Agenda packet, regular meeting — Pleasanton City Council, June 16, 2026 (part 4 of 4)

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 73

A. Data Completeness and Accuracy: All data fields associated with a completion record sent from MIS are complete and appropriate based on the type of work performed.

B. Installation Quality: Work performed on site is complete per the Installation Requirements defined in this Specification.

C. Network Performance: The AMI radio transmitter communicates with the network and the radio transmitter ID, meter number and account combination captured in MIS match the information in the AMI Software.

4.7. Installation Warranty
The Contractor shall provide a 1-year installation warranty from date of project acceptance on all meters, radio transmitters and related equipment. The Installation Warranty shall fulfill the following requirements:

A. The Contractor shall investigate the problem with a meter (e.g. leaking meter, noisy meter, etc.) and provide resolution acceptable to the City for a period of 1 year (the “Installation Warranty Period”) from the date of installation. Where the product is defective, the Contractor shall be responsible for the cost to retrieve the meter from the field.

B. The date of the start of the warranty of all products supplied and installed by the Contractor will be the date of installation.

C. Products installed by the Contractor shall include all costs to retrieve the defective product from the field for the Installation Warranty Periods.

D. Any products damaged as a result of the installation are the responsibility of the Contractor during the Installation Warranty Period.

E. Contractor shall be responsible for the plumbing system for period of 60 days from the date of installation.

The obligations contained in this section shall survive the termination or expiry of the Contract.

4.8. Health and Safety
Contractor’s strict adherence to compliance with laws, regulations, and safety protocols is mandatory to ensure a safe working environment and prevent accidents or injuries. All OSHA Safety Requirements must be adhered to by the Contractor and/or any subcontractors while on-site. Contractor is responsible for maintaining all applicable safety documentation and standards, including but not limited to:
• Injury Prevention Program
• Annual OSHA Reporting

Page 347 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 74

5. APPENDIX A – EXISTING METER BOX LID SPECIFICATIONS

Page 348 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 75

Page 349 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 76

Page 350 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 77

Page 351 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 78

Page 352 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 79

Page 353 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 1

Appendix B
RFP Reference: RFP #PWD-25.604 — CIP 26137
Document Date: April 7, 2026
Prepared By: Allen Hammond, IT Director, City of Pleasanton Reference: CUS Exceptions Summary, Data Transfer Items (Exceptions 4–8) Contractor: Core & Main LP / Concord Utility Services (CUS)

1. Purpose
This document establishes the data transfer specifications and technical requirements for the bidirectional exchange of data between the City of Pleasanton ("City") and Core & Main LP / Concord Utility Services ("CUS") during the AMI system deployment under RFP #PWD-25.604. These specifications supplement the contract exceptions negotiated in the CUS Exceptions Summary (rows 34–38) and shall be incorporated into the final Scope of Work.

The City's enterprise billing and customer information system is Tyler Munis. All data exchange processes described herein must support integration with Tyler Munis as the system of record for customer accounts, meter inventory, and billing data.

2. SFTP Infrastructure Requirements
Ref: CUS Exception 4 — SFTP file transfer is an adequate means of transferring data between parties.

2.1 Transport Security
• All SFTP connections shall use SSH protocol version 2 with a minimum key length of 2048-bit RSA or equivalent (e.g., Ed25519).
• Key-based authentication is required. Password-only authentication is prohibited. • TLS 1.2 or higher shall be enforced for all data in transit. • CUS shall provide IP whitelisting capabilities to restrict SFTP access to City-authorized IP addresses.

2.2 Data at Rest
• All files residing on the SFTP server shall be encrypted at rest using AES-256 or equivalent. • Files shall be retained on the SFTP server for a minimum of 30 calendar days after successful retrieval by the receiving party, after which they may be purged.

City of Pleasanton
AMI System Implementation
Data Transfer Specifications
Scope of Work Addendum

Page 354 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 2

2.3 SFTP Server Hosting and Management
• CUS shall provision and manage the SFTP server. The server shall be hosted within the United States. • CUS shall provide the City with dedicated SFTP credentials and connection parameters (hostname, port, public key fingerprint) no later than 30 days prior to the start of data exchange testing. • CUS shall provide separate directory structures for City-to-CUS uploads and CUS-to-City downloads to prevent cross-contamination of file flows.

2.4 Availability
• The SFTP server shall maintain 99.5% uptime availability, measured monthly. • CUS shall notify the City a minimum of 48 hours in advance of any planned maintenance that may affect SFTP availability.

3. CUS-to-City Daily Data Exchange
Ref: CUS Exception 5 — CUS will post daily upload files to an SFTP site, allowing the Utility to use automation/scripting to retrieve required files and any other relevant files that need to be posted.

3.1 Posting Schedule
• CUS shall post all daily files no later than 6:00 AM Pacific Time each business day, or as mutually agreed upon during project kick-off.
• CUS shall confirm the daily posting schedule in writing during the project kick-off phase.

3.2 File Types
CUS shall post the following daily files at a minimum (additional file types may be defined during kick-off):
a. Work Order Status File: Current status of all open and completed work orders, including meter installation confirmations, field exceptions, and rescheduled appointments. b. Meter Inventory File: Updated meter serial numbers, endpoint IDs, and installation locations for all meters deployed or swapped during the prior day.
c. Exception Report File: All field exceptions, access issues, customer refusals, and other non-standard conditions encountered during the prior day.
d. Photo/Documentation Index: Index file referencing photos and field documentation captured, with linkage to work order numbers.

