Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Rebecca Davis <br />May 5, 2020 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> <br />Table 3 – Trip Rates for 18,000 Square Feet of Retail Based on Land Use <br />Category <br /> <br />Land Use Category Daily AM Peak PM Peak <br />Supermarket 1,922 69 166 <br />Pharmacy 1,622 53 153 <br />Shopping Center 680 17 69 <br /> <br /> <br />With the same percentage of internal and attracted passerby trips the DEIR <br />assumes for the shopping center use category, the boutique supermarket <br />generates 882 more net daily, 28 more net AM peak and 28 more net PM peak <br />trips than the improperly applied shopping center category. With the same <br />percentage of internal and attracted passerby trips the DEIR assumes for the <br />shopping center use category, the pharmacy generates 1668 more net daily, 15 <br />more net AM peak and 13 more net PM peak trips than the improperly applied <br />shopping center category. While these differences, particularly in the peak <br />hours, may seem small, when added to adjustment of the improper credit for the <br />prior use, take on cumulative significance. <br /> <br />Excessive Assumptions of Trip Reductions Due To Internalization and <br />Passer-by Attraction <br /> <br />The DEIR assumes that internal trips and attracted passers-by will account for <br />31.5 percent of the Project’s gross trip generation in the AM traffic peak hour and <br />42 percent of the Project’s gross trip generation in the PM traffic peak hour. <br />Coupled with the improper deductions taken for the abandoned prior use of the <br />site, deductions eliminate 47.2 percent of the gross AM peak trip generation and <br />54 percent of the gross PM peak trip generation. The analysis appears to have <br />assumed internalization and attracted passer-by rates at maximum percentages <br />of the ranges observed in Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Making a <br />series of assumptions, all the most favorable to the Project possible, is not <br />consistent with the good faith effort to disclose impact that CEQA demands. The <br />analysis should be recompiled with more moderate percentage assumptions for <br />internalization and passer-by attraction. <br /> <br />Consequences of Improper Descriptions of Roadway Cross Sections Is Not <br />Analyzed <br /> <br />In a comment now labeled A6-5 in the FEIR response, the Orange County <br />Transportation Agency identifies several roadways where the DEIR’s description <br />of the roadway cross-section is in error. In response, the FEIR corrects the text <br />of the relevant table but fails to analyze whether the changes have any <br />consequential impact on the outcomes of impact analysis. It would seem that