2201 Broadway | Suite 400 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200

www.fehrandpeers.com

MEMORANDUM

Date: September 20, 2016

To: Logan Bailey-Perkins and Joseph Zajdel, Mather LifeWays

From: Sam Tabibnia

Subject: Mather Berkeley – Preliminary Transportation Assessment

OK14-0018

This memorandum summarizes the preliminary transportation assessment completed by Fehr &

Peers for the proposed Mather Berkeley senior housing development in Berkeley, CA. Our

findings are summarized below and described in more detail in the rest of this memorandum:

The proposed development is estimated to generate about 911 daily, 64 weekday AM

peak hour, 83 weekday PM peak hour, and 77 Saturday peak hour trips.

Since the project would generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips, it is not required to

complete a transportation impact analysis that meet the requirements of the Alameda

County Transportation Commission; however, City of Berkeley may request a focused

analysis as part of the entitlement process for the project.

Based on review of recent published documents, intersections that would most likely be

affected by the proposed development currently operate at acceptable conditions and

are expected to continue to operate at acceptable conditions in the future.

Considering the estimated trips generated by the project and that no deficient

intersections have been identified in the vicinity of the project, the proposed project is

not likely to cause a significant impact.

The parking supply proposed by the project is estimated to meet the City of Berkeley’s

parking requirements for the Berkeley Mather development.

The Mather Berkeley Project may need to implement Transportation Demand

Management (TDM) strategies to reduce automobile trip generation and parking

demand.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project is located in the block bound by Virginia Street to the north, Scenic Avenue

to the east, Le Conte Avenue to the southeast, and Arch Street to the west. The site is currently

occupied by Pacific School of Religion (PSR). In additional to academic space, PSR also provides

September 20, 2016

Page 2 of 13

on-site housing for students, faculty, and staff. PSR housing currently has 145 residents, which

comprise 96 students, faculty, or staff at PSR or other nearby Graduate Theological Union (GTU)

seminaries, and 49 family members.

The site currently provides about 95 parking spaces in parking lots and a garage; in addition,

some of the residential units also provide their own parking spaces.

The proposed Mather Berkeley project would demolish some of the existing academic and

student housing buildings currently used by PSR to provide the following:

265 independent living units consisting of 253 units on the main building site and six

units at 2317 Le Conte and six units at 2479 Le Conte

12 memory support units

36 skilled nursing units

The project would provide three apartments for PSR in the senior living building on the main site.

The proposed project would provide an underground parking garage which would utilize valet

parking to provide about 270 spaces for Mather residents and visitors. The parking garage would

be accessed through a driveway on Le Conte Avenue about 60 feet west of the Le Conte Avenue/

Ridge Road/Scenic Avenue intersection. An existing driveway on Scenic Avenue about 250 feet

north of the Le Conte Avenue/Ridge Road/Scenic Avenue intersection would provide access to

surface parking. Thirty-one parking spaces accommodating parking for up to 40 cars with a valet

operation in the surface parking lot would be designated for PSR faculty, staff and students. The

proposed project would also provide a loading dock within the main garage. The Mather

Berkeley development would also provide a pick-up/drop off area at the main building with

access at the Le Conte Avenue/Ridge Road/Scenic Avenue intersection.

TRIP GENERATION

Table 1 presents the automobile trip generation estimate for the project. The proposed project

would result in trips generated by the Berkeley Mather development and the existing PSR site.

Both are described below.

