DOCSLIB.ORG

San Fernando Valley State College URBANIZATION of the SIMI

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
San Fernando Valley State College URBANIZATION of the SIMI San Fernando Valley State College URBANIZATION OF THE SIMI VALLEY 1950-1970 .A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Geography by Mark Kimball Hocking July, 1971 The thesis of Mark Kimball Hocking is approved: Committee Chairman San Fernando Valley State College ; ; __ ,________ , _______ _ lr, , I I To Carol i l __ _ ______ _ ____________ _____ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS • . DEDICATION .•..•� iii LIST OF TABLES •.•• . Vl LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS • • • . viii ABSTRACT . • . • • • • • • . X INTRODUCTORY NOTE •• . xii HAPTER I(; I r. INTRODUCTION •••• . 1 I Overview -- . Related Studies Procedures II. THE GEOGRAPHIC SETTING. 7 Physical Settin g Relative Location Summary III. REG IONAL POPULATION GROWTH , 1950-1970 •. 14 Ventura County Growth in Relat ion to Urbanizat ion in the Los An geles Five-County Region Causes o£ Population Growth in Ventura County Forces Influencing Developers Forces Attracting Migrants Summary IV. THE SUBURBANIZATION OF SIMI VALLEY . 53 . Th e 1950-1970 Period Population Growth The ].960-1970 Period Population Growth Summary v. CAUSES OF URBAN DEVELOP MENT IN SIMI VA LLEY . 94 Owner and De. velo. per. Dec. isions. Land Supply Water Supply Accessibility Forces Attracting Migrants Hous:.i"ng Supply Accessibility i Employment Summary l__ _ VI. LAND USE • . 135 Summary VII. IMMEDIATE PROSPECTS AND CONCLUSIONS ••• 152 BIBLIOGRAPHY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 156 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Ventura County Population Growth 1880-1970 • . • • • • . • • • 16 2. Comparat ive Los An geles Five-County Region Population, 1950-1970. • • • 17 3. In-Migration, Los Angeles Five-County Region , 1950-1968 • • ••• 18 4. In-Migrat ion , Ventura County, 1950-1969 20 5. Comparat ive Population Growth , Los Angeles Five-County Region , 1950-1959 . 22 6. Ventura County Dwelling Units Authorized for Construction , 1950-1959 ••.. 26 7. 1970 Comparative Median House Values­ Selected Places • • • • • • • • • • . 33 8. Climatic Comparisons-Selected Places . 37 9. Comparative Densities per Square Mile , 1950-1970 ••••••••. 40 10. Manufacturing Employment Sources­ Eastern Ventura County, 1965 and 1970 • 44 11. Emp loyment Area of Primary Wage Earners , Conej o Valley and Simi Valley • • • 46 12. Population Dens ity Gradations , Simi Val ley to Glendale- 1950 • • • • • . 57 13 . Simi Area Population Growth , 1910-1960 •• 60 14. Population Dens ity Gradations , Simi Valley to Glendale-1960 • • • • • 61 vi r�·-------------�--------------------- ------------�------------------ -- ! 15. Populat ion Density Gradations , Simi Valley to Glendale-1970 . • •• 73 16 . Annual Comparative Growth , Ventura County and Simi Valley , 1960-1970 ••• 80 17. Comparative Populat ion Growth , Chats­ worth Statistical Area versus the Simi Valley , 1960-1969 •••••• 82 18. Subdivision Development : Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks , 1950-1965 ••••• 98 19. Comparat ive Building Trends , Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks , 1962 -1964 . 99 20. Comparat ive Populat ion Growth , Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks , 1960-1964 •• 100 21. Age of Simi Valley Residents-1970. 107 22 . Home Marketability by Price Range, 1968 , Fourth Quarter • o ••••. 108 23 . Average Daily Traffic Counts • . 115 24 . Simi Valley Annual Growth , 1967-1971 •• 121 25. Simi Planning Area-1966 Emp loyment • . 126 26 . Land Use-Simi Valley , 1964 and 1967 ••• 142 I I \ I i �----------�-------------------------------··-- ------·····-·-··· ··- ·----· -- - - -- ... - - LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Plate Page 1. Looking south toward Sinaloa Lake . May , 1971. 63 . 2. The western end of Simi Valley- October, 1959. 67 3. Looking west along the San Fernando Valley -Simi Valley Freeway Highway ( 118). May , 1971 . 69 . 4. Looking north toward Tapo Canyon. May , 1971 . 84 . 5. Looking northwest toward the Kadota Fig Farm Subdivision . May , 1971 . 86 6. The western end of Simi Valley, November , 1970 . 89 7. Looking north toward the remaining agriculture area . May , 1971 . 119 . 8. Looking south along Erringer Road . May , 1971. 140 9. Looking east along Los Angeles Avenue . May , 1971 . 145 . I Map 1. Simi Val ley Place Names . 8 2. Study Area Location . 11 3. Residential Development, 1951 . 54 4'. Residential Development , 1959. 65 ui i i 5. Residential Development, 1964. 74 6. Residential Development, 1959-1964 . 75 7. Residential Development, 1964-1967 . • • . 76 8. Residential Development, 1967-1970 . 77 9. Residential Development, 1970. 78 10. Simi Valley Land Use, 1970 . • 136 11. Simi Valley, 1951. • 148 ix ABSTRACT URBANIZATION OF THE SIMI VALLEY 1950-1970 by Mark Kimball Hocking Master of Arts in Geography July, 1971 The purpose of this study is to describe, analyze, ·and explain the population growth and landscape change in 'simi Valley, California, during the period of 1950 to 1970 in the context of regional urbanization. The dominant factors influencing population migration and the changing spatial patterns of land use are described and explained. Ventura County and Simi Valley are entwined in the Los Angeles Five-County Regional urbanization pattern. The growth rate in this region during the 1950-1970 study ~period was dramatic. The population increased 102 percent, from 4,934,246 to 9,972,037. Ventura County's rate was even faster, 228 percent, from 114,647 to 376,430. How­ ever, even these rates pale beside Simi Valley's 1,930 ~percent, from 3,011 to 61,150. This was an absolute gain X 1of over 58,000, fully 8,000 more than Oxnard, the county's largest city, gained in the same period of time. The major factors affecting growth included: available ,quantities of developable and relatively cheap land; new sources of water; new highways that increased accessi­ bility; large supplies of relatively cheap housing; region­ al employment sources; and amenities, such as a relative lack of crowding,traffic and pollution, and mild climate. This influx of people changed the formerly rural, agricultural landscape to an almost completely urbanized one by 1970. The twenty square mile valley floor was ~ominated in 1970 by single-family subdivisions and rather substantial retail developments. At the close of the study period, a city of 56,464 had been formed in Simi Valley, and transformation to an urban landscape was nearly complete. xi This is no mining boom based upon ledges that can be pinched out or worked out. This is no oil boom ••• the supply of which can readily exceed the demand. This is no boom based on wheat deals or pork corners ••• or railway com­ binations or other devices of man. This boom is based on the simple £act that hereabouts the good Lord has created conditions of climate and health and beauty such as can be found nowhere else ••• and until every acre of this earthly para­ dise is occupied, the influx will continue •••• Carey McWilliams Southern California Country, 1946. xii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to describe, analyze, and explain Simi Valley population growth•and landscape change between 1950 and 1970 in the context of regional growth. The dominant factors causing population migration will be set out in some detail. The spatial pattern of urbanization is described and explained so that findings from this study will make a contribution to the existing literature on the process of suburbanization. Overview In a short twenty-year span between 1950 and 1970, the Simi Valley was almost totally changed from a rural to an urbanized landscape. In 1950, th~ valley was typical of the famous Southern California citriculture landscape de- picted glowingly throughout the nation in early advertise- ments similar to the following: The Simi Rancho is the largest single body of land in Southern California which is now on the market in small tracts. It is nearly all in Ventura County, though a part of the 96,000 acres is in Los Angeles County. The Rancho contains 20,000 acres of first­ class farming and fruit lands in the valley; 20,000 1 acres of good hill lands suitable for vines, fruit trees, and olives; about 40,000 acres of stock ranges; and the remainder is rough mountain land from which the water supply is drawn. The price runs from $5.00 to $60.00 per acre. The cheap land is suitable for stock growing, and the best of the valley land can be had at $60.00. Good fruit and grain land is sold from $40.00 to $60.00. The terms 1 of sale are reasonable to actual settlers. The valley was agricultural, dominated by walnut and citrus orchards, by large acreages of avocados, apricots and other deciduous