HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRBM_08132009 ��'�"�°�� City of Ukiah, CA
,�'�'="���.
;* � +� Design Review Board
'��+i►�o�r.���,
1 MINUTES
2
3 Regular Meeting August 13, 2009
4 Conference Room 3 3:00 p.m.
5 Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue
6 1. CALL TO ORDER
7 2. ROLL CALL Present: Nick Thayer, Tom Liden
8 Alan Nicholson, Jody Cole,
9 Richard Moser, Chair
10 Absent: Tom Hise, Estok Menton
11 Others Present: Dwight Ashdown, Architect
12 Staff Present: Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
13 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15
16 3. CORRESPONDENCE — None
17
18 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—July 9, 2009
19 M/S Liden/Nicholson to approve the July 9 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried with
20 Member Cole abstaining.
21
22 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS — None
23
24 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL — Chair Moser read the appeal process. For matters heard
25 at this meeting, the final date to appeal is August 24, 2009 at 5 pm.
26
27 7. NEW BUSINESS
28 7A. Site Development Permit No. 09-33 SDP-PC, Grocery Outlet, 1203 N. State
29 Street, APN 001-360-23 & 001-360-27, Proposed exterior fa�ade upgrade.
30 Recommendations to Planning Commission.
31
32 Staff presented the staff report.
33
34 DRB general comments/questions:
35
36 Landscapinq
37 • Improvements appear to be minimal.
38 • Recommended pruning the bushes and allow them to grow an additional two feet
39 to screen vehicles in parking area.
40 • If a planter were added in front of the building, some type of irrigation system
41 would be necessary.
42 • Addition of greenery would complement the building and likely draw customers.
43
44 Drainaqe—gutters and downspout are existing as shown on the site plans.
45
46 Awnin
47 • New metal awning is an improvement to what is existing.
Design Review Board August 73,2009
Page 1
1 • Metal awning would be more architecturally pleasing if vegetative plants or some
2 type of articulation is added to soften the appearance, such as a trellis and/or
3 some kind of extension that could be welded onto the structure. An extension of
4 some type should not be a problem because the area is striped for storage of
5 carts rather than for vehicles and pedestrian use.
6 • As an example, there was a project that used recycled redwood to create a trellis
7 with Wisteria vines growing on it, which proved to be highly effective in terms of
8 enhancing the appearance of the building.
9 • There is space in the shopping cart area to remove some of the paving and add
10 a planter to soften appearance of the steel columns of the metal awning.
11
12 Cart Corral
13 • Reconfiguring of the shopping cart area would improve the overall layout of the
14 site as well as provide space for better on-site circulation.
15 Siqnaqe
16 • Both the street sign and sign on the building are large. Out of proportion with the
17 building.
18 • It was noted the outlet store likes to display items outside; the recommended
19 hanging signs would be beneficial in this regard.
20 • While the large metal sign on the building is allowed and the white lettering on
21 the red background is corporate. Asked the applicant to consider changing the
22 design of the sign on the building such that there would be individual red lettering
23 on a background. The `Grocery Outlet, Bargain MarkeY could be individual
24 lettering on a stucco background to soften the appearance of the building rather
25 than the large red background being such a dominant feature.
26 • The sign on the building is almost too large to be read as a sign. Encourages the
27 use of smaller signs (pedestrian size) to hang down from the awning as a form of
28 advertising, such as `Fresh Produce' etc. It is doubtful there would be any loss of
29 visibility relative to advertising the business if the red background were
30 eliminated since the existing street sign can be clearly seen from the street.
31 • Consider breaking the sign square footage broken up into smaller signs, such as
32 hanging signs under the eaves of the awning.
33
34 Buildinq Form & Finishes
35 • The members inquired about the choice of building materials, the canopy/awning
36 and whether the building will just be painted or is stucco a consideration? There
37 was discussion about building materials, color scheme and type of paint, such as
38 the use of acrylic paint with texture or acrylic stucco.
39 • Requested clarification that the building treatment will be paint with texture rather
40 than stucco.
41
42 Dwight Ashdown comments:
43 • Parking Area - One aspect of the project improvements would be repairs and/or
44 minor reconfiguration to the parking area to provide for diagonal parking in front
45 of the store that fronts N. State Street.
46 • Landscaping - There will be minor landscaping improvements to the existing
47 landscaping feature in front of the retail establishment.
48 • Signage — The signage complies with City guidelines/standards. The street sign
49 is the existing sign and will be refaced.
Design Review Board August 13, 2009
Page 2
1 • Awning extension — The problem with adding a trellis or some other type of
2 articulation is the potential for large trucks or other large vehicle to run into it.
3 • The intent is to make repairs to the plywood paneling (T-111) and paint it.
4 Improvements would be the use of acrylic paint with texture and to continue the
5 T1-11 around the sides of the building to shield the roof. He showed a photo
6 rendering of another Grocery Outlet store in Tracy, noting the paint and overall
7 design of the building to be more vibrant than the proposed project in Ukiah and
8 pointed out the Grocery Outlet has certain corporate rules that must be met. He
9 will consult with the corporate office regarding the recommended changes to the
10 large sign on the building.
11 • Interested in doing what can be done to improve the look of the building at
12 minimal cost. The objective is to paint the building and provide for new structure
13 on the `returns.' He will consult with corporate about the application of stucco.
14 • The applicant inquired whether the DRB comments/recommendations should be
15 interpreted as directives or does he consult with corporate?
16
17 DRB Role
18 • DRB comments/recommendations are recommendations in a voluntary/informal
19 process. The Planning Commission appreciates the input and the applicanYs
20 willingness to work with the DRB.
21
22 Staff comments:
23 • The Ukiah Sign Code determines sign area based on lot frontage rather than
24 building frontage, which allows for signs that are disproportionate to the building
25 frontage.
26 • The input/recommendations made by the DRB will be incorporated into the
27 Downtown Design District Commercial Design Guidelines checklist for review by
28 the Planning Commission.
29 • The Planning Commission values/relies on input from the design comments
30 made by the DRB because there are many design professionals on the Board.
31
32 DRB discussion recommendations to the Planning Commission:
33 1. Provide additional landscaping features if possible and make improvements to
34 the existing landscaping in front of the building - removing some of the paving in
35 the shopping cart area and add a planter to help soften the steel columns of
36 the metal awning; use of wisteria in pots to grow on the steel columns for the
37 canopy.
38 2. Consider consulting with a local landscape architect for planting
39 recommendations.
40 3. Reconfigure the shopping cart area to improve on-site circulation and parking.
41 4. Consider improvements to the shopping cart corral, such as a half wall with a
42 "greenscreen" that vines can grow on.
43 5. Okay with the metal awning. Does not appear that the awning can wrap around
44 the building corners based on the site plan and parking plan.
45 6. Consider the following for signage: eliminating the red background color and use
46 individual lettering for the sign on the building; hanging signs under the canopy;
47 smaller freestanding sign.
48 7. Consider for the under canopy signs, signs that advertise individual products that
49 are being sold and that could be changed out to advertise current products for
50 sale since products sold are not always the same.
Design Review Board August 13, 2009
Page 3
1 8. Consider an extension of the awning could serve as a trellis.
2 9. Preference for the use of stucco rather than paint with texture since this would
3 tie the building together. If not stucco, suggest that a sample of the
4 alternative be provided at Planning Commission with an explanation of the
5 process. T1-11 on a west facing elevation may be a maintenance issue.
6
7 8. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD:
8 None.
9
10 Chair Moser left the meeting at 4:31 p.m.
11
12 Member Thayer arrived at 4:40 p.m.
13
14 9. MATTERS FROM STAFF:
15 9A. Review, comment and discuss revised Fa�ade Improvement Program
16 Application Score Card and discuss redevelopment statutory requirements, especially
17 related to blight.
18
19 Need to revise the Scorecard to include blighted physical conditions that would make a
20 building/site eligible for fa�ade improvement money. In order to approve FIP money, the
21 DRB will need to indicate how the building/site is blighted and this cannot be a
22 conclusionary state, but rather must state/identify the conditions that make the
23 building/site blighted.
24 For"homework" points need to be assigned to each item in the scorecard. Could assign
25 each item one (1) point to establish a baseline value and adjust each item in each
26 category up from that is point. For the Location section, it could be that more than one
27 location has the same point value based on previous discussions of the Board.
28 Requested that the DRB mark up their scorecards for the next meeting and be ready to
29 set the points and identify physical characteristics of blight to be included in the
30 scorecard.
31
32 12. SET NEXT MEETING/ADJOURNMENT
33 The next regular meeting will be September 10, 2009. There being no further business,
34 the meeting adjourned at 4:56 p.m.
35
36
37 Richard Moser, Chair
38
39
40 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
Design Review Board August 13, 2009
Page 4