HomeMy WebLinkAbout07092015-packet City of Ukiah
Design Review Board
� '�"� Thursday July 9, 2015 � '��
3:00 p.m.
Conference Room 3
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 #3
300 SEMINARY AVENUE, UKIAH
2. ROLL CALL: Members Liden, Thayer, Nicholson, Hawkes, and Morrow
3. CORRESPONDENCE: None.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the May 14, 2015 meeting will be available 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. Gobbi Street Complex 680 South State Street, (File No.: 111):
Request for Preliminary Review and Recommendation of a Major Use Permit &
Site Development Permit for a proposed 26 unit multi-unit residential
development on the NE corner of W. Gobbi St. and S. Oak St
680 S. State Street (APN 002-301-55).
7. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD:
8. MATTERS FROM STAFF:
9. SET NEXT MEETING: August 13, 2015
10. ADJOURNMENT:
Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodations. Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a
meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA
requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call (707) 463-6752 or
(707)463-6207 to arrange accommodations.
��ty � u�iah City of Ukiah, CA
Design Review Board
1
2 MINUTES
3
4 Regular Meeting May 14, 2015
5
6 Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue
7 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Liden called the Design Review Board meeting to order at
8 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room #3.
9
10 2. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Tom Liden, Alan Nicholson,
11 Howie Hawkes, Colin Morrow
12
13 Absent: Nick Thayer
14
15 Staff Present: Charley Stump, Planning Director
16 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
17
18 Others present: Dan Thomas
19 Joe Thomas
20
21 3. CORRESPONDENCE:
22
23 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the March 26, 2015 and April 9, 2015
24 meetings are available for review and approval.
25
26 M/S Hawkes/Nicholson to approve March 26, 2015 and April 9, 2015 minutes, as submitted.
27 Motion carried (4-0).
28
29 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
30
31 The DRB is required by the City Code to review and make a recommendation on all Site
32 Development Permit applications.
33
34 6. NEW BUSINESS:
35 6A. Chipotle's Mexican Grill Restaurant 596 East Perkins Street, (File No.: 842): Review
36 and recommendation to Planning Commission on a Site Development Permit for
37 construction of a 2,000 square foot Chipotle Mexican Grill restaurant on the vacant parcel
38 located in the Downtown Zoning District at the northwest corner of East Perkins Street
39 and Orchard Avenue. On-site parking and landscaping are also proposed, as is outdoor
40 dining along both street frontages at 596 East Perkins Street, APN 002-200-38.
41
42 Planning Director Stump:
43 • Staff is requesting the DRB conduct a formal review and make recommendations on a
44 Site Development Permit application to the Planning Commission.
45 • The DRB provided the following recommendations at the March 26, 2015 DRB
46 preliminary meeting such that the applicant has revised the plans and submitted a formal
47 application:
48 1. Provide for good pedestrian connection to west parking lot;
49 2. East/west sidewalk be separate from the driveways such that the main entry is on the
50 corner and continue the west sidewalk to the public sidewalk;
51 3. Encourage creative solution to finding appropriate trees for shading purposes;
52 4. Use darker color palate on building;
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 1
1 5. Project architect explore pulling part of the building out which would be a nice
2 amenity for users that would still allow for sufficient light into the building. Structure
3 does not have to be a solid roof but rather 'expressed' on the edges as a solid
4 roof/architectural form where the element could be shaded for solar orientation and
5 still provide shelter for people using the outdoor dining area;
6 6. No turf, use aggregate of some kind or some other non-water using element;
7 7. Consider some permeable paving instead of concrete/asphalt;
8 8. Creative tree selection; Preference is to see more street trees planted in connection
9 with Perkins Street streetscape improvement project possibly in the planter area in
10 front of Pear Tree shopping center;
11 9. Ask applicant to consider installation of art display area that could be indoors or
12 outdoors.
13 • Staff is requesting the DRB review the aforementioned recommendations, look at the site
14 plans and provide further comments if there are any.
15
16 Chair Liden:
17 • Asked whether the DRB is being asked to include a recommendation concerning the
18 requested exceptions and/or whether this matter would be addressed by the Planning
19 Department: 1) One-story rather than the mandatory two-stories; 2) Project proposed
20 more than the maximum allowed parking; 3) Proposed build is not parallel to the principal
21 frontage line for 70% of its length.
22
23 Planning Director Stump:
24 • Confirmed the Planning Department/Planning Commission will address the requested
25 project exceptions.
26
27 DRB discussed the project recommendations made at the preliminary meeting:
28
29 Recommendation # 1
30 Provide for qood pedestrian connection to west parkinq lot
31
32 Chair Liden:
33 ■ Site plans indicate the appropriate pedestrian connection has been made.
34
35 Dan Thomas, Applicant:
36 ■ Noted a change has recently been made to the plans as it relates to the Perkins Street
37 frontage.
38
39 Planning Director Stump:
40 ■ Public Works became concerned about the Perkins Street frontage on this property
41 because there are plans to widen Perkins Street and we do not want to require the
42 applicant make improvements only to have them removed. The intent is too effectively
43 coordinate the timing for both projects. It may be not all the frontage improvements are
44 required right away such that the curb cut issue can be adequately addressed/worked
45 out. It is likely the Perkins Street improvement project will follow completion of the
46 Chipotle project. The plan is to widen Perkins Street 10 feet on the north side of the
47 street.