orchard trees, and by fields of beans, wheat, barley, and various truck crops. The valley floor was dotted with neat farmhouses set amongst the groves, and with occasional patches of urban environment. The land- 1 scape was relatively stable throughout the early fifties, but it was soon transformed into a pulsating sea of homo- geneous subdivided segments. The encroachment of a cityscape into a previously rural landscape has occurred many times across the country. Jean Gottman has observed that, "The push of the residen- rtial expansion toward the periphery is a logical and centuries-old trend in large urban centers, observed in many cities around the world."2 Similar successions of events have occurred frequently at the ever-expanding edge of the Los Angeles Five-County Region, but seldom has ur- banization engulfed an entire valley the size of Simi with such lightning quick change. The rapid suburbanization of an agricultural, rural landscape, then, is the subject of study here. Related Studies There have been no detailed explanatory studies of Simi Valley urbanization from 1950-1970. There are extant only cursory, peripheral comments available primarily in Ventura County Planning Department publications and in several other sources. However, a few other studies have been made. These include a basically descriptive one entitled, "The Changing Landscape of the Simi Valley, California from 1795 to 1968," by Crane Miller {M.A. thesis, UCLA). In 1953, Richard Lonsdale studied Simi Valley's water problems {M.A. thesis, UCLA). This work contributed much to the under­ standing of the role of water in the urbanization of Simi Valley.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CITY of SIMI VALLEY MEMORANDUM May 4, 2015 TO
    AGENDA ITEM NO. 8A CITY OF SIMI VALLEY MEMORANDUM May 4, 2015 TO: City Council FROM: Department of Community Services SUBJECT: AWARD OF FY 2015-16 COMMUNITY PROJECTS GRANT FUNDS STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council award the $150,000 in Community Projects Grant funding for FY 2015-16 to the Simi Valley YMCA ($47,650), the Boys & Girls Club of Simi Valley ($35,000), and the Interface Children & Family Services ($55,000) submissions for a total award amount of $137,650. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The Community Services Department is recommending the YMCA proposal be funded at $47,650, the Boys & Girls Club proposal be funded at $35,000, and the Interface Children & Family Services be funded at $55,000 due to meeting the criteria and representing a one-time capital cost. If these three proposals are funded, the City Council could either fund one of the other proposals in an identified need (Youth and Supportive Services were categorized as the priority areas) with the remaining $12,350, or hold the remaining funding for any unusual circumstances in the coming year. If the City Council determines not to fund as recommended, I recommend that the City Council establish a priority of funding and establish a two-person City Council subcommittee to bring back an alternative recommendation. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW On May 9, 2011, the City Council approved executing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and Waste Management related to the expansion of the Simi Valley Landfill and Recycling Center. The executed MOU provides annual funding of $150,000 for community projects and programs to be awarded at the discretion of the City Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy of the Changing Face of the San Fernando Valley Rev 2…
    The Changing Face of the San Fernando Valley By Joel Kotkin Erika Ozuna 2002 A Project of: Pepperdine University-School of Public Policy and the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley PRELIMINARY DRAFT - PREVIEW EDITION Tablle of Contents “In tackling these challenges, the Valley’s leadership must work not only to address 1. Introduction 3 these issues but do so in a way that 2. Historical Evolution: From stresses the common challenges an increasingly diverse population faces. the Chumash and Ranchland There is no Latino housing crisis, or to ‘America’s Suburb’ 5 Armenian crime problem, or Vietnamese 3. The Mestizo Valley 10 education deficit. These are common 4. Are We on the Road to problems faced by all Valleyites; they can Ghettoization? 