HomeMy WebLinkAbout1541
.
RESOLUTION 1541
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 96-008 FORA DRIVE~THROUGH PHARMACY AT
200 E. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD.
WHEREAS, on August 5, 1996, applications were filed by John Loper of
Evergreen Development Co. for a 24 hour drive-through phannacy, Development
Services Department Case Nos. CUP 96-008, and ADR 96-014, to be located on a C-2
zoned property that is commonly known a 200 E. Foothill Boulevard, and more
particularly described as follows:
Lots 14, IS and 16,in Block F of Tract 7723, City of Arcadia, County of Los
Angeles, as per map recorded in Book 93 Pages 41 and 42 of maps, in the
Office of the County Recorder of said county.
WHEREAS, A public hearing was hefd on September 10, 1996, at which time all
. interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence;
NOW THEREFORE, TIIE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIIE 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.
SECTION2 This Commission fmds:
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 irnproveinents 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. The proposed use will provide 12 on-parking spaces, which
. exceeds the on-site parking spaces requirement bytwo(2). The proposed use is required
to provide a total of ten(1 0) on-site parking spaces. The sites traffic circulation should be
.
improved, due to the closure of one driveway along, Second Avenue and the re-designed
traffic circulation through the site. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading,
fandscaping and other features are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in
the neighborhood. The proposed building was designed to be compatible with the
surrounding residential neighborhoods. The proposed building is residential in scale and
has a residential appearance due to the use of compatible building materials, roof lines,
landscaping, and cofors. The proposed project complies with all related zoning
requirements as setforth 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 Pfan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with
the General Plan.
6. That the new exterior design elements for the subject buifding 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 ofBuifding 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.
.
.
2
1541
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 96-008 is
discontinued.
6. Hours of operation shall be between 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through
Sunday.
7. Paint curbs red along Second Avenue and Foothill Boulevard adjacent to the
property.
8. All south facing signs shall not be illuminated.
9. All on-site parking lights shall comply with the City's lighting standards.
10. C.U.P. 96-008 and ADR 96-014 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.
11. 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 of September 10,1996, and the following vote:
A YES: Commissioner's Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, and Sleeter
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bell, Murphy
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 24th day of September 1996, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
.
.
.
Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter
None
Commissioner Murphy
3
1541
.
.
.
Passed, approved and adopted this
~:
~~~~
Secretary, Pl 109 Commission
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM: /J IJ
Yfl~ tJ rt)~
Michaef H. Miller, City Attorney
day of
, 1996.
~~:!!:f:-
City of Arcadia
4
1541
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
September 10, 1996
TO:
Chairman and Members of the Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM:
Donna L.Butler, Community Devefopment Administrator
By: John Halminski, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 96-008 & ADR 96-014
SUMMARY
.
This Conditional Use Permit application was submi~ed by Evergreen Development to operate a 24
hour drive-through pharmacy at 200 E. Foothill Boulevard. The Development Services Department
. is recommending approval of Conditional Use Fermit No. 96-008 and of the proposed architectural
design, subject to the conditions that are outlined in this staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Evergreen Development
LOCATION:
200 E. Foothill Blvd.
REQUEST:
A conditional 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.
LOT AREA:
Approximately 13,979 square feet
FRONTAGE:
132.43 feet along Foothill Blvd., and 105.55 feet along Second Avenue.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
.
The site is currently devefoped with a restaurant and is zoned C-2.
-- .
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercia[
.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Ralphs Market and mixed. retail; zoned C-2 & D.
South: Single-family residentia[; zoned R-l.
East: Mixed commercia[ and medical office; zoned C-2.
West: Mixed commercia[ and dental office; zoned C-2.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting a conditiona[ 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 existing restaurant building will be demolished.
The applicant is proposing that the pharmacy be open for 24 hours, Monday through' Sunday.
Because the proposed development is adjacent to a residentia[ neighborhood, as shown on the
attached land use map, the Development Services Department is recommending that the pharmacy
be open only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to II :00 p~m., Monday through Sunday. Staff is
concerned th.at a 24 hour operation adjace. nt to a residentia[zone could potentia[ly be a disturbance to.
the residence (i.e., noise generated by idling cars and traffic associated with a retail business). Also
the recommended hours of operation are in keeping with the current business hours of the existing
"Paco's" restay.rant.
The new pharmacy building will provide two drive-through windows; one for prescription drop-off
. and one for pick-up. In addition, the pharmacy will also provide a walk-in service counter area of
approximately 575 square feet, which will 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
Wallgreen's RXExpress.
Parkinll and traffic circulation
This proposal will provide 12 on-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
floor area, [1,900 sq. ft.] ).
Two-way traffic circulation through the site would be provided by a driveway entrance and exit on
both Foothill Boulevard and Second,Avenue, as shown on the submitted site plan.. The driveways
through the order and pick-up windows are designed to allow tor, one-way circulation.
Staff is recommending that a "No Left Tum" sign be posted at the Foothill Boulevard exit to.
mitigate any potential on-site vehicle congestion.
CUP 96-008
September 10.1996
Page 2
LandscllPinl:
.
