Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 CUP 95-008 DR 95-023 4-15-96DATE: APRIL 15, 1996 Inter-Com NO. 1 4-15-96 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJEOT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 & DESIGN REVIEW 95-023 (WALGREENS PHARMACY) ~ RECOMMENDATION That the City Council: . Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 96-36; and . Uphold the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 'and Design 'Review 95-023 by adopting Resolution No. 96-37, as submitted or revised. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this project, as this is an owner initiated project. The applicant has paid application fees to recover the cost of processing this application. BACKGROUND On March 11, 1996, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3419 approving a request to establish a pharmacy with drive-thru service and denying a request for a changeable copy monument sign located at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street (Attachment A). On March 18, 1996, the City received an appeal from Rudolf-Oswald Partners of the Planning Commission's action (Attachment .B). The appellants indicate that they believe the proposed use will have a negative impact on surrounding streets because of insufficient parking and congested on-site circulation due to inadequate drive-thru lanes. City Council Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 April 15, 1996 Page 2 Surrounding uses to the south include a medical office complex with a pharmacy (drive-thru service was also recently approved by the Planning Commission at this location). A fast food restaurant is located to the east. Retail ~commercial uses are located to the north across First Street and to the west across Newport Avenue. DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to establish a 1,976 square foot pharmacy with driVe-thru and walk-in services on a vacant property located at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street. The project site is approximately 0.41 acres in size and was previously developed with a service station. The site has been vacant for several years and is undergoing soil remediation for the cleanup of the previous undergrounD.gasoline storage tanks. Please refer to the March 11, 1996 P~anin~i Commission Report for a complete discussion of the proj~t~-d-et~ils (Attachment C). As part of the City review of this project a traffic analysis was prepared by RKJK Associates, Inc., to evaluate the adequacy of on- site circulation, queue length, parking and potential impacts to surrounding streets. The City's Transportation Engineer has reviewed and approved the study with respect to the content, methodology and analysis used, and has accepted the adequacy of the study's findings and conclusions. The traffic and parking study is included as an appendix to the Negative Declaration/Initial Study contained in the March 11, 1996 Planning Commission Report (Attachment C). In summary, the project is estimated to generate approximately 450 vehicle trip-ends per day, of which 45 trip-ends will be generated in the P.M. peak-hour. Since the business hours are 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M.; the use will not be open during the A.M. peak-hour. The anticipated project related traffic volumes can be accommodated within the planned arterial highways and local street systems. The additional trips generated will not significantly affect the volume to capacity ratio for either Newport Avenue or First Street, and the analysis indicates that the adjacent streets and intersection will continue to operate at Level of Service "A". City Council Report cuP 95-008 & DR 95-023 April 15,~ 1996 Page 3 At the Planning Commission meeting, the City's Transportation Engineer provided the following comparative data on traffic generated by the previous service station use and other uses permitted in the C-1 Zoning District. The data indicates that the proposed pharmacy will generate less traffic than the previous use and some other permitted uses within the C-1 District. PERMITTED USE TRAFFIC GENERATED service station (as previously developed) 780 vehicles/day 94 vehicles/ p.m. peak hour fast food 1400 vehicles/day 112 vehicles/ p.m. peak hour pharmacy 450 vehicles/day 45 vehicles/p.m, peak hour retail 100 vehicles/day 11 vehicles/p.m, peak hour The approved Traffic Impact Report also addressed the proposed on- site circulation and the adequacy of the queue length of the drive- thru lanes. An existing Walgreens Pharmacy was studied to evaluate the traffic generated by the drive-thru service. The report indicates that the demand at each window generally did not exceed two vehicles per five-minute observation period. Only once were there three vehicles queued at the pick-up window. It is anticipated that the queue storage length of two vehicles at each window should be adequate to accommodate drive-thru demand. The Planning Commission included a condition requiring the preparation of an updated traffic study if the City deems that a traffic problem exists on the subject site or adjoining streets as a result of inadequate on-site circulation. If the study indicates that there is inadequate traffic circulation, the property owner shall be required to provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. ' ' Parking is provided along the south property line and includes an angled parking.design to reinforce the one-way direction of travel. The Zoning Code requires a total of 10 parking spaces for this use, based upon a ratio of 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area (1976 sq. ft. + 200' = 9.88 spaces) and 10 parking spaces are provided. City Council Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 April 15, 1996 Page 4 PUBLIC COMMENT A total of 14 letters of opposition to this project were included as part of the Planning Commission Report. An additional 6 letters of opposition were received and are included as Attachment D. Most of the letters were from medical practitioners located within the adjacent medical complex to the south. The predominant areas of concern were adequacy of the drive-thru lanes, parking and the potential negative impact on surrounding streets. One letter from a Tustin resident identified a concern that this project would have a negative economic impact on the neighboring pharmacy. The City cannot restrict competition in the marketplace, particularly when the proposed use meets development standards, without modifying our land use regulations to include fiscal analyses. Our response to the public comments was included in the Planning Commission Report (Attachment C) . FINDINGS The proposed pharmacy use is permitted by right in the C-1 Zone; however, a Conditional Use Permit is required for the drive-thru service. In its consideration of this Conditional Use Permit, the City Council must determine whether or not the proposed drive-thru pharmacy will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing in or working in the neighborhood or whether it will be injurious or detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City. In considering its actions, the Planning Commission determined that: The proposed use can be accommodated on the subject property because there is adequate on-site circulation and queue length, as supported by the Traffic Study prepared for this project. . The use will not have a negative affect on surrounding properties or impact the availability of off-street parking. The pharmacy has provided adequate parking in compliance with the Tustin City Code and the drive-thru service will not create a demand for additional parking. Based upon the approved Traffic Study, the additional volume of traffic generated by this 'use can be accommodated on Newport Avenue and First Street. City Council Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 April 15, 1996 Page 5 . The use is compatible with the surrounding uses in t'hat there are other commercial uses that have drive-thru services in the immediate vicinity, including another drive-thru pharmacy approximately 100 feet away from the subject site and there will be no exterior amplification or noise generated from the use. CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in this report, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 96-37 upholding the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit 95- 008 and Design .Review 95-023. Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director SJP:br:cup95008.sjp Exhibits: Location Map Submitted Plans A - Commission Resolution No. 3419 & Minutes B - Lett.er of Appeal C - March 11, 1996 Planning Commission Report D - Public Comments Resolution Nos. 96-36 and 96-37 LOCATION MAP~/ ? / / / /, - .¥~., .. 14882 DON LAR~N SOUARE f'AR~'O LOAN ; 134.51 134.61 134.'~1 NO SCALE c- z O' I 3FIN3^¥ .L~IOdM3N 0 (--~, O~ 0, Z ©o 319N3AV IWOd~3N ~ ~ C 0 Z I-- W W Z I-- W W I-- W Z. I-- W _J W Z I-- W 0 0 THF~U Z 0 Z 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 '18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 RESOLUTION NO. ~3419 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 .AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023, AUTHORIZING THE 'ESTABLISHMENT OF A DRIVE-THRU SERVICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PHARMACY AND DENYING A REQUEST 'FOR'A CHANGEABLE COPY MONUMENT SIGN AT 13342 NEWPORT AVENUE. The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A® That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 was filed by Thomas Cox Architects on behalf of Walgreens Pharmacy to request authorization for the establishment of a drive-thru service in conjunction with' a pharmacy and a changeable.copy monument sign at 13342 NewpOrt Avenue, more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel No. 500-062-01. S~ That:the proposed use is allowed within the C- 1 -Retail Commercial District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Ce The subject property is located within the Town Center. Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to City Code Section 9299b, the Zoning' Administrator has forwarded action on Design Review 95-023 to the Planning Commission for consideration. The subject project has been found consistent with the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area Plan. E-e That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application on February' 26 and March 11, 1996 by the Planning Commission. Fe That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the drive-thru service applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general .welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the' property and EXHIBIT A 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 -17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3419 Page 2 improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) The proposed use can be accommodated on the subject property, providing for adequate on-site circulation and queue length as supported by the Traffic Study prepared for this project. 2) The use will not negatively affect surrounding properties or impact the availability 'of off-street parking in that the pharmacy has provided adequate parking in compliance with the Tustin city Code and the drive-thru service will not create a demand 'for additional parking. In addition, based upon the Traffic Study, t~e additional volume' of traffic generated by this use can be accommodated on Newport Avenue and First Street as currently improved. 3) The use is compatible with the surrounding uses in that there are'other commercial uses that have drive-thru service in the immediate vicinity, including another drive-thru pharmacy approximately 100 feet away from the subject site and there will be no outdoor speakers. 4) On-site traffic concerns have generally been mitigated through the separation of the drive-thru aisle from the on-site parking. 5) Off-site traffic concerns caused by the number of vehicles waiting in the drive aisle to enter the queuing aisle during peak hours ha~e generally been mitigated through the use of two windows, and a condition of approval requiring the implementation of additional mitigation measures should there be traffic impacts in the future. 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3419 Page 3 Ge That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the changeable copy monument sign applied for will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or. general welfare of the persons residing or Working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, and be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) The changeable copy sign is not consistent with signs typically installed for retail businesses and will create sign clutter along the Newport Avenue business corridor. 2) Changeable Copy ~igns are utilized by public or institutional uses such as churches and schools to provide information about activities or services.- The use of a changeable ~copy sign for advertising could encourage advertising specific brand names and pricing, both of which are prohibited by the Sign Code. He PurSuant to· Section 9272 of ' the Tustin Municipal Code, the Commission finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of Design Review 95-023, as conditioned, will not impair the orderly and .harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or-the .occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items: 1. Height, bulk and area of buildings. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. · e Type and pitch of roofs. Size .and spacing o'f windows, doors and other openings. ~ -1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3419 Page 4 ~ Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae. e Landscaping, parking area design and traffic circulation. 8. Location, height and standards of exterior illumination. · Location and appearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. 10. Location and method of refuse storage. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures t~ 'existing structures in the neighborhood. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to ~ existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 13. Proposed signage. 14. Development Guidelines and criteria as' adopted by the City CounCil. I · Je A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). That the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub-element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-element. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 to authorize the establishment of drive-thru service ~in conjunction with a pharmacy and denies the request for a changeable copy monument sign on the property located at 13342 Newport Avenue. 10' 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution Non 3419 Page 5 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the llth day of March, 1996. 'BARBARA REYES u Recording Secretary Chairwoman STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, BARBARA REYES, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary. of. the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3419 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the llth day of March, 1996. Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3419 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped March 11, 1996, on file with the. Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan. check if such modifications'are to be consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code. · (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued within eighteen (18) monthS of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway. Time extensions may'be granted if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days- prior to expiration. (1) 1.4 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director of Community Development. (1) 1.5 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities arising out of City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CEQA MITIGATION (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTIONS (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (7) PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL (1) - 2.1 At building plan check, submit three (3) sets of construction and site improvement plans in accordance with applicable Building and Fire Codes. Compliance with approved plans Shall be inspected by the Community Development Department during construction and prior to final inspection. (1) 2.2 The building shall comply in all respects with the Building Code, other related codes, City Ordinances, and State and Federal' Laws and regulationS~ (3) 2.3 Mechanical ventilation shall be provided based on the number of occupants. (3) 2.4 The tenant space, parking spaces, entrances to the building, path of travel from the parking area to the building, and sanitary facilitie~ shall be accessible to persons with disabilities. (5) 2.5 The applicant shall submit for approval.by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify:, the structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMps whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of. long-term maintenance responsibilities ,(specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. .(4) 2.6 The site will be .designed so that all parking area surface run-off is directed to and picked up by the storm drain system. (4) 2.7 The use of water conserving plumbing fixtures throughout the buildings should'be considered by the applicant. (5) 2.8 An addendum to the corrective action plan for soil remediation on this site shall be Provided to the Orange CountY Health Care Agency (OCHCA) that describes and justifies all modifications to the current remediation system on-site. This report must indicate: a) the locations of monitoring and extraction wells currently at the site; b) which wells will be abandoned; and c) where replacement wells will be located after site construction is complete. Any relocated equipment shall be approved Exhibit A Resolution' No. 3419 Page 3 by the Zoning Administrator and shall not be located within a required parking stall or drive aisle and shall 'be screened from view. Said addendum shall be approved by OCHCA prior to issuance of any permits for the project. (5) 2.9 The applicant shall obtain clearance from the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division upon completion of the soil remediation activities. SIGNS (4) 3.1 The monument sign shall be modified to eliminate the provisions for changeable copy. In addition, the monument sign shall be of a decorative design, using materials, colors, trim and details consistent with the architecture of the project. The sign shall include a routered opaque background flush'mounted. The specific sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. ~(4) 3.2 The primary wall sign shall incorporate the supplemental signage "Pharmacy" into the business identification sign. In addition, the wall signs shall be modified to include channel letters or routered opaque background with flush mounting. (4) 3.3 Complete sign plans shall be submitted which address all proposed wall, directional, and address signs. The sign plans shall' include dimensions, materials, colors, and method of illumination. The design, size, location, installation and maintenance of said signs shall be in compliance with the Tustin Sign Code. (5) 3.4 Opaque materials and signage shall not cover more than 25 percent of the aggregate area of all windows and doors of the pharmacy. SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS (4) 4.1 Provide exact details for exterior doors and window types on construction plans. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 4 (4) 4.2 Ail mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen shall be considered as an element of the overall design of the project and shall either blend with the architectural design of the building or be integrated into the landscape design. A dense type of landscaping could be utilized for screening. (1) 4.3' The stucco color shall be modified to be a warme~ color tan, with less grey tone. The roof tile shall be modified to eliminate the predominant yellow hues, either · by using a combination of tile colors or an alternate 'tile with more terra cotta color.. All final colors and materials to be used shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. All exterior~treatments shall be coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing' and clearly noted on submitted construction plans and elevations. (4) 4.4 Provide plans and details of' all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with'the .architecture of the building. Wall mounted fixtures shall be directed at a 90 degree angle directly toward the ground. All lighting shall be developed to provide 'a minimum of one (1) footcandle of light coverage, in accordance~with the City's Security COde. (4) 4.5 Ail exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the .building. (1) 4.6 Note on final plans that a six-foot-high chain linked fence shall be installed around the site prior to building construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the s~te for construction vehicles. (1) 4.7 Exterior elevations of the building shall indicate any (4) fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building and equipment heights. The building parapet shall be an integral part of the building design, and shall screen all roof mounted equipment. All roof- mounted equipment and vents shall be a minimum of six · inches below the top of the parapet. (4) 4.8 Ail roof access shall be provided from the inside of the building. Exhibit A' Resolution No. 3419 Page 5 (4) 4.9 No exterior downspouts shall be permitted; all roof drainage shall utilize interior piping, but may have exterior outlets at base of bUilding. (4) 4.10 Six (6) inch continuous concrete curbing shall be used through the parking lot, drive-thru aisle and adjacent to sidewalks, except where required to satisfy handicap access requirements. (4) 4.11 R6o~ scuppers shall be installed with a special lip device so that overflow drainage will not stain the walls. (4) 4.12 Indicate the location of all exterior mechanical equipment. Gas and electric meters shall either be enclosed within the building or boxed behind a screen wall designed to be consistent with the main building. (4) 4.13 Note on plans that outdoor storage is prohibited. (4) 4.14 The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Engineering Division a separate 24" by 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, for all construction within the public right-of-way. In addition, a separate 24" by 36" reproducible construction traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation, would be required. (4) 4.15 The applicant shall close the existing northern most driveway on Newport Avenue and western most driveway on First Street, due to their close proximity to the intersection. Removal of the existing curb ramp and construction of a new curb ramp per current City Standard No. 124 will be required for the new driveway on First Street. (4) 4.16 The Newport Avenue driveway shall be restricted to right turn in/out access. (4) 4.17 Sight distances at each access driveway shall be reviewed for compliance with Orange County'EMA Standard Plan 1117, ~.when landscaping, and improvement plans are prepared. (4) 4.18 On-street parking shall continue to be restricted adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue and First Street. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 6 (4) 4.19 If, at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a parking, traffic and a circulation problem exists on the subject property, then the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the proPerty owner to submit an updated traffic analysis prepared by the applicant's consultant, at no expense to the City. The updated analysis shall be submitted within the time schedule stipulated by the City. The property owner may delegate this responsibility, through lease negotiations, to any tenant operating under Conditional Use Permit 95-008. If the city deems there are traffic conflicts,, the property ~owner shall be required ~to provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community'~Development and Public Works Departments. Said.mitigation may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Modification of the driVe-thru lane alignment; be Elimination of one of the drive-thru windows to provide additional queuing;and, c. Construction of planter medians to separate and define vehicular access lanes. · Failure to adequately'respond to such a request and to implement mitigation measures'within the time schedules established shall be grounds for initiation of revocation procedures for Conditional Use Permit 95-008. LANDSCAPING, GROUNDS AND HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS (1) 5.1 The applicant shall submit for plan check complete detailed landscaping and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Submittal Requirements and consistent with the landscaping concept plan. Said plans shall be consistent with the existing landscape palette for the center. The applicant shall provide a summary table applying indexing identification to plant materials in their actual location.- The plant table shall list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc'. The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices (screened from view from right-of-way andon-site by shrubs), pipe size, sprinkler Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 7 type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment shall be provided. The plans shall show all propertY lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-waY areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, existing landscaping and walls and proposed new wall locations. The Department of Community Development may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity. Note on plans that adequacy of coverage of landscaping and irrigation materials is subject to field inspection at project completion by the Department of Community Development. (7) 5.2 The submitted landscaping plans at plan check shall reflect the following requirements: ae Shrubs shall be a minimum of 5 gallon size and shall be'spaced a minimum of 8 feet on center when intended as screen planting.. Be Ground cover shall be planted between 8 to 12 inches on center. Ce De When 1 gallon plant sizes are used, the spacing may vary according to materials used. Ail plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species and landscaping must be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. This will include but not be limited to trimming, mowing, weeding; removal of litter., fertilizing, regular watering, or replacement of diseased or dead plants. NOISE (1) 6.1 Ail construction operations, including engine warm up and deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance as amended, and may take place only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, unless the Building official determines that said activity will be in substantial conformance with the Noise Ordinance and the public health and safety will not be impaired, subject to application being 'made at the time the permit for the work is awarded or during progress of the work. No Sunday or holiday construction shall be permitted. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 8 (1)~ 6.2 Outside public address speakers, telephone bells, b~zzers and similar devices which are audible on adjoining properties are prohibited. FIRE AUTHORITY (.5) 7.1 Prior.to the issuance of permit, water improvement plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Chief to ensure adequate fire protection and financial security is posted for the installation. The water system design, location of valves, and the distribution of the fire hydrants will be evaluated and approved by the Fire Chief. Show all fire hydrants within 300 feet of the property. (5) 7.Z Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, a letter and plan from the developer shall be submitted to ~nd approved by the Fire Chief. This letter and plan shall'state that water for fire fighting purposes and an all weather fire access road shall be in place before any combustible materials are placed on the site. (5) 7.3 Prior to the issuance of any certificates of use .and occupancy; all fire hydrants shall have 'a "Blue Reflective Pavement Marker" indicating its location on the street or drive per the Orange County Fire Department Standards. On private property these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. (5) 7.4 The following notes shall be provides on the site plan: Se Fire Department Final Inspection Required. Schedule inspection 2 days in advance. Phone (714) 832-1011. be Locations and classifications of extinguishers to be determined by the Fire Inspector. C® Storing, dispensing or .use of any flammable and combustible liquids, flammable and compressed gases and other hazardous materials shall comply with Uniform Fire Code Regulations. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 9 de Se Building(s) not.approved for high piled combustible storage. Materials in closely packed piles shall not exceed 15 feet in height, 12 feet on pallets or in racks and 6 feet for plastics and some flammable liquids if high stock piling, comply with UFC, Art. 81 and NFPA Std. 231, 231C' and 231D. Plans of modifications to or new fire protection, detector or alarm System(s) shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. USE RESTRICTIONS (1) 8.1 The owners shall be responsible for the daily maintenance and up-keep of the facility, including but not limited to trash removal, painting, graffiti removal and maintenance of improvements to ensure that the facilities are maintained in a'neat and attractive manner. All graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours of a complaint being transmitted .by the City to the property owner. Failure to maintain said structures and adjacent facilities will be grounds for City enforcement of its Property Maintenance Ordinance, including nuisance abatement procedures. (5) 8.2 Ail loading vehicles shall be parked in designated areas and loading shall be completed during non-peak hours.' (3) 8.3, Ail building locking devices added to the premises shall meet those requirements as set forth in the Building Security Code. *** 8.4 The subject project shall be limited to a pharmacy.. Any other accessory uses or services (i.e. photo finish) shall be prohibited unless an amendment to this Conditional' Use Permit specifically authorizing th~ desired service is approved by the Zoning Administrator. FEES (1) 9.1 Prior to issuance of any permits, payment shall be made of all required fees, as may be in effect at the time of permit issuance, including, but not limited to: ae Ail applicable plan check and permit, fees to the Community Development Department, based on. the most current schedule, as may be amended prior to permit issuance. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3419 Page 10 B. New development fees to the Community'Development Department in the'amount of $.10 per square foot or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. Co The applicant shall 'be required to pay applicable Transportation System Improvement Program, Benefit Area A Fees, based upon the current fee schedule in' effect at the time building permits are issued. De Payment of any applicable East Orange County Water District'fees will be required. Ee Major thoroughfare and bridge fees to the Tustin Public Works Department in the amount of $2.84 per square foot of floor area, or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. (1) 9.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject. (5) project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $25.00 (twenty-fiye dollars) to enable, the City to file the. appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development. Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be signifiCantly lengthened. M I N U T E S TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Marjorie Kasalek, Chairwoman Lou Bone, Vice Chairman Nanette. Lunn Howard Mitzman David Vandaveer Staff Present: Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney Daniel Fox, Senior Planner Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Doug Anderson, Traffic Engineer Barbara Reyes, Recordihg Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS: No one from the audience addressed the Commission. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minu~es of the Februa~-~{ 26, 1996 Planninq Commission Meetinq. Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Lunn seconded, to approve the FebrUary 26, 1996 Planning Commission minutes. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Kasalek abstained due to her absence at last meetinq. APPLICANT: PUBLIC HEARINGS -- 2. Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Desiqn Review 95-023 (Continued from the meeting of February 26, 1996) WALGREENS RxPREsS c/o THOMAS COX ARCHITECTS OWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: · REQUEST: NEWPORT & FIRST PARTNERS · 13342 NEWPORT AVENUE RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-i) TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT pROJECT AREA AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT A 1,976 SQUARE FOOT PHARF~ WITH DRIVE-THRU SERVICE 'AND A CHANGEABLE COPY MONUMENT SIGN. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION - That the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3418; and 2. Approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 by adopting Resolution No. 3419, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Sara Pasha!ides, ASsociate Planner Commissioner Bone complimented staff on the thorough traffic study. He asked if there was any problem with the left turn onto the site going west; if there was a concern about crime as people would exit the pharmacy; and, if the soil studies were public record. Staff stated that there was adequate room for a left turn and that Police Department comments did not indicate any concern with crime related to the proposed use. Staff stated that soil remediation was already taking place and that the County would not release the site until the tests were completed. Commissioner Kasalek asked staff to compare this use versus potential uses that could be developed at this location. Douc Anderson, Traffic Engineer, stated he had done a comparison based on a six pump gas station. The average daily trips would be approximately 780 vehicles per day; the ~peak hour impact at 12% would be approximately 94 vehicles in'the p.m. peak hour versus 45 vehicles for the proposed use. A fast food use with a drive-thru would produce approximately 1400 vehicles per day. The Public Hearing opened at 7:17 p.m. Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants, representing the Walgreens Company, addressed concerns including, traffic, stating there was an adequate bypass and traffic will not back up onto Newport Avenue. He also stated that there will be sufficient parking. The Walgreens representative concurred with the traffic mitigation proposed by staff. The Company would like 'to have a changeable copy sign, and does not believe there is an issue of crime and drugS. The soil remediation is interim and expecte~ to be completed by mid-summer. Commissioner Bone asked if all the Walgreens stores had changeable copy signs. Re also asked if two employees would be sufficient to man the store efficiently and if this store was. to contain a "One- Hour Photo"-service. Barr~ Burnell stated that the signs were considered a merchandising feature and most of their Rxpress stores did have them. Their experience shows two people could run the store efficiently and this store will not have a "One-Hour Photo" service. .. CommissionerVandaveer asked for an example of what might appear on the changeable copy sign. Edward Achuck, RXpress Area Manager, stated the sign is used for advertising specials and displaying notes on health care issues such as'flu vaccinations and cholesterol screenings. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Page 3 Christopher Kernan, attorney, representing the owners of the Medical Building at 13362 Newport Avenue. Requested an adequate amount of time to review the soil and. water remediation and corrective actions plans. He asked if any provision was being made for a barrier to prevent vehicles from crashing into' their building. Commissioner Kasalek asked why the soil issue has not been a concern until this time. Christopher Kernan, stated is has been a concern but they have not had the money to get the testing done. He stated that the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) indicated that they do not release the site but that the City of Tustin will. Staff stated that the OCHCA is the lead agency and they outline the details and standards for'cleanup. Since the site is vacant, the City will not issue a building permit until the applicant submits a revised corrective action plan which reflects the proposed .development of the site. The applicant would deal directly with the OCHCA. The City of Tustin does not have any jurisdiction as to- how the soil is cleaned up but will not issue a permit to develop the property until the OCHCA indicates that development could proceed without impeding continued progress of remediation. Dr. Roberta Dornan, Dentist, 13372 Newport Avenue, feels her practice will be negatively affected by the potential traffic problems. Robert Isackson, Village Properties, stated he has all the soil information concerning the former Unocal site contamination and that the full remediation will be complete by mid-summer. Dr. Zahrowski, Orthodontist, 13372 Newport Avenue, feels it is important for his patients to get to his office on time since he sees a number of them within a short period of time. , He stated he was also a pharmacist and does not feel that the drive-thru operation will be efficient enough to keep the traffic from backing up. Dr. Richard Sandam, 13372 Newport Avenue, stated that ingress and egress to this site is a problem already and has witnessed many vehicle accidents at this location. Dr. Joseph.A. Cruz, 13372 Newport Avenue, is new to the area and is trying to build his practice. Dr. Cruz stated that this development may keep patients away that otherwise might 'use his 'services. Michael Rudolph, Rudolph-Oswald Partners, owner of the property adjacent to the subject site made a one hour long presentation to the Commission. Mr. Rudolph stated that his partnership has been a community pharmacy for approximately 15 years and the partnership has invested over a million dollars into this location. He stated that the partnership owns seven other locations so the issue is not that of competition but of public safety, parking and ingress/egress. Their site is only 100 feet from the proposed drive-thru. He stated that he only had 48 hours to respond and presented charts with photos and information which he feels shows that- traffic will back up because it is impossible to fill a prescription in 2-3 minutes as Walgreens states. He objected to the proposed changeable copy sign; the fact that most patients will not leave the site but will park and wait; and,. that the location Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Page 4 will require at least five employees who would also take up parking spaces. He feels that the mitigation proposed by staff will not correct potential problems. Commissioner Bone stated that about six months ago the Rudolph ~Oswald Partnership asked for and received a Conditional Use Permit for a drive-thru window. At that time representatives of the partnership stated it would take 2-3 minutes for a prescription to be filled and that there was plenty of space for parking ~nd that there would never be more than three cars waiting. Michael Rudolph stated that he did not recall that point and they do not have a queuing problem. The Public Hearing closed at 8:35 ~p.m. Douq Anderson, stated that the intersection of First and Newport is not the busiest intersection in the City as Mr. Rudolph stated. As identified in the traffic study, the roadway and intersection is operating at more than an acceptable level of service. He concurs with the findings and recommendations of the traffic study as prepared by a competent California Certified Traffic Engineer. Commissioner Mitzman asked how this traffic generation compared to other permitted uses which could occupy the site. Douq Anderson stated that this use would generate less traffic than other permitted uses such as a gas station or fast food. Commissioner Kasalek asked if this conclusion could also apply to the parking issue. Douq Anderson affirmed that the use would generate less traffic and parking than other permitted uses. Dan Fox, Senior Planner, stated that the initial study was presented to the adjacent property owner 21 days prior to the public hearing in response to comments' received at the last public hearing. The Traffic Engineer reviewed the rebuttal and the information included in the Commission packet. In accordance with appropriate procedures the staff report was available to the public at the same time as for the Planning Commission. Conditions of the Conditional Use Permit allow the Planning Commission to further monitor if problems do exist and also allow revocation if satisfaction is not achieved. Staff is comfortable with the 'mitigatiOn measures proposed. Commissioner Lunn stated that she does not like the idea of the changeable copy sign. Commissioner Mitzman stated that the site will not remain vacant but will be developed. He believes this proposed use is better for the surrounding area than another use permitted for the site. He agrees with the traffic study and.thinks the changeable sign is a' bad idea. He does not have a prdblem with the blue accent trim. He does not like the idea of a chain link fence which is proposed to be installed around the remediation equipment and would prefe~ a more aesthetically pleasing screening. Commissioner Vandaveer ' is against the changeable sign, has no problem with the blue strip and also does not like the idea of a chain link fence. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1996 Page 5 Commissioner Bone supports the changeable sign, believes the design of the proposed use is good and does not think there will be a traffic problem. He approves of the.blue accent stripe. Commissioner Kasalek agrees with the consensus of the use and traffic issues. She does not think that the soil remediation is an issue, does not like the Changeable copy sign, and, is not in favor of the blue accent stripe. Conunissioner Mitzman moved, Vandaveer seconded, to approve the Envirornnental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3418 as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. Conunissioner Mitzman moved, Vandaveer seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 by adopting Resolution No. 3419 revised as follows: Condition No. 2.8 shall have the following sentence added, "Any relocated equipment shall be approved by the Zoning Aclministrator and shall not be located within a required parking stall or drive aisle and shall be screened from view." Condition 4.3 shall eliminate the sentence, "The royal blue building accent colo~ shall be eliminated and replaced with a~ earth tone color." Condition 8.4 shall be added to read, "The subject project shall be limited to a pharmacy. Any other accessory uses or services (i.e., photo finishing) shall be prohibited unless an amendment to this Conditional Use Permit specifically.authorizing the desired service is'approved by the Zoning Administrator." Motion carried 5-0. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director, advised the opponents of the project of the seven day appeal period. -- 3%-~ Amendment To Desiqn Review 94-033 & Variance 96-002 (S~aan'dard Pacific) APPLICANT/ OWNER: STANDARD PACIFIC ATT: PEGGY ROBERTS LOCATION: TRACT 14188, WEST SIDE OF TOWNSHIP DRIVE AT RAWLINGS WAY ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL; EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) REQUEST: 1. TO MODIFY THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MODEL COMPLEX FOR THE PROJECT; AND 2. TO REDUCE THE ON-SITE MODEL COMPLEX PARKING REQUIREMENTS FROM 19 SPACES TO ZERO SPACES AND PROVIDE PARKING OFF-SITE ON. TOWNSHIP DRIVE Recommendation - That the Planning Commission approve Amendment to Design Review 94-033 and Variance 96-002 by adopting Resolution No. 3421, as submitted or revised. Presentation: Dan Fox, Senior Planner Commissioner Mitzman asked if the City has ever approved a model complex without a dediCated parking lot and if the Homeowners Association were notified of this project. Staff stated that the Homeowners Association, all of the current residents and the Master Association had been notified. The Public Hearing opened at 9:00 p.m. Rudolph-Oswald Partners 13400 ~'ewport Avenue Tustin, CA 92680 March 18, 1996 RECEIVED { 8 {996 CO~I~~ DEVELOPMENT City of Tustin City Council 300 Centennial Way 'Tustin, Ca 92680 RE- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR WALGREENS RXPRESS Dear Gentlepeople- Please be advised that the above-named property owner wishes to appeal the March 11, 1996 decision by the City of Tustin Planning Commission allowing a conditional use permit and construction of the above-named project. Our concern is with traffic safety and congestion at the corner site of Newport Ave. and First Street and also its direct effect on ingress and egress on adjacent properties. We are having the traffic analysis re-evaluated and expect it will take approximately 4 to 6 weeks to have this completed. · Sincerely, Michael Rudolph Rudolph-Oswald Partners EXHIBIT B ITEM NO. 2 Report to the Planning Commission DATE: MAI~CH 11, 1996 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023 APPLICANT: WALGREENS RXPRESS C/O THOMAS COX ARCHITECTS 3242 HALLADAY, SUITE 204 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 OWNER: NEWPORT & FIRST PARTNERS 562 MISSION STREET, SUITE 201 SAN FRANCISCOt CA 94105 LOCATION: 13342 NEWPORT AVENUE ZONING: RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-1) TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). REQUEST: AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT A 1,976 SQUARE FOOT PHARMACY WITH DRIVE-THRU SERVICE AND A CHANGEABLE COPY MONUMENT SIGN. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3418;' and 2. Approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 by adopting Resolution No. 3419, as submitted or revised. BACKGROUND This item was continued from the February 26, 1996 Planning Commission meeting to provide time for review of public input. The applicant is proposing to establish a 1,976 square foot pharmacy with drive-thru and walk-in services on a vacant property located at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street. The project site is approximately 0.41 acres in size and was at one EXHIBIT C Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 2 time developed with a service station. The site has been vacant for several years and is currently undergoing soil remediation for the cleanup of the previous underground gasoline storage .tanks. On March 27, 1995, the Planning Commission considered and approved Use Determination 95-002 finding that pharmacies with drive-thru services are allowed within the Retail Commercial (C-i) Zoning District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is now proposing specific site development plans and requesting approval of a Conditional Use permit in conformance with the Planning Commission's use determination. In addition, the applicant is proposing a changeable copy monument sign which also requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Sign Code Section 9494(b)(1). The subject property is located within the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area which requires Design Review approval by the Zoning Administrator. Since the proposed project also includes a specific discretionary request which requires action by the Planning Commission, the Zoning Administrator has referred the Design Review to the Planning Commission for concurrent consideration in accordance with City Code Section 9299b. Surrounding uses to the south include a medical office complex with a pharmacy which recently obtained approval by the Planning Commission (CUP 95-010) to install drive-thru services. A fast food restaurant is located to the east.~ Retail commercial uses~are located to the north across First Street and to the west across Newport Avenue. .- A public hearing notice on this project was published in the Tustin Weekly for the February 26, 1996 .Planning Commission meeting. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified of the hearing by mail. No additional notices were sent for this meeting, since the item was continued to this meeting. Notices were posted on the site, at City Hall and at the Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report for this item. Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 3 DISCUSSION Project Des6ription The proposed building would be located on a vacant site at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street and would be setback approximately 47 feet from Newport Avenue and 22 feet from First Street. The building would be setback approximately 44 feet from the south and east property lines. The required building setback from side and rear property lines within the C-1 Zoning District is zero feet. A 20 foot wide perimeter landscaped area adjacent to Newport Avenue and a 20 foot wide perimeter landscaped area adjacent to First Street is propoSed. Additional perimeter landscaping is proposed adjacent to the south and east property lines. Access to the site is currently provided by two driveways from each street. The applicant proposes to close the driveway closest to the corner on each street. One-way circulation is'proposed around the building in a counter-clockwise, direction. Due to the one-way circulation system, vehicles entering from First Street must immediately make a right turn. Likewise, customers wishing to exit the site onto Newport Avenue mus{ first travel around the building. There is a by-pass lane located on the north side of the building, providing access from First Street'to the parking area and the drop-off window. The applicant has indicated, in most cases, the prescription is phoned into the pharmacy and filled in advance of the patient .arriving. Of the patients who drop off prescriptions themselves, most leave the site and return later to pick-up the Order. The pick-up transaction, including consultation with the pharmacist, takes an average of 2-3 minutes. Two drive-thru windows are proposed for the project. The applicant has indicated that the south side window is for prescription drop-offs and the north side window is for order pick-ups. The drive-thru lanes are approximately 11.5 feet wide, with a storage length for two vehicles each. Parkinq and Circulation As part of the City review of this project a traffic analysis was prepared by RKJK Associates, Inc., to evaluate the adequacy of on- site circulation, queue length, parking and potential impacts to surrounding streets. The City Transportation Engineer has reviewed and approved the study with respect to the content, methodology and analysis used, and has accepted the adequacy of its findings and Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 4 conclusions. The traffic and parking study is identified as Attachment B, and is included as an appendix to the Negative Declaration and Initial Study, which are marked Attachment A. In summary, the project'is estimated.to generate approximately 450 vehicle trip-ends per day, of which 45 trip-ends will be generated in the P.M. peak-hour. Since the-business hours are 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M.; the use will not be open during the A.M. peak-hour. The anticipated project related traffic volumes can be accommodated 'within the planned arterial highways and local street systems. The additional trips generated will not significantly affect the volume to capacity ratio for either Newport Avenue or First Street, and the analysis indicates that the adjacent streets and intersection will continue to operate at the same Level of Service "A". The approved Traffic ImPact Report also addressed the proposed on- site circulation and the adequacy of the queue length of the drive- thru lanes. An existing Walgreens Pharmacy was studied to evaluate the traffic generated by the drive-thru' service. The report indicates that the demand at each window generally did not ~exceed two vehicles per five-minute observation period. Only once were there three vehicles queued at the pick-up window. It is anticipated that the queue.storage length of two vehicles at each window should be adequate to accommodate drive-thru demand. A condition has been included requiring the preparation of an updated traffic study if the City deems that a traffic problem exists on the subject site or adjoining streets as a' result of inadequate on-site circulation. If the study indicates that there is inadequate traffic circulation, the property owner shall be required to provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The Traffic Impact Report identifies that access to the site.should be restricted to right turns in/out at the Newport Avenue southerly driveway. The Newport Avenue northerly driveway and the most westerly driveway on First Street should be eliminated due to their close proximity to the intersection. The easterly First Street driveway should provide full access. The plans currently submitted by the applicant reflect the conditions recommended by the Traffic Impact Report. Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 5 Parking is provided along the south property.line and includes an angled parking design to reinforce the one-way direction of travel. The Zoning Code requires a total of 10 parking spaces for this use, based upon a ratio of 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area (1976 sq. ft. + 200 = 9.88 spaces), and 10 parking spaces are provided. Architecture Proposed development plans indicate a modified Spanish style architectural theme with stucco walls, multi color S-tile roof, precast concrete columns at the drive-thru canopy, stucco column details, stucco window surrounds and brick wainscot around the building. While the architectural style and roof line is not a traditional "Spanish Style", the materials and colors can be reflective of this architectural theme. The building is a single- story and proposed to be approximately 23 feet in height. The drive-thru lanes would be covered, by a solid canopy with a pitched roof element. The proposed building colors include a tan stucco and tan brick. The roof tile is multi-colored and includes yellow,' beige and terra cotta. The building accent trim around the roof eave, windows and doors is proposed to be royal blue in color. The proposed materials and architectural form would generally be compatible with the surrounding buildings to the north and south which use earth tone split face block and slump stone block. A material sample· board will be available at the March 11, 1996 Planning Commission meeting. While a variation in color is desirable and often adds to the "Early California" theme of the Town Center Redevelopment Area, the use of yellow and beige in the roof tile and the use of royal blue trim would not be considered consistent. A condition has been included for the use of an alternative color for the building trim and roof tile. The building trim should be earth tone. The roof tile should be either another tile with no yellow and a "flashed" appearance or a combination of two or three tiles, each of a separate shade of terra cotta to create a blend effect. Public Security At the previous meeting, the Planning Commission questioned the security of a drive-thru pharmacy and whether or no~ such use will' encourage an increased crime activity. The Tustin Police Department has reviewed this application and determined that a drive-thru pharmacy is not susceptible to the higher crime rates commonly 'associated with drive-thru fast food uses. The drive-thru pharmacy does not have a high volume of cash payments (like a fast-food use) Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 6 since many orders are paid by insurance or through the use of a prescription card. In addition, drug,abusers do not typically know the pharmaceutical name for the drugs and could easily be handed a fake substitute. The most 'common type of prescription crimes involve persons who forge the prescription or have obtained a doctor's prescription for an addictive drug. Conditions have been included to ensure that site lighting, window and doors meet the requirements of the City's Security Ordinance. Landscaping A conceptual landscaping plan has been included with the development plans. A 20 foot wide landscaped planter would be provided adjacent to Newport Avenue. A 10 foot wide landscaped planter would be provided adjacent to First Street. These landscaped areas would include a minimum three (3) foot high berm to screen the drive-thru lane. The perimeter streets~ape treatment includes the use of 24-inch box Brisbane Box trees. The parking lot trees include the use of 15-gallon. BriSbane Box trees. Additional landscaped planters are proposed adjacent to the east and west elevations. Rhaphiolepis Indica and T~xanum shrubs and Star Jasmine groundcover would'be used throughout the site. All plantings and irrigation would be required to comply with the city's Landscaping and.Irrigation Guidelines. Signs The applicant is proposing a total of three wall signs 'and one monument sign for business identification and two directional signs. The primary business identification sign is proposed to be 72 square feet in size and located on the west elevation facing Newport Avenue. Two 25 square foot secondary business identification signs are proposed for the south and north elevations. These signs are consistent with the Sign Code requirements for the proposed project. However, a 16 square foot supplemental sign stating "Pharmacy" is proposed on the west elevation. This sign must be incorporated into the business identification sign. The business identification sign and any supplemental signs cannot exceed an aggregate of 75 square feet for the west elevation. The aggregate area proposed for the west elevation of the building is 88 square feet which exceeds the maximum permitted by Code. The signs are proposed to be internally illuminated white cans. To'be more consistent with the design theme of the area, staff recommends that the 'signs be modified to be channel letters or a routered opaque background flush mounted type of sign. rather than a sign can attached to the building elevation. A condition has been added to require the signs be Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 7 redesigned and submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. The monument sign is proposed to be a located at the intersection, perpendicular to Newport Avenue and measures a total of 30 square feet in size and 6 feet in height. The Code permits a monument sign with a maximum.height of 6 feet and a maximum size of 32 square feet. The proposed monument sign not only includes business identification but also incorporates two lines of changeable copy signage. The Tustin Sign Code requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for changeable copy signs. The applicant believes a changeable copy sign is a vital part of their business and feels the sign is justified because there is another business (Executors Escrow) at the southwest corner of Newport Avenue and Irvine Boulevard that also has a reader board sign. While changeable copy signs can provide information to the public, the use of such signs has been limited to public and quasi- institutional uses such as churches. The use of such signs for commercial businesses to advertise products, specials and prices can add to sign clutter, are difficult to read from the street and reduce the effectiveness of other signs in the vicinity. The sign at Newport Avenue and Irvine Boulevard is a legal non-conforming sign that was installed many years ago prior to adoption of the current Code. As a result of the anticipated' street widening project at this intersection, that sign will likely be removed. Staff is not able to support the request for changeable copy and has included a condition of approval to eliminate the two lines of changeable copy with the redesign of the monument sign to be · approved by the Community Development Department. PUBLIC CONCERNS Staff received several letters from surrounding property owners and tenants identifying concerns with the potential impacts from this ~project (Attachment C). The applicant had an opportunity to review these' comments and respond to the concerns in a letter dated February 21, 1996 (Attachment D). The general items of concern, are outlined and discussed below. Issue: The on-site circulation is inadequate to accommodate the drive-thru service. Response: The City's Transportation Engineer has reviewed the public input and applicant,s response and has determined that the Traffic Study prepared, for this project accurately eValuated the on-site circulation. The Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 8 proposed use of a dual-window system, one for prescription drop-off and one for prescription pick-up and the by-pass lanes provide for ease of traffic flow. The proposed condition requiring further analysis and implementation of mitigation measures provides for additionalproject review and the requirement for on-site modifications if there is a problem, with on-site circulation. Issue: The stacking lane is not adequate to accommodate the volume of traffic utilizing ~the drive-thru service. Response: The traffic study provided specific comparative. information based upon a drive-thru pharmacy which is an acceptable method of analysis when there is inadequate transportation industry information. Since drive-thru pharmacies are a relatively new use, the City's TransportatiOn Engineerconcurs with the methodology used to evaluate the queue length and has determined the drive-thru'~lanes to be adequate to serve the use. Again, a condition has been added to the project requiring additional analysis if queue length is a problem and modification to the stacking distance may be required. Issue: The proposed project will generate a significant volume of traffic which will reduce the level of service on adjacent streets. Response: The approved Traffic Study indicated that the proposed use will generate 450 vehicle trip-ends -per day which represents approximately 0.8% of the traffic capacity on Newport Avenue and 0.4% of the traffic capacity on First Street. Due to the minimal traffic'contributions by this project, the City's Transportation Engineer has determined that the existing roadway system can adequately' accommodate the project related traffic. Issue: There is ihadequate parking for the proposed pharmacy. Response: The Tustin City Code requires a total of one space for every 200 square feet of floor area for retail uses. Since'there is no separate standard for a~pharmacy use, the rate of 1/200 has been applied to this pharmacy. A total of ten spaces are required by Code and ten spaces are provided. The City cannot require more parking than required by the Code for a permitted use. The drive-thru service may reduce the parking demand by providing an alternative access to the business. Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 9 Issue: The architectural design of a Walgreens RXpress is not compatible with the "Early California" theme of the Newport Avenue business corridor. Response: The typical Walgreens RXpress store constructed in several other locations within Orange County. is not the same design proposed for the Tustin location. In response to initial staff comments, the applicant modified the architecture to include stucco walls, stone colored brick wainscot, variegated S-tile roof, stucco columnS and window surrounds and a lowered roof line. As previously mentioned, the proposed roof color is not . consistent with the "Early California" theme and should be modified to eliminate the predominate yellow hues. A condition has been included for alternate roof'colors to be approved by the Community Development Department. Issue: The changeable copy monument sign is not appropriate for this type of business. Response: Staff is not supporting the request for'a changeable copy monument sign. A condition of approval has been added to this prOject requiring the elimination of changeable copy and for the redesigned monument sign to be approved by the Community Development Department. FINDINGS - The proposed pharmacy use is permitted by right in the C-1 Zone; however, a Conditional Use Permit is required for the drive-thru service and the changeable copy sign. In its consideration of this Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission must determine whether or not the proposed drive-thru pharmacy and changeable copy monument sign will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing in or working in the neighborhood or whether it will be injurious or detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City, as evidenced by the following findings: Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 10 DRIVE-THRU SERVICE 1) The proposed use can be accommodated on the subject property, providing for adequate on-site circulation and queue length as supported by the Traffic Study prepargd for this project. 2) 3) The use Will not have a negative affect on surrounding properties or impact the availability of off-street parking. The pharmacy-has provided adequate parking in compliance with the Tustin City Code and the drive-thru' service will not create a demand for additional parking. Based upon the approved Traffic Study, the additional volume 'of traffic generated by this use can be accommodated on Newport Avenue and First Street. The use is compatible with the surrounding uses in that there are other commercial uses that have drive-thru services in the immediate vicinity, including another drive-thru pharmacy apProximately 100 feet away from the subject site and there will be no exterior amplification or noise generated from the use. CHANGEABLE COPY MONUMENT SIGN 1) The changeable copy sign is not consistent with the type of signs typically approved for retail businesses and may create sign clutter.along the Newport Avenue business corridor. 2) The City has traditionallY approved changeable copy signs for public or institutional uses such as churches and schools to provide information about activities or services. Approval of this sign would set a precedent for other retail businesses desiring such signs. The use of a changeable copy sign for advertising could encourage adVertising specific brand names and pricing, both of which are prohibited by the Sign Code. Planning Commission Report CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 March 11, 1996 Page 11 CONCLUSION That the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 authorizing the establishment of a drive- thru service in conjunction with a pharmacy, and deny the proposed changeable copy monument sign, subject to the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 3419, as submitted or reVised. Sara J~./ P~shaIides Associate Planner Daniel AICP Senior Planner SJP:br:cup95-08. sp Attachments: Location Map Submitted'Plans A - Negative Dec and Initial Study B - Traffic Study dated 12-22-95 C - Public Comments D - Applicant Response Resolution Nos. 3418 and 3419 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714) 573-3105 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: Project Location: Project Description: Project Proponent: Lead Agency Contact Person: Telephone: ~ 7~-3/,~o~ The community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustin's procedures regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby finds: That there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant effects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said Mitigation Measures are included in Attachment A of the Initial Study which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The Initial Study which provides the basis for this determination is attached and is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of Negative Declaration and extends for twenty (20) calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary. eevmw e aIOi 4:00 os Date 7/./¢~ ' - ~s~;;e-~ Sh;ngleton - - . Co--unity Development Director NEGDEC. PM5 3704.A ATTACHMENT A/ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centetmial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714) 573-3105 INITIAL STUDY Ae BACKGROUND Project Title: Walgreens Pharmacy Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 Lead Agency Contact Person: Sara d. Pashal 5 des Phone: (714) Project Location: Southeast corner Newport Avenue and First Street 573-3122 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Thomas P. Cox, Architect 3242 Halladay, #204 Santa Aha, Ca. 92705 General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Commtini ty £nmmerci a 1 C-1 Retail COmmercial Att: David Sheego§ (714) 557-4666 Project Description: Conditional Use Permit 95-008 is a request to construct a 1976 square foot pharmacy with drive-thru services and site improvements. Surrounding Uses: North Office/commercial East Restaurant South Of fi ce West Comme rci al Other public agencies whose approval is required: [1 Orange County Fire Authority ~ Orange'County Health Care Agency [] South Coast Air Quality Management District City of Irvine City of Santa Aha [] Orange County EMA [] Othei- 1 , B. ENVIRON1MENTAL 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 in Section D below. I~] Land Use and Planning [~1 Hazards WI Population and Housing [2 Noise WI Geological Problems [2 Public Services WI Water [2 Utilities and Service Systems [] Air Quality [2] Aesthetics ~ Transportation & Circulation [--I Cultural Resources [] Biological Resources O R~creatibn ~ Energy and 1Vfineral Resources [2 Mandatory Findings of Significance Ce DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE . DECLARATION x~411 be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a sign/ficant effect on the environment, there xvill not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheets have been added to the project. A NrEGATIVE 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. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately ana132ed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" Or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be 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 significaht effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in tiffs case because all potentially sign/ficant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project Printed Name Date Title D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: [23 Earlier analyses used: Available for review at: City of Tustin Community Development Department 1. LAND USE & PLANNING- Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a Iow-income or minority community)? 2. POPULA.TION & ][lOUSING - Would the proposal: . a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or ex-tension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? · d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact [2] [2] El 0 El [3 [2] 0 0 [2] 0 [3 [3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 El 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: . e a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change 'in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curt,es or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)7 c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists7 f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, watei-borne or air traffic impacts7 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? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? c) l_x>cally desigfiated natural communities (e.g., oak fOrest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans7 b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner7 c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region7 [51 O O O [51 [51 O 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E] 0 0 E] 0 C~ 0 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)? b) Possible interference with emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or p,otential health hazard? d) Exposure 9f people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: 11. 12. a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? PUBLIC SERVICES - [~rTould the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government sen,ices in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other government sen, ices? UTILITIES & 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? b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm xvater drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional water supplies? 13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal: . a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? Potentially Significant' Impact Potentially Sign i fi ca,,t Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E] 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E] 0 E] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E] 0 0 0 0 .0 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - I4buld the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources7 c) Have the potential tO cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area7 15. RECREATION - Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 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 x~dldlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to.drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communit3; reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) D6es the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental g6als? 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 projects). d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless g~itigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o o o me EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Please refer to AttaChment A for an evaluation of the environmental impacts identified in Section D above. INITSTUD. PM5 3702A , ~ ATTACHMENT A EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 & DESIGN REVIEW 95-023 WALGREENS PHARMACY BACKGROUND The proposed project is a request for: 1) a conditional use permit to authorize a drive-through pharmacy, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9235c(m) and Use Determination 95-002; 2) a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 940463, allowing a changeable copy monument sign to provide identification for the proposed business; and 3) a design review to authorize construction of a 1,976 gross square foot pharmacy and site improvements. The project site, an approximately 0.41 acre parcel, is located on the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street. The site was at one time developed with a service station. The site has more recently been vacated and is currently undergoing remedial action for the underground storage tanks that provided gasoline for the service station. The remediation has been monitored by the Orange County Health Care Agency., Environmental Health Division - Hazardous Materials Mitigation Section. Surrounding uses to the site.include a bank across First Street to the north, a fast food restaurant to the east, commercial uses across Newport Avenue to the west and a medical office project to the south. LAND USE & PLANNING Items a' throuqh e - "No Impact"- The subject property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Community Commercial. The subject property is zoned Retail Commercial (C1) and is included within the Town Center Redevelopment Project Are~. On March 27, 1995, the Planning Commission considered and approved Use Determination 95-002 finding that pharmacies with drive-thru services are allowed within the Retail Commercial (C-i) Zoning District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project would not result in alterations of present' land uses in the vicinity. Although the site is currently vacant, a gasoline service station was previously operated at the subject site. The request to establish a drive-thru pharmacy on the site would continue to allow retail and commercial uses. The proposed pharmacy and drive-thru would be oriented to serve the surrounding residential and commercial neighborhood. Sources: Submitted Plans ~ City of Tustin General Plan and Zoning Code Field observations Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: None required. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 2 o POPULATION & HOUSING Items a throuqh c - "No Impact": The proposed project is on a site previously developed with a gasoline service station and is surrounded by commercial and office development. The proposed development would not result in any direct increase in population in that no additional dwelling units would be created. This small scale project would be designed to meet the needs of the existing residents and businesses of the communitY. The project would have no impact on the location, growth, distribution or density of the population in the surrounding area. Sources: Submitted Plans City of Tustin General Plan and Zoning Code Field observations Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. , GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS Items a, d and e - "No Impact": The site is relatively flat in its topographical features. The proposed modifications to the site would involve minor grading activity to prepare the site for the proposed new construction. The site will not be impacted by any landslides, seiche, tsunami, volcanic action, 'erosion, or subsidence since none of these geologic'features are present on-site or 'in the vicinity. The subject site was previously developed with a gasoline service station, which has been vacated and demolished. Items b, c, f throuqh i - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": According to the City of Tustin General Plan there are no Aquist-Priolo zones on or near the site. However, the site. is subject to seismic shaking as a result of the site's proximity to regional fault lines such as the Newport-Inglewood fault, as is all of Southern California. Tustin is subject to expansive soils and liquefaction due to the high ground water table in the area. However, common construction practices such as removal and recompaction of the site soil and remedial grading'will mitigate any potential impacts from any existing expansive soils encountered. Since the site was previously used as a gasoline service station, the soil has been contaminated by the underground gasoline storage tanks. The site is currently undergoing soil Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 3 remediation to clean the soil and eliminate the potential water-quality impacts. The remediation has been monitored by the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division - Hazardous Materials Mitigation Section. A comprehensive discussion of issues regarding soil contamination/remediation on the site are found.under Item 4. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitoring Required': The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: A. The applicant would be required to submit a soils report to the Building Division prepared within twelve (12) months prior to Building Permit 'Plan Check. B o The applicant would be required to submit grading plans identifying the scope of work at Building Permit Plan Check. In addition, all structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic · design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. Ail work shall be done in conformance with the Uniform Building Code, Grading Code and G~ading Manual as required by the Building Official. C ° Ail mitigation measures identified in .Item 4 below related to the soil remediation activities on the site would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project. WATER Items c throuqh i - "No Impact"- The subject site was previously graded and developed as a gasoline service station and is not located near any standing or moving bodies of water. As a result, the amount of snrface water and direction of water movement will~ not change. Items a and b - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitiqation Incorporated": As proposed, the surface areas of the project will drain into the existing storm drain system. It is not Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 4 anticipated that this project will substantially contribute to the drainage flow. However., a Water Quality Management Plan administered by the City of Tustin and the Regional Water Quality Control Board would be required to mitigate and minimize runoff into the storm drain system. Any~ water deposited into the sanitary sewer system for treatment shall be in compliance with the?range County Sanitation District requirements. The site is currently undergoing remedial action for the underground .storage tanks that provided gasoline for the service station. There exists a soil/ground water remediation system on the subject site, which is monitored by the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division. It is anticipated that soil remediation activities on the property would be completed prior to construction of this project. Once remediation is complete, the Agency has determined that no further action relative to the underground tanks is necessary. Source: Field Observations Tustin Community Development Department Tustin Public Works Department Orange County Sanitation District Regional Water Quality~Control Board. Orange County Health Care Agency Mitiqation/Monitorinq: The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: Ao The applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify: the structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMPs whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 5 B o C . m o E o F . The site Will be designed so that all parking area surface run-off is directed to and picked up by the storm drain system. Ail grading and drainage plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Tustin's Building Division and the Public Works Department to confirm compliance with Drainage Area Management Plan and Construction Standards for Private. Streets, Storm Drains and On-Site Private Improvements prior to construction. Ail landscaping irrigation shall be designed to consistent with the City's Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines which includes the use of landscaping timing devices to ensure watering .efficiency. The use of water conserving plumbing fixtures throughout the buildings should be considered by the applicant. The applicant shall obtain clearance from the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division upon completion of the soil remediation activities. . AIR QUALITY .. Items a, c and d - "No Impacts": The proposed project is a pharmacy with a drive-thru facility. The project would not result in substantial air emission or deterioration of ambient air quality, nor would it alter air movement, moisture, temperature or cause any changes in climate, or create objectional odors. Item b - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The construction of the new structure may result in short term pollutants such as dust particles which will be emitted into the air. Conditions of approval will be required for the project to minimize construction activity dust generated as part of this project. Sources: Submitted Plans Field Observations Tustin Community Development Department Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 6' Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: The site will be required to comply with grading plan approvals with regard to dust control, which requires the applicant to apply water to the site as specified in the Grading COde and 'Grading Manual. This will be monitored by the Building Division when construction commences. . TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION Items c throuqh q - "No Impact"- .The proposed project includes construction of a 1,976 square foot pharmacy with drive-thru service and 10 on-site parking spaces. The Zoning Code requires atotal of 10 parking spaces, which are provided on-site. Based on review of plans and additional technical studies, the project will not impact traffic safety, emergency access, demand for new parking, pedestrian circulation, or alternative modes of.transportation. Items a and b - "Potentially Significant unleSs Mitiqation Incorporated": The development plans submitted to the City by the applicant for the proposed project reflect the ultimate right-of-way configuration of Newport Avenue and First Street. The site plan'review and traffic analysis performed for this project were. also based upon the ultimate configuration of the site. As the site is currently vacant, any new development would generate incremental traffic impacts, which', when considered cUmulatively, will impact the City's circulation system in this area. The City's roadway system, as identified in the Orange County MPAH (Master Plan of Arterial Highways) and the City's General Plan Circulation Element, is designed to accommodate traffic associated with the ultimate build-out of the City of which this site is a part. Newport Avenue is classified as a Primary(Augmented) arterial in the City's General Plan and in the Orange County MPAH. At its current configuration of four lanes, Newport Avenue, in the vicinity of this project, currently carries 22,400 vehicles per day of which 12,000 are in the northbound direction adjacent to this project site. First Street is classified.as a Primary arterial west of Newport Avenue in the City's General Plan Circulation Element. First Street is not classified east of Newport Avenue, adjacent to the site. First Street, east of Newport Avenue currently carries 5,300 vehicles.per day. The average daily~trips for..First Street west of Newport Avenue is 19,800 vehicles. Both Newport Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 7 Avenue and First Street have a capacity of 37,500 vehicles per day and operate at a Level of Service "A". ,Although the site is currently vacant, with the exception of soil remediation equipment, there is an asphalt access drive located along the easterly 25 feet of the property. This drive is used for servicing the soil remediation operation and provides access to the rear portion of the adjacent fast food restaurant to the east. Implementation of this plan will permanently close off this access to the adjacent parcel with landscaping and raised curbs. The fast food restaurant has two driveways onto First Street, which provide adequate ingress and egress to the parking area and 'restaurant facility. The elimination of the additional access to the rear of the site as part of this development, proposal will not have a negative impact to the on-site circulation of the fast food business. The applicant has indicated that there are no access easements across the subject property that would require the driveway remain open to the adjacent parcel. The site is located on the southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street. Access to the 'site.is currently provided by two driveways onto each street. The applicant's plans indicat'e that the one driveway on each street which is closest to the corner will be permanently closed. The two remaining driveways are proposed for ingress and egress. Since the on-site circulation is designed to require vehicles to travel in a counter-clockwise direction around the building, vehicles entering from First Street must immediately make a right turn. Likewise, customers wishing to exit the site onto Newport Avenue must first travel around the building. There is a by- pass lane located on the north side of the building, providing access from First Street to the parking area and the drop-off window. The project includes two drive-thru windows; the one on the south side of the building is for prescription drop- offs, and the window on the north side is for picking-up an order. The drive-thru lanes are approximately 11.5 feet wide, with a storage length for two vehicles. The parking area along the south property line includes angled parking spaces to reinforce the direction of travel. The applicant has prepared a Traffic Impact Report for the project which was reviewed and approved by the City of Tustin Engineering Division which is included as Attachment B to this Initial Study. In summary, the project is estimated to generate approximately 450 vehicle trip-ends per day, of which 45 trip-ends will be generated in the P.M. peak-hour. The use Attachment A - 'Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 8 will not be open during the A.M. peak-hour. The anticipated project related traffic volumes can be accommodated within the planned arterial highways and local street systems. It will not significantly affect the volume to capacity ratio for either Newport Avenue or First Street. Analysis indicates that the adjacent streets and intersection will continue to operate at the same Level of Service "A" with project traffic. The Traffic Impact Report also reviewed the proposed on-site circulation and the adequacy of the queue length of the drive- thru lanes. To obtain data for this study the current traffic volume and circulation was evaluated at a similar Walgreens located in the City of Anaheim. The report indicates that the demand at each window generally did not exceed two vehicles per five-minute observation period. Only once were there three vehicles queued at the pick-up window, and that is unusual. ~It is anticipated that the queue storage length of two vehicles at.each window should be adequate to accommodate drive-thru demand. If, at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a traffic problem exists on the subject site or adjoining streets as a result of inadequate on-site circulation, then the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the property owner to submit an updated traffic analysis, at no expense to the City. If.said study indicates that there is inadequate traffic circulation, the property owner shall be required to provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Said mitigation may include the measures included under the mitigation section below. The Traffic Impact Report identifies that access to the site should be restricted to right turns in/out at the Newport Avenue southerly driveway. The Newport Avenue northerly driveway and the most westerly driveway on First Street should be eliminated due to their close proximity to the intersection. The easterly First Street driveway should provide full access. The plans currently submitted by the applicant reflect the conditions recommended by the Traffic Impact Report. The subject property is located within the Transportation Systems Improvement Program (TSIP) Benefit Area A which was estabIished to fund and provide for various circulation improvements to benefit properties within the benefitted area Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 9 as a resUlt of new development. ~ Based upon the TSIP Program, the applicant would be required to pay applicable fees to mitigate cumulative impacts. Based on the information contained in the Traffic Impact Report, it is determined that the proposed project will not have significant traffic impacts upon the circulation system and will not have a significant impact to the area in the form of cumulative negative circulation impacts. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin community Development Department Tustin Public Works Department Traffic Impact Report, dated 12-22-95, prepared by RKJK Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: .The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: Ao The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Engineering Division a separate 24" by 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, for all construction within the public right-of-way. In addition, a separate ~24" by 36" reproducible construction traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation would be required. m . The applicant shall be required to pay applicable Transportation System Improvement Program, Benefit Area A Fees, based upon the current fee schedule in effect at the time building permits are issued. C o Close the existing northern most driveway on Newport Avenue and western most driveway on First Street, due to their close proximity to the intersection. m o The Newport Avenue driveway shall be restricted to right turn in/out access. m o Sight distances at each access driveway shall be reviewed for compliance with Orange County EMA Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 10 .. .Standard Plan 1117, when improvement' pans are prepared. landscaping and F o On-street parking shall continue to be restricted adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue and First Street. Go If, at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a parking, traffic and a circulation problem exists on the subject property, then .the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the property owner to submit an updated traffic analysis prepared by the applicant's consultant, at no expense to the City. The updated analysis shalll be~submitted within the time schedule stipulated by the City. The property owner may delegate this responsibility, through lease negotiations, to any tenant operating under Conditional Use Permit 95-008. If the City deems' there are traffic conflicts, the property owner shall be required to' provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Said mitigation may include, but not be limited to, the.following: a. Modification of the drive-thru lane alignment; b . Elimination of one of the drive-thru windows, to provide additional queuing;and, C , Construction of planter medians to separate and define vehicular access lanes. Failure to adequately respond to such a request and to implement mitigation measures within the time schedules established shall be grounds for initiatio~ of revocation procedures for Conditional Use Permit 95-008. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a-e - "No Impact": The subject site is located within an urban area and is developed with a former service station. The site is free from any unique, rare or endangered species of plant or animal life. The proposed project would introduce landscape and specimen trees on to the site in confQrmance Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 11 with the requirements of the City of Tustin's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines. Ail landscaping will be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance with the City's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines. Source: Field Observations Proposed Development Plans Mitiqation/Monitorinq: None Required. o ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES Items a and c - "No Impact": The proposed project will not conflict with any adopted conservation plans nor will it result in the loss of availability of known mineral resource. Item b - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The proposed project would result in the construction use of materials that are non-renewable. However, the usage will be minimal given the scale of the project. The proposed project would not result, in any "significant" change in the current use of energy given the scale of new development but will require the renewal of services since the site is vacant. The applicant should consult with the various utility companies which would provide service to the development to incorporate energy conserving systems and design features into the project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin Community Development Department Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Compliance with all provisions of Title 24 shall be required'with regard to energy conservation prior to building permit issuance. o HAZARDS Items a, b and e - "No Impact"- The proposed use as a drive- thru pharmacy would not create conditions that negatively affect' human health. The proposed project would not result in significant hazards (i.e. explosion, hazardous materials spill, interference with emergency response plans, etc.) Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 12 Items c and d - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The proposed drive-thru pharmacy will not create any health hazards or expose people to existing sources of potential hazards. The site is currently undergoing soil remediation to .remove contaminants left from underground gasoline storage tanks. The applicant will-be required to obtain clearanCe from the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division prior'to issuance of building or grading permits. All mechanical and electrical equipment associated with the facility would comply with Uniform Building and Fire Codes. SOurces: Submitted Plans Uniform Building and Fire Codes Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Ail construction shall be in accordance with applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes. Such compliance shall be'verified during the plan check process prior to the issuance of any building permits. All hazardous materials shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with all Orange County Health Care Agency - Environmental Health Division, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. See mitigation under Item 4 regarding soil remediation. 10. NOISE Item b - "No Impact": The proposed project is a freestanding pharmacy building with drive-thru service and~would not expose persons to severe noise levels. The amount of traffic generated by the project is minimal and will not add' significantly to the existing ambient noise. The operation of a pharmacy will not generate noise. Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The proposed project would add new noise sources into the area as the property is.currently vacant. As currently designed, there are no' speakers proposed in conjunction with the drive-thru windows. The development of the project will result in short term construction noise impacts and a long-term increase in the. ambient noise levels in and~around the project site. Given the existing ~noise levels in the area generated by vehicles on the surrounding street system (Newport Avenue and First Street) the proposed project is not expected to impact the ambient noise levels in the area. Ail noise sources will be required to conform to Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 13 the City's Noise Ordinance, which applies to commercial zones at a standard level of 60 dBA, 24 hours per day. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Ail development related noise generated shall be in acCordance with the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance which, in part, limits noise generation to a maximum of 60 dba and restricts construction hours, which would be enforced by the Community Development Department and Police Department. In addition, a condition of approval has been included requiring any intercom speakers for the drive-thru service to comply.with the Noise Ordinance. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Items a and b - "Potentially Significant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": Since the project site is vacant, any development would require the services of the Fire and Police Departments. The City of Tustin Police Department has identified the need for visibility into the site for security measures and the need to reduce the opportunities for graffiti and vandalism. The applicant has provided a landscaped berm along the two street frontages to a height of three feet, with an additional twelve inches of shrubs above. With this height berm and due to the location of the building setback from the berm, there will be adequate visibility into the building from off-site. Site and .building lighting are proposed .to illuminate the parking and access drives, the drive-thru windows and front walkway. Items c throuqh e - "No Impact": It is not expected that the project would create significant demands for additional service on schools, parks, maintenance of public facilities or other governmental service. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 14 Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: The projeCt landscape and grading shall be designed to provide ~ security surveillance into the .project. Adequate lighting and window and door hardware shall be provided in conformance with the citY's Security Ordinance to deter vandalism and theft[ The development plans shall be verified for compliance at Building Permit plan check. 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a through q - "No Impact"- The project site is located within an existing commercial area with all utilities available to the site. Sanitary sewer, storm drain and water capacities required for the project are existing and have been designed to accommodate commercial projects on this parcel, such as the previous service station facility, are therefore adequate to serve'the proposed project. The proposed project would not require the need for additional utilities to serve the site. Sources: Field' Verification Submitted Plans Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: None required. 13. AESTHETICS Item a "No Impact": The proposed project is not located on a scenic highway nor will it affect a scenic vista. The project is surrounded withsimilar commercial developments and will be compatible in design and scale. Items b and c - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": As proposed, the pharmacy and drive-through facility would consist of an approximately 1,900 square foot building, two drive-through aisles, 10 on-site parking .spaces, a trash enclosure, enclosed dish antenna, one monument sign and landscaped planting areas. Due to the highly visible location of this site within the Newport Commercial Corridor and the Town Center Redevelopment Area, the architectural design and appearance of the project is important. Proposed development plans indicate a modified Spanish style architectural theme with stucco walls, multi color S-tile roof, precast concrete columns at the drive-thru, stucco Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 15 column details and window surrounds and stone-colored brick wainscot around the building. While the architectumal style and roof line are not traditional "Spanish Style", the materials and colors can be reflective of this architectural theme. Conditions of approval will be included to require final color and materials to be reviewed and approved during building plan check. Landscaping is proposed consistent with the ~City's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines; including landscape screening of parking areas and the drive-thru lane adjacent to Newport~Avenue and First Street. Landscaping would also be provide through out the parking lot, adjacent to the buildings and adjacent to the south'and east property lines. The applicant is proposing ~a monument sign which not only includes business identification but also incorporates two lines of changeable copy signage. The Tustin Sign Code requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for changeable copy signs. While changeable copy signs can provide information to the public, the use'of such signs has been limited to public and quasi-institutional uses such as. churches. The use of such signs for commercial businesses to advertise products, specials and prices can add to sign clutter and reduce the effectiveness of other signs in the vicinity. The project site is currently 'vacant. The proposed project will be required to provide adequate lighting which would add new lighting into the area to serve its operations during business hours. Ail new exterior lighting would comply with the City of Tustin Security Ordinance. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures related to the architecture, materials, col.ors, landscaping and site modifications would be included in the conditions of approval to ensure that the facility does not negatively affect the existing surrounding neighborhood. Compliance with all conditions shall be verified during the plan check process prior to the issuance of any building permits. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 16 The applicant shall provide details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a .photometric study showing the location and anticipated distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures. Ail. new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the building. Wall mounted fixtures shall be directed at a 90 degree angle' directly toward the ground. All lighting shall be developed to provide a minimum of one (1) footcandle of light coverage, in accordance with the City's Security Code. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Item a throuqh d - "No Impact": The proposed project is a '.pharmacy with drive-thru service. The subject property is not located within the City's Cultural Resources Overlay District, .nor are there any identified cultural, historic or archaeological resources identified on or around the site. The project will have no impacts on cultural resources. Source: City of Tustin Historical Resources Survey Tustin Community Development Department Field Verification Submitted Plans Mitiqati°n/Monitoring Required: None Required. 15. RECREATION Items a and b - "No Impact"- Since this project is a commercial development to provide support for residential neighborhoods, there are no impacts on recreation. The project is not located in proximity to recreational facilities and will have no impact on quality of recreation opportunities in the community. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts CUP 95-008 & DR 95-023 Page 17 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a-d - "No Impact": The project will not cause negative impacts to wildlife habitat, nor achieve any short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, nor have impacts which are potentially individually limited but are cumulatively considerable, nor will the project cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. Source: As stated above Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: As stated above. SJP: CUP95008. ENV WALGREENS RXPRESS SITE SPECIFIC TRAFFIC STUDY IREVISEDI Tustin, California ,.% ATTACHMENT B .~T ~ .'~. ~,1%~~, ~n ~. ROBI~RT KAHN · JOHN KAIN ~ ASSOCIATI=S INC. December 22, 1995 WALGREEN COMPANY Mr. David Erck, AIA Manager of Architecture Facilities Planning and Design c/o Richard S. Coen, AIA 200 Wilmot Road Deerfield, IL 60015 Subject: Waigreens RXpress Site Specific Traffic Study (Revised) Dear Mr. Erck: The firm of ROBERT KAHN, JOHN KAIN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (RKJK) is pleased to submit to the WALGREEN COMPANY this revised site specific traffic study for the Walgreens RXpress. At the request of'the City of Tustin, a site specific traffic evaluation has been prepared to address the local traffic circulation and .parking impacts with respect to the proposed project. Based upon this review, the project can be accommodated within the planned circulation system, if the recommended improvements are implemented. RKJK is pleased to provide the Walgreens RXpress site specific traffic study to the WALGREEN COMPANY. If you have any questions regarding this review or need any further information, . please do not hesitate to give a call at (714) 474-0809. Sincerely, ROBERT KAHN, JOHN KAIN & A~~--~TES, INC. R°bert Kahn, P'E' - ~/~?': M0. 08.~5~all ~: Principal ~ EXP. ~2/3~/~? ~ il Senior Associate TRANSPORTATION PLANNING - GIS - TRAFFIC/ACOUSTICAL ENGINEERING 4101 Birch Street, Suite 100 · Newport Beach. C..\ 92660 · Phone: (714) 474-0809 - Fax: i714) 474-0902 WALGREENS RXPRESS SITE SPECIFIC TRAFFIC STUDY TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA (REVISED) Prepared for: WALGREEN COMPANY Mr. David Erck, AIA Manager of Architecture Facilities Planning and Design c/o Richard S. Coen, AIA 200 Wilmot Road Deerfield, IL 60015 Prepared' by: ROBERT KAHN, JOHN KAIN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4101 Birch Street, Suite 100 Newport Beach', CA 92660 Robert Kahn, P.E. Carl Ballard December 22, 1995 JN:735-95-001 RK:CB:kgd/5425 TABL~ SECTION_ INTRODUCTION FINDINGS TRAFFIC RECOMMENDATIONS ................. · . · · · · · · · · · · . EXISTING CONDITIONS ........ ' ........................... Study Area Street System .................. Existing Average Daily Traffic .............. Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Existing Arterial Highway Plan ............................. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ...................... Parking Requirements ................ Trip Generation ................... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Project's Trip Generation Trip Distribution ................ · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · TRAFFIC IMPACTS .................. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Trip Assignment .......................... Existing Plus Project Average Dali Traffic ' Existing Plus Project Intersection Capacity Utilization Queuing Analysis · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Traffic Assessment ....................... · · Conclusions .................... ' ........... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 8 8 11 17 19 19 19 19 23 26 26 26 26 33 33 34 APPENDICES LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION ............................ A TRAFFIC COUNT WORKSHEETS EXISTING ICU CALCULATIONS eeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeeeeeeeeeee B C WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY ....... D EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ICU CALCULATIONS ................... E WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING'SURVEY .............. F STANDARD PLAN 1 1 17 ................................... G LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A C D G M N PAGE LOCATION MAP .................................. 2 SITE PLAN ..................................... .. 3 EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS ..................................... 9 EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ............... 10 EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ........ 15 EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ........ 1 6 CITY OF TUSTIN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY PLAN .............. 18 PROJECT OUTBOUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION ................ '24 PROJECT INBOUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION ; ................ 25 PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) ..... , ......... 27 PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES , ....... 28 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) .... 29 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 31 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 32 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 4 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION , CITY OF TUSTIN PARKING RATES ...................... PARKING REQUIREMENTS ............ . ............... PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ......................... EXI.STING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION PAGE 12 20 21 22 3O WALGREENS RXPRESS SITE SPECIFIC TRAFFIC STUDY TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA {REVISED) 'INTRODUCTION The purpose of this revised site specific traffic study is to evaluate the development of the Walgreens RXpress from a traffic circulation standpoint. The project consists of the development of a drive-thru pharmacy service which also features a small interior retail area with walk-up service counter. The project is located east of Newport Avenue and south of 1st Street in the City of Tustin, as shown on Exhibit A. This site specific traffic Study includes an evaluation of existing traffic conditions, project access, on-site parking, project generated traffic impacts upon the adjacent street system and existing plus project traffic conditions. The site plan for the proposed store is shown on Exhibit B. The 1,900 square foot store incorporates two drive-thru windows on each side of the building; one for prescription drop-off and one for pick-up. Each drive-thru window is protected by a large 'roof canopy supported by two columns on the outside edge of the canopy. The columns are located in and protected by a narrow raised-curb island which forms a drive-thru lane between the building and the columns. The drive-thru lanes are approximately 8.5 feet wide. A delivery door is positioned at the rear of the building for receiving merchandise. ~ Although the store provides the convenience 'of drive-thru service, customers may also enter the store for prescription service at a walk-up counter. The interior of the store includes a small retail area for the display of non-prescription products adjacent to the EXHIBIT A LOCATION ~AP 1 ST ST. SITE 7,35-95-001 :O1A WALGREEN$ RXPR£SS, Tustin. Colifomio ~ ~KJ, K 1~081~T IRWIN. JO~ k A.%OC~I~ EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN -. 7,35-95-00 I:0ZA WALCR££NS RXPRE5$. Tustin. Colilomio RO~rJ~T Ir,&HN · JOt'{~ i: ~550C~T1~ INC. counter. The interior of the store is accessed through a large sliding door located at the front of the building near a wheel-chair ramp. Ten (10) standard parking stalls are provided, one of which is designated for handicapped use with an adjacent wheelchair area. The handicapped parking stall is located closest to the wheelchair ramp entry to tl~e store. The proposed site plan for the project is adequate from a traffic circulation standpoint, if the recommended traffic improvements are implemented as noted in this report. Access point sight distance review, access street widths and traffic controls as' recommended in this report should be implemented in conjunction with the final design of the project. With these recommendations, the site plan will function adequately from a traffic circulation standpoint. FINDINGS The following findings have been reached for the proposed development within the Tustin area. 1. . The site is currently not developed and is not generating any significant traffic. . The local street system adjacent'to the project has been completed to City of Tustin General Plan Circulation Element classifications. . The intersection of Newport Avenue/lst Street is currently operating at Level of Service "A" during the peak hours. A discussion of the Level of Service concept is included in Appendix "A". Based upon this review~ the proposed project-can be accommodated within the planned arterial highway and local street system within the City of Tustin. This study includes traffic recommendations to be incorporated into the final site plan. Se The project site is projected to generate a total of approximately 450 trip-ends per day of which 45 trip-ends per hour will be generated during the PM peak hour. The facility is closed during the AM peak hour. . The intersection of Newport Avenue/lst Street is projected to continue to operate at Level of Service "A" during the peak hours for existing plus project traffic conditions. . A total of ten (10) parking spaces have been provided for the project site. The parking spaces provided meets the City of Tustin requirement of ten (10) parking spaces and should be sufficient for the development. 1 As indicated in Appendix "F", during all time periods the demand at each drive- thru windOw generally did not exceed two vehicles per five-minute observation period. This demand was exceeded only once (6:30 PM) when three vehicles were queued at the pick-up window. While more than two vehicles may approach the service windows during a short time interval, the observed demand indicates that more than two vehicles at a window at any given.time is unusual. A queue storage length of two vehicles at each window should be adequate to accommodate drive-thru demand. This storage length is available at each drive-thru aisle under the proposed site plan and building orientation without interfering with on-site circulation. TRAFFIC RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon our review of the circulation and parking needs of the project, the following recommendations should be incorporated into the final project design' The project site should continue to provide an existing access point on Newport Avenue and on 1st Street. The existing northern most driveway on Newport Avenue and western most driveway on 1st Street should be eliminated due to their proximity to The intersection of Newport Avenue/lst Street. '~ The 1st Street driveway should provide full access and the Newport Avenue driveway should continue to be restricted to right turns in/out only access. Sight distance at each access driveway should be reviewed with respect to Orange County Environmental Management Agency (EMA) Standard Plan 1 1 1 7 (see Appendix "G"), when landscaping and improvement plans are prepared. On-§treet parking should be restricted adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue and 1st Street. EXISTING CONDITIONS Study Area Street System The arterial highway system adjacent to the project is completed according to the City of Tustin General Plan Circulation Element classifications. The existing number of through lanes and intersection controls in the vicinity of the project are shown on Exhibit C. Newporl; Avenue: This north/south roadway currently has four travel lanes adjacent to the site. It is classified as a Primary (Augmented) four lane divided arterial highway on the City of Tustin Arterial Highway Plan. 1st Streel;: This east/west roadway currently, has four travel lanes adjacent to the site. It is classified as a Primary four lane divided arterial highway west of Newport Avenue and is not classified east of Newport Avenue on the City of Tustin Arterial Highway Plan. Existing Average Daily Traffic Existing average daily traffic (ADT) on arterial highways in the study area are shown on Exhibit D. ADT's are based upon the latest traffic data obtained from the 1994 Orange County Traffic Flow Map and the City,of Tustin (see Appendix "B"). EXHIBIT C EXISTIN~ NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS ~ 4U o 4D 1 ST ST. 4D 4D SITE CD 7;55-95-001:0SA WALGREEN5 RXPRE$$. Tustin. California LEGEND- (~ = TRAFFIC sIGNAL 4 = NUMBER OF I. ANES D = DN1DED U = UNDIVIDED KJ K lOLl-IN EXHIBIT D EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC [ADT] 1ST ST. 19.8 SITE 22.~ LEGEND' 5.3 -- VEHICLES PER DAY (IO00'S) 735-95-001:04A WALGRE£N~ RXPRE55. Tustin. Celifomi(~ 10 Existing Intersection Capa¢it'v U~ilizal:ion The technique used to assess the operation of an intersection is known as 'Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU). To calculate an ICU, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. ICU is usually expressed as a percent. The percent represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all apl~roaches operate at capacity. The ICU's for the exiSting study area intersection are shown in Table 1. Calculation Method: . Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) for study area intersections; 2. Saturation Flow Rate- Saturation flow value of 1,700 vehicles per lane per hour for intersections; no adjustments are used for protection movements with dedicated lanes (including both right and left turns). 3. Lost Time: A lost time factor of 5% (.05),is applied to the ICU calculations. 4. Level of Service Ranges: The following thresholds are used in assigning a letter value to the resulting LOS- 11 TABLE 1 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION APPROACH LANES~ PEAK PEAK NORTH- SOUTH- EAST- WEST- HOUR HOUR BOUND BOUND BOUND BOUND ICU~' LOS3 INTERSECTION L T R L T R L T R L T R AM I PM ^MI PM Newport Ave. (NS) at: · 1st St. (EW) I 2 1 I 2 I 1.5 1.5 1 1 2 0 0.54 0.60 A A When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a fight turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Left T = Through R = Right Intersection Cnpacity Utilization (ICU) Level of Service {LOS) 12 LOS CRITICAL VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO A 0.00 - 0.60 B 0.61 - 0.70 C 0.71 - 0.80 D 0.81 - 0.90 E 0.91 - 1.00 F > 1.00 5. Peak-Periods: Weekday peak-hour analysis periods are defined as follows: 7:00 to 9:00 AM 4:00 to 6:00 PM All peak hour studies are contained within these periods. 