3.3 File Naming Convention
All files shall follow a consistent naming convention to be defined by CUS and approved by the City. The naming convention shall include at a minimum:
• File type identifier (e.g., WO_STATUS, METER_INV, EXCEPTION) • Date stamp in YYYYMMDD format
• Sequence number for multiple files of the same type posted on the same day Example: PLEASANTON_WO_STATUS_20260501_001.csv

3.4 Monitoring and Alerting
• CUS shall implement automated monitoring to detect failures in the daily file posting process. • If daily files are not posted by the scheduled time, CUS shall send an automated notification to City- designated contacts within one (1) hour of the missed posting window.

Page 355 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 3

• CUS shall provide a manifest or checksum file with each daily posting to allow the City to verify file completeness and integrity.

4. City-to-CUS Daily Data Exchange
Ref: CUS Exception 6 — The Utility will post return files to the same SFTP site, allowing Peak Workflow to use automation/scripting to retrieve and ingest those files.

4.1 City Posting Schedule
• The City will post return files on a daily basis. The specific posting time shall be mutually agreed upon during project kick-off and documented in the Data Exchange Protocol (Section 7).

4.2 File Exchange Protocols
• CUS shall provide the file format specifications, required fields, validation rules, and expected posting schedule for all City-provided return files.
• CUS shall provide a dedicated upload directory on the SFTP server for City return files, separate from the CUS download directory.
• City IT will develop automation scripts to extract data from Tyler Munis and post files to the SFTP site in the required format.

4.3 Error Handling
• CUS shall validate all City-provided files upon ingestion and return a validation response file within four (4) hours confirming successful ingestion or identifying specific errors. • Validation response files shall identify: row-level errors, rejected records with reason codes, and a summary count of records accepted, rejected, and total submitted. • CUS shall not reject an entire file due to individual record errors. Valid records shall be processed, and only invalid records shall be flagged for correction.

5. City Daily Update File — Tyler Munis Export
Ref: CUS Exception 7 — The Utility will provide a daily update file that includes updates to account information, exceptions/exception handling, and any job type/work type descriptions at the account level.

5.1 Data Scope
The City's daily update file will be generated from Tyler Munis and will include the following data categories.

CUS must specify exact field requirements for each:

Data Category Description CUS Must Specify
Account Information Customer account number, service
address, meter number, account status,
rate code
Required fields, data types,
field lengths, valid values for
status and rate codes
Exceptions / Exception
Handling
Accounts with holds, access restrictions,
special instructions, appointment
requirements
Definition of exception types
recognized by Peak Workflow,
required format for exception
codes

Page 356 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 4

Job Type / Work Type Meter size, meter type, installation type (pit, wall, etc.), service line material
Enumerated list of valid
job/work type values,
mapping to Peak Workflow
categories
Meter Inventory Current meter serial number,
manufacturer, size, age, AMR/AMI
endpoint ID (if applicable)
Required fields for old meter
removal and new meter
association

5.2 Development Timeline
• CUS shall deliver the complete field-level specifications for the daily update file no later than the milestone specified in Section 6.1.
• City IT will require a minimum of thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of final specifications to develop, test, and validate the Tyler Munis export process.
• A two-week data exchange testing period shall follow, during which both parties will validate file transfer, ingestion, error handling, and data integrity before production go-live.

5.3 Change Management
• Any changes to the daily update file format, field requirements, or validation rules after the initial specification is accepted shall require a minimum of thirty (30) calendar days' written notice from CUS to the City.
• Changes that require modifications to the Tyler Munis export process shall not take effect until the City has confirmed successful testing of the updated export.

6. File Format Specifications
Ref: CUS Exception 8 — CUS will provide the required file layout/format specifications for Utility-provided data so it can be ingested into Peak Workflow (including required fields, naming conventions, and any validation rules).

6.1 Delivery Timeline
• CUS shall deliver complete file format specifications no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the start of data exchange testing.
• Specifications shall be delivered in a structured, written format (e.g., data dictionary spreadsheet and/or technical specification document).

6.2 Required Specification Content
For each file type exchanged between the parties, CUS shall provide specifications that include, at a minimum:

Specification Element Required Detail
Field Definitions Field name, description, data type (string, integer, date, decimal), maximum field length, required vs. optional designation File Format File type (CSV, fixed-width, XML, JSON), delimiter, text qualifier, character encoding (UTF-8 required), header row specification

Page 357 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 5

Naming Conventions File naming pattern, date format, sequence numbering, file extension Validation Rules Field-level validation (required values, valid ranges, regex patterns), cross-field validation, referential integrity checks
Error Handling Error codes, error response file format, partial vs. full rejection behavior, resubmission procedures
Sample Files CUS shall provide sample files with representative data for each file type to support City development and testing
Record Identification Primary key field(s), unique record identifiers, handling of duplicate records
Date/Time Formats ISO 8601 format required (YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS), timezone specification (Pacific Time or UTC)

6.3 Change Notification
• Any changes to file format specifications after go-live shall require a minimum of thirty (30) calendar days' written notice from the initiating party.
• Changes shall be documented in a revised specification document with a version number, change date, and description of modifications.
• No format changes shall take effect until both parties have confirmed successful testing in a non- production environment.

