Lions Hall TABULATION FORM - Berkeley, California€¦ · corner parapet wall to the avg of the...

Date

Applicant's Name

Zoning District

Existing Proposed

Permitted /

Required Notes

Units

Number of Student Housing

Units0 45 n/a

Number of Parking Spaces 49 59 32

Yards

Front Yard Setback 1 1 15' Durant Avenue

Side Yard Setback - Left 0 0 6'-14' Ellsworth Street

Side Yard Setback - Right 0 0 4'-10' BCC adjacent

Rear Yard Setback 12' 21.16' 15'-19'

between res'l bldg's north

edge and the church; does

not account for community

facility

Height

# of Stories 3 5 6

Average Building Height 25.84 52.38 65

from the top of the SW

corner parapet wall to the

avg of the high & low

portion of the lotMaximum Height 28.59 55.77 n/a at SW corner

Areas

Lot Area 45,500 24,317 24,317

Gross Floor Area* (for FAR) n/a 52,183 n/adoes not include

community facility

Footprint n/a 23,443 9,727

Lot Coverage n/a 96% 40%

Useable Open Space n/a 5,016 14,490

Floor Area Ratio n/a 2.15 n/a

Lions Hall

TABULATION FORM

*Gross Floor Area excludes parking area, as per Berkeley Zoning Ordinance Title 23F

August 11, 2010

Lions Hall LLC

R-4

Attachment A

A-1

Lions Halls LLC is proposing to construct a new five-story, 164 bed student-oriented group living (dorm) project over a new parking structure at the corner of Durant Avenue and Ellsworth Street on property owned by Saint Mark’s Episcopal Church.

1. Proposed Project The proposed project consists of demolishing the existing parking structure, the community facility and the classroom building. These structures will be replaced by a new residential building built over a seismically sound parking area. The project also replaces Saint Mark’s community facility. 1a. Parking Area The new parking area will provide 59 surface parking spaces to replace the existing 49 spaces. The garage will be accessed from Ellsworth Street (the existing Durant Avenue driveway will be eliminated and the two existing Ellsworth driveways will be consolidated). Access to Saint Mark’s church will either be via a staircase located at the northwest corner of the garage or via the elevator lobby at the northeast corner of the garage. 1b. Community Facility The new 2,722 square foot community facility is twice as large as the existing facility. This new facility will allow Saint Mark’s to better serve its existing congregation and attract new families. The new facility includes a kitchen for post-service coffee hours, a meeting room, two children’s classrooms, a nursery and two restrooms. The new community facility will mostly function as a post-service meeting area, but will also allow Saint Mark’s to accommodate weddings, funerals and other religious activities. The L-shaped configuration of the new community facility frames two outdoor areas between it and the existing sanctuary building to the north. The western plaza

Attachment A

A-2

is semi-enclosed by the new building and will provide an outdoor gathering area. The northern plaza will house a play structure and will also be used during certain church services. 1c. Residential Building The 52,200sf residential building is the new component of the project. The building includes 45 dorm units with a total of 164 beds. This building will be accessed by a lobby located at the corner of Durant and Ellsworth. The lobby area provides access to the main stairs and elevator as well as the bike parking and trash rooms. A janitor’s room is also included. The residential units are located on floors two through five. Each floor has a common room at the southwestern corner of the building.

