the VWDB’s proven record of success in the BioTech project, The Broad Foundation awarded a grant to VWDB, in partnership with Biocom . The purpose of the project has been to expand the BioTC across the Los Angeles Basin, focusing on underserved communities. The VWDB oversees the BioTC project and manages the grant funds. The VJC provides career counseling and job placement assistance to students representing underserved populations in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) including, low income, adults with disabilities, people of color, and women.

The VWDB is assisting eight community colleges in the Los Angeles Basin to launch biotechnology career pathway programs and enroll underrepresented students for those programs. The BioTC Collaborative is currently assisting four community colleges to develop their BioTechnology programs and will be targeting an additional four over the next three years for a total of eight colleges and programs launched with the Collaborative’s assistance. Services will include the support needed to ensure the students succ essfully complete their programs, earn their BioTC certificate and are connected to Bioscience companies for employment.

The VWDB is a recognized force in the sector initiatives and career pathways of the VWDA; however, this recognition is due to the delivery of services from the VJC staff who have the expertise to carry out the vision and leadership of the VWDB. Innovative approaches developed by VJC staff include the complete reimagining of the intake process to expedite the determination of eligibility, enrollment into career services, and issuance of supportive services. VJC has converted to an online application process, adopting a pre -application strategy to expedite eligibility determination, implementing Adobe Sign for electronic signatures, and adopting the system capability for participants to upload identification and other backup documentation to process enrollments.

34 of 420

Page 6 of 22 ends

Additionally, the VJC staff have been focusing on the trends in the labor market and have continued to hold a number of successful job fairs, recruitments and career fairs with partners, resulting in high number of turnouts. On average, events hosted by VJ C in relation to client, business and industry needs yield ed over 300 attendees. These VJC innovations are driven by customer-focused staff anticipating the needs of participants and implementing immediate changes to processes, policies, and procedures to address those needs.

The economic landscape, industry niches, strategic partners and the need for career services staff with the expertise to respond to the unique needs of the VWDA, are the foundation of the analysis to determine whether the VWDB should seek approval to remai n the career services provider. Using this foundation, the VWDB analyzed these factors:

a) Efficiency: The possibility that there may be cost savings if a competitive bidder can provide services at a lower cost.

b) Firewall: Using a service provider increases the firewall between VWDB and Operations.

This increases transparency and integrity.

These factors were analyzed to determine the impact of each factor on the organization, customers, partners, and employees. The results were as follows:

Factor 1: There is a possibility that there may be cost savings if a competitive bidder can provide services at a lower cost.

Result of Analysis for Factor 1: The VWDB staff concluded that while there is a possibility of a lower cost provider, the threat to the organization is that a lower cost provider may result in lower quality of services. The VWDB would essentially pay for the quality of that lower cost when considering the related facts:

Fact 1: Because the City of Glendale is the administrative entity and the career services staff are City of Glendale employees, the City leverages indirect costs associated with Technology support, Finance, legal services, processing of Individual Training Accounts (ITA) for participants, and Human Resources (HR) services. These indirect costs total an estimated $257,000 per year which the City of Glendale absorbs on behalf of the workforce development system. This support would not be provided to an external pro vider. The selected service provider would need to allocate funds from its awarded Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) budget to cover those costs. Typically, an organization charges a federally approved indirect cost rate which may range from 11% to 19% based on the provider’s federally approved rates (both profit and non -profit).

Organizations without a federally approved indirect cost rate may charge up to a 15% de minimis rate to cover the expenses. These indirect costs would, most likely, offset any cost savings from using a lower cost provider.

35 of 420

Page 7 of 22 ends

The City of Burbank also provides financial support to Job Connect, the Affiliate to the VJC located in Burbank, which provides Basic Career Services to Burbank residents, linking them to the VJC for Individual Career and Training Services. The VWDB allocated $145,500 for the 2024-2025 Program Year (PY) for Adult and Dislocated Worker Basic Career Services and the City of Burbank provides the facility, furniture, technology, supplies, equipment and other resources. This support would not be provided to an e xternal career services provider. The Verdugo Local Area would lose the benefit of financial support from the Cities of Burbank and Glendale if an outside agency is procured to provide the Career Services.

Fact 2: Currently, only 10% of the WIOA funds are spent on administrative costs. As described in Fact 1, the City of Glendale absorbs the indirect costs at $ 257,000 per year.

This ensures that 90% of funds are used for direct services to participants. With no other provider being able to secure indirect cost absorption by a separate entity, the cost absorption by the City of Glendale is a direct strength that is unmatched against other competitive bids.

Fact 3: Costs incurred from procurement will exceed any potential cost savings from a lower-cost bidder. The costs to operate a competitive bid process, conduct a bidder’s conference, recruit objective reviewers, process applications, complete approval process from the VWDB and the administrative entity, are all costs that the WIOA budget would need to bear. These are funds that could be used to serve participants instead. The procurement of Career Services Provider(s) may be cost effective and necessary in large WDA that needs multiple AJCCs to serve a larger population or reach residents in remote areas. However, VWDB serves a smaller community, making procurement an unnecessary expense. Yet, the location of the Verdugo communities necessitates a dedicated VWDB to serve its re sidents who would otherwise have an extensive commute to AJCCs located in other WDAs. With an approval from the Governor, the VWDB would not need to incur this significant expense.

Fact 4: The VWDB also considered the impact to personnel. There are about 15 to 20 staff that are governed under associations which stipulate the process for layoff. This process requires approval from City Council, Personnel Commission, City Manager and City Mayor before layoffs can occur to contract with another agency. The time it ta kes to follow the required process and attain approvals, conduct exit process for these employees, costs for unemployment insurance benefits, and benefit payouts, will exceed any potential cost savings from selecting a lower cost provider. Furthermore, salaried staff will use their bumping rights to remain employed, causing an employee in another department to be laid off. Costs associated with layoffs would decrease and possibly eliminate any potential savings from a lower cost provider.

Fact 5: The VWDB may acquire risks associated with a provider that has lower costs. The VWDB has a well -educated, degreed staff, with 73% holding a Bachelor’s Degree. Of the 73% holding Bachelor’s, 40% hold Master’s Degrees. The average length of seniority is nine 36 of 420

Page 8 of 22 ends

years with 4 0% of employees having 10 or more years’ seniority. A lower cost provider would likely pay lower salaries that would not attract the more highly qualified staff that our customers have come to expect. In researching other providers, the VWDB identified case manager wages as low as $1 9 per hour and few holding degrees above a high school diploma. Moreover, as City of Glendale employees, the VJC staff has gone through a rigorous vetting process prior to onboarding that includes background checks, drug testing, and disclosure of conflict of interest review. The disclosure forms are updated annually to ensure integrity. The complex needs of our participants and businesses require qualified educated staff to effectively address the needs of VWDB customers.

Conclusion for Factor 1: Considering the five facts identified as a result of the analysis, the VWDB concludes that the costs of a procurement process, including the loss of financial support from the Cities of Burbank and Glendale, the potential impact to personnel and the potential decrease in service excellence to customers, outweigh any potential benefit of procurement in our VWDA.

Therefore, the VWDB concludes that it would not be a prudent decision to proceed with a procurement process.

Factor 2: Using a service provider increases the firewall between VWDB and Operations. This increases transparency and integrity.

Result of Analysis for Factor 2: The VWDB assessed Factor 2 carefully, considering the importance that the members place on accountability, integrity and transparency. The following facts were identified as a result of its analysis:

Fact 1: Integrity and transparency are unmatched with the City of Glendale as the VWDB’s administrative entity. The City of Glendale can directly access data, including financial data because it uses a single network system across all departments. Stringent controls are in place that limit the VWDB from handling funds. All account payables and receivables are reviewed and approved internally and then entered by the contractor for processing; however, actual processing is conducted by the Finance Department following stringent, multi-layered approval protocols for increased transparency . A service provider will have its own private access to the system for tracking fiscal transactions and will submit fiscal reports to the VWDB. The VWDB would need to rely on their reports until they are audited to validate their financial performance. Another consideration:

a) VWDB has a history of zero audit exceptions and has never had a disallowed cost or debarment. Internal and external audits are conducted by City, County, State and Federal agencies. Moreover, with the City’s access to and control of the finance system, as well as the limited functions of VWDB staff in the system, there is no opportunity for inappropriate use of funds to occur.

Fact 2: There is a distinct separation between administrative staff and operations staff.

VJC staff provides direct services to customers and report directly to the VJC Manager. VJC staff does not conduct any administrative functions. The administrative staff does not 37 of 420

Page 9 of 22 ends

provide direct services to customers and reports directly to the Executive Director.

Administrative staff conducts internal monitoring on a n annual basis and submits reports directly to the Executive Director to demonstrate the firewall between administration and operations. Supporting the firewall between administration and operations, the VWDB procures its One -Stop Operator (OSO). The OSO reports to the VWDB Executive Director, coordinates the AJCC partners and ensures the AJCC MOU is met, among other responsibilities to maintain the firewall.

Conclusion for Factor 2: The VWDB concluded that using a service provider does not increase integrity and considering the stringent policies and protocols of the City, including internal and external audits annually, it provides the firewalls, accountability, transparency and integrity that the Board members rely on as the overseers of the organization. Furthermore, there is a distinct firewall between administrative staff and operations staff. Operations staff reports to the VJC Manager while the administrative staff reports to the VWDB Executive Director.

Based on the analysis and the factors and facts considered, the VWDB ascertains that there is no need to conduct a costly procurement process. There is no tangible benefit that can be determined based on this analysis. The result would be costly, high risk to the organization, and a significant impact to customers.

2. How would participants be better served by the Local Board or administrative entity acting in this role rather than through the awarding of contracts? Participants would be better served by the Local Board remaining as the career services provider.

Should another provider be awarded the contract to provide career services, there are several factors that would impact service to participants as follows:

a) Disruption in Services: The disruption in services to transition caseloads from one case manager to another in a different organization would significantly impact our customers, many of whom are people with disabilities, recipients of public assistance, are homeless, English Language Learners and veterans, all who are vulnerable to change and transitions.

Consistency is crucial when serving special populations.

b) Commitment to Serve Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities: The VJC is the only America’s Job Center of California (AJCC) that specifically targets individuals with intellectual disabilities and developmental disabilities. For example, the Lanterman Regional Center has been co -enrolling participants in VJC programs for many years primary for our dedication and support for helping all individuals looking for career services.

c) Role Models: The VWDB and the VJC have been recognized as role models for the services they provide and the performance they achieve including: Implementing one of the first Disability Employment Accelerator grants providing services to participants with disabilities and being the first Workforce Development Board in the nation to receive 38 of 420

Page 10 of 22 ends

Work Incentives Program Assistance (WIPA) grant from the Social Security Administration (SSA). The VJC has also been recognized for its leadership in strategic co -enrollment, resulting in a Slingshot grant to lead the Los Angeles Basin Regional Planning Unit (LABRPU) in implementing a strategic co -enrollment system. This system facilitates co- enrollments across workforce boards, offering greater opportunities for participants to access career pathways available throughout the LABRPU. The VWDB is also a well-known leader in the biotech Industry business leaders. In the fall of 2024, the VWDB Executive Director was invited to participate in a panel presentation at the World BioScience Forum held in San Diego. She provided her expertise on workforce solutions for the BioScience industry sector. No workforce developm ent professional had ever been invited to speak before this world-renowned forum prior to the VWDB.

d) Special Populations: In addition to serving people with disabilities, other special populations we serve include English Language Learners. The Verdugo region is home to a large population of immigrants, asylees and refugees, many of which come from middle eastern countries. As such, many of our participants speak Armenian, Russian, and Farsi.

Some of our staff serve as Armenian , Russian and Farsi translators and understand the culture of this special population which helps build trust when providing services. Many staff members live in the Verdugo community and therefore, not only empathize with customers, but also have a vested interest in the economic vitality of our community. We also serve the dislocated workers from various industries , with a significant number coming from the entertainment and tech sectors. Many of these individuals are highly educated, but skills rapidly become outdated, requiring them to retrain in order to re- enter the work environment continuously. Our customer feedback during focus group s recognized the expertise that staff hold in serving dislocated workers from the entertainment industry.

e) Business Services: Our staff has long-standing relationships with our business community which has come to rely on the single -point-of-contact service. These customer relationships have been established over many years of service provision. Many of our staff have been provi ding business services in the VWDA for more than ten years and these relationships cannot be replaced without great disruptions to service. The VJC staff focus on providing high quality recruitment events for high level paying positions, such as having an annual Healthcare and Tech job fair where over 300 clients are in attendance each year. The staff also strategizes the types of industry re cruitments they offer based on the labor market information and training that VJC provides to their clients.

f) Partnerships: Our staff has strong partnerships that cannot easily be replaced.

Partnerships with Glendale Community College (GCC), State of California Employment Development Department (EDD), Department of Rehabilitation, Adult Education, School Districts, labor, as well as all other key partners, are all essential to customer service. Our partnership with GCC is another role model that has been featured in multiple conferences, in both the wo rkforce and education systems. With many local workforce boards having difficulty partnering with their local community colleges, VWDB’s 39 of 420

Page 11 of 22 ends

integrated partnership with GCC is showcased as a best practice for others to emulate.

Further, a VWDB staff member serves as the Coordinator for GlendaleLEARNS, the California Adult Education Program (CAEP), and supports the GlendaleLEARNS Director in this capacity. In addition, the VWDB Executive Director serves as a member of the GlendaleLEARNS Consortium Board of Directors, further enhancing the integration of the two systems. Another key partnership is the one the VJC staff have established with VWDB members, accessing their expertise to expand partnerships and to gain insights on business and industry changes. These relationships have been established over many years of working together at the staff and leadership levels alike and are crucial in developing career pathways that meet the needs of our participants.

g) History of Performance Excellence: The VJC holds a long history of meeting or exceeding performance measures for its formula allocations (Figure 2) and performance goals for all other grants. The VJC continuously seeks to improve its programs and services to meet the evolving needs of participants, resulting in increased performance. Continuous improvement strategies are assessed by the VWDB through its AJCC Certification process.

Performance reports for all grants are included in monthly reports to the VWDB’s Executive Committee and quarterly reports to the full Board, to ensure accountability and transparency. The VWDB received a status of High Performing Workforce Board on July 31, 2023 based on criteria that includes demonstrating that performance measures are exceeded. A history of performance is further validation of the successful services provided to participants that result in transforming lives through the dignity of work.

3. Describe the Basic and Individualized Career Services the Local Board or administrative entity will provide as well as their past experience providing these services.

The VWDB and VJC have emerged as leaders in developing innovative programs to serve business and special populations. Most noteworthy is VJC’s success in serving people with disabilities , English Language Learners, individuals who are homeless, and low-income residents.

The VWDB oversees the full-service VJC located in the City of Glendale as well as the Job Connect (JC), an affiliate located in the City of Burbank. The JC, which is located at the Burbank Central Library and has two portals located at the Buena Vista Branch Library and Northwest Branch Library, expands access to residents of Burbank as well as residents in the surrounding area who may find the Job Connect a more convenient location. Although it is an affiliate site, because it is located in the library, it is a highly active center offering Basic Career Services, Rapid Response and Business outreach services. Job Connect has a proactive approach to reaching customers , both job seekers and business es. The Job Connect also serves as an on ramp to the VJC for comprehensive services, training and career pathways. VJC staff are out stationed at the Job Connect for workforce services at least once per month for the convenience of customers.

In addition to the Job Connect, the VJC staff are out stationed at GCC and Burbank Adult School, and Glendale libraries to outreach students who need assistance. During the pandemic, the VJC 40 of 420

Page 12 of 22 ends

established a virtual system to connect with students and provide them with orientations to the services available including all virtual services.

Through its comprehensive VJC, the VWDB provides the education and training necessary to create the competitive human capital required for business sustained growth and industry leadership. Based on its experience and business acumen, services are strategically developed to support the local business’ visionary leadership , as well as the intelligent risk -taking needed to compete in the global marketplace today.

Our Basic and Individualized Services are extensive; however, the unique feature is the partnerships which are well integrated, and co-enrollment across partners, including non-WIOA funded partners, is a daily occurrence as opposed to an afterthought. We are one of two Workforce Boards in the state that enroll students who are funded with CAEP Grant funds into CalJOBS and co-enroll into WIOA as well. A complete list of our Basic and Individualized Services for Adult and Dislocated Worker customers are detailed in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Verdugo Jobs Center Product Box for Basic and Individual Career Services Basic Career Services Individual Career Services
➢ Outreach, intake, orientation
➢ Determination of eligibility for all AJCC programs
➢ Initial assessment of skills, aptitudes, abilities
➢ Labor Exchange Services
➢ Referrals to other programs & Services in the
community
➢ Assistance in establishing eligibility for non -WIOA
programs
➢ Labor Market Information
➢ Information on program cost
➢ Information on Supportive Services
➢ Unemployment insurance benefit information
➢ Virtual job seeker services: resume builder,
interviewing, cover letter (CalJOBS)
➢ Comprehensive, specialized, diagnostic assessments
& in-depth interviewing
➢ Service/career plan development
➢ Group counseling
➢ Individual counseling
➢ Career planning
➢ Career exploration
➢ Short-term prevocational services
➢ Internships/ Work experience (WEX)
➢ Financial literacy
➢ Out-of-area job search
➢ Contextualized English language acquisition
➢ Citizenship (CAEP)
➢ Immigration/cultural workshops (CAEP)
➢ Work readiness workshops
➢ Guest speakers: employers

The VJC was the first career services provider in California to be awarded funds by the SSA and operate the Employment Network. Under this grant, the VJC provides and coordinates services to Social Security disability beneficiaries. This allows the VJC to provide these non-WIOA supplemental services to participants with disabilities.

Our VJC Business Services Team (BST) was developed with our EDD partner to increase job opportunities for our participants as well as to serve the business community. The group has expanded to include additional VJC partners who collaborate on various hiring events throughout the year. The BST coordinates and implements hiring events, participates in or hosts job fairs on a quarterly basis, staffs open positions for employers, and provides labor market information in addition to other business services. The BST was established under the Integrated Service 41 of 420

Page 13 of 22 ends

Delivery framework; however, the success of the team is due to the partnership developed over years of working together. With almost half of the VWDB staff having ten years’ seniority or more, this consistency in staffing allows for successful partnerships to be developed and maintained.

Business Services include Rapid Response services for those organizations that are faced with the difficult decision to layoff employees due to downsizing or closures. As members of the BST, Rapid Response staff track indicators of potential reductions, at risk business, and notifications submitted to VJC and/or EDD, including those submitted to meet the Worker Retraining and Notification (WARN) Act. The goal of Rapid Response services is to outreach business and provide intervention services to avert any p otential layoff or closure. As City of Glendale staff, VJC staff have easy access to all support services available throughout the city such as economic development department, public works, transportation, police and more to assist with business needs and requests by providing valuable resources the city offers. For those organizations that must proceed with layoff, a full array of services are available including orientations to affected workers, counseling and guidance to affected workers and management, and transition services to VJC services or alternative employment. Rapid Response services have also been converted to a virtual platform and staff proactively outreach to business and their affected workers.

Integrated Career Pathways is a success model for the VWDB and VJC that has also been featured in several conferences. Integrated Career Pathways begin with the employer partnership to identify human capital needs. Skills and competencies are defined in pa rtnership with our community college partner and the technical training is designed with the employers. Because of the populations we target, Vocational English as a Second Language, Adults Secondary Education and Basic Education are infused in the technic al training curriculum. Technical training includes certificated programs for immediate employment preparation as well as stackable credentialed programs for advanced training or higher education. The industry-valued credential is developed and incorporated for graduates to ensure skills and competencies have been achieved.

Work-based learning is also incorporated for students to apply their newly acquired skills in the workforce environment, while continuing to develop those skills with training and guidance from the employer. Work -based learning is paid time to allow studen ts to begin earning as soon as possible, contributing to program retention and success. Transition assistance and support is provided to enter permanent full -time employment and continues to ensure job retention and higher education goals are achieved. Cas e management and supportive services are provided throughout the enrollment to assist with retention and transitions. This strategy is based on the model implemented for the VWDB’s Computer Numeric Control Machinist Academy which combined adult education with technical training, work -based learning and job placement to complete the career pathway. The design of the pathway and the target population assists the VJC in identifying the partners that need to be brought in for co -enrollment of p articipants enrolled in the career pathway.

These innovative programs and services are the result of the VJC staff’s expertise and long -term partnerships that have been developed and maintained over many years. The longevity of VJC staff is a primary reason for the successful partnerships. Partners hips often decline due to staff 42 of 420

Page 14 of 22 ends

turnover; however, with the consistency of VJC staff, partnerships can be maintained even if partners experience turnover. A new career services provider would require partnerships to be developed again with new staff which would take years to reach the le vel they are with current VJC staff. This partnership disruption may jeopardize the innovation leadership that has become synonymous with “Verdugo”.

4. Provide the Local Area's performance outcomes for each of the last two Program Years (PY 20-21 and 21-22) and evidence that the Local Board or administrative entity is qualified to provide Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services, including testimonials that speak to the effectiveness and efficiency with which the Local Board or administrative entity has provided or can provide those services.

Figure 2: Verdugo History of Performance 2020 – 2022

PY 2021-2022 ADULT DW YOUTH
Employment Rate 2nd Quarter After Exit 67.6% 76.7% 69.6% Employment Rate 4th Quarter After Exit 58.2% 53.8% 61.4% Median Earnings 2nd Quarter After Exit $7,976 $8,190 $3,900 Credential Attainment 4th Quarter After Exit 78.0% 92.5% 78.0% Measurable Skill Gains 90.6% 89.5% 56.8%

PY 2020-2021 ADULT DW YOUTH
Employment Rate 2nd Quarter After Exit 57.2% 55.0% 85.4% Employment Rate 4th Quarter After Exit 63.0% 60.3% 81.9% Median Earnings 2nd Quarter After Exit $6,640 $9,444 $4,733 Credential Attainment 4th Quarter After Exit 78.2% 77.5% 89.9% Measurable Skill Gains 86.7% 91.1% 95.5%

The VWDB has a history of stellar performance relative to the negotiated performance measures established by the State. Results for the past two program years are shown in Figure 2, Verdugo History of Performance 2020 – 2022.

Evidence that the VWDB is qualified to provide Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services includes: 1) history of excellent performance; 2) integrated partnerships that braid resources and assist the most vulnerable populations; and 3) numerous testimonia ls from our partners, stakeholders and customers commensurate with our qualifications.

a) History of Performance: The VWDB has served the Verdugo communities for more than 35 years, establishing its leadership with innovative sector pathways in the entertainment 43 of 420

Page 15 of 22 ends

and healthcare industries, and earning more than 100 highly competitive grants to successfully implement the programs. Considering that the VWDB is one of the smallest, receiving significantly less funding allocations than five of the remaining six Boards located in the LABRPU, this history of performance is key evidence of our qualifications.

b) Integrated Partnerships: The VWDB has successfully established partnerships with education, labor, business and community organizations over the past 3 5 years. These long-term partnerships are the basis of our integrated service delivery model that includes co -enrollment of shared customers. We capitalize on our partnerships by integrating services and braiding resources as demonstrated through out many of our projects.

Our successful partnerships allow the VWDB and VJC to take the intelligent risks that create the innovative programs that provide opportunities for participants, including those with disabilities, to reach their full potential. Implementing the first manufacturing career pathway for people with autism, is an example of our innovation and successful partnerships. These long-term partnerships coupled with industry leadership, innovation and risk taking is a formula for success that makes the VWDB irreplaceabl e in providing career services in the Verdugo community.

Testimonials: Supporting our qualifications, the VWDB submits letters of testimony from our participants, partners, and business customers. The letters are included in this application packet under Attachment II: Support Letters and Customer Testimonials section.

5. Attach documentation (signed and dated letter) that the members of the Local Board and other relevant parties (e.g., Board of Supervisors) reviewed the information provided in the application and approved the request in a public meeting.

The letter signed by the Chair of the VWDB is included in Attachment II: Support Letters and Customer Testimonials along with the letter signed by the Chief Elected Official, Elen Asatryan, Mayor for the City of Glendale that will be received after the City Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 1, 2025 . We have also included the application Signature Page and all relevant VWDB agendas, action items, and minutes in Attachment I: Verification of Approvals.

6. Attach documentation of internal controls, conflict of interest, and firewall policies.

The VWDB has an established policy, guidelines and requirements to avoid real and perceived conflicts of interests (Attachment III: VWDB Conflict of Interest Policy ). These requirements are met through disclosures of conflicts of interests, established internal controls, and firewalls. The organizational structure assists in ensuring these internal controls and firewall are maintained (Figure 3). The organizational structure illustrates the relationships and firewall between the local board, the WIOA Administrative Entity, the AJCC One -Stop Operator, and the current 44 of 420

Page 16 of 22 ends

Adult/Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider. The relationships begin with the three cities which are partnered under a Joint Powers Agreement for the Verdugo Workforce Development Area (VWDA). The City of Glendale Mayor is the Chief Elected Official (CEO) on behalf of the VWDA.

The City of Glendale is also the administrative entity for the VWDA and the Executive Director reports to the VWDB as well as the City of Glendale Community Services and Park s’ Director which provides fiscal and managerial oversight of the workforce development services. The City of Glendale Fiscal Department conducts audits of the workforce development system’s fiscal management and reports directly to the Mayor (CEO) and Cit y Council to maintain a stringent firewall (red line in Figure 3).

Figure 3: Organizational Structure with Firewalls

The external audits are conducted on an annual basis which are reported directly to the Mayor and City Council to ensure fiscal integrity. A significant benefit of using the City of Glendale as the administrative entity for WIOA funds, is the robust electronic financial system, stringent controls and firewalls, oversight, and comprehensive processes to ensure integrity of the funds expended.

The Glendale Finance Department uses a customize d MUNIS financial system . VWDB staff has access to the MUNIS system for viewing status on transaction and generating reports but cannot make changes to the system. Entries are completed by VWDB staff; however , the entries go through multiple layers of approvals to ensure accuracy. The division of duties and approval requirements ensure that the firewall and internal controls are maintained . Processing of Individual Training Accounts (ITA), supportive services, staff travel reimbursements and expense reports, and other financial requests, require multiple layers of review and authorization prior to 45 of 420

Page 17 of 22 ends

being processed in the MUNIS system. All back-up documentation is uploaded in the system and all transactions are recorded to facilitate tracking and reporting. Other documents such as contracts, must be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and City Purchasing Administrator prior to being approved by the VWDB Executive Director and signed by the Director of the Department of Community Services & Parks. Contracts that are $50,000 or more, require approval and signature from the City Manager and contrac ts of $150,000 or more, also require City Council approval.

