Design Review Decision 13-0465.pdf4 OF EDM
CITY OF EDMONDS
N 12151h Avenue North e Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 a Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
enc, (89� DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
- STAFF DECISION -
BLD20130465 Project Proposal
Farmers Insurance Group has submitted an application for an illuminated wall sign to be mounted on
the face of the canopy at their location at 23020 Edmonds Way, Suite 112 (Compass Building). The site
is zoned Commercial Business — Edmonds Way (BC -EW).
Property Owner/Applicant
North Point Compass Property LLC
23020 Edmonds Way
Edmonds, WA 98020
Design Review Process
Cnntrnrtnr
John Niemi
Fastsigns/Lynnwood
2921 Alderwood Mall Blvd. #104
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Design review for signs is considered a Type I decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.01.003.
The application must satisfy the general criteria found in the sign code (Chapter 20.60 ECDC) and the
2012 Comprehensive Plan.
Analysis
1. Design Standards. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Edmonds Way Corridor. The
proposed sign satisfies the intent of the following goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan:
a. General Urban Design Objectives are found on pages 92 —100 and are intended to encourage
high quality, well designed projects to be developed in the Edmonds Way Corridor area that
reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds.
b. "Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered." (page 96)
c. "Minimize distraction from the overuse of advertisement elements." (page 96)
d. "Provide clear signage for each district property." (page 96)
e. "Use graphics/symbols to reduce the need to have large letters." (page 96)
2. Sign type. The channel letter sign proposed to be mounted on the outer edge of the canopy is most
similar to a "wall sign" since it is parallel to, and not projecting more than 12 inches from a wall,
although it would not actually be attached or affixed to a building wall itself but rather the canopy.
Wall signs and internal illumination are permitted in the Westgate/SR-104 district according to ECDC
20.60.0201.
3. Number of signs. According to ECDC 20.60.025.A.4, a maximum of three commercial signs may be
installed at the tenant location, not including window signs. The one proposed sign will be the only
signage for the tenant at this time.
Page 1 of 2
File No. BLD20130465
Farmers Insurance sign
4. Sign size. According to ECDC 20.60.025.A.1, the maximum total permanent sign area for uses in the
BC -EW zone is one square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of wall containing the main public
entrance to the primary building. The subject storefront is 30 feet wide and therefore the tenant
has 30 square feet of signage available.
According to ECDC 20.60.030.A, the maximum area for a wall sign in the BC -EW zone is 1 square foot
per lineal foot of attached wall. The wall sign is proposed to be 22.33 square feet. At that size, the
sign satisfies the maximum area and specific wall sign area requirements of the code.
Sign height and location. According to ECDC 20.60.030.6, the maximum height for a wall sign in the
BC -EW zone is 14 feet or the height of the face of the building on which the sign is located,
consistent with ECDC 20.60.020.A. The top of the sign is proposed to be 12.8 feet which satisfies the
code requirement for height.
6. Colors. The proposed sign will use colors typical of 'Farmers Insurance' including red, white and blue
with red individual letters. The channel letter raceway will match the color of the existing canopy.
Decision
Based on the facts and analysis in this report, staff finds that the design review for this project (File No.
BLD20130465) is APPROVED with the following condition:
1) 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.
I have reviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development Code.
Mike Clugston, Planning Division
to
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