Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1542 . RESOLUTION 1542 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTINGCONDlTIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-009 FOR A DRIVE-THROUGH PHARMACY AT 5 W LIVE OAK A VENUE, WHEREAS, on September 2, 1996, applications were filed by T & B Planning for a 24 hour drive-through pharmacy, Development Services Department Case Nos. CUP 96-009, and ADR 96-016, to be located on a C-2 zoned property that is commonly known a 5 W. Live Oak Avenue, and more particularly described in "Exhibit A". WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on October 8, 1996, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: . SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse affects to the area affected by the proposed project. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features are adequate to adjuSt said use with the iand and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use, . . 5. That the granting of such, Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and currenrzoning are consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the new exterior design elements for the subject building are in compliance with the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Regulations. 7. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. SECTION 3, That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit, for a drive"through pharmacy upon the following conditions: I. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction of Building Services. 2, Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. 3. Water service shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Water Division. 4. All work done within the public right of way shall be done to the complete satisfaction of the Engineering Division. 5. Approval of this conditional use permit shall not permit a use other than a retail drive-through pharmacy if at any time the uSe approved by CUP 96-009 is discontinued. 6. Hours of operation may be twenty-four (24) hours a day, Monday through Sunday. 7. Additional landscaping shall be attached to the existing wall facing the property, subject to:the review and approval of the Development Services Department. 8. That this Conditional Use Permit may be reevaluated by the Planning Commission at a public hearing if a security and or public safety issue arises due to a twenty-four (24) hour a day operation, . . 2 1542 . 9, C,U,P. 96-009 and ADR 96-016 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form that is available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 10, Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation, SECTION 4, The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action ofOctciber 8,1996, and theJollowing vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Murphy and Sleeter NOES: None ABSENT: None SECTION 5, The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of October 1996, by the following vote: . AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Murphy aIid Sleeter tJ None Ch . , Planning Commission Cit of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FO~ JJJJ1// >>1 ~ Michael H, Miller, City Attorney . 3 1542 . . . " 0952080 EXlllBIT "A" Legal D~scription That portion of Lot 69 of the Santa Anita Colony, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per map recorded in Book 42 Page 87 of Miscellaneous Records, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, described as follows: Beginning at a point in the East line of said lot that is distant along said East line North 00 59' 25" West 107.17 feet from the Northerly extremity of the curve described in the decree in Case No, 274177, Superior Court of said County, as concave to the Northwest and having a radius of 15.00 feet and a length of 21.21 feet; thence along said East line South 00 59' 25" East 107,17 feet to said Northerly terminus; thence Southerly along said curve 21.21 feet to its point of tangency with a line that is parallel with and distant Northerly 25.00 feet, at right angles, from the Southerly line of said Lot 69; thence along said parallel line South 80. 05' 15" West 59.94 feet to a point in the Northeasterly line of Las Tunas Drive, at the Easterly extremity of the curve described in said decree ,as concave to the North and having a radius of 450.00 feet; thence Westerly along said curve 77.53 feet; thence parallel with the East line of said lot, North O. 59' 25" West 120.00 feet; thence North 820 49' 44" East 150.00 feet to the point of beginning, EXCEPT THEREFROM all oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances and all minerals in, under and that may be produced from depth below 500 feet of the surface of the above described real property, but without the right of entry upon the surface thereof, as reserved in a deed recorded February I, 1977 as InstrUment No, 77-110740, Official Records. CLTA Standard Coverage Policy October 8, 1996 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: STJMMARY STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Chairman and Members of the Arcadia Planning Commission Donna L, .Butler, Community Development Administrator By: John Halminski, Assistant Planner JJtIr Conditional Use Permit No. cOP 96-009 & ADR 96-016 This Conditionlil Use Permit application was submitted by T & B Planning to operate a 24 hour drive-through pharmacy at 5 W. Live 0,* Avenue (N/W comer of Live Oak and Santa Anita). The Development Services Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No, 96-009 and of the proposed architectural design, subject to the conditions that are outlined in this staff report, . GRNF.RAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: LOT AREA: FRONTAGE: . T & B Planning 5 W, Live Oak Avenue A c~nditional use permit to operate a 1900 sq, ft. 24 hour drive-through pharmacy. Concurrent with the consideration of the requested conditional use permit, the' applicant is also requesting approval of the proposed design concept plans, Approximately 18;153 square feet Approx. 150 feet along Live Oak Ave., and 150 feet along Santa Anita Ave. . EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is currently vacant and is zoned C-2, GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Commercial shopping center with mixed retail; zoned C-2, South: Mixed light industrial, car wash and automotive repair; zoned CoM. East: Mixed commercial, gas station; zoned C-I. West: Mixed commercial and office; zoned COO. BACKGROlJND INFORMATION This application is before the Planning Commission because the proposed retail pharmacy is a drive- through facility. The twenty-four hour portion of the request does not require a conditional use permit because the location of the pharmacy is not within ISO feet of residentially zoned property. PROPOSAL. . The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a 24 hour "Walgreen's" drive-through pharmacy within a proposed 1,900 sq. ft. building, as shown on the submitted site plan (copy attached), The site was developed with Ii pre-existing service station. The applicant is proposing' that the pharmacy be open for 24 hours, Monday through Sunday. Staff believes that such a 24 hour operation would be a compatible use within the subject area, because the proposed development would be adjacent to commercial and light manufacturing uses, such as, a car wash, automotive repair, a service station and retail shopping centers, as shown on the attached land use map. The new pharmacy building will provide two drive-through windows; one for prescription drop-off and one forpi<:k-up. In addition, the pharmacy will also provide a walk-in service counter area of approximately 575 square feet, which wi1\ include a small retail area. for the display of non-' prescription items adjacent to the counter. The remainder of the store is strictly for employees of Wa1\green's RX'Express. Parking and traffic circulation This proposal wi1\ provide lOon-site parking spaces, which includes a van accessible handicap space, The proposed retail use requires 10 on-site parking. spaces (5 spaces per 1,000 sq,ft., of gross efloor area, [1,900sq, ft.]). CUP 96-009 October 8, 1996 Page 2 . . . Two-way traffic circulation through ,the site would be provided by a driveway entrance and exit on both Santa Anita Avenue and Live Oak Avenue, as shown on the submitted site plan.. The driveways through the order and pick-up windows are designed to allow for one-way circulation. Landscl\Pin~ In addition to providing a 5'-0" wide raised landscape buffer along Santa Anita and Live Oak Avenue, a 3'-3" deep parking space planter curb will also be provide along the easterly property line adjacent to Santa Anita Avenue, The Development Services Department recommends that all trees planted on the property shall be a minimum of 24" box, as shown on the submitted site plan. ANALYSIS A drive-through phannacy is pennitted in a C-2 zone with an approved conditional use pennit. Based upon the applicant's proposal iUs staff's opinion that the on-site parking and through access would be adequate. Staffs analysis is based largely on the parking spaces provided and the evaluation of the attached parking and traffic. study submitted by the applicant. The parking and . traffic survey was conducted at a similar site. In SUIlU1).ary, the parking survey concludes that the parking demand did not exceed 50 percent of the on-site parking at any given period, In addition, no more than one vehicle had been queued at either window during the majority of the survey, This number was exceeded, once on a Saturday at 11:30 a.m. Architectural Design Review' , Concurrent with the <;onsideration of this conditional use pennit, the Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the applicant's design concept plans for the proposed drive-through phannacy. The signs indicated on the'proposed elevations are not part of this design review, The proposed signs will be reviewed by staff through a design review procedure. However, the plans do indicate were the proposed signs will be located on the building and on the site. Staff believes that the aPplicant' sproposal meets the intent of the design criteria set forth in the' City's Architectural Design Review Regulations. The design elements of the subject building (Le., window treatment, split face concrete block, stucco, landscaping, etc.) will provide the necessary visual break up of flat wall areas, Also, the architectural design of the structure and the exterior .mat~rials would be visually hannonious with the surrounding developments (see attached building elevations), Attached for your consideration are the proposed plans, CUP 96-009 October 8. 1996 Page 3 . CEQA Pursuant to the provisiiins of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any 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 historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project: RECOMMENDATIONS' The Development Services Departmentrecommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No.96-00S, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer. 2, Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. 3, Water service shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Water Division. . 4. All work done within the public right of way shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division, 5, Hours of operation shall be twenty-four{24) hours a day, Monday through Sunday. 6. That CUP 96-00S shall not take affect until the owner and applicant have executed a form available at the Plarining Office indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval, 7, Noncompliance ,with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation, FINDINGS ANn MOTIONS A j2proval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this conditional use permit application, the Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration, find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, find that the design concept plans are in compliance with the ADR criteria, and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporated the Commission's . CUP 96-009 October S, 1996 Page 4 . decision, specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this conditional use permit application and or Architectural Design Review, the Commission should make specific finding based on the evidence presented, and move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings. Should the Planning Commission have any questions regarding this matter prior to the scheduled public hearing, please contact John Halminski at your, earliest convenience. Approved By: Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator . Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map, environmental documentation, site plan, floor plan, elevations, parking survey, Department memos and conditions of approval from Building, Engineering, Water and Fire . " CUP 96-009 October 8. 1996 Page 5 , . . . TAIl.! , WALOflEEN'S RX EXPRESS SITS SURVEY' , OHi of Survey: t 2/17/84 ISll\lfdlvl . Slrett: Un:oln Blvd. Clrv: Anlhelm Cro,U Strnt: hlfgnolla Ava. Job Numbar; 473-94.001 SidA, sq. !t./Seau: 1,900 I NUM8!/\ OF VEHIC~eS . ! SPACes . , 6 I A"r 0/\ 8EHINO AT Oil BEHINO ! TIME OROEII WINOOW PICICUP WINDOW '....R~ EO I 11,30 AM 1 . 2 . 3 . 11:35 AM I I 2 I ":4011.'-1 . 3 I ":45 AM , , 4 "I,OAM " 11:55 AM I I 3 I , I 12:00 PM , 3 12105 PM 1 2. . 12:10 PM 3 I '2:16 PM 2 . - i '2:20 PM I 2. ~ '2:26 PM 2 I Ii '2:30 PM , I 2 12:38 PM I I 4 I '2:40 PM I I 6 I I , ~,46 ,,/..1 4 -. I '.2:60 PM , I .3 , i , ~:S5 PM 3 1:00 PM , 5 \ P.,.i"O ~lfl1IM Includel .un.~ltl '~d' Implov,n. 3 , ,.' , - :'.:...:-::,J:....-:': r:::~='~ =::.-:: :7 Eo.: :.,.:': .., :": \ . . . ..",,-. _.~-:".I"11:':'c:..' ...:. ..-.... .. ".. TABU: 2 VlALOA5!N'S fiX EXPIli$$ SITE SURVEY Oate 0' Sl.lfVIY; 12/17194 ISttufd.y) StlBlt: Lin:oln alva, City: ot.II.h.im era" StrUt, 1.110110111 Ava. aId;. .q, '\,/Sem: 1.900 Job Numb.,: 47:;.94.001 II NUMBER OF \leJolICL!$ . '. I ! SP,,"'U . IS AT Oil BEHIND AT Oil BeHlNO I I 'l'tMl OAceA WINCOW PICKUP WINDOW PARKEO' I ';30 PM 3 I I ':35 PM , 3 I ":40 PM . 3 .:45 PM 4 4:50 PM ! I ':S5 pM 3 !:OO PM 3 . I I 5:05 PM I Z , . , 5:10 PM 3 ! 5:15.mM 3 , , . I I 5:20 PM , 4 i 6:26 I'M I 3 16::10 PM 2 i I , 6:35 PM Z I I; 5:40 PM , 2 I 3 Ii 5:45 PM I:' 5:50 PM I 2 ,...- i 5:55 PM 2 I , 2 I 6:00 PM . I Plrl<lng CalTlaM \I\C\UGU tUSIOlTllfl 1M emaloyeu. 4 , .::'-: ,,:",:~.::.:.;!~-;.-:. 'J::3::::i".: _ n7'~::.:'r ~_'. .. " . . . .', ..~\.,;~ ~ '9; i~:le.:;:1 ,EV~RG~::ti'i ~;:VCO.!f'tC. ;:.= I ~ABLE 3 WALGREEN'S ~X EXPRESS SITe SURVIY , , Cate 0' Survey: I a/20/94 IT\lUdayl SItUt: Unooln Blvd, City; Anaheim CrOI' StrUI: Magnolia Ava. Bldg. CQ, 'l,/Snts: ',900 Job Numb.,: 473.94.001 , NUMBE~ O~ VEHICLES I I SPACES . '8 AT OF. aEHllIIO AT 0/1 BiMINO TIME OROERWINOQW I PICKUP WiNDOW I PARKEO' ~:30AM . 3 - ; I H3S AM I 4 I ":40 AM , 4 ";4$ AM 3 ":llOAM , 3 ":55 AM 5 , , 2:00 PM 4 I 12,05 PM I 4 1 12.,10 PM Ii ! '2:1$ PM 4 Ii . , 2:20 PM , $ '2:25 PM I ? I I 12:30 PM I 8 , I 12:UPI'oI S ! 12:40 PM 5 I r I. 12:45 PM 5 i '2:&0 PM 3 , \ 2155 PM 8 .1 ':00 PM , 6 1- -.- . '. I 1,1 Pl,klno demand in:luder cultomell.nd employ us. 5 . - . - -::'..::.::-:~.< .:~::=: =:?,'.:; .:,,:_'\':07 i ]:.JL 012 '.& e,;: llFM ::vE."GRE:E:N OO:VCO. INC, P,7 , . , TA8~e 4 WALOREEN'S RX EXPIlESS SITE SU'IVEV . 02te of Surlley: CitY: Bldg. Iq, ft.lSUII: 12/20/9~ ITul~dt\l) St!'fSt: Li:-:c:lfI Blvd. Anaheim CrouStr..:; MI;r:cil. ......., 1,900 Job Numlltr: 473.94.001 " i , NUMilER OF Vel'llC:~es SPACES. Ie A" OR eil1lNg AT 01\ llEHINO OIlO!R WINDOw PicKUP WINDOW PARKeo' ~ --I -- -- r , e . I --........~. " 8 7 6 , 4 f- l I $ ~ -- I 6 , - I , 4 . S & I I " -1 , I 8 I I , I I 7 I r 5 I , ..-..--'--" - , , '~ I , I I " ~- I 3 4 . i ! I TIME ~ 4:3C PM ! 4:35 PM ! 4:AO PM 4:45 PM , ':60 PM I ':S! PM , 5:00 PM >-- I , 6:05 PM I $:10 PM 5;15 PM I 5:2.0 PM , 6:26 PM 5:30 PM I $:36 PM Ii, 5:..0 PM Ii S ..HM !Gsop//. [' S:SS PM 1 6:00 PM - '. . P.rl<ll'lg daman~ II'lClu~el ~ullomsr' and employou. 6 , - . - . - -. - -. - - -. l .:=3=:',:.:~ ~ . ;":''':'' r : .:.: "' . '. ~~ ~ Date: 8/28/96 To: ( ) Building, ( ) Econ, Dev., ( ') Engineering, ( ) Fire, r) Main!., ( ) Police. From: Planning Services, John' Halminski ?~^-; MEMORAl'lDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT (~ ( ) RECeiVED AUG 2 9 1995 C1lYOF WATER D~~CAOIA Santa Anit'1'ON CUP 96-009 & ADR 96-016 Subject' Application No,: Location: NW corner of Las Tunas (Live Oak) and Project Description: Drive-thru pharmacy (Walgreens) Conditional Use Permit & Architectural Design Review Please review the attached proposal and comment on the following checked items and any other item(s) with which your services ilia)' have concerns or special,knowledge: - , . ( ) Dedications ( ) Legaldescription ( ) Traffic circulation ( ) Parkway width(s) ( ) Streetlights ( ) Tentative ParcellTract Map contents ( ) Final Map contents ( ) Street trees &: plants ( ) Is the subject address served by a sewer line that is lributary to a deficient Cit)' lnmk line? ( ) Location and design of driveway and apron ( ) Encroachment i~to a special setback on: ( ) Grading and drainage ( ) Water services , ( ) Irrigation system ( ) Firehydrants ( ) Backflow devices ( ) Fire safety ( ) Occupancy limits ( ) Public safet}. and security ( ) Accessibility ( ) Compliance \vith Building Codes ( ) Signs ( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and Revitalization Plans ( ) Other: ( ) Conditions of approval Please respond by: September 30. 1996 . '~_' ,_, _",<" : I ExiSTING WATER StRVI~ElS) TO ~ WATER SERVICE(S) TO BE Response: ~ ABAlitla:lE~mt41~tE~~Hst INSTAllED BY AR\:f\~l,;"r-JA~R ~. , _ ~}.J)., .,,0 "'''~'''''!:\!''I::''oN'' , Ilr>.t,tS E...PErlSE ,1"';~: ~~""'l~",,"'~ ':'-"'~l" i'-:-';l~'-';"'; ::~~l <~..t'~ r:.:t - :"'- :~." f..... ~_..".v.. ".~ ,l,L .>.. 1".....;'. . .."..1 ,'.,,_ ~';~IlE<)TtC WP<: t;1~?Ii.'V. ::E:::~ ;:::.::~) C-:,:':";,: ~:'i'~~~ ~~'~~72f?3 -1)~";ALl :.. ~,';."....-~:'.! ':;,;,J :;.. ~'.~l ,'-., .'.~:.J .': JY;~.~~ij.:..:~ 'Cra:UK Vi\~. .,,~:';':'"",I ',:l,,":;'''' ,:., ;;-:";;'G';o',,',';.') I~J-"'""l OS ~ V G'''' l'-,~,...._.......... .~......,.....,~.,J.'J ._.......j..j~.J..... ~_ lit ..0& Jt';J. ViILV,,3 ,.,~;') ::E.j:,,~l. 8;;: mi)1.,:.I.~jJ m "~~fIRE LINE, AS C"- ~~ "J ~.... .-.._..~ "J ..r"---"l!. 0'.'0. _..."'..." JIJ_ 6J._J_,. t"l '.';U""v.!.:J.. . By: ., Date: 8/28/96 To: ( ) Building, ( ) Econ, Dev., ( ) Engineering, ( ) Fire, ()M~" (~ice, From: Planning Services, John Halminski MEMORANUUM: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTME~T ( ) Water, ( ) CUP 96-009 & ADR 96-016 Subject: Application No.: LO,cation: NW corner of Las Tunas (Live Oak) and Santa Anita Project Description: Drive-thru pharmacy (Walgreens) Conditional Use Permit & Architectural Design Review Please review the attached proposal and comment on the .following checked items and any other item(s) with which your services may have concemsor special knowledge: . ( ) Vedications ( ) Legal description . ( ) ,raffic circulation ( ) Parkway width(s) ( ) Streetlights ( ) ,entative Parcelrrract Map contents ( ) final Map contents ( ) Street trees & plants ( ) Is the subject address served by a sewer line that is tributary to a deficient City trunk line? ( ) Location and design of driveway and apron ( ) Encroachment i~to a spec\al,setback on: ) Grading and drainage ) Water services , Please respond by: September 30, 1996 ( ) Irrigation system ( ) Fire hydrants ( ) Backflow'devices ( ) Fire safe!)' ( ) Occupancy limits ( ) Public safet}. aild security ( ) Accessibility ( ) Compliance with Building Codes ( ) Signs ( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and Revitalization Plans ( ) Other: ( ) Conditions of approval Response: tJ>9 (~k,!iA;..u -k-o.... 'P. ,?, . B)': Date: Date: 6 To: ( ) Building, I ) Econ, Dev" . Planning Servic John Halminski CUP 96-009 Subject' Application No,: MtMORAN1)UM ~~PARTMENT ( ) Water, () 96-016 Location: NW corner of Las Tunas (Live Oak) and Santa Anita Project Description: Drive-thru pharmacy (Walgreens) Conditional Use Permit' & Architectural Design Review 'Please review the attached proposal and comment on the following checked items and any, otheritem(s) with which your services may have concerns or. special knowledge: . ( ) Dedications ( ) Legal description ( ) Traffic circulation ( ) Parkway width(s) ( ) Streetlights ( ) Tentative ParcellTract.Map contents ( ) Final Map contents ( ) Street trees &. plants ( ) Is the subject address served by a sewer line that is tributary to a deficient City trunk line? ( ) Location and design of driveway and apron ( ) Encroachment i~to a special setback on: ( ) Irrigation system ( ) Fire hydrants ( ) Backflow devices ( ) Fire safety ( ) Occup~ncy limits ( ) Public safety and security ( ) Accessibility , ( ) Compliance with Building Codes ( ) Signs ( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and Revitalization Plans ( ) Other: ( ) Grading and drainage ( ) Conditions of approval ( ) Water services Please respond by: September 30. 1996 Response: () t<J L '/ U-F. C. fk! (J (t'4 f'VU'1Il. , 91)~. (j, A !Z/l6)d 86-;t . . By: /;U~ '. Date: fj~rlU t MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT Date: September 16, 1996 FROM: John Halminski, Assistant Planner Mohammad R, Mostahkami, Acting City Engineer jJ1IVf Prepared by: Tom Shahbazi, Associate civil Engineer TO: SUBJECT: NW corner of Las Tunas (Live Oak) and Santa Anita Ave. CUP 96-009 In response to your memorandum, the items Which this division has concern or special knowledge of are listed below: 1, The existing parkway width(s) on Santa Anita varies from 8' to 9,6" and on J:,ive Oak Avenue is 12': . 2. Traffic volume may be increased, but there will be no major impact. 3. The subject property is served by a sewer line that has the capacity to transport sewage flows generated in accordance with land use reflected in the City'S current general plan with Los Angeles County's Sanitation District, This division has reviewed the subject CUP and recommends the following conditions of approval: 1. Submit grading' and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the Development Services... Director, Provide calculations for the gravity drainage system. Computations should show hydrology, hydraulics, elevations, and all the details. NOTE: show all existing and proposed parkway trees, pull boxes, meters, power poles, guy wires, street lights, driveways, sidewalks on grading/drainage plan, . 2. Submit erosion control plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for City'S approval, -1- . . . 3. plant one(~) parkway tr,ee on Santa Anita Ave. and two(2) parkway trees on Live Oak Ave, per Arcadia City Standard Drawing S-~3-1. Contact the Maintenance Services Department for type and size. 4, Close existing driveways not to be used and reconstruct curb, gutter and sidewalk to match existing. 5, Obtain permit for all work performed in public right-of-way, 6, Remove and replace deficient or damaged curb, gutter,' sidewalk and/or pavement to satisfaction of the Developrnnet services Director. Contact the Engineering Division for exact locations of removal and replacement. 7, Construct PCC driveway apron according to the Arcadia Standard Drawing No. S-~~, No driveway shall be constructed closer than three (3) fe~t from any curb return, fire hydrant, ornamental light standard, telephone or electrical pole, meter box, underground vault, manhole or tree. Driveway on Live Oak Ave. shall be located a minimun of three.(3) feet away from existing power pole, NOTE: No portions of existing gutter and AC pavement be removed unless prior approval is obtained Development Services Director. shall from 8. Gravity drainage outlets shall be constructed to conform to Arcadia City Standard Drawing No, S-~l. 9. Remove and reconstruct existing handicapped ramp per APWA standard,Drawings ~11-1. 10. Paint building number on curb face per Arcadia City Standard Drawing No, S-24. 1~. Arrange with the Southern California Edison Company to install (1) 22,000 lumen HPSV Edison owned LS-~ street light with underground circuits on Live Oak Ave, Exact locations to be determined by the City. Contractor shall obtain a lighting standard drawing from the City's Engineering -2- . . . Division. 12. The Engineering Inspector shall be contacted at (818) 574- 5490 at least 24 hours prior to construction of off-site improvements. All improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of Development Services Department prior to final acceptance by Building Division and prior to occupancy. 13. All survey monuments, centerline ties, and survey reference points shall be protected in place or re-established where disturbed in accordance with Section 8771 of the Land Surveyors Act, prior to issuance of certificate of completion of the project, This work will be the responsibility of the permittee and shall be at the permittee's expense. 14, Contractor shall comply with all requirements of Federal, State, and local laws, and regulations pertaining to the CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN WATER ACT (NPDES) . 15.' All off-site improvement plan checking, inspection charges, and other miscellaneous costs associated with the proposed development shall be reimbursed to the City. 16, All construction in the public right-of-way shall be in accordance with all applicable sections and/or provisions of the latest edition of the "Standard Specification for Public Works Construction" (Greenbook). The above items are to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director in accordance with the applicable provisions of ,the Arcadia Municipal Code. MRM,: TS: ag cc: Building Division -3,- . ",'" ~"li'~' - ~ Oi'i"----- J!~4i ~r.. g~' .'. '.1 t I {f:t If!. L ,.~ 9; t ~.; ... T. -- - ..... tl' 'OJ L ~ 5 0 f8J .,;,;.. (t::J r'J" . t; ~" ,.. t - 5rl 2 78~24 l 95.01 ~ 90 ....9t n.. ! ,."g!-. I a: I.~ I~ : ~r----I.lW._ __ ~ I ~t~ ~ ~~ ~ ..,~/!!.. !J' '.o.!i 16 ~o ~I T ('J'.' TO< WOODRUFF .Ill ,.." J,'o TO' -:mt -- B '1::.1. 76 ,::.'C,-t 'll 7.. ..-., AVE ~ ;;] ""'~ """1 u ,,"'i: t' 1 t!~ .. ____Jt6.._..;.__ '13!: 1. IT' ,. ~ ~ - ;;,~ 6 R-1 '~J ... . . ." '. ~ '7'1 .,... ,. ~... ~ ~ " ,~ ;'llf}[:"""", ~IO ~.~ : ::I G~ , 1. ,,~.....o ~ IfIN II ~.J ; ~ ~ CHURCH/SCHOOL ~ ~ R'2 . .... , - ; ~ :: . RETAIL 9E,NTER j z 0( . C-2 . - ~ - ~ z 0( t"J(IJ 1II "'~J(.,. ,... 1d .. Itoll) '.'J ~..- ~J", 'i. . . j" . C-2 _ 'f ' ~ L.qs rUN :jS \..I'll€. Ofl,l< P,;;f"fo \ ::. \ . .,.:( ,.J: MIXED, . ~ ." ~ RETAIL - \ CoM I'~ ~,J "" . PUIT .~I~~T' I "'2 I?: M I: ~ ''''''01'' Actun u. ~ ~ . :r' ;: M..".... -~ II <: 1 ~ ........."." ..: ~l' '\ ,..... 11-" :170 ""R222 ":' .J =5 'M" .' "ol.,1 o ~ 1- '1,) ~('f)~ L.l ~a 71 . ! <( :(0<,; 0:: -l COlt. '21 2i I }-. ....... _tr. ! put ., \.01 S\ r """RI" ,1Il:'IU~! Tit...' .....1..1' ..I ~. ". I '" ~ .} ..,.' .. "l!"lrt}1 ~;:O u , """.. ..' ~ ~3U~ j.)" 1 . <J:. .i'''- ,. . ~ ~ 5 c::.l!J -'10 '0'" J-. UI '1;'1 en en enO ~!a :x:Q -r <~ O-n ;On,,-om Z m - m C~1 "SJ fI ,.J ~ ,4." ...~ 1t'.0 ~ ., .- l. .. '" ~ ::~ i~ , . j~ .; }- ."" h '"'' ~ l:l .. ~~:"P'.' ~~ ~ ,j~ 4'" ...., ~ coO IMlI" . ~"c off,t\ I'~~ ...~ \1. i . LAND USE AND ZONING . <-:::'" \~''''' "" ,), 6l11.l1 tf,J) 1.11 \1.1\ \' 2 'j, ~ \"., ,;:;~ ,... ,,,' ('l .~~ l RALPHS M~RKET "tJ' .1 ,,<' ~ ~ ~ \:. ""-'-11>;' ~ ... :- , . 1 ; > lIt1!1<-ED CpM ~ 1i> -:., " .' <:: -r " I f.' ~ ~ CoM <0 :x: f ~1' 11 po.. .....,.:1. Q) ."" -' '\...\1.... ., ," .~ . _ J!.. .. .1-'1);-- ~.. :~"'" ....... · ,,_L~lo' .1w 1~"'" #' ....- }o.,.\O :~~ a . Me: ~.. . 3:t- L r:~,:- ,.." , ~t. -:1 ~., MU~:I~~: ?A~~iLy1._ .. f'I ~ __,-- 0 t,~1'1 ~ · to ;,_ .. .____.....:---\...1 MULTIPL~.F,.A._MI~Y f' ..,.,..5... · ''':. N :, \, "1\lL\lt. ~----,-_. ~ \ ~ CUP 96-009/AOR 96-016 5 W. LIVE OAK AVE. SCALE:1"=200' I . 1 , 1 . I , I , I - I Ii i"' < 1 , 1 , i ! .. 1 ~ , 1 , I . 1 , 1 , I _.- -- 1._- --- -- ~ ,.VEHJl. _--- /~:',_,_-~J-----'-- .-1- -- . ~-- --- "-- --- -~'- ,-' - ---- . ~ ~T ~"'TIm.I. _r____. --~ --- --- -~- ~-- -- ----. -.......- ----... --- ----""'--- --..........---...- --...----.....-.- ..---....... ---- ~Q .-...---. --~ ......-..-.-.--...- ..---- --------..--.------ -....---------..- ~_.._---_...-..._- ..--.-..-- .,...--.... ___. --- -~- ..-.....- - -...-....-...--...-.-- --....---....--..-..- .._-_._---~._-- ---.-------..-.. ...~_.._-_...._--_.....- ---"-..--.---. ------....-.-.-......-... -.....-----.-...,----.. -.....--------.......- -..-.....-...-.--.............- -......--.-......--.--... --..----..-....--.--. ---......,,-..--..-......--. ___.____w___ -..--...- --/' ;~./ ~b .-- ~-- ~_.... -C · LA5......__ - . ~ r . - "----... ,.."......... ~.- - ~Q .__t .-- <? ~.-------- ....-- ~ , . -' ~-' 0: ___J , , . . , , , 1..--- -: 0, ~ , , , , , , , , , :0 , ..."""os , i/~ , - , , , 0: r--- ,;.I i~ __ , - ., ",1'"1 ---~ - L - <? ;[). DO - - ,. -0: ~ o - .-..---... ...._..,.._~- _01____ . -- - PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN .....- $ f\f.-.r. . . . . =-_ I ~- , 1 . ~ -+ , ) . w ~:::::. - 1'-" , _ I __ ...~....-- -,...-.- =""1 jo- t- ~ . ~-=.c:. --,..- , I , . 1 , I , --I -, I , I I o - I . . ~d~il: U~~OII";' III -"'Ic"'''' t::~u~'; ~"~liM o:::!.z:o<"""" .. "~-:;;o o . lli:co ~K .... ~4 CJ S:!~.... ii<CB~ "',"4" ~ZCL3: .. C8 .. ~ .. - .. '" II: !!!l I it t . ! I ; i; i~ :BU I I = , I n j I I ;[ I 1(011 I I . . . -~ ..' -~ .~ ~' - - - 1- 1----.-.-....-'- -- "1 i I: ~: . (" . i i . """'-l I : ! ~ i i I I . i ,-.J i ..- , r 1 . . ~ /i .~" '\1 1.-1 ,. iU c- r I I ':~) Y-' ..t:' , ! ,.. f-i- --, I- -.- '+ -- I , .... ..' ':,.-- - ill 1-, i'~ - 01 - H -- I -J- It H I H +- i I ...~ Pi 1Ii ,.-" .... 00 .~~ t/ " ~ i l H ! I I SERVICE H r --- I I - ==~ C. I-' -- --- PWARHAC"f '- I --..- . s:r~ /' d ~ ; ru= (I" III ; ::;:::.:"'t ....- II ~ I ~-- 1m ! I 1 '1i ~- ( II r:= I -- .~ I. i .'\ -- - ; " , =.- IGI - 1'/ . iTII!J 5-..".... IBnl 1) ~rnD . . L_. ---'.-.....'......-'..".." r-'-'-' cl i ~ I i ; I . I I ! I I: (): : ( . , i i . : -- _.._,....,._-..,-~..,._._,,-- --' - - - - ~ -' -- - north -- PLDOR ......... --.- --- I'.'V'^ I . . . . $ . 100,....51:,.. ~.,2:;o:: ..~........""~ -II t!.;~",:::: 5:tU%U"""" .. 0-..:;~9 G: -c9;J.., cu8li:o Ou Z ~"'ti~~ u,co.cu'" - ..~~ ~~~~ :a.c c:2 0- a: .. "' o a: J!!5 I il , !Iii :s ~ . fie.. c0 J~ ~n I I : ;: ;: fj I I I ... I J .c d I I . .......-......- $:':::'..- .-....-..... ~.=: ,''',,.,'''_ ---- --- =:r_"='"' - ,..- $------ --q --, ~-- ...--- ---, --- --- .---....- -.....-- -..---- 0'_"- ---""'-- - ; h $--- --- :.r.:::.-..:;..- $ ~w.u..~TD/. . llCIlInI~"''''''' IIClIh'IIl!LeIt'AftCM __w._ l4!51'_II.J!VAnc.l &MY ..1UV....11QI --.- . a.EVATION ICEYNOTE$ I ,_'-"_UOO ,......- ........---- ......-.- t_~ ....__..~ 1 -...-_~ .--- ,- ..,..__..u ~,- .- ._~- -..---.- -- i)---- (ip-t. ,,-............. ~ F1H1SH . GG1LOR 5GHEOU..E 0.........--.------...... [!J=...":'..-:::..~"'=........=. @_..._._........___IIO__. @I=...&..l,P~_... 00';'''-''''''''-_. 0--------- ~=-_..-..:;.. 8-"--, 0____._w__. 8__'_.___ (D.......----...--- ElUt1.OlN5 ~ 5I6H $GtECl.l.E 1O---._..-,...~":# 0___._........lG~_"' 0----..,._. (i)___.~....CI.--.&I. 6)____.roCI"...~ (i)--'~"'-''''-- ---.....- ---....... ::"..::::~::.t..J..:r.::...~ -==-:..:=..-o;r.re....... ---.-........- H~;f4l~- ~ tlIInlI nau........CY ! ---- ----- --- i -- --- -- -..---- ---- _w._ ____v__ ~ 5TNCIHB 51SN ~AT1ON _....- . ..u.,..~~f'oo ...Z~~; u_ "II ~ci~.l::~ 2LL1:1:uonon U "t;".g~ 1lC~.:(P't"" ..li8i;ld Ou . i:i"'B~~ o CO <u~ -.lLlf !