The proposed plans provide for a 5'-0" raised landscape buffer along Foothill Boulevard. Second
Avenue and the public alley. Also, the plans indicate that a 3'-3" deep parking space planter curb
will be provide along the easterly property line.
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.
ANAL YSIS
A drive-through pharmacy is permitted in a C-2 zone with an approved conditional use permit.
Based upon the applicant's proposal it is staff's opinion that the on-site parking and through access
would be adequate. Staff's analysis is based largely on the excess parking spaces provided and the
evaluation of the attached parkiqg and traffic study submitted by the applicant. The parking and
traffic survey was conducted at a similar site.
In summary, the parking survey concludes that the parklltg demand did not exceed 50 percent of the
on-site parking at any given period. In addition, the survey included the number of vehicles at or
behind the order and pick-up windows, which indicates that no more than one vehicle had been
queued at either window. This number was exceeded once on a Saturday at 11 :30 a.m.
.
Architectural Desilln Review:
Concurrent with the consideration of this conditional use permit, the Planning Commission may
approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the applicant's design concept plans for the proposed
drive-through pharmacy.
Staff believes that the applicant's proposal 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, fuII brick veneer, stucco, landscaping, etc.) will provide the necessary visual
break up of flat waII areas. Also, the architectural design of the structure and the exterior materials
would be visually harmonious with the surrounding developments. (see attached building elevations).
Attached for your consideration are the proposed plans.
CEQA
PursUant to the provisions of the Califomia Envirorunental 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
.
CUP 96-008
September 10. 1996
Page 3
proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources. Therefore,.
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No.96~008.
subject to the following conditions ofapproval:
1. Building code compfiance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete
satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer.
2. Fire safety shalf 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. 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 96-008 is discontinued.
6. Hours of operation. shall be between 8:00 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m.
.
7. That CUP 96-008 shall not take affect until the owner andap'pficant have executed a form
available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of
approval.
8. Noncompfiance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall
constitute grounds.fodlS immediate suspension or revocation.
FrNDrNGS AND MOTIONS
AWroval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this conditional use permit ilPpfication. the
Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration, fmd that the project will not
have a significant effect on the environment, find that the design concept plans are in compliance
with the ADRcriteria, and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporated the Commission's
decision, specific findings andcollditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified
by the Commission.
.
CUP 96-008
September 10. 1996
Page 4
Denial
.
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this conditional use permit application, 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. The
Planning Commission may wish to consider one or all of the following motions and findings which
must be expanded upon with specific reasons for denial:
0.1. Find that the request would not secure an appropriate improvement.
0.2. Find that the request woufd not prevent.an unreasonable hardship.
0.3. Find that the requeSt would not promote uniformity of development.
0.4. Find that the location and configuration of the structures are not visually harmonious
with their sites and with surrounding sites and structures, and that the structures
dominate their surroundings to an extent inappropriate to their use.
0.5. Find that the architectural design of the structures and their material and colors are not
visually harmonious with surrounding developments.
.
0.6. Find that the plans for the landscaping of open spaces do not conform to the
requirements set forth in the code, and that they do not provide visually pleasing
settings for structures on the site and on adjoining and nearby sites and contlict with
the natural landscape.
0.7. Find that the design and location of signs and their materials and colors are not
consistent with the character and scale of the buildings to which they are attached or
which are located on the same site, and that the signs are not visually harmonious
with .surrounding developments.
Should the Pfanning Commission have any questions regarding this matter prior to the scheduled
public hearing, please contact John Halminski at your earlieSt convenience.
tJ
Ap
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 96-008
September 10, 1996
Page 5
Date: 8/19/96
To: .~ Building,
( ) Econ. Dev.,
( ) Engineering,
From: Planning Services,
Subject: Application No.:
( ) Fire,
( ) Maint.,
( ) Police,
John Halminski
MEMORANDUM.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
( ) Water,
( )
CUP 96-008
Location:
200 E. Foothill Blvd
ProjectDescription: Construction of a 24 hour drive,..thru and walk-in pharmacy.
Please review the attached proposal and comment on the following checked items and any other item(s) with which your
services may haveconcems or special knowledge:
( ) Dedications
( ) Legal description
( ) Traffic circulation
( ) Parkway width(s)
( ) Streetlights
( ) Tentative ParcellTractMap contents
( ) Final Map contents
( ) Street trees & plants
( ) Is the subject address served bya sewer line that is
tributary to a deficient City trunk line?
( ) Location and design of driveway and apron
( '> Encroachment into a special setback on:
( ) Grading and drainage
() Water services
( ) Irrigation system
( ) Firehydrants
( ) Backflow devices
( ) Fire safetY
( ) Occupancy limits
( ) Public safetY and securitY
c;>{ Accessibility
M Compliance with Building Codes
( ) Signs
( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and
Revitalization Plans
.
( ) Other:
(16 Conditions ofapproval
Please respond by:
Response: ~ r6.1Ih,.e '" ellt! 4.1 ~/!. :;'rfI~ .
By: %.7
~edy1
Date: ~~
.
2,/;, ItIJ'f to
,
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Date: Sept. 4, 1996
TO: John Halminski, Assistant Planner
FROM: Mohammad R. Mostahkami, Acting City Engineer
Prepared by: Tom Shahbazi
SUBJECT: 200 E. Foothill Blvd, CUP 96-008
, In response to your memorandum, the items which this division has
concern or special knowledge of are listed below:
1. .The existing parkway widths are 20' on Foothill Blvd. and
10' on Second Ave,
2. Traffic volume may be increased, but there may 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. Allan-site
drainage shall be collected by catch basin(s) and piped into
street.
Submit Erosion control plan prepared by a Registered civil
Engineer and subject to approval by the Development Services
Director.
NOTE: Show' all existing and proposed parkway trees, pull
boxes, meters, power poles, street lights, traffic signals,
utility iines, driveways, sidewalks and handicapped ramps on
grading/drainage plan.
.
2.
Dedicate a corner cut-off of not less than 21.21' for street
purposes.
-1-
.
3. Plant three (3) parkway trees on Foothill Blvd. and two (2)
parkway trees on Second Ave. at locations determined by the
Development Services Director per Arcadia City Standard
Drawing S-13-1. Contact 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, Construct 15' P. C. C. sidewalk on Foothill Blvd. to match
existing and full parkway width sidewalk on Second Ave., as
per Arcadia City Standard S-17.
6. Obtain permit for all work performed in Public right-of-way.
7.
9.
Replace AC pavement in the alley
construction. Limits of removal shall
approval of the Engineering Inspector.
damaged during
be subject to
8.
Remove and replace deficient or damaged curb, gutter,
sidewalk and/or pavement to satisfaction of the Development
Services Director. Contact Engineering Division for exact
locations of removal and replacement.
.
Construct P. C. C,' driveway apron according to the Arcadia
Standard Drawing No.. 5-11. Reduce proposed driveway width
on Second Ave. from 30" to 25' and constuct 5' of full
height curb, gutter and sidewalk. No driveway .shall be
constructed closer than three (3) feet from any curb return,
fire hydrant, ornamental light standard, telephone or
electrical pole, meter box, underground vault or manhole or
tree.
NOTE: No portions of existing gutter and A.C. pavement
shall be removed unless prior approval is obtained from
Development Services Director.
10 Gravity drai~age outlet(s) (.if required) and two new driveway
aprons shall be Constructed to conform to Arcadia City
Standard Drawing No. S-l1.
11. Paint building number on curb face per Arcadia City Standard
Drawing No. S-24,
12. Arrange with Edison company to relocate existing guy wire
anchor that is in conflict with ~roposed driveway on Second
Ave.
.
13. Arrange with Edison company to install {llone 5,800 lumen
HPSV {.LS-ll Edison owned street light on C~obra head
-2-
.
.
.
Marbelite poles with underground circuits on Second Ave.
Exact location to be determined by the Development Services
Director. Contractor shall obtain a lighting standard
drawing from the Engineering Division.
14.
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.
All survey monuments, centerline ties, and survey reference
points sqall 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.
15.
'16.
Existing handicapped ramp shall be removed and reconsturcted
to meet ADA requirements.
Contractor shall comply with all requirements of Federal,
State, and local laws and regulations pertaining to the,
CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN WATER ACT(NPDES).
17.
18. All Off-site improvement plan checking, inspection charges,
and other miscellaneous costs associated with the proposed
development shall be reimbursed to the City.
19. All construction in the public right-of-way shall be in
accordance with all applicable sections and/or prov~s~ons 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-
RECEIVED
AUG ~ \l 1996
CITYOF.'; ..''''1\
MAINTENANC" ':;,c. ..iCES
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTME~T
.
Date: MJ..SH 36 - ,j;..;!Co - 1"
To: )c{ Building, ....hIt 17
( ) Econ. Dev..
I ) Engineering,
( ) Fire.
( ) Maiht..
( ) Police,
~Water.
( )
Jake lIal~luski I?1S~ -~A-..,te'J.
f ~ .': :
From:
j;ij.aUU;II:; 3c:rvk~s.
Subject: ,\pplicationNo,:.
CUP 96-008
P.I, ~:.
".111
Location:
200 E. Foothill Blvd
Project Description: Construction of a 24 hour' drive-thru and walk-in pharmacy.
Pl<a>~ review the attached proposal and comm~nt on th~ following checked items and any other item(s) with which your
,ervices may ha....e concerns':or special knO\\:Iedge:
( ) Dedications
( ) Legal description
( J Traftic circulation
( ) Parkway width{s)
( ) Stre<tlights
I , Tentatil'e PareelTract Map contents
( ) Final Map contents
l, ) Streei trees &: plants
( ) Is the subject address served by a sewer line that is
'tributary to a,d~ticient City tnmk line?
Location and design of driveway and apron
EncroachmentinlO aspecial setback on:
( ) 'Irrigation system
( ) Fire hydrants
( ) Backllow devices
( ) Fire safety
( ) Occupancy' limits
( ) Public safety and security
( ) Accessibility
( ) Compliance with Building Codes
( ) Signs
( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and
Revitalization Plans
.
( ) Other:
( ) Grading and drainage
t>\ Water sen-ic.:s
~ Conditions of approval
Please respond by:
Response:'
SJ<.:,
B~~ t:..-.-J'
u'
II.,/'",- <;
.k~
1;, /
t-v,L '"fer
7> '
'l.€ '5UI/~ ;1/."; ~'---k;
/
r! .'~
By: (~~ /O\~~
: I
J i I
'....,...