The Executive Director maintains daily management and oversight responsibility on behalf of the VWDB and the administrative entity. The Executive Director directly manages the VWDB administrative staff, the VJC Manager, and the OSO. While the Executive Director supervises the VJC Manager, she does not provide direct services to customers in order to maintain the firewall between administration and operations as depicted by the red line between these two functions (Figure 3). Administrative staff support the VWDB, write grants, conduct strategic planning, provide accounting support, write grants, convene partners and businesses to support VJC services, coordinate AJCC certification process, develop and implement procurement, as well as other administrative functions. While administration responsibilities such as grant writing support the VJC and convening partners , the administrative staff do not provide services to customers.

The VJC staff report to the VJC Manager and participant tracking is completed in CalJOBS for real- time reporting of activities. Authorizations for ITAs and supportive services are approved by the VJC Manager. Services to participants are provided as needed and as funding allows without requiring administrative approval to ensure that the VJC Manager and staff are able to provide the services that participants need in a timely manner. There is also a red line firewall that is maintained between AJCC Partners which represent operational services and the VWDB as well as administration (Figure 3). The partnerships are joined through the MOUs that exist between the partners and the VWDB.

Another red line firewall exists between the OSO and operations to ensure objectivity in the coordination of partner services. The VWDB release s the Request for Proposals (RFP) for OSO services every three years. The OSO contract delineates role and responsibilities as outlined in the EDD Workforce Services Directive (WSD 22-13). In accordance to WSD 22-13, the contract describes the OSO’s responsibility for coordinating service delivery among all AJCC partners and service providers within the VWDA. By havi ng the OSO act as the local service delivery coordinator, the VWDB can focu s on strategic planning , oversight, policy development and creating partnerships at the local and regional level. The contract also describes the role of the OSO as follows:

▪ Coordinating the service delivery of required AJCC partners and service providers. ▪ Ensuring the implementation of partner responsibilities and contributions agreed upon in Memorandums of Understanding.
46 of 420

Page 18 of 22 ends

▪ Reporting to the VWDB on operations, performance, and continuous improvement recommendations.
▪ Implementing policies established by the VWDB.
▪ Adhering to all applicable federal and state guidance.

The OSO selection process is conducted through an open and competitive RFP process. All procurement regulations and requirements are maintained during this process including the City of Glendale’s Procurement Policy, EDD Directive (WSD 12-10) and the Office of Management and Budget’s Uniform Guidance (§200.318-200.326) and Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200). 47 of 420

Page 19 of 22 ends

Signature Page
By signing below, the local CEO and Local Board chair request approval from the Governor to be an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider. Each party certifies that this application submission was reviewed and demonstrates that the Local Board or administrative entity will meet all the requirements as an Adult and Dislocated Worker Career Services Provider under WIOA law and regulations.

Instructions
The Local Board chair and local CEO must sign and date this form. Include the original signatures with the request.

Local Workforce Development Board
Chair
Local Chief Elected Official
Signature Signature
Ara Aslanian Elen Asatryan
Name Name
Board Chair, Verdugo Workforce
Development Board Mayor, City of Glendale
Title Title
Date Date
48 of 420

Page 20 of 22 ends

Attachment I
Verification of Approvals
49 of 420

Page 21 of 22 ends

Attachment II
Support Letters and Customer Testimonials
50 of 420

Page 22 of 22 ends

Attachment III
VWDB Conflict of Interest Policy
51 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Findings and Conditions of Approval of DRB Case No. PDR 002532-2023 located at 1000 Sandringham Drive for the construction of a new 2-story, 5,067 square-foot (SF) single-family dwelling with an attached 3-car garage on a vacant 31,290 SF lot located in the R1R, FAR District III Zone.

1. Motion to sustain the Design Review Board’s decision of April 25, 2024, to approve the project with conditions.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Following a February 11, 2025, noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the decision of the Design Review Board to approve with conditions Design Review Case No. PDR 002532-2023 for the construction of a new two-story, 5,067 SF single-family residence and an attached three-car garage on a 31,290 SF lot in the R1R, FAR District III zone (“Project”), the Council continued the hearing until March 11, 2025 to allow the parties time to discuss potential new or modified conditions that would be acceptable to both sides, so that the Council could further consider the appeal with such potential new conditions. At the March 11, 2025, continued hearing, both parties represented they were amenable to the Project’s approval with the addition of six new conditions.

Accordingly, the Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a motion to sustain the Design Review Board’s decision of April 25, 2024, to approve the Project with the original conditions, along with the 6 additional conditions agreed to by both sides (with some revisions for clarity); this motion is now before Council for its consideration and vote.
52 of 420

24f
5 8
0 4

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt a motion to sustain the Design Review Board's approval of Case No. PDR 002532-2023 with the Design Review Board’s conditions, along with the 6 additional conditions presented at the continued hearing on March 11, 2025, and based on all of the evidence, testimony, reasoning and findings of the DRB articulated at the April 25, 2024 DRB hearing, and set forth in the DRB’s Record of Decision dated April 25, 2024, staff’s analysis of the appeal set forth in this and any previous staff reports, any additional testimony or evidence presented at the hearings, and the Project’s overall conformance with the Comprehensive Design Guidelines.

BACKGROUND
On February 11, 2025, the City Council held a noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the decision of the Design Review Board to approve with conditions Design Review Case No. PDR 002532-2023 for the construction of a new two-story, 5,067 SF single-family residence and an attached three-car garage on a 31,290 SF lot in the R1R, FAR District III zone. The first floor will contain 2,880 SF and the second floor will contain 2,187 SF. A swimming pool and 1,400 SF basement (not counted as floor area due to ceiling height) are also proposed.

The Council voted to continue the February 11, 2025 hearing to the March 11, 2025 City Council meeting, and encouraged the parties to meet and discuss potential Project modifications or new or modified conditions that would be acceptable to both sides, so that the Council could further consider the appeal with such potential new conditions.

On March 11, 2025, the City Council held the continued public hearing for the Project, and heard from both the Project applicant and the appellant regarding 6 new conditions that were acceptable to both sides for the Project to be approved. The Council closed the hearing and, by a vote of 3-0 (with Mayor Asatryan not able to participate and Councilmember Najarian recused), directed the City Attorney to prepare a motion to sustain the Design Review Board’s decision of April 25, 2024, to approve the project with conditions, along with the 6 additional conditions agreed to by both sides (with some revisions for clarity).

The requested motion to sustain the Design Review Board approval for the Project, with all of the original conditions, along with the 6 additional conditions presented at the March 11, 2025 continued hearing, has been prepared for Council’s consideration and vote.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The Code requires public notice when the Council considers approval of entitlements such as design review. Prior to the initial hearing on this Project, staff mailed copies of the notice to all property owners and occupants within 500’ of the project. Also, a public notice was posted on-site.
53 of 420

34f
5 8
0 4

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

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The project is exempt from CEQA review as a Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures” exemption pursuant to Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the project is the construction of a new single-family house. The property does not appear eligible for historic designation at the federal, state or local levels and is, therefore, not considered a historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit 1, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744.

ALTERNATIVES
The City Council has the following alternatives to consider:

Alternative 1. Do not adopt the motion sustaining the Design Review Board’s decision to approve Case No. PDR 002532-2023, in which case staff will return with a motion making findings for denial.

Alternative 3. Any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Roger Kiesel, Senior Planner
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Campaign Disclosure Form
54 of 420

MOTION

Moved by Council Member _____________________________, seconded by Council Member _________________________, that upon review and consideration of all documents, materials, exhibits and testimony relative to the appeal of the Design Review Board approval with conditions of Design Review Case No. PDR 002532-2023, located at 1000 Sandringham Drive (the “Design Review Case”), and after having conducted a public hearing on the appeal on February 11, 2025, and a further continued hearing on March 11, 2025, pursuant to the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, and receiving testimony, the City Council of the City of Glendale, California, based upon all of the evidence in the record, hereby SUSTAINS the Design Review Board’s decision to APPROVE the Design Review Case with conditions (the “Project”), based on the findings and conclusions set forth in the February 11, 2025 report to Council from the Director of Community Development (“February Report”), including any attachments thereto, and including additional findings and/or conditions presented and discussed at the March 11, 2025 continued hearing, as set forth below in this motion. Further, the Council hereby adopts, and incorporates herein by this reference, the analysis, findings, conclusions and conditions of the Design Review Board in its Record of Decision dated April 25, 2024 (Exhibit 3 to the February Report).

FINDINGS
In sustaining the Design Review Board’s decision and approving the Design Review Case, the Council hereby makes the following findings:

1. Site Planning: The proposed site planning is appropriate, as modified by any conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
55 of 420

2 • The residence does not have much presence from the adjacent streets, given the unusual shape of the lot.
• The residence will be located on a relatively flat portion of the subject site. • The attached garage proposed is typical of the neighborhood. The garage (as well as the residence) will be located within the main body and not the “flag” portion of the lot and, therefore, is not readily visible from the public right-of-way. • The landscape plans propose drought-tolerant plants, consistent with the Hillside Design Guidelines. As conditioned, vines or other hanging plants shall be installed to soften the appearance of the driveway adjacent retaining walls as well as the walls at the rear of the house.

2. Mass and Scale: The proposed mass and scale are appropriate, as modified by any conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
• The proposed residence is located on a flat portion of a relatively steep lot. • While the south elevation of the proposed residence does not follow the topography of the site, given the location of the proposed residence as well as existing topography and development in the greater neighborhood, this should not be problematic.
• While the proposed residence (including its entry) is large and appears monumental, it is set back significantly from adjacent streets. As conditioned, the entry shall be slightly reduced in scale, while maintaining the balance of the overall façade composition.

56 of 420

3 3. Building Design and Detailing: The proposed building design and detailing are appropriate, as modified by any conditions, to the site and its surroundings for the following reasons:
• The large balcony located off the primary bedroom should not pose privacy concerns given its location and orientation and distance from the adjacent property to the west.
• The various materials used, including smooth stucco, slate roofing and fiberglass windows, are of high quality and re-enforce the architectural design of the proposed residence.
• As conditioned, to visually minimize the rear retaining walls, the color and materials used shall blend with the adjacent earth.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. Vines or other hanging plants shall be planted adjacent to the driveway retaining walls to soften the appearance of these features

2. Only native landscaping shall be planted adjacent to the walkway leading to the front entrance.

3. Rescale the entry of the residence slightly to reduce its mass, while maintaining the balance of the overall façade composition.

4. To visually minimize the rear retaining walls, the color and materials used shall blend with the adjacent earth and substantial landscaping shall be planted above and below them.

5. All retaining walls located in the wildlife corridor depicted in green on the site plan submitted by the parties at the continued hearing on March 11, 2025 (which site plan is attached hereto as Exhibit A) (hereinafter, “Wildlife Corridor”), shall be no more than 12 57 of 420

4 inches in height, with the exception of the retaining wall along the property line located within the Wildlife Corridor.

6. The retaining walls, guardrails, and court, depicted in red (with the legend “removal of element”) in Exhibit A, which are all located on the northeast corner of the Project, shall be removed.

7. No wall-mounted lighting shall be installed, and only downward-facing and low- level lighting shall be installed, on the front facade (front main entry porch and entrance walkway), as depicted in the notes in red in Exhibit A; lighting timers shall be used to ensure darkness, and no motion-sensor lighting shall be installed within the Wildlife Corridor.

8. No lighting shall be installed that is oriented toward the Wildlife Corridor on the north end of the Project or toward the adjacent City-owned open space.

9. No impediments that are barriers, including, but not limited to, fences, walls or planted hedges, shall be constructed, installed or planted within the Wildlife Corridor, with the exception of the retaining walls allowed by Condition No. 5.

10. Malekian and Associates, Garnik Hovsepyan and/or GTS Investment Group LLC (Applicant/Owner), and their respective successors; owners by deed, deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, foreclosure or otherwise; assigns; and/or any real party in interest with an interest in the property that is the subject of this approval, and/or with an interest in the Project site, that is named as a party in any suit (hereinafter collectively the “Developer”), agree to and shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Glendale (the “City”), and each of its agents, officers, council members, commissioners, attorneys, employees and representatives (the “Indemnitees”) from any claim, action or proceeding brought against the City and/or the Indemnities to attack, set aside, void or 58 of 420

5 annul any City land use or California Environmental Quality Act approval for the Project.

The Developer agrees to use legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City. The foregoing shall include, without limitation, payment of all damages awarded against the City and/or the Indemnitees, if any, costs of suit, attorney’s fees, and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with such action or proceeding. In the event that a claim, action or proceeding referenced herein is brought, the City shall promptly notify the Developer of the existence of the claim, action or proceeding and will cooperate fully in the defense of such claim, action or proceeding. As used herein, “land use approval” shall refer to decisions of the City approving requests of applicants for planning permits, including, but not limited to, general plan amendments, annexations, zone changes, zoning ordinance text amendments, tentative maps, vesting tentative maps, tentative parcel maps, reversions to acreage, final maps, final modifications or amendments, time extensions, parcel map waivers, lot line adjustments, boundary line adjustments, certificates of compliance, conditional certificates of compliance, design review approvals, development agreements, conditional use permits, conditional use permit modifications, conditional use permit extensions, variances, variance modifications, precise plan of design, specific plans, density bonus review/housing plan applications, sign permits, parking reduction permits, site plans, temporary use permits, any administrative or discretionary permit pertaining to a land use approval, and/or any

59 of 420

6 accompanying California Environmental Quality Act determination(s) pertaining to the type of approval referred to in this section, and any other similar approval.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
60 of 420

Exhibit A to Motion to Approve Design Review Case 1000 Sandringham Drive 61 of 420

62 of 420

63 of 420

64 of 420

65 of 420

66 of 420

67 of 420

68 of 420

69 of 420

4g
25-87358

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Vacation of the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130) Vacation Case No. 188V

1. Resolution Ordering the Vacation

2. Resolution Adopting Plan No. 12-242

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Item
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vacation of a 15 foot wide alley, Alley 130, is proposed to be incorporated into the development of a density bonus application, approved by the Director of Community Development on August 20, 2024, and by the Design Review Board on March 13, 2025, to construct a new 5-story, 40,489 square-foot multifamily residential project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income households on a lot located at 117 East Fairview Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the following resolutions involving Vacation Case No. 188V, the Vacation of the First Alley of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130) to facilitate the construction of a new 5-story, 40,489 square-foot multi-family residential project with 36 residential units.

1. Adopt a resolution ordering the vacation of said public alley; and

2. Adopt Plan No. 12-242 (Alley Vacation Map) showing the location of the said alley.

ANALYSIS
Alley 130 is 15-feet wide with a single entry/exit onto East Fairview Avenue. The proposed vacation of this alley will split and incorporate 7.5-feet between two properties: 117-121 East Fairview Avenue and 1000 North Brand Boulevard. This request is part of a recently approved density bonus application dated August 20, 2024, relating to construction of a new 5-story, 36 unit, 40,489 square-foot multi-family residential project at 117-121 East 70 of 420

4g2
25-87358
5 8
2 4
Fairview Avenue. With the vacation, 7.5-feet will be added to the density bonus project, bringing its total area to approximately 18,260 square feet (0.42 acres). The remaining

7.5-feet will be added to the commercial property at 1000 North Brand Boulevard, increasing its area to about 26,474 square feet (0.61 acres). The alley is currently improved with asphalt concrete pavement and has above-ground electrical and telecommunication facilities from AT&T. The applicant is coordinating with Glendale Water & Power and AT&T to establish easements for their infrastructure.

The vacation of the alley would be consistent with the applicable goals and objectives of the elements of City of Glendale Comprehensive General Plan.

The General Plan Land Use Element designations for the adopting sites are Residential – High Density and Commercial – Community Services. The Residential – High Density designation allows for relatively large multiple-family dwelling complexes at a density of 35 to 60 dwelling units per acre. The Commercial – Community Services designation offers a full range of functional services and facilities, including offices (medical, real estate, etc.), personal services, shopping, and restricted industries. The alley vacation will enable the construction of a 36-unit density bonus project featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate-income households at 117-121 East Fairview, as well as a modest additional lot area for the C3-zoned property located at 1000 North Brand Boulevard.

Surrounding the project site are commercial businesses (bank, retail, restaurants, etc.) to the south and west, a place of worship (St. Mark’s Episcopal Church) to the north, and multi-family residences to the east. The project is consistent with both designations in the General Plan Land Use Element, as it will accommodate high-density residential development and provide added lot area to a commercial site currently occupied by a bank.

Following the vacation of Alley 130, the R-1250 and C3 zones will no longer be buffered by the alley and will directly abut one another. To comply with Glendale Municipal Code (GMC) sections 30.31.030.B.1 and 30.31.030.B.2, trees shall be planted along the abutting property line (one tree per 20 linear feet) to provide an effective screen, and a minimum 5.5-foot-high decorative masonry wall shall be constructed along the property line abutting any residential zone boundary.

The General Plan Housing Element Strategy 3 aims to encourage development of housing for senior and affordable family housing through density bonuses and continues to implement the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO). The density bonus project will provide 3 affordable units to low-income households [15% of 19 base density units] and will satisfy its IZO requirement and set aside 2 moderate-income units (10% of the 19 base density units) for an additional density bonus.

The Land Use Element Economic Goal 2 provides for opportunities for the expansion of revenue-producing commercial establishments within the parameters of other community goals. A portion of the vacated alley will the incorporated into the commercially zoned 71 of 420

4g3
25-87358
5 8
2 4
lot. The project is consistent with this Land Use Element goal because it will increase the area of the commercial site and provides opportunities for expansion of the site and increases the assessed value.

The project will implement the goals of the City’s Recreation Element. An in-lieu fee for the acquisition and management of recreational land consistent with the Recreation Element is collected with the development review process. This project will pay development impact fees, which will implement the Recreation Element goal to acquire and manage recreational land.

The project will implement the policies of the Community Facilities Element. A policy of this element is to preserve the high standards of library facilities in their educational and recreational roles. The project is required to pay development impact fees which will enable the City to proceed with the Library Arts and Culture, and Community Services and Parks Departments Capital Improvement Plan programs, including developing new, or rehabilitating existing, parks and recreation facilities and libraries.

The Circulation Element Objective 2.1 encourages land use which can be supported within the capacity constraints of existing and realistic future infrastructure. The purpose of the alley vacation is to allow for the construction of a density bonus project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income household. The project site is currently served by East Fairview Avenue, which is identified as a local street by the Circulation Element. Local streets provide a variety of functions and accommodations for vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian modes of travel. In most instances, local streets serve residential needs of the immediate community and carry low volumes to and from collector and arterials, such as Brand Boulevard. Given that the project is consistent with the Land Use Element, this complements the mix of existing commercial and residential uses surrounding the subject site and is currently supported by streets designed to handle the vehicular capacity of residential land uses; hence, the project is consistent with the Circulation Element.

Planning Commission Finding
The Planning Commission’s role is to make findings as to whether the proposed alley vacation will be consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of Glendale Comprehensive General Plan, pursuant to Chapters 2.68 and 12.24 of the City of Glendale Municipal Code, and State Government Code Section 65402.

On October 16, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion finding and recommending to the City Council that the requested conditional vacation of the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of East Fairview Avenue (Alley 130) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive General Plan of the City of Glendale.

The Planning Commission’s motion is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

Conditions of Proposed Vacation
72 of 420

4g4
25-87358
5 8
2 4
All City departments, and various agencies and public utility companies were notified of the proposed vacation. Easements and conditions included in the resolutions are as follows:

1. Fire Department has concerns on the accessibility of the properties at 117 E Fairview Avenue in case on an emergency and proper egress of the properties if the alley is vacated. As a condition of the vacation, recordation of the vacation resolution (and officially closing the alley) will not occur until after the existing building(s) are demolished to the satisfaction of the Building & Safety Division.

2. An easement shall be required by Glendale Water and Power Department for its existing utility in the subject alley.

3. An easement shall be required by AT&T for its existing utility in the subject alley.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Staff has worked with the property owner to facilitate the vacation of the public alley easement.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. Upon the completion of the alley vacation, the property would revert back to the underlying property owners and the City would receive a requisite share of property tax income. The vacated portion of the alley would be removed from the City’s street and alley maintenance inventory and, as such, the City would gain a small savings in the City’s maintenance budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The project has undergone environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and has been determined to be exempt from further CEQA review under a Class 32 “In-fill Development Project” exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 because, after review and consideration of all required technical reports and/or studies, staff determined the project meets all the conditions for an infill development project, as follows:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations;
b) The proposed development occurs within City Limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban areas;
c) The project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. 73 of 420

4g5
25-87358
5 8
2 4

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not to approve the resolution as recommended herein. This would prevent the development of the 5-story multi-family development as envisioned by the applicant.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Daniel Hernandez, Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Ruel Villaluna, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Plan No. 12-242 and Location Map (2 pages)
Exhibit 2: Planning Commission Motion Dated October 16, 2024. 74 of 420

1 3
8 8
8 RESOLUTION NO. __________

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

CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE VACATION OF THE FIRST ALLEY EASTERLY OF BRAND BOULEVARD, NORTHERLY OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE (ALLEY 130), IN GLENDALE, VACATION CASE 188V.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1:The Council having heard the evidence in relation to the proposed vacation of a portion of the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130) Glendale Alley Vacation Case No. 188V, finds from all the evidence submitted that the public alley referred to above is unnecessary for present or prospective alley purposes, and said Council orders the vacation of said public Right-of-Way, in the City of Glendale, County of Los Angeles, State of California, more particularly described in Exhibit “1” which Exhibit is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

SECTION 2:The proposed multifamily residential project located on a lot located at 117 East Fairview, in which the alley vacation is incorporated, has undergone environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and has been determined to be exempt from further CEQA review under a Class 32 “In-fill Development Project” exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 because, after review and consideration of all required technical reports and/or studies, staff determined the project meets all the conditions for an infill development project, as follows:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; b) The proposed development occurs within City Limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban areas;
c) The project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services SECTION 3: On October 16, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion finding that the subject alley vacation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive General Plan of the City of Glendale, as amended, as required by State Government Code Section 65402 and Chapters 2.68 and 12.24 of the Glendale Municipal Code.

SECTION 4: Reference is made to Plan No. 12-242 adopted concurrently herewith by said Council and to be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk for further particulars of the proposed alley vacation.

SECTION 5: The Council has determined that the public convenience and necessity require that the vacation of said Alley be subject to the following condition and easements:
75 of 420

1 3
8 8
8 A. Recordation of this vacation resolution (and officially closing the alley) shall not occur until after the existing building(s) are demolished to the satisfaction of the Building & Safety Division.

B. A 15-foot-wide non-exclusive blanket easement be reserved to the City of Glendale for public utility purposes for and the right to install, improve, alter, upgrade, repair and maintain poles, cross arms, wires, underground conduits, cables and other equipment for the distribution of electrical energy and for the transmission of sounds or signals by electricity in, on, over and under the Subject Alley Vacation Area, together with the right to cut or trim the branches and roots of any vegetation which may interfere or endanger the wires, cables, insulators or poles installed whether the said vegetation be on the right-of-way or near thereto.

C. A 15-foot-wide non-exclusive easement be reserved for Pacific Bell Telephone Company, dba AT&T California, its associated and affiliated companies and its successors assigns, lessees and agents, to construct, reconstruct and maintain (place, operate, inspect, repair, replace and remove) such aerial facilities and may from time to time require repair and installation of poles, anchors, guys cables, wire crossarms over and under the Subject Alley Vacation Area.

SECTION 6: The City Clerk is directed to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles County, California.

Adopted this 1st day of April 2025.
__________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. __________ was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the 1st day of April 2025, and that same was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

______________________________
City Clerk
76 of 420

RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE ADOPTING PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PLAN NO. 12-242 FOR VACATION CASE NO. 188V; THE PROPOSED VACATION OF THE FIRST ALLEY EASTERLY OF BRAND BOULEVARD, NORTHERLY OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE (ALLEY 130), IN GLENDALE, AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FILE SAID PLAN.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1: The attached Plan for the proposed vacation of a portion of the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130), in the City of Glendale, is hereby approved, adopted, and designated, and shall hereafter be known as Plan No. 12-242.

SECTION 2: The City Clerk is hereby directed to file said Plan in the office of the City Clerk as adopted by this Resolution.

Adopted this 1st day of April, 2025.
_______________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
The City Clerk of the City of Glendale

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. __________ was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the 1st day of April, 2025, and that same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
77 of 420

O
!
!
!
!
130
60 15 50 5050 50163
118 122 20244 6060
932
M.B. 11 - 15
RES. 14,679170 384042 364655 55

PORTIONS OF LOTS
4855 55 VAC.
5050 50163 15 50
127.75168 9515
100131.32
6363

GLENDALE BOULEVARD TRACT
5050 1 10.75
150 58
50 50163 5050

54.94 55 55
60 6047 129125
50 50163 50 50
150
4 20050.1050.10
50 50
75 6
200
200.10200.10 M.B. 6 - 1845050
169.94
3739 3541

FAIRVIEW TRACT
M.B. 11 ~ 15
2 3
43 45
1000
1016
BLK. 14
POR. LOT
1 54.94
15 15
50 5050
50 50 50 58
200200

10.75 120

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
M.B. 16 - 90
TRACT NO. 870

PORTIONS OF LOTS

PORTIONS OF LOTS
117 121
Map Prepared by:

Public Works
Engineering Department
Negin Rezaei
11 June 2024
MAP OF PROPOSED VACATION OF ALLEY 130

IN THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
12-242
Plan No.

EXHIBIT "1"
Case No. 188V
1 of 2
ALLEY 130

ALLEY TO BE

VACATED
K

E FAIRVIEW AVE
40 0 4020
Feet Alleys
Street Pavement
Sidewalks
! Power Pole
O Street Light
GWP Electric OH
ATT Conduit
Street Centerline
ROW & Tract Lines
Lot Lines
City Lot Split Lines
! !
County Lot Split Lines
City Boundary
Other

N BRAND BLVD
78 of 420

47.5 50
50 50

12.12 55
130
50 50
115
50 50

47.44 163
135.75

57.875

77.42 131.32
50 50
163

54.94 168
50 50

10.65 50

63.88 60
100
50 50
50 170
15 50
130

10.75 57.875
168
220.75
50 170.75
50 50
50 57.5
55 58
63 50

57.50 50
100
200
50 5050
100
55 163
163
95 49.875
50 50
50 50
145.88
60 5058
50 50
155
60 157.875
5050
50 157.875
127.75
50 48.84

10.75 50
200
95 50
50 50
55 145.18
169.94 169.94
60 95
150
200.10
50 150
70 130
50 48.84
170.7563
50 50
144.83
200
130
137
60 115
50 55
50 150

50.10 141
60 50

50.10 49.875
50 54.94

10.55 50
55 50
50 50
55 200
55 150
200.10
50 207
M.B. 6 - 184
14 PORTIONS OF LOTS
1104

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1023
TRACT
60 1016
M.B. 1 1 ~ 15
34 BLK. 14
48 6
120
1100
129
1015
6 15
4 47
44 932
1 43
1007
RES. 14,679
117
15 BLK. 14
125
TRACT NO. 870
7 GLENDALE BOULEVARD TRACT
M.B. 1 1 - 15
4 45
15 41
15 15
33 1104
38 7
PORTIONS OF LOTS 2 POR. LOT
40 208
46 PORTION OF LOT
208

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1 18
1031
1100
121

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
16 M.B. 16 - 124
39 200
POR. LOT
21 4
42 50
3 210
15 60
202
POR.LOT
110
118
37 215
941
1000

FAIRVIEW TRACT
5 122
31 40
BLK. 14
32 5
M.B. 16 - 124

VACATED
204
15 60
941

PORTIONS OF LOTS

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
211
17 M.B. 16 - 90

PORTIONS
OF
LOTS
19 1101
SOBEY

PORTIONS OF LOTS
214
15 130
36 35
M.B.16-124
M.B. 6 - 184
First Alley E'ly of Brand Blvd, N'ly of Fairview Av (Alley 130) - Glendale, CA

47.5 50
50 50

12.12 55
130
50 50
115
50 50

47.44 163
135.75

57.875

77.42 131.32
50 50
163

54.94 168
50 50

10.65 50

63.88 60
100
50 50
50 170
15 50
130

10.75 57.875
168
220.75
50 170.75
50 50
50 57.5
55 58
63 50

57.50 50
100
200
50 5050
100
55 163
163
95 49.875
50 50
50 50
145.88
60 5058
50 50
155
60 157.875
5050
50 157.875
127.75
50 48.84

10.75 50
200
95 50
50 50
55 145.18
169.94 169.94
60 95
150
200.10
50 150
70 130
50 48.84
170.7563
50 50
144.83
200
130
137
60 115
50 55
50 150

50.10 141
60 50

50.10 49.875
50 54.94

10.55 50
55 50
50 50
55 200
55 150
200.10
50 207
M.B. 6 - 184
14 PORTIONS OF LOTS
1104

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1 18
1031
1100
121

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
16 M.B. 16 - 124
39 200
POR. LOT
21 4
42 50
3 210
15 60
202
POR.LOT
110
118
37 215
941
1000

FAIRVIEW TRACT
5 122
31 40
BLK. 14
32 5
M.B. 16 - 124

VACATED
204
15 60
941

PORTIONS OF LOTS

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
211
17 M.B. 16 - 90

PORTIONS
OF
LOTS
19 1101
SOBEY

PORTIONS OF LOTS
214
15 130
36 35
M.B.16-124
M.B. 6 - 184
Scale
Location Map - Alley Vacation Case 188V
Map Prepared By:

Mapping & Real Property
April 2023
100 0 10050
Feet
AG Proj: Vac 188V Util Notif Map.mxd
g
Brand Boulevard
300 FOOT RADIUS
300 FOOT RADIUS

FAIRVIEW AVENUE
ALLEY 130
ALLEY
Area Proposed
to be Vacated
15'

DRYDEN STREET
EXHIBIT "1"
EXHIBIT "1" ~ 2 of 2
79 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Adoption of Glendale General Plan's 2025 Safety Element Update

1. Resolution to adopt the 2025 Safety Element Update and California Environmental Quality Act Exemption findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and15301(b).

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for April 1, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In compliance with recent State legislation, 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. Recent State Law also requires the Safety Element to identify how these and other hazards in Glendale are exacerbated by climate change, and what populations, locations, and community features (natural assets and built infrastructure) are particularly vulnerable to climate hazards and changing climate conditions. Staff and the City’s consultants have updated the 2003 Safety Element to meet these new State mandates. The 2025 Safety Element Update, highlighting the changes using strikeouts for deletions and underlines for additions, is attached as Exhibit 1 to this report. Staff has determined that the policy updates to the Safety Element are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 80 of 420

2 RECOMMENDATION
Community Development Department staff respectfully recommend that the City Council adopt the 2025 Safety Element Update as drafted.

The Planning Commission at its regularly scheduled meeting on March 5, 2025, unanimously recommended that the City Council adopted the 2025 Safety Element Update and adopt CEQA exemption findings.

ANALYSIS
Click or tap here to enter text.

Background
The Safety Element is a state-mandated General Plan element that must identify potential natural and human-created hazards that could affect Glendale’s residents, businesses, and services. The goal of the Safety Element is to establish a framework that anticipates these hazards and prepares the community to minimize exposure to these risks. The Safety Element also seeks to ensure that safety factors are integrated into the planning and decision-making process through the creation of policies for future development.

The current Safety Element was adopted in August 2003 and includes goals and policies related to the following topics: seismic and geologic hazards, flooding hazards, fire hazards, hazardous materials, terrorism, civil disobedience and crime, dangerous animals and plants, and disaster preparedness, recovery and emergency response. The 2003 Safety Element also features a summary of safety-related regulations and policies and local conditions that affect safety in Glendale, such as areas subject to seismic, flood, and fire risk.

In the past few years, California has prioritized mitigating climate change impacts and building more resilient communities, and the State Legislature has passed several bills (described below) requiring updating safety elements to account for these priorities.

This new legislation requires jurisdictions to prepare specific technical studies and develop policies that address communities who are vulnerable to climate change, emergency evacuation, and wildfire risks:
• Senate Bill 379 Climate Adaptation: Requires the Safety Element to include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies and a set of goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures based on a climate change vulnerability assessment. • Senate Bill 1035 General Plans: Requires cities and counties to update their Safety Element with new information on flood hazards, fire hazards, or climate adaptation or resilience.
• Senate Bill 1241 State Responsibility Areas and Very High Fire Severity Zones:

Requires review and update of the Safety Element to address the risk of fire in State Responsibility Areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. 81 of 420

3 • Senate Bill 99 Residential Emergency Evacuation Routes: Requires all cities and counties to update their Safety Element to include information identifying residential developments in any hazard area identified in the Safety Element that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.
• Assembly Bill 747 and Assembly Bill 1409: Requires all cities and counties to identify evacuation routes and evacuation locations in the Safety Element and evaluate evacuation route capacity (e.g., the amount of traffic a roadway can handle in an emergency), safety, and viability (e.g., ability to function during an emergency scenario) under a range of emergency scenarios. • Assembly Bill 1638: Requires emergency response agencies that serve jurisdictions where 5% or more of the population speaks a language other than English to provide information in that language in the event of an emergency.

These new requirements allow for safety elements to be better designed for agencies to further implementation efforts to prevent increased hazard risks such as wildfire and urban heat, as well as enhance emergency response and evacuation.

To meet legislative requirements, the City amended its Professional Services Agreement with Rincon Consultants, Inc. in November 2023 to update the General Plan Safety Element as part of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) preparation.

In September 2022, the City had hired Rincon to develop a "Qualified" CAAP, which sets Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals for 2030 and a net-zero emissions target by 2050 and provides a framework to track progress. The original CAAP scope included preparing a climate vulnerability analysis to assess risks across community sectors based on climate change projections, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity; this analysis was used as the basis for the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA) required for the Safety Element Update. The amended contract for the Safety Element Update also included preparation of the required Emergency Evacuation Analysis in compliance State legislation. While the CAAP is still being finalized and will be presented to the Sustainability Commission for recommendation and then to City Council for adoption, the 2025 Safety Element Update addressing State legislation requirements has been completed and is being presented to City Council for adoption. It is important to evaluate the proposed goals, policies, and actions in the 2025 Safety Element Update, as they will provide direction on how the City will prepare for future hazards associated with natural disasters and climate change. 2025 Safety Element Update
As noted above, the 2025 Safety Element Update is informed by the CCVA (Exhibit 2) prepared by Rincon and the Emergency Evacuation Analysis (Exhibit 3) prepared by Kittelson & Associates (sub-consultant to Rincon). Both analyses are included as appendices to the Safety Element.
82 of 420

4 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
The CCVA (Appendix B to the Safety Element and Exhibit 2 to this staff report) was developed in accordance with California's Office of Emergency Services' 2020 California Adaptation Planning Guide. The climate vulnerability analysis identifies, categorizes, and prioritizes risks across communities and populations based on exposure (assessed using climate change projections), sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. The CCVA evaluates climate change impacts relevant to the City and identifies populations and physical assets, such as natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services, that are most vulnerable to these impacts. Such analysis allows for targeted mitigation and adaptation strategies to be developed for the most vulnerable areas and sectors that can then be included as policies and programs within the updated Safety Element.

Emergency Evacuation Analysis
Kittelson & Associates prepared an Emergency Evacuation Assessment (Appendix C to the Safety Element and Exhibit 3 to this staff report) to comply with AB 747 and SB 99.

The Assessment evaluates two evacuation event scenarios to estimate roadway capacity constraints and travel time considerations during evacuations, helping identify locations of greater traffic congestion potential and the need for additional control measures in the event of an evacuation. The two evacuation scenarios are:
•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 analysis evaluated "no evacuation" (i.e. current baseline conditions) and "evacuation" travel times in both the base year (current year with current conditions) and future year (2040 with projected development) during the highest levels of traffic and congestion (PM peak hour). The future analysis anticipates volume of traffic generated based on maximum development allowable under the current General Plan in Glendale and traffic generated by the 2040 demographic forecasts for the entire region provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

The analysis details travel time comparisons for base year and future year from identified neighborhood areas using the current roadway network to identified evacuation destinations. These assumptions combine to provide a "worst case" analysis. Areas of congestion are identified, along with a menu of actions that the City can implement to reduce traffic congestion during evacuations. The detailed analysis resulted in planning considerations and strategies to enhance roadway and intersection capacity, as well as communication strategies, that can be used to help shape policies and actions for the City in preparation for and during evacuations; such policies and actions (programs) have been incorporated into the Safety Element Update.

Implementation of these potential strategies to help better prepare the City for possible 83 of 420

5 natural disasters is timely, given the increasing awareness of and need for emergency preparedness following the Eaton and Palisades Fires earlier this year in January.

Safety Element Recommendations
In compliance with State legislation, the 2025 Safety Element Update expands upon the natural hazards analyses contained in the current 2003 Safety Element for fire, seismic, and flood risk, and provides updated policies and actions to build capacity and increase resilience to these hazards. The 2025 Update includes new figures for seismic risk, liquefaction risk, flood and dam inundation risk, and wildfire risk, based on the latest available data. New figures showing evacuation routes and single-access residential neighborhoods have also been added to the Element. Based on the input from the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, a new “Climate Change” section has been developed and added to the Safety Element, with a new goal (Goal 5. Reduce social and physical vulnerabilities resulting from the increasing risks of climate change) and corresponding policies and programs for climate change resilience. The 2025 Safety Element Update also includes new and revised policies and actions to address wildfire risk as part of Section 3.3 Fire Hazards, and disaster response and preparedness, community outreach and education, emergency evacuation, and single-access residential neighborhoods as part of Section 3.8 Disaster Preparedness, Recovery and Emergency Response. The updated policies and actions are intended to help prepare for and further ensure the safety of all community members during emergencies, especially vulnerable populations. A detailed outline of the proposed changes is attached to this Staff Report as Exhibit 4.

CAL FIRE Review
The City was also required to conduct early coordination with participating State agencies, such as with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to ultimately receive certification of the Safety Element from the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. This State mandate applies whenever a city or county within the Local Responsibility Area or areas identified within a State Responsibility Area, contain an area designated as a very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ). A significant percentage of the City’s hillside areas are designated as a VHFHSZ (CCVA, Figure 10); therefore, certification is necessary to ensure the City is in compliance with State law.

Staff received early coordination review comments from Cal Fire in November 2024.

The minor requested modifications were made and resubmitted to Cal Fire. With all review comments adequately addressed, Cal Fire forwarded the draft Safety Element to the Board of Forestry for certification in January 2025. The Board of Forestry approved the City's draft on January 21, 2025 (Exhibit 5).

Planning Commission
The Final Draft of the 2025 Safety Element Update, appendices and attachments were presented to the Planning Commission at a duly noticed meeting on March 5, 2025. 84 of 420

6 Following review of the material and a detailed PowerPoint Presentation by City staff, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the 2025 Safety Element Update by City Council (Exhibit 6).

Updated Fire Hazard Map
CAL FIRE released updated maps for Southern California on March 24, 2025. As a result, the City has revised Plate P-3 “Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities” (Exhibit 10) to align with the State’s adjustments to fire hazard severity zones.

This updated map will be included in the final Safety Element, with no changes needed to the proposed text for the new policies and programs in Section 3.3, "Fire Hazards."

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The consultant team and City Planning staff hosted public outreach booths at four City- sponsored events at the start of the update process. These included:
•Earth Day Event at Verdugo Park – April 4, 2024
•Fire Day Event at Station 21 – May 1, 2024
•Building & Safety Open House May 15, 2024
•Climate Café Open House at Central Library – May 18, 2024 A summary of the public outreach at the pop-up events is attached as Exhibit 7.

Once finalized, the Public Review Draft, as well as the technical appendices, were posted on the City’s General Plan website and on the GlendalePlan.com website on November 18, 2024, for a 30-day public comment period. That same day, an email blast with the 2025 Safety Element Update public comment information, including the weblink, was sent to all of the GlendalePlan.com subscribers and Planning contact list (including all neighborhood associations); information on the public comment period was also posted on CDD’s social media. A total of two emails were received during the 30-day public comment period which ended on December 18, 2024; these are attached as Exhibit 8.

The public hearing notice for Planning Commission was publicized in accordance with GMC 30.61.030 Hearings and Public Notices - General Plan Amendments, and an email blast with the Planning Commission public notice was sent to all of the GlendalePlan.com subscribers and Planning contact list on February 10th and 26th, 2024. There were no callers or speakers at Planning Commission, and no comment letters were received.

The City Council Hearing was also publicized in accordance with GMC 30.61.030. Email blasts with the public notice were sent on March 12, 2025, and the information was posted on social media.
85 of 420

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

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
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.

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, and 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 from CEQA 86 of 420

8 for the reasons outlined in the State CEQA Guideline section cited above; staff has prepared and will file a Notice of Exemption following the Council’s adoption of the proposed CEQA exemption (see Exhibit 9).

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: The City Council may not adopt the 2025 Safety Element Update.

Alternative 2: The City Council may adopt the 2025 Safety Element Update with changes as directed by Council.

Alternative 3: The City Council may consider any other alternative proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Vilia Zemaitaitis, Deputy Director of Long Range Planning Approved by:

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

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft 2025 Safety Element (without Appendices: Appendix A has not been amended, and Appendix B - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Appendix C - Evaluation Analysis are attached as Exhibits 2 and 3, respectively)

2. Appendix B - Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

3. Appendix C - Evacuation Analysis

4. Detailed Outline of Proposed Amendments to the Safety Element

5. Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s General Plan Safety Element Assessment

6. Planning Commission Resolution, dated March 5, 2025

7. Pop-Up Events – Public Outreach Summary

8. Emails received during the 30-Day Public Comment Period

9. CEQA Notice of Exemption

10.Updated Plate P-3 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities, incorporating CAL FIRE’s March 24, 2025 mapping updates 87 of 420

1 1
3 9
2 0
RESOLUTION No. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN’S 2025 SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE AND FINDING THE GENERAL PLAN 2025 SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Case No. PGPA2119840
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on March 5, 2025, pursuant to the provisions of section 2.68.130 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995 and Chapter 3, Title 7 of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the Council has received, reviewed and accepted the proposed amendments to the General Plan’s Safety Element (Case No. PGPA2119840) (2025 Safety Element Update); and
WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered all materials and exhibits of current record relative to the 2025 Safety Element Update; and WHEREAS, the Council has received and considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approval of the 2025 Safety Element Update and findings that the 2025 Safety Element Update exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the 2025 Safety Element Update addresses recent State legislation related to wildfires, floods, climate change, evacuation and emergency preparedness and response (SB 1035 General Plans, SB 1241 State Responsibility Areas and Very High Fire Severity Zones, SB 379 Climate Adaptation, SB 99 Residential Emergency Evacuation Routes, AB 747 and AB 1409 Evacuation Routes and Designated Evacuation Locations in Safety Elements and AB 1638 Emergency Response Services). The 2025 Safety Element Update includes a new Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA, Appendix B) and an Evacuation Analysis (Appendix C) to the staff report to Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments, which are primarily limited to policy modifications and updates in compliance with Government Code Section 65302(g)(1) through (g)(9), are related to climate change, evacuations and wildfire risks, and 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; and
WHEREAS, these policy modifications may result in the implementation of minor alterations to existing facilities such as public utilities providing power, gas, water, sewer, or other public utilities through 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, and may involve, for example, installation of traffic signal pre-emption devices for fire response at critical intersections, the 88 of 420

2 1
3 9
2 0
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 risk; and WHEREAS, the modification to the aforementioned existing facilities will not have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment, and are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (b) and (f) (Minor alterations to existing facilities), or are exempt pursuant CEQA Guidelines §15060(c)(2) in that policy modifications are not in themselves anticipated to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the whole of the action as required by CEQA and has conducted a noticed public hearing pursuant to the provisions of section

2.68.130 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995 and Chapter 3, Title 7 of the Government Code of the State of California.

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

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference as an integral part of these findings.

SECTION 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered exemptions under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15060(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (b) and (f), and finds that the 2025 Safety Element Update 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, and will involve only minor alterations to existing facilities.

PASSED and ADOPTED this _________day of 2025.
_________________________
Mayor

ATTEST:
_______________________
City Clerk

89 of 420

3 1
3 9
2 0

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the ____ day of ________________, 2025, and that same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

_________________________
City Clerk
90 of 420

CITY OF GLENDALE

SAFETY ELEMENT
Insert Date Adopted
91 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

92 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

93 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
94 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 95 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
96 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

97 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 98 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). 99 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. 100 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 101 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. 102 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.
103 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. 104 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
105 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 106 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.
107 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.
108 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.
109 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.
110 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). 111 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). 112 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 113 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. 114 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). 115 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, 116 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. 117 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.
118 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.
119 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.
120 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)
121 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) 122 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. 123 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. 124 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 125 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 126 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.
127 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.
128 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.
129 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 130 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 131 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/
132 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 133 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.
134 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 135 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.
136 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.
137 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
138 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”. 139 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 Phone
12 Scholl Canyon Park 2849 E. Glenoaks
Blvd.

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-
140 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

141 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
142 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
143 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
144 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 145 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
146 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
147 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

148 of 420

Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –52 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-1 Seismic Hazards

149 of 420

Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –53 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-2 Dam Inundation Zones

150 of 420

Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –54 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-3 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones and Critical Facilities

151 of 420

Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –55 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-4 Single Access Neighborhoods

152 of 420

Glendale Safety Element 2025 Update
Safety Element –56 | March 2025 Draft
Plate P-5 Emergency Response Route

153 of 420

Table of Contents
Climate Action & Adaptation Plan i
%
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 2
154 of 420

155 of 420

Table of Contents

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................ 1 Report Organization ................................................................... 3 Social Vulnerability Assessment ................................................. 3 Physical Vulnerability Assessment ............................................. 4 Summary Findings for High and Very High Scores ..................... 2 Cascading Impacts Assessment .................................................. 2 Key Findings ............................................................................... 3 1 Introduction ............................................................................... 4

1.1 Purpose ........................................................................... 4

1.2 Glendale Snapshot.......................................................... 4

1.3 Glossary .......................................................................... 6

1.4 Community Engagement ................................................ 7

1.5 Vulnerability Assessment Methodology ........................ 9 2 Climate Hazards ....................................................................... 16

2.1 Climate Indicators......................................................... 17

2.2 Climate Hazards ............................................................ 17 3 Social Vulnerability Assessment ............................................... 25

3.1 What is Social Vulnerability .......................................... 25

3.2 Social Vulnerability Index Score ................................... 25

3.3 Social Vulnerability Overview ....................................... 31

3.4 Social Vulnerability by Climate Hazard ......................... 39 4 Physical Vulnerability Assessment ........................................... 67

4.1 What is Physical Vulnerability ...................................... 67

4.2 Physical Assets at Risk .................................................. 67

4.3 Physical Vulnerability by Climate Hazard ..................... 68 5 Cascading Impacts Assessment ................................................ 87

5.1 What are Cascading Impacts ........................................ 87

5.2 System Interdependencies ........................................... 87 6 Conclusion ................................................................................ 92

6.1 Problem Statements ..................................................... 92

6.2 Vulnerability Analysis ................................................... 95 7 References ................................................................................ 97 Tables
Table 1 Social Vulnerability Scores (see Chapter 3
for detailed assessment) ............................................................ 0 Table 2 Physical Vulnerability Scores (see Chapter 4
for detailed assessment) ............................................................ 1 Table 3 Impact and Adaptive Capacity Scoring Rubric .............. 15 Table 4 Vulnerability Score Matrix ............................................ 15 Table 5 Vulnerable Populations in Glendale ............................. 27 Table 6 High Vulnerability Scores .............................................. 96 Figures
Figure 1 Glendale Climate Change Impacts .................................. 2 Figure 2 Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation ................... 5 Figure 3 California Adaptation Planning Guide Phases .............. 10 Figure 4 Vulnerability Assessment Flow Diagram, Phase 2 of the California Adaptation Planning Guide ........................... 11 Figure 5 Social Vulnerability in Glendale .................................... 30 Figure 6 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) Neighborhood Redlining
Grade 36
Figure 7 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and
Municipality Tree Equity Score ................................................ 38 156 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
ii
Figure 8 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones .............................................................. 53 Figure 9 Glendale High Social Vulnerability and Landslide Susceptibility ............................................................................ 57 Figure 10 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones in Glendale ................. 76 Figure 11 Historical Wildfire Events in Glendale .......................... 77 Figure 12 Landslide Susceptibility in Glendale ............................. 80 Appendices
Appendix A - Sustainability Working Group Meeting #1 Feedback Appendix B - Interested Parties Focus Group Meetings #1 and #2 Feedback
157 of 420

Executive Summary
Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 1
Executive Summary
The City of Glendale’s Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment evaluates how climate change may impact community members and physical assets including natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services in Glendale. This report will inform the development of resilience strategies, measures, and actions for the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP).

Climate change is a global phenomenon that can impact public health, natural resources, infrastructure, emergency response, and other aspects of society at the local scale as the averages and extremes of climate conditions change. In Glendale, temperature and precipitation are expected to change in the following ways:
▪ Increasing temperatures. Average maximum temperatures in Glendale are expected to increase between 4.2° Fahrenheit (F) and 5.2°F by 2050 and between 5.4°F and 8.6°F by 2100.
▪ Increasing intensity of precipitation events and longer dry periods. It is projected that more precipitation will occur during extreme storm events and dry periods will be longer and more frequent.

Changes in temperature and precipitation are expected to influence the frequency, duration, and magnitude of a variety of climate hazards. Climate change models indicate that Glendale is expected to experience the following by the end of the century:
▪ Extreme Heat and Warm Nights. Glendale is projected to experience an increase in the annual number of extreme heat days in the coming decades. In Glendale, an extreme heat day occurs when the maximum temperature is above 97.6°F. The annual number of extreme heat days is projected to increase by as many as 32 days and the annual number of warm nights is projected to increase by as many as 69 nights by 2100.
▪ Drought. The City is expected to experience increases in the length of dry spells.
▪ Wildfire. The annual wildfire probability in Glendale is anticipated to increase from 20 percent to 30 percent by 2100. ▪ Landslides. The risk of landslides is projected to increase as precipitation variability increases and wildfires increase in frequency, size, and severity.
▪ Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation. Climate change will cause changes in precipitation patterns,
overwhelming Glendale’s stormwater infrastructure, leading to localized flooding in highly paved areas throughout Glendale. ▪ Poor Air Quality. Air quality within the Los Angeles region is projected to worsen because of an increase in regional wildfires and average maximum temperature. Longer periods of drought will also contribute to worsening air quality.

See Figure 1 for a summary of climate impacts in Glendale. 158 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

2 Figure 1 Glendale Climate Change Impacts

159 of 420

Executive Summary
Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 3
Report Organization
The report is comprised of the following sections:

1. Chapter 1 Introduction provides the purpose of the report, a snapshot of the City of Glendale, and a glossary of key terms. It also describes the community input gathered, methodology, and key data sources used to prepare the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment.

2. Chapter 2 Exposure to Climate Hazards illustrates the City’s exposure to climate hazards.

3. Chapter 3 Social Vulnerability Assessment characterizes the vulnerability of populations in Glendale. Vulnerability is the degree to which a population may be affected by changing climate conditions. This section identifies the populations and locations that are highly vulnerable to climate change. This section also describes potential impacts of climate hazards on populations, policies, and programs that help communities cope with climate hazard events. Lastly, this section provides a vulnerability score that ranks the effect of climate change on population groups on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 reflecting the highest vulnerability.

4. Chapter 4 Physical Vulnerability Assessment describes the susceptibility and limitations of physical assets and
infrastructure to climate change. The physical assets included in this assessment include natural and recreational resources, building and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services.

Similar to Chapter 3, this chapter describes policies and programs that help to protect physical assets and infrastructure from the adverse effects of climate change. A vulnerability score is also provided for each asset group.

5. Chapter 5 Cascading Impacts analyzes the interconnections between Glendale’s critical systems including energy, water, transportation, and communication systems, and the
implications of system failures associated with climate change.

6. Chapter 6 Conclusion presents the key findings of this report.

Social Vulnerability Assessment
While all populations in Glendale will be affected by climate hazards, some individuals are more vulnerable due to physiological conditions and inequitable systems and structures and, therefore, will be disproportionally impacted. The social vulnerability assessment in Chapter 3 consists of an analysis of 27 population characteristics that correspond to the most climate-vulnerable community members. These 27 population characteristics were grouped into four categories as follows:

1. Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure

2. Under-resourced Individuals

3. Individuals Facing Societal Barriers

4. Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities
Grouping the populations into these four categories allows the City to understand the systems and structures that are in place that contribute to increased vulnerability to climate change hazards.

Each of these population groups were assessed by climate hazards to produce hazard-specific social vulnerability scores summarized in Table 1.

