2200 Oxford TIA-Revised Comments 6-01-05

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND PARKING STUDY

Prepared for: Equity Community Builders
JUNE 2, 2005
Oxford Plaza & David Brower Center Traffic Impact Analysis and Parking Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................4 1.1 REPORT SECTIONS .................................................................................................... 4 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ 4 2.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ....................................................................6 2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS................................................................................... 6 2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS.............................................................................. 7 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...........................................................................8 3.1 EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK............................................................................... 8 3.2 PROJECT STUDY INTERSECTIONS........................................................................... 8 3.3 TRANSIT SERVICE ...................................................................................................... 9 3.4 EXISTING CIRCULATION AND PARKING ................................................................ 13 3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC PATTERNS, TRIP DISTRIBUTION, AND MODE CHOICE....... 18 4.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT ........................................25 4.1 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS......................................................................................... 25 4.2 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE .................................................................... 26 5.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT ...............................................29 5.1 SCENARIO 1: OP&DBC DEVELOPMENT................................................................. 29 5.2 SCENARIO 2: OP&DBC PLUS 2176 KITTREDGE STREET FAR INCREASE ......... 38 5.3 SCENARIO 3: MAXIMUM INTENSITY REDEVELOPMENT ...................................... 43 5.4 PARKING IMPACTS ................................................................................................... 50 5.5 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CIRCULATION........................................................... 58 5.6 SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 58 5.7 PARKING AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION ............................. 58 5.8 PARKING RELATED TRAFFIC IMPACTS................................................................. 60 6.0 7.0 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES.............62 6.1 PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MEASURES ........................................ 62 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS...................................67 7.1 CIRCULATION............................................................................................................ 67 7.2 PARKING .................................................................................................................... 68 TECHNICAL APPENDIX
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3-1: Study Intersection Geometry .......................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3-2: Bus Stop Locations......................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 3-3: Existing Project Intersection Traffic Counts AM Peak ................................................................. 14 Figure 3-4: Existing Project Intersection Traffic Counts PM Peak ................................................................. 15 Figure 3-5: Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts AM Peak ..................................................... 16 Figure 3-6: Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts PM Peak ..................................................... 17 Figure 3-7: Trip Distribution............................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 3-8: Census Tract and TAZ ................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 3-9: Oxford Street Public Parking Lot Vehicle Entry Volumes............................................................... 23 Figure 4-1: Study Intersection Volumes, Future No Project AM Peak........................................................... 27 Figure 4-2: Study Intersection Volumes, Future No Project PM Peak........................................................... 28 Figure 5-1: Project Added Trips, OP&DBC Proposed Development AM Peak ............................................. 32 Figure 5-2: Study Intersection Volumes, OP&DBC Proposed Development AM Peak................................. 33 Figure 5-3: Project Added Trips, OP&DBC Proposed Development PM Peak ............................................. 34 Figure 5-4: Study Intersection Volumes, OP&DBC Proposed Development PM Peak................................. 35 Figure 5-5: Warrant 3, Peak Hour Graph from Chapter 4C of the MUTCD...................................................... 37 Figure 5-6: Project Added Trips, OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase AM Peak..................................................... 39 Figure 5-7: Study Intersection Volumes, OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase AM Peak......................................... 40 Figure 5-8: Project Added Trips, OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase PM Peak..................................................... 41 Figure 5-9: Study Intersection Volumes, OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase PM Peak......................................... 42 Figure 5-10: Project Added Trips, Maximum Development AM Peak ........................................................... 46 Figure 5-11: Study Intersection Volumes, Maximum Development AM Peak ............................................... 47 Figure 5-12: Project Added Trips, Maximum Development PM Peak ........................................................... 48 Figure 5-13: Study Intersection Volumes, Maximum Development PM Peak ............................................... 49 Figure 5-14: San Francisco Bay Area Vehicles per Household Data............................................................... 56 Figure 5-15: Downtown Berkeley Public Parking Lots...................................................................................... 59
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Level of Service for Signalized Intersections ................................................................................... 6 Table 2.2 Level of Service for Unsignalized Intersections ............................................................................... 7 Table 3.1 Project Study Intersections .............................................................................................................. 9 Table 3.2 Bus Stops per Hour at Project Intersections AM Peak ................................................................. 9 Table 3.3 Bus Stops per Hour at Project Intersections PM Peak ............................................................... 10 Table 3.4 Downtown Berkeley BART Station Passenger Access Modes ..................................................... 13 Table 3.5 Existing LOS at Study Intersections............................................................................................... 18 Table 3.6 Home-Based-Work Trip Mode Choice to Oxford Plaza TAZ ......................................................... 19 Table 3.7 2000 US Census Mode Choice from Oxford Plaza Census Tract................................................. 20 Table 3.8 Oxford Street Public Parking Lot Estimated Existing Utilization .................................................... 23 Table 3.9 Auto/Pedestrian Accidents Between 1995 and 1999..................................................................... 24 Table 4.1 Stadium Place Trip Generation Forecast AM Peak .................................................................... 25 Table 4.2 Stadium Place Trip Generation Forecast PM Peak .................................................................... 25 Table 4.3 Future (2008) Without Project LOS Summary ............................................................................... 26 Table 5.1 ITE Trip Generation for the Weekday AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic........................... 30 Table 5.2 ITE Trip Generation for the Weekday PM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic........................... 31 Table 5.3 Trip Generation Adjustment by Mode Split .................................................................................... 31 Table 5.4 Scenario 1: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections......................................................... 36 Table 5.5 OP&DBC Proposed Project Plus 2176 Kittredge Allowable Area Increase .................................. 38 Table 5.6 Scenario 2: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections......................................................... 43 Table 5.7 Scenario 3: Maximum Allowable Development ............................................................................. 44 Table 5.8 Scenario 3: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections......................................................... 44 Table 5.9 City of Berkeley Zoning Code Parking Requirements ................................................................... 50 Table 5.10 Parking Concepts: Oxford Street Development........................................................................... 51 Table 5.11 Downtown Berkeley Parking Spaces Per Residential Unit.......................................................... 51 Table 5.12 Residential Parking Space Ratios Applied to Oxford Plaza ........................................................ 52 Table 5.13 Anticipated Commute Modes for Employees at David Brower Center ........................................ 52 Table 5.14 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for Brower Center and Retail Employees ............... 54 Table 5.15 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for Brower Center and Retail Visitors ..................... 54 Table 5.16 Vehicle Ownership Reductions from Residential Parking Pricing ............................................... 57 Table 5.17 Observed Downtown Berkeley Parking Utilization....................................................................... 60 Table 6.1 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Daily Parking Fees ............................................ 63 Table 6.2 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Transit Subsidies ............................................... 64 Table 6.3 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Rideshare Subsidies.......................................... 64 Table 6.4 Impact of TDM Measures on Weekday Parking Demand at Oxford Plaza & Brower Center........ 66 Table 7.1 Comparison of OP&DBC Parking Capacity and Demand ............................................................. 68 Table 7.2 Total Daily Parking Usage for OP&DBC........................................................................................ 69
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Description
The Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center (OP&DBC) project is located at 2200 Fulton Street between Allston Way and Kittredge Street in downtown Berkeley. The project combines housing, retail, office, conference, and restaurant uses in a new prototype for environmentally responsible urban development. The David Brower Center portion of the development includes office space, an auditorium, an art gallery, and meeting rooms. The Oxford Plaza portion of the development is comprised of 96 residential apartment units. The apartments are proposed to be affordable workforce housing, occupied by low and very-low income residents. The ground floor of the Oxford Plaza portion includes retail uses, a restaurant, an open courtyard, and a residential parking garage. An underground public parking facility owned and operated by the City of Berkeley serving the retail and David Brower Center uses is also part of the design. The project includes a General Plan amendment and possible zone change to permit the increased height of the development. The property is currently zoned as C-2 (Downtown Commercial). The project site is also located in the Oxford Edge subarea within Downtown Berkeley. The currently permitted maximum building height is three stories. As part of an alternative scenario under consideration, the General Plan amendment and zone change could be expanded to include an adjacent parcel at 2176 Kittredge Street. This site is currently occupied by a hand car wash. As part of this traffic and parking study, the impact of expanding the General Plan amendment and zone change to include the 2176 Kittredge parcel will be assessed in addition to the analysis of the potential impact resulting from the OP&DBC.
Analysis Methodology
The traffic impact analysis was performed in accordance with the City of Berkeley Guidelines for Traffic Studies (October 2004). Traffic operations were analyzed using the capacity analysis methodology published in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The HICAPv2 traffic analysis software, developed by Catalina Engineering, was used to perform the HCM analysis. At the request of the City of Berkeley, three development scenarios were analyzed as part of the traffic impact analysis. The three scenarios are: Scenario 1: Trips generated by the proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center Project. Scenario 2: Trips generated by the Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center Project plus trips generated by the additional maximum intensity development potential for the 2176 Kittredge parcel after the adoption of the General Plan Amendment. Scenario 3: Trips generated by the additional maximum intensity development potential for the Oxford Plaza parcel plus the additional development potential of the 2176 Kittredge parcel after adoption of the General Plan Amendment.
The proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center project was the only scenario evaluated as part of the parking demand analysis. The parking demand generated by a new development on the 2176 Kittredge parcel or a redevelopment of the Oxford Plaza parcel would be fully analyzed as part of the City of Berkeleys development review process conducted for specific developments on these sites.
Traffic Impacts
Existing, Future No Project, and Future With Project traffic conditions were analyzed at 11 project study intersections for the three development scenarios identified above. No significant impacts were identified to traffic circulation as a result of the proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center project.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
A traffic signal warrant analysis was performed at the two unsignalized study intersections located adjacent to the OP&DBC project site. Future traffic conditions at the Oxford Street/Allston Way and Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersections without the proposed OP&DBC project satisfy peak hour traffic signal warrants. Additionally, pedestrian safety concerns at both of these intersections contribute to a potential need for traffic signal control. The City of Berkeley should consider alternatives to improve traffic and pedestrian operations at these two intersections. Improvements could include restrictions on peak period left turns, pedestrian crossing enhancements, or new traffic signals at one or both intersections.
Parking Impacts
Two parking concepts are under consideration for the OP&DBC. Both concepts proposed 40 at-grade parking spaces for the residential uses on-site. An underground public parking facility is also proposed as part of the project. Concept 1 would build a single-story underground facility with 104 parking spaces. Concept 2 would provide two levels of underground parking and 211 public parking spaces. The estimated peak parking demand for all uses on the OP&DBC site combined with existing public parking utilization rates is anticipated to be 207 spaces. With the implementation of specific Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures identified in Section 6.0, peak hour parking demand is anticipated to be 173 vehicles. The peak weekday parking demand occurs at 12:00pm. Without TDM, parking demand generated by the development is comprised of 49 David Brower Center employee vehicles, 24 visitor vehicles, 24 resident vehicles, and historic utilization of 110 public parking spaces. Visitor demand is highest in the late morning, afternoon, and evening, ranging from 9 to 24 spaces during these periods. Employee demand is relatively stable at 49 to 56 spaces during the 9:00am to 4:00pm work period. With the implementation of TDM measures, employee demand is reduced to 13-25 spaces. Residential demand is stable at 24 spaces during the day and increases to a maximum of 36 spaces overnight. All residential parking demand is accommodated in the above grade residential parking area. The estimated parking demand rates can be accommodated within the parking facilities proposed as part of Concept 2. This concept even results in excess parking capacity of at least 44-78 spaces depending on the implementation of specific TDM measures outlined later in this report. Parking Concept 1 is not anticipated to provide sufficient parking capacity to meeting the estimated demand generated by the OP&DBC and existing public parking even with the implementation of the TDM measures identified in Section 6.0 of this report. As indicated above, the average daily parking demand generated by the OP&DBC ranges from 49 to 56 spaces for employee parking and 9 to 24 spaces for visitor parking without TDM measures. These average daily parking generation figures are in addition to the existing daily public parking demand which ranges from 65 to 110 spaces. If Concept 1 is selected for final development, parking mitigations would be required to accommodate anticipated parking demand. One available mitigation measure would be to require employees who commute via automobile to the David Brower Center and the Oxford Plaza retail uses to purchase monthly parking passes at other public parking facilities located in downtown Berkeley. As discussed in Section 5.7 of this report, several other parking facilities in the downtown area do have available capacity during the weekday hours. Alternative parking facilities include the Sather Gate Garage, Center Street Garage, and Allston Way Garage. These facilities are all located within mile of the OP&DBC, which is considered to be a reasonable walking distance. Under this scenario, visitor parking demand for OP&DBC would be absorbed within the overall public parking facility. If employee parking is not accommodated on site, the increased visitor demand of approximately 9 to 17 spaces can be accommodated within the proposed single level parking facility except at the 12:00pm peak period.
Recommended Mitigations
The mitigation measures summarized below apply only to the proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center project. Specific mitigation measures for future developments on the 2176 Kittredge
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
parcel or a worst-case redevelopment of the Oxford Plaza site are summarized in Section 7 of this report. The Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour in the Future With Project condition. Alternative mitigation measures were considered for this location. The recommended mitigation measure is to restripe the eastbound intersection approach on Kittredge Street to provide one exclusive left turn lane and one exclusive right turn lane. This proposed mitigation will improve the average delay experienced at the intersection to 190.7 seconds in the Future With Project Conditions for Scenario 1. This average delay is lower than the Future No Project condition, which experiences an average delay of 243.7 seconds. Based on this observed improvement, the recommended mitigation addresses the traffic impact resulting from the proposed OP&DBC project. The City of Berkeley will monitor the intersection to ensure that this recommended mitigation sufficiently addresses the anticipated project impact. If additional mitigations are required, it is recommended that the City consider prohibiting the eastbound left turn movement during the PM peak period or signalizing the intersection.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
1.0
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of the traffic impact analysis and parking study performed for the Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center (OP&DBC). The traffic impact analysis has been completed in accordance with the City of Berkeleys Guidelines for Traffic Studies. Traffic level of service calculation sheets for the existing, future, and future with project conditions are provided in the Appendix of this report.
1.1 REPORT SECTIONS

This report consists of seven sections. Introduction Analysis Methodology Existing Conditions Future Conditions Without Project Project Impacts Transportation Demand Management Strategy Recommended Mitigations
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The OP&DBC project is located at 2200 Fulton Street between Allston Way and Kittredge Street in downtown Berkeley. The project combines housing, retail, office, conference, and restaurant uses in a new prototype for environmentally responsible urban development. The David Brower Center portion of the development includes office space, an auditorium, an art gallery, and meeting rooms. The Oxford Plaza portion of the development is comprised of 96 residential apartment units. The apartments are proposed to be affordable workforce housing, occupied by low and very-low income residents. The ground floor of the Oxford Plaza portion includes retail uses, a restaurant, an open courtyard, and a residential parking garage. An underground public parking facility owned and operated by the City of Berkeley also part of the design. The property is located within Downtown Berkeley, adjacent to the UC Berkeley campus, two miles from the San Francisco Bay. The area is served by an extensive transit system, including the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Downtown Berkeley Station, several Alameda County (AC) Transit bus routes, several bicycle routes (including City designated bicycle boulevards), and pedestrian paths. The site is therefore one of the most transit, pedestrian, and bike-accessible locations in the East Bay, with the potential for a significant number of non-automobile trips to and from the completed development. The project includes a General Plan amendment and zone change to permit the increased height of the development. The property is currently zoned as C-2 (Downtown Commercial), and is located in the Oxford Edge subarea. The currently permitted maximum building height is five stories. As part of an alternative scenario under consideration, the General Plan amendment and zone change could be expanded to include an adjacent parcel at 2176 Kittredge Street. This site is currently occupied by a hand car wash. As part of this traffic and parking study, the impact of expanding the General Plan amendment and zone change to include the 2176 Kittredge parcel will be assessed in addition to the analysis of the potential impact resulting from the OP&DBC. Figure 1-1 on the following page is the proposed site plan for the project. Access to the proposed onsite residential and public parking facilities will be provided from Kittredge Street. Separate access driveways will be provided for each parking facility.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS
Residential Parking Access
Public Parking Access
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
IBI
Oxford Plaza and the David Brower Center Proposed Site Plan
FIGURE 1-1
2.0
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The analysis was performed in accordance with the City of Berkeley Guidelines for Traffic Studies (October 2004). Traffic operations were analyzed using the capacity analysis methodology published in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Capacity analysis is a set of procedures for estimating the traffic-carrying ability of facilities based on operational conditions. The efficiency of traffic operations is commonly measured by traffic engineers and planners with a grading system called Level of Service (LOS). Evaluation of roadways and intersections involves the assignment of grades from A to F, with A representing the highest level of operating conditions and F representing extremely congested and restricted operations. The level of service analysis was performed using the TRAFFIX and HiCAPv2 traffic impact analysis software programs. TRAFFIX is a network-based interactive computer program that enables calculation of levels of service at signalized and unsignalized intersections for multiple locations and scenarios. TRAFFIX also calculates signal timing (green times and cycle lengths) and maximum queue lengths to assist in evaluating signalized intersections. HiCAPv2 is a traffic analysis computer program employing the 2000 HCM analysis procedures to evaluate traffic operations at signalized and unsignalized intersections. The HiCAPv2 software is very effective at evaluating traffic conditions at individual intersections using the HCM methodology. The detailed intersection level of service calculation sheets are provided in the Appendix of this report.
2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Traffic conditions at signalized intersections were evaluated using the 2000 HCM operations methodology for signalized intersections, which evaluates capacity in terms of the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio and evaluates LOS based on controlled delay per vehicle. Controlled delay is defined as the portion of the total delay attributed to the traffic signal operation including deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. The relationship between controlled delay per vehicle and LOS for signalized intersections is summarized in Table 2.1. The City of Berkeleys traffic study guidelines identify the minimum acceptable level of service for signalized intersections as Level of Service (LOS) D. For intersections that are at LOS E or F for project conditions, an increase in 0.01 or more is considered to be a significant impact.1 Table 2.1 Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of Service A B C D E F
1
Description of Traffic Conditions Insignificant delays: no approach phase is fully utilized and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Minimal delays: an occasional approach phase is fully utilized. Drivers begin to feel restricted. Acceptable delays: major approach phase may become fully utilized. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted. Tolerable delays: drivers may wait through more than one red indication. Queues may develop but dissipate rapidly, without excessive delays. Significant delays: volumes approaching capacity. Vehicles may wait through several cycles and long vehicle queues form upstream. Excessive delays: represents conditions at capacity, with extremely
Controlled Delay (sec/veh) 10 > 10 20 > 20 35 > 35 55 > 55 80 > 80
City of Berkeley, Guidelines for Traffic Studies, October 2004
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
Level of Service
Description of Traffic Conditions long delays. Queues may block upstream intersections.
Controlled Delay (sec/veh)
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

For unsignalized intersections, the HCM 2000 methodology for unsignalized intersections was used. With this methodology, LOS is related to the controlled delay for each stop-controlled movement. The relationship between controlled delay per vehicle and LOS for unsignalized intersections is summarized in Table 2.2. For unsignalized intersections, the City of Berkeleys traffic study guidelines do not use intersection level of service as the sole criterion for establishing impact. For these intersections, impacts are established on a case by case basis where LOS E or F occurs for a specific movement or approach.2 Table 2.2 Level of Service for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service A B C D E F Description of Traffic Conditions No delay for stop-controlled approaches. Operations with minor delay. Operations with moderate delays. Operations with some delays. Operations with high delays and long queues. Operation with extreme congestion, with very high delays and long queues unacceptable to most drivers. Controlled Delay (sec/veh) 0 10 > 10 15 > 15 25 > 25 35 > 35 50 > 50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
City of Berkeley, Guidelines for Traffic Studies, October 2004
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
3.0
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section provides information on the transportation system that serves the project site, including the surrounding street network, bus routes, bicycle paths, and parking facilities. Existing traffic counts and levels of service at the project study intersections are also presented in this section.
3.1 EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK

The proposed project site is on property currently occupied by the City of Berkeleys Oxford public parking lot. The property is located at 2200 Fulton Street between Allston Way and Kittredge Street. The site is in the central business district of downtown Berkeley, adjacent to the University of California at Berkeley (UCB). The surrounding roadway network consists of the following streets, which are shown in Figure 3-1. All of the streets in the project study area have a speed limit of 25 miles per hour. Shattuck Avenue is a four-lane arterial that runs north and south in the project area. Between University Avenue and Center Street, Shattuck Avenue branches into two separate one-way streets. The west branch has three southbound lanes, and the east branch has three northbound lanes. Shattuck Avenue has retail and commercial property along the east and west sides. On-street parking is available, and is separated from through traffic lanes by channelizing islands along some segments. Oxford/Fulton Street is a north-south arterial that runs along the west side of the University of California Berkeley (UCB) campus. The four-lane roadway is named Oxford Street north of Kittredge Street, and becomes Fulton Street south of Kittredge. At the intersection of Fulton Street and Durant Avenue, Fulton transitions into a one-way street with two southbound lanes. Metered on-street parking is available along both sides of the street. Center Street is an east-west roadway with one lane in each direction. Ground floor retail and fast food restaurants line the street, and there is high pedestrian activity between the University of California Berkeley and Shattuck Avenue along this road. Allston Way is an east-west roadway with one lane in each direction. Kittredge Street is an east-west roadway with one lane in each direction. Bancroft Way is a two-lane, east-west street with one lane in each direction west of Shattuck Avenue. East of Shattuck Avenue, Bancroft is a one-way street with two westbound lanes. Durant Avenue is a two-lane, east-west street with one lane in each direction west of Shattuck Avenue. East of Shattuck Avenue, Durant is a one-way street with two eastbound lanes. Channing Way is a two-lane roadway that runs east and west in the project area.
3.2 PROJECT STUDY INTERSECTIONS

Eleven intersections were selected for evaluation by the City of Berkeley, which are listed in Table 3.1. Figure 3-1 shows the study intersections with existing lane geometries. All intersections are signalized except for #8) Oxford Street/Allston Way and #9) Fulton Street/Kittredge Street. Allston Way forms a T-intersection with Oxford Street. Likewise, Kittredge Street forms a T-intersection with Fulton Street. The approaches on Allston Way and Kittredge Street are stop sign controlled. Traffic on Oxford Street and Fulton Street is uncontrolled.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
Table 3.1 Project Study Intersections 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Project Intersection Shattuck Avenue (SB) / Center Street Shattuck Square (NB) / Center Street Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way Oxford Street / Center Street Oxford Street / Allston Way Fulton Street / Kittredge Street Fulton Street / Bancroft Way (WB) Fulton Street / Durant Avenue Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Signalized
3.3 TRANSIT SERVICE

The Downtown Berkeley area is served by an extensive transit system, including bus service and the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system. Transit service routes and frequencies are discussed in this section.
AC Transit
Alameda County Transit (AC Transit) provides bus service in the city of Berkeley and throughout the East Bay. Existing bus stops located adjacent to the project site are illustrated in Figure 3-2. The number of bus stops per hour at project intersections during the AM peak and PM peak are presented in Table 3.2 and Table 3.3. Table 3.2 Bus Stops per Hour at Project Intersections AM Peak
F 7 9 EB 0 0 0 1. Shattuck Street /Center Street WB 0 0 3 NB 2 3 3 2. Shattuck Square /Center Street WB 2 0 0 NB 2 3 0 3. Shattuck Street /Kittredge Street SB 2 3 0 NB 2 0 0 5. Shattuck Street /Durant Avenue SB 2 0 0 EB 0 3 0 9. Oxford Street /Kittredge Street NB 2 0 0 11. Fulton Street /Durant Avenue EB 0 3 0 Source: http://www.actransit.org/riderinfo/schedules/index.html Intersection Dir AC Transit Line (Bus stops per hour) 15 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 4 4 43 0 0 4 0 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 51 0 0 9 0 9 7 0 0 7 0 7 65 0 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 67 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 9 23 6 20 22 8 8 14 6 14
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
Table 3.3 Bus Stops per Hour at Project Intersections PM Peak

Intersection 1. Shattuck Street /Center Street 2. Shattuck Square /Center Street 3. Shattuck Street /Kittredge Street Dir EB WB NB WB NB SB NB SB AC Transit Line (Bus stops per hour) F 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 0 0 3 0 3 3 0 0 9 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 15 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 43 0 0 4 0 4 4 4 4 51 0 0 8 0 8 7 0 0 7 0 7 65 0 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 67 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 8 21 6 19 22 8 8 14 6 14
5. Shattuck Street /Durant Avenue
EB 0 3 0 0 4 0 9. Oxford Street /Kittredge Street NB 2 0 0 0 4 0 11. Fulton Street /Durant Avenue EB 0 3 0 0 4 0 Source: AC Transit Schedules http://www.actransit.org/riderinfo/schedules/index.html
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
10
10
1
Oxford St
2
ity Ave Univers
St Addison
7
Project Site
Way Allston
St Center
UC Berkeley 8
Way Bancroft
Milvia St
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
St Fulton
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
LEGEND Project Location UC Berkeley Campus Study Intersection - Signalized Study Intersection - Stop Sign Free Right Turn One-Way Street Direction
11
IBI
Figure 3-1
Study Intersection Geometry
ity Ave Univers

Oxford St
PROMENADE GARAGE UNIVERSITY UCP HALL GARAGE
St Addison
CENTER STREET GARAGE
St Center
ALLSTON WAY GARAGE OXFORD LOT
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
Milvia St
e St Kittredg
UC BANWAY LOT UCP UC BANCROFTFULTON LOT UCP
Way Bancroft
Shattuck Ave
King Jr. Way Martin Luther
Way Bancroft
SATHER GATE GARAGE
ph Ave Telegra
Ave Durant
St Fulton
th St Ellswor
LEGEND
g Way Channin
0 300 ft 600 ft
treet Dana S t Haste S
UCP
AC Transit Bus Stop UC Berkeley Bus Stop Public Parking UC Parking (public use after 5PM & weekends) Bike Route One-Way Street Direction
IBI
Downtown Berkeley
FIGURE 3-2
Bus Stops, Parking Lots, and Bicycle Routes
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

The Berkeley Downtown BART station is located near the corner of Shattuck Avenue and Center Street. The station has the 8th highest ridership level in the BART system. According to the California Department of Transportations (Caltrans) California Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Database3, there was a weekday average of 10,303 boardings and 9,880 alightings per day at this station in 2001. The 1998 BART Station Profile Survey results regarding passenger access modes to and from the station are listed in Table 3.4. Four train lines operating between RichmondSan Francisco Airport/Millbrae and RichmondFremont run with 15-minute headways, for a total of 16 stops per hour at this station during the weekday peak periods. Table 3.4 Downtown Berkeley BART Station Passenger Access Modes Mode Walk Bicycle Transit Drive Alone Carpool Shuttle Other Total
Source: BART 1998 Station Profile Survey
Percentage 59.3 % 4.6 % 18.6 % 7.4 % 0.9 % 0.0 % 9.2 % 100 %
3.4 EXISTING CIRCULATION AND PARKING

The current vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic counts are presented in this section. A discussion of existing trip distribution and mode choice percentages is also provided.
Traffic Counts
Traffic counts were made at the 11 project study intersections on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays between November 30th and December 9th 2004. Counts were conducted from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM to capture the AM peak hour and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM for the PM peak hour. Vehicle counts by turning movement were taken at all 11 project intersections, and are shown in Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4. Bicycle and pedestrian counts by direction were taken at four intersections along Oxford Street near the project site, and are shown in Figure 3-5 and Figure 3-6.
Source: Caltrans California Transit-Oriented Development Database http://transitorienteddevelopment.dot.ca.gov/station/stateViewStationTransportation.jsp?stationId=5
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
13
13
730 121 15 7 22 4 19
265 10
15
2
103 567 61
172
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

647 71 15 26 46 101 24 15
1254 45 17 13 39 84 13 5
3
693 36
41 17
St Addison
7
611 34
9 26
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
786 16 65 60 27
UC Berkeley
34 16 42
1045
Milvia St
4
749
52 113
8
20 597
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
764 20 2 55 24 36 100
Way Bancroft
1006 96 15 59 30
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
834 262
9
695
St Fulton
757 18 16 47 32 32 27 42
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1021 88
6
993 97
49 104
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
16 113
182 85
LEGEND Project Location UC Berkeley Campus Study Intersection - Signalized Study Intersection - Stop Sign One-Way Street Direction Turn Movement Volume
126 250 23
629 426
11
##
IBI
Study Intersection Turning Movement Volumes

Figure 3-3
Existing Condition - AM Peak
832 151 37 23 48 32 50
335 27
62
2
105 924 87
257
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

850 112 19 30 49 80 14 53
1329 59 39 6 60 102 18 4
3
898 74
38 34
St Addison
7
878 7
12 51
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
1025 39 161 48 61
UC Berkeley
34 87 21
974
Milvia St
4
965
87 291
8
26 871
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
1104 224 17 68 62 83 83
Way Bancroft
1162 90 21 72 37
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
1016 56
9
967
St Fulton
1200 38 20 56 70 67 19 84
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1185 212
6
1273 69
109 162
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
15 141
346 176
147 222 46
754 520
11
##
IBI

Figure 3-4
Existing Condition - PM Peak
Bikes
Oxford St
Peds
71
ity Ave Univers
52
St Addison
7
Project Site
Way Allston
47
625
St Center
UC Berkeley
51
113
##
Project Location UC Berkeley Campus Study Intersection - Signalized Study Intersection - Stop Sign One-Way Street Direction Turn Movement Volume
IBI
Milvia St
8
Way Bancroft
56
11
62
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
138
h St Ellswort
15
92
Ave Durant
St Fulton
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
29
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
13
LEGEND
Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes

Figure 3-5
Existing Condition - AM Peak
Bikes
Oxford St
Peds
3
ity Ave Univers
27
St Addison
7
Project Site
Way Allston
67
955
St Center
UC Berkeley
56
103
##
Project Location UC Berkeley Campus Study Intersection - Signalized Study Intersection - Stop Sign One-Way Street Direction Turn Movement Volume
IBI
Milvia St
8
Way Bancroft
73
82
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
145
h St Ellswort
10
83
Ave Durant
St Fulton
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
64
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
47
LEGEND
Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes

Figure 3-6
Existing Condition - PM Peak
Existing Intersection Level of Service

Existing traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle counts, along with transit data were used to calculate the level of service at each of the project study intersections using HiCAPv2 software. The analysis input assumptions and the reports detailing the analysis results are provided in the Appendix of this report. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 3.5. The unsignalized intersections #8) Oxford Street/Allston Way and #9) Fulton Street/Kittredge Street operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour. Both intersections experience long delays for the eastbound left turn movement. Table 3.5 Existing LOS at Study Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 2. Shattuck Square / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue LOS Level of Service Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Signalized Delay (Sec) 12.5 13.1 10.8 9.9 13.2 11.3 13.2 27.8 33.3 9.5 11.2 LOS B B B A B B B D D A B V/C 0.428 0.343 0.336 0.376 0.574 0.572 0.526 n/a n/a 0.371 0.399 PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 14.1 15.7 12.4 13.1 14.9 16.0 20.6 535.4 122.8 12.5 11.2 LOS B B B B B B C F F B B V/C 0.536 0.511 0.460 0.617 0.635 0.801 0.741 n/a n/a 0.540 0.476
3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC PATTERNS, TRIP DISTRIBUTION, AND MODE CHOICE

This project is not expected to significantly change existing travel patterns in the area. As such, the existing traffic patterns are a reasonable base for estimating the origin and destination of future trips generated by the project. Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were used to establish the trip distribution on the study area network, as shown in Figure 3-7. Non-Residential Trip Mode Choice Alameda County Travel Analysis Zone (TAZ) Trip Tables were used to obtain information relating to existing travel mode choice patterns within the area of Downtown Berkeley near the proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center. Mode choice model data provides insight into travel mode splits for commute trips to locations in close proximity to the Oxford Plaza parcel. This information can be used to estimate a likely mode choice split for employees or visitors traveling to non-residential land uses in the OP&DBC. The analysis used model data that summarized home based work trips from the Bay Area in the Years 1998 and 2010 to the TAZ area that contains the OP&DBC parcel (TAZ 733). The difference between the mode split percentages for the 1998 data and 2010 data was annualized to estimate the likely mode split for the opening year of the project (2008). Table 3.6 summarizes the mode choice percentages. Home based work trips from all other TAZs (1,099 total) in the Bay Area were categorized into the following modes:
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
18
18
Drive Alone Carpool (2+ passengers) Carpool (3+ passengers) Transit Bike Walk
Mode split is a breakdown of the percentage of trips made by private vehicles and other alternative transportation modes. The mode split assumptions used for this analysis are based on the 1998 and 2010 Travel Analysis Zone Trip Tables for Alameda County, which are summarized in Table 3.6. The model data provides insight into recent and forecast travel mode splits for commute trips to parcels and developments located in close proximity to the Oxford Plaza parcel. Table 3.6 Home-Based-Work Trip Mode Choice to Oxford Plaza TAZ Mode Choice Drive Alone Carpool (2 passengers) Carpool (3+ passengers) Transit Bike Walk Total 1998 Percentage 55.2% 6.3% 1.0% 15.7% 5.4% 16.4% 100% 2010 Percentage 49.3% 6.8% 1.2% 19.9% 5.8% 17.0% 100% 2008 Estimated Percentage 50.3% 6.7% 1.2% 19.2% 5.7% 16.9% 100%
Source: Alameda County Transportation Analysis Model
The Year 2008 forecast data in Table 3.6 suggests that a substantial percentage (41.8%) of commuters to TAZ 733 do not use automobiles to make their commute trip. It is important to note that TAZ 733 is about 0.5 square miles in size and includes the Downtown Berkeley BART station. Trip data contained in the regional model includes all parcels within this TAZ, some of which are more than mile from the BART station. Typically, mile is considered to be a reasonable distance that people will walk to access a transit station. The OP&DBC parcel is located within 500 feet of the BART Station, well within a mile walk. The proximity of the OP&DBC parcel to the BART station could result in a higher percentage of commuters to the OP&DBC using transit compared to TAZ 733 as a whole. Based on data from the 1998 and 2010 Travel Analysis Zone Trip Tables for Alameda County, a Year 2008 mode split of 58% vehicle trips (drive alone and carpool trips) and 42% other trips was used to estimate non-residential trip generation for this project. Due to the proximity of the project site to the Downtown Berkeley BART station and to the University of California Berkeley campus, as well as the nature of the site usage, it is likely that a higher percentage of visitors will use transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes of access than the zone average. The split estimate of 58% vehicle trips is a reasonable estimate for non-residential travel to and from this location.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
19
19
Residential Trip Mode Choice Data from the 2000 United States Census was used to estimate the mode split for residential trips generated by the Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center project. Census data was obtained for Census Tract 4229, which encompasses the area surrounding the OP&DBC site. Table 3.7 summarizes the residential trip mode split percentages for Census Tract 4229. Table 3.7 2000 US Census Mode Choice from Oxford Plaza Census Tract Mode Choice Drive Alone Carpool Motorcycle Transit Bike Walk Other Total
Source: 2000 US Census
Year 2000 Percentage 29.0% 4.1% 0.9% 20.5% 5.5% 35.3% 4.7% 100%
The mode split percentages in Table 3.7 were applied to the residential trip generation estimates for the OP&DBC. Automobile residential trip generation rates comprise 33% of the total number of trips generated by the proposed residential uses. This figure appears to be reasonable given the transitoriented environment of Downtown Berkeley, the proposed use of the residential apartments as workforce housing for downtown employees, and the proximity of this development to regional transit services. Figure 3-8 illustrates the location of Census Tract 4229 and TAZ 733 in relation to the OP&DBC parcel.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
20
20
36%
xford St
18%
St Addison
18%
18%
St Center
2% Project Site
Way Allston
2%
Milvia St
Shattuck Ave
16%
2%
e St Kittredg
4%
Way Bancroft
16%
14% 14%
St Fulton
2%
Ave Durant
2%
g Way Channin
Shattuc
4%
20%
12%
32%
Figure 3-7
##
IBI
Ambient Traffic Distribution
St Virginia co St Francis re St Delawa ve Hearst A y way Berkele
Shattuck Ave Oxford St
ve Hearst A
UC Berkeley
ity Ave Univers
St Addison St Center
Milvia St
TAZ 733
Project Site
Way Allston e St Kittredg Way Bancroft Ave Durant g Way Channin

St Fulton
King Martin Luther
Way Bancroft
h St Ellswort
McKinley Ave
Grant St
e Roosevelt Av
treet Dana S
McGee Ave
LEGEND Project Site Census Tract 4229 and MTC TAZ 733 Boundary
IBI
U.S. Census Tract 4229 and MTC TAZ 733 Boundaries Berkeley, California
Jefferson Ave
Jr. Way
t Haste S
Census Tract 4229

Shattuck Ave
Way Dwight t Blake S t Parker S St Carleton t Derby S t Ward S
Note: Census Tract 4229 and the MTC TAZ 733 are bounded by the same area.
Figure 3-8
Existing Parking Utilization

The project site is currently occupied by the Oxford Lot, an hourly surface parking lot with 132 spaces, 122 of which are available for public use. The remaining 10 spaces are used by the City of Berkeley for staff permit parking. The lot is controlled by an attendant who collects payment based on the duration that a car is parked in the lot. Parking utilization is an indicator of the demand for parking within an area during specific hours of the day and time of week. By reviewing parking utilization at the existing Oxford Lot, parking demand peaks can be identified. Estimates of average utilization of the Oxford Plaza lot were developed using the vehicle entry volumes from the past three years, and are displayed in Figure 3-9. This exhibit shows the entry volumes for the current Oxford Lot from Monday-Saturday.
Oxford Street Parking Lot Entry Volumes
80
70
Entry Volumes (Number of Vehicles)
60
50
40
30
MO TU WE TH FR SA
20
10
AM
PM
PM
AM
AM
PM
PM
AM
PM
PM
PM
PM
0A
:0 0
PM
PM
PM 0 :0
00
00
7: 00
00
00
00
:0 0
1: 00
00
00
00
:0
00
8: 0
10
8:
6:
11
9:
2:
3:
5:
4:
9:
7:
Time of Day
Figure 3-9: Oxford Street Public Parking Lot Vehicle Entry Volumes Table 3.8 is a summary of data collected and compiled by the City of Berkeley from several recent studies (2001-2004) that incorporate a parking element. These studies include the Vista College DEIR and FEIR, and the Library Gardens DEIR, which consisted of several surveys of parking facility utilization in the Downtown area within the last three years. Based on the data presented below, the existing Oxford Lot public parking facility experiences a high level of utilization during weekdays and Saturday afternoon time periods. Table 3.8 Oxford Street Public Parking Lot Estimated Existing Utilization Time Period Weekday Morning Weekday Afternoon Weekday Evening Saturday Morning Saturday Afternoon Saturday Evening Utilization Rate 90% 77% 75% 56% 97% 68%
Notes: The Oxford Plaza lot has only been open on Sundays for a few months, and no utilization data is available. Utilization rates assume a public space capacity of 122 spaces.
11
12
10
:0
PM
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
23
23
Accident Data
A high level of pedestrian activity occurs near the project site, particularly between BART station access points and the University of California, Berkeley campus. Recent statistics for pedestrian vs. automobile accident rates were reviewed to determine locations that may require mitigation measures to address possible pedestrian safety issues. Table 3.9 summarizes the number of pedestrian vs. automobile accidents reported between July 1995 and July 1999. In general, the study areas sidewalk network is relatively pedestrian-friendly. The City of Berkeley Southside/Downtown Transportation Demand Management Study Existing Conditions Report4 includes an evaluation of pedestrian level of service. Each roadway was assigned an LOS rating from A to F based on factors that relate to pedestrian comfort and safety, including public amenities, visual quality of the street, building facades, maintenance, lighting, landscaping, and street activity. All of the streets in the project study area had an LOS of A or B, except for the portion of Oxford/Fulton Street between Allston Way and Bancroft Way. According to the City of Berkeley report, this sidewalk segment operates at LOS D, which means the street provides a poor pedestrian experience through a combination of narrow sidewalks, ill-defined streetwall, building scale that is out of scale to pedestrians, lack of landscaping, unsafe traffic conditions, or poor lighting. Redevelopment in this area should pay particular attention to improving the pedestrian environment. The T-intersection of Oxford Street and Allston Way is stop-sign controlled on the Allston Way approach, while through traffic on Oxford Street is uncontrolled. There is a triangular island within the crosswalk across Allston Way, to separate vehicles making right-hand turns from those making lefthand turns, and to provide a pedestrian refuge. This island has proven to be problematic, however, as it resembles a free-right turn median, and gives drivers the impression that they have an open lane to turn into on Oxford Street. The median also gives pedestrians a false sense of security in an area with poor visibility. With five auto-pedestrian incidents during the four-year observation period, this intersection has been identified as a hazardous location and may require mitigation to address pedestrian safety issues. Table 3.9 Auto/Pedestrian Accidents Between 1995 and 1999 Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue
1
Auto/Pedestrian Accidents 2 2 1 0 2 1 5 2 1 1
Source: Berkeley Southside/Downtown TDM Study, Existing Conditions, Chapter 6. http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/transportation/TDM/existingconditions/BERKtdm06.pdf 1 Accident data for project intersection #1) Shattuck Avenue/Center Street and #2) Shattuck Square/ Center Street was consolidated by the source.
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/transportation/TDM/existingconditions/Map6-3PedestrianLevelofService.pdf
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
24
24
4.0
FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT
Traffic conditions in the buildout year are simulated by applying a traffic growth factor to the existing counts, and adding in cumulative project trips. A traffic growth rate of 2% per year over three years was used, for a total ambient traffic growth of 6.12%. The cumulative project trips are not expected to significantly change existing travel patterns, so the trips were dispersed onto the network using the distribution assumption shown in Figure 3-7.
4.1 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS

Cumulative projects are projects that have been approved by the City, are scheduled to be complete before the buildout year, and are forecast to generate vehicle trips within the project study area. The City of Berkeley staff identified one cumulative project for this analysis: a mixed-use development called Stadium Place that is currently under construction and is scheduled to be complete in the summer of 2005. It is located at 2310 Fulton Street, on the northwest corner of Fulton Street and Durant Avenue. The project consists of 74 rental apartments, 6,794 square feet of commercial floor area, and 18 parking spaces5.
Stadium Place Trip Generation

Trip generation for Stadium Place was forecast using ITE rates, and the mode split assumption of 58% drive-alone trips established in Section 3.4. In the analysis year, Stadium Place is estimated to generate 7 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 21 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. The calculation of these values is shown in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2. Table 4.1 Stadium Place Trip Generation Forecast AM Peak Land Use Mid-Rise Apartment Specialty Retail Center TOTAL
DU Dwelling units TGSF Thousand gross square feet TGLA Thousand gross square feet of leasable area * Total volume added to adjacent streets.
ITE Code 223 814
Peak Hour Rates Unit DU TGLA Qty 74 6.8

AM %In %Out
0.30 0
30% NA
70% NA
Auto Mode Factor 0.33 0.58
Trip s In 2 0 2
Trips Out 5 0 5
TOTAL*
7 0 7
Table 4.2 Stadium Place Trip Generation Forecast PM Peak Land Use Mid-Rise Apartment Specialty Retail Center ITE Code 223 814 Peak Hour Rates Unit DU TGLA Qty 74 6.8
PM %In %Out
0.39 2.71
59% 44%
41% 56%
Auto Mode Factor 0.33 0.58
Trip s In 6 5 11
Trips Out 4 6 10
TOTAL*
10 11 21
TOTAL DU Dwelling units TGSF Thousand gross square feet TGLA Thousand gross square feet of leasable area * Total volume added to adjacent streets.
Stadium Place land use data was obtained from the City of Berkeley Planning Department staff.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
25
25
4.2 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE

Table 4.3 summarizes the LOS for the 11 study intersections in the Future No Project Condition. The increases in traffic volumes reflect the ambient growth rate and new trips generated by the cumulative project. As would be expected, LOS levels at each intersection were slightly worse than the existing conditions. The intersection turning movement volumes for the Future Without Project condition are shown in Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2. Table 4.3 Future (2008) Without Project LOS Summary AM Peak Hour Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 2. Shattuck Square / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue LOS Level of Service Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Signalized Delay (Sec) 12.7 13.3 11.1 10.1 14.2 11.8 15.8 31.6 39.6 9.6 11.3 LOS B B B B B B B D E A B V/C 0.455 0.363 0.356 0.401 0.608 0.608 0.604 n/a n/a 0.393 0.424 PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 14.5 16.8 12.9 13.9 17.9 18.3 28.3 906.0 243.7 12.5 11.6 LOS B B B B B B C F F B B V/C 0.569 0.541 0.490 0.657 0.767 0.850 0.881 n/a n/a 0.573 0.509
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
26
26
774 128 16 7 23 4 20
281 11
16
2
109 601 65
182
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

686 75 16 28 49 107 25 16
1329 48 18 14 41 89 14 5
3
735 38
43 18
St Addison
7
649 36
10 28
St Center Way Allston
834 17 69 64 29
UC Berkeley
36 17 45
1108
Milvia St
4
794
55 123
8
21 634
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
811 21 2 58 25 38 107
Way Bancroft
1066 102 16 63 32
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
884 278
9
738
Stadium Place
St Fulton
803 19 17 50 34 34 29 45
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1082 93
6
1053 103
52 110
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
18 121
193 90
136 265 25
667 452
11
##
IBI

