Laserfiche WebLink
RE7.A. - Page 249 Expansion Project#:11637.0 <br /> Auyus<<v,LV1L Page 37 <br /> two existing Costco Gasoline stations with 5 islands was collected and compared to Redwood City's <br /> current activity,as shown in Table 13. <br /> Table 13 Five-Island Gas Station Characteristics,January 1, 2011-May 8, 2011 <br /> Percent Difference Compared to Redwood City Costco <br /> Number of Total Fuel Transactions <br /> Location Fuel Islands (18 month period) Average Daily Gallons Sold <br /> Redwood City 3 100%(Baseline) 100%(Baseline) <br /> Scottsdale 5 102% 117% <br /> Tucson 5 83% 88% <br /> As shown in Table 13, although they are both 20 fueling positions stations, the Scottsdale site had <br /> significantly higher fuel transactions and average daily gallons sold than the Tucson site. Also shown <br /> from the data in Table 13 is that the total number of fuel transactions for Scottsdale was only 2% <br /> higher than that of the existing Redwood City location even though it is a 5 island facility and sells <br /> 17% more volume of fuel on a daily basis. Furthermore, the Tucson location has 17% fewer <br /> transaction than the existing Redwood City site even though it's a 5 island facility and Redwood City <br /> is only 3 islands. <br /> In addition to the general activity levels determined for the existing 5 island Costco Gasoline facilities <br /> by transactions and sales volumes, specific trip generation and traffic counts for the two existing 5 <br /> island Costco Gasoline facilities was also collected during the weekday p.m. and Saturday midday <br /> peak periods. Table 14 shows the trip generation data for the Scottsdale and Tucson sites as well as <br /> the existing trip generation for the Redwood City location for comparison. <br /> Table 14 Trip Generation for 20 Fueling Position Costco Gasoline Facilities <br /> Weekday PM Weekend Midday <br /> Peak Hour Total Trip Ends Peak Hour Total Trip Ends <br /> Location In Out Total In Out Total <br /> Redwood City(existing) 200 200 400 215 215 430 <br /> Scottsdale,AZ 250 250 500 285 285 570 <br /> Tucson,AZ 170 170 340 220 220 440 <br /> As shown in Table 14, the Scottsdale location had higher trip generation than Tucson, which is <br /> consistent with the total fuel transactions shown in Table 13. Furthermore, the data in Tables 13 and <br /> Kittelson&Associates,Inc. Boise,Idaho <br />