13 only be solved by this community acting 5. Rethinking the Valley as a as one.” ‘Melting Pot Suburb’ 16 6. Looking Forward: Prospects for the Mestizo Valley 19 7. The Challenge to Leadership 22 Special Thanks To: Jennifer Seuss, Karen Speicher, Val Aslanyan, Luci Stephens, Talar Aslanian, Gregory Ponds (Master of Public Policy Candidates – School of Public Policy) James Wilburn, dean, School of Public Policy, as well as Jon Kemp, Tami McKelvy, Sheryl Kelo and Marie-Ann Thaler, all of Pepperdine University; David W. Fleming, Robert L. Scott and Bruce D. Ackerman of the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley © Copyright 2002, Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, 5121 Van Nuys Blvd. Sherman Oaks, CA - 818-379-7000 – [email protected] - All Rights Reserved San Fernando Valley 2 The Changing Face of the San Fernando Valley INTRODUCTION Few places in America over the past quarter century have undergone as profound a change in its ethnic character than the San Fernando Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • San Fernando Valley Burbank, Burbank Sunrise, Calabasas
    Owens Valley Bishop, Bishop Sunrise, Mammoth Lakes, Antelope Valley and Mammoth Lakes Sunrise Antelope Valley Sunrise, Lancaster, Lancaster Sunrise, Lancaster West, Palmdale, Santa Clarita Valley and Rosamond Santa Clarita Sunrise and Santa Clarita Valley San Fernando Valley Burbank, Burbank Sunrise, Calabasas, Crescenta Canada, Glendale, Glendale Sunrise, Granada Hills, Mid San Fernando Valley, North East Los Angeles, North San Fernando Valley, North Hollywood, Northridge/Chatsworth, Sherman Oaks Sunset, Studio City/Sherman Oaks, Sun Valley, Sunland Tujunga, Tarzana/Encino, Universal City Sunrise, Van Nuys, West San Fernando Valley and Woodland Hills History of District 5260 Most of us know the early story of Rotary, founded by Paul P. Harris in Chicago Illinois on Feb. 23, 1905. The first meeting was held in Room 711 of the Unity Building. Four prospective members attended that first meeting. From there Rotary spread immediately to San Francisco California, and on November 12, 1908 Club # 2 was chartered. From San Francisco, Homer Woods, the founding President, went on to start clubs in Oakland and in 1909 traveled to southern California and founded the Rotary Club of Los Angeles (LA 5) In 1914, at a fellowship meeting of 6 western Rotary Clubs H. J. Brunnier, Presi- dent of the Rotary Club of San Francisco, awoke in the middle of the night with the concept of Rotary Districts. He summoned a porter to bring him a railroad sched- ule of the United States, which also included a map of the USA, and proceeded to map the location of the 100 Rotary clubs that existed at that time and organized them into 13 districts.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Beach Water Department [ Vii ] J CONTENTS TABLES (Continued) Page Nlllllvcr Page LETTER of Transmitral
    WATER DEPARTMENT CITY OF LONG BEACH. CALIFORNIA HISTORY AND ANNUAL REPORT -.k 1943 - 1944 , i --_.--- ---- --- WATER DEPARTMENT CITY OF LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL SKETCH and ANNUAL REPORT July 1, 1943 to June 30, 1944 I i I I LONG BEACH 1944 Dedicated to tile memory of GEORGE ROYAL WADE, beloved GenerallY!ana!ler of tIle Long Beach Waler Department from December 19, 1940, to November 24-, 19#. under 'Whose direction tile book 'Was pre­ pared. His great desire -'Was to see it in print, but the Supreme Architect of tile Universe 'Willed otherwise and called him while it was still unfillislud. ---------------~ • ~ drop of water~ taken up from the ocean by a Slln­ healll~ shall fall as a snowflake upon the moun/a"in top, rest in the frozen silence through the long winter~ stir again under the summer sun and seek to find its way back to the sea down the granite steeps and fissures. It shall join its fellows in mad frolics in mountain gorgesJ singing the song of falling waters and dancing with the fairies in the moonlight. It shall lie upon the bosom of a crystal lake, and forget for a while its quest of the ocean level. Again it shall obey the law and resume its journey with mUT111urSflnd !rettinULo and then it shall pass out of the sunlight and the free air and be borne along a weary way in darkness and silence. for many days. And at last the drop that fell as a snowflake upon the Sierra)s crest and set out to find its home in the sea) shall be taken up from beneath the ground by a thirsty rootlet and distilled into the perfume of an orange blossom in a garden .
