Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design board conditionally approves McDonald’s rebuild on North High Street, bars external sign lighting
Summary
The University District Design Review Board conditionally approved a McDonald’s demolition-and-rebuild project on North High Street, requiring removal of any external illumination from new signage and asking for plan approval of final signage details.
The University District Design Review Board voted to conditionally approve a proposal to demolish and rebuild the McDonald’s at North High Street, with a requirement that any external illumination on the restaurant signage be removed.
Staff told the board the proposal — which includes a new building footprint, resurfaced leased parking to the south, upgraded lighting, landscaping, bike racks and a redesigned entrance — is generally consistent with the University District plan but flagged concerns about sign size and exterior flood- or spot-light fixtures that could cause light spillage.
The applicant, sworn before the board, said most revisions since the prior conceptual review were interior to meet McDonald’s layout standards and included moving the south-side entrance closer to High Street, adding an accessible ramp, planter beds and bike parking. The applicant also confirmed they would resurface the leased parking lot to the south and upgrade lighting there as part of their tenant improvements.
Board members discussed material choices and the design of light fixtures and signage. Several members said the signage size slightly exceeded plan guidelines but was acceptable on design grounds; others emphasized that externally mounted floodlights should be avoided. Staff recommended a condition that the applicant verify whether the signs are internally illuminated and, if not, to remove exterior illumination or return with a revised signage package.
A member moved to approve the application (A2501335) with the condition that external signage illumination be removed; the motion was seconded and the board voted in favor. The chair declared the motion carried and asked staff to follow up on final signage details and plan approval.
The board did not require improvements to the leased parking lot to the south as a condition of approval, noting that lot ownership lies with a separate entity and the applicant intends only tenant-driven resurfacing and lighting upgrades.
Next procedural steps: staff will confirm with the applicant whether the signage is internally illuminated and process a final signage package if needed. If the sign remains externally illuminated, the applicant must modify the signage or return for additional approval.