48
49 There was discussion concerning the two existing `cutouts' roughly in the same location and
50 possibly eliminating them and replace with a new one.
51
52 Chair Liden:
53 ■ The plan update would affect the proposed project because the Perkins Street frontage
54 area is where the landscaping/street trees would be located. If the sidewalk is being
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 2
1 pushed back to accompany the street being widened, the shade trees located to the
2 south would be lost.
3 ■ With no shade trees planned for the frontage area, shade for the project would be the
4 awnings over the outdoor tables.
5 ■ Asked if it was known Perkins Street is to be widened why not underground the utilities at
6 the same time?
7
8 Member Morrow:
9 ■ His understanding no trees are to be planted in that part of the street frontage area that is
10 in the right-of-way because of the City anticipated improvements planned for Perkins
11 Street.
12
13 Dan Thomas:
14 ■ Has concern the street will come too close to the building.
15
16 Planning Director Stump:
17 ■ The awning (metal canopy) has been extended/projected outward some from the building
18 for shade purposes.
19 ■ Is not concerned the street may come too close to the building, but rather the traffic
20 signal and accompanying traffic signal activator that is a separate pole being pushed up
21 into the corner entrance to the restaurant. These two items would have to be placed
22 somewhere back from the entrance. This would essentially be a design issue and Public
23 Works is aware of this.
24 ■ Public Works is of the opinion the building will not likely have to be pushed back from the
25 street and there would be a sidewalk between the street and patio area. The intent of the
26 DZC is not for patio areas to be setback for projects, but rather as close to the sidewalk
27 as possible.
28 ■ The intent is to effectively coordinate the undergrounding of Perkins Street with the
29 widening of the street.
30
31 DRB consensus:
32 ■ Fine with recommendation #1.
33
34 Recommendation #2
35 East/west sidewalk be separate from the drivewavs such that the main entrv is on the corner and
36 continue the west sidewalk to the public sidewalk
37
38 Member Nicholson:
39 ■ With the improvements to Perkins Street and corresponding new streetscape will the
40 sidewalk on Perkins Street leading to the pedestrian entry be kept?
41
42 Planning Director Stump:
43 • Confirmed the pedestrian entry will be maintained separately from the driveways, as
44 discussed by the DRB at the preliminary project meeting.
45
46 DRB consensus:
47 ■ Fine with recommendation #2.
48
49 Recommendation #3
50 Encouraqe creative solution to findinq appropriate trees for shadinq purposes
51
52 Dan Thomas:
53 ■ Will plant any tree species the DRB recommends.
54 ■ Noted the existing Redwood trees located to the west of the property line will provide
55 shade particularly in the afternoon.
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 3
1 Member Nicholson:
2 ■ Asked about how extensive the landscape plan should be and how much does the DRB
3 need to address this project component?
4
5 Planning Director Stump:
6 ■ The trees proposed are from the City's Master Tree list.
7 • A final landscape plan is necessary for approval of a Site Development Permit. There is
8 a landscape concept in place that includes native vegetation and trees from the City's
9 Master Tree List so is of the opinion the DRB does not need to review this aspect of the
10 project extensively at this point.
11
12 DRB consensus:
13 ■ Fine with recommendation #3.
14
15 Recommendation #4
16 Use darker color palate on buildinq
17
18 Planning Director Stump:
19 ■ Previously the color scheme was one color(dark brown) but has been changed to include
20 more of a two-tone color scheme as shown on page 12 of the site plans.
21
22 DRB consensus:
23 ■ Encourage the use of a darker color scheme for the building.
24
25 Recommendation #5
26 Proiect architect explore pullinq part of the buildinq out which would be a nice amenitv for users
27 that would still allow for sufficient light into the buildinq. Structure does not have to be a solid roof
28 but rather `expressed' on the edges as a solid roof/architectural form where the element could be
29 shaded for solar orientation and still provide shelter for people using the outdoor dinina area
30
31 Member Nicholson:
32 ■ Noted the site plans indicate the canopy was only extended west and is fine with this
33 design concept. The extended canopy will provide more shade/shelter from weather
34 conditions in the outdoor dining area.
35
36 DRB consensus:
37 ■ Fine with the extended canopy design.
38
39 Recommendation #6
40 No turf, use aqqreqate of some kind or some other non-water use element
41
42 DRB sees no turf is proposed.
43
44 DRB consensus:
45 ■ Likes that no turf will be used.
46
47 Recommendation #7
48 Consider some permeable pavinq instead of concrete/asphalt
49
50 Member Nicholson:
51 ■ Page 1 of the site plans does indicate permeable paving is being proposed and
52 demonstrates the locations.
53
54 Planning Director Stump:
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 4
1 ■ Public Works does not support permeable paving on sidewalks, but rather concrete for
2 durability purposes.
3
4 Chair Liden:
5 ■ Permeable paving is shown in the parking lot.
6
7 Joe Thomas:
8 ■ The construction persons for the project are of the opinion permeable paving `is a bad
9 idea' and explained from a technical aspect why.
10
11 Dan Thomas:
12 ■ The project is required to comply with the City's adopted LID Technical Design Manual
13 standards concerning drainage and runoff for the site where LID engineering
14 consultants/experts are working on this aspect of the project.
