Loading...
PLN-2010-0048 America's Diner Staff report and attachments.pdfARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD STAFF REPORT August 18, 2010 Meeting PLANNING DIVISION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO: The Architectural Design Board FROM: Mike Clugston, AICP Planner DATE: August 11, 2010 PLN-2010-0048 Exterior Painting at America's Diner (formerly Denny's Restaurant). A. Property Owner Applicant Contact Diamond Properties Osama Aziz Zimmardi and Sons 840 Hinckley Rd. Suite 220 Edmonds Denny's / 11132 Banner Rd. SE Burlingame, CA 94010 America's Diner Olalla, WA 98359 4034 31" Ave. W Seattle, WA 98199 B. Site Location 8431 244`" Street SW (zoned CG — General Commercial) C. Introduction This is a post -event permit (Attachment 1). The exterior and roof of the former Denny's on Highway 99 were repainted during the week of June 28, 2010, with the new colors of America's Diner (Attachment 2). While permits like this are usually reviewed administratively, staff was not comfortable with the color combinations used and felt that the Design Board would provide additional perspective on the review. A separate sign permit was approved for the site by staff earlier this year (BLD-2010-0321). Attachment 3 shows what the building currently looks like. Attachment 4 includes the colors chosen for the repainting and the locations of the colors on the facades and roof (the appearance of the America's Diner sign is also shown). Attachment 5 is a photograph of what the Denny's roof looked like in 1999, which was the last time the site underwent design review. Note that the roof was then a light green metal standing seam roof whereas the one that was recently painted over is asphalt shingle of a similar green color. Staff feels that the current look of the building (Attachment 3), particularly with the painted red roof and matching trim and trim cap, is excessively bright. In response, staff has rendered some alternative looks that may be better suited for the site while still using the colors preferred by America's Diner (Attachments 6a — e). The renderings could be used as a starting point for discussion about the appearance of the roof, the trim and trim cap, and the facades. Page I of 3 America's Diner PLN-2010-0048 D. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance 1. ECDC 16.60.030 — Design Standards for the CG zone (D)(1). "Buildings shall convey a visually distinct "base " and "top. " A "base " and "top " can be emphasized in different ways, such as masonry pattern, more architectural detail, step -backs and overhangs, lighting, recesses, visible `plinth" above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination thereof. They can also be emphasized by using architectural elements not listed above, as approved, that meet the intent." As it is currently painted, there is a lack of differentiation between the roof and the trim. A different color roof or different color trim and trim cap would provide better differentiation. The renderings in Attachment 6 are some options but it may be possible that a red roof is acceptable if the trim were a different color. 2. ECDC 20.12.070 — Design guidelines, criteria and checklist a. Since the project is located within the Highway 99 Corridor and zoned CG, "District - based Design Review" is required. b. According to ECDC 20.12.070.B.2, staff (or the ADB in this case) must find that the proposal is consistent with the zoning code (criteria in Chapter 16.60) and the policies applicable to the District found in the Comprehensive Plan. c. The Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 7) identifies a number of criteria that are to be ranked based on a given project. For this particular project, element (C)(4) would be the most important: "Architectural Elements and Materials — Use durable, attractive and ivell-detailed finish materials." The current color scheme at America's Diner is not attractive, nor well -detailed, and it is questionable whether painting an existing asphalt shingle roof would be durable or not. As the roof weathers, granules from the shingles will come off taking the applied color with it leaving the roof blotchy and faded. E. Comprehensive Plan Compliance 1. Location: Highway 99 Corridor. Goals and policies for the Highway 99 Corridor are located on pages 61 — 65 and are intended to encourage the development of high quality, well -designed projects that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. 2. Goals and Policies for the Highway 99 Corridor. The proposal does not satisfy the intent of the following goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan but alternative color combinations for the roof and trim like those presented in Attachment 6 could: a. "New development should be high -quality and varied — not generic — and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons." (page 64) b. "New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor." (page 64) c. "Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian friendly...." (page 64) d. "Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor." (page 64) F. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Design Board deny the proposed color arrangement used to repaint the America's Diner from the former Denny's. It is hoped that the Design Board can work with the applicant to achieve a more desirable final appearance for the America's Diner that satisfies the intent of the code and Comprehensive Plan. Page 2 of 3 America's Diner PLN-2010-0048 G. Attachments 1. Land use application 2. Photos taken during repainting 3. Photo showing current appearance of building 4. Applicant materials including color samples and locations as well as previous appearance 5. Photo showing appearance of building as approved in 1999 6. Renderings of possible alternative color combinations for roof and trim (a — e) 7. Design Guideline Checklist Page 3 of 3 city of edmonds land use application X ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW • • • ❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT r ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # �'�� 0004 ZONE C G ❑ HOME OCCUPATION DATE -7' 1 � O REC'D BY k L ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE l RECEIPT # ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT ❑ HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB YADB ❑ CC ❑ STREET VACATION ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ OTHER: PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATIONdC>�l`��.����t�� PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) ��J �0 �'(�c� S -_� � C1� \ \S /A//Gl kf,! -� J/ L PROPERTY OWNER, PHONE # ADDRESS2-40 E-MAIL p V FAX # tcl J- TAX ACCOUNT # 00 ZKO --?-;30- � SEC. TWP. RNG. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) DF��`�`�JC RIBE OW THE PROJECT M TS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) ( )C -e1Z tlo>Q 4Q&Z f/i Plvvt E [I �S �;Nt etC t`/crfS�,� APPLICANT YVLC�(� ^Jv 5 PHONE# -2 ADDRESSt��fS�� E-MAIL ✓kz i z. ' , J L FAX # Ze�v - Z '6-3 -9 CONTACT PERSON/AGENT �sy1n'uP f` J r0/1S PHONE # 360-�� > �� 7 ADDRESS ,�/ r 2 c J &MJF. E-MAIL 'G / M Cpc FAX# The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the o er as listed below. T �0�SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE � Property Owner's Author�izattion I,1 4 6LOC lu 12� certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the following is a true and correct statement: I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of ins p tion and posting attendant to this application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER i 1� DATE This application form was revised on 8/10/09. Questions? Call (425) 771-0220. L:\LIBRARY\PLANNING\Loans & Handouts\Pub(ic Hnndoutsl0td H:mdoutsTand Use Application doc -------------- - LC— '-9c7 . Attachment 1 PLN-2010-0048 Ll A IN At A*W Attachment 4 PLN-2010-0048 GL825 Rich NavyTll 7k' America's 101 VO b 2 1 �5tisd� �x. SeA� -IN' ►. fE •, \ ^ ( 1 it I ,1 ■ � `I •\ `\ 1F� t � I I I, �� ''• ''��'��� I Attachment 5 PLN-2010-0048 t m 4x. Nil f I Ew� �_% >`s L 4 '�T r .11 a ti ty i -A III jL 1. 4 Design Guidelines Checklist This checklist is intended as a summary of the issues addressed by the guidelines. It is not meant to be a regulatory device or a substitute for the language and examples found in the guidelines themselves. Rather, it is a tool for assisting the determination about which guidelines are the most applicable on a particular site. A. Site Planning NIA Lower PriorityPriorit Higher 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. Encourage human activity on street ❑ ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy and interaction (residential projects) ❑ ❑ ❑ 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential projects) ❑ ❑ ❑ 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property ❑ ❑ ❑ 9. Discourage parking in street front ❑ ❑ ❑ 10. Orient building to corner and parking away from corner on public street fronts (corner lots) ❑ ❑ ❑ B. Bulk and Scale N/A Lower Higher Priority Priority 1. provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less- ❑ ❑ ❑ intensive zones Attachment 7 PLN-2010-0048 G Architectural Elements and Materials N/A Lower Priority Higher Priority 1. Complement positive existing character and/or respond to nearby historic structures ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Unified architectural concept ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Use human scale and human activity ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials ❑ ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize garage entrances ❑ ❑ ❑ D. Pedestrian Environment N/A Lower Priority Higher Priority 1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Avoid blank walls ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Minimize height of retaining walls ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on pedestrian areas ❑ ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas ❑ ❑ ❑ 7. Consider personal safety ❑ ❑ ❑ E. Landscaping N/A Lower Higher Priority Priority 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of ❑ ❑ ❑ neighborhood 2. Landscape to enhance the building or site ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site ❑ ❑ ❑ conditions