Figure 4-1
Future No Project Condition - AM Peak
883 160 39 24 51 34 53
355 29
66
2
111 979 92
272
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

902 119 20 32 52 85 15 56
1411 63 41 6 64 108 19 4
3
952 78
40 38
St Addison
7
933 7
13 54
St Center Way Allston
1090 41 171 51 65
UC Berkeley
36 92 22
1034
Milvia St
4
1023
92 311
8
28 925
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
1172 237 18 72 66 88 99
Way Bancroft
1232 97 22 76 39
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
1077 62
9
1027
Stadium Place
St Fulton
1274 40 22 59 74 71 20 89
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1256 225
6
1351 73
116 172
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
15 151
368 187
161 236 50
799 551
11
##
IBI

Figure 4-2
Future No Project Condition - PM Peak
5.0
FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT
As requested by the City of Berkeley, three levels of analysis were performed for the Future with Project Condition. The Oxford Plaza portion of the proposed OP&DBC development includes a sixstory residential building, which exceeds the height limit established in the current zoning code. A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change have been proposed to increase the standards for the project parcel to allow a base building height of 5 stories and 4:1 FAR, with a downtown density bonus permitting a maximum building height of 7 stories and 6:1 FAR. As part of an alternative development scenario under consideration, the amendment could also affect the adjacent lot at 2176 Kittredge Street, which is currently utilized as an automated car wash. Because the proposed project may include a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, the development potential of the both 2200 Fulton Street parcel and the 2176 Kittredge Street parcel is increased. In order to understand the potential impact of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, the City requested that the potential worst-case development increase for each parcel be analyzed in addition to the proposed Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center project. This traffic analysis considers the traffic impacts of the Oxford Plaza project, as well as the impacts of the potential maximum allowable development on the Oxford parcel and the adjacent Kittredge parcel. Three development scenarios were analyzed as part of the traffic impact analysis. These scenarios are identified below. Specific details on the land uses assumed in each scenario are provided in the following sections. Scenario 1 includes the trips generated by the OP&DBC as currently proposed. This analysis allows for an understanding of the impact resulting from this proposed project. Trips are generated from OP&DBC land uses alone, without the potential impacts from the General Plan amendment. Scenario 2 analyzes the impact of the OP&DBC as well as the new development potential of the 2176 Kittredge parcel. In this scenario, the analysis focuses on the difference between the current development potential of the Kittredge site and the new potential resulting from the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The purpose of this analysis is to understand the worst-case traffic impact of expanding the development potential for the Kittredge site. Trips are generated from OP&DBC land uses, as well as a hypothetical development on the 2176 Kittredge property. Scenario 3 involves analyzing the worst-case development potentials for both the 2200 Fulton parcel and the 2176 Kittredge parcel allowable under the General Plan amendment. The traffic impacts for this case are estimated assuming that both the 2200 Fulton Street and the 2176 Kittredge Street parcels are redeveloped to the maximum FAR with permitted land uses that generate the highest number of daily trips.
5.1 SCENARIO 1: OP&DBC DEVELOPMENT

The trip generation and traffic impacts of the Oxford Plaza and the David Brower Center proposed development are discussed in this section. The cumulative effects of the potential redevelopment of the 2176 Kittredge site and the worst-case redevelopment scenarios for both lots under the General Plan Amendment are analyzed in subsequent sections.
Project Description
The proposed project is Oxford Plaza and the David Brower Center (OP&DBC). Oxford Plaza is a sixstory residential complex with 96 units of affordable workforce housing and 40 reserved parking spaces for the residential uses. Retail uses (8,700 square feet) occupy the ground-floor of this section of the building. The four-story multiuse David Brower Center contains:
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
29
29
Office space (33,000 square feet) A Conference and Educational Facility (7,400 square feet) A Restaurant (3,400 square feet) Public parking (104 below-grade spaces)
The project site is 46,306 square feet in size. The proposed building footprint is 42,431 square feet and the proposed gross floor area is 163,067 square feet. These figures correspond to lot coverage of 91.6% and a floor area ratio (FAR) of 3.52.
Trip Generation
The project vehicle trip generation for the OP&DBC was estimated using a two-step process. First, the total number of peak hour trips to the site was estimated using rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7th Edition. Tables 5.1 and 5.2 contain the trip calculation data for the AM and PM peak time periods. The ITE rates represent the total automobile trips generated by the development. Based on the ITE rates, the project is expected to generate 121 trips during the weekday AM peak period, and 133 trips during the weekday PM peak time period. This total includes a reduction in restaurant trips attributed to pass-by trips, which are trips that are already in the existing traffic flow and decide to stop at a particular development or land use. For example, a trip to the restaurant may be made by someone who is traveling between work and home and decides to stop off for a meal in between destinations. Pass-by trips were estimated using Trip Generation, Version 5.6 This software program includes the ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition trip generation rates and pass-by trip estimates. The second step was to apply the Alameda County Transportation Analysis Model mode split percentages to the ITE trip generation figures. Table 5.3 summarizes this process. As noted in Section 3.4, the 58% of the non-residential generated trips are expected to use the passenger vehicle mode, while 33% of the trips generated by residential uses will use automobiles. These mode splits result in a forecast of 64 vehicle trips during the AM peak period and 68 vehicle trips during the PM peak period. The project is not expected to significantly change existing travel patterns in the area, so project trips were dispersed onto the network using the existing ambient traffic distribution shown in Figure 3-7. AM peak hour project-added trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2. The PM peak hour project-added trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4. Table 5.1 ITE Trip Generation for the Weekday AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Land Use Mid-Rise Apartment General Office Building Specialty Retail Center High Turnover (SitDown) Restaurant TOTAL ITE Code 223 710 814 932 Peak Hour Rates Unit DU TGSF TGLA TGSF Qty 96 34.4 8.7 3.4
AM %In %Out
Trips 29 53 0 39 121
PassBy Trips 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL* 29 53 0 39 121
0.30 1.55 0 11.52
30% 88% NA 52%
70% 12% NA 48%
DU Dwelling units TGSF Thousand gross square feet TGLA Thousand gross square feet of leasable area * Total volume added to adjacent streets, assuming all trips are made by single occupancy vehicles.
6
Trip Generation by Microtrans, Version 5, Microtrans, Inc., 2003.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
30
30
Table 5.2 ITE Trip Generation for the Weekday PM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Land Use Mid-Rise Apartment General Office Building Specialty Retail Center High Turnover (SitDown) Restaurant TOTAL ITE Code 223 710 814 932 Peak Hour Rates Unit DU TGSF TGLA TGSF Qty 96 34.4 8.7 3.4
PM %In %Out
Trips 37 51 24 37 149
PassBy Trips 0 0 0 16 16
TOTAL* 37 51 24 21 133
0.39 1.49 2.71 10.92
59% 17% 44% 61%
41% 83% 56% 39%
DU Dwelling units TGSF Thousand gross square feet TGLA Thousand gross square feet of leasable area * Total volume added to adjacent streets, assuming all trips are made by single occupancy vehicles.
Table 5.3 Trip Generation Adjustment by Mode Split Trips Land Use Mid-Rise Apartment General Office Building Specialty Retail Center High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant TOTAL Unit DU TGSF TGSF TGSF Qty 96 34.4 8.7 3.4 AM 29 53 0 39 121 PM 37 51 24 21 133 Auto Mode Factor 0.33 0.58 0.58 0.58 Adjusted Trips AM 10 31 0 23 64 PM 12 30 14 12 68
The mode split reduction factor is based on data from the Alameda County Regional Model for Zone 733 and 2000 US Census data. Pass-by trips can be determined from auto trips either in the method shown above or after the mode split adjustment occurs in Table 5.3. Both methods result in an estimated 12 trips generated by the restaurant in the PM peak hour.
Most peak hour trips generated by the David Brower Center are anticipated to come from the office space and the restaurant uses. The Conference and Educational Facility, which is also part of the Center, is not expected to generate a significant number of trips during peak hours. The Conference and Educational Facility consists of an auditorium, meeting rooms, and a gallery to benefit organizations and the community. It is expected that this land use will typically be utilized during offpeak and evening hours. Traffic generated by events that attract a large number of visitors (up to 200) may be handled through a Traffic Demand Management Plan. Proposed strategies that could be employed as part of a Traffic Demand Management Plan are discussed in Section 5.4.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
31
31
2 2 1
1
Oxford St
2
1
ity Ave Univers

3 2 3
3
14
1 5
St Addison
2 1
7
4
St Center
4
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
11
Milvia St
4
14
8
Way Bancroft
6
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
11 6 5 5
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
13 2
St Fulton
3 1 2 5
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
6
8
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
2
2
3 1
11
NOTE: Trip distribution values are rounded to the nearest whole number, therefore partial trips may not be reflected at the project intersections.
##
IBI
Project Added Trips - AM Peak

Figure 5-1
Scenario 1: OP&DBC Proposed Development Impacts
776 128 18 7 23 4 21
281 11
18
2
109 602 65
182
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

686 75 16 31 49 107 28 18
1337 48 18 14 43 90 14 5
3
735 52
44 23
St Addison
7
653 36
10 29
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
838 17 69 64 29
UC Berkeley
36 17 45
1119
Milvia St
4
808
55 123
8
21 640
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
815 21 3 58 25 38 107
Way Bancroft
1066 113 22 68 37
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
897 281
9
738
St Fulton
806 20 19 50 34 34 29 50
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1087 93
6
1062 103
52 110
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
18 123
193 90
138 265 25
670 453
11
##
IBI
Study Intersection Volumes - AM Peak

Figure 5-2
Scenario 1: OP&DBC Proposed Development
1 1 2
2
2
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

2 3 1
3
9
2 10
St Addison
1 2
7
8 1
St Center
9 1
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
Milvia St
4
9
8
Way Bancroft
11
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
7 11 10 3
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
9 1
St Fulton
6 3 2 3
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
10
6
5
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
1
1
5 3
11
##
IBI
Project Added Trips - PM Peak

Figure 5-3
Scenario 1: OP&DBC Proposed Development Impacts
884 160 40 24 51 34 55
356 29
67
2
111 981 92
272
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

902 119 20 33 52 85 17 59
1416 63 41 6 65 111 19 4
3
952 87
42 48
St Addison
7
941 8
13 55
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
1099 42 171 51 65
UC Berkeley
36 92 22
1041
Milvia St
4
1032
92 311
8
28 936
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
1181 237 19 72 66 88 99
Way Bancroft
1232 103 33 86 42
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
1086 63
9
1027
St Fulton
1280 43 23 59 74 71 20 92
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1266 225
6
1356 73
116 172
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
15 153
368 187
162 236 50
804 554
11
##
IBI
Study Intersection Volumes - PM Peak

Figure 5-4
Scenario 1: OP&DBC Proposed Development
Traffic Impacts
The trips generated by the OP&DBC development were distributed throughout the network using the trip distribution assumptions shown in Figure 3-7. The resulting study intersection LOS values are listed in Table 5.4 Table 5.4 Scenario 1: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 2. Shattuck Square / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue LOS Level of Service Two intersections have a LOS of E or F in the Future with Project condition during the AM peak, PM peak, or both peak periods. According to the City of Berkeley traffic analysis guidelines, for intersections that are at LOS E or F for project conditions, a volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c) increase of 0.01 or more is considered a significant impact. Traffic conditions at the two intersections are discussed in the following sections. Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Signalized Delay (Sec) 12.7 13.4 11.1 10.1 14.4 11.8 16.5 32.2 54.2 9.6 11.3 LOS B B B B B B B D F A B V/C 0.456 0.364 0.365 0.403 0.614 0.615 0.621 n/a n/a 0.395 0.426 PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 14.5 17.0 13.0 13.9 18.0 19.2 30.5 962.6 811.5 12.5 11.5 LOS B B B B B B C F F B B V/C 0.570 0.544 0.506 0.660 0.767 0.855 0.904 n/a n/a 0.575 0.511
Oxford Street / Allston Way

The unsignalized intersection of Oxford Street and Allston Way is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak period. The critical movement at this intersection is the eastbound left turn from Allston Way onto Oxford Street. As shown in Figure 5-3, the project generates 11 northbound trips and 7 southbound trips through this intersection during the peak hour, which increases the delay from 906 seconds in the future without project scenario to 962 seconds. This impact is not considered to be significant based on the City of Berkeley Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. Signal Warrant Analysis A signal warrant analysis was conduct for the Oxford Street/Allston Way intersection to determine if a traffic signal should be installed at this intersection. Oxford Street has two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes at this intersection, with a total combined approach volume of 2,041 vehicles during the PM peak hour. Allston Way has one approach lane, with a volume of 114 vehicles during this time period. The geometry and PM peak hour future with project volumes are shown in Figure 3-1 and Figure 5-4, respectively. These volumes satisfy Warrant 3, Peak Hour of the traffic signal warrants for the need for traffic control signal, as stated in Chapter 4C of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
36
36
Devices (MUTCD). Figure 5-5 shows a graph depicting numerical values for Warrant 3 from the 2003 Edition of the MUTCD.
Fulton Street / Kittredge Street

The unsignalized intersection of Fulton Street and Kittredge Street is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak period. The critical movement at this intersection is the unprotected eastbound left turn from Kittredge Street onto Fulton Street. This intersection is closest to the project site access driveway, and provides a major connection to the rest of the network. The project generates 31 trips through this intersection during the PM peak hour, which increases the delay from 243 seconds in the future without project scenario to 811 seconds. Signal Warrant Analysis A signal warrant analysis was conduct for the Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection to determine if a traffic signal should be installed at this intersection. Fulton Street has two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes at this intersection, with a total combined approach volume of 2,405 vehicles during PM peak hour. Kittredge Street has one approach lane, with a volume of 119 vehicles during this time period. The geometry and PM peak hour future with project volumes are shown in Figure 3-1 and Figure 5-4, respectively. These volumes satisfy Warrant 3, Peak Hour of the traffic signal warrants for the need for a traffic control signal, as stated in Chapter 4C of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Figure 5-5 shows a graph depicting numerical values for Warrant 3 from the 2003 Edition of the MUTCD.
Figure 5-5: Warrant 3, Peak Hour Graph from Chapter 4C of the MUTCD.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
37
37
5.2 SCENARIO 2: OP&DBC PLUS 2176 KITTREDGE STREET FAR INCREASE