September 20, 2016

Page 3 of 13

TABLE 1

TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY

Land Use Units1

ITE

Code Daily

Weekday AM

Peak Hour

Weekday PM

Peak Hour

Saturday

Peak Hour

In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total

Mather Berkeley Project

Independent Living Apartments 265 du 2522 912 18 35 53 36 30 66 47 35 82

Assisted Living Suites 12 beds 2543 32 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 2 4

Private Nursing Beds 36 beds 2543 96 3 2 5 4 4 8 6 6 12

Subtotal

1,040 22 38 60 41 36 77 55 43 98

Non-Auto Reduction (-22%)4 -229 -5 -8 -13 -9 -8 -17 -12 -9 -21

Net New Mather Berkeley Trips 811 17 30 47 32 28 60 43 34 77

PSR Site

Students/Faculty/Staff

Communing to PSR

93

persons5 NA6 100 16 1 17 1 22 23 0 0 0

Net New Project Trips 911 33 31 64 33 50 83 43 34 77

1. DU = Dwelling Units,

2. ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 252 (Senior Adult Housing-Attached):

Daily: T=3.44*(X) Weekday AM Peak Hour: T = 0.20*(X) (34% in, 66% out)

Weekday PM Peak Hour: T = 0.25* (X) (54% in, 46% out) Saturday Peak Hour: T= 0.31*(X) (57% in, 43% out)

3. ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 254 (Assisted Living):

Daily: T=2.66*(X) Weekday AM Peak Hour: T= 0.14*(X) (65% in, 35% out)

Weekday PM Peak Hour: T= 0.22*(X) (44% in, 56% out) Saturday Peak Hour: T=0.33*(X) (46% in, 54% out)

4. Reduction of 22 percent based on BATS 2000 data for development in an urban environment within 0.5 to 1.0 mile of a BART Station.

5. Students, faculty, and staff who currently live on-site but would move off-campus as a result of the project and would commute to PSR or other GTU seminaries.

6. Following trip generation based on surveys conducted in 2000 for the GTU Master Plan Traffic Impact Study:

Daily: T=1.06*(X) Weekday AM Peak Hour: T= 0.23*(X) (94% in, 6% out)

Weekday PM Peak Hour: T= 0.28*(X) (5% in, 95% out) Saturday Peak Hour: T=0*(X)

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016.

September 20, 2016

Page 4 of 13

Berkeley Mather Trip Generation

Trip generation data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip

Generation Manual (9th Edition) is used to estimate the automobile trip generation for Mather

Berkeley.

The ITE data is based on data collected at mostly suburban sites where the automobile is often

the only travel mode. However, the project site is in an urban environment near commercial

districts and with robust transit service where many trips are walk, bike, or transit trips. Since

the proposed project is located about 0.6 miles from the Berkeley BART Station, this analysis

reduces the ITE based trip generation by 22 percent to account for the non-automobile trips.

This reduction is consistent with the Bay Area Travel Survey (BATS) 2000 which shows that the

non-automobile mode share within one-half to one mile of a BART Station in Alameda County

is about 22 percent. A 2011 research study shows reducing ITE based trip generation using

BATS data results in a more accurate estimation of trip generation than just using ITE based trip

generation.1

Furthermore, census data shows that the drive-alone mode share for the area residents is about

33 percent. Thus, the 22 percent reduction described above is reasonable and would

conservatively represent conditions at the site. It is estimated that the Mather Berkeley project

the proposed project is estimated to generate about 811 daily, 47 weekday AM peak hour, 60

weekday PM peak hour, and 77 Saturday peak hour automobile trips.

PSR Trip Generation

The project site is currently occupied by existing uses that would be demolished. The housing

component of the existing PSR site that would be demolished is occupied by 93 students,

faculty, and staff at PSR or other nearby GTU seminaries who can currently walk to school. As a

result of the proposed project, these students, faculty, and staff would move off -site and

commute to PSR or other GTU seminaries. The trip generation characteristics of the PSR

population that would move away were estimated based on a survey conducted in 2000 at PSR

1 Evaluation of the Operation and Accuracy of Five Available Smart Growth Trip Generation Methodologies.

Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis, 2011.