The geographic location and proportion of vulnerable populations in Glendale who may be more impacted by climate hazards was also evaluated and mapped. The areas of Glendale with the greatest 160 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
4 concentration of vulnerable populations are in south and southwest of the City. Census tracts that are above the 60th percentile are considered to be a high social vulnerability area. Additional areas with high social vulnerability were also identified based on input from community-based organizations. These included areas near major roads and highways, schools, the Scholl Canyon Landfill, and the Grayson Power Plant.

Physical Vulnerability Assessment
The physical assets included in this assessment include natural and recreational resources, building and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services. The physical vulnerability assessment evaluates the direct impact that climate hazards could have on these assets.

Hazard-specific vulnerability scores for each asset can be found in Table 2.
161 of 420

162 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
0 Table 1 Social Vulnerability Scores (see Chapter 3 for detailed assessment) 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 Drought
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Low Medium 2-Low Under-resourced Individuals Medium Medium 3-Medium
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Low Medium 2-Low
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Low Medium 2-Low Wildfire
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure High Medium 4-High Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 4-High
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers High Medium 4-High Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities High Medium 4-High Landslides
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Medium Medium 3-Medium Under-resourced Individuals Low Medium 2-Low
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Low Medium 2-Low
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Medium Low 4-High Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation
Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Low Medium 2-Low Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 2-Low
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Low Medium 2-Low
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 163 of 420

Executive Summary
Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 1
Table 2 Physical Vulnerability Scores (see Chapter 4 for detailed assessment) Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Extreme Heat
Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
Buildings and Facilities N/A N/A N/A
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Drought
Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Buildings and Facilities Low Low 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Wildfire
Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Buildings and Facilities High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High Landslides
Natural and Recreational Resources Medium Medium 3-Medium Buildings and Facilities Medium Medium 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services Medium Medium 3-Medium Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation
Natural and Recreational Resources Medium Medium 3-Medium Buildings and Facilities Medium Medium 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services Medium Medium 3-Medium Poor Air Quality
Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
Buildings and Facilities Low Low 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services Medium Medium 3-Medium 164 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
2 Summary Findings for High and Very
High Scores
Based on the assessment, all four vulnerable population groups are expected to experience significant impacts from climate change.

Key climate change social vulnerabilities for identified vulnerable populations include extreme heat and poor air quality. Impacts will range from increased rates of heat illness, income and property loss, and exacerbated underlying health conditions resulting in higher rates of mortality. Although the City has some programs in place, including hosting four cooling centers and adopted policies to increase access to community parks in underserved areas, there are many more steps that will be necessary to address the underlying inequitable causes of social vulnerabilities. Additional contributing factors include the lack of tree canopy in areas of high social vulnerability, and historical discriminatory practices, such as redlining.

Physical vulnerabilities include the risk of wildfire and post-wildfire landslides on Infrastructure and Critical Facilities assets. Natural and Recreational Resources in Glendale are vulnerable to extreme heat, wildfire, drought, and poor air quality.

There are three Glendale Water & Power (GWP) overhead
transmission lines and multiple water pump stations, as well as schools, fire stations, and police stations that are located within Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Post-wildfire debris and associated landslides further enhance the vulnerability of these critical facilities. Glendale Water & Power has a Wildfire Mitigation Plan which outlines procedures for vegetation management, wildfire power safety shutoffs, and other activities to reduce infrastructure vulnerabilities. However, more could be done to increase the City’s energy resilience, and protect existing facilities like schools, fire and police stations, and water pump stations.

Natural and Recreational Resources are vulnerable to multiple climate hazards. Extreme heat, wildfire, drought, and poor air quality can cause increased rates of habitat and vegetation mortality, habitat migration, and reduced environmental co- benefits for the urban tree canopy and ecosystem stability.

Although the Greener Glendale Plan aims to increase the urban tree canopy, there are additional opportunities to increase the resilience of Glendale’s Natural and Recreational Resources.

Cascading Impacts Assessment
The cascading impacts analyzed in Glendale include energy, water, transportation, and communication systems.

Energy System cascading risks include power disruptions in Glendale caused by wildfires, deliberate power shutoffs for public safety, or extreme heat overloading the grid. Power disruption has extensive cascading impacts. Impacts include but are not limited to loss of power in homes, which prevent community members from running their air conditioning or gas or electric heaters, and gas and electric kitchen appliances. For those who rely on in-home medical devices, power disruption could directly impact health and safety. If the power outages occur during bad air quality days from regional wildfire smoke, people with underlying health conditions could experience worsening health conditions. Traffic signals, cell-towers without back-up power, and critical facilities that lack backup power would cease to function. Losing many of these energy dependent amenities during events like heatwaves and wildfires can create increased risks to public health, including heat related illness, food access constraints, evacuation challenges, overloaded emergency services, and increased climate hazard exposure.
165 of 420

Executive Summary

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 3

Water System cascading impacts include reduced supply for community consumption potentially increasing water rates and associated public health concerns for under-resourced Individuals who may not have the ability to pay the increased rates. Water shortages can also impact power generation with availability of water for generator cooling. Inadequate water supply can impact wildfire mitigation without enough fire flow to fight active fires and/or prevent anticipated fires. Inadequate water can impact the City’s tree canopy which is critical for addressing the urban heat island effect and stormwater capture.

Transportation System cascading risks mainly concern mobility isolation of the community, ability for emergency services to respond to climate hazards, and constrained evacuation routes.

Transportation impacts can occur from a wide range of causes including direct physical damages on the transportation system associated with climate hazards within City limits or external impacts afflicting regional transportation networks and services, as well as power outages creating traffic signal failures.

Communication System cascading risks primarily result from downed communications creating evacuation and medical
complications, community isolation, and heightened risk for community members who are unable to receive hazard information.

Areas across Glendale in hazard zones are more prone to experiencing communication service disruptions and therefore, may experience increased cascading impacts from loss of communication infrastructure.

Key Findings
The Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment identifies key vulnerabilities associated with the following systems:
▪ Social and Governance Systems
▪ Urban Ecosystem
▪ Mobility, Land Use, and Emergency Systems
▪ Building Systems
Individuals with high outdoor exposure, under-resourced individuals, individuals facing societal barriers, individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities, natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, infrastructure and critical services are the most susceptible to climate change hazards in Glendale. Although the City has some policies and programs in place to prepare for climate related hazards, gaps remain as summarized in the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. This assessment will serve as the foundation for establishing adaptation policies and programs in the Glendale CAAP.
166 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

4 1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose
This report evaluates how climate change may impact vulnerable community members; natural and recreational resources; buildings and facilities; and services; and infrastructure in Glendale. The guiding methodology used in this assessment is based on the California Adaptation Planning Guide, which is discussed in the Vulnerability Assessment Methodology section.

Understanding the City’s vulnerabilities to climate change provides a foundation for developing climate adaptation measures and actions for the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP).

The CAAP will also include measures and actions that will help to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The difference between climate mitigation and adaptation measures and actions are illustrated in Figure 2.

1.2 Glendale Snapshot
The City of Glendale was incorporated in 1906 and spans approximately 30.6 square miles with a current population of approximately 196,543 people (US Census 2020). Glendale is the fourth largest city in Los Angeles County and is located approximately 10 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. Glendale borders the City of Los Angeles to the north and south, unincorporated Los Angeles to the northeast, cities of La Cañada Flintridge and Pasadena to the east, and the City of Burbank to the west. California State Route 134 (SR 134) and Interstate 210 (I-210) are major freeways that run west to south through the City, and I-5 and SR 2 run north to south through the City. The City is also served by Amtrak and Metrolink which provide commuter rail services and are accessible at the Glendale Transportation Center which is located in south Glendale. The City of Glendale also offers transportation services to meet a variety of needs and
demographics, including the Beeline Bus and Dial-A-Ride. Bus service throughout Glendale is provided by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Greyhound.

The City is home to the Verdugo Mountains Open Space Preserve, which holds more than 2,300 mature coast live oaks, sycamores, big leaf maples, bay laurels, and other native trees. The area is designated by Los Angeles County as a Significant Ecological Area (MRCA 2023). The City contains 47 parks and facilities including two regional parks (more than 30 acres in size), two community parks, 17 neighborhood parks, 13 mini-parks, and 13 special use facilities with recreational resources that are designated for specific groups (City of Glendale N.d.a).

Existing critical facilities are necessary for a community’s response to and recovery from emergencies. Critical facilities must continue to operate during and following a disaster to reduce the severity of impacts on the community and accelerate recovery. Example critical facilities in Glendale include police and fire stations, power lines, and public libraries.
167 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 5
Figure 2 Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

168 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

6 1.3 Glossary
Several words and phrases are used throughout this assessment to illustrate climate vulnerabilities within Glendale. ▪ Adaptation. The process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects, either to minimize harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate (IPCC 2012). ▪ Adaptive Capacity. The City of Glendale’s ability to cope with and adjust to the impacts of climate change (Cal OES 2020). ▪ Asset. Refers to a resource, structure, facility, or service that is relied on by a community.
▪ Cascading Impact. Climate hazard caused impacts that
compromise infrastructure or disrupt critical services (e.g., power supply or water conveyance) broadening the scope of impact past a singular subject to reliant subsystems and populations (Collins et al. 2019).
▪ Climate Driver. An increase in the proportion of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is the primary human-caused source of change to the earth’s climate (USGCRP 2017).
▪ Climate Hazard. A dangerous or potentially dangerous condition created by the effects of the local climate (Cal OES 2020). Climate hazards of concern for Glendale are extreme heat and warm nights, drought, stormwater flooding, wildfire, landslides, and poor air quality.
▪ Climate Indicator. A measure of a particular aspect of the Earth’s climate that can be tracked over time to show trends and changes. Climate indicators relevant to the City of Glendale and discussed in this report are temperature and precipitation. ▪ Compounding Risk. When two or more extreme events or
average events occur simultaneously and increase the scope of impact or severity of the event; an additional risk brought about by increased frequency of events from climate change
(Seneviratne et al. 2012).
▪ Impact. Effects on natural and human systems including effects on lives, livelihoods, health, ecosystems, economies, societies, cultures, services, and infrastructure due to the interaction of climate hazards and the vulnerabilities of the system or asset effected (IPCC 2012).
▪ Mitigation. An act or sustained actions to reduce, eliminate, or avoid negative impacts or effects (Cal OES 2020).
▪ Resilience. The capacity of an entity (an individual a community, an organization, or a natural system) to prepare for disruptions, to recover from shocks and stresses, and to adapt and grow from a disruptive experience (Cal OES 2020)
▪ Sensitivities. The degree to which a species, natural system, community, asset, or other associated system would be affected by changing climate conditions (Cal OES 2020).
▪ Vulnerable Populations. Certain populations experience increased exposure, risk, or vulnerability to climate change impacts and often have less capacity and fewer resources to cope with, adapt to, or recover from climate impacts (Cal OES 2020).

Assessing and mitigating impacts to these populations is prioritized given the increased risks and sensitivities. ▪ Vulnerability. The propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected (IPCC 2012).
169 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 7

1.4 Community Engagement
Incorporating input from the community, experts in the field, and interested parties into the development of this Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment provides critical context for how recent climate-driven events in Glendale have impacted critical infrastructure, services, and community members. It also serves to identify existing government-run programs within the City and remaining gaps that can be filled through strategies included in the CAAP.

The Sustainability Working Group meeting with Glendale City staff elicited information on historical climate change impacts, existing and planned efforts to manage climate change impacts now and in the future, and gaps in City programs and services. The Sustainability Working Group identified projects, programs, and policies the City should put into place to increase community resilience.

In addition, the City held two focus group meetings. These meetings were attended by community-based organizations in Glendale and elicited information on vulnerable populations, climate change impacts, and existing community resources that protect the community from climate change hazards.

Information shared by interested parties will further inform climate adaptation policies and programs in the City’s CAAP and will continue to provide ongoing guidance on strategies that address key community needs.

Sustainability Working Group Meeting
The City of Glendale assembled a Working Group to help shape the Glendale CAAP. The Sustainability Working Group is made up of representative from the following City departments and divisions:
▪ City of Glendale Water & Power Department
▪ City of Glendale Public Works Department
▪ City of Glendale Integrated Waste Management Division ▪ City of Glendale Fire Department
▪ City of Glendale Police Department
▪ City of Glendale Community Development Department
▪ Community Services and Parks Department
▪ City of Glendale Sustainability Office
▪ City of Glendale Library, Arts and Culture Department ▪ City of Glendale Economic Development Division
The City hosted its first Sustainability Working Group meeting on May 17, 2023, to gather information on historical impacts and existing and planned programs in the City that increase community resilience. Attendees provided input on the types of impacts that facilities, operations, staff, and the community have experienced from past floods, extreme heat events, landslides, and wildfires. The Sustainability Working Group also provided feedback on primary barriers and constraints preventing adequate preparation or response to climate hazards, steps to overcome these barriers, and types of projects, programs, or plans that are needed to better adapt to climate change. This assessment includes key findings from the Sustainability Working Group meeting, which are included in the Social Vulnerability by Climate Hazard section. The Mural Board activity used to gather feedback at the Sustainability Working Group is included as Appendix A.
170 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

8 Interested Parties Focus Group Meetings
To date, the City of Glendale has hosted four focus group meetings for the CAAP which occurred in June and July 2023 with the following community based:
▪ Adams Hill Neighborhood Association
▪ Arco
▪ Armik Avedisian Real Estate Services
▪ AT&T
▪ BLK dream Camp Co
▪ CDBG Commission
▪ City of Glendale
▪ Climate Reality Project – Los Angeles Chapter
▪ Community Foundation of the Verdugos
▪ Cuningham
▪ Department of Justice
▪ Dignity Health – Glendale Memorial Hospital
▪ Gharibian Real Estate & Finance
▪ Glendale Community College
▪ Glendale Environnemental Coalition
▪ Glendale Healthier Community Coalition
▪ Glendale Kiwanis
▪ Glendale Parks & Open Space Foundation
▪ Glendale Students for Sustainability
▪ Glendale Teachers Association
▪ Glendale Unified School District
▪ Glendale Water & Power
▪ Jackson Vintage Properties
▪ Keller Williams Commercial Glendale
▪ Los Angeles Regional Collaborative for Climate Action and Sustainability
▪ MedProse Consulting
▪ Montrose Verdugo City Chamber of Commerce
▪ NAMI Glendale
▪ Sierra Club Verdugo Hills Group
▪ Silversher Productions
▪ Student from Crescenta Valley high School
▪ Sunroom Desk
▪ Sustainability Commission, City of Glendale
▪ Surfrider Foundation South Bay Chapter
▪ UCLA Students
▪ USC Verdugo Hills Hospital
▪ Whiting Woods Property Owners Inc.
▪ WRP Group
▪ YWCA Glendale and Pasadena
Each interested party brings unique expertise about Glendale and climate-related solutions to the project. Incorporating this knowledge is critical in understanding the scale of impacts, vulnerabilities, and existing adaptive capacity of the community in the City.

The City provided the focus groups attendees with an overview of potentially vulnerable groups in Glendale. Attendees provided input on additional potentially vulnerable groups in the City, their primary climate hazards of concern, experiences during recent climate hazard events in Glendale, barriers faced when preparing for and/or responding to climate hazards, and plans, programs, and resources 171 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 9
that the community-based organizations currently provide that increase community adaptive capacity. The additional vulnerable groups identified through the focus group meetings are included in this assessment primarily in Social Vulnerability Assessment. The Mural Board activities used to gather feedback at the Focus Group meetings is included as Appendix B.

Community Workshop
The City hosted 4 virtual and 8 in-person community workshops in October and November 2023 to share results of this CCVA, present high-level strategies to increase community resilience to climate change, develop actions to achieve strategies with the community, and answer questions related to the CAAP.

Community Engagement as part of Climate Action
and Adaptation Plan
As part of the CAAP, the City has a robust community engagement plan. The City is hosting a project website, attending community events, sending out e-blasts, sending out surveys, hosting community workshops, and attending existing meetings held by business associations and community-based organizations to gather feedback on and help guide the direction of the CAAP.

1.5 Vulnerability Assessment
Methodology
California Adaptation Planning Guide Phases
The Glendale Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment follows the vulnerability assessment process recommended by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), as documented in the 2020 California Adaptation Planning Guide (Cal APG). The adaptation planning process outlined by the Cal APG consists of four phases, illustrated in Figure 3.

1. Phase 1 consists of scoping a project to define, explore, and initiate the planning process, which the City completed as part of the CAAP initiation.

2. Phase 2 consists of the vulnerability assessment process which encompasses this report and is outlined in more detail in Figure 4.

3. Phase 3 consists of developing adaptation strategies which will be completed as part of the CAAP in which the summarized vulnerabilities of the City are prepared as prioritized adaptation strategies.

4. Phase 4 consists of the implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment of the adaptation strategies.

This report is also consistent with Government Code § 65302, as amended by Senate Bill (SB) 379, which requires cities and counties across California to prepare a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment to inform updates to the Safety Element of the General Plan.
172 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

10 Figure 3 California Adaptation Planning Guide Phases

173 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 11
Figure 4 Vulnerability Assessment Flow Diagram, Phase 2 of the California Adaptation Planning Guide

174 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

12 Key Data Sources
The following data sources and tools, many of which are recommended within the Cal APG and Southern California
Adaptation Planning Guide (SoCal APG), were used in preparation of this report.
▪ Cal-Adapt is an online tool that presents historic and modeled projections based on 10 different global climate models. The tool was developed and is maintained by the University of California, Berkeley with oversight from the California Energy Commission (CEC). This tool is used to present projection data related to minimum and maximum temperature, precipitation, extreme heat, warm nights, drought, and wildfire. This tool uses data from California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment and is expected to be updated soon with data from the Fifth Climate Assessment as it becomes available.
▪ California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment was developed by the CEC and other State of California coordinating agencies to present up-to-date climate science, projections, and potential impacts associated with climate change. The CEC and coordinating agencies developed nine reports to provide regional-scale climate information to support local planning and action. The Los Angeles Region Summary Report (2018)
presents an overview of climate science, regional projections, specific strategies to adapt to climate impacts, and key research gaps needed to spur additional progress on safeguarding the Los Angeles Region from climate change. The Los Angeles Region Summary Report was used to understand regional
changes that may affect Glendale both directly and indirectly. ▪ California Heat Assessment Tool (CHAT) is an online mapping tool funded by the California Natural Resources Agency as part of California’s Fourth State Climate Change Assessment to help state and local public health officials understand how heat vulnerability will change with increasing temperatures due to climate change. CHAT uses historical and projected daily maximum and minimum temperature, humidity, and
emergency room visit data along with population and
environmental characteristics to assign census tracts with heat vulnerability scores and to project the frequency and length of Heat Health Events over the course of the century for two climate scenarios (RCP 8.5 and RCP 4.5). A Heat Health Event (HHE) is any heat event that generates public health impacts, regardless of the absolute temperature.
▪ Tree Equity Score is a mapping tool created by the non-profit organization, American Forests, using tree canopy data from Earth Define. Trees provide numerous environmental and
health benefits, including improved air quality, shade, and ambient cooling. Trees are often distributed unequally
throughout the neighborhoods in cities. Tree Equity Score is intended to help identify census tracts that could benefit from additional tree planting the most and to estimate the benefits of tree planting to make the case for allocating the resources needed to do so. Tree Equity Scores are based on how much tree canopy and surface temperature align with income,
employment, race, age, and health factors. Scores are meant to indicate whether there are enough trees in specific
neighborhoods or municipalities for everyone to experience the health, economic, and climate benefits that trees provide. ▪ Los Angeles County Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment is a comprehensive assessment of the social and physical vulnerabilities facing Los Angeles County as a result of climate change. The assessment defines high climate vulnerability as a combination of increased exposure to climate hazards; high susceptibility to negative impacts of exposure; and low adaptive capacity, or ability to manage and recover from exposure. The 175 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 13
assessment includes a Climate Hazard Assessment (CHA) which evaluates potential changes in the frequency and severity of specific climate hazards (extreme heat, wildfire, extreme precipitation and inland flooding, coastal flooding, and drought) resulting from climate change in the coming decades. It also includes a Social Vulnerability Assessment (SVA) which looks at the level of risk across communities and populations and identifies groups and places that are highly vulnerable to climate hazards. The third major section is the Physical Vulnerability Assessment (PVA) which examines how physical infrastructure and facilities across the County face risk of damage from climate hazards and outlines how damage to
highly vulnerable facilities could affect people and society.

Finally, the Cascading Impacts Assessment explains how
infrastructural systems rely on one another and how harm to one type of infrastructure can affect other facilities, related services, and the people who rely on those services.
▪ City of Glendale Local Hazard Mitigation Plan contains a series of proposed action items that when implemented can help reduce the risk from hazards through education and outreach programs, the development of partnerships, and the
implementation of preventative activities (e.g., land use programs) that restrict and control development in areas subject to damage from natural hazards. The Plan includes wildfire, flood, and landslide mitigation action items. As of August 2023, the City is in the process of updating the 2019 Plan.
▪ U.S. Census, 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) presents demographic data by census tract and was used in the social vulnerability analysis. U.S. Census data was used to identify the percentage of the Glendale population that corresponds to each vulnerable group.
▪ The Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) PLACES Health Data (updated 2023) presents health demographic data by census tract. CDC PLACES Health Data was used to identify the Glendale population health statistics that correspond with the Social Vulnerability Index and vulnerable populations. This data is based on the 2010 census boundaries.
▪ U.S. Department of Energy Low-Income Energy Affordability Data (LEAD) presents population data on low- and moderate- income households that carry a disproportionate energy
burden, as included in the Social Vulnerability Index.

Data Limitations
The limitations of this report and analysis stem from gaps in data availability and completeness of data methods. Census data can miss portions of the population (e.g., individuals experiencing homelessness, undocumented individuals) and general
demographic information may not fully identify the full extent of populations at increased risk from climate change impacts. For example, Middle Eastern and Armenian individuals who have traditionally been classified as “white” in census designations face systemic disadvantages from potentially missing funding and resource opportunities that other minority groups may receive (Census Bureau 2022; Warren 2022). Extrapolating air quality hazard exposure data in the context of climate change is difficult because it is at a regional scale and regional GHG impacts have not traditionally been measured or monitored in the same way that local air quality has been. Therefore, the estimates of exposure to these hazards are likely to be underestimated.

The data presented in Cal-Adapt tools are projections, or estimates, of future climate. The limitation in these projections is that the long- term behavior of the atmosphere is expressed in averages – for example, average annual temperature, average monthly rainfall, or 176 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

14 average water equivalent of mountain snowpack at a given time of year. The averages discussed often downplay the extremes by which daily weather events occur and when presented as an average, only show moderate changes within the climate. What is often lost in averages is that the frequency of extremes, like atmospheric rivers, may increase while low-moderate intensity weather events decrease through the end of the century. In instances of modeled precipitation projections, it maintains an average similar to historic levels which does not account for anticipated fluctuations in extremes (CEC 2023).

Social Vulnerability Methodology
The presence and overall distribution of vulnerable populations in the City of Glendale were identified based on the U.S. Census and American Community Survey data, CDC’s PLACES Health data, and U.S. Department of Energy LEAD Tool. The data used for the social vulnerability analysis were supplemented using information received through the focus group meetings. See Interested Parties Focus Group Meetings section of this report for a summary of these meetings. This report follows the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) SoCal APG and Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment methodologies for identifying, grouping, and analyzing vulnerable populations.

The SoCal APG identifies the following populations as generally experiencing higher risk for climate impacts in a given community:
▪ Low income
▪ Experiencing
homelessness
▪ Incarcerated
▪ Single female heads of
households
▪ Undocumented immigrants
▪ Non-English speakers
▪ Unemployed or
underemployed
▪ Seniors and young
children
▪ Military veterans
▪ Non-white communities
▪ Renters
▪ Students
▪ Visitors and seasonal
residents
▪ Tribal and indigenous
communities
▪ Individuals with impaired
health/disabilities
▪ Isolated individuals (e.g., no
car or transit access)
▪ Individuals with educational
attainment less than 4 years
of college
▪ Outdoor workers
Vulnerable populations were identified in Glendale through several state recommended data sources. For groups analyzed using U.S.

Census data, the report identified populations in Glendale present at higher rates than the statewide average. Glendale’s vulnerable populations are described in the Social Vulnerability Assessment section later in this report.

Vulnerability Scoring Methodology
Vulnerability scoring is a valuable step in the climate vulnerability assessment process because it identifies which assets and populations face the greatest threat from climate hazards. This can aid in the prioritization of adaptation actions. The vulnerability score is a combination of the impact and adaptive capacity scores.

The impact and adaptive capacity scores are developed using a qualitative methodology outlined in the Cal APG, as seen in Table 3.

Impact and adaptive capacity scores are assigned for each climate hazard for all assets and vulnerable populations. The vulnerability score is prepared by combining the two scores as demonstrated in Table 4. The range of potential impacts spans 1 through 5 with 4-5 representing the highest levels of potential impact.
177 of 420

Introduction

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 15
Table 3 Impact and Adaptive Capacity Scoring Rubric
Score Impact Adaptive Capacity
Low Impact is unlikely based on projected exposure; would result in minor consequences to public health, safety, and/or other metrics of concern.

The population or asset lacks capacity to manage changes; major changes would be required.

Medium Impact is somewhat likely based on projected exposure; would result in some consequences to public health, safety, and/or other metrics of concern.

The population or asset has some capacity to manage climate impact; some changes would be required.

High Impact is highly likely based on projected exposure; consequences to public health, safety, and/or other metrics of concern.

The population or asset has high capacity to manage climate impact; minimal to no changes are required.

Source: Cal OES 2020
Table 4 Vulnerability Score Matrix
Adaptive Capacity
Potential
Impacts
High Medium Low
High 3 4 5
Medium 2 3 4
Low 1 2 3
Source: Cal OES 2020

178 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

16 2 Climate Hazards
Climate change is a global phenomenon that can impact local health, natural resources, infrastructure, emergency response, and many other aspects of society. The primary driver of climate change is increased GHGs in the atmosphere due to human activity. Future projections of climate and climate hazards are dependent on both location and the trajectory of global GHG emissions over time. The Cal-Adapt tool provides climate data from global scale models that have been localized (downscaled) to 3.7 mile by 3.7-mile grids (CEC 2023). The data in Cal-Adapt is combined with information from the California Fourth Climate Change Assessment to model future changes in specific types of hazards within this assessment. Climate change projections use different Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP), which describe potential trajectories of global GHG emissions (CEC 2023). Projections in this assessment are based on RCP 8.5, a high emissions scenario in which global GHG emissions continue to rise through the end of the 21st century. The selection of RCP 8.5 for assessing vulnerability is recommended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research in the Cal APG (Cal OES 2020).