The proposed change to the General Plan would increase the allowable building height on the project site by two stories. The amendment also affects the adjacent lot at 2176 Kittredge Street, and increases the potential density if the property was redeveloped. In this section, the traffic impacts of the additional two stories of building area are evaluated in addition to the OP&DBC development impacts. For evaluation purposes, the most reasonable land use scenario that generates the greatest number of trips was used. If the car wash site was redeveloped into an office building that covered the entire lot, then the traffic impact would be due to the trips generated by office space with an area twice the size of the property. The lot at 2176 Kittredge has an area of 21,350 square feet, which corresponds to 42,700 square feet of general office land use. Only the two additional stories of office floor area were included in the analysis to understand the traffic impact specifically associated with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The full impacts of a new development on the 2176 Kittredge parcel would be evaluated as part of that projects development application. This analysis would also include a reduction factor to account for trips generated by the existing car wash. The trip generation for the OP&DBC plus the development potential of the FAR increase on the 2176 Kittredge site is listed in Table 5.5. As was the case with the OP&DBC analysis, the mode split factor was applied to the trip generation rates. The project is not expected to significantly change existing travel patterns in the area, so project trips were dispersed onto the network using the ambient traffic distribution shown in Figure 3-7. The AM peak hour project-added trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-6 and Figure 5-7. The PM peak hour project-added trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-8 and Figure 5-9. Table 5.5 OP&DBC Proposed Project Plus 2176 Kittredge Allowable Area Increase Land Use Qty Drive Alone Factor AM Peak Hour ITE Trips Rate 10 31 0 23 PM Peak Hour ITE Trips Rate 0.39 1.49 2.71 6.19 12 30 14 12
Mid-Rise Apartment (DU) General Office Building (TGSF1) Specialty Retail Center (TGSF1) High Turnover Restaurant (TGSF1)
General Office Building (TGSF1) 38 1.49 37 TOTAL 102 105 1 TGSF Thousand Gross Square Feet 2 The lot at 2176 Kittredge Street has an area of approximately 21,350 square feet. The two additional stories allowable under the General Plan amendment would provide 42,700 square feet of additional floor area for development.
2200 Fulton Street 96 0.33 0.3 34.4 0.58 1.55 8.7 0.58 0 3.4 0.58 11.52 2176 Kittredge Street 42.72 0.58 1.55
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
38
38
3 3 1 1 1
2
1
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

6 2 3
14
3
27
1 6
St Addison
4 1
7
5 1
St Center
5 1
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
19
Milvia St
4
27
8
Way Bancroft
7
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
19 7 6 8
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
25 4
St Fulton
4 2 5 9
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
6
15
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
4
4
3 2
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-6
Scenario 2: OP&DBC With FAR Increase on Adjacent Parcel
778 128 19 7 24 5 21
282 11
20
2
109 602 65
182
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

686 75 16 31 49 107 31 18
1343 48 18 14 45 91 14 5
3
735 65
44 24
St Addison
7
654 37
10 30
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
839 18 69 64 29
UC Berkeley
36 17 45
1128
Milvia St
4
821
55 123
8
21 641
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
816 21 4 58 25 38 107
Way Bancroft
1066 122 23 69 40
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
909 282
9
738
St Fulton
807 21 22 50 34 34 29 54
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1088 93
6
1069 103
52 110
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
18 125
193 90
140 265 25
670 454
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-7
Scenario 2: OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase
1 1 3
2
1 3
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

2 6 1
3
12
3 17
St Addison
2 4
7
13 1
St Center
16 1
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
Milvia St
4
12
8
Way Bancroft
19
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
16
Way Bancroft
8 19 17 4
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
11 2
St Fulton
11 4 2 4
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
17
6
7
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
2
2
9 4
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-8
Scenario 2: OP&DBC With FAR Increase
884 160 41 24 51 34 57
356 29
68
2
112 983 92
273
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

902 119 20 33 52 85 17 62
1417 63 41 6 66 113 19 4
3
952 90
43 55
St Addison
7
946 8
13 55
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
1106 42 171 51 65
UC Berkeley
36 92 22
1042
Milvia St
4
1035
92 311
8
28 944
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
1188 237 19 72 66 88 99
Way Bancroft
1232 105 41 93 42
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
1088 64
9
1027
St Fulton
1285 44 24 59 74 71 20 93
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1273 225
6
1358 73
116 172
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
15 153
368 187
162 236 50
808 555
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-9
Scenario 2: OP&DBC Plus FAR Increase
Traffic Impacts
The LOS at each intersection for this scenario is summarized in Table 5.6. The impacts are similar to those in Scenario 1, with slightly higher delay at some intersections but no change in LOS. Detailed reports are available in the Appendix. Table 5.6 Scenario 2: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 2. Shattuck Square / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue LOS Level of Service Two intersections have a LOS of E or F in the Future with Project Scenario 2 condition during the AM peak, PM peak, or both peak periods. These intersections are identified below. Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Signalized Delay (Sec) 12.7 13.4 11.2 10.1 14.6 11.9 17.0 32.3 59.0 9.6 11.4 LOS B B B B B B B D F A B V/C 0.457 0.364 0.370 0.404 0.619 0.621 0.637 n/a n/a 0.395 0.429 PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 14.5 17.2 13.0 13.9 18.0 19.3 32.1 976.5 1306.2 12.5 11.5 LOS B B B B B B C F F B B V/C 0.570 0.547 0.516 0.663 0.767 0.857 0.919 n/a n/a 0.577 0.513

The unsignalized intersection of Oxford Street and Allston Way is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak period. As shown in Figure 5-8, the project generates 19 northbound trips and 8 southbound trips through this intersection during the PM peak hour, which increases the delay from 906 seconds in the future without project scenario to 976 seconds. This impact is not considered to be significant based on the City of Berkeley Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.

The intersection of Fulton Street and Kittredge Street is warranted for signal control under the future with project conditions. If signalized, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS A, even with the potential traffic impacts that could result from development increases allowable under the General Plan amendment.
5.3 SCENARIO 3: MAXIMUM INTENSITY REDEVELOPMENT

If the General Plan amendment is approved, it would increase the potential development density on both the 2200 Fulton parcel and the 2176 Kittredge parcel. If the OP&DBC is not completed as planned, or if the property is redeveloped in the future, different traffic impacts may be involved. To evaluate the maximum reasonable traffic impacts of the General Plan amendment, the 2200 Fulton site was evaluated as a 5-story facility that covers the entire lot, with four stories of general office
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
43
43
space and one story of ground floor retail. The two-story increase on the 2176 Kittredge property is included in this analysis, as described in Scenario 2. The trip generation for this scenario is listed in Table 5.7. The AM peak hour project-added trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-10 and Figure 5-11. The PM peak hour projectadded trips and turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5-12 and Figure 5-13. Table 5.7 Scenario 3: Maximum Allowable Development Land Use Qty Drive Alone Factor AM Peak Hour ITE Trips Rate 166 0 PM Peak Hour ITE Trips Rate 1.49 2.71 160 73
General Office Building (TGSF ) Specialty Retail Center (TGSF1)
General Office Building (TGSF1) 38 1.49 37 TOTAL 204 270 1 TGSF Thousand Gross Square Feet 2 The Oxford lot has an area of 46,300 square feet. Four stories of office space covering the entire lot would have an area of 185.2 square feet. 3 One story of retail covering the Oxford lot would have an area of 46,300 square feet. 4 The lot at 2176 Kittredge Street has an area of approximately 21,350 square feet. The two additional stories allowable under the General Plan amendment would provide 42,700 square feet of floor area.
2200 Fulton Street 185.22 0.58 1.55 3 46.3 0.58 0 2176 Kittredge Street 42.74 0.58 1.55
Traffic Impacts
The LOS at each intersection for this scenario is summarized in Table 5.8. The impacts are similar to those in Scenario 1, with higher delay at some intersections but no change in LOS. Detailed HiCAPv2 reports are available in the Appendix. Table 5.8 Scenario 3: Future With Project LOS at Study Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection 1. Shattuck Avenue / Center Street 2. Shattuck Square / Center Street 3. Shattuck Avenue / Kittredge Street 4. Shattuck Avenue / Bancroft Way 5. Shattuck Avenue / Durant Avenue 6. Shattuck Avenue / Channing Way 7. Oxford Street / Center Street 8. Oxford Street / Allston Way 9. Fulton Street / Kittredge Street 10. Fulton Street / Bancroft Way Control Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized Signalized EB Stop Sign EB Stop Sign Signalized Delay (Sec) 12.7 13.4 11.3 10.1 15.4 12.1 18.5 33.5 64.3 9.6 LOS B B B B B B B D F A V/C 0.460 0.364 0.389 0.404 0.634 0.640 0.667 n/a n/a 0.395 PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 14.6 17.9 13.3 14.7 18.2 19.8 37.9 1078.1 3497.5 12.5 LOS B B B B B B D F F B V/C 0.574 0.554 0.564 0.670 0.767 0.862 0.970 n/a n/a 0.584
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
44
44
AM Peak Hour Intersection 11. Fulton Street / Durant Avenue LOS Level of Service Control Signalized Delay (Sec) 11.4 LOS B V/C 0.432
PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec) 11.6 LOS B V/C 0.521
Two intersections have a LOS of E or F in the Future with Project Scenario 3 condition during the AM peak, PM peak, or both peak periods. These intersections are identified below.

The unsignalized intersection of Oxford Street and Allston Way is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak period. As shown in Figure 5-8, the project generates 52 northbound trips and 17 southbound trips through this intersection during the PM peak hour, which increases the delay from 906 seconds in the future without project scenario to 1,078 seconds. This impact is not considered to be significant based on the City of Berkeley Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.

The intersection of Fulton Street and Kittredge Street is warranted for signal control under the future with project conditions. If signalized, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS A, even with the potential traffic impacts that could result from development increases allowable under the General Plan amendment.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
45
45
8 8 1 2 2
10
2
1
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

14 2 7
32
3
63
1 6
St Addison
10 1
7
5 1
St Center
5 1
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
46
Milvia St
4
63
8
Way Bancroft
6
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
46 6 6 20
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
59 9
St Fulton
4 2 11 22
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
11
6
36
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
9
9
3 2
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-10
Scenario 3: Worst Case Maximum Development Impacts
782 128 24 7 25 6 21
282 11
26
2
109 602 65
182
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

686 75 16 35 49 107 39 18
1362 48 18 14 51 91 14 5
3
735 101
44 24
St Addison
7
653 37
10 32
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
839 17 69 64 29
UC Berkeley
36 17 45
1154
Milvia St
4
857
55 123
8
21 641
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
816 21 6 58 25 38 107
Way Bancroft
1066 148 22 69 52
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
943 287
9
738
St Fulton
807 21 28 50 34 34 29 67
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1088 93
6
1089 103
52 110
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
18 130
193 90
145 265 25
670 454
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-11
Scenario 3: Worst Case Maximum Development
3 3 9 1 1
2
2 9
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

5 15 4
12
3
22
12 43
St Addison
4 11
7
37 4
St Center
39 4
Project Site
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
17
Milvia St
4
22
8
Way Bancroft
52
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
39
Way Bancroft
17 52 47 7
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
20 3
St Fulton
31 8 3 8
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
47
6
13
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
3
3
25 12
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-12
Scenario 3: Worst Case Maximum Development Impacts
886 160 42 24 52 35 63
359 29
70
2
113 989 92
274
Oxford St
ity Ave Univers

902 119 20 36 52 85 20 71
1423 63 41 6 68 120 19 4
3
952 100
52 81
St Addison
7
970 11
13 55
St Center
Project Site
Way Allston
1129 45 171 51 65
UC Berkeley
36 92 22
1051
Milvia St
4
1045
92 311
8
28 978
Shattuck Ave
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
1211 237 19 72 66 88 99
Way Bancroft
1232 114 74 123 46
h St Ellswort
5
Ave Durant
1097 65
9
1027
St Fulton
1305 48 24 59 74 71 20 97
g Way Channin
Shattuck Ave
1303 225
6
1364 73
116 172
t Haste S
10
Way Dwight
15 155
368 187
164 236 50
824 563
11
##
IBI

Figure 5-13
Scenario 3: Worst Case Maximum Development
5.4 PARKING IMPACTS

Parking demand and supply were analyzed only for the Oxford Plaza & David Brower Center. The City of Berkeley did not require analysis of parking demand created by the worst-case development scenarios. Parking demand for these scenarios will be analyzed in the future in conjunction with specific development proposals for these sites. The City of Berkeley Zoning Code was used to determine the required number of parking spaces for the land uses proposed in the OP&DBC. Table 5.9 summarizes the size and type of uses planned and identifies the minimum parking requirements outlined by the City of Berkeley Zoning Code. Table 5.9 City of Berkeley Zoning Code Parking Requirements Land Use Office Conference and educational facility Restaurant Retail Affordable multi-family housing Total SqFt
** Zoning Code Section 23E.68.070
Proposed Sq. Ft. 33,000 7,400 3,300 8,400 100,560 (96 units) 152,660
Parking Requirement 1.5 spaces/1,000 sqft of gross floor area of applicable non-residential space* 1.5 spaces/1,000 sqft of gross floor area of applicable non-residential space* 1.5 spaces/1,000 sqft of gross floor area of applicable non-residential space* 1.5 spaces/1,000 sqft of gross floor area of applicable non-residential space* One per 1,200 sqft of gross floor area** Total Non-Residential Parking Required Total Residential Parking Required Total Parking Required by Code Required Parking to Replace Existing Surface Parking Total Parking Required per Code and for Replacement of Existing Parking
Required Spaces 50 11 5 13 84 79 84 163 110 273
* City of Berkeley Zoning Code Section 23E.68.080
Project Parking Supply

Parking for the OP&DBC will be provided by an underground parking structure accessible from Kittredge Street. The parking structure will be separated into two distinct sections accessed from separate driveways. The first section will be located at-grade, providing 40 parking spaces for the planned residential units. The second parking section will be an underground public parking garage, operated by the City of Berkeley. Several factors are considered in the identification of the preferred public parking configuration, including: Estimated parking demand, Existing City parking requirements for the new development, and Cost of construction for each parking concept.
There are two alternatives under consideration for the public garage. The first concept provides one level of underground public parking; the second provides two levels of underground public parking. A summary of the capacity of both concepts is included in Table 5.10.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
50
50
Table 5.10 Parking Concepts: Oxford Street Development Parking Entrance Configuration Public Parking Lot Type Number of Public/NonResidential Spaces Number of Residential Spaces (street level) Total Parking Spaces Two parking entries located on Kittredge Street. One entry for public parking access and one for residential parking. Concept 1 Concept 2 One level below grade 104 40 144 Two levels below grade 211 40 251
Residential Parking Comparison

Based on observations of other residential developments in downtown Berkeley, it appears that the Zoning Code residential parking requirements are too conservative and may result in excess parking capacity, particularly if shared parking strategies and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are implemented. It is important to note that the Berkeley Zoning Code residential parking requirement is reduced to 1 space per 3 units for projects in the Downtown area that are exclusively residential. This requirement means that mixed use projects in Downtown Berkeley are required by Code to provide more residential parking than projects that are exclusively residential. Mixed-use developments would arguably require less residential parking compared to developments that are exclusively residential since the mixed-use developments encourage pedestrian activity and reduce their residents reliance on automobiles. There have been several residential and mixed use developments throughout downtown Berkeley that have set a precedent for lower residential parking capacity in establishing lower needs from those identified in the zoning code. For example, the Gaia Building provides 41 parking spaces for 91 residential units. Also, the Shattuck Avenue Lofts provide 14 parking spaces for 24 residential units. Table 5.11 shows a comparison of residential parking supply provided by various residential and mixed use developments in downtown Berkeley. Table 5.11 Downtown Berkeley Parking Spaces Per Residential Unit Development Gaia Building The ARTech Building Shattuck Avenue Lofts The Berkeleyan Stadium Place Parking Spaces 41 12 14 39 18 Residential Units 91 21 24 56 74 Space/Unit 0.45 0.57 0.58 0.70 0.24
As shown in Table 5.11, recent housing developments in downtown Berkeley provide between 0.24 and 0.70 residential parking spaces per unit. For comparison purposes, these space per unit ratios and the two Berkeley Zoning Code standards were applied to the proposed 96 Oxford Plaza residential units. The results of this comparison are summarized in Table 5.12 below.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
51
51
Table 5.12 Residential Parking Space Ratios Applied to Oxford Plaza Source of the Space/Unit Ratio Gaia Building The ARTech Building Shattuck Avenue Lofts The Berkeleyan Stadium Place Berkeley Zoning Code Residential Projects Berkeley Zoning Code Mixed-Use Projects Space/Unit 0.45 0.57 0.58 0.70 0.24 0.33 1/1,200 sqft Comparable Number of Parking Spaces 43 55 56 67 23 32 84
As shown in Table 5.12, the Berkeley Zoning Code requirement for one residential parking space for every 1,200 square feet of gross floor area results in a very conservative estimate for required residential parking. There are several examples of other developments in Downtown Berkeley adequately serving residential parking demand with lower space to unit ratios than what is required by code for Oxford Plaza. These precedents suggest that a lower parking requirement could meet anticipated residential parking demand at the Oxford Plaza development.
Non-Residential Parking Generation Estimates

The analysis of parking demand from the non-residential uses in the David Brower Center looked at the generation rates and the expected time periods when each land use would likely generate its greatest demand for parking. The OP&DBC includes a mix of land uses including offices, retail, a restaurant, and conference/meeting space for special events. It should be noted that the time periods where these land uses generate the greatest demand for parking do not usually overlap. The City of Berkeley Zoning Code parking regulations provides the most conservative approach for estimating parking demand generated by the proposed non-residential uses in the David Brower Center. The Berkeley Zoning Code requires 79 spaces based on the non-residential square footage. Parking management and reductions to parking generation rates identified by this analysis will use these standards as the starting point for comparison. The project developer has surveyed the expected tenants of the office space at the David Brower Center to determine the current transportation modes used by their employees for the daily commute. The office uses within the David Brower Center have the highest level of required parking per the Berkeley Zoning Code, so reducing parking generation rates from the office tenants would have the greatest benefit in reducing parking demand from the new development. The employees of the currently proposed office tenants at the David Brower Center rely heavily on transit and other alternative modes of transportation for work trips. Table 5.13 summarizes the results of the travel mode survey for each of the known office tenants. Table 5.13 Anticipated Commute Modes for Employees at David Brower Center Place of Residence East Bay 3 25 SF 4 5 Other 3 1 Commute by Transit/Bike/ Carpool # of % Empl. 5 29 50% 94% Commute by SOV # of Empl. 5 2 % 50% 6%
Tenant Center for EcoLiteracy Ran
Leased Area 3,000 10,000
# of Empl. 10 31
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
52
52
Tenant Earth Island Institute Total
Leased Area 10,000 23,000
# of Empl. 40 81
Place of Residence East Bay 13 41 SF 27 38 Other 0 4
Commute by Transit/Bike/ Carpool # of % Empl. 38 72 95% 89%
Commute by SOV # of Empl. 2 9 % 5% 11%
Source: Equity Community Builders and individual organizations identified in the table above. SOV = Single Occupancy Vehicle
Typical Parking Demand A parking accumulation estimate was developed for a typical weekday to determine average primary demand for the non-residential uses in the David Brower Center. Tables 5.14 and 5.15 summarize the results of this analysis. Estimated weekday parking demand rates for the non-residential uses in the David Brower Center were developed using several sources of information, including the mode choice data summarized earlier in this report, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) parking generation data, and the employee commute modes summarized above in Table 5.13. The baseline assumptions associated with the parking demand accumulation analysis are summarized below: The parking demand and accumulation rates shown in Tables 5.14 and 5.15 do not take into account any transportation demand management (TDM) measures implemented at the David Brower Center. The estimates are based on survey data from the proposed office tenants and mode split data obtained from the regional model. The employee commuter survey data in Table 5.13 was used to identify parking demand for the office uses accounting for 23,000 of the 33,000 square feet allocated to office space. Parking demand for the remaining 10,000 square feet of office space was calculated using the regional model mode split percentages, assuming 58% of trips are made via automobile. Visitor parking demand for office uses was developed using ITE daily trip generation rates and subtracting employee trips. Visitor mode split matches the regional mode split percentages. Visitor parking demand was distributed proportionally throughout the day with an assumed midday peak, similar to the existing pattern for the Oxford Plaza public lot. Retail employees were estimated using a rate of 2.3 employees per thousand square feet. Parking demand for retail customers is based on ITE estimates for peak parking demand. Adjustments were made for both employee and customer parking demand rates to match regional model mode split percentages (i.e. peak parking demand was assumed to be 58% of ITE estimated figure, consistent with regional mode split for single occupancy vehicle trips for this TAZ). Restaurant employees were estimated using a rate of 3.2 employees per thousand square feet. Parking demand for restaurant customers is based on ITE estimates for peak parking demand. Adjustments were made for both employee and customer parking demand rates to match regional model mode split percentages consistent with the retail uses.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
53
53
IBI
Table 5.14 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for David Brower Center and Retail Employees Parked Vehicles 7:00 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 28 49 49 52 49 56 56 2 3 3 6 6 6 6 3 53 4 4 4 4 8 8 8 8 14 21 21 21 18 21 21 21 21 8 3 53 3 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 2 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 6 4 4 7 8 6 3 8 8 8 6 8 8 8 8 5 8:00 AM 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 4:00 5:00 PM 3:00 6:00 0 0 0 0 8 6 34 14
Table 5.15 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for Brower Center and Retail Visitors
GROUP
Use
Earth Island Institute
Center for EcoLiteracy
Ran
Other Office
Retail
Restaurant
Total
Table 5.15 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for David Brower Center and Retail Visitors Parked Vehicles 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 9 0 0 0 0 3 4 1 1 1 2 4 6 17 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 3 7 9 24 1 1 2 2 3 8:00 AM 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 2 1 2 2 4 6 17 1:00 2:00 2 1 2 2 4 3 14 PM 3:00 2 0 1 2 4 3 12 4:00 1 0 1 1 5 7 15
Use
5:00 1 0 0 0 4 7
6:00 0 0 0 0 8 13 12 21
Earth Island Institute
Center for EcoLiteracy
Ran
Other Office
Retail
Restaurant
Total
Table 5.14 Weekday Parking Accumulation Estimates for Brower Center and Retail Employees
PAGE
Parked Vehicles 7:00 3 31 8:00 AM 9:00 55 10:00 58 11:00 69 12:00 73 1:00 73 2:00 70 PM 3:00 65 4:00 68
5:00
6:00 46 35
54
Total Accumulation (Employees & Visitors)
54
As shown in Tables 5.14 and 5.15, the peak demand periods for the non-residential uses in the David Brower Center will occur during the midday and late afternoon time periods. The midday time period represents the peak demand period for the office uses, with retail uses peaking in the midday and evening time periods. The restaurant peak demand period occurs in the early evening after most of office parking demand has dissipated. However, the restaurant parking demand is expected to increase in the afternoon in anticipation of the evening peak, creating a higher overall rate of demand for the David Brower Center. It is important to note that these parking generation and accumulation estimates do not factor in the meeting and conference facilities proposed for the David Brower Center. The parking demand for these uses is more difficult to quantify since the use of these facilities will not be as consistent as the office, retail, and restaurant uses. The analysis of parking for the meeting and conference facilities at the David Brower Center is discussed in the following section.
Special Events and Meetings

The conference center and meeting facilities at the David Brower Center would be utilized by the organizations operating in the building and other similar groups in the Bay Area for special conferences and events. The anticipated maximum demand for parking that could be generated by these uses is discussed in this section. The proposed David Brower Center development allocates 7,400 square feet to the conference and meeting facilities. These facilities include a small gallery, several small meeting rooms and an auditorium. The developer estimates that these conference facilities could accommodate a maximum of 150 to 200 people for special events. Maximum parking demand for the conference facility was estimated assuming an event that draws 200 people to the David Brower Center. Using the mode split data for the Oxford Plaza area identified by the regional model (54.1% automobile), a large event would generate demand for as many as 108 parking spaces beyond those identified in Tables 5.14 and 5.15. Events on this scale would be infrequent, with a majority of the conferences and events drawing fewer than 100 people. It should also be noted that many of the events held at the David Brower will be environmentally themed, potentially attracting attendees who are more likely to use alternative transportation modes than the population as a whole. Large events held during the midday hours on weekdays combined with the standard office, retail, and restaurant uses would generate a substantial amount of demand for parking at Oxford Plaza. Proposed Traffic Demand Management strategies to mitigate the demand for parking include: The David Brower Center will be managed by full-time on-site staff members. These staff members will be responsible for event scheduling, advertising and management. The staff members will be trained in the Traffic Demand Management strategies developed in this report, ensuring that these strategies will be coordinated with large events. If large events (greater than 100 people) are scheduled during weekday or weekend peak hours, attendant parking will be provided to accommodate the possible increase in demand. Using an attendant to manage parking demand could temporarily increase the capacity of the public parking lot by approximately 26 automobiles for the single level concept and 50 automobiles for the two level concept. Work with the City of Berkeley to develop special event parking control strategies that direct visitors to use other public parking lots in the downtown area. This planning can use the proposed downtown parking guidance system under development by the City. Event notices and advertising materials will promote the use of transit and other alternative transportation modes by event attendees. Event materials could also identify alternative
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
55
55
public parking facilities located near the David Brower Center to assist in dispersing parking demand. In cases where a large event will generate significant parking demand during normal peak public parking hours, special arrangement can be made to designate off-site parking and shuttle services for event attendees. This measure would be used only if necessary, when the traffic management measures identified above are not anticipated to sufficiently mitigate parking demand.
Assuming these measures are in place, the impact of conference and event parking demand would not exceed the capacity available in the two-level public parking facility.
Residential Parking Generation Estimates

The occupants of the 96 affordable housing units at the Oxford Plaza will be low to very low income residents. Demographic analysis shows that higher densities of development as well as low income households own fewer vehicles per household. According to Figure 5-14 below, the average vehicle per household in developments with 5 or more units falls below the average vehicle per household (1.76).
1. Bay Are a Ve hicle s pe r House hold by Income and Unit Type (1990)
3.0 Median Inc =
2.5 Vehicles per Household
2.0
Avg. veh/hh = 1.76
1.5
1.0
0.5
Detached Hom e All Unit Types 5+ Units
0.0
6% 18 % 30% 42% 54 % 72 % 102 % 150 % 2 10 % 240% +
Pe rce nt of M e dian Incom e

S o urc e : 1990 C e ns us
Figure 5-14: San Francisco Bay Area Vehicles per Household Data Since the 96 high density affordable housing units at the Oxford Plaza are designated for low income residents and vehicle ownership decreases with higher densities and lower income status, this could translate into a reduced demand for parking. Two significant resources were consulted to assist in estimating possible residential parking demand at the OP&DBC: 2000 US Census Data Parking Management and Downtown Land Development: The Case of Downtown Berkeley, CA - Elizabeth Deakin, et al, UC Berkeley
US Census Tract 4229 is located in Downtown Berkeley and includes the OP&DBC parcel. The 2000 Census data reported that 42.7% of households in Tract 4229 do not have access to a vehicle. The application of this percentage to the 96 proposed residential units in Oxford Plaza would result in an estimate of at least 41 units occupied by residents who do not own vehicles, and about 55 units with a vehicle.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
56
56
The UC Berkeley study, conducted by Professor Elizabeth Deakin, found that 55% of new residents in downtown Berkeley do not own a vehicle. An additional 40% of these residents only own one vehicle.7 The information was collected from surveys conducted during a study of downtown Berkeley parking demand rates. The study noted that most residential developments in the downtown were constructed with off-street parking supplies significantly below a ratio of one space per unit. Even with this ratio, many of these residential developments experienced an underutilization of residential parking. As illustrated in Figure 5-14, affordable housing units typically have lower than average vehicle ownership rates. In light of these statistics, the base residential parking demand before the implementation of TDM measures for the Oxford Plaza residential units is assumed to be a maximum of 48 vehicles. In order to reduce this estimated demand, additional TDM strategies should be explored by the OP&DBC. One option is to encourage residents to participate in a CarShare program. Members of City CarShare8 have 24-hour access to cars at 40 locations throughout the Bay area. Reservations can be made online or by phone, for any length of time from 15 minutes to 15 days or more. A fee charged per hour and per mile includes the cost of gas, insurance, parking, and maintenance. Downtown Berkeley includes several City CarShare locations, including three locations within a mile of the project site. In a study that followed hundreds of members of City CarShare over an 18-month period, it was shown that overall automobile travel among users dropped 47%. Since joining, 30% of City CarShare households in San Francisco have sold one or more of their privately owned cars, and 67% have chosen not to purchase an additional car.9 These figures indicate that each CarShare vehicle substitutes for 5 to 10 private vehicles. The OP&DBC will support CarShare use by providing a CarShare vehicle and a dedicated parking space on the premises. The OP&DBC will cover the application fee, monthly membership dues, and the deposit for qualified tenants who wish to enroll in the program. Residents would only be responsible for paying the daily usage and mileage fees associated with the use of the vehicle. Another effective residential parking reduction strategy is to unbundle the allocation of parking spaces with the rental of an apartment. By having apartment renters pay separately for a parking space, only spaces that are needed by the residents will be occupied. The lower rent associated with not having a parking space will attract tenants that do not own vehicles, or encourage vehicle owners to use alternative transportation instead. A study funded by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute (VTPI) found that unbundling residential parking fees from monthly rent can result in reduced parking utilization rates. Table 5.16 summarizes the anticipated reductions in residential parking demand resulting from various monthly parking charges. Table 5.16 Vehicle Ownership Reductions from Residential Parking Pricing Annual (Monthly) Fee $300 ($25) $600 ($50) $900 ($75) $1,200 ($100) $1,500 ($125) -0.4 Elasticity 4% 8% 11% 15% 19% -0.7 Elasticity 6% 11% 17% 23% 28% -1.0 Elasticity 8% 15% 23% 30% 38%
Source: Todd Litman, Parking Requirement Impacts on Housing Affordability, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, June 2004.
7 8 9
E. Deakin. et al. Parking Management and Downtown Land Development: The Case of Downtown Berkeley, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, 2004.
http://www.citycarshare.org/
Robert Cervero and Yushin Tsai, San Francisco City CarShare: Second-Year Travel Demand and Car Ownership Impacts, UC Berkeley, July 2003.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
57
57
The unbundling strategy may be implemented for the residential units at Oxford Plaza. Assuming a monthly charge of $50 per parking space, vehicle ownership could be reduced by 11%. This percentage reduction was combined with the estimated percentage of CarShare members who sell one or more vehicles after joining CarShare to determine a possible reduction in Oxford Plaza residential parking demand. Combining these two TDM measures, it is estimated that residential parking demand in the OP&DBC could be reduced from 48 spaces to approximately 36 spaces. This assumption uses an estimate that the CarShare program will substitute for 7 vehicles (the average observed in the 2003 UC Berkeley study) and the unbundled parking charges would further reduce demand by an additional 5 vehicles. As noted previously, developments in Downtown Berkeley that are exclusively residential are required per code to provide only one parking space for every three residential units. Applying this ratio to the Oxford Plaza would result in a requirement for only 32 residential parking spaces. Considering the observed parking demand in other downtown residential developments, the incentives to attract tenants with a low rate of vehicle ownership, and existing Berkeley Zoning Code Standards, it is anticipated that the proposed 40 residential parking spaces in the OP&DBC will be sufficient to meet demand.
5.5 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CIRCULATION