September 20, 2016

Page 5 of 13

and other GTU seminaries, which showed that about 66 percent of the population that does not

live on-site commute to GTU by automobile.2

The PSR population that would move away because of the project would generate 100 daily, 17

AM peak hour, 23 PM peak hour, and no Saturday peak hour automobile trips. This estimate is

conservative in that it does not account for the non-school trips generated by the current on-

site students or trips generated by the 49 non-GTU affiliated family members that currently live

on-site. In addition, although enrollment at PSR is expected to decrease in the near future, this

analysis assumes that enrollment would remain similar to current levels.

Total Trip Generation

As shown in Table 1, the proposed project is estimated to generate a total of 911 daily, 64

weekday AM peak hour, 83 weekday PM peak hour, and 77 Saturday peak hour trips.

Considering the low level of net new trips generated by the project and that the roadway system

in the project vicinity generally operates at acceptable conditions during the peak times (See

discussion starting on page 9 of this memorandum), it is expected that City of Berkeley would not

require a major traffic impact analysis for the project. However, City may request a focused

analysis with a limited scope of work as part of the entitlement process for the project.

Since the project would generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips, it is exempt from the

requirements of Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) and no further analysis that

comply with ACTC’s requirements are needed.

PARKING

City of Berkeley parking requirements for the proposed Mather Berkeley project followed by

parking demand for PSR are described below.

2 Source: GTU Master Plan Traffic Impact Study (Fehr & Peers, 2000)

September 20, 2016

Page 6 of 13

City Code Automobile Parking Requirements

Table 2 summarizes the off-street parking requirements for the project based on City of Berkeley

Municipal Code (Sections 23D.36.080 and 23D.40.080. The project is required to provide 177

spaces in the main garage to meet the City of Berkeley’s requirements. Since the main garage

would provide 270 spaces, it would exceed the City’s requirements by 93 spaces.

The City’s parking requirements for the Berkeley Mather project presented in Table 2 is

conservative because:

It is assumed that parking demand for all uses at the site would peak at the same time.

The project will implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to

incentivize employees to use non-automobile modes for their commute to and from

the site. In addition, the on-street parking surrounding the site is controlled by

Residential Parking Permits (RPP), which limits parking by non-residents to two-hours

or less from 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekdays. As a result, it is expected that most

daytime employees would not drive and would not generate parking demand.

In addition, Appendix A presents the estimate parking demand for the project based on ITE

data. Similar to the City of Berkeley Code requirements, the provided parking supply would

exceed the parking demand estimated based on ITE data.

PSR Parking Demand

Thirty-one parking spaces (with the ability to accommodate up to 40 cars with a valet

operations) in the parking lot would be designated for PSR faculty, staff, and/or students. The

total parking demand for PSR cannot be estimated at this time; however, it is estimated that the

weekday peak parking demand for the 93 PSR students, faculty, and staff that would move

away and commute to the site would be about 46 spaces3. The peak parking demand for PSR is

estimated to occur during peak school hours (10:00 AM to 4:00PM) on Mondays through

Thursdays. Thus, parking spaces designated for PSR may not be adequate to meet PSR’s typical

weekday peak parking demand. However, overflow parking for PSR will be provided in the

parking garage.

3 Estimating that 66 percent would drive and be onsite three days per week based on the survey

conducted in 2000.

September 20, 2016

Page 7 of 13

TABLE 2

AUTOMOBILE PARKING REQUIREMENTS

Land Use Units1 Ratio2 Required Parking

Main Parking Garage

Main Site (R4 Zoning)

Residential Living Units 346.903 KSF 1 space per 4.0 KSF 86.7 spaces

PSR Apartments 3.475 KSF 1 space per 1.0 KSF 3.5 spaces

Assisted Living 12 residents 1 space per 5 residents 2.4 spaces

Employees 113 employees 1 space per 2 non-

resident employees 56.5 spaces

Subtotal 149.1

Satellite Sites (Virginia and 2317 Le Conte, R3 Zoning)