Additionally, projections are forecasted to mid-century (2035-2064) and end-century (2070-2099) as 30-year averages to be compared to a modeled historical baseline (1961-1990) (CEC 2023).

This section presents information on temperature and precipitation, which are considered climate indicators. Following this section are a series of graphics that display information on projected changes to climate hazards due to changes in climate indicators. These hazards include extreme heat and warm nights, drought, wildfire, landslides, stormwater flooding and extreme precipitation, and poor air quality.

Causes of Climate Change
Climate change is caused by the release of GHGs 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).
179 of 420

Climate Hazards

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 17

2.1 Climate Indicators
The climate indicators relevant to Glendale are temperature and precipitation. The following section summarizes projected changes to these climate indicators.

Temperature
Currently, Glendale has an average maximum temperature of 74.9°F and an average minimum temperature of 51.2°F. Average maximum temperatures are expected to increase in Glendale by
approximately 5.2°F (RCP 8.5) by the mid-century and 8.6°F (RCP

8.5) by end-century. Average minimum temperature is expected to increase in the City by approximately 4.8°F (RCP 8.5) by mid-century and 8.3°F (RCP 8.5) by end-century (CEC 2023). Temperature increases affect various climate related hazards including extreme heat and warm nights, drought, wildfire, and poor air quality, further described in the illustrative graphics below.

Precipitation
Climate projections show that there will be more frequent and longer dry periods punctuated by increased precipitation intensity of the largest storms or wet periods (Hall et al. 2018). Projections for Glendale predict that annual precipitation totals will remain relatively stable, decreasing slightly by approximately 0.3 inches by end-century (RCP 8.5). However, as already observed in recent years, precipitation changes are largely observed as more extreme variability with intense wet years followed by extreme drought (CEC 2023). Climate change is projected to increase the intensity of extreme precipitation events in the Los Angeles region (Hall et al. 2018). By the end of the century, some locations in the Los Angeles region are expected to experience up to 30 percent more precipitation on the wettest day of the year and the intensity and frequency of atmospheric reiver events are also projected to occur (RCP 8.5) (Hall et al. 2018). Although changes in average precipitation are small, both wet and dry periods are expected to be more extreme, which can increase the risk of related climate hazards such as stormwater flowing and landslides (Hall et al. 2018).

In Glendale, precipitation changes are expected to affect drought, stormwater flooding, wildfire, and air quality.

2.2 Climate Hazards
This section outlines projected changes for the following climate hazards:

Extreme Heat

Warm Nights and Heat Health Events

Drought

Wildfire

Landslides

Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation Events

Poor Air Quality
180 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

18 Extreme Heat
181 of 420

Climate Hazards

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 19
Warm Nights and Heat Health Events
182 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

20 Drought
183 of 420

Climate Hazards

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 21

Wildfire
184 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

22 Landslides
185 of 420

Climate Hazards

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 23
Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation Events
186 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

24 Poor Air Quality
187 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 25
3 Social Vulnerability Assessment

3.1 What is Social Vulnerability
While all populations in a community will be affected by climate hazards, some individuals are more vulnerable due to physiological conditions and inequitable systems and structures and therefore will be disproportionally impacted. For example, seniors (over 65 years old); young children (under 5 years old) and their parents and caregivers; and pregnant women are more at-risk than the general population to heat illness during an extreme heat event. Vulnerable populations experience heightened risk to climate change and have inequitable access to resources to adequately adapt and recover from the associated impacts. Glendale is home to several vulnerable populations (see Table 5 and Figure 5), some of whom have already been disproportionately harmed by climate change.

3.2 Social Vulnerability Index Score
A social vulnerability index was developed to identify the location and areas of highest concentrations of climate-vulnerable population groups in Glendale based on 31 population data indicators (see the highlighted rows in Table 5). Each indicator represents a characteristic that either increases a person’s physiological vulnerability to climate hazards or decreases the ability of an individual to prepare for, cope with or recover from climate hazards due to systemic inequities. Selected indicators are consistent with guidance in the Cal APG (Cal OES 2020) and SCAG APG (SCAG 2020). The indicators also reflect input from community- based organizations provided during the City-held Focus Group Meetings (see Interested Parties Focus Group Meetings section above). For more information on why these population
characteristics are considered vulnerable to climate change impacts, see the Social Vulnerability by Climate Hazard section. Data for these indicators was obtained from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 2017-2021, CDC’s PLACES Health Data, U.S.

Department of Energy LEAD Tool, Esri’s Crime Index data, and California Immigrant Data Portal.

The 27 population data indicators are organized into four separate groups for the purposes of this assessment. Grouping populations allows the City to understand what systems and structures contribute to increased vulnerability to climate change hazards.

Through identification of factors that contribute to population vulnerability, adaptation solutions can be developed that specifically address those contributing factors. Population groupings are as follows:

1. Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure.

2. Under-resourced Individuals.

3. Individuals Facing Societal Barriers.

4. Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities
The indicators were used to assess the geographic location and proportion of vulnerable populations in Glendale who may be more impacted by climate hazards. Data for these indicators was obtained from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 2017-2021, CDC’s PLACES Health Data, U.S. Department of Energy LEAD Tool, and Esri’s Crime Index data. The Social vulnerability analysis was 188 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

26 conducted to identify the concentration of each population group in each census tract in Glendale. Figure 5 displays social vulnerability in Glendale by census tract. Census tracts with high proportions of vulnerable populations, relative to state statistics, have higher percentile rankings on the 0 percent to 100 percent scale. The higher the percentile, the higher the vulnerability to climate change.

The areas of Glendale with the greatest concentration of vulnerable populations are in south and southwest Glendale Census tracts that are above the 60th percentile are considered a high social vulnerability area. Notably, the Grayson Power Plant is located in a high social vulnerability area. Figure 5 also displays additional areaswith high social vulnerability, beyond what was idenfitied using existing data and state tools, that were identified by representatives from local community-based organizations as part of the City-held Focus Group Meetings (see dotted areas in Figure 5). The additional focus areas were determined using a 1/4-mile buffer around schools(which is where children, a climate-vulnerable population group, spend much of their time),, I-5, (SR 134), Brand Boulevard, the Scholl Canyon Landfill and the Grayson Power Plant.

In addition, the areas south of SR 134 and west of Brand Boulevard are included as additional vulnerable focus areas, as identified during the Focus Group meetings.

Systemic Inequities
Individuals facing societal barriers include marginalized individuals due to their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability, economic status, or immigration status, all of whom encounter systemic obstacles that can limit their access to opportunities, resources, and fair treatment, are directly impacted by systemic social and economic inequities.

These challenges create educational, resource, economic, and health disparities that leave communities extremely vulnerable to climate change impacts (Baird 2008). When looking at the intersectionality and compounding impact of these societal barriers, these communities are more likely to face high outdoor exposure, be systematically under-resourced, be subjected to toxic stress and/or have chronic health
conditions, live in high-hazard risk areas and substandard housing, and are less likely to be homeowners (APA 2012).

These systemic factors make them disproportionately
vulnerable to climate hazards. In the City, many of these individuals face compounding risks associated with linguistic and income barriers. Immigrants and people who are
undocumented are often deprived of access to medical
services, quality housing, and basic needs, as well as access to social and economic services (Gamble et al. 2016).

Additionally, historical mistreatment and underserving by government leads to distrust, which compounds the lack of access to resources even when they do available.
189 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 27
Table 5 Vulnerable Populations in Glendale
Population Type Population Description Percentage of Total Population/Household Type Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure
Outdoor Workers Individuals who are employed, 16 and older, and work outdoors 8% People experiencing
houselessness1
Individuals who currently lack fixed, regular, and adequate housing 0.1% Visitors2 Individuals who are not residents and are visiting the study area for a limited time Not Available People who use active
transportation*
People who primarily get around by walking, biking, or other active mode of transportation
9%
People who use public transit* People who primarily get around by buses, trains, subways, and other forms of public transportation
3%
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers
Black, Indigenous, and People
of Color (BIPOC)
Individuals who do not identify as white 23%
Native Americans Individuals who identify as American Native and Alaskan Native 0.6% Limited or non-English
speakers
Households with individuals who are non or limited English-speaking 11% Immigrants3 Individuals residing in the United States with legal documentation 51% People who are
undocumented4
Individuals residing in the United States without legal documentation 6% Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Seniors Individuals 65 years or older 18%
Young children and their
parents/caregivers*
Individuals 5 years and younger 5%
People who are differently
abled
Individuals with access and functional needs (physical and mental) 26% Individuals with asthma* Individuals diagnosed with asthma 9% Individuals with cardiovascular
disease
Individuals diagnosed with coronary heart disease 6%
People with diabetes* Individuals diagnosed with diabetes 9% 190 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

28 Population Type Population Description Percentage of Total Population/Household Type People with high blood
pressure*
Individuals diagnosed with high blood pressure 28%
People with stroke risks* People with disproportionately high risk for stroke 3% Miliary Veterans Individuals who have served but are not currently serving in the US Armed Forces 2% Pregnant people* Individual with a baby or babies developing inside the womb Not Available Under-Resourced Individuals
People experiencing poverty Household incomes less than 80 % the State median household income 14% Unemployed Percentage of population aged 18-64 who are unemployed 7% Individuals with no health
insurance
Individuals aged 18 to 64 years old currently uninsured 7% Households without a
computer
Households without access to a computer 6%
Households without
broadband internet
Households without access to broadband internet 26%
Renters Housing units that are renter occupied 64%
Individuals without vehicle
access
Individuals without access to a vehicle 17%
Single female heads of
household with kids
Households with kids supported by a single female 14%
Individuals with education
attainment less than 4 years of
high school
Percentage of people over age 18 without a high school education or higher 10% People in overcrowded
households
Household with more than one person per room 5%
Mobile home households Housing units that are mobile homes 0.1% Households experiencing
housing burden
Percentage of gross household income spent on housing costs 11% Students Individuals 3 years and older enrolled in school 23% People who live in areas of
high violent crime
Percentage of areas that have an above average risk of crime occurring relative to the US average.
63%
191 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 29
Population Type Population Description Percentage of Total Population/Household Type Households using fuels for
heating*
Households using solid fuels, kerosene, and gas to heat home 78% Residents without air
conditioning7*
Households without air conditioning Not Available
Households experiencing
energy burden
Percentage of gross household income spent on energy costs 1% Highlighted rows indicate population indicators for which census level data for Glendale was available, and therefore were included in the social vulnerability index mapping. * Populations added based on Focus Group input.
1 People experiencing houselessness percentage is calculated using data for Glendale from the City’s 2023 Glendale Homeless County (195 sheltered and unsheltered) and the 2020 City of Glendale Population from the Census (196,543). Data for this group was not available at the Census tract level for Glendale and therefore was not included in the Social Vulnerability Index. 2 Data for visitors was not available at the Census tract or City level for Glendale and therefore was not included in the Social Vulnerability Index. 3 Immigrants with legal documentation percentage is calculated using data for Glendale and is sourced from the California Immigrant Data Portal (99,796 immigrants with legal documentation in Glendale in 2019, most recent year available) and the 2020 City of Glendale Population from the Census (196,543). Data for this group was not available at the Census tract level for Glendale and therefore was not included in the Social Vulnerability Index. 4 People who are undocumented is calculated using data for Glendale and is sourced from the California Immigrant Data Portal (11,130 undocumented immigrants in Glendale in 2019, most recent year available) and the 2020 City of Glendale Population from the Census (196,543). Data for this group was not available at the Census tract level for Glendale and therefore was not included in the Social Vulnerability Index.

Source: The percentages used in this table were acquired from the U.S. Census, 2021 American Community Survey (ACS), CDC’s PLACES Health Data, Esri’s Crime Index, and U.S. Department of Energy LEAD Tool.
192 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

30 Figure 5 Social Vulnerability in Glendale

193 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 31

3.3 Social Vulnerability Overview
Vulnerability is the propensity or predisposition of a certain asset or population group to be adversely affected by climate change impacts. The following subsection provides an overview of what makes the vulnerable population groups more susceptible to climate change impacts. The Social Vulnerability by Climate Hazard Section provides:
▪ An overview of the impacts of climate hazards
▪ Potential impacts of climate hazards to each of the four population groups
▪ City-led and community adaptive capacity
▪ Vulnerability score which is a combined score of the potential impact and adaptive capacity for each of the four population groups by climate hazard
Information for impacts on populations and adaptive capacity was pulled from government sources and peer reviewed articles and supplemented using information provided by City staff during the Sustainability Working Group meeting and community-based organizations during Focus Group meetings (for more information on these meetings, refer to the Sustainability Working Group Meeting and Interested Parties Focus Group Meetings section of the report). Adaptive capacity is the ability to adjust to the consequences of climate change. Types of adaptive capacity include adjustments in behavior, resources, and technologies. There are other forms of adaptive capacity that are led by institutions (e.g., schools, religious institutions), community-based organizations, non-profits, special districts, and other nongovernmental entities.

The two types of adaptive capacity that are discussed in this report:

1. City-led adaptive capacity indicates the ways in which the City currently manages the negative impacts of climate change through City and utility-led plans and programs.

2. Community-scale adaptive capacity The ability of a community to deal with climate-related challenges, like extreme weather, can be improved by features in both the man-made and natural surroundings, as explained in the Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment.

Both City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity are assessed for each population group by climate hazard.

An impact score and an adaptive capacity score are identified for each vulnerable population group by climate hazard, along with an overall vulnerability score consistent with the scoring methodology provided in the Vulnerability Scoring Methodology Section.

Vulnerability scoring helps the City understand which climate effects pose the greatest threats and should be prioritized in adaptation planning and policy.

The results of the analysis will inform the development and prioritization of adaptation policies and programs to increase community resilience as part of the City of Glendale CAAP and Safety Element Update.

Indicators that Drive Community Vulnerability
Below is an overview of the vulnerability indicators for each population group that drive community vulnerability to climate change. This assessment acknowledges how the intersectionality of systems compound individuals’ vulnerability across multiple factors at once; however, for the purpose of this assessment, analysis was conducted based on the vulnerability that increases an individual’s risk to the greatest degree.
194 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

32 Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure
Outdoor workers, people experiencing houselessness, visitors, and people who use active transportation and public transit face high outdoor exposure, which increases vulnerability to potential climate hazards. Approximately 8 percent of the population in Glendale are outdoor workers and face high risk of climate hazards.

Glendale has an estimated 195 people experiencing houselessness in 2023 (City of Glendale 2023). There is a significant concentration of people experiencing houselessness that are unsheltered in the Downtown Area, particularly in Central Park (City of Glendale 2023).

Central Park offers access to vital resources for the unsheltered population, including the Central Library and the Adult Recreation Center (City of Glendale 2023). People experiencing houselessness often suffer from high rates of respiratory conditions, mental illness, and other chronic health conditions and therefore are more vulnerable to climate hazards (CDPH 2020).

Glendale offers hiking trails, a diversity of restaurants, and icon sites such as the Alex Theatre, to visitors. Visitors are at risk because they may not receive warning during emergency events and are more likely to be unsure of how or where to receive help, or how to evacuate. Visitor deterrence, which could occur during and following climate hazards, would have impacts on the local economy (Gamble et al. 2016).

In Glendale, 17 percent of households do not have access to a vehicle (U.S. Census ACS 2021). People without access to a vehicle use active transportation, such as walking and biking, and public transit to get around. People who rely on active transportation or public transit have higher outdoor exposure, such as extreme heat, air pollution, or heavy rainfall, than those who use personal vehicles and are therefore at greater risk to climate hazards. This high risk is compounded by the fact that communities of color are more likely to have limited or no access to a car, increasing their likelihood of being impacted during heat and other climate hazards (CDPH 2020).

People who rely on active transportation or public transit may experience barriers in accessing cooling centers, evacuating in a timely fashion, and have a greater likelihood of encountering interruption in transportation services which could lead to direct income losses from the inability to access their workplace during climate events.

Under-resourced Individuals
Under-resourced individuals have inequitable access to resources with which to prepare for, cope with, and recover from climate change impacts, due to economic disparities, social inequities, geographical location, lack of education, policy gaps, historical factors, and limited social networks, which further exasperates vulnerability to climate impacts. Individuals who are unemployed or people experiencing poverty often face financial barriers when preparing for and recovering from climate change hazards.

Individuals in these groups often live in homes that are less protected against climate hazards or are more likely to be renters so are unable to make needed home improvements. People
experiencing poverty may not be able to take time off work to address health concerns either caused by or exacerbated by climate hazards, such as heat-related illnesses, respiratory problems from air pollution, or injuries resulting from extreme weather events, leading to further challenges in managing their well-being and financial stability. People experiencing poverty in conjunction with food and housing insecurity are rendered systematically more vulnerable than the general population to many co-morbid health issues. Glendale’s current unemployment rate averaged over 5 years is 6.6 percent, higher than the county and state
unemployment rates (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2022). The current poverty rate for Glendale is 13.9 percent 195 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 33
with an estimated 27,065 citizens of 195,227 living in poverty (Welfare Info). Neighborhoods experiencing more than 25 percent poverty include densely populated communities adjacent to major roadways such as I-5 in the southern and central parts of the city (City of Glendale Income and Poverty). These neighborhoods largely consist of marginalized communities where population density is 5,000 to 30,000 people per square mile (City of Glendale Census 2010).

Single female heads of households, as defined by the U.S. Census as female householders with children under 18-years-old and no spouse/partner present, are often subjected to high levels of work- life conflict and financial hardship, which can make preparing for, coping with, and recovering from climate hazards difficult. They are also more likely to serve as the primary caretaker of children which can make evacuating during a hazard scenario difficult (Flanagan et al. 2011). Additionally, women’s wages, on average, are lower than their male counterparts. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, in 2020, women earned 84 percent of what men earned (Pew
Research Center 2021). This disparity is even more extreme for Black women who earned on average 64 percent of what white, non-Hispanic men earned in 2020 (Bleiweis et al. 2021). On average, Glendale single female heads of households experience poverty levels of nearly 22 percent across the city’s census blocks. In the most densely populated areas of the city, this rate reaches highs of

37.3 percent (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2022).

As such, they will likely experience increased difficulties preparing for and recovering from climate hazards.

Individuals with educational attainment of less than 4 years of high school usually have lower earning potential and are twice as likely to be unemployed than those with a high school degree
(Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities N.d). Individuals with low educational attainment are more likely to work in outdoor and/or labor-intensive environments thus increasing the impact of climate events (CDPH 2017). In the Glendale area, 16.5 percent of adults, aged 25 and older, lack a high school diploma (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center 2022). Under-resourced individuals are less likely to have access to transportation, healthcare, and other basic needs and often lack the financial resources to evacuate from a climate hazard or find a safe and affordable place in which to evacuate.

Households without a computer or broadband internet access may be less likely to receive emergency alerts or governmental guidance before, during, or after a climate hazard event, making them particularly vulnerable in evacuation scenarios. Individuals without health insurance are more likely to have undiagnosed pre-existing health conditions and inadequate access to preventative care and treatment, which may make them more vulnerable to health impacts from climate hazards (Gamble et al. 2016). According to the Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center Community Health Needs Assessment from 2022, Glendale overall has very high health insurance rates at 96.6 percent. However, minority ethnic groups tend to have lower health insurance rates. Glendale BIPOC communities on average have health insurance rates of 86 percent (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center Report 2022).

Individuals who rent housing have limited ability to weatherize their homes for hazard events. Mobile home households also often do not have adequately weatherized homes. For example, renters may not have temperature control in their housing units and generally experience a higher water and energy utilities cost burden than homeowners (Cooley et al. 2012).

Households experiencing housing cost or energy cost burden are less likely to have financial resources to prepare for, respond to, or recover from impacts. Individuals living in overcrowded housing are more likely to face health and safety concerns and face financial 196 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

34 barriers when preparing for and recovering from climate hazards (EPA 2022). In Glendale, 48.7 percent of owner and renter occupied households are cost-burdened, which is higher than both the county and state rates (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center Report 2022). Over half of the Glendale ZIP codes serviced by the Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center have cost-burdened population rates of over 50 percent (Glendale Memorial Hospital and Health Center Report 2022). 2022).

Residents who lack air conditioning are at extreme risk of health impacts particularly associated with extreme heat. About 30 percent of households in California. Of those households without air conditioning, a majority are in low-income communities (Chen et al. 2020)
People who live in areas of high violent crime are more likely to live in areas with neighborhood instability and economic disadvantage.

Additionally, one study found that 20 percent of most
disadvantaged neighborhoods are predicted to absorb over 50 percent of climate change-related increases in violence. This highlights the critical link between environmental stressors, resource scarcity, and social vulnerability, as these areas often struggle with limited access to essential resources, economic opportunities, and social services. This lack of resources can intensify tensions and conflicts when compounded by the additional pressures brought on by climate change impacts, leading to heightened levels of violence in heat-stressed neighborhoods (Plante and Anderson 2017). In Glendale, from 2012 to 2017, there were 2,887 arrests, generating $1,196,547 in incarceration rates (MDH 2017). Most of the documented crime in Glendale occurs around densely populated, marginalized communities adjacent to I 5 and SR-134 (Neighborhood Scout 2023). Glendale experiences disproportionate rates of arrests by race and these rates are likely to continue to increase, exacerbated by heat inequity from climate change impacts.

Students may experience educational disruption and setbacks including reduced rate of graduate and college attendance as aa result of climate hazards that cause school closures, loss of personal property, and/or psychological distress, particularly students with additional characteristics that increase sensitivity to climate hazards. Additionally, students have limited ability to modify the physical conditions at school that affect climate hazard exposure and risk such as air filtration and air conditioning (GAO 2022).

Individuals Facing Societal Barriers
Glendale is located within the ancestral lands of the Tongva people.

Because many Native American people experience some degree of the implications of colonial violence, cultural erasure, and social marginalization, they are more likely to be under-resourced and experience poverty (Rogers 2012). Not all City residents who identify as Native American have ties to tribal communities, which affects the ways in which climate hazards impact individuals. In 2020, one in three Native Americans across the United States were living in poverty (Northwestern Institute for Policy Research 2020).

Native Americans often experience worse health outcomes and lower life expectancies compared to other populations due to a variety of systemic factors including toxic stress due to regularly experiencing racism and other systemic harms, disproportionate poverty, and discrimination in the delivery or accessibility of health services. Native Americans are also less likely to have health insurance, which may limit their ability to seek medical care for injuries or illnesses caused or exacerbated by climate change impacts (Rogers 2012). Native Americans are more likely to live in high-hazard risk areas and less likely to be homeowners, which 197 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 35
leaves them vulnerable to climate impacts (Gamble et al. 2016).

Within the vulnerability analysis, potential impacts to Native American populations are discussed in the context of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC).

Recently, the City of Glendale recognized its past with racial injustices by unanimously passing a resolution apologizing for its history as a “sundown town” (Crouch 2020). A sundown town is the term for predominantly white towns and cities across the nation that attempted to keep their towns minority-free through violence, discriminatory legislation, and harassment. These places were areas in which City officials posted notices that minorities could work and travel in the town, but had to leave by sunset, or “sundown” (Christmas 2021). The history of violence and discriminatory laws against people of color and marginalized communities extends beyond the direct harassment and exclusion of these peoples in Glendale’s history through legislation such as the intentional neighborhood redlining, as described in Individuals Facing Societal Barriers. Now, as climate change impacts threaten all of Glendale’s citizens, these communities are feeling the generational effects of racial injustice, stemming from the City’s past as a “sundown town.” These communities predominantly reside in C-graded
neighborhoods, as depicted in Figure 6, and face climate vulnerabilities such as increased pavement, lack of trees for adequate cooling (Figure 7), and heat inequity. While Glendale addresses its history as a sundown town, the effects of its past on marginalized communities are being exacerbated by climate change and continue to shape their inequitable climate vulnerabilities. 198 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

36 Figure 6 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) Neighborhood Redlining Grade
199 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Action & Adaptation Plan 37
Tree Equity Score
The number and distribution of trees in cities in the United States, often reflects differences in race and income across city landscapes.

While the amount of paved and impermeable surfaces and lack of water features and green spaces can increase the impact of temperature increases from climate change, adding more green spaces and especially trees, can have the opposite effect. Trees provide several critical services to cities and residents including shade, improved air quality, increased rain interception and reduced stormwater runoff, and in great enough numbers, trees can cool ambient temperatures and reduce the impact of climate change and extreme heat on public health.

Treeequityscore.org analyzes a range of neighborhood
characteristics including the existing tree canopy, population density, income, employment, surface temperature, racial demographics, age distributions, and health metrics to create a single tree equity score between 0 and 100. A score of 100 would indicate that a neighborhood has achieved tree equity.

Of the 137 census block groups included in the Tree Equity Score Municipality Report for Glendale, 11 have a tree equity score below

70. Comparing the HOLC map in Figure 6 and the Tree Equity Score map in Figure 7 can shed some light on the legacy of redlining and historic disinvestment on current levels of heat risk throughout the City. In line with the research referenced above, the southern and western portions of Glendale that had C (Definitely Declining) graded neighborhoods continue to have fewer trees, and lower tree equity scores relative to the rest of the City. Neighborhoods just north of West Kenneth Road and East Mountain Street and in east Glendale, north of SR 134 which received an A grade have some of the highest tree equity scores in the City.
200 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

38 Figure 7 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and Municipality Tree Equity Score

201 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 39
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health
Related Sensitivities
Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities are socially and physiologically vulnerable to climate change impacts and hazards. Seniors and people who are differently abled may have limited or reduced mobility, mental function, or communication abilities, making it difficult to evacuate during or prepare for a climate hazard event. They may also have medical needs for electricity which may be impacted during a public safety power shutoff or climate hazard event. Individuals in these groups are more likely to have pre-existing medical conditions or chronic illnesses that may exacerbate the risk of illnesses and medical problems from climate hazards. Individuals with asthma, individuals with cardiovascular disease, individuals with diabetes, individuals with high blood pressure, and individuals with stroke risk are more likely to experience health impacts from climate hazards because of pre-existing conditions or diseases. Seniors often face challenges regulating their temperature due to medications or underlying conditions related to age. Young children are socially and physiologically vulnerable to climate hazards. They often have limited understandings of climate hazards and insufficient resources to independently prepare for and safely respond during a climate hazard event. Young children are reliant on their caregivers to ensure their health, safety, and wellbeing. Young children have not fully physiologically developed and are therefore more vulnerable to health effects of climate change impacts. (Kenney et al. 2014).

