HomeMy WebLinkAbout02142013 - packet City of Ukiah
Design Review Board
Agenda
Thursday February 14, 2013 3:00 P.M.
Conference Room # 5
The Design Review Board encourages applicants and/or their representatives to be available at the meeting to
answer questions so that no agenda item need be deferred to a later date due to a lack of pertinent information.
1. CALL TO ORDER: UKIAH CIVIC CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM #5
300 SEMINARY AVENUE, UKIAH
2. ROLL CALL: Members Liden, Thayer, Hise, Nicholson, Hawkes
3. CORRESPONDENCE: None.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from December 8, 2011 and October 11, 2012 are included for
review and approval.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: The City of Ukiah Design Review Board welcomes
input from the audience. In order to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person
and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be
taken on audience comments.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Preliminary Review Ukiah Valley Medical Center — Hospital Support Building (File No. 13-03-
PRE-DRB). Design review pre-application review of new Hospital Support Building. 275 Hospital
Drive, APN 002-160-08.
7. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD:
8. MATTERS FROM STAFF:
A. Outdoor Dining Structure Program for powntown Ukiah. Request for Design Review Board
recommendations regarding design and materials for outdoor dining structures.
9 . SET NEXT MEETING/ADJOURNMENT: - March 14, 2013
The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate
individuals with disabilities upon request. If possible, please contact the City of Ukiah (707) 463-
6200 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting time.
��ty � u�iah City of Ukiah, CA
Design Review Board
1 MINUTES
2
3 Regular Meeting October 11, 2012
4
5 Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue
6 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hise called the Design Review Board meeting to order at 3:00
7 p.m.
8
9 2. ROLL CALL Present: Tom Liden, Alan Nicholson, Howie Hawkes,
10 Nick Thayer, Tim Hise, Chair
11 Absent:
12 Staff Present: Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
13 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15 Others present: Scott Nilsen
16 Clay Johnson
17
18 3. CORRESPONDENCE: None
19
20 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: - September 13, 2012
21 M/S Nicholson/Liden to approve the September 13, 2012 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried
22 (5-0)with Member Thayer abstaining.
23
24 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
25
26 6. NEW BUSINESS:
27 6A. Preliminary Review Talmage Road Multi-Family Residential Project (File No: 12-16-
28 PRE-PC-DRB). Design Review Board pre-application review of a multi-family residential
29 development at 582 Talmage Road, APN 003-160-57.
30
31 Senior Planner Jordan gave a staff report.
32
33 Clay Johnson gave a project description as referenced in the site plans (attachment 6):
34 • The design of the project is conceptual at this point.
35 • The project would construct 18-multi-family units on the site for a total of 19 dwelling units
36 including the existing residence. The new units would be located in buildings that contain
37 one or two apartments. The apartments will be one-bedroom units that include a garage.
38 • The site is flood plain and floodway, so the units were designed with all of the living
39 space above the garage.
40 • The walls of the structures will be split-face CMU is on the ground level dues to flood
41 concerns.
42 • Buildings face either north or south to take advantage of passive solar/shade
43 opportunities and provide for energy conservation as much as possible.
44 • Each unit has a well-covered porch upstairs that provides for some outdoor area.
45 • The units were designed to be simple and flexible for ease of living and convenience.
46 • The site layout provides for adequate on-site circulation for tenants and emergency/utility
47 vehicles and is configured to address potential noise impacts from the freeway.
48 • The access road runs along the eastern edge of the property providing a buffer between
49 the units and the freeway and allowing an area for tree planting. Both will provide a buffer
50 for noise from the freeway.
51 • Parking is provided along the access road.
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 1
1 • There can be no construction of any kind in the floodway area. As such, this area is
2 designated on the site plans as an 'open space/recreational area.' At the pre-application
3 meeting, the Planning Commission suggested a community garden for this area.
4 • Each building has two units with a common stairway that runs between the units. The
5 stairway is behind the door and provides access to the garages so tenants do not have to
6 go outside to access the garages.
7 • The project intent is to provide for a secure/comfortable and aesthetically pleasing
8 residential living experience.
9 • The Planning Commission provided some valuable input relative to the project design
10 and site layout and suggested flipping the units to allow for an improved pedestrian
11 orientation/access, a better sense of community/neighborhood. And more private open
12 space, and more attractive project.
13 • Each unit has a garage. The entry hall has an exterior door that goes out to the street as
14 well as two doors to each garage so the tenants each have their own locks. To get to a
15 unit, a tenant walks through a common area.
16 • Solar panels will be part of the project. 50% of the roof area is facing directly north and
17 south to take advantage of solar.
18
19 Member Hawkes:
20 • Sees value for a tenant to have secure and private garage.
21 • Supports that the building materials are durable and that the decks are waterproofed.
22 • Asked about mitigation measures for sound proofing from freeway noise.
23 • Asked about plans for sidewalks.
24 • Supports providing for as much pedestrian orientation and access as feasible.
25 • Likes the concept of live/work with residents living upstairs and having a business
26 downstairs.
27
28 Member Liden:
29 • The storage area could be junk collectors and recommends eliminating this fenced area.
30 Also, the overhang over the garage would be a `junk' collecting space and this space
31 could be better utilized. Could incorporate this space into the garage.
32 • Altering the design of the garage would change the floor plan of the building.
33 • Asked about fencing for the project.
34 • Asked about plans to renovate the existing building.
35 • Likes the idea of flipping the floor plan from an aesthetic and safety perspective. This
36 concept provides for a nice presentation path to the complex and front entrance. With a
37 change in the design configuration there is better use of space, giving way to more
38 private space and less opportunity to store junk.
39 • With regard to the project being located in the floodplain inquired as to the location of the
40 closest parking that is above the flood plain in the event during flood conditions tenanYs
41 cars must be moved.
42 • It may be the garage will flood. Recommends constructing the garage shelving off the
43 floor level.
44 • Likes the project.
45 • Appears the project would not be child-oriented. There may be a single-mother, one child
46 situation residing in the units. The units are only one bedroom and not large enough for
47 family living.
48 • If there is a play area for children, it is likely some people would not want their units near
49 this facility.
50
51 Member Nicholson:
52 • Asked about parking for the site.
53 • Likes the concept of a community garden. Gardens usually have fencing. Since fencing is
54 not allowed in the floodway, questions how this would work. Recommends the applicant
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 2
1 meet with the community garden project coordinator to see if a community garden is
2 doable in the 'open space/recreational area.'
3 • Need to provide a garbage/recycling plan.
4 • Does not like the separate structures for storage. Preference would be to incorporate into
5 the unit to make better use of space. If the designated storage area is part of the final
6 design, use materials that tie in with the unit.
7 • Likes the "flipped uniY' recommended by Planning Commission which would create some
8 connectivity and yard space for the tenants. As it is now, the only front yard is the
9 asphalt/paving on the parking lot.
10 • Having a front yard that goes into a green space provides for social interaction and
11 supports flipping the plans to allow for more of a pedestrian orientation and open space.
12 • There is no community common area. Would like to see a defined common area to make
13 the site more tenant/pedestrian friendly.
14 • The addition of window awnings would create more interest as well as reduce HVAC use
15 for summer cooling and heating in the winter. Adding a trellis may be another
16 consideration for shade screening purposes.
17 • Has some issue with parking along the sidewalk. The goal of Ukiah is to make Ukiah a
18 more walkable/biking pedestrian-friendly community. The strip between the freeway and
19 the new access road has the potential for the creation of more parking. Could remove
20 parking from the west side and more to the east with 'pull-outs. Eastside could be all
21 parking, but it would be better with some planting islands between some parking stalls.
22 • Likes the plans, but flipping them to create more of a pedestrian access with front doors
23 would be a more favorable approach. In this way, the units would be closer to the street
24 allowing for more open space in the back and providing for a nice project presentation
25 overall.
26 • Recommends the final site plans include information about the building elevations and
27 floodway.
28 • There could be garage access at the bottom landing of the stairs and have the stairs
29 open.
30
31 Member Thayer:
32 • Supports the landscaping provide for water efficiency/conservation. It is likely the project
33 is subject to `WELO' Requirements. If this is the case, would ask that the project have a
34 dedicated meter for irrigation that is separate from each unit and used for landscaping
35 purposes.
36 • Very supportive of having a community garden because the community benefits. With
37 this, provide for parking considerations and determine who will be using the space and
38 what the arrangements will be.
39 • The project, as designed, contains a lot of asphalt.
40 • Possible problem if people cannot park in the driveway they could block other cars for
41 people wanting to get in their garages even if the car is parked only for a brief time.
42 • Possibly reorient the stairwell to allow access from both sides. As designed with stairwell
43 in the middle cuts up the space too much. Would like to see this space better utilized for
44 tenant use.
45 • Likes the idea of a common space. Would like to see totally private space outdoors.
46 • If the paving is done correctly and the portico over the front door is done provides for a
47 public setting.
48 • With the tenants possibly being older, younger couples, or single persons creates a
49 formal element that needs to have access points into it. Again, would like to see this
50 space more for the tenanYs use.
51 • Recapture space for inside storage such that outdoor private space could be enlarged
52 and be able to take advantage of the extra area.
53 • Emphasized the importance of utilizing space well.
54 • Consider common collector areas for garbage, such as end of each driveway.
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 3
1 • Provide for more of a `dressy' entranceway from the entry and driveway apron to the
2 garage to get away from the sort of `apartment complex look.' Possibly allow for more of
3 a domestic appearance.
4 • Review the screening for the site and allow for preservation of the Oak trees remaining if
5 they are serviceable. Also review the shade possibilities for the paved areas not just for
6 the buildings.
7 • Be able to clearly identify drainage basins and incorporate into the landscaping.
8 • Landscaping should be professionally maintained and should be professionally designed
9 from the beginning.
10 • The design has a `tree house' effect. The vestibule is a public space where people would
11 not be leaving personal items. Could a change be made to the outside of the building to
12 keep the entry clear to the front door? Is it possible to expand the concept and move it to
13 the outside of the building so there are essentially two separate buildings? Understands
14 this could be `pricey.'
15 • Is fine with the garage entrance with stairwell left open and with the public front door at
16 ground level or, could eliminate the center vestibule in favor of the stairwell being outside.
17 • Relevant to the City Master Tree List, use `residential tree IisY for this project.
18
19 There was discussion about permeable paving and feasibility with regard to this project.
20
21 Chair Hise:
22 • Understands the open space/recreation area is part of the property to be used by
23 tenants. A garden would be possible here. Most gardens are neighborhood gardens
24 rather than `community gardens.' Because of this, parking should not be a concern.
25 • Supports the garden area be located in the 'open space/recreational area' shown on the
26 site plan.
27 • The 4-unit building to the south does not line up like the other buildings and questioned
28 why the building is pushed back. Bringing the units more in alignment with the other units
29 provides for more space that could be landscaped and utilized for a child's play area that
30 is more protected and safe and more easily supervised than something that might be out
31 by the street. There will probably be some children living in the complex. Children should
32 not be playing near the street. The better approach would be for children to leave their
33 unit and go directly to a play area.
34 • Likes the "flipped building" plan. Has seen this before and it works well. Provides for
35 sense of community. Also, provides a front entrance, and still allows people to enter the
36 units using the garage entrance in the back.
37 • The storage areas should either become part of the garage or do something different.
38 What will likely occur in these areas is ultimately the collection of debris and leaves. This
39 space could be better utilized. It will eventually look like `no-man's land.' While the
40 storage space is a good idea, attach it to the garage/incorporate it into the building.
41 • The design and materials selected for the units look good. Likely the masonry wall will be
42 constructed 1-foot above flood level.
43 • Change the design of the entryway to the units. Does not see any the reason or benefit to
44 the entry as designed. As designed, there are safety concerns since someone could be
45 trapped in this area and cannot see if anyone is in the area/stairwell prior to entering the
46 area. In terms of safety for people to have to come into the vestibule before going up
47 stairs, this could present a hazard since it is not open or visible to neighbors or the public.
48 This could create an unsafe space, especially for woman/children since they could be
49 locked in this area with someone and no one is able to see them. The stairwell should be
50 open and visible to neighbors or other persons if someone calls out for help. Recommend
51 removing the door/vestibule allowing for this area to be open and stairs leading to the
52 individual units. In this way, people can see who is in the stairwell and know who is there
53 before the door closes behind. This design would also provide for an easier exit.
54 Practically speaking, how does a visitor get to the unit since the door would be locked?
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 4
1 Is there an intercom? Does the tenant run down the stairs and let guests in? Most
2 apartments here have outdoor/open stairways that lead directly to the unit.
3 • Agrees with Member Nicholson there could still be garage access at the bottom landing
4 of the stairs and have the stairs open.
5 • With regard to egress from the second story unit, a person gets down to the stairwell but
6 is still not out of the building. The door could be jammed so there are many things that
7 could happen in that space. There are some practical things that could be done without
8 setting up a dangerous place for children because just by opening the door people are
9 still not in the safety of their unit.
10 • Keep the stairway open to each front door with entry clear to the front door like people do
11 with the front entry to their home.
12 • Agrees with Member Thayer- the garage entrance is fine with the stairwell open and the
13 public front entrance at ground level but could consider eliminating the vestibule and
14 leave the stairwell open outside to the street.
15 • Affordability will be driven by costs.
16
17 Clay Johnson:
18 • When looks at flipping the floor plans will look at storage area and possible modification
19 to the site plan.
20 • As shown on the floor plans the garage is actually a shorter length than the building in
21 order to provide covered outdoor space for tenants.
22 • Relative to fencing, there is a collection of fences from multiple properties on the western
23 side of the site. The intent is to build a fence in this location. There is fencing on the other
24 side of Doolin Creek since there are other buildings in this location. There is no fencing
25 on the project side of the Creek. Because this open space area is located in the floodway
26 of Doolin Creek no fencing is allowed.
27 • Durable materials will be used.
28 • More trees will be planted to help mitigate noise impacts from the freeway. The Planning
29 Commission recommended planting trees directly to the east and west of each of the
30 buildings to help mitigate sound from the freeway and screen from morning/afternoon
31 sun.
32 • The buildings have no east or west facing windows. The intent is to construct walls that
33 are from 8 to 10 inches thick to provide adequate insulation for energy conservation
34 purposes and sound proofing.
35 • Common walls are only at the ends of the kitchen because the central stairwell is located
36 between the units.
37 • The intent of the stairwell as designed with a door is so tenants can get to the garage
38 without having to out into the public. Assumes the tenant will lock their doors. Essentially
39 each complex is an apartment having two different tenants in each unit. Will consider
40 concept that the garage entrance have no door to the stairwell and the front entrance to
41 the units be at ground level.
42 • The Planning Commission recommended extending the sidewalk to the end of the
43 property.
44 • Will discuss renovations to existing buildings with the property owner.
45 • Will look into the possibility of providing a community garden.
46 • Has no knowledge about the appropriate place to park vehicles during flood conditions. Is
47 not a civil engineer. The site appears to be flat.
48 • The reason the 4-unit building is pushed back is because there was not enough depth to
49 add another series of buildings. These units are pushed back to be farther from the
50 freeway and to allow for more landscaped area.
51 • There is an associated expense and structural consideration of having a `hinge' in the
52 masonry wall in order to allow it to be 1-foot above flood level. This aspect is currently not
53 part of the plans and will need to be worked out.
54
55 Staff:
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 5
1 • Compliance with WELO and Cal Green was not reviewed as part of the staff prelim. A
2 formal application would be reviewed for consistency with the WELO and any Cal Green
3 requirements. Likely that the project is subject to WELO requirements.
4 • As far as live/work scenarios, tenants can have the equivalent of a home occupation and
5 there are many things that qualify as home occupations.
6 • The parking requirement for a one bedroom unit is one space and the project is in
7 compliance with the parking. There is no street parking since there is no street frontage
8 for the Project so parking for guests/visitors needs to be provided on site.
9 • It is not uncommon to have at least one single parent and a child residing in the complex.
10 This might be very attractive for this person, particularly in the proposed location which is
11 close to shopping, services and transit.
12
13 7. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD
14 Member Thayer: Recommends the DRB have a joint meeting to check in with Planning
15 Commission. Would like to know what the Planning Commission would like from the Board when
16 reviewing projects and how the current process is working.
17
18 Staff: Planning Commission is complimentary of the work done by the Board and has not
19 indicated that anything is missing in the review or comments provided. Planning Commission
20 does rely on the comments from the Board and asks applicants how they have complied with
21 DRB recommendations. Will keep this item on the agenda as an opportunity to check-in with the
22 Board to see if a joint meeting should be scheduled or maybe a member of the Board could
23 speak at a Planning Commission meeting.
24
25 There was discussion about when is the appropriate time to complete the design guideline
26 checklist for a pre-application project.
27
28 8. MATTERS FROM STAFF
29 There will be a City Council General Plan discussion on October 15, 2012 at the City Conference
30 Center. DRB are encouraged to attend.
31
32 9. SET NEXT MEETING/ADJOURNMENT
33 The next meeting will be Thursday, November 8, 2012. The meeting adjourned at 4:22 p.m.
34
35
36 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
37
38
Design Review Board October 11, 2012
Page 6
��ty � u�iah City of Ukiah, CA
Design Review Board
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 Regular Meeting December 8, 2011
3
4 Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue
5 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hise called the Design Review Board meeting to order at 3:04
6 p.m.
7
8 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Tom Liden, Alan Nicholson, Nick
9 Thayer, Howie Hawkes, Estok Menton, Chair
10 Tom Hise
11 Absent: None
12 Staff Present: Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
13 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15 Others present: Steve Calcagno
16 Joseph Welch
17 Peter Kahn
18 David Babcock
19 Gary Akerstrom
20 Jeff Fowler
21 Guy Mills
22
23 3. CORRESPONDENCE: None
24
25 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: - The minutes from the September 1, 2011 and October 13,
26 2001 meetings are included for review.
27
28 M/S Liden/Hawkes to approve the September 1, 2011 and October 13, 2011 minutes, as
29 submitted with Member Menton abstaining.
30
31 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None.
32
33 6. RIGHT TO APPEAL: There are no appealable items.
34
35 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
36 7A. Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station File No. 11-01. Conduct a public hearing and
37 make recommendations to the Planning Commission on design and landscaping for the
38 proposed Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station to be located within the Airport Industrial
39 Park.
40
41 Staff:
42 • The project consists of the following components:
43 ■ Construction of a new 137,620 square foot wholesale warehouse.
44 ■ Construction of a new 16-pump gas facility with the approval for expansion to 20-
45 pumps.
46 ■ A Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) to consolidate the several existing parcels
47 into two.
48 ■ A Site Development Permit(SDP)for the proposed building and site layout.
49 ■ A general rezone of the project site to retail commercial.
50
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 1
1 • The project is located outside of the Downtown Design District so the project is not
2 required to go through the DRB process. Costco has voluntarily offered to come to the
3 DRB to receive comments on their project specific to site design and architecture.
4 • Staff has provided the Board with Airport Industrial Park Ordinance 1098 that governs
5 land/land uses in the Airport Industrial Park. The project is zoned AIP PD and subject
6 specifically to the `retail commercial' land use designation.
7 • Staff also provided the Board with the design guidelines for properties `outside of the
8 Downtown Design District.'
9 • Staff will prepare an analysis of the project when it goes to the Planning Commission and
10 also as part of the EIR that will include an analysis of the project for consistency with the
11 Ukiah General Plan and zoning designation.
12 • As shown on `Exhibit B' of the AIP Circulation Plan, the light manufacturing/mixed use
13 land use designation portion of the property will have to be rezoned to retail commercial
14 as part of the project application and City Council will determine whether or not the
15 rezone is appropriate for the site.
16
17 David Babcock of David Babcock &Associates, Landscape Architect for the Project:
18 • Introduced Steve Calcagno, Civil Engineer for Kier&Wright Civil Engineers & Surveyors,
19 Inc., Peter Kahn, Project Manager for Costco and Joseph Welch of Mulvanny G2
20 Architects
21 • Will answer questions from the Board concerning the design aspects of the project.
22
23 David Babcock/Steve Calcagno gave a PowerPoint presentation concerning the project as
24 described in Attachment 1 with comments about:
25 ■ The location of the project and site description and referred to the concept site
26 plan, sheet 3.
27 ■ It is important the building is nicely designed from all elevations and view points,
28 functions well and that the site provides for good circulation and referred to site
29 lines and sections, sheet 7 in relation to the neighboring infrastructure and other
30 buildings in the area.
31 ■ Commented on the proposed building orientation and the reason why the
32 particular design works well for the layout of the site, particularly with the site
33 being looked upon as a gateway to the City.
34 ■ The design allows for parking to be on two sides of the buildings so that parking
35 is spread around and not all concentrated right in front.
36 ■ The site plan objective is to provide for a nice pedestrian orientation/interaction
37 by designing the driveways to be as far away from the entrance as possible such
38 that people cannot drive right up to the store.
39 ■ Costco parking stalls are typically wider than other retail establishments to
40 accommodate larger trucks and/or vehicles.
41 ■ Referred to the floor plan and noted the Ukiah Costco will feature a bakery,
42 pharmacy, optical center, hearing aid testing center, food court, a photocenter, a
43 tire center, and other features that may be `typical' of Costco. Other site
44 amenities include landscaping, a parking lot, and a gas station.
45 ■ The tire center will include retail tire sales and a tire installation facility and
46 explained how this project component will function.
47 ■ Addressed the layout for the proposed gas station facility and how it would
48 function without tying up the traffic inside the queuing of the gas station. In order
49 to open and operate the gas facility, local, state and federal environmental
50 requirements must be met related to disposal of hazardous materials,
51 underground fuel tanks, and implementation of spill prevention countermeasures
52 to prevent petroleum product spills into nearby water ways and/or water
53 detention facilities.
54 ■ Explained how truck deliveries will occur where the intent is to create a design
55 that would not disrupt the drive isles and/or traffic on the site.
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 2
1 ■ More specifically described how the building orientation and on-site circulation
2 addresses the element of`connectivity' with regard to curbs, gutter and sidewalks
3 and sidewalks that meander. Costco's objective is to create a `sensitivity' towards
4 the pedestrian and this can be accomplished by providing a pedestrian
5 connection throughout the project.
6 ■ Generally explained the unique floor plan for the Ukiah Costco that will assist
7 with effective customer flow/circulation so members can enjoy their shopping
8 experience.
9 ■ Space has been provided for new freezers and coolers and demonstrated the
10 location.
11 ■ Costco will sell a variety of products in a large number of product categories and
12 demonstrated how products will be organized and shelved for customer
13 convenience.
14 ■ Emphasized that the entrance to the establishment is very important and
15 describe how this will be articulated.
16 ■ The design/materials/color scheme concepts selected for the building provide for
17 an architecturally pleasing project that is energy efficient/sustainable,
18 architecturally welcoming/good fit for Ukiah, environmentally conscious, has an
19 nice contemporary style, effectively provide for proper massing because the
20 building is essentially big-box, is harmonious/complements other buildings in the
21 neighborhood in order to best minimize the visual impact of a large retail
22 warehouse. The objective is `simplicity' that creates architecture true to Costco's
23 business plan, which lends itself to a project that is high quality, durability, and
24 has value.
25 • Specifically discussed the building elevations as shown on the site plans by
26 demonstrating how the design features/techniques, color schemes, and
27 materials, texture of material and placement work congruently to provide for a
28 nice blend and an aesthetically pleasing appearance.
29 ■ The combining of concrete and architectural metal panels will help reduce the
30 visual impact.
31 ■ Through the use of design techniques such as the orientation of the metal panel,
32 landscaping, the incorporation of varying parapet cap depths and heights will
33 successfully break the long elevations both horizontally and vertically on the
34 building.
35 ■ The building design includes signage that is scaled appropriately to the mass of
36 the building elevations so as to not to be overwhelming. The warehouse signage
37 will consist of externally illuminated reverse pan channel letters and the gas
38 station signage will also be externally illuminated that is consistent with the
39 International Dark Sky Association policies/recommendations. Building signage
40 will be the Costco red and blue corporate colors. Costco does not utilize
41 monument or pylon signs.
42 ■ There is also signage for the gas station that will also be internally lit and in
43 accordance with the International Dark Sky Association requirements.
44 ■ The project will feature all the brand new thinking of today's Costco projects. As
45 such, skylights are part of the design features to take advantage of natural
46 sunlight were feasible and appropriate. Accordingly, lighting systems and
47 placement of lighting fixtures also designed to properly fit the design, size/scale
48 of the building. The lighting systems represent the latest technology in that they
49 are computerized to light up or dim as necessary. Indoor lighting will adjust to the
50 lighting conditions for the building, which is a huge energy savings.
51 ■ The type of equipment that will be used in the building to heat and cool,
52 refrigeration equipment, etc., are of high energy efficiency.
53 ■ Referred to the concept landscape plan that features a variety of trees and
54 vegetative shrubs, perennials and grasses and discussed the proposed
55 landscape area plan objectives. Tree plantings will provide a substantial level of
56 parking lot shading and will serve to reduce summer heat gain with the parking
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 3
1 field. A substantial amount of the proposed plants will be drought tolerant that will
2 use less water compared to other types of species. The water/irrigation system
3 proposed will reduce water consumption.
4 ■ There are `generous bio-swales' on the site and demonstrated their location on
5 the site plans. The project will use bio-swales in planters.
6 ■ The project includes a small water retention basin at the lower end of the site.
7 The majority of the parking lot runoff will drain into this basin. In this way, the
8 project complies with the EPA requirements and the State Water Resources
9 Control Board relative to water treatment and water quality standards. Many of
10 the storm water regulations are over and beyond what you would see, but Costco
11 takes measures to ensure this.
12 ■ Addressed the shade plan objective for compliance with the City's 50% shade
13 canopy requirement for parking lots and the projecYs intent in this regard, noting
14 compliance with this requirement is difficult.
15 ■ There was discussion about the truck loading dock located at the north edge of
16 the building and how this facility will function. A transformer and two trash
17 compactors would also be located along the north edge of the building and
18 sufficiently screened.
19 ■ The HVAC units and other systems will be sufficiently screened.
20 ■ The proposed color scheme chosen are warm natural earth tones which relate to
21 the neighborhood and some of the more recent buildings developed in the area.
22 ■ Again, of priority is to design a project that specifically addresses energy
23 conservation through the use of energy efficient lighting systems, reflective roof
24 material to produce lower heat absorption and thereby lowering energy
25 consumption during the hot summer months. Costco uses a management system
26 called daylight harvesting' to monitor and adjust mechanical and lighting systems
27 to conserve energy. With the new building, it is possible to maximize the amount
28 of daylight allowed into the building and take advantage of the free energy the
29 sun can provide. The skylights, light sensors, associated control systems,
30 energy-efficient HVAC units, building orientation and associated design feature
31 will result in energy savings and efficiency.
32 ■ The project plans also include a preliminary grading and drainage plan and a
33 preliminary utility plan.
34
35 There was discussion about:
36 • The potential use of a portico at the entrance like Home Depot has so that members can
37 take advantage of loading merchandise, particularly during rainy conditions. It was noted
38 waiting for a vehicle to come, a customer cannot stop and load merchandise for safety
39 reasons. The area in front of the building is designated as a fire lane. A portico would be
40 problematic if store only has one entrance. The applicant will work with staff on the issue
41 of having an area where people can have a loading zone because this is usually a
42 concern for projects. A customer can always ask Costco staff to help with loading of
43 merchandise or unloading of inerchandise if there is a return.
44 • Parking, layout of the parking lot and the number of parking spaces required and
45 proposed, noting parking for the project should be sufficient. It was further noted the
46 majority of the parking stalls will be 10 feet wide and 18'h feet long and will take up
47 considerable space. In other words, stalls are deeper and wider than what is standard.
48 Nine feet wide parking spaces may be installed at the far end of the parking lot should
49 there be a `pinch for space.' Typically, Costco provides for plenty of parking
50 accommodations for their projects. The total number of parking spaces proposed for the
51 Ukiah Costco is 643 that include 14 accessible stalls.
52
53 Board questions:
54 Q1: What is the highest point of the building?What is the plan for shade trees?
55 Q2: Will permeable paving be a part of the project?
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 4
1 Q3: Do all the roof collection, gutters and downspouts utilize the same drainage flows as the
2 parking lot?
3 Q4: Is traffic mitigation a topic for discussion?
4 Q5: With regard to water systems, if sustainability is a project goal, why is there no water
5 attachment and/or drain water recycling system on the site to be used for landscape use.
6 With that amount of roof surface proposed, the volume of water that could be attached
7 rather than treating the water as a waste product to go back into the ground and/or river
8 could actually be utilized if it is sight compatible. Supports integrating the concept of
9 water collection and effective use thereof on-site as much as possible into the
10 thought/planning process since preservation of water is environmentally important.
11 Q6: Are the trees going to be irrigated?
12 Q7: Will the project meet the City's 50% shade requirement for parking lot trees?
13 Q8: Asked for clarification regarding the 'champagne fa�ade' relative to the metallic treatment
14 on the building.
15 Q9: Asked for clarification about building treatments and effects thereof.
16
17
18 Costco Representatives:
19 A1: The highest parapet is 34 feet and the lowest is 31 feet. To appropriately comply with the
20 City's 20% landscaping standards and shade preference, Elms are proposed to shade
21 the building that will reach 25 to 30 feet at maturity.
22 A2: The paving materials are traditional asphalt.
23 • While the technology for the application of permeable paving is coming, Costco builds
24 projects to last a long time. For instance, there is a 25-year warranty on the paint and
25 metal on the building, as well as a 20-year warranty for the parking lot material.
26 • The intent is to build once and provide for low maintenance.
27 • In terms of maintenance, the parking lot will be swept every evening.
28 • The intent is to maintain a clean parking lot such that the excess water runoff from the
29 parking lot is also clean.
30 • Is not satisfied that permeable paving is durable enough to get the kind of warranty that
31 traditional asphalt gives, particularly with the amount of traffic that a Costco store
32 generates.
33 • Is of the opinion permeable paving has not been around long enough and the studies are
34 not available.
35 • There may be opportunities for permeable paving in the future.
36
37 A3:The runoff water in this regard is channeled into the storm water drainage system and is a
38 standard procedure for all Costco stores.
39
40 Gary Akerstrom:
41 • Is the developer of Redwood Business Park.
42 • In terms of permeable pavement in the Ukiah area, the normal ground soil Ukiah has is a
43 lot of sand and clay composition so as a result permeable pavement does not work here.
44 • Briefly commented on the issue of runoff, drainage and streets and the condition of
45 streets in Ukiah.
46
47 Costco representative:
48 • Costco has recently been incorporating underdrains in their project parking lots similar to
49 french or burrito drains underneath areas such as landscape isles to capture water from
50 surface areas or other. As a result of the underdrains the life span of surfaces has
51 increased.
52
53 Gary Akerstrom:
54 • Commented the detention basin for the site during storm conditions will fill up in
55 approximately two hours and noted the existing pond in the area is very helpful with water
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 5
1 detention before discharge into the Russian River. The pond does capture water runoff
2 from the Airport and Redwood Business Park.
3
4 Costco representative:
5 • In addition to the pond, much of the water drains into the Caltrans ditch along Highway
6 101 that goes unmetered to the low lying down stream area.
7
8 Gary Akerstrom:
9 • Is familiar with drainage issues in the area, has performed some calculations in this
10 regard and advised water goes through a culvert under the freeway, which is actually a
11 very short distance to the Russian River. Anything more than a two-year storm condition,
12 everything on the east side of freeway is under water and this is something to consider.
13 It does not pay to do a detailed analysis of a ditch that goes down stream on the east
14 side of the freeway. Again, recommends taking advantage of the pond for drainage
15 purposes, as well as utilize it as a landscape feature in combination thereof.
16
17 Jeff Fowler, Ken Fowler Auto
18 • Has a car dealership to the north of the proposed project.
19 • Discussed how access will occur for large trucks making deliveries at the northern portion
20 of the parcel adjacent to his dealership and is of the opinion there should be no problems
21 with this approach.
22 • Addressed the proposed landscaping for the site and is concerned with pollen and/or
23 other types of debris from trees will blow on his cars displayed for sale.
24
25 Costco representative:
26 • In terms of access, certain sections of the cul-de-sac on Airport Park Boulevard will be
27 redone having a different curb line/cut for access to the site, particularly for the benefit of
28 large trucks.
29 • One of the most important functions of a Costco is truck deliveries and explained what
30 will occur for truck deliveries with the unloading of palates and added the truck loading
31 dock would be located at the north edge of the building within the building area. The
32 facility would face east and include three individual side-by-side loading bays. A low
33 screen wall would be constructed along the edge of the dock, facing north to help
34 mitigate visual impacts. All docks will face in one direction so that any noise potential
35 would be channeled to the east toward the highway.
36 • Will consider the tree species so the trees will not impact neighbors. Referred to
37 conceptual landscape plan, sheet 9.
38
39 Costco representative:
40 A4: City Planning staff has indicated the topic of potential traffic impacts and mitigation
41 measures was not part of today's design review discussion of the project.
42 • Costco wants the traffic matter to work and would not pursue the project knowing there is
43 a traffic problem. Traffic studies will provide the necessary information about potential
44 impacts and mitigations measures.
45 A5: On-site drainage and corresponding water collecting/storage systems has been a
46 consideration. Will look into water conservation options.
47 A6: Has a sophisticated watering system for the trees that includes bio-swales. Depending
48 upon the nature of the soil, appropriate drainage systems will be provided. Costco works
49 with a soil scientist to assist with determining the appropriate irrigation system for trees
50 and vegetation. Costco provides for a unique program for irrigation and maintenance of
51 vegetation and trees. In terms of sustainability and water conservation, lawns are no
52 longer part of the landscaping program. Landscaping species are selected based on
53 durability and ability to adapt in a retail environment in addition to selecting plants that are
54 drought tolerate and native to the area. Elaborate landscaping techniques/systems are
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 6
1 applied so that vegetation can survive, thrive and grow to maturity. Costco wants their
2 landscaping to grow and look good. Talked about Costco's sustainability practices.
3 A7: Will comply with the City's 50% shade requirement and referred to sheet 10, shade plan
4 and sheet 10.1, comparative shade plan.
5 A8: The application results in a `shadow relief' effect relative to the metallic sheen material
6 instrumental in reducing heat gain for the building to conserve energy. From an aesthetic
7 standpoint, the color of inetallic sheen will change color throughout the day from an earth
8 tone color i.e., from a brown to a light brown to a silver color. This material treatment
9 provides a nice contrast with the light colors being applied.
10 A9: Commented on the `metal profile' application treatment and noted one will be oriented
11 horizontally for the box rib. The `less aggressive rib metal panel' provides for a bat and
12 board appearance and will be oriented vertically. Demonstrated why and how the
13 materials can be applied vertically and horizontally to provide for an architecturally
14 pleasing effect.
15
16 Board comments:
17 • Project needs more than one point of egress for trucks, etc.
18 • The project objective says the building shall be shaped and oriented to take advantage of
19 passive solar energy and solar collection in the winter, as well as energy efficient
20 measures for keeping the building cool in the summer. Encourages taking advantage of
21 photovoltaic opportunities as much as possible.
22 • It appears that most of `loads' will be electrical for the cooling, refrigeration and lighting
23 and applauds that Costco uses an energy management system (daylight harvesting) and
24 integrated energy management systems that offer centralized controls and monitoring for
25 lights, HVAC and refrigeration.
26 • Understands applicant is working on keeping down maintenance/sustainability costs and
27 further encourages the use of photovoltaic opportunities.
28 • Likes that LED lighting is utilized in display cases and in freezer/cooler doors; that interior
29 and exterior HID lighting systems continually increase efficiency; photo sensors will be
30 installed in the skylights throughout the warehouse that automate the control of HID
31 lighting, minimizing use of artificial lighting; Refrigeration systems will convert waste heat
32 to reheat hot water tanks, night screens are installed on all open refrigeration cases
33 reducing cooling loss and energy on refrigeration compressors, localized energy controls
34 to be install in all refrigeration units, air doors to be installed in produce coolers, using air
35 flow to contain cool air in the interior.
36 • Likes the building orientation and presentation.
37 • Some members and employees may want to bicycle to Costco.
38 • Consider parking area vehicles that are battery/solar operated with recharging facilities.
39 • Design the entryway so that people have a covered/protected area where they can wait
40 for or meet other people.
41 • Likes that lighting fixtures are consistent with the International Dark Sky Association
42 standards.
43 • Likes the color palate selected for the building.
44 • Related to the building articulation and massing would like to see some architectural
45 features from the Ukiah Brewery somehow incorporated into the design aspect for the
46 Project.
47 • Supports plant species that are perennial.
48 • Likes the selection of trees for the parking lot.
49 • Replace Crape Myrtle with California Redbud.
50 • Provide for shading on the east side of the building to keep the signage accessible in that
51 narrow space in order to provide some morning shade.
52 • Reorient vegetation to provide for improved visual access into the site with regard to
53 signage and provide for better anchored/defined/accented corners. This would allow for
54 'cleaner site lines.'
55 • Provide for more native plants.
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 7
1 • Better integration of the `understored planting.'
2 • Would like to see the plant species for the bio-swale to better understand how the bio-
3 swale will be implemented.
4 • The revised City Master Tree List that has not yet been approved by and/or adopted
5 Council would be helpful with the selection of appropriate trees for the project.
6 • Concern was expressed about the `box appearance' and massing of the building.
7 • An entry canopy is a nice feature.
8 • Understands the building is a `box' and recommends adding a few other roof overhangs
9 to soften the appearance of the building by helping to break up the horizontal mass.
10 • Asked about the north side of the building and what is supposed to occur on the east
11 elevation.
12 • It appears the south elevation is `busier' than the others.
13 • Consider deep roof overhangs that create shadows off of the building that add variety
14 aesthetically.
15 • Make certain the site interior is pedestrian and bicycle friendly that provides for a nice
16 connection to different areas on the site. Supports having a pedestrian pathway on the
17 south side of the building that would provide for accessibility and a nice connection
18 between the building and parking lot.
19 • Pathways/sidewalks should be wide enough that two or three persons could comfortably
20 walk side-by-side or even a baby carriage; possibly having a 6-8 foot width.
21 • Shade/protection measures from weather conditions would be helpful on the south side
22 of the building.
23 • Likes the proposed project overall, noting consideration is given to including as much
24 sustainable practices as possible, that attention has been paid to building orientation,
25 landscaping, drainage, water and energy conservation and aesthetics.
26 • Not include arches in the design.
27 • Likes the building orientation and sight lines people will be looking at when driving to the
28 site, color scheme, building treatments and materials that aesthetically provide for an
29 appealing building even though the building is a big box structure.
30 • The building and site design will not be too overwhelming.
31 • The proposed design is similar to that of the Rohnert Park Costco.
32 • Likes the presentation of the entry.
33 • Questions the location of the tire bay. Moving the bay farther east would interfere with an
34 already nice view of the project from the freeway. It may be tire bay should be developed
35 to the north side of the building if this is workable.
36 • Develop a pedestrian way for buses and bicycles coming in. A person could park further
37 away and take the pathway. Otherwise, there is no place for people to walk with the
38 current layout in the area where the bay exists now. There is also no overhang for
39 protection purposes and as currently designed presents a safety hazard because there is
40 no place for people to walk. Someone would have to direct traffic as it is now just to get
41 traffic in and out of the bay. There is also the matter of where people are going to park for
42 those persons waiting to get tire service. Recommends rethinking the south exposure in
43 terms of safety, accessibility and allowing for an adequate pedestrian connection with
44 overhangs where feasible as long as they do not hang over the curb to shield people
45 from the rain. Other than this issue, the project is nicely designed.
46
47 David Babcock comments:
48 • The building is designed to receive solar at some future date if appropriate so the
49 engineering for solar panels is already set in place. The roof will be metal. The number of
50 skylights in the food service area has been reduced to conserve energy because they are
51 not necessary in this location. Skylights are essentially important to light the isles for the
52 members. On a day like today in December, it is possible to operate the warehouse on
53 basically 25°/a of its lighting because of `daylight harvesting.' The building is designed to
54 take advantage of sunlight where feasible/sustainable. Providing for sufficient shade from
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 8
1 vegetation and building materials/treatments as well as the orientation of the building will
2 help to keep energy costs down.
3 • There was discussion about the addition of a Class III bicycle lane in the area that was
4 addressed in the EIR for the Walmart Expansion Project.
5 • The food service area/food court area will have tables and chairs for people to meet and
6 this area is immediately accessible when one walks in the entrance. If it is cold and
7 windy, people can go inside the building. Accordingly, the building will have a 26'h-foot
8 overhang that will serve as a cover.
9 • The light fixture for the parking lot will be consistent with the International Dark Sky
10 Association standards.
11 • Is open to looking at the City's Master Tree List.
12 • There will be a flat canopy over the doors that will wrap around over what is called the
13 'bread door,' which functions as a service truck and receiving door. The intent of this
14 feature is to help break up the horizontal appearance. Referred to the site plans and
15 commented on the different elevations to explain the location of the canopies, how
16 shadowing will occur and how water would be shed. The canopy will extend outward from
17 the edge of the building and will cast some shadowing below it.
18 • Referred to sheets 5 and 5.1 that show the different elevations for the building and the
19 plans for varying treatments i.e., parapets that will break up the mass of the building.
20 • Further discussed the concept of `shadow casting' with regard to canopies and use of
21 materials/treatments to assist with the element of massing and enhance aesthetics.
22
23 8. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD
24 There was some discussion about the issue of traffic impacts and whether there are mechanisms
25 in place requiring Costco to pay for improvements.
26
27 10. MATTERS FROM STAFF
28 There was discussion about the future of the DRB since it is a function of the RDA that may or
29 may not be allowed to exist under California State Law. A decision will be made by the State in
30 January about whether or not city redevelopment agencies in California will be dissolved.
31
32 11. SET NEXT MEETING/ADJOURNMENT
33 The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
34
35
36 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
37
38
39
40
Design Review Board December 8, 2011
Page 9
1 ITEM NO. 6A
Community Development and Planning Department
�ity � u�,iah. 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
planninq c(�.cityofukiah.com
(707)463-6203
2
3 DATE: February 14, 2013
4
5 TO: Design Review Board
6
7 FROM: Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
8
9 SUBJECT: Request for Preliminary Review of Ukiah Valley Medical Center Hospital Support
10 Building
11 275 Hospital Drive, APN 002-160-08
12 13-03-PRE- DRB
13
14 REQUEST
15
16 Staff requests the Design Review Board conduct a preliminary review of the project as
17 presented by the applicant and shown on attached plans.
18
19 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
20
21 An application has been received from Charles Ackerley of Jennings Ackerley Architecture and
22 Design requesting Design Review Board review of preliminary plans for a new Hospital Support
23 Building (HSB) to be located at the north east corner of 275 Hospital Drive.
24
25 The proposed HSB would collect and organize the scattered delivery process currently serving
26 the hospital. A portion of the proposed building would be two stories, this is shown on the
27 attached site plan. The first floor would include a loading dock, materials management area,
28 linen services, dietary supply along with maintenance and support offices. The second story
29 would house the hospital administration offices.
30
31 STAFF ANALYSIS
32
33 The applicant has submitted this preliminary review application in order to receive Design
34 Review Board direction regarding the proposed project. Since this is not a formal application,
35 staff has not reviewed the application for consistency with the general plan, zoning, or airport
36 requirements. Below is a description of the general plan, zoning, and airport designation for the
37 subject parcel.
38
39 General Plan. The General Plan land use designation of the parcel is Commercial. This land
40 use designation identifies lands where commerce and business may occur. Commercial lands
41 are more precisely defined through the uses allowed in the individual zoning districts.
42
Ukiah Valley Medical Center
Hospital Support Building
275 Hospital Drive
File No:13-03-PRE-PC
1
1 Zoning. The zoning of the parcel is Heavy Commercial(C-2).
2
3 Parkinq• The proposed Hospital Support Building would primarily contain offices and
4 support services. Within the C-2 zone professional offices and business offices require one
5 parking space for each three hundred (300) square feet of floor area. The adequacy of the
6 proposed parking will be evaluated as part of a formal application.
7
8 Landscapinq. The C-2 zoning district includes landscaping standards. New parking areas
9 would be required to comply with the landscaping requirements unless granted relief by the
10 Planning commission as allowed by the zoning ordinance based upon the size, scale,
11 intensity, and location of the development project. The landscaping requirements include the
12 following:
13
14 ■landscaping coverage of twenty percent (20%) of the gross area of the parcel, unless
15 based upon the small size of a parcel, it would be unreasonable and illogical with a
16 minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the landscaped area shall be dedicated to live
17 plantings;
18
19 ■landscaping proportional to the building elevations;.
20
21 ■One (1) tree placed between every four (4) parking stalls within a continuous linear
22 planting strip;
23
24 ■primarily deciduous species, designed to provide a tree canopy coverage of fifty percent
25 (50%) over all paved areas within ten (10) years of planting;
26
27 ■perimeter planting strip with both trees and shrubs.
28
29 ■defined pedestrian sidewalks or marked pedestrian facilities within landscaped areas
3o and/or separated from automobile travel lanes; and
31
32 ■one (1) street tree every 30 feet of parcel frontage.
33
34 Process. Use permits have been required to allow the expansion of the hospital,
35 including the birthing center, heliport, and storage, as such, a Major Use Permit would be
36 required along with a Major Site Development Permit for the new HSB. The use permit
37 and site development permit applications would be processed concurrently.
38
39 Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan. The project is subject to the requirements of the Ukiah
4o Municipal Airport Maser Plan. The subject parcel is partially located in the B-2 zone. The B-2
41 infill zone policy allows the expansion of existing hospital facilities provided that the buildings
42 are single story and the use does not exceed an intensity of 60 people per acre. The final
43 design may include a portion of the two story section of the proposed building within the B-2
44 zone, and would then require review by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission.
45
46 Design Guidelines. The project is subject to the Design Guidelines for Projects located Outside
47 of the Downtown Design District.
Ukiah Valley Medical Center
Hospital Support Building
275 Hospital Drive
File No:13-03-PRE-PC
2
1 Attachments:
2 1. Preliminary Site Plan
3 2. Preliminary Stacking and Program Diagram
Ukiah Valley Medical Center
Hospital Support Building
275 Hospital Drive
File No:13-03-PRE-PC
3
.
.... ..... ... .... .... . r X 4fl': .: . : �
.. � � �.� �� .
tt�+ �'�W������` "� � ,� �: y � u�4�ee ��.;_,,,,,.,
��,,.,., �`�� �� � , , � w� ��� ��"' �
.• ... . t
..
� � . ,,,,. � " .x � �:
.
, y.., x...��''d"$ � �,��r. . �
�_� �.
.
�� ..
� , �
. ,3 ..
.
x � �� �,, ��
� ����,� �.�.. ,, .
�� „�� Wh9C=Maeptfi�l Supp�r4�uiiding
� ��
� � ��,
�� . �.z� „.. F. , �.
�� 7he pr4poaed Mospit�(�aup�astf Btriidin�{N58}callects and
.�.,;��:�.� QY 2711Z85�8SC&1f91'9ddB�iV9
„
'�, , L, 9 ry Process eurrent(y serring t�s
_�a � , !
`'������ `' ;,b�� inelut�d in the firsE ilaar program,a toa6irrc�doek;materiafs�
���t ��� � msnagement�Ilnssr senrices,dleta�ysuP�lY�maicit�nance�rid
� &upportirqj bH'�ces,The second floor wilf cansolidata
Most of the hos ital su ort activities � ic14'�ff ` Administlsliue Cunctians From ti�e IrospifaL
P pp fY}N.�E , ; ,
� a y Additional pqrkirtg to the Nnrth will muke A new Hospital Support Buiiding Ioca'ted
take place on the east slde af the s�te wdy for a new Ho�pital S�pport Builtling to the North¢ast corner will ar n�ze
and s�rvice i�tram Perkins Sfi. 9a �
' serviee;accessfo the hosp�tal
____.-- --- i
EXSSTING � _ —� �:__�_
— --- -- —_--------------
----.—--- ---------- - FINAL __�� _-----
. ����,�M r� h .. ��,.n,. �#G
.e .�'Y, x ,� .
� r�
>� '
.t�'�,+ � � y,�" �
� � ��
� o- .
�,., � � ` �a� � a
,
��' '�� � �
�� ` �
1 ,�� � � � � �"
�,
administration
affice� reception
x ;
„ ,
�� m q
, �
4� � �
. ., ,, i�f a� a ����
. '.,., � ,, a �. ..
.,. ', '. . : ��'k
�
�y
�. ' . , �: �, � g �,�l� d��°��t
�i
�, `�^ �� + �. .�$ i� „..0
i
; �?, ,. g .:� `�; �`� ��r:
; 2nd flo0r , �
� i ���� � �;�,�t
� � � � � � � � '�� �
� ' o� "b �uai �''�T i' �1 @'*.
1 x
*v
� � i �, �,"�'�� er o ,� ��.�s a � ����?�h . ��'�.��,�.. .
..� w
i
ot�t going i
r�aterials 2 stor�entrance
seeurity � and Ia by
�
j $� } �
loading dock � ����������e �
material ������� ,r�` ` ""
,
��^�� ' �
� a : , �
inPak� � w�4b�+ . o��
fst floa
.� , '�!
r�* ��
�� �. . � � . s .
�. '7� �. '_- �= ,.. � ` .,' `� . .
.H.w
�.�
�
6�P`VdCE,`Gd�'�I �`�� etaffeMnnnce. ' .� ..�. � � - ��y�
t1Yi�SU��C"�. .... � � ......... .... � .,:� . .. �� � .
,,. ��� � *�����
�� °r
''� parking �
��
Stacking and Program � ��
Diagram G
; �� i-�w
---------— PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW
_—.._—_._.-------- -..— ----- ---.-------------------- -------- --- ----
�� — ----- ----
L I O NAKI S���a�N���g G��RLEY Ukiah Valiey Medical Genter�Hoapital Support Building
21312013
.
O �
�:�°
EQ
; ,
. . ___.
����; �
�.R� - ._
. • - ,
��
.. . ........:.. .. , \
�«�� ��\\\\\\\\
\\\\�\��\��
�.�w \���������
... � ��fi �_
-------------------------------�—�-------------. ; ,
� � ,
�.,� ,. �n , , _
Illllllli ° -. ' , — — — — - - —
� � �
�� � �
� , — o �
= , ,
�
,
��, ,
�
�
¢. �
�
� � - - - — _ _ ,
, - - ,
� � � � — — ,
,� , , — — - - - - - - - - - — — ,
� e o , ,
� ,
� ,
, ,
, — — — — — — — — — — — — — ,
� � ,
� 0 ;, ,
, ,
, ,
�
, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
ITEM N0. 8A
Community Development and Planning Department
300 Seminary Avenue
G��tiJ O� u�c�i Ukiah, CA 95482
planninq(a�citvofukiah.com
(707)463-6203
DATE: February 14, 2013
TO: Design Review Board
FROM: Shannon Riley, Project and Program Analyst
SUBJECT: Outdoor Dining Structure Program for powntown Ukiah
On December 19th,the Ukiah City Council authorized Staff to develop an Outdoor Dining
Structure Program for powntown Ukiah. Modeled after the successful pilot project at
Patrona (corner of Standley and School Streets),the Program will apply to eligible
restaurants within the downtown core.
Guidelines for the Program are being developed at this time. The assumption is that an
annual permit would be obtained by participating restaurants, similar to an encroachment
permit. Like the pilot project, participating restaurants would adhere to City and Alcoholic
Beverage Control regulations.
Staff wishes to avoid a"cookie-cutter" appearance in the downtown and will thus allow for
businesses to personalize their outdoor dining structures to a certain extent. However, in
order to ensure minimum safety and design standards for the Program, Staff is requesting
that the Design Review Board recommend design standards, including materials.
Below, please find the categories selected for your input. The drafted language and
materials listed are only recommendations; please feel free to add or substitute materials
based on your professional knowledge and experience.
Fencin�
Fencing shall be designed of wrought iron or,treated wood, or cast aluminum and shall not
exceed 36" in height. If alcoholic beverages are to be served, fencing shall meet the
requirements of the use associated license issued by the State Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control.
Floor Surface
Flooring surface shall be designed of . (The deck at Patrona is built from Trex
materials. However,the business owner has stated that the surface is slippery.)
1
ITEM N0. 8A
Furnishing Standards
Tables and chairs shall be of commercial grade and designed for outdoor use. All
furnishings shall be properly maintained and cleaned regularly.
Tables and Chairs
Tables and chairs shall be of the same or a similar and compatible design. Plastic or
resin tables and chairs are prohibited. All tables and chairs within a use area shall
be of the same or compatible color. Bright, reflective, and fluorescent colors are
prohibited.
Materials - Permitted:
■ Framework: Wrought iron, fabricated steel, cast aluminum, cane or
teak.
■ Chair seat: Wrought iron, fabricated steel, cast aluminum, cane,teak
or rattan.
■ Table top: Solid tops of slate, marble, granite, faux stone,wrought
iron, embossed aluminum,teak,tempered glass, and mesh tops of
wrought iron and aluminum are permitted. Plastic, resin, and plain
metal table tops are not permitted.
■ Table Top Dimensions: Square 28", Rectangular 36"x 24", rount 30".
■ Table Height: Standard cafe height up to 30".
Umbrellas and Umbrella Stands
Table center and freestanding umbrellas are permitted. All umbrella panels shall be
of the same solid color. A complementary solid color may be used for trim (such as
piping). Patterns (floral, stripes, etc.) and fluorescent colors are prohibited.
Materials - Permitted:
■ Umbrellas: Canvas only. Vinyl or plastic umbrellas are prohibited.
■ Stands: Cast aluminum,wrought iron, fabricated steel, or wood.
Lighting
Under umbrella lighting (directional or tube) and table top lighting (candles or
other low level light sources) are permitted. Lighting shall create a soft glow
directed at the tabletop or cart surface. Lighting shall not create glare or fall outside
of the use area. To provide for a warm glow, lighting sources shall be or warm white
light (2700 to 3200 degrees Kelvin). Cool white lighting can create a harsh glare and
is prohibited. Bare bulb neon,backlit signage, colored lights, blinking or"chasing"
lights are prohibited.
2
ITEM N0. 8A
Portable Heaters
Standing portable propane heaters are permitted, subject to review and approval by
the Fire Department. Electric or fuel heaters other than propane are prohibited.
Trash Receptacles
Trash receptacles shall be of an appropriate size in relation to the use area and of
materials and design compatible with other use furnishings.
Other Decorative Items
■ Padded fabric chair pads are permitted, shall be brought indoors nightly, and
shall be clean when placed outside each day.
■ Tabletop flower arrangements, centerpieces, and candles are permitted and
shall be brought in nightly.
■ Streamers, balloons,banners, and other decorative items not specifically
permitted herein are prohibited.
■ Furnishings and decorations shall not encroach beyond the permitted use area
or overhang pedestrian or vehicular circulation paths.
3