The OP&DBC development is not anticipated to have negative impacts on pedestrian or bicycle circulation. The signalization and redesign of the intersection of Oxford Street/Allston Way and the signalization of the Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection will improve pedestrian safety and circulation.
5.6 SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION RECOMMENDATIONS

The OP&DBC will include two access driveways on Kittredge Street. One driveway will provide exclusive access to the at-grade residential parking spaces. The second driveway will access the proposed underground public parking facility. Kittredge Street is a two-lane roadway that serves relatively low volumes of automobile traffic in the existing and future conditions. The low traffic volumes make this roadway an excellent choice as the access route to the OP&DBC parking facilities. Separate driveways were proposed for the two parking facilities at the request of City of Berkeley staff. The separate driveways will facilitate easier access and egress to the underground public parking facility and help to reduce possible driver confusion related to authorized use for each parking facility.
5.7 PARKING AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

No public parking will be available in the Oxford parking lot during construction of the OP&DBC and the new underground parking facility. During construction, daily public parking demand for the Oxford parking lot will need to be distributed to other public parking facilities located in downtown Berkeley. City-owned public parking lots located in close proximity to the Oxford lot include the Center Street Garage and the Sather Gate Garage. Privately-owned public parking facilities include the Allston Way Garage and Promenade Garage. Based on the average weekday daily parking utilization rates reported in the Berkeley Parking Utilization Study for these four facilities, it is anticipated that sufficient parking capacity is available to accommodate displaced demand from the Oxford parking lot.10 Table 5.17 summarizes the average daily utilization for each of the nearby public parking facilities. Figure 5.15 identifies the location of these parking facilities in relation to the Oxford parking lot.
10
City of Berkeley, Berkeley Traffic Data and Parking Utilization Analysis and Downtown Berkeley Parking Information Study: Draft Inventory and Needs Statement, March 2003.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
58
58
ity Ave Univers

Oxford St
PROMENADE GARAGE
St Addison
CENTER STREET GARAGE
St Center
ALLSTON WAY GARAGE OXFORD LOT
Way Allston
UC Berkeley
Milvia St
e St Kittredg
Way Bancroft
Shattuck Ave
Public Parking One-Way Street Direction

0 300 ft 600 ft
IBI
King Jr. Way Martin Luther
Way Bancroft
SATHER GATE GARAGE
ph Ave Telegra
Ave Durant
St Fulton
th St Ellswor
LEGEND
g Way Channin
treet Dana S t Haste S
Downtown Berkeley
FIGURE 5-15
Public Parking Lots
Table 5.17 Observed Downtown Berkeley Parking Utilization Total Weekday Weekday Weekday Parking Morning Afternoon Evening Supply Utilization Utilization Utilization 75% Oxford Lot 132 90% 77% 51% Center Street Garage 410 98% 88% Sather Gate Garage 24% 436 15% 62% Allston Way Garage 37% 610 73% 84% Promenade Garage 30% 120 57% No Data Source: City of Berkeley, Berkeley Traffic Data and Parking Utilization Analysis Parking Facility Minimum Available Parking 13 8 165 97 51
It is recommended that temporary signage detailing the date of construction initiation, the anticipated duration of construction, and suggested alternative public parking facilities be posted at the Oxford parking lot at least one month prior to the beginning of construction. Temporary signage should also be provided at the former entrance to the Oxford parking lot during construction, identifying alternative public parking facilities. Notifications should also be provided to business and theaters located near the Oxford parking lot so that these businesses can notify customers that alternative parking facilities should be used during construction. While the temporary closure of the Oxford parking lot will redistribute traffic patterns in the vicinity of the parking lot, no significant permanent traffic impacts are anticipated to result from the parking lots temporary closure. The temporary signage placed in the Oxford parking facility and at adjacent businesses prior to the beginning of construction will assist in minimizing the number of automobiles who travel directly to the Oxford parking lot and then search through the downtown area for available parking. Advance notice to frequent patrons of the Oxford lot will assist these drivers in finding alternative parking facilities during the construction period.
5.8 PARKING RELATED TRAFFIC IMPACTS

As discussed previously in this report, two underground public parking concepts have been developed for the OP&DBC. The first concept would provide a single-level underground public parking lot with 104 parking spaces. The second concept includes two underground parking levels with a total of 211 public parking spaces. As discussed in Section 5.4 of this report, the combined parking demand of the OP&DBC and existing public parking utilization will likely exceed the capacity of the 104 space singlelevel parking lot. In this scenario, the overflow parking demand for the Oxford public lot would disperse to alternative public parking facilities located in downtown Berkeley. Available public parking facilities capable of absorbing this excess parking demand are identified in Section 5.7. This section discusses the possible traffic impacts resulting from the excess parking demand recirculating into the downtown roadway network. The City of Berkeley has requested an analysis of the potential impact resulting from additional automobile traffic generated by vehicles traveling to the Oxford parking lot and reentering the roadway network because the parking facility is at capacity. These additional automobile trips have been termed parking search trips for the purposes of identification in this report. It is anticipated that the parking search trips would only be generated in the single-level public parking facility is implemented. The two-level public parking lot is anticipated to have enough capacity to meet projected parking demand. Overall, parking search trips are not anticipated to have a significant impact on traffic operations in the vicinity of the Oxford parking lot. The traffic impact of parking search trips is limited because the peak time periods for parking demand and roadway traffic volumes do not experience a significant amount
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
60
60
of overlap. A full summary of parking demand versus capacity can be found in Section 6.0 of this report. The single level public parking lot is not anticipated to approach capacity until 10:00am on weekday mornings. This estimate is based on observed existing utilization and estimated demand for the new land uses. By comparison, the AM peak hour ends by 9:00am for all project study intersections analyzed in this report. Because there is not overlap between the AM peak traffic period and AM time periods where parking demand exceeds capacity, there are no anticipated traffic impacts in the AM peak period as a result of parking search automobile trips. There is an overlap between the PM peak period for traffic and time periods where parking demand is anticipated to exceed the capacity of the single level public parking lot. The PM peak hour for a majority of the project study intersections occurs within the 4:00pm to 6:00pm time frame. During this time period, excess parking demand is anticipated to range from zero vehicles to 41 vehicles depending on the implementation of specific TDM measures identified in Section 6.0. In a worst-case scenario, as many as 41 automobile trips would reenter the roadway network from the Oxford parking lot and travel to a nearby parking facility. The two closest facilities with significant amounts of available parking capacity are the Allston Way Garage and the Sather Gate Garage. Automobile trips between the Oxford lot and Allston Way garage would travel through one study intersection, Shattuck Avenue/Kittredge Street. Trips between the Oxford lot and the Sather Gate Garage would travel through three study intersections, Fulton Street/Kittredge Street, Fulton Street/Bancroft Way, and Fulton Street/Durant Avenue. With the exception of the Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection, these study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS B or better in the Future With Project condition. These additional parking search trips would not have significant impact on these intersections. While the Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour during the Future With Project condition, the primary cause of the impact is the delay associated with the eastbound left turn movement. A majority of the trips passing through this intersection will be traveling to access the Sather Gate Garage or other parking lots to the south, requiring a right turn at this intersection. The addition of as many as 20 right turns during the PM peak hour at this intersection would contribute the deficient traffic operations already identified in this report. Mitigation measures for this intersection are identified in Section 7.0 of this report. The proposed mitigation measures would address projectrelated trips and the parking search trips. This scenario assumes that half of the 41 parking search trips generated during the PM peak hour travel to the Sather Gate garage, while the remaining trips travel to the Allston Way Garage. It should also be noted that the City of Berkeley is currently studying the implementation of a real-time parking guidance and information system. This system will include variable message signage located throughout the downtown, providing directions to public parking facilities with available parking capacity. If implemented, this system would significantly reduce the number of automobiles forced to search for available parking between public parking facilities.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
61
61
6.0
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Transportation demand management (TDM) measures can be very effective at reducing the number of automobile trips and parking demand generated by a particular development. TDM measures have the potential to be very effective due to the proximity of the OP&DBC to regional and local transit systems such as BART and AC Transit. Downtown Berkeley is also very pedestrian and bicycle friendly, further encouraging the use of alternative non-automobile modes of transportation. Data from the Alameda County Transportation Analysis Model suggests that a significant percentage (42%) of people traveling to and from the traffic analysis zone containing the OP&DBC parcel use transit or other alternative transportation modes to complete their trip. The trip distribution percentages obtained from the model have already been incorporated in the parking accumulation analysis presented in Section 5.0. As noted previously, the traffic impact analysis and parking accumulation analysis presented earlier in this report do not incorporate TDM measures. This section summarizes TDM measures that will be implemented at the OP&DBC in order to reduce the number of automobile trips generated by the development and overall parking demand in the on-site parking lots.
6.1 PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MEASURES