Date:
!J .,.?~:, - )'(:;'
.
( )
( )
.. ~ce, . -._~
H::~:~ki_-~ ( ~ \1
Date: 8/19/96
~P' ---
...r 'TO: "1) Building,
\ ) Econ. De~..
( ) Engineering. _
J Planning services? Jo~n
.....
-
~Fire,
( ) Maint..
-1--
I~m:
---.
Subject: Application No.:
CUP 96-008
Location:
200 E. Foothill Blvd
.'-:: -:.,~~
. .~ I,,:.';.;
t"~
"',,oJ
.; .. 1"'.......
:';';:0
:' MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTi\lE~T
/
V~
\Vater,
Project Description: Construction of a 24 hour drive-thru and walk-in pharmacy.
Please revie\1 the attached proposal. and comment on the following checked items and any other item{s) with which I'our
services may h"'e'concems or special knowledge: .
Pleas. respond'by:
Response: --;rA~ a /JL/V A-fJ Vf .II r/f/tQA7 0..//1/
A- f( {\rl Y; 13~ '(i -
'7(};). 4. (l09C/0/)/-';1II..,
· B~()J,~
t<-~ i (;/1 7 f 'i tJr:,l
.
( ) Dedications
( ) Legal description
( ) Traffic circulation
( ) Parkway width(s)
( ) Streetlights
( ) Tentative Parcel'Tmct Map contents
-( ) Final Map contents
( ) Street trees & plants
( ) Is the subject address serl'ed by a sewer line that is
tributary to n deficient Cit}' tntnk line~
( Location and design of drivewa)' and apron
( Encroachment into a special setback on:
Grading and drainage
Water sc:r\'ices
( ) Irrigation system
( ) Fire hydrants
(;II Backflow devices
()( Fire safety
( ) Occupancy limits
( ) Public safet}' and security
( ) Accessibility
( ) Compliance with Building Codes
( ) Signs
( ) Consistency with Redevelopment and
Revitalization Plans
( ) Other:
(/0.. Conditions of approval
Ir&' -?: 11
Ih.A. rfo,l...,<'1
r:'", (J
Cok
Date: ~ /L~ leu
I
.
.
~ , "I.
. J
W Iif.l
~ I '2 I
I
SAV-ON RALPHS MARKET I
MIXED RETAIL ' , on ...'
0 '" ...1
I ., .,.. -,
'" I
~..
C-1 & D C-2 & D
""-
1 ~
~ oil I
BANK :l: I
:l
-, 'k'" rrd 1
I
ISb:r?> 13!; '~ "l" 1'20 137 1%7.'
FOOTHILL .0
2 BLVD
o t'l ~a;o 40 (~ 40 1t'l~..:I 5I.1l4'_. 2(~ 40;.)0. 40 40 Ii 40 40 40
....'m '0' ~ <'2&'./ (.?/V (2/4,/ 222./
)t; 1 en r- ::l ~ III MED ~ :!l .,
MEDICAL OFFICE - '"
\u; ~ ....' .Ii ' ~~ OFFICES .n C 2::
'9 5 C-23 '2 z <S
w - Q Q Q ~1/ - Q
. .40 40140 0 ~'s ~ PHfARM~CY I 11
:l 4V 40 51,64 0404040~40
... .. 50 ALL~~Y
5~ 52 52 5'2 55.84 ~'l.52 50 50 50
15 IGo 17 18 /7 18 19 '20 '21 '2'2
GO ~. 0 O~ EO 0 R-1 cJ 0 0
f?SIJ (155) I) O&S) llff/) (ZP/) (2i1S/ t:!p,./ ( Z/S./ rrl7.) (221)
52 52 5'2. S7 S,84 5'2 G'2 50 50 50 50 SO
LAUREL <> AVE
..
52 53:J ,-,}'3v . lfk..1 55,84 C 52./Oe; 50 (')k.J ,.ljj./ d~ 50
('/4"""" (74' (:'.n:?.."I Z f2pp./ (;rp~./ (2217.1
0 0 0 0 0", 0 '0 0 0 Q 0 0
0 '" R-1
l"' w '" E
R-1 ... ~
I rn 13 1'2 II \0
~'2 en "7 ..7 c:a.AA "., ~~ ~A eA "^ e" .."
CUP 96-008
200 E.FOOTHILL BLVD.
SCAlE:1 "=1 00'
.
LAND USE AND ZONING
.
,
--
--
:==-
~-
.
;
.
! 13.
, .
--
-- --"
,
.
Q
<::==>11
I
,
,
,
~--
--.,
,
,
"
-.-
,
i
:
" ~ ;
- [ ---
--
:a
,--,
~~,
@~
,
:
,
,
:
'f:~ I
"
ils>
;----
----i-----
I
I
i
-
..-
F:..OOR p~"t"N
---
I
.
~-....
. .
.
.
=~2:1~
U5"'S11
1II.;cii:
~I!:u~~
Uc~5~.,
:ii8Mi
Ouz
".-2;
&u.~u....
!lc~!
!!~~
..
~
o
II:
.
,
! .
II!
v .
~ ~
1ih
: ;: I
U I
- I
f .c . 1
I
"
.
--
.0-
---
--.......
..-.#_.'-
--
--
I ,...___
..._"--
~..--=
. -..--
.----
---...
:::~_..-
-------
--
~~.a":,,, H"- e;':'".~
.
NCJIt'tWazv....~
-....-
~ e-~"'TIQN
~
;G:;
.;~-E;..f{':"T:3'i
~EI..fo''';T1,::)t.;
Pll'.-.-.
. .
aevA"OH~
7_
l!~Fl"'~.GO...oot~
e-.______
i!l=--=--=-~'=~
m-----_..__
1Bcz::.-,:':,-_
liJtoP....-....__-
6---...--......
I!J:;:'".....-::..
8-------
r;---.----
IB-....-.-......-_
(D-----
s-.,.----
.
I
.
.
.
liD 0"'-2'"
~,2:oi
O=--f:~l
i.I~=
..I!!-..~~
CO;:~
~a8\:i
~~~~:
u.::iuoo.
a:c~~
~I~~
..
15
l!l
..
.
f
I
In
fH~
~u
.
= :: :
t1 I
...
led
'.
.
~..E.~-.
__ ~"'~CN
--~-_.
--
==""~-=..
-'-~-
__-=-==~..o
::-::.-::.....-
--- -...
=::.:..~;;c'".::::-_
==-:.~_..--
--... -
.
I
i
---j--'- ---,---------
i ---~, ~--l'
i
i
.L I
q~-==--:r--~
i ;.
~.-1.
...:t:::""'.._~! '
'ii~._~0
" '
A!
.!
I
! I
J........._ t
r"---..t
i >> I
, I
T_L~~~_._----;---
-~..-
_~.._:r-"
__"':":0:1
I
i
i
i
i
,I
i
I
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
__L --'"'
..i ..-Tu
-,')
.>
,__J
.-c....J is
/ '
~-: r
~-~.~~,~.. .
: .;,
.:~/;-.. i--
'I~ " 'r-'-
. ,'.
,,. ,
: /,.'
I: ,. .!-
j'
"
I
'II
_____ I
. .~
le-
-,
I'
::
,--
.", .
~l
--"
.
--;;
.. .......
.,
,
-
-
r--
!~
I-
I
.
~\ ---So:=-
, :----=-..
t_ a=-
-
...-
~_.:,::==,'C;--
---:-...."=::-.-=--==-
IIIlfIIl
PRELIMINARY SITE $
_=::.."'::-__ FJ:r~
---=.-==--
[rr.-':.
. .
I
.
.
.1
..-- I
..u~:~: :
U....:... I
~.= ).:. I
%~~~~ :
o C;:c2~
K::t:="l"""
CW'A!e
.0__-
tU:~~=
;c5f
..i~.
..C~
IE .
.. !
ID
~
.
J
I
III .
. J
J ,~
~II
I
. . I
II t
,
... I
.
I A-
I .. 1
'.
.
.
.
~
Oal8 af Survey:
TAIL! ,
WALGREEN'S RX liXI"RESS S/T6 SURVEY'
,
12/17/84 ISlturdlvl . 51'''11
Llnealn 81vd,
City:
Anaheim
Crou 5~r..t: Magnolia AVI.
Job NI/mbtr; 473.94.001
Sldg. sq, I~./Seau;
',900
II NUMS!I'I O~ VEHICLes
SPACeS. '8
I AT 011 BEHIND AT 01'1 IEHINO
I TIME OROER WINDOW PICICIJ~ WINQOW PARl:EO'
":30 AM 1 , 2 3
";35 AM I 2
":40AM . 3
I ":45 AM , , 4
":50AM 4
,';55 AM , I 3
i , 2:00 PM , 3
! \1;05 PM 1 2
II 3
12;'0 PM
! '2:15 fir.! - 2
i :z
Ii '2:20 PM
2
Ii 12:26 PM
I , 2
; 12:30 PM ,
I 12:35 PM , "
i 12:40 PM , 6
r '2:46 PM 4
I .
'2:5'0 PM , 3
i '2:55 PM 3
':00 PM , 5
P.'~;no dtm'M inClud.. eult~lI\.rl .~~' Imolo"lIl.
.
3
;
:':':.~':J:-::': ta3=~..:3 ~ ..7;'l::':': ._.:-;
. _4 ~_ ...... ::..=.' ......~. _.~-;".:l'''~':'.,' ..,,""...~.... ..'....
TABU! 2
VlALOflEEN'S FIX EXPIIUS SITE SURVEY
Oale 0' Surviv;
12/17/94 ISatllfd'y)
SIl881:
L.incOln Blvd;
.
CIIY:
"1'I.I'I,;m
l:tD" Slrut: I.1lgllolll AV8.
BldO. 'Q. fl./Seml
1.900
Job Numb.r: 473.94.001
NUMBeR OF VEl-lICUS "
"
I SP"'CItS . 16
,A1'OA BEHIND AT OASEHINO
TIME OADeA WINO OW PIC/CUP WINDOW PARK EO'
4;30 PM 3 I
4135 PM 1 3
4:40 PM . 3
4:45 PM 4
4:50 PM 5
4:5$ PM 3
5:00 PM 3
~ 5:05 PM , 2
I 3
I 5:10 PM
I I 3
' 6:'$ PM
, , .
I mo PM 1 4
i 6:26 I'M 3
I 6:30 PM 2
, &:35 PM I 2
: '5:40 PM , 2
r
Ii 5:4:;"M 3
Ii I
I 5:50 PM 2
'r-
I 5,$,5 PM Z
I 6:00 PM, , 2
.
PII}(Jn; deman~ includu cUIIOn'",. .nd emOloyeu.
.
4
,
-:-:~.,=':':i~">:< '~~:3:-: :{~ ~ .::"7< :.:'r
,- .
,-
. .
.
.
.
.. ":\';1.- ez . Sc ~~~ l~F:1 e:\I~R:::K;:~N Di:vCO. !tiC.
~.=
I TABLE 3
WALGREEN'S ~X EXPRESS SITE sURVey
, .
Oale of SIINev:
1 a/20/94 (TII.ulay)
SIIUt:
Uncoln Bllld.
City:
8ldlj. c~. fI./Snm
Anaheim
CIon StrUt: Magnolia Alia.
'.800
Jol:l Numb.r: 473.94.001
r ,
NUMBER Q~ VEIolIC\.ES
f SPACES . IS
Ai OF. BEHINO AT QR BiMINg !
'rIME OROER WINDOW PlCICUP WINDOW PARKED'
;-
I , ':30 AM 3
-
i ":36 AM , .
":40 AM , ..
.
"'4$ AM 3
";50AM 1 :I
11:55 AM & ,
I 2:00 PM 4
I ' 2:05 PM 4
I 12.:10 I'M S
1'12:151'1.1 ..
II .
12:20 PM 1 5
'2:25 PM ,
I
12,30 PM 6
12:nPM 5
I 12:40 P/.I 5
,12,45 PM S
i 12:60 PM .1 3
1'2:s5 PM 6
'1 1,00 PM , S
,- .
I
\.'
p"klnf demand in:ludu :u'tomoll and emoloye...
5
.
- =
':'!. .:r..:~ .";"_ . .~.:==: ,=::.-. ~ . :-.~_ t :~.:i _ _. t.::
- ~ ~
.. JUI.. '12 '9.. eGo llPM c;vEFlGF/E:o. oe:VCO,INC.
1',7
,
. .
T AS..e 4
WALGREEN'SRX eXPRess SITE SURVEY
D)t~ of Suryev:
~ 2/20/S~ (T"ndtv)
Sl~nl:
Lil1C~11'l Blvd.
.
City:
Anaheim
Cron Str"t: Magnoll. "''oil,
BldO. aq, ~.IStlu:
1,900
Job Number: 473.94.001
Ii ,
NU/vIBEi'l OF Vel'llC:~ES
I SPACES . , s
AT OR 8iii1Nt) AT ClllliHlNO
TIME OFlOEFl WINOOW PICKUP WINDOW ~A~ICEo'
! 4:30 PM 5
,.. ~-
I ..,3.' PM S
, . .1 --
4:40 PM ., e
4:45 PM 7
.:&0 PM 6
I .:S! PM , 0\
,
, ~:OO FM I S
-
I I 6
I' 6:05 PM , -
) 5:'0 PM , ,
5:15 PM .
I .
, S:20 PM 5
, I G
, 6:26 PM
5:30 PM I "
I
5:3S PM I 8
I ,
! 5\0 PM I 7
,
, !
I 5
I $.46 PM --!----.
!~50 PM --
,
, 1 5
I ---
~ 5:55 PM I 3
I.~:oo PM ..
.
.
.
ParlUn; demend I/\Clueel ~ullomei. end erTl~loyeu.
6
,
-: -' =...:: --: ~
j .::J.::i:':.;2 _ . ;':'..:. ~ : .:;i
.
.
.
File No,: CUP 96-008
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 96-008
A Conditional Use Permit to operate 24 hour drive-thru and walk-in pharmacy
B. Location of Project:
200 E. Foothill Blvd.
Arcadia, CA 91006
. C, Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
Evergreen Development
2505 Canada Blvd. St. IA
Glendale, CA 91208
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
.
Date: August 12, 1996
Date Posted: August 14; 1996
. By~;J~ . .ft
slstant Planner
.
.
.
File No,: CUP 96.008
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-008
, 2, Project Address:
200 E. Foothill Blvd,
Arcadia, CA 91006
3, Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
Applicant& Lessee: Property Owner:
Evergreen Development Gary Barringer and the Lee R, & Ann Hammonds Trust
2505 Canada Blvd. 181 Colorado Place
Glendale, CA 91208 Arcadia, CA 91007
4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
5. Contact Person & Telephone Number:
John Halminski, Assistant Planner
(818) 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 ~hases of the project and any secondary.
support, or off.site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary,)
A Conditional Use Permit to operate a 24 hour drive-thm and walk-in pharmacy.
9. Other public agencies whose approvans required:
(e,g" penn its, financing, development or participationagreemehts)
City Building Services / City Fire Department / City Engineering Division I
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked 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
[ j Public Services
[ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Resources
[ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance .
.
DETERMINA nON
(Tg be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis ,of this initial evaluation:
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I frod that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
enviroiunent, there will notbe a significant 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 Signiticant
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
envirorunent, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all
potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
Envirorunental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Em, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are,imposed upon the proposed project.
jrlWv,
S i lUre
August 14 1996
Date
.
_John Halminski
Print Name
City of Arcadia
For
.
-3-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
File No,: CUP 96-008
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. 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 will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis),
.
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
operational impacts,
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there 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 from "Potentially SignificantImpact" 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 I5063(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 appropriate. 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 wiih 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 with jurisdiction over
the project?
(The proposed use will be required to comply with
the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency
with applicable environmental 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 drive4hru pharmacy which
is consistant with the surrounding land uses,)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g,.
impacts to soils or fannlands, 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
Woulclthe proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
(The proposed use'is a drive-thru pharmacy which
is consistant with the surrounding land uses.)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
Of indirectly (e,g.. through projects in an
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ )
[ )
[ )
[ )
[ )
[ )
File No,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ )
[ )
[ ]
[ ]
[ )
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ )
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[XI
[X)
[XI
CEQA Checklist
3/96
W ou Id the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrasrructure)?
(The proposed project is consistant with the zone
designation and general plan,)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
(The proposed project is consistant 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 within the vicinity
of an iaentified fault. However, all new
consrruction must compy with any applicable
building code requiimentil 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'groundfailure, including liquefaction?
(The site for the proposed use is within the vicinity
of an identified fault zone, however no such
hazards have been identified, including
liquefaction, in the vicinity of the identified fault
zone.)
d) Landslides or mudflows?
(The site for the proposed use is on flat land, and'
not'within an inundation area.)
e) Erosion, changes, in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
(The proposed project is consistant with the zone
designation andgeneral plan,)
t) Subsidence of the land?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
( I
[ 'J
File No,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ I
( I
[ I
( I
[ I
[ I
( I
( I
Less Than
Significant
Impact,
[ I
( I
[XI
[ I
[X]
[ ]
[ I
[ I
No
Impact
.
[XI
[XI
[ I
[XI
.
[ I
[Xl
[XI
[Xl
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
(The site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to subsidence,)
g) Expansive soils?
(The site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to expansion of soils,)
h) 'Unique geologic or physical features?
(No such features have been identified III 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?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, no
such changes'are included in the proposal.)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
(The site for the proposed use is not within an
inundation area,)
c) Discharge into surface willers or other alteration of
surface water quality (e,g" temperature, dissolved
oxygen, or turbidity)?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect surface waters.)
d) Changes in the amount of surface willer in any
water body?
(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?
(Based on a project-speCific screening analysis"the
proposal will not affect any currents or water
movements.)
t) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct,additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavlllions
or through substantial loss of ground water
recharge capability?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
File No.: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[]
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
No
Impact
[XI
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[XI
CEQA Checklist
3/96
Would the, proposal result in
potential impacts involving'
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposaf will not affect ground waters.)
g) A Itered direction or rate of flow of ground water?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
,
h) Impacts to ground water quality?
(Based on a prcijecHpecific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
i) Substantial ,reduction in the amount of ground
water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will nolaffect ground waters.)
S. AIR QUALITY
Would the proposa!:
a) Violate any air quality standard, or contribute to,an
existing'or projected air quality violation?
(The proposed use will be required to comply' with
the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality
Managemerit' District,)
b) Expose sensitive receptors 'to pollutants?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis the
proposal will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants.)
c) A Iter air movement, moisture, or temperature or
cause any change in climate?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will nolhave aily such affecis.)
d) Create objectionable odors?
(Based on.a project-specifi~ screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such affects.)
6. TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle, trips or traffic congestion?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
. [ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
..,
File No,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ J
.
No
Impact
[X]
[Xl
[X]
.
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUP 96-008
Potentially
. Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporllted Impact Impact
(The proposed project is consistant with the zone
designation and general plan.)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(The proposed project is consistant with the zone
designation,andgeneral plan, The location that has
not been identified as hazardous,)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
(The site of the proposed use is readily accessible
and the proposed use will not inhibit access to
adjacent or nearby uses.)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off.site? [ ] [ ) [ 1 [Xl
(There will be adequate on-site parking for both
the tenants and guests to serve the proposed use.)
. e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,
there are no existing or potential hazards or
barriers to pedestrians or bicyclists.)
l) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g.. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(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? [ 1 [ 1 [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals and birds)? [ 1 [ 1 [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impactsc)
. b) Locally designated species (e,g" heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have ,any such impacts.)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e,g., oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
d) Wetland habitat (e,g., marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)?
(Based on a project'specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
(Based on a project-specific screening, analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacl'i,)
8,ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
(The proposed project is consistant with the zone
designation and, general plan,)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
(Based ona project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and,theresidenl'i of the State?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
9. HAZARDS
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
(BaSed on a projecHpecific screening analysis. the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
File No,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
,Incorporated
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ ]
[ J
[ I
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ I
[ 1
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ J
No
Impact
.
[XI
[Xl
[XI
[Xl
.