6. Peak-Hour: The highest one-hour period in both the AM and PM peak periods, as determined by four consecutive. 15-minute count periods are used in the ICU calculations. Both AM and PM peak hours are studied. 13 7. Peak-Hour Data Consistency: Variations in peak-hour volumes can affect LOS calculations because they vary from day-to-day. To minimize these variations, no counts are taken on Mondays, Fridays, holidays or weekends. 8. Right Turn Movements: if the distance from the edge of the outside through lane is at least 19 feet and parking is prohibited during the peak period, right turning vehicles may be assumed to utilize this "unofficial" right turn lane. Otherwise, all right turn traffic is assigned to the through lane. If a right turn lane exists, right turn activity is checked for conflicts with other critical movements. It is assumed that right turn movements are accommodated non-conflicting left turn phases (e.g., northbound right turns during westbound left turn phase), as well as non- conflicting through flows (e.g., northbound right turns, southbound left turns, and eastbound through flows) represent a sum of V/C ratios which are greater than the normal through/left turn critical movements. Right turn volumes have, been reduced by 15% to account for right turns on red. If'a free right turn lane exists (right turns do not have to stop for the signal), a flow rate of 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane is assumed. The V/C ratio of the right turn lane is reported but not included in the sum of the critical V/C ratios. Existing ICU calculations are based upon manual AM and' PM peak' hour turning movement counts made for ROBERT KAHN, JOHN KAIN & ASSOCIATES, INC. in December, 1995 (see Exhibits E and F). An explanation of Level of Service is included in Appendix "A". Traffic count worksheets are provided in Appendix "B". 14 EXHIBIT E EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1ST ST. SITE 73,5-95-001:0SA WALGRE-ENS RXPRESS. Tustin. Callfomic3 EXHIBIT F EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1ST ST. SITE 735-95--001:06A WALGREENS RXPRESS. Tustin. Calitomia nKJ, K The study area intersection is currently operating at Level of Service "A" during the peak' hours. The existing ICU calculation worksheet is provided in Appendix "C". Existing Arterial Highway Plan Existing and future roadways are included in the City of Tustin Arterial Highway Plan and is illustrated on Exhibit G. This exhibit shows the nature and extend of arterial highways that are needed to adequately serve the ultimate development depicted by the land use element of the General Plan, 17 EXHIBIT G CITY OF TUSTIN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY PLAN SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN 7~5--95--001:07A r KJK WALCREEN$ RXPRES5. Tustin. Calif0mio 18 ROBERT KANN- JOHN PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Parking Requiremenl;s~ The parking requirements for this project have been based upon the City of Tustin parking code in relation to the specific land use, i.e. retail stores for this project. The parking rates utilized in this stu_dy are shown in Table 2. Based upon the planned use, number of square feet and parking rate, the project's parking requirement has been determined and .is presented in Table 3. A total of ten (10) parking spaces have been provided for the project site. The parking spaces provided meets the City of Tustin requirement of ten (10) parking spaces and should be sufficient for the development. Trio Generation Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is produced or attracted to a development. Trip generation for this project has been based upo& the specific use which is planned for the development. Trip generation rates have been developed fOr the Walgreens RXpress by data collected for RKJK. Counts made at a similar Walgreens RXpress facility located at the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Magnolia Avenue in the City of Anaheim are provided in Appendix "D". The facility was observed during store operating hours (9:00 AM to 9:00 PM) on a typical weekday. Counts' were split from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM (Tuesday) and 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM (Thursday). Proiect'$ Trip Generation The project's trip. generation has been determined and is included in Table 4. The Waigreens RXpress is'projected to generate a total of approximately 450 trip-ends per 19 TABLE 2 CITY OF TUSTIN PARKING RATES LAND USE Retail Stores UNITS~ SF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED PER .UNIT 1 ~200 SF ~ SF = square feet 20 TABLE 3 PARKING REQUIREMENTS LAND USE Retail Stores QUANTITY 1,900 UNITS~ SF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 10 ~ SF = square feet 21 TABLE 4 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION PEAK HOUR~ AM PM LAND USE QUANTITY IN I OUT IN I OUT DAILY2 Walgreens RXpress3 Site NOM4 NOM 20 25 450 All peak hour rates rounded to the nearest 5. Daily rates rounded to the nearest 10. Source: Peak hour and 'daily trips derived from counts made for RKJK (see Appendix 'D"). NOM = Nominal, facility closed during AM peak hour. 22 day and the PM peak hour trip generation will be 45 vehicles per hour (two-way). The facility is closed during the' AM peak hour. Trip Distribution Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the site. Trip distribution is influenced by a number of factors, including the geographical location of the site, the type of land use, access to the regional freeway and transportation system, and other planned uses in the area. Trip distribution for this study has been based upon near-term conditions, based upon those highway facilities which are in place. The trip distribution patterns for the project are graphically depicted on Exhibits H and I. 23 PROJECT OUTBOUND EXHIBIT H TRIP DISTRIBUTION 1 ST ST. 20 55 10 35 LEGEND' 10 = PERCENT FROM PRojEcT 735-95-001:0SA r KJK WALGREE. t~ RXPR~5. Tustin, California ~ ruU~N -~ ~ t. ~5o~I1:~ ~ PROJECT INBOUND TRIP EXHIBIT ! DISTRIBUTION 35 1ST ST. 2O 10 55 .% - LEGEND' 10 = PERCENT TO PROJECT 7,35-95-001:09A WALGREEN5 ~o TRAFFIC IMPACTS · Trip Assignment Based upon the trip generation, trip distributions and planned access to the project, traffic assignment has been determined. Project related average daily traffic '(ADT) volumes are shown on Exhibit J. Project PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit K. The facility is closed during the AM peak hour. ExisTing Plus Pro.'iect Average Daily Traffic Once the project related traffic is assigned to the Street network and added to existing volumes in the study area, the traffic impact' can be assessed. Exhibit L shows average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for existing plus project traffic conditions· ExisTing Plus PrQ!ect Intersection Capacity Utilization InTersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) for existing plus project traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 5. Table 5 shows ICU calculations at the study area intersection with existing geometrics. As shown in Table 5, the study area intersection is projected to continue to operate at Level of Service "A" during the peak hours. The existing plus project ICU calculation worksheet is included in Appendix "E". AM and pMpeak hour turning movement volumes for existing plus project traffi~ conditions' are shown on Exhibits M and N, respectively. 26 EXHIBIT J PROJECT AVERAGE DALLY TRAFFIC [ADT] 1ST ST. 9O 158 SITE 45 58 '% . LEGEND- 90 ?' VEHICLES PER DAY 7,35-95-001:10A WALGRF_~ ~$. Tu'~tin. * .... Cahform~ EXHIBIT K PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1 ST ST. SITE 7:35-95--001:11,*, WALGflEENS RXPRF..S5. TusLin, California EXHIBIT L EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC [ADT] 1 ST ST. 19.9 22.6 SITE LEGEND- 5.3 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) TABLE 5 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION APPROACH LANES~ PEAK PEAK NORTH- SOUTH- EAST- WEST- HOUR HOUR BOUND BOUND BOUND BOUND ICU~ LOS3 INTERSECTION L T R L T R L T R L T R AM I PM AM PM · 1 st St. (EW) 1 2 1 I 2 1 1.5 1.5 1 1 2 0 0.54 0.60 A A When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be .triped o~' unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside tho through lanes. L = Left T = Through R = Right Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU} 3 Level'of Service {LOS) 30 EXISTING PLUS EXHIBIT M PROJEC:T AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1ST ST. SITE __ 73.5-95--001:1 WALCREEN~ RXPRE5$o Tustin, Col;fomio EXISTING PLUS EXHIBIT N PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1 ST ST. SITE 735-95--001:1 4A K WALCREENr5 P, XPRE$$. Tustin. Colifoml(~ ~ ~- JO~ ~ k ~:X3AR:5 I~C. Queuing Analvsi~s To assess the queuing demand at the drive-thru windows and on-site access, a similar Walgreens RXpress facility was examined at the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Magnolia Avenue in the City of Anaheim. To establish typical demand profiles, the facility was observed on a weekday during store operating hours (9:00 AM to 9:00 PM). Counts were split from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM (Tuesday) and 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM (Thursday). The total number of vehicles passing through each drive-thru window during each five-minute observation period is provided in Appendix "F". As indicated in Appendix "F", during all time periods the demand at each drive-thru window generally did not exceed two vehicles per five-minute observation period. This demand was exceeded only once (6:30 PM) when three vehicles were queued at the pick-up window. While more than two vehicles may approach the service windows during a short time interval, the observed demand indicates that more than two vehicles at a window at any given time is unusual. A queue storage length of two vehicles at each window should be adequate to accommodate drive-thru demand. This storage length is available at each drive-thru aisle under the proposed site plan and building orientation without interfering with on-site circulation. Traffic Assessmen]~ No special turning lanes or other highway upgrades are required to accommodate the proposed project. Each of the access driveways can adequately accommodate the projected traffic with one lane in and one lane out. 33 The 1st Street driveway should provide full access and the Newport Avenue driveway should continue to be restricted to right turns in/out only access. Sight distance at each access driveway should be reviewed with respect to Orange County Environmental Management Agency (EMA) Standard Plan 1117 (see Appendix "G"), when landscaping and improvement plans are prepared. On-street parking should be restricted adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue and 1st Street. The number of parking spaces (10) provided meets the City of Tustin parking code requirements' (10) and will accommodate the parking demands in the project. Conclusions The proposed site plan for the Waigreens RXpress is adequate from a traffic circulation standpoint, if the recommended traffic improvements are implemented as noted in this report. Access point sight distance review, access street widths and traffic controls as recommended in this report should be implemented in conjunction with the final design of the project. With these recommendations the site plan will function adequately from a traffic circulation standpoint. 34 APPENDIX A LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION LEVEL OF SERVICE - DEFINITIONS* Service Level General Definition Freeways Criteri· for measurement: Density (c~trs per lane-mile} Arterials Criteria for measurement: Average travel speed (mph) Free flow. Individual users m'e virtually tmaffeeted by the pres- · nee of others in the traffic stream. Freedom to select de- sired speeds ·nd to maneuver within the traffic stream la ex- tremely high. The ge·ertl level of comfort ~nd convenience pro- vided to the motorist, passenger, or pedestrian ts excellent. Free flow operations. Average travel speeds near 60 mph gen- erally prey·il on ?0-mph freeway elements. Vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their .ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. The aver·ge spaeir~ between vehicles Is about 440 ft, or 22 eat-lengths, with · maximum density of 12 ears/ mi/In. The effects of minor Inci- dents or breakdowns are easily absorbed at this level. Although they may cause · deterioration in LOS in the vicinity of the inci- dent, standin~ queues wlU not form, and Waffle quietly returns to LOS A on pe~aing the dis- ruption. PrimarUy f~ee flow-operations at average travel speeds usually within 90 percent of the free flow speed. Vehicles ate completely unimpeded In their Ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Stopped delay &t sig- nalized intersections is minimal. Stable flow, but the presence of other u~ers in the truffle stream begias to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds ts rela- tively ~affected, but there is · slight decline in the freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream from LO-q A. The level of comfort and convenience provided ts somewhat less than at LOS A, became the pres·nee et others in the traffic s~ream begins to re'feet individual bet~vlor. Reasonably free-flow conditlon~, and speeds of over 51 mph are maintained on ?0-mph freeway elements. The averse spacir~ between vehicles i~ about 260 ft, or 13 ea~-length% with a maximum density of 20 cam/mi/In. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restric- ted. TI~ effects of minor in·i- dents and beeakdowna are still easily abaot~oed, though local deterioration in service would be more severe than for LOS A. Unimpeded operations at average travel speeds usuaUy within 70 percent of the free flow speed. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream ia ~ligt~tly restricted and stopped delays ate not bothemome. Stable flow, but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individUal u~ers becomes significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream. The selection of speed ia ~ffectad by the pres·nee of others, and maneuvering within the traffic stream requiges subetantlal vigilance on the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably st tttis level. Stable operations, but flows approach the range in which smaU increases In flow wUl .cause substantial deterioration in service. Avers4[· travel speeds are stlU over 54 mph. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream ts noticeably restricted at LOS C, and lane changes requite additional care and vigilance by the driver. Average spacings are in the range of 175 ft, or 9 car- lengths, with · maximum density of 30/ca-s/mi/in. Minor incidents may stiU be absorbed, but the local deterioration in se[vice wiU be subat~ntl-l- Queues may be expected to form behind any significant block·ge. Addition~l vigilance, by driver required for safe operation. Stable operations. AbUity to maneuver and change lanes in midblock loc&lions may be mote r~tricted th~ in ~5 ~ and lo.er queu~ ~or atg~ e~rdl~tlon may ~ntrlbute to lower averse travel s~e~ of a~ut S0 pement of t~ ~vetage flee ~low High-der~lty, but stable, flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver ~u'e severely restricted, and the ctclver or pedestrian experlenee~ a generally poor level of comfort and convenience. SmaLl Increases tn traffic flow will generally cause operational problems at this level. Operating' renditions at or near the capacity level AU speeds ~re reduced to a low but relatively uniform value. Freedom to man- euver wittfin the traffic stream is extremely difficult, and It is generally ax~complhhed by forcing a vehlele or pedestrian to ~gtve way" to aeeommo(late such man- euvem. Comfort and convenience levels ere extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally high. Operations at this level ~re USUally unstable, because small increases in flow or minor perturbations within' the traffic stream wU] came breakdowns. Level-of-service F. Fomed or breakdown flow. This condition extsts wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which ess traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations. Arrival flow exeeects discharge flow. Borders on unstable flow. In thin ra~nge, small Increasea in flow eau.~e substantial deterlorntlon in service. Average travel speeds of 46 mph or more ran stiLl be maintained on 70-mph freeway elements. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream ia · everely limited. Even minor Incidents can be expected to create substantial queuing, because the traffic stream has little space to ~bsorb disruptlon~ Average spacings are about 125 ft, or 8 car-lengLha, with a maximum density of 42 car~mt/ln. The boundary between LOS D and LOS E describes operation at capacity. Operations in thla level a. re extremely unstable, because there are virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream. Vehicles are spared at approximately 80 or 4 ear-leng'tha, at relatively uniform headways. ThL% however, represents the minimum spacing at whlch stable flow ran be accommodated. Any dhruptlon, to the traffic stream, aueh -- a vehicle entering from a ramp~ or a vehicle ehangtng fanes, causes following vehicles to give way to admit the verdcle. At capacity, the traffic stream l~s no abtllty to dl~ipate even the most minor disruptions. Any Incident ran be expected to produce a serious breakdown with exterulve queuing. The range of flown encompassed by relatively small compared to other levels, but reflects a substantial deterioration in service. Maneuverability within the traffic stream Ls extremely limited. Average travel speed~ at rapacity are approximately 30 mph. Level F de~.ribes forced or breakdown flow. 3uch conditions generally exist within queues forming behind breakdown Points. Breakdown occur~ when the ratio of aotual arrival flow rate to actual capacity or the forecasted flow rate to estimated capacity exceeds 1.0 0. Operations at such a point will generally be at or near capacity, and downstream operations may be better as vehicles p~ the bottleneck (assuming that there are no additional downstream problems). The LOS F oDerations observed within a queue are the result of a breakdown or bottle- neck at a downstream point. BOrders on a increa~ea in flow may cat~e aubata, ntlal Increases In app~ch de~y and, hence, ~cre~ea In ~terlal s~. Th~ may ~ due to adve~e a[~ pm~e~ion, ln~o~iate sig~ tire.g, ~gh volume, or ~me combination t~se. AveraKe travel s~ ~e a~ut 40 percent of iree ilow Significant approach delays ,and average travel speeds of one-th/rd the free flow speed oc lower. Such operations are caused by some combination or adverse progression, high signal den31ty, extensive queuing at critical Intersections, and inappropriate signal timing. Arterial flow at extremely low spectra below one-third to one- quarter of the free flow speed- intersection congestion la likely at critic,,] signalized locatlotu, with high ap~o&ch de~ay~ resulting. Adverse prog'resalon is frequently a contributor to this condition. 'Source: "Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209" T'r~nsr~rtntirm Reneare. h Roa~. l~tnshine'tnn D.C.. 1985 APPENDIX B TRAFFIC COUNT WORKSHEETS SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS N-S STREET' E-W STREET' NEWPORT FIRST LANES' 6:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM ?:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 8:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM 9:00 AM 15 AM 3O AM 45 AM 10:00 AM 15 AM 30 AM 45 AM NORTHBOUND NL .NT 1 2 52 86 54 92 50 126 73 101 52 94 45 112 53 49 2 3 9 5 4 5 75 3 69' 2 .TOTAL NL NT VOLUMES = 428 755 AM Peak Hr Begins at DATE- 12/13/95 DAY: WEDNESDAY SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND SL ST SR EL ET 1 2 1 1.5 1.5 ER 1 CITY- TUSTIN PROJECT# 0195001A WESTBOUND WL WT 1 2 WR TOTAL 0 5 185 20 12 12 18. 8 22 8 195 29 16 14 20 10 26 3 211 35 38 16 21 15 45 8 ~ 219 34 40 18 25 7 37 6 244 47 39 23 29 13 38 6 164 30 30 33 21 4 38 7 165 38 38 22 23 14 45 5 156 27 35 19 20 12 42 2 424 3 470 12 581 7 574. 6 595 2 490 8 491 7 443 NR 33 SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT 48 1539 260 248 157 177 83 293 730 AM WR TOTAL 47' 4068 PEAK VOLUMES = 220 433 ADDITIONS'SIGNALIZED 23 23 838 146 147 90 96 39 158 27 2240 SOUTHLAND CAR COUNTERS VEHICLE AND MANUAL COUNTS N-S STREET' E-W STREET' NEWPORT FIRST DATE' 12/13/95 DAY' WEDNESDAY CITY' TUSTIN PROJECT# 0195001P LANES: NORTHBOUND NL NT 1 2 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL 1 1 2 1 1.5 1.5 1 1 2 0 2:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 3:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 4:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 5:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 6:00 PM 15 PM 30 PM 45 PM 56 190 43 145 54 167 61 195 55 211 60 222 64 236 62 215 9 23 185 21 80 48 54 27 28 14 . 735 12 11. 139 23 73 70 43 18 33 19 629 11 12 '166 25 72 49 50 18 27 9 660 13 13 161 22 76 46 46 12 50 25 720 6 21 165 30 70 54 45 15 35 30 737 10 17 160 27 85 52 42 17 45 25 762' 19 14 176 24 93 57 44 20 52 15' 814 15 12 165 22 90 53 41 21 45 20 761 TOTAL NL NT VOLUMES = 455 1581 PM Peak Hr Begins at PEAK VOLUMES = 241 884 NR- SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR 95 123 1317 194 639 429 365 148 315 157 500 PM 50 64 666 103 338 216 172 73 177 90 TOTAL 5818 3074 ADDITIONS-SIGNALIZED ......................· ......., ............... LO:AT]ON C0D£ 1~4!3.272 LOCA~IO~ - N£~PORT-BTN §RYAN/I~VlN[ AVERAGED VOLUMES FOR - IU£SOAY 12/6/94 TO WEDNESDAY 12/7/94 TIME mB $8 TOTAL TIME NB S8 TOTAL 12 15 - 12'30 15 8 23 12 30 - i2:45 6 8 14 !:OC - 1.15 9 / 16 1:15 - 1.30 7 $ 12 1:30 - 1:45 5 1:45 - 2:00 2 23 I 15 ~ O0 2:15 t2 $ 15 2:15 - 2:30 8 5 13 Z.30 - 2:45 ~ 2 6 2:45 - 3:00 3 27 4 14 7 3:00 - 3:15 5 0 5 3:15 - 3:30 8 4 12 3'30 - 3:45 I 2 3 3 45 - 4:00 5 19 6 12 11 4:00 - 4 15 4 4 15 - 4:30 7 5 4 30 - 4:45 7 6 13 4:~5 - 5:00 6 24 14 32 20 30 31 56 5'00 - 5:15 9 I1 ZO 5.15 - 5:30 15 15 30 5.30 - 5:45 26 30 56 5 45 - 6:00 30 80 52 108 82 188 $:00 - 8:15 45 40 85 6:15 - 6:30 68 75 143 6:30 - 6:45 ?2 78 150 6:45 - 7:00 94 279 134 327 228 606 7:00 - ?:15 105 129 234 7:15 - 1:30 151 169 320 /:30 - 7:45 180 170 330 7:45 - 8:00 178 594 Z09 677 387 1271 8:00 - 8:15 166 182 348 8:15 - 8:30 150 Z07 357 $:30 - ~:45 143 154 297 8.45 - 9'00 128 587 159 712 297 1299 9:00 - 9:15 123 159 282 , 9:15 - 9:30 123 155 278 9:30 - 9:45 106 143 249 9:45 - 10:00 148 500 186 823 314 1123 12:15 - 12:30 220 228 448 12:30 - 12:45 213 173 386 12:45 - 1:00 231 815 210 819 447 1694 1:00 - 1:15 193 lgl 384 1:15 - 1:30 226 185 411 1:30 - 1:45 196 153 349 1:45 - 2:00 197 812 190 719 387 1531 2.00 - Z:15 250 177 427 Z:J5 - 2:30 216 leg 385 Z:]O - 2:45 234 174 408 2:45 - 3:00 281 981 190 710 471 1691 3:00 - 3:15 248 203 451 3:15 - 3:30 263 ZOl 464 3:30 - 3:45 246 173 419 3:45 - 4:00 268 1025 162 739 430 1764 4:00 - 4:15 248 168 415 4:15 - 4:30 276 166 442 4:30 - 4:45 270 148 418 4:45 - 5:00 314 1108 179 6~I 493 1789 5:00 - 5:15 280 158 438 5:15 - 5:30 326 160 458 5:30 - 5:45 289 140 429 5:45 - 6:00 316 1Zll [63 6~1 479 1832 6:00 - 5:15 219 174 6:15 - 6:30 251 184 6:30 - 6:45 244 142 8:45 - 7:00 234 1008 154 654 7;00 - 7:15 179 7:15 - 1:30 163 · 107 7:30 - 7:45 128 103. 7:45 - 8:00 154 824 124 454 8:00 - 8:15 140 87 8:15 - 8:30 105 7Z 8:30 - 8:45 IZZ 84 8:45 - 9:00 112 479 72 315 9:00 - 9:15 78 68 9:15 - 9:30 99 64 9:30- 9:45 71 99 9:45 - lO:O0 67 315 65 297 453 435 386 388 1662 299 270 278 1078 ZZ7 2O6 184 194 146 163 170 133 612 i~:00 - 10:15 124 143 267 10:00 - 10:15 69. 43 llZ 10:15 - 10:30 144 163 307 10;15 - 10;30 51 35 88 10:30 - 10:45 185 . 110 335 10:30 - 10:45 41 32 73 10.45 - 11'00 183 596 157 533 3Z0 1229 10:45 - 11:00 30 lgl Zl 131 51 32Z I1:00 - 11:15 !71 170 341 I1:00 - 11:15 37 14 51 J1 15 - 11:30 195 115 370 I1:15Il11:30 29 20 49 11:30 - 11:45 199 178 , 377 11:30 - 11:45 ~3 ZZ 45 I1:~5 - IZ:CO 195 761 197 720 393 1481 11:45 - 12:00 19 108 20 76 39 184 TOTALS 3,532 3,906 7,438 8,737 8,156 1¢,933 ADT 'S 12. ~69 10,102 22.371 -~AFFIC D~TA SER¥I£ES. IbC. LO£A[IGH CODE 10413.025 LCCATION - IST-BTN NEWPORT/PROSF£CT AVERAGED VOLUMES FOR - MONDAY 1]///94 TO TbE$OAT 11/8/94 TIME £B wfl TOTAL T[M£ EB ~8 TOTAL 12:00 - 12:15 ? 4 11 12:00 - 12:15 239 ~12 451 12:15 - 12:30 7 8 15 12:15 - 12.30 217 218 433 !~'~0 - !2:45 9 5 14 12:30 - 12:45 195 20g 404 12:45 - 1.00 8 31 3- 20 II 51 1~:45 - 1.00 ~25 876 221 858 446 1/34 i:OO - 1:15 6 4 - 10 1:00 - I:~5 209 236 445 1:15 - 1:30 S 7 12 1:15 - 1:30 201 218 419 !:30 - l:45 Z 3 5 1:30 - 1:45 183 ZOZ 385 !.45 - 2:00 ; 20 3 17 10 37 1:45 - Z:O0 150 743 Z17 813 367 1815 ~:00 - ~:15 4 3 7 ~:00 - 2:15 IZ1 Z03 374 Z.15 - Z:30 5 3 8 Z:15 - 2:30 .151 211 362 2.30 - 2:45 2 0 Z Z:]O - 2:45 18~ 170 359 Z.¢5 - 3:00 4 15 Z 8 B 23 Z:45- .3:00 173 6e4 ~81 ?65 35~ 3:00 ' 3:15 3 I 4 3:00 - 3:15 177 186 363 3:15 - 3:30 / ! 8 3:.15 - 3:30 187 I95 382 3:30 - 3:45 7 I 8 3:30 - 3:45 l?l 202 373 3:45 - ¢:00 5 ZZ 0 3 5 25 3:45 - 4:00 182 717 Z03 786 385 ::00 - 4:15 7 5 12 4:00 - 4:15 172 201 373 4:15 - 4:30 11 $ 17 4:15 - 4:30 202 189 391 4:30 - 4:45 12 7 19 4:30 - 4:45 204 183 387 4:45 - 5:00 9 39 8 26 11 65 4:45 - 5:00 248 824 186 759 432 1448 1503 1583 5:00 - 5:15 23 I0 33 5:00 - 5:15 275 183 468 5:15 - 5:30 21 22 43 5:15 - 5:30 233 208 441 5:30 - 5:45 28 25 53 5:30 - 5:45 223 191 414 5:45 - 6:00 2/ 99 19 76 45 175 5:45 - 6:00 208 939 189 781 3~7 1720 6:00 - 5:15 '48 38 82 6:00 - B:lS 188 158 346 6:15 - 6:30 ?0 37 107 6:15 - 6:30 167 137 304 5:30 -' 6:45 58 69 137 B:30 - 6:45 137 108 245 6:45 - ?.00 75 zsg gg 241 174 500 6:45 - 7:00 153 645 102 505 255 1150 7:00 - 7:15 82 104 188 7:00 - 7:15 105 gl ?'15 - 7:30 g~ i$0 258 7:15 - 7:30 71 88 159 ?.30 - /:45 117 230 347 7:30 - 7:45 84 74 158 7:45 - 8:00 131 4Z8 278 772 408 1200 7:45 - 8:00 57 327 55 318 B:O0 - 8:15 143 232 375 8:00 - 8:t5 64 58 120 8:15 - 8:30 125 222 347 8:15 - 8:30 89 51 120 8:30 - 8:45 134 195 329 8:30 - 8:45 63 53 118 8:45 - 9:00 136 538 185 834 321 137~ 8:45 - 9:00 45 241 '44 204 ' 89 645 445 9:00 - 9:15 141 161 307 '9:00 - 9:15 55 43 98 9:15 - 9:30 130 141 271 9:15 - 9:30 51 32 83 9:30 - 9:45 138 153 291 9:30 - 9:45 41 43 84 9:45 - I0:00 169 578 150 805 319 1183 9:45 - I0:00 32 179 25 144 58 323 10:00 - 10:15 136 IlO 306 10:00 - 10:i5 3I 22 53 10:15 - 10:30 145 141 792 10:15 - 10:30 Z6 18 44 /0:30 - 10:45 148 177 325 10:30 - 10:45 22 31 53 10:45 - ll:O0 180 589 17~ 572 338. IZB1 10:45 - I1:00 2Z 101 14 85 35 I88 11:00 - 11:15 154 157 311 11:00 - 11:15 17 lB 33 11:15 - 11:30 173 195 368 'I1:15 - 11:30 19 7 25 11:30 - 1!:45 Ig6 220 416 11;30 - 11:45 12 10 22 1i:45 - 12:00 201 724 174 746 375 1470 11:45 - 12:00 18 68 7 40 25 lOB TOTALS 3.342 4,020 7,362 6.342 6,118 12,460 ~DT'S 9.684 10.138 19.822 TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES. INC. .............................................. LOCATION CODE 10413.024 LO~AIION - IST ST-BIN RED HtLL/N£UPORT AVERAGED VOLUM£S ?OR - ru£sDiY 11/15/94 TO ~[DN[SOA¥ 11/16/94 · TIME E8 W8 TOTAL liME [B WB 12 O0 - 12:15 1~.15 - 12:30 12.30 - 12:45 22 45 - 1:00 TOTAL 12:00 - l?;IS 46 a0 ' 86 12:15 - IZ:30 50 36 86 12:30 - 12:45 64 30 98 12:45 - I:00 46 226 35 141 BI 34/ i;00 - 1:15 I I 2 1:00 - I:15 58 46 104 ! !5 - 1:30 0 2 2 1:15 - '1:30 54 25 19 l 30 - 1:45 0 0 0 1:30 - 1:45 48 47 95 1.45 - 2.00 1 2 0 3 I $ 1:45 - 2:00 48 203 48 166 96 2:00 - 2 15 O 0 0 2;00 - Z:15 49 51 100 Z'15 - 2:30 2 I 3 ~:15 - 2:30 52 33 85 2-30 - 2:45 '0 0 0 2:30 - 2:45 Si, 44 99 2:45 - 3 OD 0 2 0 ! 0 3 2:45 - 3:00 63 Zi9 63 igl 126 3:00 - 3:15 0 I 1 3:00 - 3:15 44 43 87 3 15 - 3.30 0 2 2 3:15 - 3:30 52 45 97 3 30 - 3:45 1 0 I 3:30 - 3:45 45 56 101 3.45 - 4.00 0 i 0 3 0 4 3:45 - 4:00 6U 209 59 203 127 4:00 - 4 15 I 2 3 4:00 - 4:15 74 49 123 4:15 - 4:30 0 I I 4:15 - 4:30 53 .45 98 4 30 - 4:45 1 0 1 4:30 - 4:45 ?O 6I 131 4.45 - 5:00 I 3 1 4 Z Y 4:45 - 5;00 8/ 284 55 210 142 5:00 - 5:15 0 3 3 5:00 - 5:15 99 63 162 5 15 - 5:30 i 0 1 5:15 - 5:30 94 62 156 S 30 - 5:45 2 1 3 5:30 - 5:45 64 57 · 141 5 45 - 6:00 5 .8 / 11 12 19 5:45 - 6:00 82 359 55 247 147 6:00 - 6:15 8 13 ~1 6:00 - 6:15 67 48 115 6:15 - 6 30 7 13 20 6:15 - 6:30 59 51 110 6:30 - 5:45 23 19 42 5:30 - 6:45 59 30 89 6.45 - 7:00 18 56 24 69 42 !25 6:45 - 7:00 52 237 31 150 83 7-00 - ?:15 17 19 36 7:O0 - 7:15 43 30 73 7 15 - 7:30 24 40 64 7:15 - 7:30 32 25 57 I 30 - 7:45 27 52. 79 7:30 - 7:45 28 Ii 37 7.45 - 6:OO 37 105 6Z 173 99 278 7:45 - B:00 34 !35 33 99 B7 8:00 - 8:15 32 59 91 8:00 - 8:15 36 18 54 8:15 - 8:30 35 48 83 8:15 - 8:30 19 ZO 39 8.30 - 8:45 37 55 9Z 8:30 - 8:45 23 16 3~ 8:45 - 9:00 2Z 1Z6 3L 193 53 319 8;45 - 9:00 !9 97 16 /0 35 9:00 - 9:15 35 38 71 9:00 - 9:15 26 15 41 9:15 - 9:30 35 33 68 9.15 - 9:30 22 17 39 9:30 - 9-45 34 4Z 76 9'30 - 9:45 18 11 29 9:45 - 10'00 23 127 34 145 57 ZTZ 9:45 - lO:G0 Z2 88 6 49 20 10.00 - 10:15 31 35 65 10:00 - 10:15 14 7 21 !0:15 - 10~30 28 35 63 10:15 - 10:30 8 Z 10 iD:30 - 10:45 30 . 37 67 10:30 - I0:45 13 11 24 10:45 - Il:OD 41 130 42 i49 83 279 10:45 - 11:00 8 43 11.00 - 11:15 38 39 77 il;O0 - 11;15 5 3 8 Zl:15 - 11;30 44 30 74 11:15 - 11:30 7 4 !I 11:30 - 11:45 32 40 7~ 11:30 - 11:45 7 3 10 374 410 412 494 605 397 234 157 137 65 1i:45 - 12.00 57 171 55 154 llZ 335 [1:45 - lZ.O0 4 23 I 11 5 34 TOTALS 738 920 1,658 Z. 108 l. 588 3. 677 ADT'S 2.846 2,489 5.335 APPENDIX C EXISTING ICU CALCULATIONS Intersection- Newport Ave. (NS) / 1st St. (EW) Project: Walgreens RXpress Site Specific Traffic Study Traffic Condition: Post 2020 Conditions With Thistledown Lane Configuration: Initial Existing AM Intersection Capacity Analysis v/c Move Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio NL 1.0 1700 220 0.13- NT 2.0 3400 433 0.13 NR 1.0 1700 23 0.01- SL 1.0 1700 23 0.01 ST 2.0 3400 838 0.25* SR 1.0 1700 146 0.08- EL 1.5 2550 147 0.06* ET 1.5 2550 90 0.04 ER 1.0 1700 96 0.05- WL 1.0 1700 39 0.02 WT 2.0 3400 158 0.05* WR 0.0 1700 27 0.02 Clearance Interval Percentage = 0.05 Sum of Critical Movements = 0.54 A PM Intersection Capacity Analysis v/c Move Lanes . Capacity Volume Ratio NL 1.0 1700 '241 0.14- NT 2.0 3400 884 0.26 NR 1.0 1700 50 0.03- SL 1.0 1700 64 0.04 ST 2.0 3400 666 0.20* SR 1.0 1700 103 0.05- EL .£.5 2550 338 0.13. ET 1.5 2550 216 0.08 ER 1.0 1700 172 0.09- WL 1.0 1700 73 0.04 WT 2.0 3400 177 0.08* WR 0.0 1700 90 0.05 Clearance Interval Percentage = 0.05 Sum of Critical Movements = 0.60 A , denotes critical movement denotes V/C ratio reduced 15 percent for right turn on red APPENDIX D WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY WALGREENS RXPRESS {ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY NUMBER OF VEHICLES MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAY LINCOLN DRIVEWAY . TIME IN I OUT IN OUT TOTAL 9:00 AM 0 9:05 AM 0 9:10 A.M 0 9:15 AM 1 1 9:20 AM 1 1 2 9:25 AM 1 1 9:30 AM I 1 9:35 AM 1 1 9:40 AM 1 1 1 3 9:45 AM 1 1 9:50 AM 3 1 4 9:55 AM 1 1 2 10:00 AM 1 1 2 10:05 AM 1 I 1 3 10:10 AM 1 3 2 6 , 10:15 AM 1 2 1 4 10:20 AM 1 1 2 WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES , , MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAY LINCOLN DRIVEWAY TIME IN OUT IN OUT TOTAL 10:25 AM 1 I 2 10:30 AM 0 10:35 AM 1 1 10:40 AM 1 1 10:45 AM 1I 2 10:50 AM 2 2 10:55 AM 3 1 1 5 11:00 AM 1 1 11:05 AM 2 1 1 4 11:10 AM 3 3 1 7 11:15 AM 1 2 1 4 11:20 AM I 1 11:25 AM 1 1 2 11:30 AM 2 I 3 11:35 AM 1 1 11:40 AM 1 1 11:45 AM 2 1 3 WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) 11 '50 AM 2 2 1 5 11:55 AM I 3 1 5 12:00 NOON 1 1 12:05 PM 2 I 3 12:10 PM 1 3 1 1 6 12:15 PM 1 1 2 4 12:20 PM 2 ,1 2 5 12:25 PM 1 2 3 12:30 PM 2 1 1 4 12:35 PM 1 2 3 12:40 PM I 1 12:45 PM 2 2 4 1 2:50 PM 1 1 12:55 PM 1 1 2 1:00 PM 2 1 1 4 1:05 PM 1 3 1 5 1'10 PM 2 1 2 1 6 WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAY LINCOLN DRIVEWAY TIME IN I OUT IN OUT TOTAL, 1:15 PM 2 1 3 1:20 PM 3 2 11 7 1:25 PM 1 I 2 1:30 PM 1 1 2 4 1:35 PM 1 1 2 1:40 PM 0 1:45 PM 1 1 2 1:50 PM 1 3 4 1:55 PM 2 1 3 2:00 PM 1 1 2:05 PM 0 2:10 PM 1 1 2 2:15 PM 3 1 1 5 2:20 PM 1 2 1 1 5 2:25 PM 1 1 1 3 2:30 PM 1 3 2 2 8 2:35 PM 2 2 .5 1 10 WALGREENS RXPRESS {ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY {CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAY LINCOLN DRIVEWAY 2:40 PM 3 4 2 9 2:45 PM 3 1 3 7 ..... 2:50 PM 1 1 2 4 2:55 PM 4 I 2 3 10 3:00 PM 2 2 3:05 PM 2 2 I I 6 3:10 PM 3 3 6 3:15 'PM 3 3 1 7 3:20 PM 2 2 1 5 3:25 PM 1 3 2 6 3:30 PM 0 3:35 PM 1 1 2 3:40 PM 1 1 3:45 PM 1 2 1 1 5 3:50 PM 3 1 1 5 3:55 PM 2 1 1 4 4:00 PM 1 1 2 WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) 4:05 PM 4:10 PM 4:15 PM 4:20 PM 4:25 PM 4:30 PM 4:35 PM 4:40 PM 4:45 PM 4:50 PM 4:55 PM 5:00 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM 5:15 PM 5:20 PM 5:25 PM NUMBER OF VEHICLES MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAy TIME 'IN OUT 2 1 1. 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 4 2 3 1 2 LINCOLN DRIVEWAY IN OUT TOTAL WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES MAGNOLIA DRIVEWAY LINCOLN DRIVEWAY TIME IN I OUT IN I OUT TOTAL,i 5:30 PM' 3 1 1 5 5:35 PM 1 1 5:40 PM 1 1 5:45 PM 3 2 5 5:50 PM 1 3 1 5 5:55 PM 2 2 4 6:00 PM 1 1 2 4 6:05 PM 2 1 3 6:10 PM 1 1 2 6:15 PM 2 1 3 6:20 PM 1 1 1 3 6:25 PM 3 3 6 6:30 PM 3 2 5 ,,, 6:35 PM 3 3 ,,,, 6:40 PM 1 I 2 6:45 PM 2 2 6:50, PM 1 1 2 'WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES .. 6:55 PM 1 1 7:00 PM I 2 I 1 5 7:05 PM 2 1 1 4 7:10 PM 1 1 1 3 7:15 PM 2 1 3 7:20 PM 1 1 2 7:25 PM 1 1 1 3 6 7:30 PM 1 1 2 7:35 PM 1 2 1 4 7:40 PM 2 1 1 4 7:45 PM 1 1 2 7:50 PM 0 7:55 PM 0 8:00 PM 1 1 8:05 PM 2 1 3 8:10 PM 2 2 8:15 PM 2 1 1 4 WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) TRIP GENERATION SURVEY (CONT'D) 8:20 PM 1 2 1 4 8:25 PM I 1 8:30 PM I 2 1 1 5 8:35 PM 1 1 2 8:40 PM 1 1 8:45 PM I 1 2 8:50 PM 1 1 8:55 PM 0 9:00 PM 0 DATE OF SURVEY: 12/7/95 (Thursday) - 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM 12/12/95 (Tuesday) - 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM APPENDIX E EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ICU CALCULATIONS Intersection- Newport Ave. (NS) / 1st St. (EW) Project- Walgreens RXpress Site Specific Traffic Study Traffic Condition: Background + Project Lane Configuration- Initial Existing AM Intersection Capacity Analysis Move Lanes Capacity NL 1.0 1700 NT 2.0 3400 NR 1.0 1700 SL 1.0 1700 ST 2.0 3400 SR 1.0 1790 EL 1.5 2550 ET 1.5 2550 ER 1.0 1700 WL 1.0 1700 WT 2.0 3400 WR 0.0 1700 V O L U M E S Background Project Total 220· 0 220 433 0 433 23 0 23 23 0 23 838 0 838 146 0 146 147 0 147 90 0 90 96 0 96 39 0 39 158 0 158 27 0 27 v/c Ratio 0.13- 0.13 0.01- 0.01 0.25* 0.08- 0.06* 0.04 0.05- 0.02 0.05* 0.02 Clearance Interval Percentage = Sum of Critical.Movements = 0.05 0.54 PM Intersection Capacity Analysis Move NL NT NR SL ST SR Lanes 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 V O L U M E 'Capacity Background Project 17,30 241 0 3400 884 9 1790 50 0 1700 64 7 3400 666 0 1700 103 0 S Total V/C Ratio 241 0.14- 893 0.26 50 0.03- 71 0.04 666 0.20* 103 0.05- EL ET ER 1.5 1.5 1.0 2550 338 0 338 0.13, 2550 216 4 220 0.09 1700 172 0 172 0.09- WL WT WR 1.0 2.0 0.0 1700 73 9 82 0.05 3400 177 5 182 0.08* 1700 90 0 90 0.05 Clearance Interval Percentage = 0.05 Sum of Critical Movements 0.60 * denotes critical movement - denotes V/C ratio reduced 15 percent for right turn on red A A APPENDIX F WALGREENS RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY WALGREENS PD(PRESS {ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY TIME 9:00 AM 9:05'AM 9:10 AM 9:15 AM 9:20 AM 9:25 AM 9:30 AM 9:35 AM 9:40 AM 9:45 AM 9:50 AM 9:55 AM · 10:00 AM 10:05 AM 10:10 AM 10:15 AM 10:20 AM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D) TIME 10:25 AM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW 10:30 AM 10:35 AM 10:40 AM 10:45 AM 1 10:50 AM 10:55 AM 1 11:00 AM I 1:05 AM 11:10 AM 11:15 AM 11:20 AM 11:25 AM 11:30 AM 11:35 AM 1 11:40 AM' 11:45 AM 1 1 AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM! QUEUING SURVEY {CONT'D! TIME 11:50 AM 11 '55 AM 12:00 NOON 12:05 PM 12:10 PM 12:15 PM 12:20 PM 12:25 PM 12:30 PM 12:35 PM 12:40 PM 12:45 PM 12:50 PM 12:55 PM 1:00 PM 1:05 PM 1:10 PM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR' BEHIND ORDER WINDOW TIME 1:15 PM 1:20 PM 1:25 PM 1 1:30 PM 1:35 PM 1:40 PM 1:45 PM - 1 1:50 PM 1:55 PM 2:00 PM 2:05 PM 2:10 PM 2:15 PM 1 2:20 PM 2:25 PM 2:30 PM 2:35 PM 2 2:40 PM AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS {ANAHEIM} QUEUING SURVEY ICONT'D} TIME 2:45 PM 2:50 PM 2:55 PM 3:00 PM 3:05 PM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW AT OR BEHIND' PICKUP WINDOW 3:10 PM 3:15 PM 3:20 PM 3:25 PM 3:30 PM 3:35 PM 3:40 PM 3:45 PM 3:50 PM 3:55 PM 4:00 PM 4:05 PM 4:10 PM WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D) TIME 4:15 PM 4:20 PM NUMBER OF VEHICLES ' AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW 4:25 PM 4:30 PM 4:35 PM 4:40 PM 4:45 PM 4:50 PM 4:55 PM 5:00 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM 5:15 PM 5:20 PM 5:25 PM 5:30 PM 5:35 PM 5:40 PM AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS IANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D) TIME 5:45 PM 5:50 PM 5:55 PM 6:00 PM 6:05 PM 6:10 PM 6:15 PM 6:20 PM 6:25 PM 6:30 PM 6:35 PM 6:40 PM 6:45 PM 6:50 PM 6:55 PM 7:00 PM 7:05 PM 7:10 PM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER' WINDOW AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM) QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D) NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW TIME 7:15 PM 7:20 PM 7:25 PM 1 1 7:30 PM 1 7:35 PM 1 7:40 PM 1 7:45 PM 7:50 PM 7:55 PM 8:00 PM 8:05 PM 1 8:10 PM 1 8:15 PM 1 8:20 PM 1 8:25 PM 1 8:30 PM 8:35 PM 1 ,, 8:40 PM AT OR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW WALGREEN'S RXPRESS (ANAHEIM} QUEUING SURVEY (CONT'D} 8:45 PM 8:50 PM 8'55 PM 9:00 PM TIME NUMBER OF VEHICLES AT OR BEHIND ORDER WINDOW AT oR BEHIND PICKUP WINDOW DATE OF SURVEY: 12/7/95 {ThurSday) - 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM 12/12/95 (Tuesday) 9:00 AM To 3:00 PM APPENDIX STANDARD PLAN 1 1 17 $ or × Llr~fed use ore( R/~r Curd line j Line of sight (Typ.] Left and Right Turn Out And Cross Trofflc Sight Dlstonce _L Y DISTANCE (FT.) __ I~AJOR 660 580 37 37 13 PRII~RY GlO 500 25 25 ~ __ SECONDARY 550 430 18 18 G COI~,4UTER 500 360 0 0 0 COLLECTOR 390 250 0 0 0 _ LOCAL 280 150 0 0 0 · X and X' are bc~ed upon a sf~ndord 14' medl~n for m3]o~ and pr~y hl~s -- Use S values f~ u~lgnollZed ~t~sectl~s md S(sjvo~es for slgnol~ed ~tersectlons Lbr/ted ~ of sight (TYD.) Curb line m~cli~ __ A - lLeft Turn InJ Sight glstonceJ ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY Re~ 77-g2 Revl~ec~ Re~ 82-?i8; 86-114~ 88-134E g1-1481 INTERSECTION SIGHT D[STANCE STD. PLAN 1117 SHT. I OF 3 NOTES: 1. ~]qe distance $ FepFe~nt~ the corner sight dLsfance measured along the tentative of , roo~ The corner sight dl~tance !~ the all, fence required to o11o~ 7 ~Z ~econd~ for the driver on the cross rood (or ~t turn pocketl to ~o~elv ~o~ the ~ln rood~y or left ~Ila the approach vehlcla ~oval~ at the o~d de~l~ ~d. of the ~ . 2. The dl~tmce ~ ~uld be Increased by 2~Z from ~ ~mt ~hom on the table on ~stal~d dom~ode~ st~r ~m ~4 and longer thru o~ ~. . . ~ Polnts A and A, ~e t~ ~atlo~ of ~ driver's line of ~ight [~.5 f~t eve hel~t) to onco~ng vehlc~s (4.25 f~t ~t he~htl Iocat~ at Points C ~ C' ~lle h a vehicle at an ~tersection ~ feet ~ ~on the projection of ~e c~ line. In case ~all Poin~ A or ~' be ~s th~ flfffeen fe~t from fha edge of the ~aveled 4. ~e distance Y' ~ ~ ~sfonce ~asured ~ f~ centeri~ of the ~ road fo right through trial bna. ~e dlsf~e Y" ~ equal to zero for T-Inffer~ec+lo~. distance X !~ ~ d~t~ce ~ed ~om ~e centerllne of ~ mln rood to ~e center of the f~ right t~ough ~avel Im~. ~ d~ta~e X' ~ the dlstmc~ ~a~ured from the center~ of the ~h road to the canf~ of t~ travel i~ n~Gre~ the centarl~e of the rood. 5. Th~ L~ted U~e Area Is deter~ned by the graphical ~t~d ~ ~he oDproDrlate distances glv~n In the above table. If ~all be used for ~e Purpose of proh~Itlng or clewing obst~cflo~ h order' to ~Inta~ adequate ~lght d~tonce at ~tersecfl~s. ~. ~e LI~ of ~Igh+ II~ sholi be ~ of hfersectlons on oll i~caplng plans. ~ere ~ ~ter~ectl~ ~ ~ca~ed on a vertical ~ve, a ~o~e of ~e i~ of sl~t be requ~ed. ?. Obstructlons s~ os bus ~elter~ ~al~ or iand~caping ~!~ the L~ted Use ~rea ~ 'could r~lct ~e IIn~ of ~lght ~hall not b~ ~ Plant~ and shrub~ ~1~ the L~ed U~e ~rea ~11 be of th~ type ~hat ~li.gro~ no higher +hm 12 Inches above ~e grou~ and shall be mhfalned of ~ mxl~m ~i~t o~ ~ Inches above the groun~ ~lnfen~e o~ a ~er helg~t ~y be requ~ed_ crest vertical' c~ves per Note ~ b. · ~o~le o~ fha I~e o~ sl~? ~v be ~equ~ed to verl~ ~ ~ni~m vertlcOl cle~ance above vorlob~ helgh? obs?ruc?~ns such as slope landscaping, pl~s and s~ubs. c. The foe o~ slo~ ~y en~ooch hfo the L~?ed. Use Areo provided ?ho? ?he requlre~n~s of (b) obove ore sofl~fled. ~ [n lieu o~ ~rovldln0 o profile o~ ~e line of sloht. ~he t~ o~ sio~ sholl no? en~oo~ h?o ?he L~?ed Use .~e~ ond ~he L~?ed Use ~eo ~holi ~lope of ~x~m ~o ?~ ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ~NACE~NT AGENCY STD. PLAN NTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE SliT..2 OF 8. Tre~8 shall not be pornttted with. in any portion of the Llmlted U~e Are(~ g- Iqedlan areas i~$s than slx J~) feet In width shall be paved ~Ifh concrete Der Standard PIm I114. Residential drlve~:~¥~ serving four or rr~re units and com~rclai drlve~ys ~hail be treated as a k~cal street Intersectlot~ ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY · /___/~.//~~ ?/-/~/ S T D. P C A N Approved _ INTERSECTION .S[CHT DISTANCE SHT. 3 OF 3 -RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 FEBRUARY 12, 1996 CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN: RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS STRONGLY OBJECT TO THE ISSUING OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023 AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CHANGEABLE MONUMENT SIGN AND OBJECT TO THE AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF A 1900 GROSS SQUARE FOOT PHARMACY AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS AS PRESENTED. WE OBJECT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. A CHANGEABLE MONUMENT SIGN IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS AND DOES NOT MATCH THE STANDARDS FOR PROPERTY IN THE TUSTIN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT AREA 2. THE STANDARD CONSTRUCTION OF WALGREENS RXPRESS-( ATTACHED PICTURES OF 3 ORANGE COUNTRY SITES) SHOWS COMPLETE NON CONFORMANCE TO THE SPANISH STYLE ARCHITECTURE THAT ALL SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE ADHERED TO. WE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE GAUDY APPEARANCE USED IN THE WALGREENS RXPRESS LOCATIONS AND FEEL THAT COLOR AND SIGNAGE MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE TO THE AREA AND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION NEEDS TO LOOK AT THIS VERY CLOSELY. 3. THE PROPERTY IS TOO SMALL TO ACCOMMODATE AMPLE PARKING FOR THE TYPE OF BUSINESS PROPOSED AND ~ QUEUING OF CARS WILL EVENTUALLY LEAD TO BACK UP OF TRAFFIC INTO THE MOST IMPACTED INTERSECTION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND EVENTUALLY LEAD'TO INCREASED 'TRAFFIC. ACCDENTS. ., · ,. 4. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED IF THE PROPOSED MITIGATIONS' WILL NOT CURE.THE PROBLEM. THE ALLOCATION OF 9 PARKING STALLS WITH ONE HANDICAPPED STALL WILL CAUSE BACKUP ON NEWPORT AND FIRST. STREET LEADING TO REDUCED INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM OUR ADJACENT PROPERTY WHICH WILL DLRECTLY AFFECT OUR PROPERTY VALUE. THIS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL BACK UP TRAFFIC ON NEWPORT AVE WHICH IS CLASSIFIED AS A PRIMARY (AUGMENTED) ARTERIAL IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND IN THE ORANGE COUNTY MI)AH. ATTACHMENT C RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNER/8' 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 HAVING LOOKED AT THIS LOCATION FOR THE WALGREENS RXPRESS, WE VIEWED THE 3 OTHER LOCATIONS FOR WALGREENS IN ORANGE COUNTY ( ATTACHED PHOTOS). THIS APPEARED TO BE THE SMALLEST LOT AND THE TEN PARKING STALLS WERE THE LEAST PROVIDED IN ANY LOCATION. THEIR OTHER LOCATIONS HAD THE FOLLOWING PARKING: MAGNOLIA AND LINCOLN LOCATION-. 16 MARKED SPACES PLUS STREET KNOTT AND BALL- 13 MARKED SPACES PLUS NUMEROUS STREET SPACES. HARBOR AND EDINGER -17 MARKED SPACES AND 20 ADJACENT SPACES . JUST TO NOTE: KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN LOT NEXT DOOR- 21 MARKED SPACES WE HAVE ALSO ATTACHED A REPLICATION OF THE. LOT DIAGRAM WITH PROBABLE PARKING ALLOTMENT DURING A PEAK BUSINESS TIME. PER THE EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS REPORT PAGE 6 ITEM 6 WE DISAGREE WITH ITEMS C THROUGH G- NO IMPACT. WE FEEL THAT THIS CONSTRUCTION DOES DIRECTLY IMPACT THE DEMAND FOR NEW PARKING. PER PAGE SEVEN OF YOUR REPORT LAST PARAGRAPH INDICATES "IN SLFMMARY, THE PROJECT IS ESTIMATED TO GENERATE APPROXIMATELY 450 VEHICLE TRIP-ENDS PER DAY, OF WHICH 45 TRIP - ENDS WILL BE GENERATED IN THE PM PEAK-HOUR" WE CAN NOW ADDRESS THIS INFORMATION, BUT WE ALSO WILL PRESENT MORE INFORMATION SHOWING THAT THE 45 TRIP-ENDS IS AT BEST A VERY VERY LOW ESTI2MATE OF ~ TRUE VALUE AT THE PEAK-HOUR AND THAT A TRUE ESTIMATE SHOULD BE THIS VALUE MULTIPL1-ED BY TWO OTHER FACTORS.. LOOKING AT THE SITE.-MAP AS WE HAVE PRESENTED TO YOU (ATTACHED), OF THE 9 PARKING SLOTS AVAILABLE FOR NON HANDICAPPED PARKING, 4-5 OF THEM SHOULD BE OCCUPIED BY EMPLOYEES AT THE PEAK HOURS. WE CALLED LOCAL PHARMACIES TO FIND OUT THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT WERE ON STAFF AT THIS TIME OF DAY. THIS LEAVES 3-4 PARKING SPACES OPEN FOR PATRONS. WITH 45 TRIP-ENDS 1N AN HOUR AND AN AVERAGE OF 20-30 MINUTES TO FILL A PRESCRIPTION( CALLED WALGREENS AND SAVON TO GET TIME) AND 2-8 MINUTES FOR THE PHARMACIST TO COUNSEL THE PATIENT ON MEDICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY LAW, THE 3-4 PARKING SPACES THAT ARE OPEN COULD BE FILLED IN THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF. THE PEAK- HOUR LEAVING NO SPACES FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR PATRONS. THIS SHOULD IN ITSELF BACK CARS LIP ON TO NEWPORT AND FIRST STREET CONGESTING TRAFFIC AND PREVENTING INGRESS AND EGRESS TO OUR ADJACENT PROPERTY.*****WE WANT THE CITY TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF ALL THE EMPLOYEES WALKED TO WORK WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS AND ITS TRAFFIC FLOW rcODOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 IT STILL CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ITS PATRONS WITHOUT LEADING TO OVERFLOW.***** A BUSINESS NEEDS TO OFFER EMPLOYEES, PATRONS AMPLE PARKING AND ALLOW FOR SAFE ENTRY AND EXIT TO THE PROPERTY. CLEARLY THE SITE PLAN AS WE SEE IT DOES NOT OFFER ANY OF THESE POINTS . AT THIS POINT WE SHOULD ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY. IF YOU STAND. AT THE CORNER OF FIRST AND NEWPORT AT THE PEAK TRAFFIC TIM]E · ONE CAN SEE THAT THIS INTERSECTION IS A VERY HECTIC AND HAZARDOUS CROSSING. ADDING TO THIS A BUSINESS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE'IT OWN TRAFFIC NEEDS WILL INVARIABLY BACK TRAFFIC FLOW ON TO NEWPORT AND FIRST.. CARS TRYING TO AVOID THIS'WILL AT SOME TIME END UP IN ACCDENTS WITH CONSIDERABLE HARM TO PROPERTY AND PERSON. WE ALSO ARE ATTACHING TO OUR OBJECTION ,FOR THE RECORD, TWO CURRENT ARTICLES (JANUARY 1996) INDICATING THAT THE PROPOSED P .HARMACY WILl BE SPENDING MORE TIME WITH EACH PATIENT AS THE PRACTICE OF PHARMACY CHANGES IN THE FUTURE ( ARTICLE ON PHARMACEUTICAL CARE). THIS WOULD ALSO MAKE EACH TRIP-END REQUIRE EVEN MORE TIME THAN THE ABOVE ESTIMATES AND WOULD LEAD TO EVEN MORE PARKING AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION.. WE NOW COME TO TffE ISSUE OF QUEUED PARKING AT THE DRIVE THRU WINDOWS. THE TRAFFIC STUDY YOU WERE PRESENTED WAS FOR A RELATIVELY NEW STORE (ONE AND ONE HALF YEARS OLD ) LOCATED AT . LINCOLN AND MAGNOLIA. THIS STORE IS NOT THE BUSIEST OF THE 3 ORANGE COUNTY LOCATIONS. WE 'FEEL IT IS'AN UNDER ESTIMATION TO USE FIGURES FROM A RELATIVELY NEW STORE TO APPROXIMATE TI-IE FUTURE TRIP-ENDS OF THIS LOCATION. ONE SHOULD HAVE MULTIPLIED THEIR FIGURE BY SOME FACTOR FOR MATURITY OF LOCATION. WE ALSO FOUND A PROBLEM WITH THE TIMES THIS STUDY WAS RUN.. THE STUDY WAS DONE ON A TUESDAY AND THURSDAY(NOTED IN STUDY)AND WHEN WE CALLED LOCAL PHARMACIES TO ASK WHEN WERE THEIR BUSIEST DAYS ,THEY ALL SAD'! MONDAY AND FRIDAY ARE CONSDERABLY BUSIER." WITH THIS IN MIND, THIS TOO SHOULD MULTIPLY THEIR 45 TRIP-ENDS AT PEAK PM HOUR BY SOME FACTOR. THEREFORE THEIR 45 TRIPS ENDS SHOULD BE A NUMBER CONSDERABLY HIGHER. WE THEN' MONITORED THE LINCOLN AND MAGNOLIA DRIVE THRU WINDOW ON 2/12/96 FROM 3:40PM TO 6:OOPM TO SEE THE COUNTS OF CARS. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NUMBER OF CARS AT EITHER WINDOW.WE ONLY COUNTED THE TIMES . TWO OR MORE CARS WERE PRESENT. 3:40 PM 2 CARS 4:35 PM 2 CARS 4:52 PM 2 CARS 5:28 PM 3 CARS 5:32 PM 2 CARS 5:55 PM 2 CARS 5:58 PM 2 CARS RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNER5 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 IF YOU WILL REFER TO THE QUEUING SURVEY PROVIDED FOR DECEMBER FOR THIS LOCATION THE ABOVE NUMBERS REFLECT A VERY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE FROM THE DECEMBER FIGURES AND CONTINUES TO SUBSTANTIATE TIlE FACT THAT THE LAY OUT AND QUEUING PROBLEM WILL CONTINUE TO ESCALATE UNTIL TRAFFIC IS HALTED ON THESE TWO MAJOR STREETS IN TUSTIN. EVEN WITH THIS IN MIND, THE STUDY STILL SHOWED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO HAVE 3 CARS QUEUED AT A WINDOW AT ONE TIME. PLACING THE FACT THAT THIS IS A NEW STORE ON A SLOW DAY WE PROPOSE THAT AS TIME WOULD GO ON TillS ALSO WOULD COMPLETELY STOP FLOW OF TRAFFIC ON THIS SITE AND LEAD TO BACK UP OF TRAFFIC ON TO NEWPORT AVE AND FIRST STREET, LEADING TO A TRAFFIC HAZARD AND A SAFETY RISK. WE THEN QUESTIONED A PHARMACIST( KRISTEN HIRATA 213 667 5197 THAT WORKED AT A LOS ANGELES PHARMACY( AT 4904 SUNSET BLVD)WHICH HAS A PICK UP ONLY DRIVE THRU. WE LOOKED FOR A DRIVE THRU THAT HAD BEEN AROUND FOR SOME TIME AND THIS LOCATION WAS IN EXISTENCE FOR OVER 6 YEARS. WE WERE TOLD THAT IT WAS COMMON FOR 3 OR MORE CARS TO BE IN LINE. AND THAT TillS TAKES PLACE SOME 30 TO 40 TIMES A MONTH.. OUR ATTACHED PLOT DIAGRAM SHOWS HOW THE TOTAL PARKING IS INADEQUATE AND HOW 3 CARS QUEUED IN LINE WILL ALSO CAUSE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. WHEN YOU CONSIDER THAI BOTH OF THESE PROBLEMS OF PARKING AND QUEUING CAN SEPARATELY CAUSE BACK UP OF TRAFFIC AT PEAK TRAFFIC TIMES ON BOTH MAJOR STREETS AND THAT TOGETHER THEY SURELY WILL CAUSE IRAFFIC BACK UPS. ONE MUST TAKE A NEW LOOK AT THE VIABILITY OF THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS FOR THIS SMALL A LOT. THE CITY OF TUSTIN OBVIOUSLY IS CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROBLEM SINCE ON PAGE 10 NUMBER 6 THEY ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF MITIGATION/MONITORING REQUIRED FOR THE PARKING. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THE SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS AS LISTED ON PAGE TEN JUST WON'T WORK. IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT THE SITE YOUR WILL SEE THAT: ._.2DOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 A. MODIFICATION OF THE DRIVE-THRU LANE ALIGNMENT WILL HAVE NO DIRECT AFFECT ON THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON THE SITE, IN FACT THIS MAY INCREASE THE CONGESTION. B. ELIMINATION OF ONE OF THE DRIVE-THRU WINDOWS WILL NOT DECREASE CONGESTION; BUT WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF CARS AT THE OTHER WINDOW WHICH IN ITSELF WILL LEAD TO MORE CONGESTION FLOWING OUT TO EITHER FIRST OR NEWPORT. C. CONSTRUCTION OF PLANTER MEDIANS TO SEPARATE AND DEFINE VEHICULAR ACCESS LANES WILL ELIMINATE EVEN MORE DRIVING AREA AND LEAD IO FURTHER CONGESTION. ONE MUST BE FAMII.IAR WITH TH2E PRACTICE OF PHARMACY TO UNDERSTAND THAT A PHARMACY DRIVE THRU WINDOW IS NOT THE SAME AS A MACDONALDS DKIVE THRU. FILLING A PRESCRIPTION TAKES MORE TIME THAN PACKAGING A BIG MAC AND FRIES. POTENTIAL FOR A VERY LENGTHY TIME WAIT EXISTS- IF A PHARMACIST MUST CLARIFY OR PROCESS A DRUG INTERACTION FOR APATIENT. THIS PROCESS TAKES ONE OR TWO PHONE CALLS TO A PHYSICIAN OR INSURANCE COMPANY, ALL OF WHICH CONSUME TIME. IF YOU ARE QUEUED UP AND ARE BLOCKING THE DRIVE-THRU LANE YOU CANNOT BE SENT TO A SPACE TO WAIT AND HAVE THE PHARMACIST DELIVER THE PRESCRIPTION TO YOU., LIKE YOU CAN GET A BIG MAC SENT TO YOUR CAR WHILE WAITING. THE PHARMACIST IS REQUIRED TO COUNSEL THE PATIENT BY LAW AND CANNOT TAKE THE MEDICATION TO THE CAR SINCE HE IS NOT ALLOWED BY LAW TO LEAVE THE RX DEPARTMENT UNATTENDED BY A PHARMACIST. EVEN IF HE COULD OR A CLERK WOULD TAKE THE MEDICATION TO A PARKED CAR THE POTENTIAL FOR CRIME IS ASTRONOMICAL WHEN PEOPLE ARE CARRYING DRUGS OUTSIDE OF A PHARMACY. THIs LOCATION IS JUST TOO SMALL FOR THIS PROJECT TO WORK. IT IS NOT TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TUSTIN CITY TO ALLOW A PROJECT DESTINED TO FAILURE ON SUCH A IMPORTANT SITE TO BE CONSTRUCTED. THE FARMER MARKET IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF A BUSINESS THAT DID NOT SUCCEED DUE TO PATRONS NOT BEING ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF A LOCATION'WITHOUT A TRAFFIC PROBLEM. WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE WALGREENS COME TO OUR COMMUNITY AS AN ADDITION TO OUR MEDICAL PROFESSION, 'BUT NOT TO BE DONE AT A PLACE THAT WILL IMPACT ADJACENT TRAFFIC AND THE INGRESS AND EGRESS TO ADJACENT BUSINESSES TO SUCH A DETRIMENTAL AFFECT. IF THE CITY HAS REAL CONCERNS ALREADY ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND PARKING PROBLEMS AND THE MITIGATIONS ARE NON VIABLE IN THE FUTURE AND ONE RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS 13400 NEWPORT AVE TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 714 731-1344 KNOWS THAT REVOKING A PERMIT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE AND WILL LEAD TO TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LITIGATION ON BOTH SIDES THE CITY MUST NOT ISSUE A CONDITIONAL PERMIT. ANY TRAFFIC BACK UP ON TO NEWPORT AVE WILL IMMEDIATELY BLOCK ACCESS TO OUR PROPERTY AND WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO ALL OUR LEASED BUSINESSES AT OUR LOCATION. RUDOLPH OSWALD PARTNERS WANT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, THE ARCHITECT AND DEVELOPER AND THE PROPOSED TENANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE WILL PROTECT OUR PROPERTY VALUE AND RIGHTS TO EGRESS AND INGRESS TO OUR PROPERTY TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW. MICHAEL RUDOLPH :1 H FINdAV iHOdMH N urlO~ oFF TIOI% Roland Nelson of - Blu pri t FOr Patient ( aPe By Michael Slezak Roland Nelson has re-engineered his pharmacy after 52 years in retail practice, and has freed up his time for' 'pharmacy Care' Roland Nelson says that re- modeling and re-engineering )Lis l{e~,qioltls Drugs in Bil'l~- ingl..u, Ala., was "ti~e i~est tldng that ever hal~l)ened to us." "I never realized how inefficient pl,tr- nlaeists are," savs Nelson, at lea~t not illl- tii he implemented changes in the phar- macy~ design and work flow some 1S months ago. "~ don't have to answer ex'ex)' phone c~dl or talk to every docton" Now, Nelson spends less time on die phone confirming prescriptions and drug switches witli personnel from physicia~ls' offices. Instead, he's busy counseling patients and managing their dn~g therapy. Filling prescriptions is a quicker process, too. As a result of redirecting the pharmae)'k work flow, technicians do more of the counting and p(nu~ng. Even Nelson's patients behave dif- f~;rentl)'. They don't interrupt ld]n wldle I~e is with otfter patients. They are~'t impatient to get tlteir ]nedic.tions spri.t out tl~e "These clmnges we're making have got me excited abo.t phan..cv agai~. The)"ve gotten ilL)' blood tlowi.g," says the 53-year-old Nelson, who gra(lua~ed from Auburn University School Pharmacy in 1964 and has owned Re)qlolds Drug since 1969. The remodeling and re-e~tgineering, Nelson says, have allowed the staff Rep~olds Drug, including Nelson~ 24- year-old pharmacist daughter, to start concentrating on practicing what I~e calls "pharmacy care." Nelson currently performs disease management t~}r a hantlfld of patients ~ witl~ diabetes, asthma and it),l)ertension ~ a~.l has l~egun to see some positive results. He l.q'~es t. ¢:oniilm(,~ eXl-mmli.g' th.se ser- rictus al.l h) shirt gelling paid tbr II.:lil. l{t*lilOtlclill~ tile ifllariilacy was tl,e first step i. tile process, says Nels, m, l~e- ca.se witl.mt eli~nim~ting inefllcie~t de- sigt~s and ti~e-wasti.g tasks, tl~ere xx,~t~ltl l)e t.~ ti~.e to impIcmetst lal~art~ta- cy care. lie received advice from Aulmm Universi~, pml~ssors, including Bill Felkey. M.S., and Bruce Berger, PI~.D., befi~re embarking on the process. Ti~e new U-shaped pl~armacy counter at lieynohls places pharmacists at eye-level witlt patients d~.'ing all in- teractions. On the fitr right of the phar- IllltC~¥ counter is its illOSl mfiqt~e feature, a lmilt-in desk with a cot~qmter. The plsarnmcist- sits at the desk, and patie~tts wl.~ need a new l}rescription filled or wlto I.tve qucstio.s sit i. a cltair direct- 26 J..~NLiARY 19tJ6 * ..kMERICAN I)RUCCIgT iICI' t]~e p~ oti~er rt:adil Ix' across from the pharmacist. There. ti~e patient receives c(mnseling and gets other se~'ices, such as blood press~,'e readings. A nearby counseling roon~ also is availal~le if extra l'~fix.ac), is ~leede(1. "T]~e palie~d is co~,seled wl~ile the prescription is I~eing filled," sa)'s Nel- son. Pharmacists ~s(' a laser pri~ter un- derneath the desk to print written pa- tient infi)rmati(m if nee(let1. "With that patient sittin~ down, x't)t~ have Ids ~mdi- xSded attention," he says. "Ile~ soaking up more than if we were just standing there. It,s seen ~s serious business." "1 nevep realized how inefficient pharmacists ave. We don't have to answer every phone call or talk to every doctor." Nelson says another added benefit of the cot, nseling desk is that otl~er pa- tients no lo~,ger i~dern~pt while he is' counseling someone, something they used to do before be remodeled. Pa- tients waiting fi,' a pharmacist are seat- ed in chairs near the center of the phar- macy. "Noxx; they respect the fact l'm sitting, talking to another patient. I I,tx'en't trained them lo wait there, but llwy do it~" sa)'s Nelson. l;~trlher, tl~e pharmac), desk is "a sell- ing tool," he explai,s. "'Fhe patients sit- ting in the wailing area want the same t3~e of se~x'ice" they see being given at the pharmacy desk. "It raises the level of expectation of the customer." At the left end of the pharmacy is a "Prescription Pick-Up" area where ~ents e:m quickly get fl~eir mffls. Teeh~- cians do their work at the center of the counlen Merchandise such as x4tamins, herbs, fbminine hy~ene products m~<t pm- ph)'lactics me placed in fixmt of this ~ea. Another cha,ge was reclesiguing the sl~elving and storage for prescription cln~gs. Nelson replaced the traditional "pharmacy bays" that run pe~l~endieu- lar to the counter with large shelves that run parallel to counter. Eigh~,-six percent of the medications dispensecl at ~e)'nolcls Drugs are held on the new sl~elves. Nelson monitored all prescriptions Ibr a 45-clay period and phtc'ecl tl,e most fre(luentl'v dispensed drugs on the new shelves so pharmacists or, technicians could simply turn aro~ind, get the drug, and dispense it. Patients are pleased that they aren't w~ting ~ long to get their prese~pfions filled. Noxx; on average, O~ey w~fit l~veen three and seven minutes, saw Nelson. In addition, the phan~acy now bas adjustable sheMng so each shelf can be An Uplifting Experience Roland Nelson hasn't been paid for much of the phar- macy care he has performed for his patients. Nonethe- less, a recent experience left him feeling optimistic that eventually, he'll be reimbursed for his efforts. Nelson was paid $150 for helping a man suffering from impotence. The Iongtime patient had visited the urologist and, he told Nelson, he was dismayed because a pair of nurses there told him his only options for a cure were using a pump or a regular combination injec- tion of Regitine and papaverine. Nelson says he offered to perform a "pharmacothera- py outlook" and review'the patient's prescription and over-the-counter medications, for a fee. After the review, Nelson recommended the patient be taken off two of his medications, including Inderal, and the patient's physician agreed. The recommendation proved a success and the patient's impotence was cured. "He was happy to pay [the fee]," Nelson recalls. "Then, he took that to his insurance company, and they balked. They said they didn't pay for these kinds of services. "This guy was a hard-nosed fellow, though," chuckles Nelson. "He said that was fine, he'd just start taking the Inderal again, and then start the Regitine therapy at $79 a month for the rest of his life. The woman at the insur- ance company said she'd have to call her supervisor. The insurance company ended up paying." Nelson hopes that customer demand for pharmacy care will lead to the day when ."eventually, our paycheck will be proportional to the number of patients we care for and case-manage." That will. be a slow process, though, he predicts, "probably five years away." And when pharmacists begin getting paid for services, Nelson says he has "some off-the-wall" ideas about how it should be done. "1 don't want insurance companies to pay," he muses. "I'd rather have patients receive the services and set their value. If we let insurance companies [decide what to] pay for it, they'll do the same thing as they do now [with dispensing rates]." Perhaps not such an off-the-wall idea at all. AMERICAN DRIJ(;(;IST o .JANUARY 1996 27 set at a different height to accommodate packages and bottles of vaD,ing sizes. This allowed NelSOll lO create a variety of small si,elves of various heights and resuhed in 28% additional space. Physical changes in the Reynolds Drug pharmac), were accompanied by changes in the work flow. The phone system was revamped so it only rings in the pharmac); and only the pharmacy cashier is desig~mled to answer it. The pha!'macy also developed a pti- vale voice mailbbx for ph)'sieians, who can call the line directly and leave a mes- sage to approve prescription changes. Technicians filling refills now work separately from the pharmacist, too. "Previously, when teehs asked ques- tions, the pharmacist tended to push them aside and say '~t me show yOU,'" says Nelson. By eliminating that ~peet of the relationship, technicians have be- come more independent, saving time fo,' themselves and tl~e pharmacists. Nelson says he is "not a guru" when it comes to remodeling or re-engineering -- he was merely able to see beyond stone of the inefficiencies passed dom through generations of pharmacists. "You need to get out of the box" and see pharmac7 in a new way, he saTs. One of the best rewards, Nelson adds, is that "once you do it, patients love it." Taking 'Care' of Business Roland Nelson and his staff are ready to expand their efforts to practice what he calls "pharmacy care," now that Reynolds Drug has been remodeled and re-engi- neered. Among the disease states Nelson is tackling are diabetes, asthma and hypertension. The pharmacy recently held a seminar for about 75 'people with diabetes at a local hotel with a diabetes ed- ucator making a presentation. The pharmacy has since helped four or five patients with monitoring the disease. Nelson also has managed therapy for one asthma pa- tient for the past year, and the patient's peak-flow read- lng has improved to over 200, Prior to receiving pharma- cy care,'he had a maximum reading of 150. Even better, Nelson adds, the patient only visited the emergency room once in 1995 ~ compared with six visits in 1994. Nelson gives this patient a medical chart where he can record when and if he has taken his medication, and the results of his peak-flow readings. Results are entered into the pharmacy computer monthly, when the patient comes in to pick up a new chart. The pharmacy is also setting the stage for 'managing patients' hypertension. "We see 20 to 30 patients a week who have hyper- tension," says Nelson. Pharmacists have measured pa- tients' blood pressure manually using a stethoscope and inflatable cuff since the late 1970s, but now record the data on a computer. When a patient is heading to the physician, Nelson prints out the readiags for a given time period and displays them in graph form. "We have never, and we never will, use a machine to take blood pressure readings," he says. "There is some- thing to be said for touching the patient. It's hard to build trust and a relationship unless there's touch." Pharmacists at the store also ask patients with hyper- tension a series of. open-ended questions to learn more about their condition. Nelson says he decided to start down the path to pharmacy care because "the writing is on the wall. This is where we're heading. Pharmacy care starts one pa- tient at a time." Pharmacists, says Nelson, already have the knowl- edge to practice pharmacy care, they just need to have the confidence. "It's like when you first get out of school and you're afraid of patients asking you questions," he explains. "You wonder 'Will I be able to answer them?'" Nelson's own worries, however, were alleviated soon after he re-engineered his business. 'One doctor knew what we were trying to do with the pharmacy," recalls Nelson. 'He called me and said '1 have a patient coming in 45 minutes. She's on methotrexate. I need to know her BSA.' He gave me her height and weight. '1 got off the phone and thought, 'What is a BSA?'" With a little research, Nelson discovered the meaning of BSA ~ body surface area. "Now, I own that," he says. "You never stop learning." The education process, though, is easier than the mo- tivation process, Nelson says. It has been difficult for the Reynolds staff, Nelson included, to make what amounts to a paradigm shift. 'We're no different than 95% of pharmacists. Our pharmacists talk about how many prescriptions they filled yesterday," he says. "1 want them to say how many new diabetics we served. How many signed up for the new hypertension management program?" Nelson says his own daughter, out of pharmacy school less than two years, is as hooked on filling, counting and pouring as he is. This philosophy is reinforced because "the number-one job the pharmacist does in a communi- ty setting is to fill those prescriptions. Why is that? If you don't do that, you don't get paid." Another problem for pharmacists is %onvincing insur- ance providers we can't do their job and our job, too. That is so frustrating," he says. "You get a high by mak- lng an intervention or helping a patient. And right after that you spend 35 to 40 minutes getting a $5 prescrip- lion to go through the computer. It takes you from the top of the mountain to the bottom of the valley." Nonetheless, he says, he is confident a critical mass of pharmacy care pharmacists will develop, and change~ the perception of the profession. 'I'm back to practicing pharmacy the way I did in 1964, when I took care of patients," says Nelson. "I'd do a manual patient profile to keep track of drug interac- tions as much as to remember Mrs. Jones' first name and the names of her kids. We're moving to pharmacy care, and I just want to keep going forward." ~ Michael Slezak JANUARY 1996 · AMERICAN i)iII. J(;GIST .By l b 1 vey cha of I flee cisl hal th( pe, Pierson Publication Reimbursement Focus ...... In Wisconsin and other states, pharmacists are risking thousands of dollars to create practices that focus on patient care in the hope that their efforts will be recognized,- and rewarded monetarily. Pharmacist John Bohhnan invested in store improvements, staff training and software in order to implement new patient care model in his pharmacy in Boscobel, Wisconsin. Pharmacies Redesign PractiCes, and (Some) Payers Respond David Vaczek A practice model that enables macies are redefining the focus of their . nerstone of an aggressive program to pharmacist~ to focus on practices and adopting methods that roll out a standard patient care manage- patient care withot, t the - allow a more hands-on approach to ment system into the marketplace. distractions of administra- patient care, which includes teaching "It's risky. This will put our pharma- tive tasks is taking a group of Wiscon- patients how to manage their own cists ot~t in front of the patients," says sin pharmacists into a brave new world health. In these "ground-up" revisions, John ~hhnan, who is spending $7,000 0fpatient care management, the pharmacies are each spending thou- for store improvements, staff training, In a conversion process of six to sands of dollars for store improvements, and software to implement the model nine months duration, 38 state phar- training and new software to imple- in his Boscobel, Wisconsin, pharmacy. ment the Pharmcare practice model "We will be educating the patients .................................................................. David Vaczek is a Westchester, New i designed by Pharmaceutical Care Set- on their care so that they will have a York-based freelance medical andphar- . vices, Inc., Waco, Texas. much better idea of what outcomes to mac)' writer, i The Wisconsin Pharmacists Associ- expect," says ~hlman, adding: "The ............................... ' ation has picked Pharmcare as the cor- patient is going to be the final judge. Continued ~ January 1995 Pharmacy Times 23 Reimbursement Focus One of Several Models. Pharmcare is one of several practice models that have recently emerged that offer sys- tems for pharmacists to expand patient care services beyond traditional DUR interventions and focus on determining the outcomes of drug therapies. In per- forming tests and developing lab values when needed, in communicating with other caregivers, and in following stan- dardized treatment strategies, pharma- cists in these models are blazing a trail which all of retail pharmacy will inevitably follow, many contend. Meanwhile, patients and a number of pioneering payers, who have recog- nized that pharmacists are uniquely qualified to "keep patients between the lines" in drug therapy and health care management, have increasingly sig- naled interest in reimbursing pharma- cists for these expanded patient care ser- vices. Pharm~:are's success in Wisconsin, and in the 11 other states where it is being tried, doesn't only rest with the reception it receives from enlightened patients, who will often be the ones deciding whether or not to pay for addi- tional services. Institutional payers are also evaluating pharmacists' ability to improve outcomes and reduce medical costs, as pharmacists begin to set the rates they hope to charge for these "cog- nitive services." The Wisconsin project has found cause for optimism on that score. The program has kindled interest in a major state insurer and in the state's Medicaid program. The private insurer, Wisconsin Physicians' Services (WPS), has agreed to pay for the pharmacy management - services provided by the 38 pharmacies on a trial basis for one year. WPS was attracted to Pharmcare's approach to work-flow management, which leaves the pharmacist~physi- cally situated away from the counter~ to concentrate on patient counseling 24 Pharmacy Times .January 1995 and drug monitoring. Technicians are assigned to collection of patient data, product dispensing, and administrative tasks. "I like the work-flow changes. That kind of commonsense approach to the problem was the first thing that attracted us to the program. Pharmacists haven't often been available to provide these services," says David Armstrong, WPS's pharmacy benefits director. The insurer will process 3.3 million claims in 1994, administers the state's Medicare Part B progrmn, and is the regional administrator for the Champus military Medicare program for civilian depen- dents. In the trial starting January 1, 1995, WPS will pay pharmacists a fixed amount--S25 for an mdividt,al, $50 for a family~to cover patient care services for a year. The money isn't paid until the pharmacist enlists the patient into the program, which requires a 20% patient co-pay. The payment method is "just for the study period. It is not the way we necessarily see cognitive ser- vices being financed in the future," says Armstrong. Under Watch by Medicaid. The Pharmcare program is'also being closely watched by Wisconsin Medicaid administrators, who arc planning develop an incentive-based reimburse- ment system for pharmacy services, says Kevin Piper, Wis.consin's Director ~f Health Care Financing. "We want to bc one of the payers of pharmacy services. We believe very firmly in the gt×x] and expertise of the pharmacy commu. nity, and that what is in their interest is also in the interest of patients and tax- payers," says Piper, who is working with the pharmacists association and the University of Wisconsin in a study to develop a rei,nbursement system. Piper says an incentive payment sys- tem might take one of three forms: a fee-for-service schedule with varied pay- ments based on the type of interven- tion; payment based on a retrospective review of performance; or paying the pharmacist a fixed amount per month to act as the patient's case manager or care c~rdinator. Piper believes an incentive payment system for pharmacists would contribute to the health care savings that Medicaid plans to achieve through the launch of a planned on-line prospective DUR sys- tem and a retrospective DUR system cugently being developed. Medicaid and WPS both anticipate significant health care savings in reduced hospital visits and lower drug costs as a result of pharmacists' care-giv- ing activities. In a budget proposal 'to the gover- nor's ofl~ce, Piper has projected that the Medicaid program would save $12.5 million a year with the implementation of the DUR systems and a pharmacists' incentive payment program. WPS's goal in the Pharmcare test is to'reduce patients' overall medical costs by 9 -.> ,o~a substantial saving consider- ing the escalation in health care expen- ditures in recent years. That saving would allow an estimated three-to-one return on its investment, according to .Armst rang. T(, date, Wisc(msin's experience with a new approach to pharmacy ser- vices is typical of what fs happening across the country. Pharmacies are test- lng vari, n~s new ;~pprt~aches t~) interven- tion and patient management, as payers l~k f,~r results. The Pbarmcare program, developed by former Waco, Texas, pharmacist Jeanne Ann Stasny, is being used by 150 pharmacies so far, says Howard Biel, vice president of pharmacy operations. Two-year-old CarePoint, Inc., a Charleston, South Carolina, company, is marketing a program similar to Pharmcare's, that employs training, Hyd 0 ] C I ., J$cephble .'~$ IOp~C al .~d In the Iungal Or no! OCCu~ has been Id recemve )r etlernal ,der oihe~ ~ ~',r aDDed ally unCle~ ~ d~ape's HPA ~'S ~at s~ud,es ecl 0~ ~et- ~ an,reals laDofalofy won~en on )Decal cot ~ltens,vely cosle~o~ds ~s ~n .1~ in q~an- '*On should lo IOD~Cff1 :SS~On ,ce 8re8 [o Cushmgs ~ ~ecewlng :lude hnear O absence ,on include ~ of topical al~ble Wllh ~ ~epoded ~lh the use asmg order aCnedorm ~s. maceta- fit amounlS ~ him I~om d~ess~ngs If an ~nfec. ~opfop~ale :bes. NDC I lubes. R5186 92FHY25.~ Reimbursement Focus . . work-flow chan~es, store.redesign, and software that supports a patient-focused pract ice. Pharmacists ()cctq~y a separate coun- selin~ r,~(,n and peflbrm Jal~ ~estin~ that uwei~ ~l~e (:Jinical l.al,(,rat(,'ics I~l,r(wu~ue~t Act ~t;~tJ;~rtJs in I JcaJtJ~ t3t~c,~ws, I~lc.'~ I,r~,~ram, whicJ) k'lcKc~s~,n h:~ j, ,i~t'tJ a~ a l,arl~wr. maci~ts in the recently launcJlcd t',ased l Jealth Outcomes fl~cus on c~nditions, affecting i6% of patients~ a~thma, diabetes, hypertensi<m and high ch,)lester~d~where interventi(ms Cilll Jlave the m()st impact (~ll COSTS, chief executive T(,n R~scnthal. Launched in 3 Stores. Lip and run- nin~ in three CVS st(Ires today, the pro- gram will be targeted to McKesson's Valu-Rite pharmacies next year. are teaching the (CVS) pharmacies how to implement it, and testing it with patients to find out what xvorks and what doesn't work," says Rosenthal. Lucinda Maine, senior director for pharmacy affairs at APhA, observes: "The practice models are in an advanced state of continUous evolution. We learn something every day about what we know or don't know." While pharmacies seek to reach a "consensus on what the core components of the model are," interest in paying for ser- vices has gained momentum among payers, Maine notes. The Pharmcare model has received support frown state associations and pharmacies, which feel a "ground-up" approach is needed to allow pharmacists full scope in exercising their communi- cation and cognitive skills. The Illinois Pharmacists Association, for example, is training pharmacies in the m~el, with a goal of 2~ pharmacies in the program by the end of 1996, says Mark Pilking- ton, executive director. "We wanted a model of practice /' ~t~re t~..onq me ~~ / services include. "' "~:::~(-''~&5~:~:-~:~'?;~?~h~~~,-_ ~ ~ / J Ass~iation, ChriS J 312-939-73~.. "'.:'~::-/-7.5.{~?~:::?????_~?~(.)~__ ...:'~;5'~':.~..~¢~?~L~?~?' J Texas, HowaM Bid, vice · 5922. :"'-: '" :'.'"'~:= -'" t::'' . -' ':: -':~' :-';-~ -..-.":;t:.:??'?- · CareVoint Total Pharmaceutical Care Program m6del' O~r~°P~, i~a:; '~::'-'' Charleston, Sou~ Oarolin~, 1-8~-296- 1825. -- ' · Health Outcomes Inc., Richmond,.Virginia, Tom Ro~¢nt~l,' CEO, 804- ~59-3995. "' : · Institute of Pha~aceutical Ca~e, University of Minnes0m, o~oing throe-year demonstration p~oject to develop a m~¢l for pha~ac~ Some training materials are available. Linda Strand, Ma~ Ann Tomechko, 612-622-18]0. · "Achieving Value kom Pharmacists' Services," pamphlet, AP~ Mitch Rothholz, 202-429-2549. · Pharmacist' care claim form, ~d information on payers ~or se~,ices, NARD Management Institute, Ken Whittemore, ~03-68]-82~. Q (that sUpports) a philosophy of caring. We will be selling these concepts to the patients, first and foremost," Pilkington says. Wisconsin is aiming to enroll I00 pharmacies a year, says Chris Decker, executive vice president. The WPA has committed $80,000 to help roll out its program--the Wisconsin Pharmaceuti- cal Care Initiative. "We determined it was do-or-die time for pharmacy practice, and that the window of opportunity for us to demonstrate our value to the health care system was, and still is, quite nar- row, and vetT real," says Decker. '"There is simply no economic future in the dispensing of prescription drugs. There is no question we need to change our business focus, and no question soci- ety has a need for drag therapy manage- ment. What we are striving to do is si'tow tha.t pharmacists have all impact beyond the cost of the drug. They are caregivers, not just purveyors of drug prcxJucts," says Decker. The success in its new initiative, and the future of pharmacy, Decker feels, depends on the extent to which phar- macies rally behind the patient care experiment. Says Decker: "The ball is definitely in our cot, rt." ~ January 1995 Pharmacy Times 27 'M. Marlene Oodoy. D.D.'S. General and Cosmetic Dentistry 13420 Newpod Ave,, Suite L Tustin, C:alifornio 924)80 OITy OF TL;S~ ~O ~,,, Marlene Godoy, D.D.~. General and Cosmetic Dentistry 15420 Newport Ave., Suite L Tusfin., Colifornio 92680 M. Marlene Godoy. D.D.S. General and Cosmetic Dentistr, V. 15420 Newpod Ave., Suite L Tusfin, Cc~lifornia 92680 ROBERT E. DREIBELBIS, M.D. 2-13-96 City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Calif. 92680 Attn: Sara J. Pashalides RE: Walgreens Pharmacy Dear.Ms. Pashalides, I am concerned about the Walgreens Pharmacy construction for the following reasons: 1. I am concerned about the traffic back up on to Newport Ave. which would directly impede cars getting to and leavin~ my property. The site plan ~oes not have enough parking and queuing at the drive thru windows will directly lead to back up of traffic. The lot is too small for this business. 2. I am concerned for safety an~ crime,when queuing takes place and potential for carrying drugs outside'of pharmacy occurs an increase in crime will happen. 3. I am concerned about aesthetic of new buildin~ since it does not conform to spanish type typical construction. The site is an extremely visible location in Tustin. 4. The changeable monument sign does not conform to area. 5. As directly adjacent property owner, I would like to see soil. studies over time showing non seepage to my property. Sincerely, ~,M.~~. 13420 Newport Ave., #D · Tustin, CA 92680 · (714) 544-6050 Paul D. Braun, D. D. S. Diplomate of the American Board of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery February 13,. 1996 City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Ca. 92680 Attn: Sara J. Pashalides RE: Walgreens Pharmacy I am very concerned about the Walgreens pharmacy construction for the following reasons: ~ 1. The traffic back up on to Newport Ave. which would directly impede cars getting to and leaving my property. The site plan does not have enough parking and queuing at the drive thru windows will directly lead to back up of traffic. The lot is too small fOr this business! 2. I am very concerned for safty and crime! When.queuing takes place and potential for carrying drugs outside of pharmacy occurs an increase in crime will happen. 3. The site is an extremely visible location in Tustin. I am concerned about the aesthetics of the new building since.it will not conform to the spanish type contruction which is so prevalent in this area. 4. Also the Changeable Monument Sign will not conform to our area. 5. Most importantly, as a directly adjacent property owner I would like to see soil studies over time showing non-seepage to my property! I look forward to hearing from'you as I am very interested in your response on these very critical issues! Critical for me as a business owner but critical for the city of Tustin as well! Si~erely' . ~~ ~~ ~ Braun, D.D.S. A Professional Corporation 2401 W. Chapman Ave., Ste. 101 Orange, California 92668 (714) 939-7505 13362 Newport Ave., Ste. G Tustin, California 92680-3492 (7,14) 838-4141 DAVID A. COHEN, M.D. Internal Medicine 13362 C Newport Avenue Tustin, California 92680 Telephone: 838-4160 Febuary 13,1996 City of Tustin Community Development Dept. Tustin, Ca 92680 Attentin:Sara Pashatides . . RE: Walgreens Pharmacy Dear Ms. Pashalides In regards to the proposed Walgreens Pharmacy at NeWport Ave and First Street. I have concern due to the traffic back up on Newport'Ave. Newpoct"Ave is a very well traveled street with an abundant amount of traffic which a drive-thru pharmacy will not help in any way. It will make it difficult for patients leaving my office to exit the parking lot to Newport while cars wait in the drive-thru. I also have concern regarding the parking. The previous business had an accident in where an automobile hit the building and damaged an examining room, not to mention the scare it gave patients as well as the staff. At that time the area was not used as a parking lot. I feel the property .is to small to have this type of business,and possibly not enough parking spaces for the patrons. David A. Cohen,M.D. DAC/pd ! \ RONALD W. COTLIAR, M.D., F. AiA.D. DIPLOMATE AMERICAN 8OARD OF DERMATOLOGY 13420 NEWPORT AVENUE. SUITE G TUSTIN. CALIFORNIA 92680 (714) 731-0061 ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF DERMATOLOGY - UCLA MEDICAL CENTER DIRECTOR OF PEDIATRIC DERMATOLOGY - UCLA MEDICAL CENTER February 13, 1996 Sara J. Pashalides City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Dear Ms. Pashalides: Re: Walgreens Pharmacy As a practicing physician in Tustin, I am concerned about the Walgreens Pharmacy construction for the following reasons: 1. I am concerned about the traffic· back-np onto Newport Avenue which would directly impede cars getting to and leaving my property. The site plan does not have enough parking and queuing at the drive through windows will directly lead to back-up of traffic. The lot is too small for this business. 2. I am concerned for safety and crime. When queuing takes place and potential for carrying drugs outside of the phar- macy occurs, an increase in crime will happen. 3. I am concerned about aesthetics of new building since it does not conform to the spanish-type typical construc- tion. The site is an extremely visable location'in Tustin. 4. I am concerned that the changeable monument sign does not conform to the area. 5. As a directly adjacent property owner, I would like to see soil studies over time'showing non-seepage to my proPerty. Ronald W. Cotliar, M.D. ~ SANDHAM MEDICAL GROUP RICHARD W. SANDHAM, M.D. 13372 NEWPORT. SUITE C TUSTIN, CA 92680 (714) 544-7632 TOLL FREE: February 12, 1996 City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 82680 Attn. Sara J. Pashalides Re proposed Walgreen's Pharmacy at Newport Ave. and First Street. I am concerned with the effects that this development might well have on traffic at an already congested comer. The ingress and egress of cars in a "drive through" format where patrons would have to wait for their prescriptions to be filled would very likely add to the congestion and obstruction of traffic flow that occurs now. There are also concerns for the aesthetics architecturally and the appropriateness of the type of signs proposed. I have occupied space in the adjacem medical cemer for over 20 years and have been able to observe the changes that have occurred. ! have observed numerous accidents related to the many cars and trucks around this intersection. I feel that the increasing traffic is indeed a problem that could onlY be worsened by this proposed usage of this property. Please deliberate carefully and thoroughly about this matter! Thank you. Sincerely, Richard W. Sandham M.D. SAM I~ABINOWITZ, M.D. Diplo,nate. American Acacle'my of Family Practice · 12462 Brookhurst Ave., Suite A · Garden Grove, CA 92640 ° 714/741-3220 13362 Newport Ave., Suite A ° Tustin, CA 92680 ° 714/505-7770 February 13, 1996 City of Tustin Community Developement Dept. 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Ca. 92680 Attn: Sara J. Pashalides This letter is in regards to the Walgreen's Pharmacy that is to be built on the corner of First and Newport in Tustin. As an employee in the medical facility next door I am concerned. Allowing this pharmacy to locate here will compoUnd an already difficult 'traffic situation. Especially with the addition of a drive thru.window, the potential for back up traffic is great. The size of this lot is not large enough to accomodate the parking necessary for this business. I am also concerned about the possibility of an increase in crime with two Pharmacies so close together. This could become a central location for theft because of the assumed availability. Thank you for considering these concerns. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions. · , Siner'ely, Karen Mqnis Office Manager FEBURARY 12, 1996 CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 300 CENTENNIAL WAY TUSTIN, CA 92680 ATTN: SARA J. PASHALIDES I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE WALGREENS PHARMACY CONSTRUCTION FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS... 1. CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC BACK UP ON TO NEWPORT AVE, WHICH WOULD DIRECTLY IMPEDE CARS GETTING TO AND LEAVING MY PROPERTY. THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH PARKING AND QUEUING AT THE DRIVE THRU WINDOWS WILL DIRECTLY LEAD TO BACK UP OF TRAFFIC. THE LOT IS TOO SMALL FOR THIS BUSINESS. 2. CONCERN FOR SAFETY AND CRIME. WHEN QUEUING TAKES PLACE AND POTENTIAL FOR CARRYING DRUGS OUTSIDE A PHARMACY OCCURS AN INCREASE IN CRIME WILL HAPPEN. 3. CONCERNED ~ABOUT AESTHETIC OF NEW BUILDING SINCE IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO SPANISH TYPE TYPICAL CONSTRICTION THE SITE IS AN~ EXTREMELY VISIBLE LOCATION IN TUSTIN. CHANGEABLE MONUMENT SIGN DOES NOT CONFORM TO AREA. 5. AS DIRECTLY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOIL STUDIES OVER TIME SHOWING NON~ SEEPAGE TO My PROPERTY. TUSTIN, CA 92680 James J. Zahrowski, D.M.D., M.S. Practice Limited to Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial .Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attention Sara J. Pashalides February 13, 1996 Re: Walgreens Pharmacy construction at Newport and First St. As a business owner I am concerned about the Walgreens Pharmacy construction for the following reasons: I o o e · Concern about the traffic back up on to Newport Avenue . which would directly impede cars getting to and'leaving from our place of'business. The site plan does not have enough parking. The lines of cars at the drive through windows will.directly lead to a back tp-of traffic. The lot is too small for this business. Concern for safety and crime. When queuing takes place and potential for carrying drugs outside of the pharmacy occurs, an increase in crime will happen. Concern about the aesthetics of the new building, since it does not conform to a SPanish type typical construction. The site is an extremely visible location in Tustin. Changeable monument sign does not conform to the area. Thank you for your time on this matter! Sincerely, 13372 Newport Ave., Suite E. · Tusfin · CA · 92680 · (714) 544-5345 DIPLOMATES AMERICAN BOARD Of PEDIATRICS FEBRUARY 13, 1996 SUBJECT: WALGREENS PHARMACY TO: CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department We are writing in regaurds to the Walgreen Pharmacy project. We are very concerned about having a drive through pharmacy at the present location suggested. Our concerns are as follows: 1. concernedabout the traffic back up on to Newport Ave. which would directly impede cars getting to and leaving our office parking for patients. The site plan does not have enough queing for a drive though window and also not enough parking space availability. 2. concern for safety and crime. When queuing takes place and potential for carrying drugs outside of pharmacy occurs an increase in crime will happen. 