The caregivers of young children are also at risk during some climate hazard events as they may face challenges navigating an evacuation process with young children. Military veterans may have been exposed to a variety of environmental, physical, and chemical stressors during military service which may have caused physiological or psychological health conditions, illnesses, or different abilities that make them particularly vulnerable to climate hazards (Olenick et al. 2015). Pregnant people and their fetuses are particularly vulnerable to climate hazards as they are susceptible to certain health conditions, including anemia, low birth weight, preterm birth, and miscarriage. Pregnant people are also at increased risk of experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder and depression after a climate hazard event (EPA 2022).

Residents in households using fuels for heating, as opposed to electricity, are more likely to be impacted by indoor combustion pollutants. Combustion pollutants are the gases and particles made by burning any fuel such as natural gas, diesel, and kerosene.

Exposure to combustion pollutants may lead to adverse health impacts that can make individuals more at risk of climate hazards.

For example, cooking emissions, especially from gas stoves, are associated with increased respiratory disease (CARB 2023).

3.4 Social Vulnerability by Climate
Hazard
This section assesses the potential impacts, adaptive capacity, and the resulting social vulnerability, of each population group by climate hazard.

Extreme Heat and Warm Nights
Overview
Extreme heat was a major issue identified during Focus Group Meetings 1 and 2. Specifically, the lack of air conditioning in housing units, limited protection for renters, and the urban heat island effect in areas with high proportions of vulnerable populations were identified as areas of concern. Below is an overview of the urban 202 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

40 heat island effect, historical causes of inequitable heat exposure, tree equity score in Glendale, and compounding risks of housing and heat related illness.

Sustainability Working Group participants also identified extreme heat as a major concern. Participants noted having to close facilities due to broken Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) during extreme heat events, and warnings of rolling blackouts.

URBAN HEAT ISLAND
Urban Heat Island (UHI) refers to developed areas that are hotter than the surrounding landscape primarily due to the use of building materials and surfaces that absorb and re-radiate heat (like roofs and pavements), as well as a lack of vegetation, particularly trees.

The UHI effect causes people in cities to have higher heat exposure than residents in less densely developed areas. Within urban landscapes, neighborhoods with more impermeable and dark colored surfaces, and fewer trees, parks, and water features, have greater heat exposure and heat related risk than urban
communities with more green space and reflective surfaces. These differences in development patterns typically correspond with income and demographic disparities across the urban environment.

Low-income communities and many communities of color across Los Angeles County are the most impacted by the urban heat island effect (LA CDPH 2021). UHI will likely compound the impact and risk of extreme heat days and higher average temperatures resulting from climate change. In some locations, the effect could be twice as strong as the impact of global warming (Huang et al. 2019).

In Glendale, the UHI effect will most likely impact vulnerable communities in densely populated communities without access to green spaces, open areas, or reflective surfaces. According to the Urban Heat Island Interactive Map from the California
Environmental Protection Agency (CEPA UHI), the areas of Glendale which will experience the most intense UHI effect are the southwest neighborhoods along I-5 and the northeast neighborhoods along I- 210 (CEPA UHI). These areas have historically been socially vulnerable areas in C-graded neighborhoods (Figure 6) which have experienced racially motivated redlining and currently experience low tree equity scores (Figure 7). The UHI effect is calculated per urban census tract in degree-hours per day, in which the temperature differences every hour per day over 182 warm summer days are summed, then divided by the number of days in the study. In Glendale, the southern socially vulnerable communities have a degree-hour day rating of about 80.53, while the northern socially vulnerable communities have a rating of about 149.75 degree-hour days (CEPA UHI). In A-graded Glendale communities with higher tree equity scores, degree-hour days range from about 74.21 to 99.15 (CEPA UHI). As such, Glendale’s most populated urban areas will likely experience the highest UHI effects and heat inequity stemming from historical redlining and lack of access to green open spaces.

HISTORICAL CAUSES OF INEQUITABLE HEAT EXPOSURE
After the Great Depression the U.S. Government undertook numerous projects to stimulate the economy, expand housing stock, and evaluate the riskiness of home mortgages. The Home Owners’ Loan Corporation was established in 1933 with the passage of the Home Owners’ Loan Act, with the key task of refinancing mortgages and slowing down the rate of foreclosures (FHFA).

During the 1930’s the HOLC created detailed maps of urban areas across the United States. HOLC maps documented the perceived risk of lending and determined the lending practices of banks and other mortgage lenders administering the federal loans.

These maps graded neighborhoods on a scale from “A” through “D” and the grade correlated with color coding on the maps of green 203 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 41
through red, hence the term “redlining”. A-rated neighborhoods, colored green on the maps, were classified as the most desirable, and least risky for lenders. D-rated neighborhoods, colored red on the maps, were classified as the highest risk neighborhoods, and families in these neighborhoods were typically denied mortgages and their mortgages were often not federally insured if they were granted one (Rothstein 2017). The HOLC neighborhood assessments explicitly used racial makeup of residents as a determinant of neighborhood quality and mortgage risk (Rothstein 2017).

Neighborhood descriptions included references to the racial make- up of a neighborhood, in particular the homogeneity, percentage of immigrants and whether they were considered “subversive”, and the number of black, Mexican, and residents of various non-white ethnic groups (Nelson et al., 2023; Rothstein 2017). In the HOLC assessments, racially integrated neighborhoods, and neighborhoods with higher numbers of immigrants and people of color were considered higher risk and perceived as destined to deteriorate in value (Nelson et al., 2023; Rothstein 2017). This led to disinvestment in low-rated areas of cities and a loss of wealth building for generations of American families who were unable to purchase homes (Rothstein 2017). This practice of racial exclusion from homeownership allowed white Americans to accumulate wealth through government backed homeownership while minority communities were excluded and marginalized (Rothstein 2017).

Historic disinvestment and constraints on loans to real estate developers tied to racial restrictions resulted in differences in the quality of housing, amount of housing, and the amount of green space and other amenities that were built in different
neighborhoods based on the income and racial demographics of potential residents (Nelson et al., 2023; Rothstein 2017).

Many of these development differences still largely persist to this day. Recent research has shown that neighborhoods that HOLC rated as a “D” level of risk are still predominantly low-to-moderate income and communities of color, while “A” neighborhoods are still predominantly white and above average income. Previously red- lined neighborhoods are also correlated with more impervious paved surfaces, fewer trees and green spaces, and higher average temperatures than the non-redlined, historically white
neighborhoods in the same city (Hoffman et al.). Another study assessing 175 of the largest urbanized areas in the United States found that the average person of color lives in a census tract with greater than 2 degrees Celsius higher urban heat island intensity compared to non-Hispanic whites (Hsu et al.). A few degrees of temperature difference, and especially warmer temperatures at night, can translate into an appreciably increased risk of heat stress.

This means that communities that faced historical housing discrimination often bear a greater health burden as excessive heat events become more frequent and severe due to climate change.

This disparate heat exposure risk is known as heat inequity.

Figure 6 shows the HOLC Neighborhood Redlining Grade for neighborhoods in Glendale. Green colored areas represent neighborhoods that were graded A (Best). Neighborhoods just north of West Kenneth Road and East Mountain Street and in east Glendale, north of SR 134 received an A grade. Several
neighborhoods bordering A grade neighborhoods were graded B (Still Desirable) due to deed restrictions that limited development to single family housing and prevented non-white families from purchasing homes. These areas were developed with federal financing and graded favorably on the mortgage risk map as a result of the good quality homes this financing afforded, and the racial segregation achieved through racially restrictive deeds.

Neighborhoods graded C (Definitely Declining), yellow areas on the map, are located in north Glendale along I-210, and in south and southwest Glendale. The reasoning provided for C grade
neighborhoods was the presence of lower-income and working- class. Residents, powerlines and industrial uses, and mixed quality 204 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

42 of housing. No neighborhoods in Glendale were rated D (Hazardous).

Areas with high social sensitivity in Glendale today fall within neighborhoods rated C (Definitely Declining) by HOLC, as shown in Figure 6.

COMPOUNDING RISKS: HOUSING AND HEAT RELATED ILLNESS
Housing and socio-economic factors can intersect in ways that compound the risks of climate impacts such as extreme heat events.

When housing is in short supply and unaffordable this can lead to overcrowding, especially for lower-income communities. Aging, overcrowded, and poorly insulated housing can contribute to risk from heat related illness, which can in turn lead to hospital visits and even increased mortality. If the electricity grid is strained during a heat wave and there are power outages, this can further increase the risk of heat related illnesses if access to adaptations such as air conditioning, fans, and refrigeration are lost.

A study published In 2022 found that housing age, housing crowding ratio, and roof condition were found to be correlated with the risk of heat-related illness indexes and can predict the risk of heat- related emergency department visits and heat-related mortality on a state level. This analysis indicates that housing quality and affordability as characterized by age, crowding, and roof condition can impact heat related illness risk (Hu et al. 2022).

The California 2020 Census Hard-to-Count index rated census tracts in south and southwest Glendale as falling within the highest difficulty level for accurately estimating population numbers. The variables cited for contributing to difficulty in getting accurate counts were renter occupied units, crowded units (in south Glendale), immigrants and limited English-speaking population, multi-unit structures, and households without broadband subscriptions (CA Census 2020). The large numbers of immigrants, non-English speakers, and crowded housing conditions in south Glendale likely contributed to an undercount of the true population of Glendale.

Housing affordability issues also impact Glendale residents.

According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), housing is considered “affordable” if monthly housing costs are no more than 30 percent of a household’s gross income. In Glendale, 57.8 percent of renter households spend 30 percent or more of their income on housing cost, compared to 55.3 percent regionally. Additionally, 36.1 percent of renter households in Glendale spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing cost, compared to 28.9 percent regionally. These households are considered severely cost burdened (SCAG 2021).

The age of housing stock can indicate housing quality and the likely need for rehabilitation work that can impact public health, including remediation of lead-based paint and maintenance or replacement of major elements such as roofing. 77 percent of the housing stock in Glendale was built prior to 1980, and 20.2 percent of those homes, the largest proportion, were constructed prior to 1939 (SCAG 2021). Typically housing over 30 years of age is likely to need rehabilitation work to major elements of the structure. Given the age of the housing stock in the City, a large majority of Glendale’s housing stock is in substandard condition, with approximately 1,291 units lacking telephone service, 164 units lacking plumbing facilities, and 1,478 units lacking complete kitchen facilities (SCAG 2021). The age, availability, cost burden, and crowding conditions of Glendale housing may contribute to increased risk of heat-related illnesses, especially as climate change contributes to more frequent extreme heat events.
205 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 43
A separate study analyzed exposure and vulnerability to heat by housing type and location using census tract level data combined with housing characteristics, climate projections, and an index of adaptive capacity and vulnerability to heat. The analysis revealed that subsidized housing in California simultaneously has the most sensitive populations and barriers to adaptation while being disproportionately located in the hottest census tracts (C. J. Gabbe et al. 2020). Specifically, while 8 percent of California’s total number of housing units are located in tracts with high heat exposure and high vulnerability populations (high-high tracts), these high-high tracts contain 16 percent of public housing units, 14 percent of Low- Income Housing Tax Credit units, and 10 percent of Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (C. J. Gabbe et al. 2020).

These studies show that housing policy should be considered an essential public health and safety mechanism for mitigating climate change-exacerbated health conditions in Glendale. Policies and programs should aim to address heat exposure and adaptation for subsidized housing, highly sensitive populations, and seek to increase housing availability and quality, especially in the hottest parts of the community, in order to help reduce health impacts from extreme heat.

Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of extreme heat on each vulnerable population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Individuals with high outdoor exposure are at risk of health impacts from extreme heat. Outdoor workers are often subject to strenuous work conditions and are vulnerable during extreme heat events.

People experiencing houselessness and displaced individuals are exposed to the health-related impacts associated with extreme heat because they have limited access to shelter and air conditioning.

The primary health impacts to these populations are heat-related illnesses, such as heat stress, heat stroke, and dehydration, which can be life-threatening (CDPH 2020). Visitors are at risk during extreme heat events because they may not be keyed into local heat warning communications and are less likely to know where to seek refuge. People that rely on active transportation or public transit may experience health impacts from extreme heat due to biking and walking in high temperatures and high exposure while waiting for public transit.

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
Under-resourced individuals may not be able to pay for adequate air conditioning or fans, increasing their exposure to extreme heat.

Individuals without vehicles may face challenges traveling to cooling centers or temporary shelters during extreme heat events (Cooley et al. 2012). Residents who lack air conditioning are at risk of health impacts from extreme heat at increased temperatures may make it harder to regulate their body temperatures. Households without a computer or broadband internet may not receive heat advisory warnings or governmental guidance, causing them to experience health impacts from extreme heat exposure (CDPH 2017). Under- resourced individuals are less likely to receive medical care for illnesses triggered or exacerbated by extreme heat, or if treatment is received, they are likely to face a significant medical cost burden and related financial stress. Extreme temperatures may contribute to a rise in high violence crime rates, which increases safety risks to people who live in areas of high violent crimes (Muggah 2021).

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
BIPOC, immigrants, and people who are undocumented are more likely to live in housing with insufficient protection from extreme 206 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

44 heat events and limited or no affordable air conditioning and are less likely to be able to make the home improvements necessary due to financial constraints or because they are renters. Limited or non-English speakers may not be provided heat advisory warnings or governmental guidance in their language, potentially causing them to experience greater exposure to extreme heat (Gamble et al. 2016). The primary health impacts to these populations are heat- related illnesses, such as heat stress, heat stroke, and dehydration, which can be life-threatening (CDPH 2020). Immigrants and people who are undocumented may not have access to medical services to treat heat-related illnesses.

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities are particularly at risk of heat related illnesses during extreme heat events. People who are differently abled, seniors, and children may have difficulty affording or accessing air conditioning or traveling to cooling centers during extreme heat events. Extreme heat events can also trigger power outages which are particularly dangerous for individuals who are electricity-dependent, either for their mobility, communication, or medical devices. Extreme heat conditions can exacerbate asthma, cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, certain different abilities, and other respiratory and cardiovascular conditions, potentially causing heat- related illnesses such as heat stress, heat stroke and dehydration, which can be-life threatening (CDPH 2020). Residents in households using fuels for heating may face disproportionate health impacts from extreme heats events as high temperatures may lead to compounding impacts from indoor air pollutants. Young children are still physiologically developing which means that they are less able to regulate their bodies during extreme heat events (Kenney et al. 2014). Young children and seniors are especially at risk of dehydration as their bodies are not able to regulate as well (Kenney et al. 2014). When exposed to extreme heat, pregnant people and their fetuses are particularly susceptible to heat exhaustion, heat stroke, dehydration, low birth weight, preterm birth, and infant mortality (EPA 2022). Dehydration may exacerbate underlying health conditions and illnesses.

Warm nights affect the body’s ability to cool down and recover from heat stress during extreme heat periods exacerbating heat-related health problems including, heat exhaustion, dehydration, and cardiovascular stress, especially for individuals with chronic health conditions and health related sensitivities.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to extreme heat and warm nights.

CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Existing efforts that increase the City’s resilience to extreme heat include:
▪ Increasing urban forest, tree canopy coverage, parks, and open space throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan and the Glendale Downtown Specific Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements, including in vulnerable areas not within 1/3 mile of recreational open space (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012) (Glendale Downtown Specific Plan 2019).
▪ Inventorying backup-generators, medical equipment and supplies, temporary shelters, and other emergency response supplies and equipment are adopted policies and strategies as 207 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 45
envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element 2003. (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).

COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
As described in the Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment, the following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to extreme heat and warm nights in Glendale:
▪ Heat refuge: Cooling centers and other cool indoor public and private locations can provide critical refuge for people to escape extreme heat conditions. The City operates 4 cooling centers placed around the City, with only one of the four located close to areas of high social vulnerability (Glendale News Press 2023). ▪ Park access: Parks and open spaces can provide shade, natural cooling, and mental health benefits to community members seeking refuge from the heat. In their Greener Glendale Plan— Community 2012, Glendale aims to increase parks specifically in areas not currently within 1/3 mile of recreational open space and develop strategies to provide parks or recreational open space in those areas (Greener Glendale Plan – Community Plan 2012). Currently, most Glendale parks and green spaces are not accessible by most vulnerable populations, but Glendale is working to develop strategies to address this imbalance. ▪ Tree canopy: Trees can provide shade, natural cooling, and mitigate the urban heat island effect, providing numerous benefits to residents. According to Glendale’s tree equity report, 19 of 137 block groups have a tree equity score of less than 75. These 19 block groups are located in dense, vulnerable communities adjacent to major roadways like I-5. The lack of tree canopy in these areas will exacerbate the urban heat island effect and increase heat inequity.
▪ Thermal building performance: Older buildings heat up faster during extreme heat events and are less effective at remaining cooler than outdoor temperatures. Improving building
insulation and using reflective building materials can increase thermal building performance, increasing community resilience.

Thermal building performance in Glendale is likely poor, given that 77 percent of the housing stock in Glendale was built prior to 1980, with 20 percent of those homes, the largest
proportion, constructed prior to 1939.
▪ Permeable surfaces: Permeable spaces include green spaces and other cool, ground surfaces that help protect against localized heat gain and reduce the urban heat island effect.

Large areas of permeable surfaces are located in areas with the lowest social vulnerability scores, where access to open spaces and cooled surfaces prevent urban heat island effects. In Glendale, these areas have historically been less densely populated areas, typically away from major roadways and in areas with fewer vulnerable populations.

208 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

46 Vulnerability Score – Extreme Heat and Warm Nights
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score 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 209 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 47
Drought
Overview
Prolonged drought conditions can cause long-term public health problems including shortages of drinking water and poor-quality drinking water, impacts on air quality, sanitation and hygiene, and food and nutrition, and more disease, such as West Nile Virus carried by mosquitoes breeding in stagnant water (CDC 2020).

Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of drought on each sensitive population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Unless there are major water shortages in the City which disrupt drinking water supplies or cooling water features at parks and other public locations, individuals with high outdoor exposure are most likely not at disproportionate risk to drought.

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
During periods of prolonged drought, under-resourced individuals are more likely to experience the cost burden associated with increased water rates (Feinstein et al. 2017). These individuals may struggle to access clean and affordable drinking water which may cause financial strain (Gamble et al. 2016).

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
Unless there are major water shortages in the City, individuals facing societal barriers are most likely not at disproportionate risk to drought.

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Unless there are major water shortages in the City, individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities are most likely not at disproportionate risk to drought.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to drought.

CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Existing efforts that increase the City’s resilience to drought impacts include:
▪ Increasing urban forest, tree canopy coverage, parks, and open space throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan and the Glendale Downtown Specific Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements, including in vulnerable areas not within 1/3 mile of recreational open space (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012) (Glendale Downtown Specific Plan 2019).
▪ Increasing biodiversity of plants and ecosystems are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012).
▪ Glendale Water & Power offers the Utility Users Tax exemption to low-income senior and differently abled customers. Glendale Water & Power also promotes the Low-Income Household
Water Assistance Program (LIWAP) which provides funds to assist low-income households with water and wastewater bills (GWP Financial Assistant Programs 2023).
210 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

48 COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
As described in the Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment, the following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to drought.
▪ Water conservation practices: Water conservation practices such as using drought-tolerant vegetation in gardens and open spaces, promoting water reuse for non-potable uses and
installing water efficient appliances are important practices for increasing resilience to drought are adopted policies and strategies. Policies and strategies in the Greener Glendale Plan seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012).
211 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 49
Vulnerability Score – Drought
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Low Medium 2-Low Under-resourced Individuals Medium Medium 3-Medium
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Low Medium 2-Low
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Low Medium 2-Low 212 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

50 Wildfire
Overview
Wildfires cause direct and indirect impacts to community members.

Wildfires that burn within City limits can pose a significant impact to the safety of community members and can burn homes. Indirectly, wildfires both within and outside of City limits can cause power disruption and lead to poor air quality. Focus Group participants identified concerns with wildfires leading to power disruption and affecting air quality through smoke.

Population groups that are located in the additional vulnerable focus areas are at-risk to wildfires, as shown in Figure 8. These include community members within ¼ mile buffer of schools (which is where children, a climate-vulnerable population group, spend much of their time), ¼ mile buffer of I-210 and SR 2, as well as portions of east Glendale.

Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of wildfire on each vulnerable population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Some outdoor workers, including fire fighters, police officers and other emergency personnel, may be exposed to hazardous work conditions during wildfire events and may become injured from burns and wildfire smoke. Domestic workers that typically service areas under a wildfire evacuation order are impacted by loss of wages, especially where hazard pay is unavailable. In some cases, domestic workers were still required to report to work within emergency evacuation areas, exposing themselves to harm (Climate Resolve 2021). Individuals with high outdoor exposure may face disproportionate exposure to wildfire smoke which can exacerbate existing respiratory conditions, mental illness, and chronic health conditions. (CDPH 2017). Individuals with high outdoor exposure may be reliant on active and public transportation modes and have a more difficult time evacuating in a timely fashion.

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
Under-resourced individuals may experience injuries or death from burns and are likely to experience financial burden associated with medical treatment and property loss or damage (CDPH 2017). These individuals may have their belongings and homes damaged by a wildfire. If this occurs, under-resourced individuals are less likely to be covered by insurance and more likely to suffer from the cost burden. Under-resourced individuals are less likely to have adequately hardened and weatherized housing. They are more likely to have limited control over home hardening and
improvements that may protect against fire. Subsequently, they may experience economic and health impacts and a greater loss of belongings than affluent homeowners (Gamble et al. 2016).

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
BIPOC, immigrants, and people who are undocumented are
generally more likely to live in housing with insufficient protection against wildfire. Individuals facing societal barriers may not have access to language appropriate advisory warnings or government guidance. Individuals in these groups may face systematic and/or cultural barriers to access resources to safely evacuate hazard areas and/or to treat injuries (Gamble et al. 2016) (Mendez et al. 2020).

The harm that many community members have experienced when engaging with government systems, including at evacuation centers, may make it harder for them to receive the support and services that they need.
213 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 51

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities may be more susceptible to injuries or death from burns (CDPH 2017). People who are differently abled, young children and their parents/caregivers, military veterans, pregnant people, and seniors may have difficulty evacuating from wildfires, increasing the risk of health impacts from wildfire burns (EPA 2022).

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to wildfire.

CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Existing efforts that increase the City’s resilience to wildfire impacts include:
▪ Ensuring adequate fire services, such as fire equipment, infrastructure, and response times throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety
Element 2003).
▪ Enforcing fuel management, weed abatement, fire-resistant landscaping, and structure hardening programs and efforts to minimize wildfire risk are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).
▪ Designing, constructing, maintaining, and operating Glendale Water & Power electric transmission and distribution system to minimize wildfire risk are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale Water & Power – Wildfire Mitigation Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood- wide improvements (Glendale Water & Power–- Wildfire
Mitigation Plan 2022).
▪ Coordinating with local and regional jurisdictions and agencies to update and implement disaster preparedness and recovery plans, maintain mutual aid agreements, and carry out
evacuation procedures are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan—Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003). ▪ Inventorying backup-generators, medical equipment and supplies, temporary shelters, and other emergency response supplies and equipment are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).

COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
As described in the Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment, the following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to wildfire in Glendale:
▪ Fire Safe Structures: Homes and facilities that are designed and constructed with fire resistant building materials will mitigate potential impacts from fire and smoke.
▪ Fire Resistant Landscaping: Planting fire resistant plants can mitigate the spread of fire in open spaces and surrounding structures. Employing vegetation management techniques (e.g., trimming, pruning, and cleanup) will reduce flammability. 214 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

52 ▪ Roadway and Access: Roadway access and street signage ensures adequate ingress/egress for residents and emergency personnel.
▪ Fire Service Resources: Fire equipment, infrastructure, and response times are all critical.

215 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 53
Figure 8 Glendale High Social Vulnerability Areas and Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones

216 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

54 Vulnerability Score – Wildfire
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Medium Medium 3-Medium Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 4-High
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Medium Medium 3-Medium Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities High Medium 4-High 217 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 55
Landslides
Overview
Population groups that are located in the additional vulnerable focus areas are at-risk to landslides, as shown in Figure 9. These include community members within ¼ mile buffer of schools, ¼ mile buffer of I-210, La Crescenta Avenue, and SR 2, as well as portions of east Glendale.

Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of landslides on each sensitive population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Individuals with high outdoor exposure (outdoor workers, people experiencing houselessness, visitors, and people who use active transportation and public transit) may not receive timely emergency evacuation information or may have limited access to shelter and transportation to evacuate from hazardous areas (Gamble et. Al 2016). Some outdoor workers, including emergency personnel and construction workers, may be exposed to hazardous work
conditions during landslide events and may become injured from debris, rocks, or damaged infrastructure or facilities.

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
Under-resourced individuals may experience injuries or death from landslides and are likely to experience financial burden associated with medical treatment (CDPH 2017). These individuals may have their belongings and homes damaged by a landslide. If this occurs, under-resourced individuals are less likely to be covered by insurance and more likely to suffer from the cost burden. Under- resourced individuals are less likely to have adequately hardened and weatherized housing. They are more likely to have limited control over home hardening and improvements that may protect against landslides. Subsequently, they may experience economic and health impacts and a greater loss of belongings than homeowners (Gamble et al. 2016).

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
BIPOC, immigrants, and people who are undocumented are
generally more likely to live in housing with insufficient protection against landslides. Individuals facing societal barriers may not have access to language appropriate advisory warnings or government guidance. Individuals in these groups may face systematic and/or cultural barriers to access resources to safely evacuate landslide hazard areas and/or to treat injuries (Gamble et al. 2016) (Mendez at al. 2020). The harm that many community members have experienced when engaging with systems, including at evacuation centers, may make it harder for them to receive the support and services that they need.

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities may be more susceptible to injuries or death from a landslide (CDPH 2017). People who are differently abled, young children and their parents/caregivers, pregnant people, and seniors may have difficulty evacuating from landslides, increasing the risk of health impacts and geographical isolation (EPA 2022).

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to landslides.
218 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

56 CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Existing efforts that increase the City’s resilience to landslide impacts include:
▪ Mitigating landslide risks and potential damage to structure and infrastructure through requiring geotechnical investigations, regular inspections, and prohibiting reconstruction of structures in areas with failed slopes are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).

COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
The following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to landslides in Glendale:
▪ Stabilize slopes mechanically or with vegetation: Vegetation helps stabilize slopes and prevent erosion by strengthening roots in the soil.
219 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 57
Figure 9 Glendale High Social Vulnerability and Landslide Susceptibility

220 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

58 Vulnerability Score –Landslides
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Medium Medium 3-Medium Under-resourced Individuals Medium Medium 3-Medium
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Low Medium 2-Low
Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Medium Low 4-High

221 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 59
Stormwater Flooding and Extreme
Precipitation
Overview
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 (NASEM 2019).

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 impacts directly create physical damage from inundation (Hall et. al 2018). Flooding can also lead to cascading risks due to loss of power, wastewater management issues, pollution carried by stormwater including hazardous materials, and overwhelm storm drainage infrastructure, exacerbating public health concerns.

Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of stormwater flooding and extreme precipitation on each sensitive population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Individuals with high outdoor exposure (outdoor workers, people experiencing houselessness, visitors, and people who use active transportation and public transit) may not receive timely emergency evacuation information or may have limited access to shelter and transportation to evacuate from hazardous areas (Gamble et. Al 2016). Some outdoor workers, including emergency personnel and police offers, may be exposed to hazardous work conditions during flooding events and therefore are vulnerable to health impacts (CDPH 2020).

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
Under-resourced individuals may experience injuries or death from high velocity flooding and are less likely to receive medical treatment (CDPH 2017). Individuals in these groups may experience cost burdens if their belongings and homes are damaged from floodwater inundation. Under-resourced individuals are less likely to have adequately hardened and weatherized housing. They are more likely to have limited control over home hardening and
improvements that may protect against flooding. Subsequently, they may experience economic and health impacts and a greater loss of belongings than homeowners (Gamble et al. 2016).

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
BIPOC and people who are undocumented are more likely to live in low-lying area that are more susceptible to stormwater flooding.

They are also more likely to live in housing with insufficient 222 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

60 protection against stormwater flooding. Individuals facing societal barriers may not have access to language appropriate advisory warnings or governmental guidance. Individuals in these groups may face systemic and/or cultural barriers (including racism and other forms of discrimination) when seeking access to resources needed to safely evacuate hazard areas and/or to treat injuries (Gamble et al. 2016) (Mendez et al. 2020).

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Individuals with underlying health conditions may be more at risk of injury/illness due to exposure to mold after flooding events. Molds grow in places with a lot of moisture, particularly areas where there has been flooding and inadequate home hardening to protect from water infiltration. After severe flooding events, damage from flooding may lead to mold infestations, as home interiors are exposed around pipes, windows, and roofs. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), exposure to damp and moldy
environments may cause health effects ranging from sneezing and mild allergic reactions to fungal infections for more susceptible populations, such as those with chronic respiratory disease. Studies also suggest that early mold exposure in children may lead to the development of asthma and further sensitivity to mold. Young children and their parents/caregivers, seniors, people who are differently abled, pregnant people, and individuals with chronic health conditions or illnesses may not be able to safely evacuate floodwater hazard areas. This could lead to further exposure to mold infestations and increase the likelihood of experiencing serious health-related events for these populations.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to stormwater flooding and extreme
precipitation.

CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Existing efforts that increase the City’s resilience to stormwater flooding and extreme precipitation impacts include:
▪ Mitigating flood impacts through discouraging development of critical facilities in flood hazard areas, requiring hydrological studies, and maintaining City-owned storm drain facilities are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety
Element 2003).

COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
As described in the Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment, the following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to stormwater flooding and extreme precipitation in Glendale:
▪ Green Infrastructure: Green infrastructure projects expand permeable areas and reduce flooding potential. According to the City of Glendale Nature Based Development, the City has conducted Indigenous Tree Protection programs and annual street tree planting programs for decades. In 2011, the City completed a re-forestation project within Scholl Canyon and has planted over 5,000 trees in 2020. Additionally, Glendale maintains over 5,000 acres of open space and 286 acres of developed park land, with 47 parks and recreation facilities (City of Glendale Nature Based Development).
223 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 61
Vulnerability Score – Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Individuals with High Outdoor Exposure Medium Medium 3-Medium Under-resourced Individuals High Medium 4-High
Individuals Facing Societal Barriers Medium Medium 3-Medium Individuals with Chronic Health Conditions or Health Related Sensitivities Medium Low 4-High

224 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

62 Poor Air Quality
Overview
Focus Group participants identified concerns with wildfires contributing to poor air quality through smoke.

LOCAL CONDITIONS IMPACTING AIR QUALITY
The City of Glendale is in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the San Diego County line to the south. The air quality in the SCAB is primarily influenced by a wide range of emissions sources – such as dense population centers, heavy vehicular traffic, industry, and weather (South Coast AQMD N.d.) The general region lies in the semi-permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific Ocean, resulting in light average wind speeds. The SCAB experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude) because of the Pacific high-pressure zone. This inversion limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. The combination of stagnant wind conditions and low inversions produces the greatest pollutant concentrations in the SCAB. On days of no inversion or high wind speeds, ambient air pollutant concentrations are lowest. During periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, air pollutants generated in urbanized areas are transported predominantly onshore into Riverside and San Bernardino counties (CARB N.d.)

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS
Air quality monitoring stations throughout the region monitor concentrations of air pollutants and determine whether ambient air quality meets the California and federal standards for various air pollutants. While air quality has improved in the SCAB over the past several decades, the region has exceeded the federal health 8-hour ozone standard 124 days in 2022, based on preliminary data.

Maximum levels are almost twice as high as the federal standard for clean air (South Coast AQMD N.d.)

POOR AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Poor air quality is associated with increased health impacts, most frequently from inhalation of pollutants. Examples of inhalable pollutants include particulate matter, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. Of these pollutants, the most common is particulate matter, which refers to inhalable particles that are commonly made up of sulphate, nitrates, ammonia, and other harmful compounds. Higher temperatures are conducive to air pollution formation, and rising temperatures could therefore result in worsened air quality. Worsening air quality due to climate change can create respiratory issues for sensitive populations and impact indoor environments that do not have adequate air filtration systems. There are several types of sources that cause a decline in air quality:
▪ Dust. Increased temperature leads to dry, dusty conditions also associated with drought (Hall et al. 2018). Increases in dust conditions increases 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 health effects have been reported primarily in infants and children, and seniors with preexisting heart or lung diseases (CARB 2022). ▪ Smog. Increases in ambient temperature can lead to higher rates of smog also referred to as ozone. Groups most sensitive to O3 include children, the elderly, people with respiratory disorders, and people who exercise strenuously outdoors 225 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 63
(USEPA 2021a). Depending on the level of exposure, ozone can cause 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 (CDPH 2014). Ground-level ozone has also been shown to have particularly disproportionate adverse impacts on
populations experiencing homelessness and lower median
income (PNAS 2021).
▪ Fewer Natural Filtrations. Precipitation variability and long periods of dry spells lead to less reliable air quality for the entire region. Moisture in the air can filter pollutants and provide for overall improved conditions. Urban vegetation can directly affect air quality. Trees remove gaseous air pollution. Large healthy trees remove more pollution than younger, smaller trees (USDA Forest Service, 2002). Rising temperatures could increase mortality for large healthy trees which would reduce the ability for urban vegetation to reduce air pollutants, therefore increasing pollutant exposure to sensitive
populations.
▪ Wildfire Smoke. Temperature, severe wildfire conditions, and the area burned by wildfires have all increased throughout the state and are expected to continue to increase. Higher
temperatures accompanied by an increase in the incidence and extent of large wildfires will lead to increased wildfire smoke and associated toxins and air pollution (Hall et al. 2018).

Wildfire smoke is comprised of a mixture of gaseous pollutants, hazardous air pollutants, water vapor, and particle pollution (fine airborne particulate matter – PM2.5) with particle pollution being the main component and the principal threat to public health (USEPA 2021b). Smoke from wildfires is known to
contain a large abundance of PM2.5 and are estimated to contribute to approximately 18 percent of the total PM2.5 atmospheric emissions in the US (Liu 2016). On days where PM2.5 exceeds regulatory standards an average of 71.3 percent of the total PM2.5 emissions are attributable to wildfires (Liu 2016). Short-term exposures to PM2.5 (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 (CARB 2022).

COMPOUNDING RISKS: HEAT AND SMOG DURING A RECENT HEAT
WAVE
Central and Southern California experienced a heat wave in July 2023 that not only raised the risk of wildfires and heat-related illness, but also resulted in bad air quality. The South Coast AQMD issued an air quality alert for inland areas of the SCAB because of elevated levels of ozone caused by the high temperatures and weak winds that allowed the air to stagnate (LA Times, 2023). As discussed in the Social Vulnerability by Climate Hazard section, heat presents a major health risk to community members, especially to those with higher vulnerability to heat. Ozone levels increased alongside temperature throughout the day, peaking around noon and the early afternoon. Since higher temperatures increase ground level ozone, these health risks are compounded during extreme heat events, particularly when local conditions such as low wind speed, prevent the dispersion of pollution.
226 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

64 Potential Impacts
This section describes the potential impacts of extreme heat on each sensitive population group.

INDIVIDUALS WITH HIGH OUTDOOR EXPOSURE
Outdoor workers may become injured from smoke inhalation and poor air quality during heat waves. People experiencing houselessness are particularly at-risk when air quality is poor as they often suffer from respiratory conditions, mental illness, and chronic health conditions that may be exacerbated from poor air quality. People experiencing houselessness have limited access to shelter and often do not have access to transportation to evacuate from smoke engulfed areas (CDPH 2017). Visitors may not have access to emergency public health warnings related to poor air quality. Additionally, poor air quality from smoke or extreme heat may deter visitors, impacting Glendale’s economy (Gamble et. al 2016). People who use active transportation and public transit are vulnerable during times of poor air quality because of their higher outdoor exposure.

UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS
Under-resourced individuals may experience injuries or death from respiratory issues caused by smoke or poor air quality during heat waves and are likely to experience financial burden associated with medical treatment (CDPH 2017). Renters have limited control over home hardening and improvements, such as filtration, that protect against poor air quality. Individuals living in mobile homes may also face disproportionate risk if their homes do not have adequate filtration.

INDIVIDUALS FACING SOCIETAL BARRIERS
Limited or non-English speakers may not be provided with smoke advisory warnings or governmental guidance in their language, potentially causing them to experience greater exposure to smoke.

Individuals in these groups may face systematic and/or cultural barriers to access resources to safely evacuate hazard areas (Gamble et al. 2016). Individuals in these groups may experience injuries or death from smoke inhalation (CDPH 2017). People who are undocumented may not have access to medical services to treat injuries (Mendez et al. 2020). The harm that many community members have experienced when engaging with government
systems, including at evacuation centers, may make it harder for them to receive the support and services that they need.

INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC HEALTH CONDITIONS OR HEALTH

RELATED SENSITIVITIES
Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities may be more susceptible to injuries or death from smoke inhalation (CDPH 2017). These populations are particularly at risk to respiratory health impacts associated with smoke inhalation of wildfire smoke pollutants and pollutant poor air quality during heat waves. Seniors and military veterans are vulnerable to health impacts from wildfire smoke and extreme heat pollutants because they are more likely to have underlying respiratory and/or cardiovascular conditions and illnesses. Young children may experience respiratory health impacts from wildfire smoke and extreme heat pollutants because their respiratory systems are not fully developed and are sensitive to stressors. Individuals with cardiovascular disease, individuals with high blood pressure, and individuals with stroke risk may experience severe cardiovascular health impacts if exposed to wildfire smoke and extreme heat pollutants. Individuals with diabetes face increased risk of all-cause 227 of 420

Social Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 65
respiratory and cardiovascular-related physician visits after wildfires and an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity (Ratter-Rieck et al. 2023). Individuals with asthma may experience severe respiratory health impacts such as difficulty breathing if exposed to wildfire smoke pollutants (EPA 2022). Residents in households using fuels for heating may face disproportionate health impacts from wildfire events and extreme heat as the resulting outdoor air pollutants may lead to compounding impacts from indoor air pollutants. People who are differently abled, young children and their
parents/caregivers, pregnant people, and seniors may have difficulty evacuating from wildfires, increasing the risk of health impacts from wildfire smoke inhalation (EPA 2022).

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led and community-scale adaptive capacity to poor air quality.

CITY-LED ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
There are no existing policies or programs led by the City for addressing poor air quality.

COMMUNITY-SCALE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
The following resources increase the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities to poor air quality in Glendale:
▪ Tree canopy and large open spaces: Trees and large open spaces can reduce air pollution and provide numerous other benefits to residents, including providing shade, natural cooling, and mitigating the urban heat island effect.
▪ Indoor air filtration: Upgrading central air system filters and using high efficiency portable air cleaners can effectively improve air filtration in homes, protecting residents from the impacts of poor air quality.

228 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

66 Vulnerability Score – Poor Air Quality
Population Group Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score 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

229 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 67
4 Physical Vulnerability Assessment

4.1 What is Physical Vulnerability
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. Given that robust infrastructure is a crucial element in enhancing Glendale’s resilience, this assessment examines the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to understand how climate change will impact them.

4.2 Physical Assets at Risk
Physical Assets Included in the Physical Vulnerability
Assessment
The physical assets included in this assessment include natural and recreational resources, building and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services in Glendale.

Natural and recreational resources
Natural and recreational resources within Glendale, as detailed in the General Plan Recreation Element and Open Space and
Conservation Plan, include parks, City bikeways, open spaces, waterways, critical habitats, and street trees. The City currently provides 284 acres of total parkland space across 31 parks.

Waterways in Glendale include the Los Angeles River and two of its tributaries, Verdugo Wash, and the Burbank Western Channel.

Glendale has more than 49,000 City trees. Of those City trees, 43,000 are public rights-of-way along City streets and the remaining 6,000 trees are located in City parks. These resources provide sources of community resilience to the city. These resources are spread throughout the City and face various levels of exposure to climate hazards.

Primary vulnerabilities for parks and natural resources are typically associated with extreme heat and drought related stressors, increasing wildfire frequency and severity, with impacts such as species mortality and loss of habitat.

Buildings and Facilities
Climate change is expected to amplify extreme weather and hazards in Glendale. A jurisdiction’s vulnerability increases when buildings and facilities are not designed, operated, and/or maintained to function effectively under extreme weather conditions. The following buildings and facilities in Glendale are particularly important to assess for climate change impacts because they play a critical role in providing services to the community: City Hall, schools, police stations, libraries, fire stations, hospitals, parks, recycling facilities, water treatment plant, the Grayson Power Plant, potable/recycled water pump stations, and Scholl Canyon Landfill /waste management facilities.

Infrastructure and Critical Services
Within Glendale, there is a variety of infrastructure and critical services that are vulnerable to climate change. Assets within this category include water and wastewater services, storm drainage and flood protection, solid and hazardous waste and recycling, fire 230 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

68 services, emergency services, medical services, energy utilities and major utility corridors, water lines, transmission lines, public transportation, roadways, and active transportation routes. This asset group is sensitive to climate change as the impacts of hazards can affect the ability to provide services and resources; and the infrastructure in place may not be adequately prepared to sustain increasing and compounding hazards.
▪ Glendale Water & Power provides water and electrical services to City residents and businesses.
▪ Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the City.
▪ The Glendale Public Works Maintenance Services maintains the City’s sewer system.
▪ The City’s wastewater is processed and reclaimed at the Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant
▪ Most stormwater drains in Glendale are owned and maintained by the City Public Work Department.
▪ The Glendale Police Department provides police services to the City.
▪ The Glendale Fire Department provides fire suppression services in the City.
▪ Waste and recycling services are provided through the Public Works – Integrated Waste Management Department.
▪ The Glendale Transportation Division operates the Beeline Bus, Dial-A-Ride and the Glendale Transportation Center.
▪ The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority operates buses throughout Glendale.
▪ Amtrak, Los Angeles Department of Transportation Metrolink, and Greyhound serve the Glendale Transportation Center
providing rail and bus services.

4.3 Physical Vulnerability by Climate
Hazard
Extreme Heat and Warm Nights
Overview
Extreme heat and warm nights impact natural resources, buildings, and infrastructure. As described in the Climate Hazards section, extreme heat events are expected to increase in both severity and frequency by mid-century.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Increased temperatures can cause vegetation stress in parks, landscaping, wildlife, and urban forests. Indirect impacts include reduced carbon storage and increased tree and vegetation mortality, as well as increased watering needs and related costs.

Wildlife under these conditions face impacts of heat stress and heat related illness as well as disrupted reproductive cycles, and compounding risks associated with early and extended seasonal temperature increases (Backlund 2008). Plants are more likely to experience heat stress and drying, and species’ habitat ranges may shift. Some pests can proliferate more easily with warmer temperatures (Hamerlynck 1995), and some plants and animals ill- suited to the new warmer conditions may suffer increased mortality rates (Ackerly et al. 2018). Increased temperatures may also impact outdoor recreation opportunities and residents and visitors would not be as likely to enjoy the mental and physical health benefits associated with outdoor recreation.
231 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 69

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Extreme heat may impact occupants of buildings and facilities that are not adequately weatherized for increased temperatures, however, the buildings and facilities themselves are not at risk to extreme heat or warm nights.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
As temperatures increase, roadways, active transportation routes, and railroads are vulnerable to damages through sustained heat such as buckled railroad ties and cracked surfaces. Additional impacts from extreme heat are associated with increased emergency service calls which could strain medical services.

Electrical infrastructure could be overwhelmed by demand and result in blackouts and Glendale Water & Power could conduct power safety shutoffs to avoid impacts to electrical facilities. Power outages have significant impacts on communication networks, water conveyance, and vulnerable populations. See the Cascading Impacts Assessment for more information on the cascading impacts of power outages.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the city-led adaptive capacity to extreme heat and warm nights:
▪ Increasing urban forest, tree canopy coverage, parks, and open space throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan and the Glendale Downtown Specific Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements, including in vulnerable areas not within 1/3 mile of recreational open space (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012) (Glendale Downtown Specific Plan 2019).
▪ Increasing biodiversity of plants and ecosystems are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood- wide improvements. (Greener Glendale Plan – Community
2012).
▪ Inventorying backup-generators, medical equipment and supplies, temporary shelters, and other emergency response supplies and equipment are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003). 232 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

70 Vulnerability Score – Extreme Heat and Warm Nights
Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
Buildings and Facilities N/A N/A N/A
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High 233 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 71
Drought
Overview
Drought poses a risk to Glendale and the surrounding LA County.

The recent 2012– 2016 drought had major impacts on water resources throughout the state, such as permanently reduced groundwater storage capacity because of land sinking caused by excessive extraction of groundwater (Lund et al., 2018). In the future, drought severity, frequency, and length are expected to increase so much so that California may experience long-term droughts at least every decade (Bedsworth et al., 2018). Glendale Water & Power is responsible for maintaining an adequate and reliable water supply. The City purchases between 60 percent and 70 percent of its potable water from the Metropolitan Water district of Southern California. The remaining 30 percent of its water is from local groundwater wells.

Drought can have severe impacts on natural resources,
infrastructure, and critical services.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Drought would likely increase irrigation requirements for maintaining landscaping, park facilities, and street trees, while water use restrictions would potentially prevent asset managers from meeting this increased watering demand, resulting in water- stressed vegetation, increased vegetation mortality, and potentially reducing the quality of and benefits provided by recreational resources such as open spaces and parks and the urban forest (Lund et al., 2018; Okin et al., 2018). Drought will disrupt habitats and the ability for wildlife to survive from dehydration and unreliable food sources.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Drought can cause increased soil cracking and subsidence in areas with low groundwater tables and high plasticity soils (e.g., clay- heavy soils), causing damage to building foundations and façades (LA County CVA 2021).

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
Drought can impact water reliability and water infrastructure.

Projected changes in snowpack, temperature, and precipitation rates from climate change across California will result in increased water scarcity through the end of the century (Ackerly et al. 2018).

The recent multi-year drought significantly strained the State’s water supply systems, which resulted in water storage levels sinking to historic lows. This led to mandatory water use restriction impacting day to day activities and local economies. Low water supply also led to significant capital investments by water agencies in an effort to increase reliability during extended drought periods, which may lead to future water rate adjustments. Drought can result in an increased dependency on groundwater and lower groundwater levels, causing increased contaminant concentrations in aquifers and permanently impaired aquifers (LA County CVA 2021). Although Glendale has a diverse portfolio of multiple different water sources and providers, the impacts of drought on the water system are regional in scope. Drought can also result in increased maintenance needs, causing cracked pavements
compounded with extreme heat (Samuel et al. 2019).
234 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

72 Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the city-led adaptive capacity to drought:
▪ Implementing and enforcing water use restrictions for non- essential or wasteful activities by promoting conservation and administering penalties for overuse are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the City of Glendale Urban Water Management Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (City of Glendale Urban
Water Management Plan 2020).
▪ Utilizing a phased approach to water use restrictions to account for varying supply (i.e., mandatory water restrictions in times of emergency water shortage) are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the City of Glendale Urban Water Management Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood- wide improvements (City of Glendale Urban Water
Management Plan 2020).
▪ Maintaining a diversified water portfolio is critical for drought resilience. The City of Glendale purchases between 60 percent and 70 percent of its potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and between 30 percent and 40 percent of its water is from local groundwater wells.

235 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 73
Vulnerability Score – Drought
Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Buildings and Facilities Low Low 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High 236 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

74 Wildfire
Overview
Climate change has been linked to increases in wildfire activity and longer wildfire seasons across California (Westerling et al., 2006).

Increasing temperatures, earlier snowmelt, megadroughts, and precipitation whiplash events are all contributing factors (Ullrich et al., 2018; Swain et al., 2018). However, wildfire activity and its associated impacts vary depending on factors such as land use, ecology, and topography. Wildfire events typically occur in more rural areas, along the wildland urban interface (WUI), and in wildfire hazard severity zones. Historically wildfires have affected Glendale mainly on a regional level with two wildfires in City limits as show in Figure 11, La Tuna and (2017) and the Mountain Fire (2002).

Potable/recycled water pump stations, parks, schools, landfill/waste management stations, police stations, and fire stations are located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone in northern Glendale, as shown in Figure 10.

Sustainability Working Group participants also identified wildfire impacts to community members due to road closures and smoke.

Impacts of wildfire smoke on air quality are described in the Poor Air Quality section below. Power disruption is discussed in the Cascading Impacts Assessment below.

Wildfire risks are likely to increase in the future. While many critical facilities are located in urbanized areas, where wildfire is less likely to occur, urban assets may be affected by disruptions in the delivery of services (such as electricity) provided by facilities located in the path of wildfire. See Cascading Impacts Assessment for more information on these impacts.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Wildfires can cause direct mortality and loss of resources and wildlife as well as indirect mortality due to loss of habitat area and available food sources and seed bank (Backlund 2008). The severity and frequency of wildfires can exacerbate these impacts further through habitat conversions resulting in vegetation communities that no longer support the species using that habitat (Coop et al. 2020). Wildfire impacts on parks can also cause prolonged closure of park facilities, limiting access to important recreational areas and facilities for the public.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Structures and buildings located within wildfire hazard zones are at risk of direct structural damage from wildfires. There are many critical facilities in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, including potable/recycled water pump stations, parks, schools, landfill/waste management stations, police stations, and fire stations as displayed in Figure 10. These critical facilities could be directly damaged by wildfires. Areas of high exposure include low density residential zoned areas in north Glendale below I-210 and above Markridge Road, between La Canada Boulevard and SR 2, as well as
neighborhoods throughout east Glendale as displayed in Figure 10.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
Wildfire hazard zones may expand by the end-of-century which could lead to more critical facilities at risk of structural damage.

Additionally, above ground or just below-grade utility lines have the potential to be damaged in wildfire hazard zones, resulting in oil and gas leaks, water loss, and power outages, which can cause fires.

Utility lines under certain high wind conditions can also trigger 237 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 75
wildfires through downed power lines (Ackerly et al. 2018).

Additionally, public safety power shut offs in response to wildfire risk can affect power service reliability. Three above-ground major transmission lines that GWP maintains are located in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, as shown on Figure 10
Increased frequency of wildfires can place strain on fire and emergency services. Displaced residents can cause service strains and needs for additional community safety services. Increased frequency of wildfires can place strain on fire and emergency services. Evacuation routes could be disrupted during a wildfire event limiting emergency responders’ access and the ability for people to evacuate.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led adaptive capacity to wildfire:
▪ Ensuring adequate fire services, such as fire equipment, infrastructure, and response times throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city- wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–-
Safety Element 2003).
▪ Enforcing fuel management, weed abatement, fire-resistant landscaping, and structure hardening programs and efforts to minimize wildfire risk are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).
▪ Designing, constructing, maintaining, and operating Glendale Water & Power electric transmission and distribution system to minimize wildfire risk are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale Water & Power – Wildfire Mitigation Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood- wide improvements (Glendale Water & Power–- Wildfire
Mitigation Plan 2022).
▪ Coordinating with local and regional jurisdictions and agencies to update and implement disaster preparedness and recovery plans, maintain mutual aid agreements, and carry out
evacuation procedures are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).

238 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

76 Figure 10 Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones in Glendale

239 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 77
Figure 11 Historical Wildfire Events in Glendale

240 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

78 Vulnerability Score – Wildfire
Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources High Low 5-High
Buildings and Facilities High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High 241 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 79
Landslides
Overview
Sustainability Working Group participants identified historical issues related to mud and debris flows following the Station Fire and impacts to development and anticipate these impacts to continue due to climate change.

Areas in the north bordering I-210 and La Crescenta Ave, and areas in central Glendale along SR 2 as well as those in east Glendale have high landslide risk, as shown on Figure 7. The San Gabriel Mountains, San Rafael Hills, and Verdugo Mountains are at the greatest risk in the area for having slope instabilities. Historically, landslide occurrences have affected the City of Glendale during extreme precipitation events preceded by intense wildfire.

Landslides can cause habitat loss, erosion, property damage, injury, and strained emergency services.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Landslide susceptibility directly overlaps with parks and natural resource areas throughout the City as shown in Figure 12. In the event of a landslide, there is potential for loss of lands, habitat, and disruption of waterbodies in areas of debris flow. There is risk around loss of topsoil and habitat conversions. Wildlife and plants face a compounding risk to landslide events because it creates both habitat displacement and increased mortality risk.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Buildings and facilities located in the landslide risk zone are susceptible to damage in the event of a landslide event. There are many critical facilities in landslide hazard zones, including potable/recycled water pump stations, parks, schools, landfill/waste management stations, police stations, and fire stations as displayed in Figure 12. Areas of high exposure include areas in the north Glendale bordering I-210, from Canada Boulevard and SR 2, as well as those in east and southeast Glendale as displayed on, Figure 12.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
There is high landslide susceptibility along roadways in the northern and east end of the County, shown in Figure 12, and in areas where there are several critical facilities including fire stations, schools, and water pumps, there is a risk of emergency service disruption and impacts to evacuation (CDOC 2021). Pipelines for water, electrical distribution lines, and roadways are vulnerable to landslide impacts which could occur in sloped areas that extend into wildfire zones.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the City-led adaptive capacity to drought:
▪ Mitigating landslide risks and potential damage to structure and infrastructure through requiring geotechnical investigations, regular inspections, and prohibiting reconstruction of structures in areas with failed slopes are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–- Safety Element 2003)
▪ Coordinating with local and regional jurisdictions and agencies to update and implement disaster preparedness and recovery plans, maintain mutual aid agreements, and carry out
evacuation procedures are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003). 242 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

80 Figure 12 Landslide Susceptibility in Glendale
243 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 81
Vulnerability Score – Landslides
Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources Medium Medium 3-Medium Buildings and Facilities High Medium 4-High
Infrastructure and Critical Services High Medium 4-High 244 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

82 Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation
Overview
Sustainability Working Group participants identified historical and current flood issues including downed trees, flooded roads and buildings, and downed trees and debris from storms hitting utility lines.

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 (NASEM 2019).

Cascading impacts are discussed in the Cascading Impacts Assessment section.

The Verdugo Wash is a 9.4-mile-long tributary of the Los Angeles River in Glendale. It flows southeast along the eastern edge of the Verdugo Mountains and is entirely encased in a concrete flood control channel. The City is working toward a re-envisioned Verdugo Wash that includes a linear park to increase public access and aesthetics in the area. The project will create a 9.4-mile-long linear park and nature trail for walking and cycling with access to business and entertainment venues increase connections between nature, people, places, and culture as it weaves several important City centers, services, and neighborhoods together that make up a large area of Glendale (City of Glendale N.d.b).

The Los Angeles River runs through the City of Glendale from north to south along the eastside of Griffith Park south to Elysian Park.

This narrow, seven-mile stretch of the Los Angeles River is known as the Glendale Narrows. It is currently one of the only stretches of the Los Angeles River that does not contain a concrete bottom, and as a result, provides crucial habitat for local vegetation and wildlife. The City is working towards finishing the Glendale Narrows Riverwalk, which will provide approximately one mile of trails for bicyclists and pedestrians. This project will include parks, rest areas, river overlooks, an equestrian facility, public art projects, interpretive signage, and the Garden River Bridge connecting to Griffith Park (City of Glendale Narrows Riverwalk).

The Burbank Western Channel is a 6.3-mile-long tributary of the Los Angeles River in the eastern San Fernando Valley that serves as a flood control channel. Intersecting the Los Angeles River at the start of the Glendale Narrows, the Burbank Western Channel allows for 245 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 83
excess water in the river to flow north into this area and avoid flooding the surrounding north Glendale and south Burbank areas.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment projects more extreme precipitation events will occur throughout the Los Angeles region, which may lead to areas throughout Glendale to experience more frequent flooding. Heavy precipitation can lead to erosion which may impact vegetation and wildlife. Because there is a low risk of flooding in open spaces in Glendale, the impact on natural and recreational resources is deemed to be low.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
Flooding may cause damage to buildings and facilities or render them temporarily unusable should flooding of buildings or facilities occur.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
Impervious surfaces can impede the absorption of water and augment stormwater flooding in areas of Glendale. There is risk of damage from increased extreme precipitation events including localized flooding, erosion, transport of debris, and sediment deposition. Storm drainage and flood protection services for the City may be impacted by these events, and flooded roadways may be temporarily impassable, disrupt or delay provision of emergency services, or increase risk to road users.

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the city-led adaptive capacity to drought:
▪ Increasing urban forest, tree canopy coverage, parks, and open space throughout the City are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Greener Glendale Plan and the Glendale Downtown Specific Plan. Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements, including in vulnerable areas not within 1/3 mile of recreational open space (Greener Glendale Plan – Community 2012) (Glendale Downtown Specific Plan 2019).
▪ Mitigating flood impacts through discouraging development of critical facilities in flood hazard areas, requiring hydrological studies, and maintaining City-owned storm drain facilities are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element. Policies and strategies seek city- wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (General Plan–-
Safety Element 2003).
▪ Coordinating with local and regional jurisdictions and agencies to update and implement disaster preparedness and recovery plans, maintain mutual aid agreements, and carry out
evacuation procedures are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003). 246 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

84 Vulnerability Score – Stormwater Flooding and Extreme Precipitation Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources Medium Medium 3-Medium Buildings and Facilities Medium Medium 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services Medium Medium 3-Medium 247 of 420

Physical Vulnerability Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 85
Poor Air Quality
Overview
Poor air quality events often coincide with regional wildfire events, periods of time without wind, extreme heat events, and extended droughts. As climate change is expected to result in an increased severity and frequency of those extreme events, it is likely that poor air quality will worsen in the future and under worse climate scenarios. Poor air quality can harm wildlife and vegetation as well as cause strained emergency services based on the negative health impacts associated with poor air quality.

Potential Impacts

NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
The direct effects of air quality declines on natural resources and parks relate to plant and wildlife health as increased levels of air pollutants cause stress and mortality. Impacts from poor air quality can further impact natural resources since air quality declines correspond with other hazards, such as extreme heat, compounding risks. The degradation of plant and wildlife health could impact the quality of recreational resources such as open spaces and parks.

Impacts from poor air quality can also make outdoor recreational resources dangerous or unhealthy for vulnerable groups identified in the Social Vulnerability Assessment section.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
The impact of reduced air quality will have a similar effect as extreme heat for buildings and facilities. The ability to filter air will greatly affect the populations reliant on buildings and facilities. The direct impact of poor air quality on buildings and facilities is low.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL SERVICES
Higher incidence of unsafe air quality generated by increased smog, dust and pollutants can create general strain on existing infrastructure and critical services through increased rates of hospitalization and emergency and medical services (CDPH 2020).

Adaptive Capacity
This section gives an overview of the city-led adaptive capacity to drought:
▪ Inventorying backup-generators, medical equipment and supplies, temporary shelters, and other emergency response supplies and equipment are adopted policies and strategies as envisioned in the Glendale General Plan – Safety Element.

Policies and strategies seek city-wide or neighborhood-wide improvements (Glendale General Plan–- Safety Element 2003).

248 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

86 Vulnerability Score – Poor Air Quality
Physical Assets Impact Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Natural and Recreational Resources High Medium 4-High
Buildings and Facilities Low Low 3-Medium
Infrastructure and Critical Services Medium Medium 3-Medium

249 of 420

Cascading Impacts Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 87
5 Cascading Impacts Assessment

5.1 What are Cascading Impacts?
Glendale community members rely on an interdependent network of critical facilities, services, and infrastructure that are vulnerable to climate change. Electrical infrastructure could be overwhelmed by peaks in demand and result in blackouts or public safety power shutoffs instituted by GWP to avoid impacts to electrical facilities.

Power outages have significant cascading impacts on
communication networks, water conveyance, transportation systems, emergency services, and vulnerable populations. Water systems can fail from lack of power or supply creating city-wide shortages and issues related to power generation cooling or wildfire mitigation. Transportation systems could fail from a variety of direct physical vulnerabilities through climate hazards as well as through power reliant infrastructure which could isolate community members to unsafe conditions. These interconnected, or cascading impacts, could broaden the scope of impact past a single system or neighborhood to reliant subsystems and populations.

The Los Angeles County Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment includes a detailed analysis of the interconnections between various systems to better understand the different paths a climate hazard impact may have (Los Angeles County 2021). A systems map was created that identifies critical nodes (e.g., aqueduct volume, imported water supply) and the potential pathways of cascading impacts from one node to another.

Based on the Los Angeles County Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment systems map, electricity was found to strongly influence every other infrastructure sector and was found to have the most connections. Highway system reliability and communications were nodes that had the second and third highest number of outgoing connections. Water was also found to be heavily relied upon by other infrastructure nodes. Community function, defined as human health, well-being, and livelihood in the Los Angeles County Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, was found to be an
interconnected node when considering indirect connections.

Maintaining community function is the actual purpose of energy, communications, and transportation services, but it is people who keep infrastructure running. Therefore, when climate hazards interfere with workforce availability, there are significant cascading impacts to reliant subsystems.

Unlike most other municipalities, Glendale has direct control over its own water and electricity, through GWP. These two
interconnected sectors and associated cascading impacts unique to Glendale are discussed in this chapter, followed by an assessment of cascading impacts associated with transportation and
communications.

5.2 System Interdependencies
The following section builds on Glendale’s physical and social vulnerabilities through an analysis of the interconnections between Glendale’s energy, water, transportation, and communication systems and highlights the more prominent cascading risks across Glendale’s systems.
250 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

88 Electricity System
The electricity delivery system, often times referred to as the “grid”, is made up of three primary subsystems; electricity generation, transmission, and distribution. Each of these systems needs to be operational in order for community members to receive the electricity they rely on for lighting, internet, communication, heat, hot water, and more recently, mobility. Each of these systems can be impacted by a physical threat such as wildfire burning facilities or infrastructure, wind or vegetation damage, or extreme heat which can decrease the effectiveness of transmission and distribution lines. Increased heat can also increase electricity demand (for example when extreme heat triggers additional cooling demand) that exceeds the amount electricity is available (generation) or the capacity of the infrastructure to move that electricity (transmission and/or distribution).

Electricity Generation
Glendale Water & Power relies on both locally sourced and external sources of energy to meet its demand. Local sources of energy generation include the Grayson power plant, existing solar and planned battery storage. External sources of energy are obtained via the Pacific DC and Southwest AC interties, which are transmission line interconnection points with an energy grid that spans the Western United States. The Glendale Water & Power Integrated Resource Plan (2019) outlines the makeup of Glendale’s energy portfolio as well as an analysis of load and resource needs based on projected climate changes, state requirements of renewable resources, and changing needs of the community (City of Glendale Water & Power 2019).

1 Per the IRP GWP anticipates a load increase from 28 GWh in 2019 to 173 GWh in 2030, and 290 GWh in 2038 for Electric Vehicles using the states assumption of 5 million EV's by 2030.

GWP produces local sourced energy at the Grayson Power Plant, which is a collection of 9 gas burning engines, that produces 173 MW from units 1-8 and 48 MW from unit 9 during peak load. Units 1-8 were set to expire in 2022. According to the Integrated Resource Plan, alternatives to energy generation within Glendale are limited.

It is estimated that GWP would need 12.4 square miles of solar panels to adequately power Glendale, which is equivalent to about 40 percent of Glendale’s land area. Even with GWP investments in locally produced energy sources the City is constrained by land, resource, and infrastructure availability (Ascend 2021).

To address these energy generation constraints, GWP has proposed to replace Grayson Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8A, and 8BC at the Grayson Power Plant to install reciprocating internal combustion engines which generate electricity using a variety of fuels, but predominately natural gas in the short term. This system change is intended to address existing energy shortfalls within the antiquated system currently in place at the Grayson Power Plant. These engines are intended to operate as backup power generation during peak demand hours (Ascend 2021).

With anticipated upgrades to the Grayson Power Plant, and assuming a certain amount of EV charging1 and associated charging infrastructure, increased ambient temperatures, and projected energy demands, GWP anticipates meeting demand pending
approval of the Grayson Power Plant changes upon construction and implementation of the newer engines. Until changes occur, the energy supply of local sources and external sources will not meet forecasted or current peak demand (Ascend 2021).
251 of 420

Cascading Impacts Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 89
The Grayson Power Plant in southeast Glendale is located in close proximity to a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, which is located just outside City limits (City of Glendale Water & Power 2019).

Electricity Transmission
GWP has access to a limited amount of external transmission through the Pacific DC and Southwest AC interties. The interties provide approximately 212 Megawatts of peak load. Typically, Glendale needs 478 MW of peak load. During high heat days, the actual megawatts obtained through the interties is likely lower, as heat reduces load capacity on transmission lines. The limited access Glendale has to external sources of energy necessitates over half of the peak load energy generation to be produced within City limits (Ascend 2021).

Climate hazards could 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 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 risk 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 risks (City of Glendale 2022). In addition, impacts anywhere along those transmission lines outside of Glendale could also cause issues within Glendale if enough capacity is not available locally to meet demand.

Electricity Distribution
The third part of the grid are the smaller distribution lines, transformers, and service lines running directly to each individual building. Distribution systems can be disrupted by similar impacts as transmission lines (wildfire, wind, vegetation, extreme heat), but at a local level. Small areas of wildfire, neighborhood trees, or demand outstripping capacity for a local transformer or distribution line.

Summary
Between higher rates of extreme heat days and increasing wildfire probability due to climate change, the possibility of power disruption is high (City of Glendale 2022).

Power disruptions in Glendale, whether caused by factors like wildfires, deliberate power shutoffs for public safety, or extreme heat, have extensive cascading impacts. Impacts include but are not limited to loss of power in homes, which prevent community members from running their air conditioning or gas or electric heaters, and gas and electric kitchen appliances. For those who rely on in-home medical devices, power disruption could directly impact health and safety. If the power outages occur during bad air quality days from regional wildfire smoke, people with underlying health conditions could experience worsening health conditions. Traffic signals, cell-towers without back-up power, and critical facilities that lack backup power would cease to function. Losing many of these energy dependent amenities during events like heatwaves and wildfires can create increased risks to public health, including heat related illness, food access constraints, evacuation challenges, overloaded emergency services, and increased climate hazard exposure.

Natural Gas System
Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the City through transmission lines and high pressure distribution 252 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

90 lines. Natural gas lines have the potential to be damaged in wildfire hazard zones, resulting in oil and gas leaks and power outages, which can cause fires or explosions. Significant landslides after wildfires or during an extreme rain event may also damage natural gas lines. In addition, natural gas leaks, such as the 2016 leak at the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility in Southern California, can lead to temporary closures of natural gas facilities. In the case of Aliso Canyon, the loss of the facility’s storage capacity was unable to be offset by short term increase in the volume of gas deliveries through the regional supply network. This event exposed the limitations of the region’s natural gas system to effectively respond to the prolonged disruption to a critical component of its energy storage infrastructure (Hall et al. 2018).

Water System
Per the City of Glendale’s Urban Water Management Plan (2020), Glendale is anticipated to experience water supply disruption for outdoor water use during drought conditions. GWP acquires water from a variety of sources including water purchased from the Southern California Metropolitan Water District, groundwater from the Verdugo and San Fernando Basins, and recycled water from the Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (City of Glendale Urban Water Management Plan 2020). These sources enter the City through 11 different conveyance points and are distributed through water distribution lines and pump stations across the entire City.

Water pump stations are located in landslide risk areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (City of Glendale Urban Water Management Plan 2020).

Many relationships between higher water usage and lower water availability are observed. There are several demonstrated positive feedback loops wherein the City's water systems can be strained due to drought and extreme heat conditions, which in turn lead to diminished water availability, influenced by both consumer demand and climatological factors. Water usage for regional and city-specific wildfire mitigation aligns with heightened drought conditions and decreased water supplies. These interconnected impacts within the water sector compound, resulting in extreme strains on water supply and introducing additional challenges for Glendale.

During drought conditions, there is an increase in demand for water, however, that is when water supply is constrained. Increased demand for water during drought conditions include water needs for landscaping, and water-cooling features for community members. Drought conditions typically increase the risk of wildfire, further compounding the effects of drought on the community. The cascading impacts of an adversely impacted water system include reduced supply for community consumption potentially increasing water rates and associated public health concerns for under- resourced Individuals who may not have the ability to pay for increased water rates. Water shortages can also impact power generation with availability of water for generator cooling.

Inadequate water supply can also impact wildfire mitigation without enough fire flow to fight active fires and/or prevent anticipated fires. Inadequate water can impact the City’s tree canopy which is critical for addressing the urban heat island effect and stormwater capture.

Transportation System
Several freeways and major arterial routes run directly through wildfire and landslide hazard zones in Glendale creating broad transportation system and infrastructure vulnerabilities. There are many resulting cascading impacts from transportation sector disruptions which could result in mobility isolation for the community, reduced ability for emergency services to respond, and constrained evacuation routes. Transportation impacts can occur 253 of 420

Cascading Impacts Assessment

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 91
from a wide range of causes including direct physical damage associated with climate hazards within City limits or external climate impacts afflicting regional transportation networks and services.

Power outages could cause traffic signal failures. Transit system failures could place the community in increased danger with inability to evacuate or seek medical attention.

I-210 and I-5 as well as SR 134 and 2 overlap multiple hazard zones and simultaneously serve as major evacuation routes. This type of infrastructure exposure can result in both city-wide and regional cascading impacts limiting evacuation and emergency service accessibility.

Communications System
Like other sectors, the initial vulnerability within Glendale’s communication systems and infrastructure relates to physical exposure to climate hazards. Communication networks consisting of utility, telephone, and broadband infrastructure can experience disruptions and service failures from exposure to extreme heat, wildfires, landslides, and flooding. The viability of a communication network is greatly improved with redundant communication networks, backup power, and alternative forms of communication (e.g., radio) to help minimize the extent of impact to community members. The cascading impacts resulting from downed
communications can vary from interrupted evacuation
communications to general isolation and heightened risk due to inability to receive hazard information. Areas across Glendale in hazard zones are more prone to experiencing communication service disruptions and, therefore, may experience increased cascading impacts from loss of communication infrastructure. .

254 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

92 6 Conclusion
Climate change can have far-reaching consequences on the Glendale community. This report evaluates how climate change may impact community members and physical assets including natural and recreational resources, buildings and facilities, and infrastructure and critical services.

Consistent with Phase 3 of the Cal APG, major problem statements are provided to characterize the overall climate impacts Glendale may experience. These problem statements will be utilized to frame and generate climate adaptation strategies for the Glendale CAAP.

6.1 Problem Statements
The following problem statements are intended to guide the development of adaptation policies and programs for the City’s CAAP. Problem statements are organized based on four systems that have the greatest influence on climate resilience, as well as greenhouse gas emissions reduction.

Building Systems
Residential Buildings. Weatherized or fire-hardened residential buildings are critical to increasing community resilience to the effects of extreme heat, wildfires, landslides, stormwater flooding, and poor air quality. A large majority of Glendale’s housing stock was built over 50 years ago and needs rehabilitation to address climate stressors. Individuals facing societal barriers are generally more likely to live in housing with insufficient protection against climate hazards. Particularly in south Glendale, overcrowding, poor housing conditions, a large number of immigrants, and non-English speakers render the households disproportionately vulnerable to climate hazards. Under-resourced individuals are less likely to have adequately hardened and weatherized housing. They are more likely to have limited control over home hardening, improvements, and air conditioning/filtration systems that protect against climate hazards. Residential buildings are located in Very High Hazard Severity Zones in northern and eastern Glendale. Residential buildings are also located in landslide susceptibility zones in areas north bordering I-210 and La Crescenta Ave, and areas in central Glendale along SR 2 as well as east Glendale.

Critical Public Facilities. Critical public facilities are structures and institutions that provide Glendale with resources and services and are essential to the health and welfare of residents. Weatherized and energy resilient critical public facilities are important for a community to be able to better respond to and recover from a climate hazard event. These facilities must continue to operate during and following a climate hazard event to reduce the severity of impacts and accelerate recovery. Critical public facilities located in landslide susceptibility areas and Fire Hazard Severity Zones include schools, police stations, and fire stations.

Resilient Energy System. The reliability of Glendale’s energy system is critical to the resilience of the City’s services and community members. Glendale’s energy system and power infrastructure are highly vulnerable to extreme heat which causes increased energy demand due to cooling needs, wildfire, and landslides. Energy infrastructure and dependent populations experience cascading impacts around power outages from downed utility lines, power safety shutoffs, and grid overload. All forms of power outages can 255 of 420

Conclusion

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 93
affect how critical services are able to perform their needed functions during a climate hazard. Three above-ground major transmission lines that Glendale Water & Power maintains are located in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. The Grayson Power Plant, which generates electricity using natural gas, exacerbates the poor air quality conditions in southeast Glendale. This area is designated as a high social vulnerability area in Glendale. Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitives are disproportionately susceptible to health impact associated with air pollutants. The Grayson Power Plant is located in close proximity to a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, which is located just outside City limits.

Mobility, Land Use, and Emergency Systems
Alerts and Evacuation. Emergency communications and timely evacuations are an essential part of emergency operation planning and community safety. Emergency communication and evacuation orders will be key to alert the Glendale community regarding various climate hazards, including wildfires and landslides, extreme heat events, and poor air quality days. Barriers to communication and evacuation can occur from deficiencies in the energy, transportation, and communication systems, as well as inequitable access and distribution of resources. Individuals with chronic health conditions or health related sensitivities may have difficulty evacuating in a timely fashion during a hazardous event which can result in direct impacts to health and safety and exacerbate chronic health problems. Individuals facing societal barriers may not have access to language appropriate advisory warnings or government guidance and may face systematic and/or cultural barriers to access resources to safely evacuate hazard areas and/or to treat injuries.

Under-resourced individuals and individuals that rely on public transportation are less likely to have access to transportation for evacuation purposes and often lack the financial resources to evacuate from a climate hazard or find a safe and affordable place in which to evacuate.

Transportation and Communication Infrastructure for Emergency Evacuation. Major freeways and arterial routes in Glendale are located within landslide and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, including the I-210, I-5, SR 134, SR 2, La Canada Boulevard, N Verdugo Road, and La Crescenta Ave. These routes serve as major evacuation routes, allowing community members to evacuate during emergency orders and allowing emergency personnel to enter emergency evacuation zones. Should these transportation networks be directly impacted by landslides or wildfires, or are impacted by regional threats outside City limits, emergency evacuation could be adversely impacted. Communication
infrastructure (such as cell towers) damaged by wildfires or landslides would hinder emergency communications and impact the health and safety of emergency personnel and community
members.

Equitable Access to Services. People who rely on active transportation or public transit may experience barriers in accessing cooling centers, parks, and other critical services, and have a greater likelihood of encountering interruption in transportation services which could lead to direct income losses from the inability to access their workplace during climate events. They also have higher outdoor exposure, such as extreme heat, air pollution, or heavy rainfall, than those who use personal vehicles and are therefore at greater risk to climate hazards. This high risk is compounded by the fact that communities of color are more likely to have limited or no access to a car, increasing their likelihood of being impacted during heat and other climate hazards. Under-resourced individuals are less likely to have access to transportation, healthcare, and other basic needs which increases their vulnerability to climate hazards. 256 of 420

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

94 Building on systemic inequities, these disproportionate exposures can leave community members isolated and/or without the needed resources during a climate hazard event.

Urban Ecosystems
Water Reliability and Consumption: Water supply infrastructure, such as pipelines and pump stations, can be damaged by climate hazards, impacting water reliability throughout the City which has direct implications on wildfire mitigation, community members, and critical services. Several water pump stations are located in landslide susceptibility areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in northern Glendale. Glendale’s water potable supplies, including those from the Southern California Metropolitan Water District and groundwater from the Verdugo and San Fernando Basins, have declined in recent years due to lower-than-average rainfall. Extended drought conditions that impact availability of water supply can increase the cost of water and affect water quality, resulting in disproportionate impacts to vulnerable populations.

Natural and Recreational Resources. Natural and recreational resources in Glendale, including parks, City bikeways, open spaces, waterways, critical habitats and street trees, face exposure to climate hazards. All of these resources provide community benefits either directly or indirectly and face heightened risks of drought, landslides, stormwater flooding, wildfires, extreme heat and poor air quality. Primary vulnerabilities for natural resources are associated with extreme heat and drought related stressors, increasing wildfire frequency and severity, with potential impacts including species mortality and loss of habitat. Climate hazard events may impact outdoor recreation opportunities and residents and visitors may not be as likely to enjoy the mental and physical health benefits associated with outdoor recreation. Parks in northern and eastern Glendale are located in landslide susceptibility areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

Resilient Landscapes. Significant areas of northern and eastern Glendale are located within Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

Glendale is expected to experience increased decadal wildfire probability throughout the entire City by the end of the century.

Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones encompass many natural and recreational resources, entire residential communities, and critical public facilities and utility infrastructure. Wildfires may exacerbate poor air quality and water quality declines, structural damages, service line disruptions and strain, human and wildlife mortality, and habitat loss. This broad level of exposure and projected impacts across all asset groups makes wildfire one of the greatest climate hazard risks for the City. Adapting existing and planned landscapes in residential areas, open spaces, and adjacent to critical public facilities and utility infrastructure is critical to reducing ignitability and wildfire risk. Removing or modifying live and dead vegetation in high-risk areas can reduce the potential spread of wildfire ignitions and increase community safety.

Social and Governance Systems
Equitable Community Safety As climate change impacts occur, virtually all populations in a community will be affected; however, some individuals will be disproportionally impacted by climate hazards due to inequitable systems and structures. The areas of the City with the greatest concentration of vulnerable populations are in south and southwest Glendale. Census tracts that are above the 60th percentile is considered a high social vulnerability area.

Additional areas with high social vulnerability include historically redlined areas as well as areas identified based on input from community-based organizations. These included areas near major roads and highways, schools, the Scholl Canyon Landfill and the 257 of 420

Conclusion

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 95
Grayson Power Plant. Community members in these areas are also at-risk for disproportionate impacts from climate change.

Inequitable access to, and distribution of resources, critical services, and resilient infrastructure systems decreases the ability for sensitive populations to prepare for, cope and recover from climate impacts.

All Hazards Awareness and Capacity Building. The overall exposure of Glendale to climate change hazards creates vulnerabilities throughout the entire community. Virtually all vulnerable populations face barriers in accessing information and/or adaptive resources targeting climate hazard resilience. Glendale community members may possess informal networks creating resilience to climate change which the City can further augment through tools and resourcing of both individuals and community-based
organizations.

Recovery and Reconstruction. Adaptation to climate change involves both preparedness and recovery and reconstruction. The way in which a community is resourced after experiencing a climate hazard event can be a source of community resilience or of systemic inequities. Individuals across all vulnerable population groupings face larger barriers to recovering from hazards without adequate accessibility to resources for recovery and reconstruction.

Extreme Heat and Air Quality Protection. All vulnerable communities in Glendale are significantly exposed to poor air and extreme heat. Changes in annual average maximum temperature by the end of the century will increase across the entire region increasing incidences of extreme heat. Impacts from temperature increases and extreme heat events are expected to include heat- related illness, such as heat stress, heat stroke, and dehydration, which can be life threatening.

6.2 Vulnerability Analysis
In addition to problem statements, vulnerability scoring helps the City understand which climate change hazards pose the greatest threat to specific asset groups and would need to be prioritized in adaptation planning and policy development. Vulnerability scores were determined by combining the impact scores with adaptive capacity scores assigned within Chapters 3 and 4. A list of asset categories with high vulnerability scores is provided in Table 6.

Glendale City CouncilApril 1, 2025

Glendale City Council
April 1, 2025