    [Show full text]
  • Three Chumash-Style Pictograph Sites in Fernandeño Territory
    THREE CHUMASH-STYLE PICTOGRAPH SITES IN FERNANDEÑO TERRITORY ALBERT KNIGHT SANTA BARBARA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY There are three significant archaeology sites in the eastern Simi Hills that have an elaborate polychrome pictograph component. Numerous additional small loci of rock art and major midden deposits that are rich in artifacts also characterize these three sites. One of these sites, the “Burro Flats” site, has the most colorful, elaborate, and well-preserved pictographs in the region south of the Santa Clara River and west of the Los Angeles Basin and the San Fernando Valley. Almost all other painted rock art in this region consists of red-only paintings. During the pre-contact era, the eastern Simi Hills/west San Fernando Valley area was inhabited by a mix of Eastern Coastal Chumash and Fernandeño. The style of the paintings at the three sites (CA-VEN-1072, VEN-149, and LAN-357) is clearly the same as that found in Chumash territory. If the quantity and the quality of rock art are good indicators, then it is probable that these three sites were some of the most important ceremonial sites for the region. An examination of these sites has the potential to help us better understand this area of cultural interaction. This article discusses the polychrome rock art at the Burro Flats site (VEN-1072), the Lake Manor site (VEN-148/149), and the Chatsworth site (LAN-357). All three of these sites are located in rock shelters in the eastern Simi Hills. The Simi Hills are mostly located in southeast Ventura County, although the eastern end is in Los Angeles County (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • San Fernando Valley Business Journal the Valley 200 July 20, 2020 Table of Contents
    THE VALLEY 200THE MOST INFLUENTIAL LEADERS IN THE VALLEY AREA 2020 017_sfvbj_V200_Section Cover.indd 17 7/14/20 1:48 PM 18 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUSINESS JOURNAL THE VALLEY 200 JULY 20, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 20 INDEX 38 FINANCE 22 LETTER FROM THE 43 GOVERNMENT EDITOR & PUBLISHER 47 HEALTH CARE 24 ADVISORS 30 BUSINESS 51 ORGANIZATIONS 36 EDUCATION 54 REAL ESTATE We congratulate all the leaders in the Valley 200. Thanks to them, our economy is stronger and our community is better! 018_sfvbj_V200_TOC.indd 18 7/14/20 1:49 PM JULY 20, 2020 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUSINESS JOURNAL 19 MEET THE COMPANY THAT’S BEEN IMPROVING BOTTOM LINES SINCE 1991 We bring a new approach to business and personal insurance. One that makes sure you’re not simply protected against liability, but sheltered from risk in the first place. We put decades of experience and know-how to work in helping you avoid expensive claims before they start and then mitigating claims when they do occur. 800-578-8802 POMSASSOC.COM 009-57_sfvbj_fullpages20200720.indd 19 7/13/20 5:13 PM 20 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUSINESS JOURNAL THE VALLEY 200 JULY 20, 2020 INDEX PEOPLE K Shafferty, John . 29. Commerce Department . 51 N Kahn, Dan . .28 Shapiro, David . 46 Community Foundation of the Valleys 52. Northeast Valley Health Corp . 50 A Kasendorf, Alexander . 28 Sherman, Brad . 46 Compass Charter Schools . .36 O Adam, Al . .43 Katz, Richard . 28 Simpson, Danone . 42 ConsejoSano . .47 Oschin Partners . 29 Adelstein, Wayne . 24 Khorsand, Vahid . 40 Skeeter, Jane . 35 Cooper Communications Inc .