[XI
[XI
[XI
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
-
FileNo,: CUP 96-008
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? [ 1 [ J [ 1 [XI
(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 [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screeniDg analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? [ ] [ 1 [ ] [X]
(Based OD 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 [ ] [ 1 [Xl
(Based Dn 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 [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
(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 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,. the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Police protection? [ ] [ 1 [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
. c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
File No.: CUP 96-008
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. w ill not have any such impacts,)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, .including roads? [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,.the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
e) Other governmental serviCes? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [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? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Communications systems? [ 1 [ 1 [ I [XI .
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
c) Loc~1 or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? [ ] [ 1 [ ] [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) Stonn water drainage? [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal,will not have any such impacts.)
t) Solid waste diSposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis" the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
g) Loc~1 or regional water supplies? [ ] [ J [ ] [X]
(Based ona project-specific screening analysis, the
propbsal will nothave any such impacts,)
13. AESTHETICS
Would,the proposal: .
CEQA Checklist
3/96
----
- -.*'-........
File N(l,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
. Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
0) 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. CUL rURAL RESOURCES
Would ,the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Bl1Sed on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such'impacts.)
. b) DislUrbarchaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Bl1Sed 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) ha\'e the potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cullural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on 0 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
]/96
Would the proposal result in
potentia' impacts' involving:
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
(Based on a projecHpecific screening analysis. the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a 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 or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate imponant examples of the major periods
of California 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
shon-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
(Based on a project,specifiC"Screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively 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-specific 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
tpetiering, program EIR. or other CEQA processes to
analyze any notedeffect(s) resulting from the proposal.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
( I
[ I
File No,: CUP 96-008
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ I
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ ]
[ J
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
.
[X]
[X]
[X]
.
[X]
[XI
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
,-'
.
FileNo,
Cup Q"r.lOf?;,
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Date Filed:
General Information
1, Applicant's Name: Rv....g,.....n n"",,'npm..nt Attn. ,lnhn T.nppr
Address: 2505 C~"d.. Blvd.. Suite lA. Glendale. CA 91208
2. Property Address (Location): 200 E. Foothill Blvd.
Assessor's Number: 5772-016-014 & 013
3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
Tnhn Tnp,::arJ F.upr~rppn Opvplnpmpnr (R1R) 2&O-R727
4.
List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
project, including those required by City, regional, state and federal agencies:
.
5, Zone Classification: C-2
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
Proiect Description
7, Proposed use of site (project description): 1 gOO SF. "inqle ,,~ilrv Dharmacv with two
covered drive-un windows and parkin~ for 12 automobiles
8, Site size: D 971 SF
, .
9. Square footage per building: 1. gOO SF
10.
.11.
Number of floors of construction:
One
Amount of off-street parking provided: 12 parkillg spaces including a Handicapped space
12. Proposedschedulingofprojectl'nn~t.."rtinn ~t",.t nf' IrQ7 rn"'p,..tinn~fQ7
13. Anticipated incremental development Build out in one Dhase
,
.-- .... ~- -
14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected: .
MiA
15. If commercial, indicate the type, Le. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation:
lIl"ighhnrhnnd pharm"cv with aoorox'. 540 SF of public sliles area. Hours: up to
24 hours. typically 9 AM to 9PM
16, If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
ilIA
17, If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
MiA
18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this
and indicate clearly why the application is required: .
CUP reouired due to the two drive",up windows
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items,checked yes
(attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
19.
Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
contours.
o
tJ
21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of p.roject.
0 ~
0 ~
0 e
0 a-.
E:I.R_
3{95
20, Change in scenic views or vistas'from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads,
22. Significant m:iourtts of solid waste or litter.
23. Change-in dust, ash, smoke; fumes or odors in vicinity.
-2-
.
.
.
-,"
YES
NO
24,
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
drainage patterns,
o ~
25, Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
o 9-
o ~
o ~
26, Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more.
27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
28. Substantial change.in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.).
o \a
29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc,).
o 'Gi1
30,
Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
D'~
Environmental Settin!!;
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.
32. ,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 of 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.
31.
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 correct e best of my knowledge and belief.
~/ ~/q t?
Dat
E,I.R.
3/95
-3-
...=
.
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
200 E. Foothill Blvd.
City of Arcadia
#31 - Description of Project Site: The project site currently contains an operating, full
service restaurant. The site contains a single story building ofapproximately 3,645 SF
built in 1949 and has been remodeled. The balance of the site obtains parking, The site
is fairly level and does not contain any significant plant or animal life, There do not
appear to be any cultural, historical or scenic aspects of the site. The restaurant that is
operating on the site has a liquor licensee and serves liquor in addition,to Mexican food.
It currently operates for lunch and dinner.
#32 - Description of Surrounding Properties: The site is bordered by a two story
medical office building on the east. The property is bounded by a 16' alley on the south.
South of the alley are single family homes that front on Laurel Ave" The alley is used as
access for the restaurant and medical office building as well as access for the single
family homes, To the west of the site, across 2nd Ave" is a single story medical office
building. To the north of the site is retail commercial space (Ralph's on the NEC and a
bank, Savon, Vons and a McDonalds drive-through restaurant on the NWC),
.
H:IFoothill'Z".Enyirofonn080296,doc
.