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.
-.
.
.
.