SU0008325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

For the evaluation of traffic impacts,a trip generation figure for a supermarket,provided by Trip Generation, 8th Edition, was used (102.24 per 1,000 square feet). The trips for the fast-food restaurant are the same as calculated by the Kimley-Hom traffic analysis(1,490 trips). Based on these figures, this alternative land use would generate approximately 2,276 trips, which is approximately 50%less than the 4,532 trips used to evaluate air quality impacts of the proposed Project. Given the reduced vehicle trips, impacts on the intersections and freeway ramp junctions would be reduced. As with the Combination Gasoline Station alternative, it is expected that intersections operating at LOS D with the proposed Project under cumulative conditions would likely operate at a minimally acceptable LOS C under this alternative.As indicated in the Project traffic analysis, however, LOS D and LOS F occurred under cumulative conditions with the proposed Project at the SR 12/North Thornton Road intersection during AM and PM peak hours, respectively. For the proposed Project, a mitigation measure requiring signal coordination at the three intersections studied in the traffic analysis was recommended. This same mitigation would apply under this alternative. Freeway ramp junctions would continue to operate at LOS D under both existing and cumulative conditions under this alternative and this alternative would contribute traffic to these unacceptable LOS. As any contribution of traffic to the ramp junctions operating at LOS D would be a significant impact, and because no feasible mitigation is available, as is the case for the proposed Project, the ramp junction impacts for this alternative would be significant and unavoidable under both existing and cumulative conditions. The potential elimination of heavy-duty truck traffic may have a more positive effect on this issue.As such, though traffic generation may be reduced under this alternative, impacts under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed Project.(DEIR,p.7-12.) Air Quality Reduction in traffic volumes would also reduce the amounts of air pollutant emissions that would be generated,particularly NOx emissions.ROG,NOx and PM10 emissions under this alternative would be below the SJVAPCD significance thresholds. In addition, as with Alternative 3, diesel particulate matter emissions would be reduced due to elimination of service for heavy-duty trucks. This would reduce the potential health risks associated with these emissions. (DEIR, p. 7-12.) 3. Feasibility of Alternative 4 Though traffic generation may be reduced under this alternative, traffic impacts under this alternative would be similar to those the proposed Project. In particular, as with the proposed Project, the ramp junction impacts for this alternative would be significant and unavoidable under both existing and cumulative conditions. The Retail with Fast-Food Restaurant alternative would meet some of the Project objectives, as they related to providing freeway commercial services. However, it would not meet Project objectives related to providing services for autos and trucks,particularly fuel dispensing services, emergency tire repair and replacement services. (DEIR,p. 7-13.) For the reasons stated above, the Planning Commission finds Alternative 4 to be infeasible and rejects it as a viable alternative to the Project. The Project in its current form,moreover,reflects Love's Travel Stops Env'iionmentol Impact Report 20 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations