Laserfiche WebLink
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECAST4 <br />Dail- <br />AlI Peak Hour <br />P11 Peak Hour <br />Enter <br />Exit <br />Total <br />Enter <br />Est <br />Iotal <br />Description <br />2-13-ac <br />Trip Generation Rrrtes: <br />22l= Multifamily Housing (hlid-Rise') (TEIDLj <br />=.44 <br />'36% <br />74% <br />0-36 <br />614a <br />39°.a <br />0.44 <br />320: Shopping Center (TEl1DOD SF) <br />37.75 <br />6-11% <br />33% <br />0.94 <br />4390 <br />5=°0 <br />3.81 <br />Trip Generation Forecasts: <br />'21: Residential (220 DU) <br />1,197 <br />1 <br />58 <br />79 <br />59 <br />33 <br />97 <br />Internal Capture <br />-84 <br />0 <br />-1 <br />-1 <br />-6 <br />-2 <br />-S <br />Residential Subtotal <br />1,113 <br />21 <br />57 <br />73 <br />53 <br />36 <br />39 <br />820- Retail (12,350 SF) <br />466 <br />7 <br />5 <br />12 <br />'3 <br />-4 <br />47 <br />Internal Captrrre6 <br />-84 <br />-1 <br />D <br />-1 <br />? <br />-6 <br />-S <br />Retail Subtotal <br />38' <br />6 <br />5 <br />11 <br />-1 <br />13 <br />39 <br />Total Project Trip G-eneratiou <br />1,495 <br />?' <br />62 <br />89 <br />74 <br />54 <br />128 <br />tiau-Auto Itip Adjustment (S°lo) <br />"~ <br />-1 <br />-3 <br />-4 <br />—t <br />-2 <br />-6 <br />Net Project Trip Geueratiou <br />1,42_0 <br />i¢ <br />59 <br />85 <br />'0 <br />;2 <br />12? <br />As you can see in the excerpt above, the total number of daily trips estimated for the proposed Project <br />is 1,420. However, review of the Project's CaIEEMod output files demonstrates that the Saturday and <br />Sunday trip rates are underestimated (see excerpt below) (Appendix C, pp. 155, 182, 207). <br />Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated <br />Mitigated <br />Land se heeKday I Saturday Sunday Annual vNq I <br />Annual <br />pa men s se t <br />StripMall 3E•2.84 344.19 107.34 632,�1'38 = <br />,,,,,,, <br />...032,1,38 <br />OL3 6 <br />As you can see in the excerpt above, the total numbers of daily trips that were calculated for Saturday <br />and Sunday were underestimated by approximately 59 and 320 trips, respectively. This is inconsistent <br />with the information provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report, and thus, the Saturday and Sunday <br />trip rates were underestimated within the model. As a result, the Project's operational emissions are <br />underestimated and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. <br />Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated <br />The Addendum concludes that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on the <br />health of sensitive receptors near the Project site without conducting a quantitative health risk <br />assessment (HRA) for construction and operation (p. 3.2-2). The Addendum fails to conduct a quantified <br />HRA and instead relies upon a Localized Significance Threshold (LST) analysis, which found that Project <br />emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD LSTs. Based on the LST analysis and qualitative assertions, the <br />Addendum concludes that the Project would have a less than significant impact on nearby sensitive <br />receptors. Regarding construction -related health risks, the Addendum states, <br />"Table 3.2-2 shows the on -site construction emissions and compares them to the Local <br />Significance Thresholds (LSTs) established by SCAQMD to represent the maximum emissions <br />4 <br />