Residential Living Units 43.181 KSF 1 space per 4.0 KSF 10.8 spaces

Nursing Home 36 residents 1 space per 5 residents 7.2 spaces

Employees 28 employees 1 space per 3 non-

resident employees 9.3 spaces

Subtotal 27.3

Main Garage Total Required Parking 177

Main Garage Parking Supply3 270

Main Garage Surplus 93

2479 Le Conte (R4 Zoning)

Residential Living Units 7.236 KSF 1 space per 4.0 KSF 1.8 spaces

2479 Le Conte Total Required Parking 2

2479 Le Conte Parking Supply3 6

2479 Le Conte Surplus 4

1. KSF = 1,000 square feet

2. Based on City of Berkeley Municipal Code section 23D.36.080 for R3 Zoning and section 23D.40.080 for R4 Zoning

3. Based on project information provided in January 2016.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016

This estimate assumes that the PSR population would continue to have the same trip making

characteristics and parking demand as documented in the year 2000 survey. It is likely that the

high cost of parking and lack of parking availability in the area would result in fewer automobile

trips than documented in the year 2000.

September 20, 2016

Page 8 of 13

This analysis does not account for current PSR residents that have a car and park either in a PSR

parking facility or on-street. Their parking demand would be eliminated as a result of the

proposed project.

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS IN THE PROJECT VICINITY

The operations of roadway facilities are typically described with the term level of service (LOS), a

qualitative description of traffic flow based on factors such as speed, travel time, delay, and

freedom to maneuver. Six levels are defined from LOS A, which reflects free-flow conditions

where there is very little interaction between vehicles, to LOS F, where the vehicle demand

exceeds the capacity and high levels of vehicle delay result. LOS E represents “at-capacity”

operations. When traffic volumes exceed the intersection capacity, stop-and-go conditions result

and a vehicle may wait through multiple signal cycles before passing through the intersection;

these operations are designated as LOS F. Typically, City of Berkeley considers LOS E and LOS F

as unacceptable LOS for intersection operations.

Table 3 summarizes intersection operations at locations that are most likely to be affected by the

proposed project. Table 3 includes operations for both existing and future cumulative conditions

based on our review of publicly available documents published within the last 10 years.

All intersections operate at LOS C or better under Existing conditions and at LOS D or better

under Cumulative conditions during both AM and PM peak hours. Two intersections, Hearst

Avenue/Oxford Street and Hearst Avenue/Euclid Avenue are projected to operate at LOS D in the

future. However, the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect traffic operations at

these two or other intersections in the vicinity of the project.

There are no recent published studies that document operations at the intersections in the

immediate vicinity of the site, such as Le Conte Avenue/Ridge Road/Scenic Avenue, Virginia

Street/Scenic Avenue, and Virginia Street/Arch Street intersections. Since these intersections are

located on low-volume streets that generally serve the adjacent uses, it is expected that they

operate at acceptable levels.

September 20, 2016

Page 9 of 13

TABLE 3

INTERSECTION LOS SUMMARY

Intersection

Traffic

Control

Peak

Hour

Existing Cumulative

Delay1

(seconds) LOS1

Delay1

(seconds) LOS1

University Avenue/

Shattuck Avenue 2 Signal

AM 17 B 19 B

PM 22 C 34 C

Hearst Avenue/

Shattuck Avenue 2 Signal

AM 16 B 18 B

PM 21 C 25 C

Hearst Avenue/

Oxford Street 2 Signal

AM 29 C 35 C

PM 34 C 53 D

Hearst Avenue/

Spruce Street3

Side-Street

Stop

AM 12 B 13 B

PM 16 C 20 C

Hearst Avenue/Le Conte

Avenue/Arch Street 4 Signal

AM 10 B N/A N/A

PM 14 B N/A N/A

Hearst Avenue/

Euclid Avenue 2 Signal

AM 15 B 16 B

PM 20 B 49 D

Hearst Avenue/Gayley

Road/La Loma Avenue 2 Signal

AM 13 B 16 B

PM 14 B 18 B

Notes: Bold indicates an intersection operating at unacceptable LOS E or LOS F.

1. For signalized, all-way stop-controlled, and roundabout intersections, average intersection delay and

LOS based on the 2000 HCM method is shown. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, delays for

worst movement and average intersection delay are shown: intersection average (worst movement).

2. Source: Richmond Bay Campus Long Range Development Plan Transportation Impact Analysis

(November 2013).

3. Source: University of California Berkeley 2020 Long Range Development Plan Draft EIR (April 2004).

4. Source: Hearst Avenue Complete Streets Study (November 2012).

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016.

September 20, 2016

Page 10 of 13

PLANNED ROADWAY MODIFICATIONS IN THE PROJECT VICINITY

Fehr & Peers reviewed publicly available documents to identify planned roadway modifications in

the project vicinity. Based on our review, the Hearst Avenue Complete Street project, which is

currently under design, would result in the following major modifications that would better

accommodate pedestrians and bicycles on Hearst Avenue:

Narrow Hearst Avenue from generally two auto lanes to one lane in each direction to

accommodate bicycle lanes and a median

Prohibit left-turns at the Hearst Avenue/Spruce Street intersection and restrict access

between Spruce Street and Hearst Avenue to right-turns only.

Restrict access between Arch Street and Hearst Avenue to right-turns from southbound

Arch Street to westbound Hearst Avenue only. Prohibit all other movements between

Arch Street and Hearst Avenue.

Based on our review of public documents, no other roadway modifications or mitigations are

planned or proposed on the roadway network in the vicinity of the proposed project.

POTENTIAL OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS

As previously described, the proposed project is not expected to result in significant impacts on

traffic operations in the project vicinity. Most likely, the project would not be required to provide

mitigation measures. However, it is likely that City of Berkeley would request the project to

improve the pedestrian environmental in the vicinity of the project. Potential improvements may

include:

Repair sidewalks along project frontage

Provide pedestrian-scale lighting along project frontage.

Improve conditions at adjacent intersections, such as Le Conte Avenue/Ridge Road/

Scenic Avenue, Virginia Street/Scenic Avenue, and Virginia Street/Arch Street

intersections. These improvements may include constructing a traffic circle at the five

point intersection, reconstructing corner curbs with smaller radii, providing corner

bulbouts, and/or directional curb ramp.

In addition, based on our review of the project site plan in January 2016, the following should be

considered:

Provide red curb on Le Conte Avenue between project driveway and the Le Conte

Avenue/Ridge Road/Scenic Avenue intersection and for 20 feet to the southeast on Le

Conte Avenue to provide adequate sight distance for vehicles exiting the garage.

September 20, 2016

Page 11 of 13

Ensure that the proposed traffic circle at the Le Conte Avenue/Ridge Road/Scenic

Avenue intersection would provide adequate sight distance for vehicles and pedestrians

entering and exiting the traffic circle.

Ensure that trucks and service vehicles can enter and leave the loading dock.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)

As previously described, the proposed project is located in an urban environment. The project is

within walking distance of several destinations including the small commercial district on Euclid

Avenue (one block east), UC Berkeley (one block south), Shattuck Avenue commercial district (0.3

miles west), and Downtown Berkeley (0.5 miles southwest). The project is also served by bicycle

facilities, including a designated bicycle boulevard on Virginia Street and planned bicycle lanes on

Hearst Avenue. Since the project is located on a somewhat steep hill, non-motorized access (i.e.,

walking and biking) may be difficult, especially for those with limited mobility.

Transit access to the site is provided by UC Berkeley BearTransit and AC Transit. The nearest bus

stop to the project site is on Hearst Avenue at Le Conte Avenue, which is used by both BearTransit

and AC Transit. BearTransit serves destinations in downtown Berkeley and around the UC

Berkeley campus. It is available to the general public for $1.00 per ride. AC Transit provides bus

service to destinations in downtown Berkeley and beyond, including the Transbay Terminal in

downtown San Francisco. In addition, the Downtown Berkeley BART Station, about 0.6 miles from

the site, provides regional rail service.

Considering the size of the project and the non-automobile amenities in the project vicinity

described above, it is likely that City of Berkeley would require the project to implement a robust

TDM plan to reduce the automobile trips and the parking demand generated by the proposed

project. Potential strategies, for consideration, may include:

Provide On-call or regular shuttle service with designated hours to frequent

destinations such as the Downtown Berkeley BART Station, commercial districts, and

medical centers.

Provide partial or full subsidy of transit costs for employees. Options may include:

o Pre-paid transit vouchers for employees that can be used on any transit agency

in the Bay Area.

o AC Transit EasyPass for all site employees. The program allows purchase in

bulk of annual bus passes that allow unlimited rides on all AC Transit buses at a

deep discount (See www.actransit.org/rider-info/easypass).

o Commuter Benefits program for pre-tax paycheck deductions of transit and

bicycle commuter expenses for site employees.

September 20, 2016

Page 12 of 13

Provide long-term (such as bicycle lockers) and short-term (bicycle racks) bicycle

parking throughout the site.

Unbundle the cost of parking from the cost of housing for residents. Unbundled

parking helps residents understand the cost of parking, and can influence a resident’s

decision to own a car. Unbundling parking can also make housing more affordable by

not forcing residents who do not own a car to pay for parking.

Consider providing shared parking in the garage where most parking spaces are not

designated for specific users. For example, a parking space used by PSR faculty during

the daytime can be used by Mather evening shift staff.

Consider making parking spaces in the garage not used by Mather available to PSR.

Regularly provide site residents, employees, and visitors with information on

transportation options.

Please contact us with questions or comments.

Attachments:

Appendix A - Berkeley Mather Parking Demand Based on ITE Data

September 20, 2016

Page 13 of 13

APPENDIX A - BERKELEY MATHER PARKING DEMAND BASED ON ITE DATA

Table A summarizes the parking demand estimate for the project. Parking generation data

published by ITE in Parking Generation (4th Edition) is used to estimate the project parking

demand. It is estimated that the Mather Berkeley project would have a peak parking demand of

181 spaces, which corresponds to a peak occupancy of about 67 percent.

TABLE A

PARKING DEMAND ESTIMATE BASED ON ITE DATA

Land Use Units1

ITE

Code

Weekday Peak

Demand

Saturday Peak

Demand

Independent Living Apartments 265 du 2522 156 156

Assisted Living Suites 12 du 2543 6 6

Private Nursing Beds 36 du 2543 19 19

Total Parking Demand 181 181

Parking Supply4 270 270

Surplus 89 89

1. DU = Dwelling Units,

2. ITE Parking Generation (9th Edition) land use category 252 (Senior Adult Housing-Attached):

Weekday 85th percentile Demand Rate = 0.59 vehicles per dwelling unit ITE does not provide Saturday average demand; it is assumed to be same as weekday.

3. ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 254 (Assisted Living):

Weekday 85th percentile Demand Rate = 0.54 vehicles per dwelling unit Saturday 85th percentile Demand Rate = 0.54 vehicles per dwelling unit

4. Based on project information provided in January 2016.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016

The estimated parking demand for the Berkeley Mather project is conservative because:

Similar to the ITE trip generation data, the parking generation data is based on

observations at mostly suburban sites where the automobile is often the only travel

mode. Considering the project setting, it is expected that many residents will choose to

not own a private automobile and would not need a parking space.

It is assumed that parking demand for all uses at the site would peak at the same time.

The project will implement TDM strategies to incentivize employees to use non-

automobile modes for their commute to and from the site. In addition, the on-street

parking surrounding the site is controlled by RPP, which limits parking by non-residents

to two-hours or less from 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekdays. As a result, it is expected

that most daytime employees would not drive and would not generate parking

demand.