CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETTIMG AGENDA PACKET 7-7-26

Accordingly, the City Council cannot make this finding. 5. The project, when adjacent to existing residential dwelling units, is designed to minimize impacts, including privacy, light, and glare. The west side of the property is adjacent to residential uses, and the record indicates the north and west sides of the canopy are non-illuminated. Accordingly, the proposed illumination design is appropriate in relation to nearby residential uses and minimizes potential impacts from light and glare. Accordingly, the City Council makes this finding. 6. The plan meets the requirements of the municipal code and any other applicable guidelines, policies, and standards. The Project is not consistent with the City’s applicable guidelines or policies, including the following: a. The General Plan. The Project does not align with the applicable General Plan’s Programs, Policies, and Goals, including Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3, which calls for “attractive sign design and higher quality sign materials,” and “attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors.” As proposed, the Project’s sign design is not attractive, and uses the bright franchise colors specifically discouraged by the General Plan. Additionally, the Project is not consistent with Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage," inasmuch as it relies heavily on franchise signage. b. The Downtown Specific Plan. Moreover, the Project fails to conform to the Downtown Specific Plan, which calls for developments to, amongst other things, “improve the major gateways into downtown to create a sense of arrival and to enhance the aesthetics along these roadways.” (Downtown Specific Plan, LD-G.13.) The Project’s proposed signage does not improve this major gateway into downtown, nor create any sense of arrival or enhance aesthetics, with its use of overly bright franchise colors. Accordingly, the City Council cannot make this finding. Section 5. The City Council hereby denies Case No. P25-0300, a Sign Design Review application to install new monument, wall, canopy, and pump signage as part of a gas station rebranding process from the former 76 Gas Station to the new Shell Gasoline and FastFill Market located at 4191 First Street. Section 6. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on June 16, 2026. Page 158 of 214