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles/Orange/Riverside/San Bernardino/Ventura Los Angeles County Cities
    Southern California Regional Energy Network Los Angeles/Orange/Riverside/San Bernardino/Ventura Los Angeles County Cities Alhambra ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Compton ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Canoga Park ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Carson ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 Cerritos ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 Chatsworth ................................................................................................................................................... 9 Compton ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Culver City ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 El Monte ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Grossman OSPI Case Number: D11-04-019 Document: Order of Revocation
    RE: Douglas Grossman OSPI Case Number: D11-04-019 Document: Order of Revocation Regarding your request for information about the above-named educator; attached is a true and correct copy of the document on file with the State of Washington, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Office of Professional Practices. These records are considered certified by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. Certain information may have been redacted pursuant to Washington state laws. While those laws require that most records be disclosed on request, they also state that certain information should not be disclosed. The following information has been withheld: None If you have any questions or need additional information regarding the information that was redacted, if any, please contact: OSPI Public Records Office P.O. Box 47200 Olympia, WA 98504-7200 Phone: (360) 725-6372 Email: [email protected] You may appeal the decision to withhold or redact any information by writing to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, OSPI P.O. Box 47200, Olympia, WA 98504-7200. IN THE MATTER OF THE EDUCATION ) CERTIFICATE OF ) OPP No. D11-04-019 ) Douglas Grossman ) FINAL ORDER Certificate No. 475774F ) OF REVOCATION ) COMES NOW the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), under the authority granted by the laws of the state of Washington, having reviewed the file of the above- referenced case, and having considered the entire evidence contained therein, does hereby revoke the Washington Education Certificate, No. 475774F, of Douglas Grossman, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth below: FINDINGS OF FACT 1.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 12. FACILITY USE, FEES and CONDITIONS Approved April 18, 2019
    CHAPTER 12. FACILITY USE, FEES AND CONDITIONS Approved April 18, 2019 Contents General Statement 2 Program Service and Goals 2 Facility Use Permit 3 Advance Reservation 4 Alcohol 4 Amplification 5 Cancellation/Refund 5 Concessions 5 Deposits 6 Cleaning and Damage Deposit 6 Fee Deposit 7 Dog Parks 7 Dog Shows 8 Employee Use of District Facilities 8 Facility Specific Rules 9 Ball Fields 9 Challenger Park 9 Corriganville Park 10 Courts (Tennis and Pickleball) 11 Robert P. Strathearn Park and Museum 12 Santa Susana Depot 13 Soccer Fields 13 Fee Schedule (Exhibit A) 31 Filming 17 For-Profit 22 Golf Course Use by High School 22 Grass Fee 25 Impact Fee 25 Inflatable or Other Apparatus 25 Insurance 25 Marquee 26 Meet-ups 26 Movies in the Park 26 Non-Resident 26 Payment 26 Permit (“Facility Use Permit”) 27 Prohibited Rentals 27 Park Ranger/Event Staff 27 1 CHAPTER 12. FACILITY USE, FEES AND CONDITIONS Approved April 18, 2019 Reservation Periods 27 Responsibilities of the Permit Holder 27 Sales 28 Showmobile 28 Special Events 29 Toilets 30 Waiver/Reduction 30 General Statement On October 3, 1961, the residents of the unincorporated area of Simi Valley voted authority, in accordance with the California Public Resources Code, to empower the board of directors to levy a separate property tax to pay for recreation and park services. These funds have been designated to support the administration and operation of facilities, programs and services offered by the district. It is the policy of the district to assess fees and charges for certain program, facility use, and special services provided by the district consistent with California state law.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Profile
    City of Glendale, California Community Profile LA CRESCENTA- MONTROSE LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE BURBANK The City of Glendale was incorporated on February 16, 1906 and spans approximately 30.6 square miles with a current population of approximately 201,020 GLENDALE people (US Census). Located minutes away from downtown Los Angeles, Pasadena, Burbank, PASADENA Hollywood, and Universal City, Glendale is the fourth largest city in Los Angeles County and is surrounded EAGLE ROCK by Southern California’s leading commercial districts. SOUTH PASADENA As one of its core functions, Glendale provides well-maintained streets and a variety of transportation services. The City’s historic success at attracting employers is partially attributed to the result of its location at the center of four major freeways including the I-5 Golden State Freeway, SR-2 Glendale Freeway, SR-134 Ventura Freeway, and the 210 Foothill Freeway; all provide easy access for residents, workers, and customers from around the region. Glendale also offers its own bus services, the Beeline, with 13 routes connecting customers to Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), the City of Burbank, and the Metrolink Stations in both Burbank and Glendale. The Bob Hope Airport in Burbank serves the Los Angeles area including Glendale, Pasadena, and the San Fernando Valley. It is the only airport in the greater Los Angeles area with a direct rail connection to downtown Los Angeles. The City of Glendale is located about 30 minutes from Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) which is a commerce leader and designated as a world-class airport for its convenient location, modern facilities, and superior sea/air/land connections.
    [Show full text]
  • 2003-03 SSMPA Newsletter
    ~~H~P~A~ ANon-Profit501 (c)(4) Organization Volume 30, Issue 26 Incorporated August 31, 1971 March 2003 Newsletter Watershed Stewardship California has lost 951'0of it s wetlands mostly to urban development and farms. The Wetlands Recovery Project is a partnership of 17 federal and state agencies which have come together. pooling resources and expertise to acquire. restore and protect wet lands all the way from Pt. Concepcion to the US/Mexico border. A watershed is defined as that area (drainage basin) where all storm water (and urban runoff) flows int o a common receiving wat er (lake, bay, estuary, ocean) . There are 5 major watersheds in Los Angeles County: the San . Eagles Nest Family Gabr iel River Watershed, the LA River Watershed, the Walking through the green, clean hills Santa Clara River Watershed (the biggest and the last not even thinking of looking for a thrill unchannelized), and the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, while all about us I happily see which includes the Malibu, Topanga, and Ballonasub­ the colorful flowers of spring looking at me. watersheds, among others. My attention is certainly demanded At least 18 watershed management plans are in the when a rock above me is commanded works in LA County. These plans are blueprints for river by a family of coyotes taking in the view, restoration and revitalization. There is a corridor plan for who hope, no doubt, to sight a meal or two. the LA River, but it doesn't take into consideration feeder But, once they see me, they stand and stretch streams and the headlands of t he northern San Fernando and melt into the chaparral to see what they can catch.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Cultural Resources Assessment
    APPENDIX B Cultural Resources Assessment 3700 Riverside Drive Mixed-Use Project Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for City of Burbank 150 North Third Street Burbank, California 91502 Contact: Daniel Villa, Senior Planner prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 301 Los Angeles, California 90012 August 2020 Please cite this report as follows: Madsen, A., M. Strother, B. Campbell-King, S. Treffers, and S. Carmack 2020 Cultural Resources Assessment for the 3700 Riverside Drive Mixed Use Project, City of Burbank, Los Angeles County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 19-08998. Report on file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources ............................................................................. 1 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ................................................................................ 2 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Location and Description ........................................................................................ 3 Personnel ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]