15
16 DRB understands the project is subject to LID Manual review.
17
18 DRB consensus:
19 ■ Would like to see some permeable paving, if feasible but understands this depends on
20 the LID report.
21
22 Recommendation #8
23 Creative tree selection; Preference is to see more street trees planted in connection with Perkins
24 Street streetscape improvement proiect possibly in the planter area in front of Pear Tree shoppinq
25 center
26
27 DRB understands there may not be sufficient room for trees in the frontage area if Perkins Street
28 is widened. Would not want to recommend trees be planted only to be removed if the frontage
29 improvements.
30
31 Chair Liden:
32 ■ Cannot recommend trees be planted unless the building is moved back.
33
34 Member Nicholson:
35 ■ Would not support moving the building back because parking space is needed.
36
37 Planning Director Stump:
38 ■ Is of the opinion if there is any room left over for trees on the Perkins Street side once the
39 street is widen would want a tree planted there.
40
41 Member Nicholson:
42 ■ Asked if there was a way to condition the project such that a tree(s) be added if there is
43 sufficient space once the Perkins Street improvement project is complete.
44
45 Planning Director Stump:
46 ■ DRB could recommend a tree be planted to the Planning Commission should there be
47 room once the Perkins Street improvement project is complete.
48
49 DRB consensus:
50 ■ Encourage the planting of a tree(s) in the frontage area if there is sufficient space to do
51 so after Perkins Street is widened.
52
53 Recommendation #10
54 Ask applicant to consider installation of art displav area that could be indoors or outdoors
55 Member Nicholson:
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 5
1 ■ Sees no reference to this in the site plans.
2 ■ Would like to keep Recommendation#10 as a recommendation to Planning Commission.
3
4 Chair Liden:
5 ■ Does not consider Recommendation #10 to be particularly an issue.
6
7 DRB consensus:
8 ■ Would like Recommendation #10 to remain as a recommendation to Planning
9 Commission.
10
11 Landscapinq
12
13 Member Nicholson:
14 ■ In addition to the Red Maple and London Plane trees as shown on the site plan would
15 like to see one other significant tree planted closer to the building. Sees there is a good
16 planter area behind the proposed building.
17 ■ Related to the west side of the project and Pear Tree Center, has concern with regard to
18 the pedestrian thoroughfare and the no parking island where proposed that this will cut
19 into the Redwood tree roots and needs to be moved down and/or moved to the north
20 about 10 feet and demonstrated the location on page 1 of the site plans. Showed on the
21 site plan the location where it may be necessary to remove one parking space to sustain
22 the tree root system.
23
24 Dan Thomas:
25 • Finds it difficult to address landscaping specifics until the drainage plan/LID Manual
26 review and Perkins Street improvement project are addressed and/or more defined. Does
27 not know about the feasibility of implementing a bio-swale system until the issue of
28 drainage/runoff is evaluated/analyzed for the project.
29 ■ Acknowledged the importance of taking care of the trees for pedestrian safety purposes
30 and for the protection of the root system.
31
32 DRB recommended consideration be given to modifying the pedestrian connection to Pear Tree
33 Center and corresponding parking strip so the pedestrian thoroughfare would avoid tree roots and
34 damage thereof. In other words do whatever it takes to protect the tree roots which might mean
35 modifying the pedestrian thoroughfare and/or parking strip.
36
37 Dan Thomas:
38 ■ Asked about the City parking regulations for parking lots of having a planter area
39 requiring one tree for every four parking spaces.
40
41 Member Morrow:
42 ■ A deviation presently exists with regard to the aforementioned parking requirements.
43
44 Planning Director Stump:
45 ■ Does not see compliance with the parking lot requirements as a problem. Planning
46 Commission will be informed that `something creative is trying to be achieved' with the
47 proposed project and site constraints.
48
49 DRB discussion about the design of the outdoor dining area and possible use of pavers and/or
50 other materials such as granite that would be ADA assessable.
51
52 M/S Nicholson/Hawkes that the DRB recommends Planning Commission approval of a Site
53 Development Permit for Chipotle's Mexican Restaurant to include the recommendations made by
54 the DRB at the Preliminary meeting as discussed above with specific mention the project should
55 provide good pedestrian connection to the west parking lot such that the necessary parking lot
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 6
1 curb cuts and pedestrian thoroughfare are built to avoid damaging tree roots to the existing
2 Redwood trees, provide for permeable paving if feasible assuming the LID report does not
3 change this opportunity, provide for one more significant tree be planted in the northwest planter
4 area if there is no conflicts with drainage and LID requirements with the City and provide more
5 street trees in the frontage area south of the building after the Perkins Street
6 realignmenUimprovement project is completed, if possible. Motion carried 4-0.
7
8 7. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD:
9
10 8. MATTERS FROM STAFF:
11
12 9. SET NEXT MEETING
13 The next regular meeting will be Thursday, June 11, 2015.
14
15 10. ADJOURNMENT
16 The meeting adjourned at 3:56 p.m.
17
18
19 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
Design Review Board May 13, 2015
Page 7
1 ITEM NO. 6A
Community Development and Planning Department
�tty � uk�h 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
plannin�@cityofukiah.com
(707)463-6203
2
3 DATE: July 09, 2015
4
5 TO: Design Review Board
6
7 FROM: Michelle Johnson,Assistant Planner
8
9 SUBJECT: Request for Preliminary Review and Recommendation of a Major Use Permit & Site
10 Development Permit for a proposed 26 unit multi-unit residential development on
11 the NE corner of W. Gobbi St. and S. Oak St
12 680 S. State Street(APN 002-301-55).