3. concern~ed about aesthetic of'new building since it does not conform to spanish type typical construction. The site is an extremely visible location of Tustin. 4. changeable monument sign does not conform to area. Please take the time to consider our concerns. Hitesh Patel, M'.D. Sangeeta Pate1, M.D. Carol T. Swartz, M.D. 13372 NEWPORT AVENUE 0 SUITE B '?' TUSTiN,-CA 92680 0 (714) 544-3430 ~ FAX (71'4) 573-8330 MARVIN lC SHAPIRO, M.D., INC. Internal Medicine 13362 NEWPORT AVE., SUITE B TUSTIN, CALIFOR~NIIA 92680 Telephone 838-1351 2/13/96 City. of Tustin Connmmity DevelgDment Dept 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 I wish to register an objection to the pro- posed Walgreens Pharmacy at the corner of Newport and First St. ' There is clearly no need for another drug store in thes area. There would be further interference with the already heavy traffic here. There is in- adequate parking at the site. Also, it seems the building would not fit in well aesthet- ically to the area. Sincerely, Marvin R. Shapiro, M.D. DR. WALTER F. COMBS OPTOMETRIST TUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER SUITE D 13372 NEWPORT AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92680 TELEPHONE 544-4810 City of Tustin Community Development Dept. 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA. 92680 Attn- Sara J. Pashalides I have been a doctor in the Tustin Medical Center for 30 years. We have just enough parking for our own patients now & its very crowded at times. A new Walgr~een's Pharmacy on the corner of 1st and Newport Ave. is way too small to allow adequate parking. Our already over'- burdened parking would then take Walgreen's great overflow-? create havoc in our center. This would cause great hardship for our' patients. Also there would be a greater potentiai for crime in our area because of the carrying of drugs. We also have found out that the building would not conform to the ~'panish style, architecture of the Medical Center & would stand'out like a sore thumb on the highly visible corner of our center. A changeable monument sign also detracts from the area. Finally, I would like to see soil studies done over time showing non seepage to my property. · ~ Sincerely, ~....~~~ Dr. W.F. Combs MICHAEL J. PAQUETTE, D.D.S. Family Dentistry. Cosmetic Dentistry February 26, 1996 City of Tustin Community Development 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attention: Sara Pashalides Subject: Walgreens RXpress Newport & First Street Dear Ms. Pashalides: It has come to my attention that Walgreens i's proposing to build a 1,976 square foot drive-thru pharmacy at the'southeast corner of Newport Avenue and First Street. My office is located in the professional complex next door to this proposed development and I am concerned about the increase in traffic which will result with a drive-thru service. It is currently very difficult to make a left-hand turn into the parking area because of traffic lined up to make a left turn onto First Street. Having a drive-thru on this very busy corner will only aggravate the current traffic situation. Sincerely, Michael J. ~quet~e, D.D.S. 13420 Newport Ave., Suite C, Tustin, CA 92680 (714) 838-7561 February 21, 1996 Ms. S~a J. Pashdides Associate Pl~ncr .Cky ofTustin Plannia$ Dcpamcnt 300 Cente~ Way Tua~ Ca. 926~0 i Subject' Wdgrcens Rx Press : First & Newport Tustin. Ca. ~.e: Letter dated February 12, 1996 from Randolph Oswald Partners De,~r Ms Pashslides: We are in receipt of the latter from Randolph Oswald Panners (R.OP) opposing' the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for the Walgreens Poc Prcss at the above Iocat{on. After careful rex4ew whh our Store Operations/Health Service (Pharmacy) Management to verify how the Rx Press urlits fi~netion, and review of the planning process that Waigreens ~d the City of. Tustin has entered into that has lead to the architectural design and site l?.yout for this project, we would like to offer t.he following response: 1) Walgreens standard sign package for both R.x Presses and-full size stores includes a pylon sign v,~th a readerboard. As the nations leading drug store chain, operating more than 2,1'00 units, we feel that it is not only appropriate to have a ceaderboard, but that the ability to notify, the consumer of ongoing Health Care Specials is an integral part of operational success. Because of that, we are pursing ~. conditional'use permit for the readerboard portion of'the monument sign that we understand is pe .rmitted by code. 2) Although we feel strongly that the design, image and construction of our prototypical Kx Press units is that of a first class retailer, we have agreed to modify the exterior design and building materials based on numerous reviews and discussio~ with the city. Signage for this project will not exceed that permitted by code. ATTACHMENT D February 2 l, 1996 ,'vis P;shalid¢; page 2 3,4) The. property is'large enough to accommodate our building (which is designed with two separate drive-thru window~ to minimize queuing and maximize ~peed/service), 1'0 parking spaces which meets the city requirements, and "e;c~po" lanes'around the building (a Walgreens requirement) which allows a vehicle full access of the site even if there are customers at both the drive-thru windows. ,4, traffic study was prepared by aa independent traffic engineering firm, RKJK & Associates, Inc., and was based on the ex_isling Orange County Rx P/'ess unit which has been in operation the longest. Thcs' concluded That the parking provided "will accommodate the parking demands in the . project", and that "the proposed site plan for the Walgr.eens lb: Press is adequate from a traffic circulation stand point". It is our understanding that th/s report has been reviewed and accepted by the City of Tustin Traffic Engineer. Additionally, the worst case scenario presente~l by KOP (as shown oa their marked up site plan) does not block, traffic on either Newport Avenue or First Street, and most certainly does not block traffic on any adjacent or near-by properties. 1) The number of parking spaces at the Tustin location, as welt as all other locations is a function of the land available. The parking provided at the Tus'tin site meets both the city requirements and Walgreens criteria. 2) This Walgreens Facility does not include "One Hour" Photo 'processing'm does the Lincoln & Magnolia facility which ROP cited, and therefore has one less employee. Daily operation~ will provide for one Phannacist and one clerk at the time the store opens. They will be relieved for tho ~,eaing shift by a second Ph0j'maeist and clerk. The short time that they overlap oc_,c,~rs before 5:00 p.m., and therefore a more accurate estimation of parking available for customers is 8 spaces. 3) Most of the prescriptions are phoned in and are fdled in advance of the patient arriving. Of those patients who drop off prescriptions themselves, most leave the premises after that very short exchange and return later to pick up prescriptions that have already been filled. The pichng up transaction, including patient consultatio~ takes an average of 2-3 minutes.. This quick service is 'entirely consistent ,Mth the convenience philosophy of the Rx Press program. February 21, 1996 Ms. Pashalides Page 3 1) Walgreens would not purme a site plan layout without serious'concern and consideration for the ~afety of employees, patrons and the public in general. Based on the traffic report provider, ~nd on our extensive eXperience in re~all site planning, we not only feel the site layout is adequate, but safe as well. 2) The traffic study was based on p 'ezdc hour traffic at the existing-Lincoln & Magnolia store, which has not only been open longer th~n the other two R.x Presses in this market, .. but was the busiest store at the time the traffic study was performed. It is interesting that both the traffic report and the ROP data, gathered at peak hours, suggest queuing for two cars is more the norm. The ~ite plan easily accommodates two cars, ~nd in fact aca. ommodates three ears without impending traffic flow on the site. 1) Conversations with Walgreens Pharrnaclst~ operating existing RX Presses stores indicates that it is extremely.rare when there ~e more than two cars queued at either of the Drive-thru windows. 2) As previously stated, it is Wtlgreens opinion, as well as the Traffic Engineer' s, that the site is designed to provide adequate parking as well as adequate queuing. 1) The drive-thru lanes have been intentionally designed to include an "escape" lane, which not only helps eliminate traffic congestio~ but i~ a customer convenience- · 2) The facility is imentionally designed with two dfivo-thru windows to provide C°nvenienoe and eliminate on-site tr~ffi¢ congestion_ 3) Any planter medians introduced to the site plan are at the request of the City ot'Tustin. Walgreens would be agreeable to reducing or eliminating them if' they are not required. 4) We agree that Pharmacy Drive-thru windows are not the same as McDonalds Drivo- thru windows, although one must be familiar with Walgreens Rx Press Drive-thru fac. ilities to understand how they differ from McDonalds, or for that matter, other Pharmacy Drive- thrus. FebrUary 21. 1996 Ms. Pasha]ides page 4 As Previously stated, the majority of' the prescriptions filled ~.re either phoned in or dropped off for pick up at a later time. This allows for a prescriptlon pick up/patient consultation time that averages 2 to :3 minutes. For those patients who are in the minority, wishing to drop off their prescription and waiting until it has been filled, wo offer the option of waiting inside the store or being issued 'a pager so that as they wait in a parking space they. will be alerted when the prescription b ready.' Convenience. and quick service being the cornerstone of the Rx Press program, even/eaton is made to fill the prescription in much less time then the 20-30 minutes cited in the KOP letter. 5) Walgreens s/re selection process takes a very in-depth look at every site for demograp.hics, population densities, competition, traffic counts and patterns, and a host of other factors. This sophisticated and painstaking review process means two things: 1) Only the very best sites' are ~pproved, and 2) The likelihood for a successful store is extremely high. Based on W~gr¢~ns track record for selecting superior sites, we have 'every reason to believe this will be a very successful loczfion. We appreciate the oppormrtity to respond to the concerto expressed b~"Rudolph Osward Partners. Should you have any questions or ned additional infonmfion please do not hesitate Io contact me at (847) 940-3373. . Yours Truly, Richard $. Coen, AIA Project Architect Wal~eens Co. W. Thien T. Bergseth G. Riedi J. Rubin J. Bandura R_ Isackson D. Sheegog Via UPS Overnight Service February 21, 1996 Ms. Sara J. Pashalides Associate Planner City of Tustin Planning Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Walgreens Rx Press Newport Boulevard / First Street Tustin, CA RECEIVED FEB 2,2 1996 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ElY .... Dear Sara: As you are aware, Village Properties is the owner of the above referenced location where Walgreens Rx Press has applied for a Conditional Use Permit. The'purpose of this letter is to respond to the letter of opposition I haVe received from Rudolph Oswald Partners (ROP). The ROP ownership certainly has taken a considerable amount of effort in generating such a lengthy and detailed opposition letter. I found this to be quite odd because in the 20 plus Walgreens projects our company has developed throughout California over the past ten years, it is rare we are subject to any neighborhood opposition as Walgreens is regarded as a neighborhood asset to communities. I have come to learn that this is not a letter of opposition from a concerned citizen, but a letter of opposition from a competitor for competitive reasons after being informed that ROP owns and operates a small pharmacy on their property. The ROP letter goes into considerable detail in reporting findings which are inaccurate and false. It is my understanding that Walgreens corporate will be sending you a letter to respond directly to the operational, traffic, parking circulation etc. issues falsely cited in the ROP letter. We have worked for well over one full year with the Planning Department and the Redevelopment Agency to bring forward to the Planning Commission a project which has addressed all the various architectural, landscaping and site plan concerns voiced by the City. In order to accommodate compatibility and architectural concerns, Walgreens has gone to great effort and expense to modify their prototype to have a Mediterranean style elevation. This store will be the only non prototype of the Walgreens Rx Press stores. The original site plan proposed, which is Walgreen's preference, (see attached) had the parking in front and the building to the rear. Walgreens has since moved the building to the front of the site and placed the parking to the rear to accommodate Planning Department design guidelines. We have had to drop the parking count to 10 spaces from 14 to accommodate the landscape guidelines. I think this demonstrates Walgreens good faith efforts to be compatible with the downtown architectural environment and to work with the City staff which is rare among large retail companies. Rl/Pashalides/Tustin WG/2-21 Ms. Sara J. Pashalides February 21, 1996 Page Two Walgreens has signed a 25 year groundlease and will make a $1,000,000 plus commitment to this location. As the most respected and successful pharmacy provider in the U.S., they do not open stores which do not operate properly. Walgreens has studied this site in detail and have hired outside professionals in malting their decision. We have received numerous inquiries for this property from one hour oil changers, drive thru fast food restaurants and other users who are often considered controversial. However, we chose to work with WalgreenS and I am confident that their unique operation at this location will be well received by the community. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the ROP letter. Sincerely, N~,w/port / Firs~ners Robert Isackson enclosures J. Rubin R. Coen D. Sheegog Rl/Pashatides,Tustin WG/2-21 ,.il 'February 7, 1996, Sam J. Pashalides . Associate Planner City of Tustin Planning Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 sdbje : Walgreens RxPress, First Street & Newpod Boulevard., Tustin TCA Job # 94039 Regarding: Justification of Reader Board Variance · Dear Sara: Together with our CUP Application 95-008, we have requested a vadance to allow a changeable copy readerboard integral with our free-standing sign, Our client, Walgreen Company, see~i this readerboard as a vital part of their business, and rarely constructs stores without this amenity. As a grounds of justification, there is another business two blocks north at the southwest comer of Newport Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, which enjoys this privilege. This business is Executors II1' Escrow. To deny Walgreens a changeable copy sign would be to deny them a privilege enjoyed by a neighboring business. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Si'n~cerely, ~ ~ . · eegog, 'ACel~ltect Principal DS/alc M:~94039~tust41 .doc SZ¢Z tlalla#a~, Sufle Sa~zta Aha, £afilor~ia Pi)ooe: llf.~$1.~G¢G fax: IH.$51. H~g RECEIVED -- HARig~J6 i To the Tustin City Council March 16,1996 I have been a resident of Tustin for about 19 years. ! have been doing business with the Tustin Pharmacy for a very long time. I.would be very upset if it were' to be driven out of business by a Walgreen Pharmacy. Small businesses are the.back bone of the-American Way and the economy. Now the Tustin City Council wants to shoot it dbwn by letting a Walgreen Pharmacy build on the corner of 1st. and Newport Ave. As we all knoW there is a sav-on Pharmacy and the Tustin Pharmacy almost in the same block--NOW we need a Waigi'een in the same block, too? To me that is Bad Planing-- Bad Idea-Bad PR. Small businesses that might be thinking of locating in Tustin will give it a little more thought, and might not do so. You are telling the world you do not care about small business, you will not support the ------II L.._'_ .... ~ ,- --, ..... ( le ec Quali y den iary with a soft touch /ti. R(~beda Dornan, D.D.S. I ,\K',ll Y 111N I 1'41R'( ! I Ml'¢ il{( ),'",IANI )IHt II AR ^NI ) I A('I^I I'^IN February 14, 1995 City of Tustin Community Development Department Attn: Ms. Sara J..Pashalides 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Dear Ms. Pashalides, [ was in Larwin Square at lunchtime today. As usual, I had to zigzag past the stopped cars near the Burger King' drive-thru. You see, there is only room for 2-3 cars in the queue so the overflow cars have to "park" helte{ skelter in the middle of traffic lanes, ,,,,,ailing their turn to get in line. Nmv it has come to my attention that the City of Tustin may allow Walgreen's to build a drive-thru pharmacy, creating a traffic snarl right next to my place of business. Please, use your foresight and do not approve of the proposed Walgreen's Drive Thru Pharmacy at the busy intersection of Newport Avenue and First Street. I have a dcntal office in the Tustin Medical Arts Plaza. It isn't news to'you that there is considerable traffic congestion along Newport Avenue, especially during the peak travel hours at lunchtime and the end of the day. I am very concerned that the inevitable traffic congestion February 19, 1996 TO: CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attn' Sara J. Pashalides RE- Proposed Walgreens Pharmacy Dear Ms. Pashalides- As a General Partner in both the Tustin Medical Dental and Selcasnan partner- ships, arid as a thirty Year resident of Tustin and occupant of the medical center, I am very concerned with some of the issues surroundinq tile proposed Walgreens pharmacy on the corner of Newport Avenue and First S~:reet. Traffic flow and safety are a major concern and we have had problems in the past where a driver lost control and actually ranched into our medical office building. I feel that anY traffic backup whatsoever at tile proposed Nalgreens drive-up window could create major problems near such a busy intersectioh. I would like-to know if Caltrans has reviewed tt~e specific site plan and what was their evaluation? Further, I am not" aware of any mention of a toxic waste clean up or environ- mental evaluation on tile corner site. Tile Union 76 gas station which occu- pied the lot for twenl:y-plus years was suddenly gone and ttleir ground tease was not renewed and I am wondering if this action was in any way related to tile clean up costs? Is there a report relating to the underground Lanks, soil condition, or other aspects of tile former service station? Finally, I-am very disappointed with the aesthetic aspect of tile proposed building. The highly visible corner is literallyin the center of town and over Ll~e past LllirLy years tile owrlers of Li~e medical center have gone to great lengths Lo keep our buildings up and maint, ain the upscale appearance of our city. Many other residents and business owners have also put forth great effort to build and/or upgrade structures in Tustin Lo a sui}(:i-ior level. To a large extent, Ll~ese efforts along with the municipal build.ing codes and Llle work of Lhe city I)uil(ling a~d planning deparLments i~ave kept our home town from lookirlg like Garden Grove or parts of Santa Aha where there is a strip mall on every corner. I feel tt~at Lhe architects hired by Walgreens have t'ls. Pashalides Page two completely missed the mark on this.project and should not be allowed' to erect this type of building. I have been advised by counsel that should our concerns'not be met and our questions answered, legal action may be necessary to obtain the information we are requesting. I sincerely hope this is not necessary. I look forward to hearing from .your department in the near future. Earl ~iern'an, M.D. Primary Care Physicians Josel,h A. Cruz, M.I). · Karen A. Fong,'M.D. · Glenn M. Jabola, M.D. · Chester D. Mojica, M.D. · Regina Y. Mojica, M.D. City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 February 13,1996 Re: Walgreens Ph,armacy Dear Ms. Pashalides, I 'am'concerned about the Walgreens Pharmacy construction for the following reasons: 1. Concerned about the traffic back up on to Newport Avenue Which would directly impede cars getting to and leaving my property. The'site plan does not have enough parking and. queing at the dri'Ve thru %zindows will directly lead to back up of traffic. The lot is too small for this business. 2. Concern for safety and crime. When queing takes place and Potential for carrying drugs outside of pharmacy occurs an increase in crime will happen. 3. Concerned about aesthetic of new bu{lding since it does not conform to spanish type typical constr~ction. The site is an extremely visible location in Tustin. 4. ~hangeable monument sign does not conform to area. Sincerely, Orion Primary Care Physicians 13372 Newpc~rt Ave., Suite I, Tustin, CA 92680 · (714) 505-1460 · Fax (714) 505-1470 City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin CA 92680 Attn: Sara J. Pashalioes RE: Walgreens Express Drug Drive Through Dear Ms. Pashaiioes, As a tenant in the medical building adjacent to Newport Ave and' First Street, I am concerned about the proposed building of the express drug drive through on the South East corner of this intersection. Presently I find it difficult to make a left turn into my location going South on Newport Avenue. With the proposed drive through traffic pattern, we will see a significant tie-up of cars on Newport Avenue possibly impacting the intersection at First Street. I don't believe the Express Drug Store lot is adequate in size to handle the accumulation of auto traffic in a drive through situation. It also appears parking on this lot will not all0w adequate spaces for both customers and employees and I anticipate a migration of the overflow into the parking spaces in our medical facilities. , Another problem is the design and appearance of the new building, which as I understand does not conform to the red file roofs of the buildings in the adjacent area. Your attention to these concerns will be deeply appreciated. Sincerely, John L. Croal, D.D.S. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-36 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-008 AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023' INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: Ao The request to approve Conditional Use Permit 95- 008 and Design Review 95-023 is considered ' a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. m o A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. C . Whereby, the City Council of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative Declaration. m o The City Council has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council, having final approval authority over Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023, has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, prior to approving the proposed project, and found that the Negative Declaration adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the City Council has found that although the proposed projects could have impacts, there will not be a significant effect because mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant'environmental effects to a point where clearly no significant effect would occur. The mitigation measures are identified in Exhibit A of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study and are adopted as findings and conditions of Resolution No. 96- 37. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-36 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the 15th day of April, 1996. JIM POTTS Mayor PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; 'that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-36 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 15th day of April, 1996, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 RESOLUTION NO. 96-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95- 008 AND DESIGN REVIEW 95-023, AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DRIVE-THRU SERVICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PHARMACY LOCATED AT 13342 NEWPORT AVENUE. The City Council does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: no That a proper application for Condit-ional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 was filed by Thomas Cox Architects on behalf of Walgreens Pharmacy to request authorization for the establishment of a drive-thru service in conjunction with a pharmacy and a changeable copy monument sign at 13342 Newport Avenue, more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel No. 500-062-01. m ~ That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application on February 26 and March 11, 1996 by the Planning Commission at which time the Planning Commission approved the project. C o That Rudolf Oswald Partners has submitted an appeal of the Planing Commission's action on this project. D . That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said appeal on April 15, 1996 by the City Council. That the proposed use is allowed within the C- 1 Retail Commercial District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. F o The subject property is located within the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to City Code Section 9299b, the Zoning Administrator forwarded action on Design Review 95-023 to the Planning Commission for consideration. 28 ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-37 Page 2 Ge He The subject project has been found consistent with the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area Plan. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the drive-thru service applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) The proposed use can be accommodated on the subject property, providing for adequate on-site circulation and queue length as supported by the Traffic Study prepared for this project. 2) The use will nOt negatively affect surrounding properties or impact the availability of off-street parking in that the pharmacy has provided adequate parking in compliance with the Tustin city Code and the drive-thru service will not create a demand for additional parking. In addition, based upon the Traffic Study, the additional volume of traffic generated by this use can be accommodated on Newport Avenue and First Street as currently improved. 3) The use is compatible with the surrounding uses in that there are other commercial uses that have drive-thru service in the immediate vicinity, including another drive-thru pharmacy approximately 100 feet away from the subject site and there will be no outdoor speakers. 4) On-site traffic concerns have generally been mitigated through the separation of the drive-thru aisle from the on-site , parking. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Resolution No. 96-37 Page 3 I · J· 5) Off-site traffic concerns caused by the number of vehicles waiting in the drive aisle to enter the queuing aisle· during peak hours have generally been mitigated through the use of two windows, and a condition of approval requiring the implementation of additional mitigation measures should there be traffic impacts in the future. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the changeable copy monument sign applied for will, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, and be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) The changeable copy sign is not consistent with signs typically installed for retail businesses and will create sign clutter along the Newport Avenue business corridor. 2) Changeable Copy signs are utilized by public or institutional uses such as churches and schools to provide information about activities or services. The use of a changeable copy sign for advertising could encourage advertising specific brand names and pricing, both of which are prohibited by the Sign Code. Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the Council finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of Design Review 95-023, as conditioned, will not impair the orderly and harmonious~ development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the Council has considered at leaSt the following items: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-37 Page 4 Ke 0 1. Height, bulk and area of buildings. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. · Size and spacing of windows, doors and other openings. · Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae. · Landscaping, parking area design and traffic circulatiOn. 8. Location, height and standards of exterior illumination. · Location and appearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. 10. Location and method of refuse storage. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 13. Proposed signage. 14. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted,by the City Council. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). That the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub-element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26¸ 27 28 Resolution No. 96-37 Page 5 been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-element. II. The City Council hereby uphold the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit 95-008 and Design Review 95-023 to authorize the establishment of drive-thru service in conjunction with a pharmacy and deny the request for a changeable copy monument sign on the property located at 13342 Newport Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning · Commission Reoslution No. 3419, incorPorated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Tustin City Council., at a regular meeting on the 15th day of April, 1996. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK JIM POTTS MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of TuStin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-37 was duly passed and adopted'at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 15th day of April, 1996, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK