pln20130024 McDonalds.pdfv
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
III c 1890
To:
From:
Date:
Subject.
Street file for 21420 Highway 99 (McDonald's)
Kernen Lien, Senior Planner
March 29, 2013
Administrative Design Review STAFF DECISION for BLD20130219
BLD20130219 Project Proposal
McDonald's is proposing to update the exterior of the existing building located at 21420 Highway 99 and
to add an additional drive -through lane.
Property Owner:
McDonald's USA LLC
Way LLC Lynnwood
12131 11 P Avenue NE, Suite 103
Kirkland, WA 98034
Applicant.
Freiheit & Ho Architects, Inc., P.S.
Derek Smith
5209 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200
Kirkland, WA 98034
Design Review Process
As part of the City's review of the building permit referenced above, design review is required pursuant to
ECDC 20.10. The project is located in the General Commercial "CG2" zone and is therefore subject to
district based design review applying the design standards contained ECDC 16.60.030 and policies
contained in the specific section of the comprehensive plan addressing the Highway 99 corridor. Since
the proposed building is less than 60 feet, design will be conducted by staff as a Type I decision.
Findings & Conclusions
1. Scope. According to ECDC 20.10.020, design review is intended to apply to all development
including any improvement to real property open to exterior view, including but not limited to
buildings, structures, fixtures, landscaping, site screening, signs, and parking lots. Since this is a
rehabilitation of an existing building, design review is focused on building design and massing.
Additional, since there is a alteration to the drive -through lanes, the drive -through criteria in ECDC
16.60.030.B.5 will also be reviewed.
2. Environment. The project is exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(3) because the proposals involves the remodeling of an existing
building. A critical area determination conducted under file number CRA19990252 found that no
critical areas existed on or adjacent to the site.
Page I of 3
3. ECDC 16.60.030 CG Zone Design Standards.
The following design standards from ECDC 16.60.030 are applicable to the subject project.
a. Building Design and Massing
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.
The proposed building updates display a distinct base and top. A grey aluminum parapet will
wrap around the top of the building. Overhangs are provided at the entrances. An existing
wainscot with be retained and a culture stone veneer will be added to the building.
ii. To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting streets or
residential properties, walls or portions of walls abutting streets or visible from residentially
zoned properties shall have architectural treatment applied by incorporating at least four of
the following elements in the design of the facade:
(1) Masonry (except for flat concrete block).
(2) Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall.
(3) Belt courses of different texture and color.
(4) Projecting cornice.
(5) Projecting metal canopy.
(6) Decorative tilework.
(7) Trellis containing planting.
(8) Medallions.
(9) Artwork or wall graphics.
(10) Verticaldifferentiation
(11) Lighting fixtures.
(12) An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent.
All of the walls facing streets have at least four of the elements listed above incorporated into
their design. An existing wainscot will be retained around the base of the building.
Projecting canopies are provided at the entrances. A culture stone veneer will be added to the
building providing some vertical differentiation. The building will be accented with an arch
of the traditional McDonald's yellow.
b. Drive -through facilities:
i. Drive -through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the
building that face a street.
ii. Drive -through speakers shall not be audible off -site.
iii. Only one direct entrance or exit from the drive -through shall be allowed as separate curb cut
onto an adjoin street. All remain direct entrances/exits to the drive -through shall be interal
to the site.
Page 2 of 3
The drive -through lane is an existing drive -through that is not located along a facade that
faces the street. No new curb cuts or proposed for the drive -through. Two curb existing curb
cuts provide ingress and egress to the site. The modification to the drive -through lane
includes adding a second order location within the interior of the site. Drive -through
customers than proceed to the single drive -through lane along the southern side of the
building.
4. Comprehensive Plan. The site is designated "Highway 99 Corridor" and is within the Hospital
community and Family Retail focus area. The proposed project shows an effort towards the
following Comprehensive Plan policies and goals:
A.4. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses,
supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region.
B.4. New development should be high -quality and varied — not generic — and include amenities for
pedestrians and patrons.
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and goals of the comprehensive plan for the
Highway 99 Corridor.
S. Signs. Signs are being reviewed under a separate building permit, BLD20130220.
Decision
Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with design criteria in ECDC 16.60.030 and in the
Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff finds that the design of the building remodel in permit
BLD20130219 is APPROVED.
reviewed the applir�ation for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development Code.
0
Lien
Appeals
March 29, 2013
Date
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 3 of 3