20100330100913584.pdfpp EDM
�y D 0 CITY OF EDMONDS
r 121 5`h Avenue North • Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
�og90 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
- STAFF DECISION -
BLD20100221 Project Proposal:
Berry Neon signs has submitted a sign application for Edmonds Orthodontics which includes a
wall mounted externally illuminated channel letter sign.
Property Owner
Cyber Properties LLC
2109764 th Ave W, Suite 200
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
Design Review Process:
Applicant
Berry Neon Sign Systems
7400 Hardeson Road
Everett, WA 98203
The proposed project requires a Design Review. Projects that remain under the SEPA threshold
are reviewed by staff with the building permit and the design review is considered an
administrative Staff Decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.60 (Sign Code) and is a
Type I decision pursuant ECDC 20.01.003.A.
Analysis:
1. Location. The project site is located at 21920 76th Avenue West on the northwest corner of
76th Avenue West and 2201h Street SW. The site is zoned RM -2.4 — Multifamily Residential.
The comprehensive plan designation for the site is Mixed Use Commercial and it is located
within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center overlay.
2. Sign type. The proposed sign is a wall mounted externally illuminated channel letter sign. .
This sign type is permitted within the RM -2.4 zone.
Size. Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.025 commercial uses in the residential zones are subject to
the maximum area and height limitations established for signs in the BN zone. Sites within
the BN zone are permitted 1 square foot of sign area per lineal foot of wall containing the
main public entrance. The building where Edmonds Orthodontics is to be located has
approximately 96 feet of lineal wall where the main public entrance is located. Therefore, 96
feet of signage is allowed for the entire site, to be divided between all tenants in this building.
Edmonds Orthodontics is the first tenant to apply for a sign permit.
Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.A, the maximum area of wall signs within the BN zone is 1
square foot per lineal foot of attached wall. The wall where the Edmonds Orthodontics sign
is located is approximately 47 feet long. The sign area of the proposed sign is 16 feet. This
is within the limits allowed for the site and the wall which the sign is attached.
The allowable sign area left for the site is 80 square feet.
4. Color. The letters of the sign are white, while the wall attachment and external light are
painted to match the color of the building. Sign color is acceptable for the site.
Page 1 of 2
5. Height. Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.B, the maximum height of wail signs is 14 feet or the
height of the face of the building on which the sign is located. The application proposes to
place the sign on the face of the building at a height of approximately 22 feet which is
consistent with ECDC 20.60.030.B.
6. Number. For commercial uses within a residential zone, pursuant ECDC 20.60.025 signs are
subject to the maximum area and height limitations established for signs in the BN zone.
While number of signs is not mentioned, it is appropriate to use the number of signs in the
BN zone as well. The maximum number of signs within the BN zone is three per site or one
per physically enclosed business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants,
whichever is greater. Edmonds Orthodontics is only requesting one sign, which is consistent
with the number of signs allowed in the BN zone.
Decision:
Based on the facts and conclusions of this report, staff finds that the design review for this
project (File No. BLD20100221) is APPROVED.
I have reviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development
Kernen Lien, Planning" Division Date
Appeals: Design review decisions by staff under the provisions of ECDC 20.12.030 are only
appealable to the extent that the applicable building permit or development approval is an
appealable decision under the provisions of the ECDC. Design review by staff is not in itself an
appealable decision.
Page 2 of 2