Transportation and parking demand management measures are aimed at mitigating the number of automobile trips and parking demand generated by a development. Several TDM measures are proposed for the OP&DBC, with the objective of reducing the number of automobile trips generated by the development, therefore decreasing the necessary amount of parking supply at the OP&DBC. Recommended transportation and parking demand management measures include: A centrally located kiosk or bulletin board will be provided in both the David Brower Center lobby and Oxford Plaza residential area of the development. These information centers will provide transit schedules, carpool/ridershare information, contact data for the City of Berkeleys Office of Transportation, and other transit and ridershare supportive materials. Consistent alternative transportation information will also be included in any website or other marketing materials. Building Management will designate a permanent Employee/Resident Transportation Coordinator, who will coordinate the CarShare, Transit benefits, kiosk, Guaranteed Ride Home, etc programs. The David Brower Center will include on-site management staff. One staff on-site staff member will be designated as the developments Employee Transportation Coordinator. Residential transportation coordination will be handled by the on-site residential building manager. Employees and visitors to the David Brower Center will be charged parking fees for use of the underground public parking lot. A monthly transit or ridershare allowance will be provided to employees working in the David Brower Center. This allowance will likely be coordinated through the Bay Area Commuter Check program. Employer participation will likely be ensured through requirements incorporated into tenant leases for the building. OP&DBC will participate in the City CarShare program by providing up to 3 parking spaces for City CarShare vehicles in the public and residential portions of the parking garage. One space would be provided in the residential parking facility, and two spaces would be located in the underground public parking lot. The development will also pay the initial CarShare membership fee and monthly subscription fees for residents of Oxford Plaza to join the CarShare program.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
62
62
OP&DBC will participate in the Alameda County Guaranteed Ride Home program. Reduced cost parking will be provided for employee carpools and vanpools. The site plan for the OP&DBC includes a private 25-foot by 21-foot bicycle storage room in the residential parking garage to support bike usage.
A comprehensive transportation and parking management plan that includes several strategies (shared parking, more accurate parking requirements, pricing, etc.) can often reduce parking demand requirements by 30-50% compared with generous minimum parking requirements, free parking, and each space assigned to an individual motorist. The benefits of several of these TDM measures are discussed further in the following sections. Parking Fees Parking fees may be implemented as a parking management measure in a particular area to reduce parking demand. Parking fees can play a significant role in influencing the parking generation rates for particular land uses. Pricing of commuter parking and higher rates during peak periods is particularly effective at reducing peak use. Charging drivers directly for parking is more equitable and economically efficient to those who drive less or not at all. The Victoria Transport Policy Institute (VPTI) sites a previous study completed by the Comsis Corporation in 1993 that identified reductions in vehicle trips resulting from daily parking fees. Table 6.1 summarizes the observations from this study. Table 6.1 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Daily Parking Fees Setting Suburban, transit-oriented Activity Center, transit-oriented Regional Central Business District, transit-oriented Daily Parking Fee (1991 $) $1.30 $2.60 $4.00 5.9% 14.3% 22.5% 13.1% 30.5% 42.6% 21.0% 46.8% 58.7%
$0.00 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
$5.20 28.6% 61.4% 70.6%
Sources: Victoria Transport Institute, Comsis Corporation, Implementing Effective Travel Demand Management Measures: Inventory of Measures and Synthesis of Experience, USDOT and Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1993.
Downtown Berkeley is a very transit-oriented area with direct access to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system and Alameda County (AC) transit system. The data presented in Table 6.1 suggests that single-occupancy vehicle trips could be dramatically reduced after the implementation of parking fees. However, the overall impact of parking fees on vehicle trips to and from the OP&DBC is anticipated to be slightly lower than the figures identified in Table 6.1. The City of Berkeley already charges high daily parking fees ($12 to $15 per day) in its City-owned parking lots. For the purposes of this TDM analysis, it is assumed that parking charges would reduce vehicle trips and parking demand for the David Brower Center by 30%. This figure is one-half of the 61% trip reduction estimate presented in Table 6.1. This figure is also a conservative estimate for parking demand reduction resulting from high daily parking fees, considering the parking fee structure already in place within Downtown Berkeley. Ridershare and Transit Subsidies Another effective trip reduction and parking demand management strategy is for employees to provide rideshare and/transit subsidies to their employees. These subsidies can be provided in the form of additional compensation or in-lieu of salary increases. The subsidies are usually provided with a
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
63
63
defined set of use standards, which require participating employees to commute via transit or ridershare for a minimum number of days each month. TDM studies have identified a strong link between the amount of the transit and ridershare subsidy and employee participation rates. As would be expected, higher subsidies result in a greater number of employees participating in the program. The impact of transit and ridershare subsidies was estimated for the OP&DBC using data provided by the VTPI.11 Tables 6.2 and 6.3 summarize the VPTI estimated percentages for vehicle trip reduction resulting from various daily transit and ridershare subsidies. Table 6.2 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Transit Subsidies Setting Activity Center, rideshare oriented Activity Center, transit-oriented Daily Transit Subsidy $0.50 $1.00 $2.00 1.1% 5.2% 2.4% 10.9% 5.8% 23.5%
$0.00 0.0% 0.0%
$4.00 16.5% 49.7%
Table 6.3 Percent of Commute Vehicle Trips Reduced by Rideshare Subsidies Setting Activity Center, rideshare oriented Activity Center, transit-oriented Daily Rideshare Subsidy $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 8.4% 0.5% 17.0% 1.2% 24.9% 2.4%
$0.00 0.0% 0.0%
$4.00 31.4% 4.3%
The David Brower Center ownership group has committed to ensuring that a minimum $2/day transit and ridershare subsidy is provided by the office and retail tenants. This subsidy requirement would be incorporated into the tenant lease agreements to ensure participation by all employers located in the David Brower Center. For the purposes of estimating reductions in trip generation and parking demand in this study, it is assumed that a $2/day transit and ridershare subsidy would result in a trip reduction of 25%. This figure represents the combined percentage of the trip reduction rates linked to subsidies in transit-oriented activity centers. Shared Parking Shared Parking means parking spaces are shared by more than one user, allowing parking facilities to be used more efficiently. The mixed uses at the Oxford Plaza/David Brower Center create a base of diverse parking users with varying peak demand times for parking. The mixed uses and varying peak demand times increase the likeliness of a successful shared parking program. For example, the restaurant can share parking with the office space tenants because restaurant parking demand peaks are in the evening and the office parking demand is during the day. Additionally, a significant portion of the daytime demand for the restaurant could come from the adjacent office uses, which would not generate parking demand. To determine the feasibility of shared use parking, projections for types of use and peak demand by time of day are provided to demonstrate the potential reduction for demand by time of day and use. The parking accumulation estimates presented in Tables 5.14 and 5.15 reflect shared use of available
11
Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Commuter Financial Incentives, June 2004, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm8.htm
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
64
64
parking facilities. VTPIs recommended percentages for basic minimum parking needs by use and time of day are 100% for office, 90% for retail and 70% for restaurant during weekday midday hours were used in these estimates. Regulate Parking Parking facilities can be managed and regulated to encourage more efficient use of parking resources and more efficient travel. This often involves making the most convenient parking spaces available to certain higher-value uses. Below are typical strategies: Set parking prices to equal or exceed transit fares. For example, set daily rates at least equal to two single transit fares and monthly rates at least equal to a monthly transit pass. Use rates that are higher for peak times. Avoid discounts for long-term parking (i.e. monthly parking permits). Unbundle parking from housing, so apartment and condominium residents pay only for the parking spaces they need. Provide free or discounted parking for Rideshare and CarShare vehicles.
The OP&DBC will implement several of these parking management measures including setting parking fees to exceed transit fares and unbundling residential parking from housing. Additional parking management measures will be considered if necessary. Impact of TDM Measures With the implementation of TDM measures (parking pricing, transit and rideshare subsidies, CarShare, unbundled residential parking, etc.), anticipated trip generation rates and parking demand at the OP&DBC would be reduced. The combined impact of parking pricing and a proposed $2/day transit/ridershare subsidy for employees is anticipated to reduce employee parking rates by as much as 55%. Visitor parking demand rates are anticipated to be reduced by 30% as a result of the parking pricing. It is assumed that may of the automobile trips removed by the TDM measures will be completed using transit or other alternative modes of transportation. Table 6.4 summarizes the estimated impact that TDM measures would have on hourly parking demand at the OP&DBC. This table summarizes the data presented in Tables 5.14 and 5.15 and estimates potential residential parking demand during weekday daytime hours. It is assumed that residential parking demand would be at 100% (40 spaces) between 10:00pm and 6:00am. Average residential parking demand during daytime hours is estimated to be 60% of peak demand.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
65
65
IBI
Table 6.4 Impact of TDM Measures on Weekday Parking Demand at Oxford Plaza & David Brower Center Parked Vehicles
Table 6.4 Impact of TDM Measures on Weekday Parking Demand at Oxford Plaza & Brower Center
GROUP
Use 7:00 3 32 35 8:00 28 24 52 AM 9:00 49 24 73 10:00 49 24 73 11:00 52 24 76 12:00 49 24 73 1:00 56 24 80 2:00 56 24 80 4:00 53 24 77 5:00 34 24 58 PM 3:00 53 24 77
DBC & Retail Employees Oxford Plaza Residents* Subtotal Employee & Residents
6:00 14 32 46
Employee Accumulation with TDM Measures Oxford Plaza Residents* Subtotal Employee & Residents with TDM Measures 2 32 34 0 0 0 7 7 23 56 74 97 134 112 107 3 0 0 20 3 3 0 50 5 4 0 65 7 4 6 80 8 7 9 110 7 4 6 95 7 4 3 93 37 46 46 47 46 49 49 48 5 4 3 93 105 13 24 22 24 22 24 23 24 22 24 25 24 25 24 24 24 24 24 48 3 5 7 93
15 24 39 1 4 7 75 108 87
6 32
38
David Brower Center Office Visitors Retail Visitors Restaurant Visitors Existing Public Parking
0 8 13 95
Subtotal Visitors & Public Parking
116
Visitor Accumulation with TDM Measures Existing Public Parking Subtotal Visitors & Public Parking with TDM Measures 0 7 7 22 54 72 92 127 2 20 4 50 7 65 12 80 17 110
12 95 107
10 93 103
9 93 102
11 93 104
9 75 84
15 95
110
Total Accumulation Without TDM (Employees, Residents, Visitors, and Public) 42 75 129 147 173
207
192
187
182
185
145
162
Total Accumulation with TDM Measures (Employees, Residents, Visitors, and Public) 41 144 102 103 144 69 85 144 15 44 59 100
118 144 -3 26
139 144 -29 5
173 144 -63 -29
156 144 -48 -12
152 144 -43 -8
150 144 -38 -6
152 144 -41 -8
123 144 -1 21
148
Parking Concept 1 Capacity Parking Surplus/Deficit Parking Surplus/Deficit with TDM
144 -18 -4
PAGE
66
Parking Concept 2 Capacity 251 251 251 251 251 Parking Surplus/Deficit 209 176 122 104 78 Parking Surplus/Deficit with TDM 210 192 151 133 112 * Note: Residential parking demand is assumed to be 36 vehicles between 7:00pm and 7:00am.
251 44 78
251 59 95
251 64 99
251 69 101
251 67 99
251 107 128
251 89 103
66
7.0
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS
Recommended mitigation measures related to circulation and parking associated with the Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center development are presented in this section.
7.1 CIRCULATION
The Oxford Plaza and David Brower Center development is not expected to have a significant impact on the circulation system in the project area. There are locations where mitigation measures are recommended, however, due to existing safety and operational issues. Mitigations associated with the project are included in this section, as well as a discussion of General Plan Amendment impacts.
Project Mitigations
The forecast traffic volumes at Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection satisfies Warrant 3, Peak Hour of the traffic signal warrants for the need for a traffic control signal, as stated in Chapter 4C of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants does not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. Other mitigation measures can be considered if they adequately address the traffic impacts at the intersection. It is important to note that the traffic signal warrants at this intersection is satisfied based on future traffic conditions without the trips added by the OP&DBC project. The trips generated by the project do contribute to the poor traffic operations at these intersections, but these trips are not the cause of the deficiencies. Any contribution by the project to the cost of a new traffic signal should correlate with the portion of the traffic impact resulting from trip-added trips. The exact contribution percentage would be determined through negotiations between the developer and the City of Berkeley Fulton Street / Kittredge Street The intersection of Fulton Street and Kittredge Street is located at the southeast corner of the OP&DBC development site, and is the closest intersection to the driveway that will provide access to and egress from the property. This intersection is currently operating at LOS F during the AM and PM peak periods, and is forecast to have even longer delays and queues in the Future With Project condition. Three alternative mitigation measures were considered for this location. The recommended mitigation measure is to restripe the eastbound intersection approach on Kittredge Street to provide one exclusive left turn lane and one exclusive right turn lane. This proposed mitigation will improve the average delay experienced at the intersection to 190.7 seconds in the Future With Project Conditions for Scenario 1. This average delay is lower than the Future No Project condition, which experiences an average delay of 243.7 seconds. Based on this observed improvement, the recommended mitigation addresses the traffic impact resulting from the proposed OP&DBC project. The LOS calculation sheet for this proposed mitigation is located in the Appendix of this report. Additional mitigation options include prohibiting eastbound left turns during the PM peak period. This mitigation would result in a redistribution of traffic on the surrounding street network. However, this redistribution would not result in a significant traffic impact since many of the adjacent intersections are operating at an acceptable level of service. The final alternative option would signalize the intersection to better serve the eastbound left turn vehicular movement as well as pedestrian traffic. Under signal control, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS A. The City of Berkeley will monitor traffic conditions at the Fulton Street/Kittredge Street intersection after completion of the OP&DBC project. If the recommended mitigation for this intersection does not adequately address the identified project impact, one of the two alternative mitigations identified in this section will be considered for implementation.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
67
67
General Plan Amendment

It should be noted that even without the General Plan Amendment, redevelopment of either site to capacity could generate enough trips to cause significant impact. A reasonable development with a balance of uses and open space may be developed on the property without significant impact, or with impacts that may be mitigated through traffic demand management and other measures. The amendment is not anticipated to allow developments that would generate an overwhelming amount of traffic. However, given the increased potential, new projects on affected property should be carefully reviewed to ensure that the traffic generated by those projects is reasonable.
7.2 PARKING
The average weekday parking demand, including existing demand for public parking, for the Oxford Plaza property with the implementation of TDM measures would be expected to range from a maximum of 173 vehicles in the morning and midday hours to an average of 147 vehicles in the afternoon. These figures incorporate employee and visitor parking for the David Brower Center, existing public parking demand, and residential parking from Oxford Plaza. The anticipated high end for total parking demand in the evening is 148 vehicles. The high-end for parking demand without TDM measures would be 207 vehicles during the weekday mid-day time period. Two parking facility concepts are under consideration for the OP&DBC. Concept 1 would provide a total of 145 parking spaces. In both concepts, 40 at-grade parking spaces are provided for the residential units. Concept 1 provides 104 parking spaces in an underground public parking facility. Concept 2 includes the addition of a second level to the public parking lot, allowing for 211 public parking spaces to be provided. In total, 251 spaces would be provided in Concept 2. It is anticipated that the combined parking demand for the OP&DBC and the existing public parking will exceed the proposed capacity of Parking Concept 1. Parking Concept 2 should be able to accommodate anticipated parking demand with excess capacity. The excess capacity for Concept 2 is expected to range from 39 spaces in the mid-day to 60 spaces in the afternoon and 204 spaces in the early morning. Table 7.1 compares the capacity of the two alternative parking concepts and anticipated demand. Table 7.1 Comparison of OP&DBC Parking Capacity and Demand Parking Provided (Public & Residential Combined) 144 251 Range of Parking Demand Without TDM Measures 42 to 207 42 to 207 Range of Parking Demand With TDM Measures 41 to 173 41 to 173 Range of Surplus/Deficit Without TDM Measures 102 to -63 209 to 44 Range of Surplus/Deficit With TDM Measures 103 to -29 210 to 78
Concept
Concept 1 Concept 2
Note: See Table 6.4 for a detailed summary of parking demand by time of day.
The peak weekday parking demand with TDM measures occurs at 12:00pm and is comprised of 22 David Brower Center employee vehicles, 17 visitor vehicles, 24 resident vehicles, and historic utilization of 110 public parking spaces. Employee demand with TDM measures is relatively stable at 22 to 25 spaces during the 9:00am to 4:00pm work period. Residential demand is stable at 24 spaces during the day and increases to a maximum of 36 spaces overnight. All residential parking demand is accommodated in the above grade residential parking area. Table 7.2 summarizes the anticipated daily parking demand with the implementation of TDM measures for employees, residents, and visitors at the OP&DBC. The table includes the expected number of daily users from each category, and the type of parking permit most likely purchased by each user.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
68
68
Table 7.2 Total Daily Parking Usage for OP&DBC Type of User Office Employees Office Visitors Retail/Restaurant Employees Retail/Restaurant Visitors Residential Overflow to Public Lot Anticipated Total Daily Users 14-17 22 9-14 160-178 31 Anticipated Maximum Users per Hour 14-18 5-8 4-6 16-21 25-31 Average Stay Duration (Hours) 8 2 6 1 10 Type of Payment for Parking Monthly Hourly Monthly and Hourly Hourly Monthly (Evenings)
Based on these projected parking demand figures, no parking mitigation measures would be required for Parking Concept 2. This concept would provide adequate parking capacity to serve anticipated demand. Parking Concept 1 is not anticipated to provide sufficient parking capacity to meet the estimated demand generated by the OP&DBC and existing public parking. As indicated above, the average daily parking demand generated by the OP&DBC ranges from 22 to 49 spaces for employee parking and 12 to 24 spaces for visitor parking. These average daily parking generation figures are in addition to the existing daily public parking demand which ranges from 65 to 110 spaces. If Concept 1 is selected for final development, parking mitigations would be required to accommodate anticipated parking demand. One available mitigation measure would be to require employees who commute via automobile to the David Brower Center and the Oxford Plaza retail uses to purchase monthly parking passes at other public parking facilities located in downtown Berkeley. As discussed in Section 5.7 of this report, several other parking facilities in the downtown area do have available capacity during the weekday hours. Alternative parking facilities include the Sather Gate Garage, Center Street Garage, and Allston Way Garage. These facilities are all located within mile of the OP&DBC, which is considered to be a reasonable walking distance. The other public parking facilities combined would need to accommodate daily employee parking demand of 22 to 49 automobiles, depending on the implementation and success of the proposed TDM measures. As noted in Section 5.7, the Sather Gate Garage has an average peak utilization rate of 62%, resulting in an available capacity of 165 vehicles. Additionally, the Allston Way Garage has an observed available of as many as 97 vehicles. Both of these parking facilities appear to have sufficient capacity to absorb the anticipated OP&DBC employee parking demand. Under this scenario, visitor parking demand for OP&DBC would be absorbed within the overall public parking facility. If employee parking is not accommodated on site, the increased visitor demand of approximately 9 to 17 spaces can be accommodated within the proposed single level parking facility except at the 12:00pm peak period.
IBI
GROUP
PAGE
69
69
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
IBI
GROUP
PAGE

2200 Oxford TIA-Revised Comments 6-01-05

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

2200 Oxford TIA-Revised Comments 6-01-05

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND PARKING STUDY

1.1 REPORT SECTIONS

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

Residential Parking Access

Public Parking Access

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Controlled Delay (sec/veh) 10 > 10 20 > 20 35 > 35 55 > 55 80 > 80

City of Berkeley, Guidelines for Traffic Studies, October 2004

Controlled Delay (sec/veh)

Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.

2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.

City of Berkeley, Guidelines for Traffic Studies, October 2004

3.1 EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK

3.2 PROJECT STUDY INTERSECTIONS

3.3 TRANSIT SERVICE

Table 3.3 Bus Stops per Hour at Project Intersections PM Peak

5. Shattuck Street /Durant Avenue

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

Study Intersection Geometry

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

ity Ave Univers

PROMENADE GARAGE UNIVERSITY UCP HALL GARAGE

CENTER STREET GARAGE

King Jr. Way Martin Luther

SATHER GATE GARAGE

treet Dana S t Haste S

Bus Stops, Parking Lots, and Bicycle Routes

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

Percentage 59.3 % 4.6 % 18.6 % 7.4 % 0.9 % 0.0 % 9.2 % 100 %

3.4 EXISTING CIRCULATION AND PARKING

Source: Caltrans California Transit-Oriented Development Database http://transitorienteddevelopment.dot.ca.gov/station/stateViewStationTransportation.jsp?stationId=5

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

ity Ave Univers

Study Intersection Turning Movement Volumes

Existing Condition - AM Peak

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

ity Ave Univers

Study Intersection Turning Movement Volumes

Existing Condition - PM Peak

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

ity Ave Univers

Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes

Existing Condition - AM Peak

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

ity Ave Univers

Select Intersection Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes

Existing Condition - PM Peak

Existing Intersection Level of Service

3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC PATTERNS, TRIP DISTRIBUTION, AND MODE CHOICE

Source: Alameda County Transportation Analysis Model

OXFORD PLAZA AND THE DAVID BROWER CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS

Ambient Traffic Distribution