SU0008325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, r + Board of Supervisors January28,2013 Page 13 The Omni Means analysis first calculated the amount of land use area at the Project site that the EIR alternatives analyses assumed would remain undeveloped under various alternatives. (Omni Means Technical Memo, p. 1.) The analysis then applied a Floor Area Ratio ("FAR')to estimate the square footage of buildings that could potentially be developed under Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4, as shown in Table 1 in the memorandum. (Omni Means Technical Memo, pp. 1-2.) Finally, using these calculations, Omni Means calculated two different development patterns for each Alternative. Omni-Means then formulated a reasonable worst case trip generation estimate associated with full development of the site ("Option 2"). The analyses also considered trip generation at full build-out of the site assuming the same land use as proposed under each EIR alternative("Option 1'). (Omni Means Technical Memo,p.2.) Alternative 1:No Project Alternative Under Option 1 for the No Project Alternative, the analysis assumed the remainder of the land at the Project site would not be developed. Development would be limited to uses allowed by right under CF-S zoning, namely, a small group care facility as analyzed in the EIR. This alternative results in a significantly lower trip generation compared with the Project. (Omni Means Technical Memo,p. 2.) Under Option 2 for the No Project Alternative, however, retail uses were assumed to be developed on the entire 11.68 acre site. This would include two fast food restaurants, a grocery store, and a general retail store. Trips associated with this retail use would equate to an approximately 180 percent increase as compared to the Project. Based upon this significant increase in trip generation, development along this pattern under the No Project alternative would result in a significant deterioration in intersection level of service ("LOS") conditions as compared to the LOS conditions under the Project. (Omni Means Technical Memo,pp. 2-3.) Alternative 2: Reduced Project Size Under Option 1 for the Reduced Project Size Alternative, the remainder of the Project site would be developed with another half-sized travel stop. This option would result in the same trip generation as the base conditions, and therefore, all intersections would operate at the same LOS identified in the ETR. (Omni Means Technical Memo,p. 3.) Under Option 2, the assumed commercial uses would result in 11,585 daily trips, 618 AM peak hour trips and 956 PM peak hour trips.These numbers represent a 400 percent increase in trips compared with those of the EIR alternative, and approximately a 150 percent increase in trips compared with those of the Project. This increase in trip generation would result in a significant deterioration in intersection LOS conditions as compared to LOS conditions under the Project. (Omni Means Technical Memo,p. 4.) Alternative 3: Combination,Gasoline Station