My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2025
>
111825 REGULAR
>
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/26/2025 1:59:45 PM
Creation date
12/26/2025 1:52:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/18/2025
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
399
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />Canopy Signage <br />As noted, there was not majority support among the City Council either for approval of the <br />canopy signage as installed, or for requiring revision and redesign of that element of the SDR. <br />Councilmembers with concerns about the signage cited provisions of General Plan Policies 15 <br />and 16, and Program 15.3, which calls for the City to encourage signs that are designed with <br />higher quality materials, use attractive colors, and minimize franchise colors and branding. <br />Staff noted that the General Plan and Sign Ordinance do not include quantified standards for <br />the amount of branded signage that is permissible to include, meaning that a decision about <br />appropriateness of a sign design is to some degree subjective, with the Zoning Administrator’s <br />approval of the sign being based on various factors including location, all elements of the sign <br />proposal, comparison to the previously installed signage when a business is undergoing re- <br />branding, nature of nearby gas station signage, among other factors. It is noted that there are <br />examples throughout Pleasanton of signs with both more and fewer branded elements than <br />the Gulf Gas station. <br /> <br />Accordingly, staff continues to support the Zoning Administrator’s prior determination, and as <br />was the case at the May 6, 2025, meeting, to support approval of the canopy signage and <br />overall SDR, based on the project-specific analysis previously provided. The improvements to <br />the revised monument signage, which reduces the amount of branded signage, further <br />support this recommendation. However, it is ultimately up to a majority of the City Council to <br />determine if the signage is appropriate as proposed, and the City Council could decide to deny <br />the application, or specify additional design changes or amendments to the canopy signage. <br /> <br />For reference, images of the canopy signage (day and evening) as proposed and installed, <br />are included in Attachment 5. <br /> <br />Finally, going forward, and recognizing the somewhat unique circumstance of this application, <br />staff would emphasize that this decision should not be considered to set a precedent. <br /> Applications will continue to be reviewed in light of the full range of site- and project-specific <br />conditions and circumstances, some of which are outlined above,particularly with respect to <br />evaluation of conformance to the above-referenced General Plan policies. <br /> <br />As proposed and conditioned, the Zoning Administrator found the proposed SDR is in keeping <br />with other similar gas station signage design concepts throughout the City, would be <br />Page 18 of 399
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.