~~~ ~<C~ .. a: .. .. o a: IE il I , 5 I ! i ~ I ~ a. . rCh :BU I = . . . . Ii I 11 ; N I . oC 1 1 I t . FileNo.: CUP 96-009 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit CUP 96-009 A Conditional Use Permit to operate 24 holl!' drive-thru and walk-in pharmacy B. Location of Project: 5 W, Live Oak Ave, Arcadia, CA 91007 . C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Barry Burnell T &B Planning 3242 Halladay St. #100 Santa Ana, CA 92705 D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E, Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: None e, Date: September 9,1996 Date Posted: September 12, 1996 B'~A..IJ..t..: .A.' ssistant Planner . File No.: CUP 96-008 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DlUvE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. 96-009 2, Project Address: 5 W. Live Oak Avenue Arcadia, CA 91007 . 3, Pr~ject Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Nwnber: Applicant & Lessee: Property Owner: Barry Burnell, T &B Planning Consultants John Carroll, Corsair, LLC 3242 Halladay St. #100 9171 Wilshure Blvd" # 6 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Beverly Hills, CA90210 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 9 I 007 5. Contact Person & Telephone Nwnber: John Halminski, Assistant Planner (8 I 8) 574-5447 6, General Plan Designation: Commercial 7, Zoning Classification: C-2 General Commercial . -1- CEQA Checklist 7/95 . . . File No.: CUP 96-008 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or ofT-site features necessary for its implementation, Attach additional sheets if necessary.) A Conditional Use Pennitto operate a 24 hour drive"thru and walk-in phannacy. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g" permits, financing, development or participation agreements) City Building Services / City Fire Department / City Engineering Division / ENVIRONMENT AL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors c,hecked below. would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Population & Housing [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Water [ ] Air Quality [ ] Transportation / Circulation [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Hazards [ ] Noise [ ] Public Services [ J Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance ' DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the enviroiunent, there will not be a significan~ effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE'DECLARATION will be prepared, [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, -2- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No,: CUP 96-008 . [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ~~ S' ature September 9 1996 Date . John Halminski Print Name City of Arcadia For -, . -3- CEQA Checklist 7/95 . . . File No,: CUP 96-008 EV ALUA nON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I, A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead ,agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e,g., the project wil\ not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screeninganaIysis), 2, All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off~site as well as on-site, cumulative as'well as project-level, indirect as well as,direct, and construction related as well as ~perationaI impacts. 3, "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate ifthere is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required, 4, "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the, incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fr~m "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses"may be cross-referenced), 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration (Section l5063(c)(3)(D)}, Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist,references to information sources for potential impacts (e,g., general plans, zoning ordinances): Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriat~,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. " -4. CEQA Checklist 7/95 , . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? (The proposal is consistent with the Commercial designation in the General Plan and is a use for which is authorized by Section 9275.1.45 of the Zoning Ordinance.) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies withjurisdiction.over the project? (The proposed use will be required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable ~nvironmental plans, E,g., the South Coast Air Quality Management District.) c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the' vicinity? (The proposed use is a drive-thrupharmacy which is consistant with the surrounding land uses;) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e,g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? (There are no agricultural resources Or operations in the area,) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low"income or minority community)? (The proposed use is a drive-thru pharmacy which is consistant with the surrounding land uses,) 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (The proposed, use isa drive-thru pharmacy which is consistant with the surrounding land uses.) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e,g;, through projects in an Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I File No.: CUP 96-009 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ ) [ I [ I [ I [ I Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ I [ ] [ I [ I ( I No Impact [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan.) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (The proposed project is consislant with the zone designation and general plan.), 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (The site for the proposed use is not within the vicinity of an identified fault. However, all new construction must compy with any applicable. building code requinnents pertaining to seismic standards.) b) Seismic ground shaking? (The site for the proposed use is not more susceptible to seismic ground shaking than any other site in the area, The proposed use will occupy a new building that will be required to comply with current seismic standards,) c) Seismic.ground failure, including liquefaction? (The site for the proposed use is not within the vicinity of an identified fault zone, however no such hazards have bee!1 identified, including liquefaction, in the vicinity of the identified fault zone.) '- d) Landslides or.~udf1ows? (The site Cor the proposed use is on flatland, 'and not within an inundation area.) e) Erosion, changes in topography or unslliblesoil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan.) f) Subsidence'ofthe land? Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ I [ I [ ] [ I [ ] [ I [ I File No,: CUP 96-009 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ I [ ] [ ] ( ] [ I [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ['] ( I ( ] No Impact [X] (Xl [X] (XI (X] [Xl [XI [XI CEQA Checklist 3/96 FileNo.: CUP 96-009 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less' Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (The site for the proposed use is not in an area subject to subsidence.) g) Expansive soils? [ 1 [ I [ ] [Xl (Th,e site for the proposed use is not in an area subject to expansion of soils.) h) Unique geologic or physical, features? [ I [ I [ ] [XI (No such features have been identified at the site of the proposed use,) 4. WATER Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? [ I [ I [ I [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, no such changes are included in the proposa1.) . b) Exposure of people or property ,to water related hazards such as flooding? [ I [ I [ I [XI (The site for the proposed use is not within an inundation area,) c) Discharge into surface waters or omeralteration of surface water quality (e.g" temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? [ 1 [ I [ I [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not. affect surface waters,) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? [ I [ I [ I [XI (Based on a project-specific screening' analysis, the proposal will not affect surface,waters.) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? [ I [ ] [ I [XI (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affe,ct any currents or water movements.) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals,. or through . interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through , substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ I [ I [ I [XI CEQA Checklist 3/96 File No,: CUP 96-009 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters.) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? [ ] [ ) [ ) [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affe<:t ground waters.) h) Impacts to ground water quality? [ ] [ ], [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters,) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplies? [ ) [ ) [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters,) 5. Am QUALITY Would the proposal: . a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [lq (The proposed use will be required to comply with the regulations of the South Coast A ir Quality Management District.) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X) (Based on a project-specific screening analysis the proposal will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,) c) A Iter air movement, moi~ture, or temperature or cause any change in climate? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-spe<:ific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) . ' d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] ,[ ) [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects,) 6. TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION Would ihe proposal result in: . a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ) [ ] [X) CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan,) b) I-!azards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e,g" farm equipment)? (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan. The location that has no! been identified as hazardous,) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (The site of the proposed use is readily accessible and the proposed use will notiithibit access to adjacent or nearby uses.) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (There will be adequate on-site parking for both the tenan.tsand guests to serve the proposed use;) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, there are no existing or potential hazards or barriers to pedestrians' or bicyclists,) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e,g" bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, there are no existing or potential conflicts with policies supporting alternative transportation.) g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (Based on a project-specific screeniqganalysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 7. BIOLOGICAl.: RESOURCES Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Ehdangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fISh, insects, animals and birds)? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) b) Locally designated species (e.g" heritage trees)? Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ I [ ] [ I [ I [ I [ I [ ] File No,: CUP 96-009 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ ] [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ ] No Impact [XI [XI [XI [X] [XI [XI [X] [XI CEQA Checklist 3196 File No., CUP 96-009 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? .r J [ 1 [ 1 [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis,the proposal will not have any such impacts.) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts;) d) Exposure of people to existing sources.of potential health hazards? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will. not have any such impacts.) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? [ ] [ 1 [ ) [Xl (Based on,a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) . 10. NOISE Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, ,the proposal will nolhave any such impacts,) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or'altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ 1 [ 1 [ ) [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis,the proposal will not have any such impacts.) b) Police protection? [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [Xl (BaSed on a project-specific screening analysis, the . proposal will not have any such impacts,) c) Schools? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl CEQA Checklist 3/96 File No.: CUP 96-009 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impects,) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) . b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ) [X] (Based on a project,specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project'specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) . f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X) (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 13. AESTHETICS . Would the proposal: CEQA Checklist 3/96 File No,: CUP 96-009 Potentially . Significant Potentially Uhless Less Than Would the proposal ~sult in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) c) Create light or glare? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the . proposal will not have, any such impacts.) b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) c) , Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) d) have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analYsis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 15. RECREATION Would the proposal: ,a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional . parks or other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project.specific,screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such, impacts,) CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 16. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat ofa fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare ot endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Cali fomi a history or prehistory? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-tenn, to the disadvantage of long-tenn, env~onmentalgoab? (Based ona project-specific screening analysis, the proposai will not have any such impacts.) c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cum.ulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future project) (Based on a project-specifjc screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts:) d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) , 17. EARLIER ANALYSES No additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program E!R, or other CEQA processes to analyze any noted effect(s) resulting from the,proposal. Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] I ] [ ] File No;: CUP 96-009 Potentially Significant Unless ' Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ) [ ] [ ] No Impact [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] CEQA Checklist 3/96 FileNo. '. CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: General Information . 1. Applicant's Name: Barry Burnell, T&B Planning Consul tan ts , Inc. Address: 3242 Halladay street, Suite #lOO, Santa, Ana, CA 92705 2. Property Address (Location): Northwest corner of Las Tunas Drive & Santa' Assessor's Number:, 5788-20-20 Anita Avenue 3. Name, address and telephone nuIIiber of perS<ln to be contacted concerning this project _~:-'i:"Y Burnell, T&B Planning ConsuTtan ts ,Inc. ).!42 Halladay Street, Suite #100, Santa Ana, CA 92705 4, List and describe rany other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: , Conditional Use Permit,Siqn Application, Architectur.al Design Review 5. 6. Zone Classification: C-2 Conunercial General Plan Designation: Proiect Description ';'0, ~1, 12. 13, 7. Proposed use of site (project d~cription): Drive-thru pharmacy \ 8. Site size: .42 acre, 18,153 squ~21e seet 9. Square footage per building: 1,900 s.f. Number of floors of construction: 1 Amount of off-street parking provided: Proposed scheduling of project Begin construction lO spaces upon approval.,complete in 60 days be developed at one time Anticipated incr~enta1 development: Entire site to 14, . 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: N.A. If commercial, indicate the type, Le,neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: ~ighborhood commerci~l,500 square teet of sales area, loading through rear service entry, hours of operations: 8am to lOpm 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: N.A. 17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the' project 18. . N.A. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: City ordinances require processinq of a Conditional Use Permit Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). 19. 20, 21. .23, YES NO Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground contours, o iii Change in sceru<; views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads, o iii Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. o o o Iil 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter, IE) Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes ~r odors in vicinity. ~ EJ.R. 3/95 -2- , .24. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. 30, -, -. YES NO Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. ' o Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. o o o Is site onfi1led land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more, Use ~r disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives, Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). o Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). o Relationship to a larger projector-series of projects. o Environmental Setting .31. 32. o ~ (:I \]I []I QJ []) Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures, Attach photographs of the site, Snapshots or Polaroid photos Will be accepted. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc,), intensity ot land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards,.etc,), Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and corre;f)to the best of my knowledge and belief. ':7/3l/96 f/)M,....v;j&~ Date Signatu/e- . -3- E.I.R. 3/95 ATTACHMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Environmental Setting 31. The subject property is ciJrrently vacallt. The property was previously a service station, but that use has been aballdoned. Structures were tom down and soils were remediated. The site is flat, Soils have recently been remediated to clean up service station residues and tailk leakage, Soils were replaced and compacted for development. No plants or animals are located on-site. The site is not significant from a cultural, historical or scenic aspect. See attached photos, 32, Adjacent properties are all commercial retail in nature. The subject property is on the northeast comer of Las Tunas Drive (Live Oak Avenue) and Santa Anita A venue. This comer is part of a larger retail commercial complex that includes a variety of stores and restaurants, A Chevron service station occupies the comer across Santa Anita Avenue. A Ralphs grocery store is on the opposite comer and an automotive retail/repair center and a carwash are across Las Tunas Drive to the south. See attached photos. -. . . .