13 File No.: Munis 111
14
15
16 REQUEST
17
18 Staff requests the Design Review Board conduct a Preliminary Review and make recommendations to
19 the Applicant on a Site Development Permit application and Use Permit for a proposed 26 unit multi-
20 family residential development on the North East corner of West Gobbi Street and South Oak Street.
21
22 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
23
24 A preliminary application has been received from Doug Guillion for project review on a Use Permit and
25 Site Development Permit for a a proposed 26 unit multi-unit residential development on the North
26 East corner of West Gobbi Street and South Oak Street located at 680 South State Street (APN 002-301-
27 55). The Project includes:
28 ■ two-story single family apartment complex
29 ■ 26 unit(8-two bed units and 18-one bed units)
30 ■ 38 vehicle parking spaces
31 ■ 4 bicycle parking spaces
32 ■ landscaping
33 The zoning ordinance requires a Site Development Permit for all construction over 150 square feet;
34 therefore,the Project requires approval of a Site Development Permit in addition the Use Permit required
35 for the New Development Multi-Family Unit Use of the site.
36
37 The Design Review Board is required by the City Code to review and make a recommendation on all Site
38 Development Permit applications.
39
1
1 SETTING
2
3
�
4 Existing EVlulti-Family
5
6 �
7 x � � 3
g Rite Aid
10 rm�
11 '
� �.
12 .,,� ._
Existing Multi-family
13 `J! � :
��— 'v�'I;i��
14
15
16
17
18 r
19 5ingle Family , .�
20 � . .—.
, .•5 �
21 Parking '�.� � `
22 e'= - ....
23
24 The project site is located on a 39,249 square foot parcel at the NE corner of W. Gobbi St. and S. Oak St.
25 The vacant .89 acre in-fill site is directly west of the Rite Aid site, and has some improvements in place
26 including sidewalks and street trees. The project would have two access points one from S. Oak Street
27 the other from W. Gobbi. The site was previously part of the old Rite Aid development. The property is
28 zoned C-1 and is immediately adjacent to the Rite Aid property on S. State St. The parcel is flat,
29 undeveloped and surrounded by the following uses:
30
31
32 Surrounding Uses:
33
34
35 c�� `� 1'Lb Zones
36 �cu
�oc
37 -� �uc
38 �c�
39 �cz
u�N
4O �PF
4Z U PD-RESiDENTinL
42 E -P��COMMERCIAL
I 1M
43 �R,
-R1H
44 � o S �Rz
45 N � �R,
�t _���N mmm 18-
2
1 ■ North: Single Family Residential and Multi-family Residential uses zoned
2 Medium Density Residential (R2) and High Density Residential (R3);
3 ■ East: Retail stores and Commercial Service uses zoned Community
4 Commercial (C1);
5 ■ South: Commercial Services Single Family Residential, and Multi-family
6 Residential service uses zoned Community Commercial (C1), and Heavy Density
7 Residential (R3); and
8 ■ West: Single Family Residential and Multi-family Residential uses zoned Single
9 Family Residential (R1), and Heavy Density Residential (R3).
10
11
12 STAFF ANALYSIS
13
14 General Plan: The General Plan land use designation of the parcel is Commercial. This land use
15 designation identifies lands where commerce and business may occur and allows multi-family projects
16 with a use permit. Commercial lands are more precisely defined through the uses allowed in the
17 individual zoning districts (see Zoning below).
18
19 AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONE MAP: The subject property is located in the "C" Airport Compatibility
20 Zone. This "C"Zone would not change as a result of the proposed project
21
22
23 �! � I��..�� � r.,���,,;,; ,
�.�� I r'
24
25 r -
26 � ;. t� Project Site
�
2� 5'
�
% �.
p �7 d5' �
20 {�f �i ��
29 }�
�
30 '��,
31 � �
32 �'
���, ..
33 "n _'�J�'�L v I �
34 � Legend
�����Afrpah Property
35 �-,:��r;�c i_��
�Parcels 4-04
36 �,I — — . �ZoneA
37 �'I �zo�eA�
�i Zone B1 �
38 � _ �
�I j? 1� Zone B7'
7'
39 I - �' �Zone B2
`^ i' ,r
4� I „��,�,�� 0 zone c
. T
I Zone�
41 y, �'�t'`n�w` Ukiah Ciry Limits
42 ��� ��
43
44
45
46
3
1 A summary of the requirements applicable to the Project are provided below.
2
3 ■ Uses: Single story residential and low intensity retail and offices are allowed.
4 ■ Maximum Density: 60 people per acre maximum for non-residential uses.
5 ■ Minimum Open Land: 30% "open land" is recommended and includes parking lots and
6 landscaped areas.
7 ■ Deed Notice: Recordation of an avigation easement or deed notice is required.