Common Rooms The common rooms, which residents pass through on each floor as they leave the elevator lobby, are central to the concept of living in the building and are located on the building’s prominent corner on each floor. The second floor common room is the largest common space and is the building’s primary gathering space. This common room includes access to an outdoor patio, a communal kitchen and dining room, a lounge and a media room. The third and fifth floor lounges are designed for studying and gathering. Laundry facilities are also located on the third and fifth floors. The fourth floor lounge includes a second, smaller common kitchen and dining area. The third through fifth common areas are each approximately 1,090 square feet and the second floor lounge is 1,500 square feet, a total of more than 4,770 square feet of common rooms. Dorm Units The project consists of 45 dorm units. There are 2 one-bed units, 4 units that have a single shared bedroom, 3 three-bedroom units and 36 four-bedroom units. Each unit has a living room, a bathroom, and an eating area. The units do not have full kitchens. The only cooking facility provided in each unit is a microwave oven suitable for heating small meals. The eating areas are designed to allow the residents to prepare simple meals (cereal, top ramen, sandwiches) or purchase food “to go” and eat them in their units. It is expected that most residents will purchase a meal plan through UC Berkeley, will use the building’s common kitchens to cook full meals, or will avail themselves of the many excellent dining options in the Southside area. Most bathrooms have separate sink areas allowing two people to use the bathroom at the same time. Living rooms will provide a small gathering area for the residents of each unit. The bedrooms in the dorm units are designed for single occupancy and no unit will hold more than 4 residents. Each room is 8’ by 12’ and is expected to be furnished with a bed, a closet / armoire and a desk. The bedrooms do not have fixed closets to allow maximum furniture layout flexibility. Each bedroom has a lock that allows for complete privacy in a shared living environment.

Attachment A

A-3

1d. Open Space The project provides open space on the podium and on the roof deck. The podium open space includes a large planted area between the residential building and the community building (1,532 square feet), a planted area between the residential building and the Berkeley City Club property (552 square feet) and a roof deck (2,596 square feet). The total open space area for the residential building is 5,016 square feet. There are also 4,902 square feet of podium-level open space that will be used by the church. 1e. Lot Split The parcel on which the project will be constructed is a 45,500 square foot site that is bounded by Bancroft Way, Ellsworth Street, Durant Avenue, the Berkeley City Club property and the Canterbury House property. In order to obtain financing, the proposed project must be located on a separate lot. Therefore, after project approval, but prior to project construction, Lions Hall and Saint Mark’s Church will undertake a lot split, with mutual access easements as necessary, to create two legal parcels. The new lot line is shown on the plans and the Lions Hall lot shall be approximately 24,317 square feet. 1f. Inclusionary Housing The proposed Lion’s Hall is a residential dorm. Residential dorms are not considered dwelling units and, as such, the project is exempt from the City of Berkeley’s Inclusionary Housing ordinance (23C.12.020.b). The project is not seeking a density bonus.

Attachment B

Project

Code Compliant Dorm Development

Zoning Analysis

Building Area 32,700

Residential Units 33

Beds / unit 4

Total Beds 132

Open Space Required 6,600

Open Space Provided 4,950 Balance on roof

Parking Required 27 Provide in Lift Spaces

Cost Analysis

Residential 32,700 Square Feet

Hard cost / SF 220$ (actual psf cost would be higher due to smaller building)

Soft cost / SF 100$

Total Cost 10,464,000$

Podium 22,140 Square Feet

Hard cost / SF 75$

Soft cost / SF 35$


Community Facility 2,000 Square Feet

Hard cost / SF 125$

Soft cost / SF 25$

Total Cost 300,000$

Parking Machine Foundations 8,400 square feet

Hard Cost / SF 75$

Soft Cost / SF 30$

Foundation cost 882,000$

Parking Machines 54 Machine Spaces

Cost / Machine 15,000$

Total Cost 810,000$

Total Development Cost 14,891,400$

130 Bed Dorm

Attachment B

Project

Code Compliant Dorm Development

Value Analysis

Residential Units 33 Units

Gross Rent / Unit 2,800$

Net Rent / Unit 1,820.00$ (assumes 35% expense load)

Monthly Income 60,060$

Vacancy at 5% (3,003)$

Net Monthly Income 57,057$

Annual Net Income 684,684$

Parking Spaces 80

Gross Rent / Space 150.00$

Net Rent (15% expense load) 127.50$


Vacancy at 5% (513)$



Total Annual Income 801,545$

Cap Rate 6.00%

Value 13,359,090$

Net Value (1,532,310)$ (Value less costs)

Return to Cost ‐11.47%

130 Bed Dorm

Attachment B

Project

Proposed Dorm Project

Zoning Analysis



Beds / unit 4

Total Beds 164



Parking Required 34 Not Provided

Cost Analysis


Hard cost / SF 220$ 4 story building

Soft cost / SF 110$



Hard cost / SF 75$

Soft cost / SF 35$



Hard cost / SF 125$

Soft cost / SF 25$

Total Cost 375,000$

Parking Machine Foundations ‐ square feet

Hard Cost / SF 75$

Soft Cost / SF 30$

Foundation cost ‐$

Parking Machines ‐ Machine Spaces


Total Cost ‐$


164 Bed Dorm

Attachment B

Project

Proposed Dorm Project

Value Analysis

Residential Units 164 Beds

Gross Rent / Bed 875$

Net Rent / Unit 612.50$ (assumes 30% expense load)




Annual Net Income 1,145,130$

Parking Spaces 56







Total Annual Income 1,226,526$

Cap Rate 6.00%

Value 20,442,100$

Net Value 1,081,100$ (Value less costs)

Return to Cost 5.29%

164 Bed Dorm

Attachment B

Project

Code Compliant Housing Development

Zoning Analysis



Beds / unit 4

Total Beds 176



Parking Required 44 Provide in Lift Spaces

Cost Analysis


Hard cost / SF 225$ Addt'l cost for full kitchens

Soft cost / SF 100$



Hard cost / SF 75$

Soft cost / SF 35$



Hard cost / SF 125$

Soft cost / SF 25$

Total Cost 300,000$

Parking Machine Foundations 14,400 square feet

Hard Cost / SF 75$

Soft Cost / SF 30$

Foundation cost 1,512,000$

Parking Machines 88 Machine Spaces




44 Unit Housing

Attachment B

Project

Code Compliant Housing Development

Value Analysis

Residential Units 44 Units

Gross Rent / Unit 2,800$

Net Rent / Unit 1,960.00$ (assumes 30% expense load)





Parking Spaces 97







Total Annual Income 1,124,126$

Cap Rate 6.00%

Value 18,735,425$

Net Value (1,001,975)$ (Value less costs)

Return to Cost ‐5.35%

44 Unit Housing

r- ' _ .

l

l , I , I ,

- --- - + - 1- l .t -- r ~ - -- - . .--- ;::-- fJ>~E"" oP- '?oJ>. ut'*\

I =l=- ------- t . ,l -- ....----....-...,....,.,.,....,..,... l •

I I ,

c l-II.. ")

IVI .J ..J Ua I

I I ,

I ,

I •

I I

f ·

o, , ,, I 't ,.

- - --- - -1---.-.

C.e~M u,:,r-rr ..., 1_ 'Z.,ooo ¢

-

-I

a.[-1 - --. -

19111l1d

l... 3>

I~I

II

/0

-

. -- - -

1 -

8

~

i ~Pt;

S...tcS

[X 7 -

-

- -

~ b

...-----"" -.---

- -- -- -- - .. .--, -- ~11- ~ - -

- - - - - - - - - -

?AUIN~ L\FT

AV-e'P. uoR.~ (z'8 SVAttS)

o , , I \

I.

J

?~IZ.'" ,,J( L I F''T ArLEA- A~A"'1'M£').J""S (q" SrAc.Es")

- -=~~~~~---~----------z.~ 2.7 /

/

/

/

/_-----1,, /

/" ,f

/

,-, /2: ,

/III , /., t-

• VJ , /-' ..I " - ------.--LIa •

I" " , """- / ,

,/.• " .... ;>, "

/ "" ./ ,", I,

" / " f'./ ....... " ,/

/'/ .- ,

I / ~ " "- -,./I

• / ,/ " "- "I ./ ,'

/' " , I '- "

, i

If"" 31 .... ,· .. = - -~-------. - - - - "I

L

-- ~ _ .

I

[ 2.

I -, ~

[ ,,

I '-/ ,

· I

, -·

I '~

' "

I s "

I '[

I '0

I " 1'2..

/

/ ./

------•, - -

'Land Use: 560 Church

~:... Land Use Description "

A church Is a building where public worship services are held. A church houses an assembly hall orS' sanctuary. It may also house meeting rooms, classrooms and occasionally dining, catering, or party

.~· faclilties. The database for this land use alsotncludes synagogues and mosques.

.' Database Description

r The database consisted of all suburban sites with the except·lon of one urban site. Parking demand at the ::;. urban site was similar to that of the suburban sites and therefore the data were Gomblned and analyzed

together.

{~ ' . ,.'. . Average site density: 25 sq. ft. GFA per seat (six sites).., • Average parking supply ratios: 0.27 spaces per seat (11 study sites), 0.66 spaces per attendee (eight .

study sites) and 10.6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA (10 study sites).

The wide variation In parking demand rates based on building GFA was likely due to variations in the provision of meeting rooms, classrooms and residence space In addition to worship space in some facilities .

.Limited data were available for parking demand on weekdays at houses of worship with primary services on Sunday. At one site, a weekday parking demand rate of 0.006 vehicles per seat was reported for the hour beginning at 6:00 p.m. At another site, a weekday parking demand rate of 1.17 vehicles per 1,000 sq; ft. GFAwas reported for the hour beginning a110:00 a.m.

Limited data were available for parking demand at houses of worship with primary services on days other than Sunday. • One study was submitted for a synagogue that had a peak parking demand rate of 0.41 parked

vehicles per attendee between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m. during a Saturday service with 132 attendees. • One study was submitted for a mosque that had a building size of 4/800 sq. ft. GFA and a peak

parking demand rate of 6.2 parked vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA between 1:00 and 2:00 p.m. on a Friday.

• Two Seventh-Day Adventist churches were observed to have parking demand rates of 0.32 and 0.40 vehicles per attendee between 10:00 and 11 :00 a.m. on a Saturday during services with 78 and 105 attendees, respectively.

Future studies should Include weekday data that encompass group activities (such 8S, youth groups, study groups, retreats) as well as base employee data.

Institute of T\"ansportatJon Engineers Parking Generation, 3rd Edllion135

Additional Data

Land Use: 560 Church

The graph below provides a sample of the weekly variation in church attendance for Sundays during the course of the year, based on a ohurch with 230 members in Oregon. Peak attendance points were associated with the Easter and Christmas seasons. Summer months have the lowest Sunday attendance. Variations in church actlvit/es and functions may affect the Sunday attendance characteristics shown in the graphic. ' .

Sunday Attendance Variation Sample Data 1997-2002

400~----------------~~--------------------------------~

~ 'tI 300 ~ c( . '0 200 ~ ~ 100 --.- -- ------ ---- ----------- - -- ------ - -------::J Z

SOURCE: OKS Associates, 2002.

Study Sites/Years

Month

Newport Beach, CA (1981); Anaheim, CA (1983); Bollingbrook, IL (1983); Burr Ridge, IL (1983); Anaheim, CA (1984); Syracuse, NY (1984); Oklahoma City, OK (1986); Anaheim, CA (1988); Rochester, NY (1989); Clearwater, FL (1996); Goleta, CA (1999); West Chester, PA (2001); Philadelphia, PA (2002)

-.--.-~ . .. . . '- -. n....,annrtatlon Engineers "

136

•

P = O.16x +

W= OJr1

G> 200'" 13 .c.-Q)

150 > G> 100"~ ~

ctS 500Il

• Actual Data Points -- Fitted CUNe/Average Rate

Parking Gener81lon, 3rd Edilion

a. a 0 200 400 600 800 1000 " 1200

x =Seats


Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Seats On a: Sunday

Sunday Peak Period Parking Demand

'," . .:.!;

t~; ' ,1)

.\.~

I:

:.:- "

"


Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Attendees

'(I) 800G)-(,).J: 600 ~ "0 400 -G)

~ cu 200 -0Il

Q.. 0 0

• Actual Data Points

. On a: Sunday

9:00 a.m.-12:00 .m. 16

. 410 attendees Demand 0.44 vehicles er attendee

0.16 . 37%

0.1 ~-0.63 vehicles er attendee 0.60 vehicles er attendee 0.41 vehicles er attendee


P = 0.49x - 8

500 1,000 1,500 2,000

x = Attendees

-Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate

138 Parking Generation,


Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs: 1,000 sq. ft. GFA On a: Sunday

300 250


•

200 - ----------------

150 -- ------- ----; ------------'----~------------.- -----------

100 - --------- --...+--------------------------- -._-- --------

50 -----.----------:----.------------------.--------------------..--; ..o+-~~~--.-,-------r-~----~._---------I

ro 10 20 30 40 ,

x = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA "

• Actual Data Points

______-""II' .- *" I(4Q4""'........ ft*I ''CIl ;tp;;o14 4¥J&

In8titLl~ of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation, 31d Edilion139

1

Lions Hall

Project Objectives, Request for Variance and Analysis of Alternatives

October 5, 2010

Project History and Objectives

St. Mark’s Church opened its doors in Berkeley in 1877. The existing Saint Mark’s Sanctuary Building was

built in 1902 on a 45,500 square foot lot at the corner of Bancroft Way and Ellsworth Street. In the early

1960’s Saint Mark’s constructed a one story parking garage at the corner of Ellsworth Street and Durant

Avenue. In the 1960’s, the City of Berkeley re‐zoned the parcel from C‐1 commercial to R‐4 residential.

The existing sanctuary building has a foot print of +/‐ 14,745 square feet. The existing garage has a

footprint of +/‐ 22,600 square feet. Overall, the existing structures cover 37,345 square feet of the

45,500 square foot lot or 82% lot coverage. The existing parking garage encroaches into the setbacks on

Ellsworth Street, Durant Avenue and along the interior side yard. As a result, the existing structures are

non‐conforming.

The existing garage includes 49 parking spaces. The church has a seating capacity of 350 seats. Based

on ITE Standards of .16 parking spaces per seat (land use 560 Religious Assembly) the church should

provide 56 parking spaces. Saint Mark’s has indicated that the existing parking does not meet their

needs and believes that a 56 to 60 space facility will better serve their congregation.

In 2000, as the sanctuary approached its 100th anniversary, Saint Mark’s recognized that the sanctuary

required a major renovation. The existing foundations did not meet current seismic codes, the church

did not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the building’s major systems required

modernizing. The church had two options. One was to demolish the existing sanctuary and construct a

modern new structure that met current codes or renovate the existing historic structure, which qualifies

as eligible for the National Register of Historic Buildings. Despite the significant cost of moving ahead

with a renovation the church chose to preserve the structure and renovate rather than demolish and

rebuild.

The church undertook the renovation work in 2000. Unfortunately, the renovation cost exceeded

estimates and ultimately, Saint Marks was required to expend all of its financial reserves to complete

the project. In addition, subsequent to the renovation, the church experienced operational challenges

as operating costs increased and revenues declined.

2

In 2005, Arrowsmith Acadmeny, the Church’s main tenant, vacated without notice. Without reserves

and without a source of regular income to fund ongoing operations, the church cut back dramatically to

make ends meet. Although the church was able to find a new tenant a year later, they recognized that

the long term viability of their congregation depended on their ability to find a more stable source of

income, and their ability to make their facilities more attractive to new families.

Overall, Saint Mark’s faces a deteriorating financial situation. Without reserves and without a stable

source of income, the prospect of paying for the ongoing maintenance of their historic facility and

deteriorating parking garage will be challenging. Furthermore, the aging of its congregation coupled

with a lack of facilities to attract new families suppresses the long term prospect of financial

improvement.

In 2006, Saint Mark’s sought proposals from developers that could provide the church with a new and

stable stream of income so that Saint Mark’s could stabilize its financial situation, maintain its church

and continue to provide services for the Berkeley Community. Saint Mark’s selected Hudson

McDonald’s Lions Hall project.

The Lions Hall project was formulated at a time when it appeared that the City of Berkeley would adopt

the South Side plan. The Lions Hall project conforms to the current draft of that plan. Unfortunately,

approval of the plan has been delayed and the project has been submitted under the existing R4 zoning.

Saint Mark’s Church and Lions Hall are seeking variances to the R4 zoning so that Saint Marks can

continue to enjoy existing property rights and continue to serve the Berkeley community. As will be

demonstrated, the proposed project is the only project, given the unique circumstances associated with

the Saint Mark’s property, that will enable Saint Mark’s to generate much‐needed revenue from the use

of its property.

Proposed Project

The proposed project is a private dorm constructed above a new and slightly larger parking structure.

Please see Attachment A for the detailed description of the proposed project that was previously

submitted to the City of Berkeley.

Project Objectives

In pursuing a project to replace its parking structure and obtain a new source of income for the church,

Saint Mark’s Church identified the following project objectives:

Construct a seismically sound, inviting, water‐tight parking garage that will continue to serve

the Church’s parishioners and the local community

Construct a larger community facility that can:

o Support a post‐service coffee hour for a larger congregation

o Provide child care / religious education during church services

3

o Serve as a community meeting hall

o Provide enough restrooms to meet the demand during musical concerts and

religious holidays

Construct a safe, landscaped courtyard above the parking garage to serve as a church

gathering space

Provide a reliable stream of income to Saint Mark’s so that it can:

o Retire debt incurred to renovate its landmark‐eligible sanctuary

o Continue to provide religious services to its community

o Continue to provide community services such as food and shelter programs for

homeless youth

Improve the neighborhood’s sustainability with a project that will be environmentally sound

Create a project for people that may be interested in participating in the Saint Mark’s

community

To help Saint Mark’s church meet their objectives, Lions Hall, the project developer, identified the

following objectives:

Construct a project that meets the forward‐looking goals of the South Side Plan

Construct a car‐free housing project that will reduce automobile usage in the south side

Construct housing that meets the specific needs of college students

Construct a financially viable project that can provide Saint Mark’s with a reliable source of

income

Construct a renovated parking facility that can serve the south side area and the

congregation

Request for Variances

To be constructed as proposed, the Lions Hall project requires the following variances:

A variance to increase the Group Living Accommodation Density from 130 beds to 164 Beds

A variance to reduce the yard setbacks on the Front, Street Side and interior side of the lot

A variance to allow the lot coverage to exceed 40%

A variance to reduce the required amount of open space from 14,850sf to 5,000sf

A variance to eliminate the parking requirement for the Group Living Accommodation

The City of Berkeley has already demonstrated a commitment to supporting variance findings for

religious institutions in the South Side area. In 2000, the City approved the variances necessary for

Westminster House to construct a similar private dorm project on an R4 zoned site. In 2002, the City

approved variances for First Presbyterian Church to construct a large education and office facility on its

R4 zoned campus.

The granting of the variances requested by Saint Mark’s will continue this commitment to ensuring that

Berkeley’s rich and diverse religious community remains financially sound, while helping to sustain a

Berkeley institution with a 134 year history in the city.

4

The remainder of this section of this report reiterates and expands upon the information that supports

the granting of a variance in this situation:

1. The existing parcel is unique for the following reasons: a. It includes an existing 100+year old sanctuary building that is listed on the State Historic

Resources Inventory as eligible for the National Register b. It includes existing on‐site structures that exceed current lot coverage standards and

extend into required yard setbacks c. It includes an existing parking garage that does not meet current seismic codes and

suffers from significant water intrusion d. It is surrounded by properties that encroach into the yard setbacks e. It includes an existing community facility that needs to be replaced in order to replace

the garage f. It includes an existing out‐dated classroom building that contains asbestos and lead

paint g. The removal of the existing classroom building will improve the visual quality and

architectural integrity of the west side of the Berkeley City Club h. The property is owned by a not‐for‐profit religious institution that has operated at the

same location for more than 134 years i. The existing property is unusually large for the south side being more than one acre in

size 2. The variances are needed to approve an economically viable project that will preserve Saint

Mark’s existing property rights as follows: a. The project will provide income to Saint Mark’s to help it offset the extensive cost of the

voluntary seismic and safety upgrades completed on the National Register eligible sanctuary building undertaken by the church in 2000

b. The project will provide income to Saint Mark’s that can be used to maintain its historic sanctuary building into the future

c. The project will generate income for Saint Mark’s church that will allow the church to continue to provide community services including services targeted to help homeless youth

d. The project will generate income for Saint Mark’s church that will allow the church to continue to provide religious services to the community

e. The existing garage must be replaced and improved so that Saint Mark’s church can continue to serve its congregation

f. The existing community facility must be expanded to include new classroom spaces to allow Saint Mark’s church to continue to successfully serve as a place of worship for Berkeley families

3. The proposed project will not adversely affect health, the public welfare or other properties in the district for the following reasons: a. The parking use and the community facility use already exist b. Housing is generally a low‐impact use the benefits the community by providing more

living options for residents c. The proposed building is located more than 50 feet from the main tower of the Berkeley

City Club building so it will not adversely affect the building’s access to light and air. d. The proposed housing will be “car‐free” and will provide student‐oriented housing

within one‐block of the UC campus, thereby reducing automobile use in the South Side area

5

In considering the request for variances, it should be noted that the impact of the requested variances is

quite small as shown as follows:

Variance for density: This variance is requested because of the peculiar zoning regulation that restricts

R4 Group Living Accommodation projects to R3 densities, even though R4 allows buildings to be twice as

large as buildings in the R3 district. The strict application of R4 zoning limits a GLA project to 130 beds,

but we demonstrate later in this report that an apartment building with 164 beds can be constructed

without a variance. In other words, there is no real impact associated with granting this variance as

there will be no increase in the number of residents as compared to a code‐compliant apartment

project.

Variance for setbacks: The existing parking garage and its associated planters extend to the property

lines along Ellsworth and Durant. The podium deck is set back from the planters, but the granting of this

variance will result in almost no change in the perception of the first floor vis‐à‐vis the property line.

Variance for lot coverage: The proposed project increases lot coverage 1.2% over what currently exists.

This additional 575 square feet of lot coverage will be imperceptible.

Variance for open space: The project could provide the required amount of open space on the roof,

however, as requested by the Berkeley City Club, the project includes a smaller roof deck located far

from the City Club building. If this variance is denied, the Lions Hall project could provide the required

amount of open space in a larger roof deck.

Variance for parking: Berkeley traditionally waives or reduces parking in residential projects to reduce

automobile ownership and reduce traffic. The R4 district does not include any provision to allow a

parking reduction or waiver. The South Side Plan specifically calls for this site to be included in its car‐

free housing overlay. The granting of this waiver will actually be beneficial to Berkeley and will help the

city achieve its carbon reduction goals.

Alternatives Considered

To demonstrate that variances must be granted so that Saint Mark’s can preserve and enjoy substantial

property rights and economic use of their property, we analyzed several projects that could be

constructed in conformance with the R4 zoning regulations. When creating these alternatives we used

the following criteria:

1. They must conform to all R4 zoning regulations

2. They must utilize conventional construction methods

The primary assumption underlying this analysis is that the City will treat the entire Saint Mark’s

property as a single, 45,500 square foot lot and will concur that the demolition and reconstruction of the

existing non‐conforming parking garage can be approved pursuant to section 23C.04 of the Zoning

Ordinance.

6

Based on this, we analyzed the following five alternate projects:

The demolition of all on‐site buildings, including the sanctuary building, and the construction of

a code‐compliant dorm project

A code‐compliant apartment project constructed above a re‐built parking garage

A code‐compliant dorm project constructed above a re‐built parking garage

A code‐compliant office building constructed above a re‐built parking garage

The demolition and reconstruction of the existing facilities

These projects are described in more detail below. The financial analysis comparing each option is

included as Attachment B.

Demolish all existing structures and build a dorm project on‐site

The project that provides the greatest financial return is a project that demolishes all on‐site structures

and replaces them with a code compliant residential project. We have analyzed a dorm project, but an

apartment project would also be financially viable. While this project works from a financial standpoint,

it does not retain the church and thus does not meet any of the goals associated with helping the church

remain an important part of the Berkeley community. It is also likely that the National Historic Register

eligible sanctuary building cannot be demolished. Therefore, this project is not a viable alternative.

Code compliant apartment project

Attachment C shows the plans for a re‐built parking structure with an apartment building constructed

above the podium. The parking garage is re‐built to its existing footprint pursuant to 23C.04 of the

Zoning Ordinance. This re‐built garage provides for 53 surface parking spaces. The residential structure

above the podium conforms to all setbacks and represents the largest code compliant, cost‐effective

building that could be constructed on the podium.

