AgdaPkt 2007-08-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

In the Roadway Segment Analysis section, only local access streets, not regional access, were studied in the EIR tables. Specificaily, Highway 101 and El Camino Real (only approximately l/4 of a mile from the project site) were not adequately considered. Won't there be diverted traffic from Highway 101 and El Camino? Most/All trips were assumed to be diverted from Woodside Road when in fact they will have originated from elsewhere to Woodside Road. Termed a "draw effect," we believe Costco members from surrounding communities and cities will come to the proposed Costco by way of the regional access routes. The reason for such an effect is due to the availability of gas from the proposed fueling station. It is mainly our unique location on the Bay Area peninsula that will cause members from neighboring cities to converge on Redwood City's Castco center. A single trip win allow for "one stop shopping," whjch was deemed a desirable benefit by Costco to increase warehouse sales. For example this potential "draw" for a person in San Carlos, who may normally shop in Foster City's Costeo, would redirect his/her shopping at the Redwood City Costeo. This seems to be supported by Costeo's letter to Jill Ekas on May 31, 2007 containing Attachment H. This attachment showed the results of an in-house survey conducted February through March 2007 oflisted people and their respective zip codes requesting their indication of support or opposition to the proposed project. Despite the obvious support percentages, it is very important to note that this same survey shows that more than half of the signatures showing support for the proposed project are from non - Redwood City ziu code~ (such as Hayward, Fremont, Newark, Union City, Palo Alto, San Mateo, Half Moon Bay). If the purpose was to show interest based on zip codes, it shows interest on their behalf in visiting the Redwood City Costco; thus, using regional access roads, streets, highways, etc; (Note: The Stanford EIR indicated use of regional access roads.) Also, would now these regional trips be considered primary trips? Moreover, would there now be a corresponding increase in trip generation pertinent to the warehouse as shown in Table 4.4-5 of the EIR? Will this have an impact on the more stringent C/CAG guidelines and mitigation requirements? This realistic future occurrence was not considered. We continue to question the EIR's stated distinction of internal trips versus primary trips. This was also scrutinized in the California Department of Transportation letter submitted in response to the DEIR. On page 4.4-10 of the DEIR, it states that, "Primary trips are new trips to the site where the sole purpose of the trip is to visit the Costeo Wholesale and/or the fb.eling center." Doesn't this specify this as one new trip? Also, depending on a customer's needs on a particular day, the need for gas may be supplemented by a visit to the warehouse. Who's to say what need was the primary reason for the trip to the proposed project? Also, if Costco data provided shows that roughly half of Costco members will shop at the warehouse and the gas station on the same trip, wouldn't it be prudent to consider half of the "internal trips" as really primary trips? With the current approval of a use permit by the Zoning Administrator for the preferred alternative consisting of the approximately 160,000 square foot warehouse, we do not believe the noise projected to be produced by the tire installation center was adequately studied. With Costeo's preferred alternative project, the location of the tire installation center is now on the opposite side of the warehouse compared to "the Project" studied. Appendix F, labeled Noise Study studied the noise impact multi-family units close to the 7A Page 13 o CD 0)