8
9 Zoning: The subject property is zoned Community Commercial (C1). The purpose of the Community
10 Commercial Zoning District is to provide a broad range of commercial land use opportunities along the
11 primary transportation corridors within the City. It is intended to promote, and provide flexibility for
12 commercial development, and to encourage the establishment of community-wide commercial serving
13 land uses. The Community Commercial(C-1)Zoning District is consistent with the Commercial(CJ General
14 Plan land use designation.
15
16 Vehicle Parking-Number of Spaces Required: The zoning ordinance requires one parking space for
17 one bedroom units; two (2) parking spaces for two (2) or more bedrooms per unit. The proposed
18 project requires 34 vehicle spaces;the applicant is proposing to provide 38 vehicle spaces.
19
20
21 Vehicle Parking
22 8 2 bedroom units 16
23 18 1 bedroom units 18
24 Required 34
25
26 Bike Parking:The zoning ordinance requires bike parking equal to 10% of the vehicle parking spaces
27 required. Since the number of required vehicle spaces is 36, the required number of bike parking
28 spaces is 3. The applicant has proposed to provide 4 bike parking spaces.
29
30 Landscaping: the C1 zoning district includes the following landscaping standards:
31
32 ■ Landscaping shall be proportional to the building elevations.
33
34 ■ Landscape plantings shall be those which grow well in Ukiah's climate without extensive
35 irrigation. Native species are strongly encouraged.
36
37 ■ All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and
38 mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short amount of time.
39
40 ■ Deciduous trees shall constitute the majority of the trees proposed along the south and
41 west building exposures; nondeciduous street species shall be restricted to areas that do not
42 inhibit solar access.
43
44 ■ Parking lots with twelve (12) or more parking stalls shall have a tree placed between every
45 four (4) parking stalls within a continuous linear planting strip, rather than individual
46 planting wells, unless clearly infeasible. Parking lot trees shall primarily be deciduous
4
1 species, and shall be designed to provide tree canopy coverage of fifty percent (SO%) over
2 all paved areas within ten (10) years of planting. Based upon the design of the parking lot, a
3 reduced number of trees may be approved through the discretionary review process.
4
5 ■ Parking lots shall have a perimeter planting strip with both trees and shrubs.
6
7 ■ Parking lots with twelve (12) or more parking stalls shall have defined pedestrian sidewalks
8 or marked pedestrian facilities within landscaped areas and/or separated from automobile
9 travel lanes. Based upon the design of the parking lot, and the use that it is serving, relief
10 from this requirement may be approved through the discretionary review process.
11
12 ■ Street trees may be placed on the property proposed for development instead of within the
13 public right of way if the location is approved by the city engineer, based upon safety and
14 maintenance factors.
15
16 ■ All new developments shall include a landscaping coverage of twenty percent (20%) of the
17 gross area of the parcel, unless because of the small size of a parcel, such coverage would be
18 unreasonable. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the landscaped area shall be dedicated
19 to live plantings.
20
21 ■ Landscaping plans shall include an automatic irrigation system and lighting plan.
22
23 ■ All required landscaping for commercial development projects shall be adequately
24 maintained in a viable condition.
25
26 Staff requests that the Design Review Board provide recommendations on: tree and plant species and
27 suggested locations on the site.
28
29 Site Development Permit: In order to approve a Site Development Permit, the following findings are
30 required to be made and supported by information included as part of the application and public record.
31 As part of its review of the proposed Project, staff requests the Design Review Board also consider the
32 required findings.
33
34 1. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City General Plan.
35
36 2. The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or
37 inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern.
38
39 3. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to
40 traffic on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or
41 surrounding uses.
42
43 4. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the
44 proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and
45 screening large expanses of paved areas.
46
5
1 5. The proposed development will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property, or on the
2 property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings in the
3 neighborhood, or impair the value thereof.
4
5 6. The improvement of any commercial or industrial structure will not have a substantial
6 detrimental impact on the character or value of an adjacent residential zoning district.
7
8 7. The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including
9 trees,shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site.
10
11 8. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the
12 structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box-like uninteresting external
13 appearance.
14
15 CONCLUSION
16
17 Staff requests the Design Review Board review the proposed project and make a recommendation to
18 the applicant for their review.
19
20 ATTACHMENTS
21
22 1. Project Description date stamped July 2, 2015
23 2. Project Plans date stamped July 2, 2015
24
6
Attochm�nt # '--
-_
r • � • a
architecture+eng�neermg
July 2, 2015
Re: Gobbi Street Complex
Gobbi and Oak Streets
APN: 002-301-55
Dear Commiitee Members,
It is with pleasure that I take this opportunity to provide you the following overview of the proposed
development at the aforementioned address. The project is fairly straight forward, with 3 building
designs that reside within the development. When applicable, sections of the City of Ukiah's Article 7
REGULATIONS IN COMMUNITY (C-1) DISTRICTS, Chapter 2, Article 17 and the Adopted Low
Impact Development (L.I.D.) standards have been specifically addressed within designs and
considerations thereof.
Brief History
The site is on the vacant lot immediately to the west of the Rite Aid. It is 38,869 square feet and
Zoned C-1. The property was identified to the developer as a location prime for this type of project.
Building Program
The intent of this project is to help fulfill a clear and distinct need for housing in the region. The goal
is to provide a mix of entry level single family apartments. During preliminary studies pertaining fo the
local ordinances, it appears as if the maximum number of units that can be sited on the property is
26. This is based upon Article 7, section 9084 item B.
Site Design
Given the goal to maximize the number of units in a practical and cost effective manner, we have
chosen to propose 2 story conventionally framed wood structures. There were several guiding design
principals with regards to location, building orientation and arrangement. Article 7, section 9087
part B requires that the design shall preserve the privacy of adjoining property owners. On this site,
the concern does not seem to be with the Commercial Rite Aid property, rather the neighboring
residences on the north side would be more severely impacted with 2 story buildings. It is for this
ll5 Meyers Street Suite 110
t 530.3420302 Chico, Cal fomia 95928 f 530342.1882
www.rgachito.com
�.
�1
�
r • • a
reason that we kept the buildings to the south. In order to establish onsite parking in accordance
Article 17, we chose to provide an onsite parking aisle in compliance with Article 17 9197. This
arrangement of parking dictated the separation of the two rows of residences, separated by the drive
aisle and parking. This allowed for the opportunity to distribute landscape more evenly across the
site in line with the desired Low Impact Development standards. It is suggested in these standards to
"treat storm water as close to the source as possible."
From a building orientation stand point it was more desirable to front as many of the residences on to
Oak Street as possible. In preliminary discussions with city staff, there is offsite parking available at
this porfion of the street and the design allows to utilize this readily available parking.
Proposed Architectural Elements
The intent of this project is to be owner held and managed. Exterior finishes have been selected for
energy efficiency, durability and project compatibility. The use of earth toned plaster over insulated
panels as the primary exterior finish system provides a system compatible with the surrounding area.
As an architectural accent, it is proposed that brick be utilized as features in locations as indicated on
the drawings. The remaining colors were chosen to be complimentary to the plaster, brick and roof
systems. The stair accesses to the upstairs has been concealed as much as possible, utilizing shared
stairs between tandem units. The back sides of the units have articulation and patios/ balconies to
enrich the architecture on all facades and specific the highly visible east side adjacent to the Rite Aid
property.
The trash enclosure is proposed to be matching plaster over a containment wall with doors that
conceals the visibility of the contents with.
Description of Landscape Design
The primary objective of the landscape design for this project is to provide an aesthetically pleasing
landscape that will compliment the architecture of the buildings while at the same time being
conservative with water use (and demonstrating compliance with AB 1881). Irrigation will be
automatically controlled low volume dripper line with real-time Evapotranspiration Adjustment and
Rain/ Freeze switches. The plant palette will be comprised of low water use plant material- where
practical, California natives suited for the Ukiah area will be specified. The bio swales that are
proposed are in keeping with the idea of reducing storm water run-off, pollution prevention,
improving water quality, and enhancing the vitality of local creeks and waterways.
5' erel ,
�
R�
Ma Gallaway,A .; L AP
President, C.E.
Russell, Gallaway Associates
2
-- —— - - -- w.,,�„�y,_ae,��.... u°u°°'�► "9'°"°"y^'A"Y""la �azw► ,�yw���x,wa•.e, - — --
Z88['Zt£"°1 ZO£0'ZtE(OES) ' °�.�'^ °°�' ���a
azbsne����t,�e,..,��y, .��ua���neJ ,.......o...n... .� �
u i i�„��,•�a�„S.,a��.s�i �,..
X3ldW0�1990'J �m �.,, �
� •oc�� 'S3�YI�0:� ,(e.uel�ei�'��assml .. � ��
� �,�..�...��. •� „a
..,,7 ,,.,�a„�..,� ..,..
� a � . � g .
� ` �� p � y�3yys�aeo� „ � o.
� �� � � • . .. • � �p•.�._-= . �
� �
G � �a 0 y33uis�eso� _�`�i -_ �.:.�--'�-. �-_-�.-v"-� - � �� . uJ
.�• '' �
E ����� d . _p�_- .— .. ----_- - --- ~ _, ;f, - �
.0 � 6���� __ -- � _ __ _� + ^t' " `� �� F
° W -� �'� I :. W
� p � - ; _ � I�o: , �
� p-: '� i i ;•: , s
!p� N
° e S � I I� � -•_ . .:-I� I.• t Q
� , �1�: � - - �
���y sx � i i!.': . y ��.:. ',.
E � � i
# y f �••
Yc B � �� � � •� ' i � rN �� � i
s g g� � � ' '' , - •� i i.'Q
6 � I I . . ... -i I �� , . I 1 � •
I • I 1 � I
1 J n'1• �
r�
1 ". ' ' . �
I I �'� _— __ —
o , , , _ . ��; ,'
� � W I ' �1: � � .
��s � 1 � ' 1 � '� I �
� � ��� � I ' - - - ,�� N ,. ..
._:: a� �� � � __ � ...
�, i � . � � �,� �.o:
I � I 4.
��� �� � i � � � � 1 �
� I I . � ' �?i � 'i� � I I, W
�� I i • .
� J i I !. .. � . . � N�. • ..
. •• � • L'1 �
i
W i � �� �
..-.......„.„..... � � � I
�� g I � �� � �' . . � I� •' � Y
� 4�� Z � � • , �• ' a - .-.. �.� 'L,�• � � o
� �� � � �: $
. , ., �
� tl I �' ' � • 3 '�
� a i '� � •' "
� � „ �
� � � - — . a ="_ � �.
a � � . ... • . •i ' � �
� , 1 .1•°.
� I -, �• ; ,' .
_ � � . - ��
, . . . �
� ; I � , � � - �_ I:��.�r
;.� ,
' ' � i - i i . I i
� ' ' _ � i i ' ' { I � �• •
i �
b � I _ _ � � � �ti � �r�
W � - � � i I�LJ
I � i�t ' � � � I '
�� '� � I � � � • i (.
.�3� ' }i'. ' ;�.�� • � '
�. � i
AM' i � F�' "I I
��� I � • ; � , , � �' i
� " -- � , .. . . 1 .- i ��: � ;
I ��.� - --- �
� -- �.;���
�� � . • ' ' .i. '
� � � � � • � - ' � - �� �
� I ' ''
I ' '
5 �� � ' ;'� �
� ' ' + �� • �
M I .. . � e
1 I U� c �
� r .� , �� ° � � �
z1;. � �, = ♦ I �
�
}. r a� I . . � ,
F- � � � I 1
_.7 � I: ` '. ,
, � ��. . � I
� . . _��t__ .
I ---- --- --- ---- ---- --- �
, i- i i
I ' _ _ �� �
� '
� �- -'-- -'��'-' _ I
-- ---- - �i 41 . E
t__�--- ��_Y =-----=+- . o
� __--- �
� I_ — �--�' �vuN3ms3a �
� _ �--�-- ��auva �
OOOOM{ �+��um1N.�v9.,u�d 10L�S1 �a9wnv�»lo�d uji _-
�eisaPVli9/w���1°O9a�o��"�.�., wo�ueisaPMiB�ww . m�s 4�8aQ
OZ6l'66B(OE5)�%b'�/OEl 1-66810f51 3NOHd �����p �
8Z656 VItJUOlI7VJ�O�IH�"OLL 311f15'AVMWONB CC9 '� � �
JNI�17311HJNV 3db'750Nb1 Hlbl�NVINB '9N1�NOI'1'Ifl' - '��
� o r s¢am unw�u �y 1
warnr�rmu�m� melw lus
�ti
H1aoN g b��
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a �� �G f
� � � � r N � _ � � � � � S-
� W °
� ag a� a� � a a a a "a 'a a a 'a a�
� �� �� �� � � �d � � � � � � o0
�� �� ��
a a m ., o R R � = � = � n � , w� � p�
?z � FW,�s
� � � � � � � � N � � � � � � ���woo �3<0
- - - - WW�m°� v�3�
� v� vi �n � N QO���� _�`�'�
a � � � a � � � � � � O ❑ o 0 3'-�����?17�g�
3 � � 3 � � � Ow�Z2°Js�,,,W�
� ': � ���g���3����
� Q >>Z��o�oF���
� �p Z �W°u F v 5 O �
� i i � � �� � Z �30����'-��o<
Z =_ �� � Z � �� �W a� o� 1 O ,�7i,,,=OS��f3z�°�`
° "" p� � ° 3 � �O � a" _o h�' F- o�o;a���z o L S��
3 S� S �W � O w �� � o� >W 5 �_ � Q oz"'���3i,��,�u�va
�b �W o� P� � F � $ >= W� %s � wO-�ZZLLp �Z<Z
N� ��., ?� �� �� m i� �� � �� =s N� �i � C� "'�Z�O Q O Z�O._,?e°�
J s� W� o J W m �= z �W p =s �s � � �� k �5��0320
(�� �� �a �� �y� � �'� �� �k �o K� � o„ i� ��` � O����'„���G�z
z - � O dwszp
�� s� �c �� �� �.,a �� 0� 'C�o �> S� �� ��° �� �J� CO o�O'"m�LL���.g u LL
m s� m =° � �s �� �$ °: aa u� o s op � ,��°� S w=�W
�o., g�� o,'�; � �0��3���m~°a
�i� ��r O � � � � � � � � �,'I; Q ���3�>aw03�<3
WEST GOBBI STREET _ _�--;�' '"
_ � _�, �'t--1
- � \ I Q T � � 1
� ___� `I
i �
- ��� �
_� ~ d.
i
�
.I '' �i
o�
�
. � �s . __i
o °j
'� �
,. .
G il: ��
w
� � w F¢-
�� j � �� d' '^ '^ 'tl w x �!
\ � I Y °r5 °J� � �y � K X b� i. a
z 4 W
I� _ O � S � 1
F �
� i I O` � �
j � '�� 0 � � a - P $ 'x
� u] °
Y � Q M1
c a � �
� r
a' �` j ❑I i � � �� O � � �
� °
� �' x � � �
a �<
� ° Z Z g � � � 03 �
�, p � � � o o � � � � � �
°� � � p � ° � � g�g� U o � � � m �
� r' �..[� I U O � g ,vi, �e k � J Z � � � 3 � �
`° � + --,� i � � o � � ? p ° ���� U o � g � W � �
� � ,, Y a � � � [O p 0 � 7 � � x � °
* � a, v 7 � � � O � Q � `o �
__ ___ a o s s _ N � O = o �
�
_ _ ....- - • '. �,��..,. - -- ' a0000-►► »Y`.'�o�vv��`f""� �n�s� ,�yw�u�x.p�a.d,
w,,,.,,.y.,_o
,, �gg�-�fiE..� �oE�-ZtE�o£s, .�,��e �. �eaa
eznsb r,,,,�;.ie����,y, '�uluo�vneJ ""' ...�.� .�. �
� oi i�„�� �aa.,s ,.;�i.si i �
xa�awoa�aeo� '°"°""
•�u� �;a�eno�1 .ie.He��m�����;sn�� °�'° °•••u•,, s�ou.�ro �
.a..mumwwn.mn 9n �"' vanln
....p,�.N W�a{,w'+�
Z H fA
a � o 0
d
� W a a
� W W
J J
� � � � d 00 �
����� �: � �: O O
� $ $���8� c o� 'i i' W � ' �•� W
� � ��� �� � � "� �• �
� � � � ������ `� � � o � � ��;, � o
� y � � q ; � �,
� $ � g � � ��@ �� C :i � a��'�.,, ~
� � � � � ����� � ,�, I, m I� 1 y
� � � � � � � � � a g ������ � i
O 8 B O B 8 � B B � 0 W W � - ' � W '
li I p �
y � -
Z
O
N
� �
W
W g �
�
O
� �
� W
� �
g °
- p.
� \
I
O
�
O
� I.
0
- W
� m
.
E � O p �
E
I
I
I ��'' I
C ;I �
�— ;� � ' ' B� � �
� �.� �
� - ; ,
I I i � °4' ; :
� ; �
� � �� s -
4 �:
6
r
� `
�v ;
W �
F � � � b/�'
p �n� !
� i �
� I I e —
I 1 j
� � p � I I ' �
� � � - i ' -
_ 3 � � � � 3
g q pu 4
A yT � � C T
� p �
- - - ' ���„�,�y.,_oa,�.�. 00000-r► ,�,��,��vn�„f„"Ia ►oz�s� ,�yw���,a.�, — -- -
,, z��-�t�.., �o�o-ZtE,��, ���.�. .�.. saa
8Z6S6 c�uin���v��oa�y� rt� axvn�ae MOpYtl
Ol l.,�mc'7.,.,��5 sn.:aW SI I �7Y�Y0�11�1LJ' � �
� X37d WOO 1990'a
�i�� �sa�eno=1�.�e.ur��e`�'��d5511\� '�`° ""'"•° wou�uv �
� .�,��...u..� a �
••••Jv.:��Fr:�:y,�.In.� Yn� YOM3!!3
= Z
a � O O
O.
� W a a
Y W W
� W W
����� O O
� � �a���� � �
6 C
� � � � ����€� o 0
�g � � � � �g �g � ������ � �
� �
� � . t � � � � � g g � 3���� W °�I W
r.
$ � ������ � m d� m
oeooeooee0o .mW � _ � �3
� °�' O � � F
� � � au '
~ - �0
J
o �� � �
0
g �
� �
g - -- •� _• �❑
� �— ----
W C �
J '
~ L
~ � ��
W
� C
Q � �❑ -
�
r.. �
� a-
�
00
- ao
�
�
;
� a ', � c �-� _ o❑
� � � � i
� � � ' � � �" �
� � � $�" �
� 3
¢ p 4
Y h
M T wT
� � P
1
�
.�� o
� �- � ��
•••J � � �
'�ti '\-1
���'_ �; ...',�_�w� Q J � O
��5.�!`�•� 1,�.�:�.tj1; � N �L \ �
r/� / O
I..V .J
Y W LU Q �
�• I, - -.. W (> ��
',f 1' r..'� J Z
:�x ��;� Q p � �
o Q � �M
.,, - � �X W
� ,� �} W O
`��; �-, - W
�� �_� N
> �
�
a
i_� -x -.��_�. -; a
�` f
��+' _ ;4r fn
C
�
J
�
�-;r—�_-: �.��i.—::i,.; N U
!-irl �f'•t•�•s'_.r�IS�.!�
� � µ�
. ��
r..� l,:i.
f.i �•, ��
�t:_
'� . '
Y `�N R�}
.-.... r�5 �y��'�r -
,}'�' .' ''_r �t1:
��_�Y ';�.�;',�'' ;f
'+," i_ +
�f'
� r_���' c j•�
}�� .;�
r��
A I �ri
�"
c+
'r!s' "�::Z�'•4
�t�+ �C�
J'� f"3
C� a�
� Yni'�� —
�..r�s.,- �0 •
_-4 1
�J �
��
� L
� __ -- --------- _ _ -- - _ - - -- -- _ _-,�- -- j
; ,_;�:-:;. x: a
��fi_.:; � - _ �i m ,
'��#�� :;:- � � �, i
- � -- - - - - - - p
. I>. - 0 O �
r- ' W } I
�
NQ
�
;: . ; m Z
� ' m �
I ± � J
f � �.
I a
` V t1.,
� - -- - __ . ._
�
� ■
� v :
�:
� _ �
k Y..- _� -. M#;= �� � - ■ C
:;�-� �--
t .��r�,, .
I '�� ..rE� r
, . . ' Sr �
' rYy �
: ..�:� , J
� '. y..
-�' �f ��� ,i;-� r��'r.� ,
Y ;:i� �
� � ��. �; � � �n � � _
��
�
i '. _. � � Q i
� _
4 �
I
I
i "
1
E �
l
� �
}� c
� V y �
I c: �
• O't '
C '
�
I � d
�
�
i u
y�
_ .r
I �
i '�L... o i
i-! 3 Q Q '
�� . . - •-- --- _ . .. .... �.. ._ .. .. - - -- --�-
`-��. .
�;�: . . �
'��V __�___.-.. _. _ , - - � -- - - i