Parking is a primary zoning issue related to a code‐compliant residential use. Saint Mark’s Church has

indicated that it uses 100% of the existing on‐site parking on Sundays and believes it could use 60

parking spaces. This is consistent with the parking requirements for churches determined by the

Institute of Traffic Engineers. As shown in Attachment D, ITE land use 560 (Church) suggests a ratio of

.16 parking spaces for each church seat. Saint Mark’s has a seating capacity of 350 resulting in a parking

requirement of 56 spaces.

Saint Mark’s utilizes its parking on Sundays, religious holidays, some Saturdays and two weeknights per

week. The evening and weekend use of parking required by Saint Mark’s conflicts with the times and

days that residential tenants are most likely to desire parking (evenings and weekends when residents

are at home). Therefore, to be code‐compliant, the residential use would have to provide the code

required amount of residential parking (one per 1,000 sf) in addition to the parking required by the

church.

After reviewing the options for providing on‐site parking, it was determined that P210 Klaus Lifts

(double stackers) would be the most cost effective and viable solution. The “puzzle parkers” that do not

7

require below‐grade car storage are not practical for public or church use as they require a personalized

key and training to operate. To accommodate the p210 lifts, the garage must be constructed with a

subterranean level where the residential cars are stored. After a resident moves his/her car to the

lower level, the upper level space will be available for public and church parking.

The financial analysis assumes that all residential construction is Type V wood framing and that each 756

square foot unit includes two bedrooms (4 beds) and one bathroom. Because of the setback limitations,

the Saint Mark’s community facility in the code‐compliant alternatives is limited to only 2,000sf.

As shown in Attachment B, the cost of building the apartment project exceeds the value of the

apartment project resulting in a negative net value. Therefore, this project is not financially viable.

Code Compliant Dorm Project

This project utilizes the same footprint as the apartment and assumes that the code maximum 132 dorm

beds could be constructed in a 3 story building that has the same per square foot cost as a four‐story

building. The parking for the dorm units (1 space per 5 beds, or 27 spaces) is constructed using the Klaus

Lift system. The smaller building and smaller parking requirement results in lower costs (a smaller

basement and fewer lifts). However, the reduced rent from the smaller project is insufficient to offset

the fixed cost of rebuilding the garage and community facility. Because the net value of this project is

negative, this project is not financially viable.

Code Compliant Office Project

Office tenants are on site during the weekday and are often not on‐site in the evenings and the

weekends. Therefore, it is likely that an office project could be developed utilizing a shared parking

arrangement with Saint Mark’s Church. The size of the office project is limited by the amount of parking

that can be constructed. As shown on the plans, the reconstructed parking garage can provide parking

for 53 cars. At a ratio of 1 parking space for each 800 square feet of office use, a total of 42,400 square

feet of office could be constructed on the podium. The footprint of this office would be very similar to

the residential footprint and the building would be five stories tall (four levels of office over the

podium).

The financial analysis is based on rent and occupancy figures provided by Colliers International. Based

on these figures, the cost of constructing the office is greater than the value of the office making the

project financially infeasible.

Reconstruct the Existing Facilities

Finally, we studied the cost of simply renovating the existing facilities. Because these facilities generate

very little revenue, their reconstruction would not be financially viable. The chart in Attachment B

summarizes the options evaluated.

8

Conclusion

The most financially beneficial project would be to eliminate the church and construct a new building

on‐site that does not include a new parking structure or community facility. This option obviously does

not meet Saint Mark’s goals as it requires the removal of the church. None of the remaining code‐

compliant alternatives are financially viable.

The only financially viable project that meets the objectives of Saint Mark’s Church is the proposed 164

bed car free dorm project that requires variances to be approved. The financially viable project is the

only project that will allow Saint Mark’s to continue to enjoy their existing property rights and function

as an on‐going not‐for‐profit that serves the Berkeley community.

Lions Hall TABULATION FORM - Berkeley, California€¦ · corner parapet wall to the avg of the...

Documents

Transcript of Lions Hall TABULATION FORM - Berkeley, California€¦ · corner parapet wall to the avg of the...