Design Review Decision 11-1078.pdfEDM0�o CITY OF EDMONDS
N
12151h Avenue North ® Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 ® Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
- STAFF DECISION -
BLD -2011-1078 Project Proposal
O'Reilly Auto Parts has submitted an application for a wall sign and a pole sign at their 23005 Highway 99 location.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Corridor Development with overlays including Highway 99 Corridor.
The site is zoned CG — General Commercial.
Property Owner Applicant
O'Reilly Auto Parts
233 S Patterson
Springfield, MO 65802
Design Review Process
BB&T Sign Services
16212 Bothell -Everett Highway, Suite F239
Mill Creek, WA 98012
Design review for signs is considered a Type I decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.01.003. The design
standards in the sign code (Chapter 20.60 ECDC) and those general urban design standards in the Comprehensive
Plan apply.
Analysis
1. Design Standards. The proposed signage satisfies the intent of the following goals and policies from the
Comprehensive Plan.and the design standards in ECDC 20.60:
a. Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the Highway 99 Corridor are located on pages 63 — 67 and are
intended to encourage the development of high quality, well-designed projects that reflect the values of
the citizens of Edmonds. The associated general urban design objectives are located on pages 92 — 98.
b. "Provide adequate lighting for signage panels." (page 95)
c. "Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered." (page 96)
d. "Minimize distraction from the overuse of advertisement elements." (page 96)
e. "Provide clear signage for each distinct property." (page 96)
f. "Minimize potential for view blockage." (page 96)
g. "Signs should be related to the circulation element serving the establishment." (page 96)
h. 'landscaping should be used in conjunction with pole signs for safety as well as appearance." Page 96).
2. Sign type. Both wall and pole (freestanding) signs are permitted types in the SR -99 (Highway 99) area
according to ECDC 20.60.0201. Internal illumination is permitted as well but according to ECDC 20.60.020.H,
no commercial sign shall be illuminated after 11:00 p.m. unless the commercial enterprise is open for business
and then may remain on only as long as the enterprise is open. Both signs are internally illuminated - a
automatic timer has been included in the design and a note on illumination will be added as a condition of the
decision.
3. Number of signs. According to ECDC 20.60.025.A.4, a maximum of three commercial signs may be installed at
the subject location, excluding window signs. Two signs are proposed signs leaving one additional sign
available for the tenant.
Page 1 of 2
File No. BLD -2011-1078
O'Reilly Auto Parts signs
Sign size. According to ECDC 20.60.025.A.2, the maximum total permanent sign area for uses in the CG zone is
one square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of building frontage along a public street up to 200 square
feet. The O'Reilly building is 102' by 76' along the western Highway 99 frontage and the northern 230`h Street
SW frontage, respectively. As a result, 178 square feet of signage is available for the site.
According to ECDC 20.60.030.A, the maximum area for an individual wall sign in the CG zone is 1 square foot
per lineal foot of attached wall. The wall sign proposed for the western elevation is 70.51 square feet. The
sign satisfies the wall sign area requirement of the code.
According to ECDC 20.60.045.C, the maximum area for an individual freestanding (pole) sign in the CG zone is
56 square feet or one-half square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of street frontage, whichever is greater,
up to a maximum of 160 square feet. The subject site has more than 300 lineal feet of street frontage on
Highway 99 and 230`h Street, so the default maximum of 160 square feet will be applied. As proposed, the
pole sign is approximately 78.125 square feet, thus satisfying the freestanding sign area requirement of the
code.
The two proposed signs total 148.635 square feet which is less than the 178 square feet allowed for the site
according to the code. The site has 29.365 square feet of signage remaining for future use.
5. Sign height and location. According to ECDC 20.60.030.B, the maximum height for a wall sign in the CG zone is
14 feet or the height of the face of the building on which the sign is located. The top of the proposed wall sign
will be located below the height of the face of the building where it is located. As proposed, the proposed wall
sign satisfies the height requirement.
According to ECDC 20.60.045.D, the maximum height for a freestanding in the CG zone is 25 feet. The
proposed pole sign will be 25 feet tall. As proposed, no portion of the pole or sign cabinet will encroach the
required 4' street setback along Highway 99.
6. Colors. The signage will use O'Reilly corporate colors including green, brown, black and white.
7. Landscaping. According to ECDC 20.60.045.G, freestanding signs such as pole signs shall have a landscaped
area twice the size of the sign area at the base of the sign and that area shall be protected from vehicles by
curbing. The proposed 78.125 square foot pole sign satisfies this code requirement since it will be sited in the
extensive new landscaping area adjacent to Highway 99 which is surrounded by curbing.
Decision
Based on the facts and conclusions of this report, staff finds that the design review for this project (File No. BLD -
2011 -1078) is APPROVED, with the following condition:
1. The timer controlling sign illumination shall be set to turn the signs off at 11:00 p.m. or whenever the
business closes for the day.
I have reviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development
Mike Clugston Planning Division
Date
Appeals: Design review decisions by staff 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