My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2025
>
050625 REGULAR
>
COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2026 4:21:10 PM
Creation date
8/26/2026 4:17:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/6/2025
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.
/
249
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 2 of 5 <br />and allow certain types of signage that would not be considered appropriate or supportable <br />today (e.g., internally illuminated cabinet signs). However, master sign programs typically run <br />in perpetuity with the project area they represent and very few, if any, include language <br />requiring updates. The typical remedy for these issues is to encourage updates or application <br />for a new master sign program when a project area proposes significant exterior design <br />upgrades or new construction occurs. Similarly, the Zoning Administrator may also have to <br />make exceptions for proposed signage that may not conform with an approved master sign <br />program. <br />Sign Design Review <br />If a sign is proposed within a project area without an approved master sign program (typically a <br />standalone-type commercial or office building), Sign Design Review is required. As part of the <br />SDR process, the Zoning Administrator evaluates the proposed signage for conformance with <br />the following policies and standards prior to making a determination: <br />1. Any applicable General Plan policies, specifically: <br />1. Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3: <br />Attractive sign design and higher-quality sign materials <br />Attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors <br />2. Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and <br />prototype architecture and signage". <br />Any applicable design guidelines (such as the Downtown Design Guidelines) and, for signs on <br />Main Street, standards in the Downtown Revitalization District Ordinance (PMC Chapter <br />18.74), and the criteria set forth in Chapter 18.20 for Design Review, generally, are also <br />considered. <br />3. Any applicable provisions specified in PMC Section 18.96 (Signs). <br />The City's Sign Ordinance includes basic parameters as to the amount, size, placement and <br />lighting of signs (with such standards varying by zoning district), but lacks strict, objective <br />design parameters in many respects, particularly with regard to aesthetics (e.g., colors, <br />materials, permissible lighting levels, amount of branding vs. non-branding components, etc.). <br />Staff provides formal and informal feedback to applicants through the review process, with <br />comments taking into account the Design Review criteria, as identified in Chapter 18.20, which <br />includes factors such as the location and visibility of the site, existing signage/sign conditions <br />and design/character of the buildings or structures on which the signage is being placed, <br />proposed lighting, nature of the use for which the signage is proposed, and character, type and <br />proximity of adjacent uses. The City must also consider the reasonable expectation that a <br />business may wish or be entitled to use its corporate colors, business identification or branding <br />as part of its signage program. <br />In most instances, the Zoning Administrator is successful in negotiating well-designed, high- <br />quality, and proportionally sized signage based on the guidance of the documents listed <br />Page 194 of 223Page 176 of 249
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.