7. Data Exchange Protocol Document
CUS shall collaborate with the City to produce a Data Exchange Protocol document during the project kick-off phase. This document shall serve as the operational reference for all data transfer activities and shall include:
e. Complete SFTP connection parameters and credentials management procedures f. Daily file posting and retrieval schedules for both parties g. File naming conventions and directory structures
h. Escalation procedures for file transfer failures
i. Contact information for technical support on both sides (City IT and CUS/Peak Workflow) j. Data validation and reconciliation procedures
k. Disaster recovery and business continuity provisions for data exchange

8. Testing and Acceptance

8.1 Testing Phases
l. Connectivity Testing: Validate SFTP connectivity, authentication, directory access, and file transfer performance from both City and CUS environments.

Page 358 of 443 ends

Exhibit A: Scope of Work CPX
RFP# PWD 25.604 City of Pleasanton, CA RFP-2 | Page 6

m. Format Validation Testing: Validate file formats, naming conventions, and field-level data against specifications using sample data.
n. Integration Testing: End-to-end testing of the full data exchange cycle: Tyler Munis export → SFTP upload → Peak Workflow ingestion → processing → return file → City retrieval. o. Error Handling Testing: Validate behavior for malformed files, missing required fields, duplicate records, and SFTP connectivity failures.

8.2 Acceptance Criteria
• Data exchange shall not proceed to production until both parties have signed off on successful completion of all testing phases.
• Acceptance criteria shall include: zero data loss in transit, 100% field-level validation accuracy, successful error handling for all defined error conditions, and round-trip processing within agreed SLA timeframes.

Document Revision History
Version Date Author Description

1.0 04/07/2026 Allen Hammond Initial draft based on CUS Exceptions 4–8

Page 359 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project Tab Extended
C1 $ 4, 752,978.56
C2 $ 3,
347,498.30
C2b $ -

C3 $ 1,
266,460.21
C3b $ 3,
457.13
C4 $ 164,
842.11
$ 9,
535,236.31
Tab Extended
C8 $ 61, 205.38
$ 61,
205.38
Where an application can be provided as both a SaaS or Hosted system the SaaS pricing shall be included on Tab C6, the Optional Hosted solution may be submitted as an Option on Tab C9 Options Total Optional C8
Tab Description
C8 - Optional Products, Services and Software
Total Optional C8
Appendix C - Financial Workbook
City of Pleasanton
Core & Main LP
RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project
Utility:

Proponent:

Project/RFP Number:

C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Initial Capital Costs - C1, C2, C3, C4, C5
Tab Description
C1 - Water Meter Supply
C2 - Installation Services
C3 - AMI Network & Radio
C4 - Software Implementation & Training
Total Initial Capital Costs - C1, C2, C3, C4, C5
C2b - Installation Services-Lids
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C Pricing Form | Page 1 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025 Exhibit B

Page 360 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project Item # Acceptance Category Description Sub-Description Unit of Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
C1.1 Supply and Install
Equipment 5/8" x 3/4" Each Yes 17,679
$ 219.
00 $ 3,
871,701.00
C1.2 Supply and Install
Equipment 3/4" Short Each Yes 18
$ 219.
00 $ 3,
942.00
C1.3 Supply and Install
Equipment 1" Each Yes 3,277
$ 256.
83 $ 841,
631.91
C1.4 Supply and Install
Equipment 1.5" Each Yes 5
$ 675.
33 $ 3,
376.65
C1.5 Supply and Install
Equipment 2" Each Yes 4
$ 784.
42 $ 3,
137.68
C1.6 Supply and Install
Equipment 3" Each Yes 4
$ 1,
558.45 $ 6,
233.80
C1.7 Supply and Install
Equipment 4" Each Yes 3
$ 1,
820.26 $ 5,
460.78
C1.8 Supply and Install
Equipment 6" Each Yes 2
$ 4,
166.67 $ 8,
333.34
C1.9 Supply and Install
Equipment 5/8" x 3/4" Each Yes 5
$ 278.
05 $ 1,
390.25
C1.10 Supply and Install
Equipment 3/4" Each Yes 1
$ 278.
05 $ 278.
05 C1.11 Supply and Install
Equipment 1" Each Yes 14
$ 362.
93 $ 5,
081.02
C1.12 Supply and Install
Equipment 1.5" Each Yes 1
$ 831.
82 $ 831.
82 C1.13 Supply and Install
Equipment 3" Each Yes 1
$ 1,
580.26 $ 1,
580.26
4,752,978.56$
Transfer the total for C1 - Water Meter Supply to Appendix C Pricing Form Summary Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proposer: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C1 - Water Meter Supply
Note: Proposer to fill in all cells in blue.

Proposer Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable TOTAL C1 - Water Meter Supply
Supply of an Approved Non-Mechanical Water Meter:

Supply of a Contractor installed non-mechanical water meter (C715-18) including base meter, high resolution encoder register, prewired and potted to a 5-foot, 3-strand, 22-gauge wire attached to the plug end of a Nicor AMI waterproof connector. Products are invoiced with an accepted installation.

Supply of an Approved Non-Mechanical Water Meter for Recycled Water:

Supply of a Contractor installed non-mechanical water meter (C715-18) for recycled water including base meter, high resolution encoder register, prewired and potted to a 5-foot, 3-strand, 22-gauge wire attached to the plug end of a Nicor AMI waterproof connector.

Products are invoiced with an accepted installation. Recyled water meters shall come with a purple register lid and be clearly marked as a non-potable water meter.

Comments (Optional - blue cells do not have to be filled out) City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C1 Water Meter Supply | Page 2 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 361 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project Item # Acceptance Category Description Sub-Description Unit of Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proposer: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C1 - Water Meter Supply
Note: Proposer to fill in all cells in blue.

Proposer Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable C1.10
C1.11
C1.12
C1.13
C1.14
C1.15
C1.16
C1.17
C1.18
C1.19
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C1 Water Meter Supply | Page 3 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 362 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Projectt Item # Acceptance
Category Description Size Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
C2.1 Mobilization Supply of Services to Mobilize the Project. (Capped at 2%). N/A Milestone Yes 1 $ 160, 000.00 $ 160,
000.00
C2.2 Mobilization Issuance of Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Materials Bond N/A Milestone Yes 1 $ 50, 000.00 $ 50,
000.00
C2.3 5/8" x 3/4" Each Yes 15,953 $ 95.
00 $ 1,
515,535.00
C2.4 3/4" Each Yes 18 $ 95.
00 $ 1,
710.00
C2.5 1" Each Yes 3,277 $ 95.
00 $ 311,
315.00
C2.5b Supply and Install
Equipment
Small Meter Change Out Installation (Outside set): Non-Working Meters (Billing Groups 2 - 9) Removal and disposal of existing water meter from an existing meter box, installation of a new water meter supplied by the City (of the specified size), radio transmitter, and consumables including, but not limited to wiring and washers. 5/8" x 3/4" Each Yes 1,726
$ 200.
00 $ 345,
200.00
C2.6 5/8" x 3/4" - 1" Each Yes 85 $ 45.
00 $ 3,
825.00
C2.7 1.5" - 2" Each Yes 1,276 $ 75.
00 $ 95,
700.00
C2.8 3" - 8" Each 125 $ -
C

2.9 Supply and Install
Equipment
Survey of Service Line Material:

Field verification of the material type of the customer-owned portion of the service line.

Visual inspection of the City-side portion of the service line. Record field findings and transfer data to the City.

All sizes Each Yes 22,460 $ 24. 00 $ 539, 040.00
C2.10 Supply and Install
Equipment
Dewatering Existing Meter Box:

Proivde the equipment and labor to pump water out of an existing meter box of the specified size including dechlorination diffuser.
5/8" - 1" meter Each Yes 632 $ 45. 00 $ 28, 440.00
C2.11 Supply and Install
Equipment
Debris Removal:

Provide the equipment and labor to remove dirt and debris from an existing meter box, and dispose of the spoils.
5/8" - 1" meter Each Yes 4, 172 $ 16. 00 $ 66, 752.00 C2.12 Supply and Install
Equipment
Excavate, Remove and Re-install an Existing Meter Box:

Provide the equipment and labor to excavate and remove an existing meter box, debris and spoils removal, re-installation of an existing meter box (in accordance with City specification) of the specified size including: backfill and compression to grade. 5/8" - 1" meter Each Yes
252 $ 295.
00 $ 74,
340.00
C2.13 Supply and Install
Equipment
5/8" x 3/4" Each Yes 225 $ 531. 84 $ 119, 664.00
C2.14 Supply and Install
Equipment
3/4" Each Yes 10 $ 531. 84 $ 5, 318.40
C2.15 Supply and Install
Equipment
1" Each Yes 35 $ 570. 54 $ 19, 968.90
C2.16 Supply and Install
Equipment
Line Freeze - Small Meter (5/8"x3/4" to 1"):

Perform a line freeze with CO2 or electric freeze kit on the appropriate sized pipe as required. 5/8" x 3/4" - 1" meter Each Yes 1 $ 205. 00 $ 205. 00 C2.17 Residential Installer Per hour Yes 1 $ 165.
00 $ 165.
00 Small Meter Change Out Installation (Outside set):

Removal and disposal of existing water meter from an existing meter box, installation of a new water meter supplied by the City (of the specified size), radio transmitter, and consumables including, but not limited to wiring and washers.

Supply and Install
Equipment
City of Pleasanton
RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project
Core & Main LPProponent:

Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue
Proponent Proposed?: Yes - Contractor is Responsible; No - City is Responsible C2 - Installation Services
Utility:

Project/RFP Number:

Supply and Install
Equipment
Radio Transmitter Retrofit Installation - Pit Mount:

Installation of a radio transmitter to an existing meter and register in an existing meter box, including consumable items.

Pre-approved hourly work:Supply and Install
Small Meter Curb Stop Installation:

Supply and installation of a curb stop valve of the specified type and size, including compression fitting to adapt to existing pipe and consumables.

Note: This item applies when a curb stop valve is damaged during an installation.

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C2 Installation Services | Page 4 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 363 of 443 ends

Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue
Proponent Proposed?: Yes - Contractor is Responsible; No - City is Responsible C2 - Installation Services
Utility:

Project/RFP Number:

C2.18 Plumber Per hour Yes 1 $ 320. 00 $ 320. 00
C2.19
Contingency Items - boxes, lids, box extension rings, meter spuds, extensions, adapters, meter couplers, flanges, fittings, in-line connectors, compression fittings, PVC fittings, tamper clips, Nicor connectors, backflow prevention devices ,
5/8" x 3/4" - 1" As approved 1 $ 10, 000.00 $ 10, 000.00 3,347,498.30$
C2.19
C2.20
C2.21
C2.22
C2.23
C2.24
C2.25
C2.26
C2.27
C2.28
Comments (Optional - blue cells do not have to be filled out) C2.12 pricing is for softscape only
Pre-approved hourly work:

TOTAL C2 - Installation Services

E
quipment
Supply and Install
Equipment
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C2 Installation Services | Page 5 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 364 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Projectt Item # Acceptance
Category Description Size Existing
Quantity
Proponent
Proposed?
# of Required
Replacements Price Extended
C2b.1 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 8 3/4" x 14 1/2" x 1" 1,150 No 0
$ 50.
28 $ -

C2b.2 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 10 1/8" x 15 3/8" x 1 3/4" 11,153 No 0
$ 90.
51 $ -

C2b.3 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 11 1/4" x 18 1/8" x 1 3/4" 4,250 No 0
$ 99.
41 $ -

C2b.4 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 10 3/4" x 21" x 2" 2,418 No 0
$ 87.
92 $ -

C2b.5 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 13 3/4" x 23 1/4" x 2" 3,143 No 0
$ 143.
09 $ -

C2b.6 Supply and Install
Equipment
Meter Box Lid Replacements as required.

The City's preference is to maintain existing meter box lids and mount radios under the lid.

Vendors who would benefit from new meter box lids should specify the quantity that will be replaced and the per unit installed price of the new meter box lid 17" x 30" x 2" 350 No 0
$ 215.
98 $ -

C2b.7 Supply and Install
Equipment
Drilling Existing Meter Box Lid:

If the Contractor prefers to drill existing lids as opposed to replacement, provide the equipment and labor to drill existing concrete or composite meter box lid to accommodate radio transmitter mounting equipment.

Various sizes 22,464 No 0
$ 52.
64 $ -

-$
C2b - Installation Services-Lids
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue
Proponent Proposed?: Yes - Contractor is Responsible; No - Not Required.

Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project The City’s existing meter box lids are Armorcast polymer concrete lids. In determining the work required to adapt the existing lid to an AMI Radio Transmitter, the Contractor shall follow this order of preference:
- Mount the AMI Radio Transmitter under the existing lid using existing mounting holes - Replace the existing lid with the Contractor’s preferred lid solution. - Adapt the existing lid using a through-the-lid mount
The Contractor is to speificy what, if any, meter box lid replacements are reqquired as part of providing its solution and meeting the RSR as outlined in the RFP.

TOTAL C2b - Installation Services-Lids
Comments (Optional - blue cells do not have to be filled out) City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C2b Installation Services-Lids | Page 6 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 365 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Projectt Item # Acceptance
Category Description Size Existing
Quantity
Proponent
Proposed?
# of Required
Replacements Price Extended
C2b - Installation Services-Lids
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue
Proponent Proposed?: Yes - Contractor is Responsible; No - Not Required.

C2.45
C2.46
C2.47
C2.48
C2.49
C2.50
C2.51
C2.52
C2.53
C2.54
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C2b Installation Services-Lids | Page 7 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 366 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number;
Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project 22,202
Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
C3.1 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a RF Radio Transmitter:

Supply of an FCC-approved radio transmitter for use in meter replacement, retrofit, or upgrade scenarios. Transmitter to be designed and warranted for submerged installation in meter boxes. Radio transmitter to be prewired and potted to a 5 foot, 3 strand, 22-gauge wire attached to the Receptacle end of a Nicor Hydroconn® Series III AMR waterproof connector. Price to include any mounting brackets and consumables required to conform to the manufacturer's installation instructions for through-the-lid or under-the-lid antenna. Invoiced on successful installation.

RF Submersible Each Yes 1,364
$ 117.
71 $ 160,
556.44
C3.2 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a Cellular Radio Transmitter:

Supply of an FCC-approved cellular transmitter for use in meter replacement, retrofit, or upgrade scenarios. Transmitter to be designed and warranted for submerged installation in meter boxes. Cellular radio transmitter to be prewired and potted to a 5 foot, 3 strand, 22-gauge wire attached to the Receptacle end of a Nicor Hydroconn® Series III AMR waterproof connector. Price to include any mounting brackets and consumables required to conform to the manufacturer's installation instructions for through-the-lid or under-the-lid antenna. Invoiced on successful installation.

Cellular Submersible Each No 20,838
$ -

C3.3 Supply and Install
Equipment Project Management Fee Each Yes 1 $ 418,158.00 $ 418,
158.00
C.3b Supply and Install
Equipment Facility Fee Each Yes 1 $ 243,000.00 $ 243,
000.00
C.3c Supply and Install
Equipment Fence Supply and Installation Each Yes 1 $ 22,500.00 $ 22,
500.00
C.3d Supply and Install
Equipment MTU and Meter Battery Disposal Fee (per location) Each Yes 22,353 $ 4.
75 $ 106,
176.75
C3.5 AC Power Each Yes 11 $ 6,
543.91 $ 71,
983.01
C3.6 Solar Power Each No $ -

Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C3 - AMI Network & Radio
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Network deployment management:

Coordination, initial inspection and support the approval of the AMI network deployment including labor and disbursements. The Proposers shall enter the total upset limit for both labor and disbursements.

Disbursements will be invoiced based on actual cost for travel, food, accommodation, parking, vehicle rentals.

Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of AMI Collection Devices - Data Collector
Supply of AMI Data Collector (powered as indicated) including the data collector and antenna. Invoiced at the time of a successful installation.

Proposers shall enter the number of data collectors required.

Total Number of Radio Transmitters Required =
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3 AMI Network & Radio | Page 8 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 367 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number;
Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project 22,202
Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C3 - AMI Network & Radio
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Total Number of Radio Transmitters Required =
C3.7 AC Power Each No $ -
C3.8 Solar Power Each No $ -

C3.9 Installation on a building Each No $ -

C3.10 Communications Tower / Water Tower Each Yes 10 $ 16,733.85 $ 167, 338.50
C3.11 Lighting or power pole Each Yes 1 $ 18,274.09 $ 18, 274.09
C3.12 Installation on a building Each No $ -

C3.13 Communications Tower / Water Tower Each No $ -

C3.14 Lighting or power pole Each No $ -

C3.15 40' Each No $ -

C3.16 60' Each No $ -

C3.17 90' Each No $ -

C3.18 Supply and Install
Equipment
Stamped Engineering Drawings
Provide a P. Eng. Stamped Design drawing with the proposed installation for each data collector installation site. The total quantity for these line items should equal the total quantities in line items C3.5, C3.6, C3.7, C3.8
Each Yes 11 $ 5, 250.00 $ 57, 750.00
C3.19 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a Handheld and Communication Device (where applicable):
to perform reading, programming, and maintenance trouble shooting.

Including handheld, software, radio transmitter communication device, cradle, power and communication cables. Products are invoiced with an approved delivery.

Each Yes 3
$ 241.
14 $ 723.
42 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of AMI Collection Devices - Data Repeater
Supply of AMI Data Repeater (powered as indicated) including the data repeater and antenna. Invoiced at the time of a successful installation.

Proposers shall enter the number of repeaters required.

Supply and Install
Equipment
Installation of Data Collector
on the types of assets shown:

The installation shall include all mounting equipment, labor, lifting equipment, safety fall protection equipment, LAN, AC and Antenna wiring and conduit as required, and initialization and testing. The total quantity for these line items should equal the total quantities in line items C3.7, C3.8
Supply and Install
E
quipment
Supply and Installation of New Pole
Pr
ovide the labor, materials and equipment in for the supply and Installation of new concrete or composite pole(s) for data collector or repeater locations where a building does not exist.

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3 AMI Network & Radio | Page 9 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 368 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number;
Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project 22,202
Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C3 - AMI Network & Radio
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Total Number of Radio Transmitters Required =
C3.20 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of Communication Application for an Existing Smart Phone (where applicable): to perform reading, programming, and maintenance trouble shooting. Including radio transmitter communication device and related equipment and application license for smart phone app. (if required and in addition to those shown in C3 AMI Network & Radio)
Each No $ -
1,266,460.21$
C3.21
C3.22
C3.23
C3.24
C3.25
C3.26
C3.27
C3.28
C3.29
C3.30
TOTAL C3 - AMI Network & Radio
Comments (Optional - blue Cells do not have to be filled out) Handheld and Communication Device (C3.19) includes the Kamstrup Infrared Optical Eye for in-field configuration of meters.

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3 AMI Network & Radio | Page 10 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 369 of 443 ends

RF Submersible Each No
$ -

C3b.2 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a Cellular Radio Transmitter:

Cellular Submersible Each No 262
$ -

C3b.3 Supply and Install
Equipment Labor Each No
$ -

C3b.4 Supply and Install
Equipment Disbursements Each No
$ -

C3b.5 AC Power Each No $ -

C3b.6 Solar Power Each No $ -

C3b.7 AC Power Each No $ -

Supply and Install
Supply of AMI Collection Devices - Data Repeater
Supply of AMI Data Repeater (powered as indicated) including the data

Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project The City of Pleasanton prefers to have AMI deployed throughout its territory but understands the complexity presented by Kilkare Woods. Vendors are to propose their preferred approach for collectoring meter reads in Kilkare. The City will consider either AMI or AMR.

C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Network deployment management:

Disbursements will be invoiced based on actual cost for travel, food, accommodation, parking, vehicle rentals.

Proposers shall enter the number of data collectors required.

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3b Kilkare Mtr Reading | Page 11 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 370 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number;
Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project Total Number of Locations in Kilkare Woods 262
Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project The City of Pleasanton prefers to have AMI deployed throughout its territory but understands the complexity presented by Kilkare Woods. Vendors are to propose their preferred approach for collectoring meter reads in Kilkare. The City will consider either AMI or AMR.

C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable C3b.8 Solar Power Each No $ -
C3b.9 Installation on a building Each No $ -

C3b.10 Communications Tower / Water Tower Each No $ -

C3b.11 Lighting or power pole Each No $ -

C3b.12 Installation on a building Each No $ -

C3b.13 Communications Tower / Water Tower Each No $ -

C3b.14 Lighting or power pole Each No $ -

C3b.15 40' Each No $ -

C3b.16 60' Each No $ -

C3b.17 90' Each No $ -

C3b.18 Supply and Install
Equipment
Stamped Engineering Drawings
Provide a P. Eng. Stamped Design drawing with the proposed installation for each data collector installation site. The total quantity for these line items should equal the total quantities in line items C3.5, C3.6, C3.7, C3.8
Each No $ -
C3b.19 Supply and Install
Equipment
AMR Drive-by Data Collection Hardware (if necessary).

Provide description and documentation Each Yes 2
$ 1,
707.32 $ 3,
414.64
C3b.20 Software
AMR Data Collection Software (if necessary)
Including software loading, configuration, development of interfaces (not including billing side of the interface), and support of user acceptance testing.

Each No
$ -

E
quipment

repeater and antenna. Invoiced at the time of a successful installation.

Proposers shall enter the number of repeaters required.

Su
pply and Install
Equipment
Installation of Data Collector on the types of assets shown:

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3b Kilkare Mtr Reading | Page 12 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 371 of 443 ends

C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable C3b.21 Software Labor Each Yes 1 $ 42. 49 $ 42. 49
C3b.22 Software Disbursements Each No $ -

3,457.13$
C3b.23
C3b.24
C3b.25
C3b.26
C3b.27
C3b.28
C3b.29
C3b.30
C3b.31
AMR Onsite Equipment Training: (If necessary)
Provide onsite training on operation of AMR data collection equipment.

Labor line should include the number of days of training. Disbursements will be invoiced based on actual cost for travel, food, accommodation, parking, vehicle rentals.

TOTAL C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Comments (Optional - blue Cells do not have to be filled out) AMR Drive-byData Collection Hardware (C3b.19) consists of the READy Advanced Converter Kit which includes 2 handheld units, antennas, chargers and associated equipment for 2 separate drive-by vehicles in the field.

C3b.21 Price of External Antenna
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3b Kilkare Mtr Reading | Page 13 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 372 of 443 ends

C3b - Kilkare Meter Reading
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable C3b.32
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C3b Kilkare Mtr Reading | Page 14 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 373 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Project Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of
Measure
Proponent
Proposed? Quantity Price Extended
C4.5 Initial software license Milestone Yes 1 $ 68, 000.00 $ 68,
000.00
C4.6 Implementation labor Milestone No $ -

C4.7 Implementation disbursement Milestone No $ -

C4.8 Training labor Milestone No $ -

C4.9 Initial software license Milestone Yes 1 $ 56, 842.11 $ 56,
842.11
C4.10 Implementation labor Milestone Yes 1.
00 $ 22,500.00 $ 22,
500.00
C4.11 Implementation disbursement Milestone No $ -

C4.12 Training labor Milestone Yes 1.
00 $ 7,
500.00 $ 7,
500.00
C4.13 Software Labor Milestone Yes 1.
00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,
000.00
C4.14 Software Disbursements Milestone No $ -

164,842.11$
C4.15
C4.16
C4.17
C4.18
C4.19
C4.20
TOTAL C4 - Software Implementation & Training
Software
Supply and implementation of the AMI Data Collection Software:

Including software loading, configuration, development of interfaces (not including billing side of the interface), support of user acceptance testing and on-site training.

Software
Supply and implementation of the Meter Data Management
Software:

Including software loading, configuration, development of interfaces (not including billing side of the interface), support of user acceptance testing, on-site training and 3 years of data storage.

Onsite Equipment Training:

Including radio transmitter installation, maintenance and troubleshooting, operation of handheld, data collector and repeater equipment. Labor line should include the number of days of training.

Disbursements will be invoiced based on actual cost for travel, food, accommodation, parking, vehicle rentals
C4 - Software Implementation & Training
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project Comments (Optional - blue cells do not have to be filled out) C4.9-C4.13 pertain to Kamstrup Ready software setup and training as well as equipment training C4.5 pertains to installer WOMS setup and user fees
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C4 Software Impl & Training | Page 15 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 374 of 443 ends

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C4.21
C4.22
C4.23
`
City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C4 Software Impl & Training | Page 16 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 375 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Projectt Item # Acceptance
Category Description Sub-Description Unit of Measure Proponent Proposed? Quantity Price Extended C8.1 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a Non-Mechanical Water Meter with Remote Shut Off
Supply of non-mechanical water meter (C715-18) with remote shut off capability, including base meter, high resolution encoder register, prewired and potted to a 5-foot, 3-strand, 22- gauge wire attached to the plug end of a Nicor AMI waterproof connector. Products are invoiced upon accepted delivery.

Each No
1 $ - $ -
C8.2 Supply and Install
Equipment
Supply of a Non-Mechanical Water Meter with Remote Flow Restriction Capability
Supply of non-mechanical water meter (C715-18) with flow restriction capability, including base meter, high resolution encoder register, prewired and potted to a 5-foot, 3-strand, 22- gauge wire attached to the plug end of a Nicor AMI waterproof connector. Products are invoiced upon accepted delivery.

Each No
1 $ -
C8.3 Supply and Install
Equipment Credit for Use of City-provided space for Warehouse Facility Each No $ -
C8.4 Optional Proponent Products or Services Leak Detector Software Each Yes 1 $ 58,775.06 $ 58,775.06 C8.5 Optional Proponent Products or Services Leak Detector Up and Running
Each Yes 1 $ 1 ,543.91 $ 1 ,543.91
C8.6 Optional Proponent Products or Services Aquana SV2 Smart Valve Each Yes 1 $ 30 0.00 $ 3 00.00 C8.7 Optional Proponent Products or Services Aquana External Antenna Each Yes 1 $ 6 4.29 $ 6 4.29 C8.8 Optional Proponent Products or Services Aquana Annual SaaS Plan A
Each Yes 1 $ 1 7.15 $ 1 7.15
C8.9 Optional Proponent Products or Services Aquana Cellular LTE-M Connectivity
Each Yes 1 $ 1 7.15 $ 1 7.15
C8.10 Optional Proponent Products or Services 5/8" x 3/4" flowIQ 2200 Stainless Steel
Each No 1 $ 2 43.91 $ 24 3.91
C8.11 Optional Proponent Products or Services 3/4" S flowIQ 2200 Stainless Steel
Each No 1 $ 24 3.91 $ 24 3.91
C8.12 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.13 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.14 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.15 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.16 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.17 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.18 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - C8.19 Optional Proponent Products or Services Each $ - 61,205.38$
C8 - Optional Products, Services and Software
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable TOTAL C8 - Optional Products, Services and Software
Comments (Optional - blue cells do not have to be filled out) Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C8 Optional | Page 17 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 376 of 443 ends

City of Pleasanton
RFP Number; Water Meter Replacement and AMI System Installation Projectt C8 - Optional Products, Services and Software
Note: Proponent to fill in all cells in blue.

Proponent Proposed? Yes = Proposed option, No = Not Applicable Utility: City of Pleasanton
Proponent: Core & Main LP
Project/RFP Number: RFP# 25.604 AMI Replacement Project C8.20
C8.21
C8.22
C8.23
C8.24
C8.25
C8.26
C8.27
C8.28
C8.29
First year of Leak Detector Software (C8.4) is free.

City of Pleasanton, CA
#
C8 Optional | Page 18 of 18 Diameter Services copyright 2025

Page 377 of 443 ends

ATTACHMENT 3
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
2025-26 CIP Allocation (Water Replacement CIP- Fund 421) $2,020,000 2026-27 CIP Allocation (Water Replacement CIP- Fund 421) 2,100,000 2027-28 CIP Allocation (Water Replacement CIP- Fund 421) 2,180,000 2028-29 CIP Allocation (Water Replacement CIP- Fund 421) 2,270,000 2029-30 CIP Allocation (Water Replacement CIP- Fund 421) 2,360,000 Water Operations Budget (Water O&M - Fund 420) 2,514,096

TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING TO DATE
Project Expenditures to Date
Legal Services $11,105
Total Project Expenditures to Date $11,105
Anticipated Project Expenditures
Core and Main LP - AMI CPX Agreement for Goods and Services $10,262,257 Core and Main LP - AMI OPX Agreement for Goods and Services 2,514,096 Contingency (Approximately 5%) 513,113
TM Integration Software (SEW Integration and TM Integration Tyler & Concord) $142,000
Total Anticipated Project Expenditures $13,431,466

TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Funding Balance/(Shortfall)
Current (Balance) $1,526
$13,442,571
$13,444,096

WATER METER AND AMI SYSTEM REPLACEMENT
CIP NO. 26137
06/02/26

Page 378 of 443 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

Item #19

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

June 16, 2026
City Clerk

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A POLICY ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR PUBLIC MEETING DISRUPTIONS UNDER SENATE BILL 707

SUMMARY
Senate Bill 707 (SB 707) was signed into law in 2025 and establishes new requirements under the Brown Act for qualifying public agencies to provide access and allow participation in certain public meetings, including remote access beginning July 1, 2026. This update applies to the City of Pleasanton's City Council meetings and requires the City Council to adopt a policy to address interruptions to telephonic or internet service.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving a policy establishing a process for public meeting disruptions under Senate Bill 707.

BACKGROUND
SB 707 was signed into law in 2025 and the remote meeting components of SB 707 will become operative on July 1, 2026. SB 707 updates portions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act) related to public meeting access, teleconferencing, remote participation, public comment, and meeting accessibility.

Beginning July 1, 2026, the City Council is required to provide a method for the public to attend and participate remotely during open public meetings. This may be done through a two-way telephonic service, a two-way audiovisual platform, or other method allowed by law.

SB 707 also requires the City Council to adopt a disruption policy before July 1, 2026. The policy addresses how the City will respond if telephonic or internet service is disrupted during a meeting.

DISCUSSION
The proposed policy (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) describes the City's process in the event remote access fails during a City Council meeting. A disruption may occur if telephonic or internet service fails, preventing members of the public from attending, observing, or providing public comment remotely. The policy instructs the City Council to recess the meeting and make good- faith efforts to restore the service. SB 707 requires the open session to remain recessed for at least one hour unless service is restored sooner. If service is restored, the City Council may resume the open session.

If service cannot be restored after the required recess period, the City Council may continue the meeting only after making findings by roll-call vote that:

1. Good-faith efforts were made to restore the service; and

2. The public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public

Page 379 of 443 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

access.

The policy also requires the disruption and related actions to be documented in the meeting minutes.

Adoption of the attached resolution will formally approve the City of Pleasanton SB 707 meeting disruption policy.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Adoption of the SB 707 meeting disruption policy supports public access, meeting continuity, transparency, and compliance with Government Code section 54953.4.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted as this is an administrative matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Not applicable as this is an administrative matter to conduct City business.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action. Costs for implementation, including hybrid meeting operations, will be handled through existing and future operational budgets.

Where appropriate, PEG funds may be used for eligible audiovisual, captioning, and meeting accessibility improvements.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk Alexa Jeffress, Assistant City Manager

Acting City Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution approving SB 707 disruption policy

2. Presentation

Page 380 of 443 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON TO

APPROVE A POLICY ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR PUBLIC MEETING DISRUPTIONS UNDER SB 707
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2025, Governor Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 707 (SB 707), which amended portions of the Ralph M. Brown Act relating to public meeting access, teleconferencing, remote participation, and related public access requirements; and WHEREAS, beginning July 1, 2026, Government Code section 54953.4 requires eligible legislative bodies, including the City Council, to provide members of the public an opportunity to attend open and public meetings through a two-way telephonic service or two-way audiovisual platform, except as otherwise provided by law; and
WHEREAS, SB 707 requires the City to formally adopt a policy, on or before July 1, 2026, that establishes the procedure for recessing and reconvening a meeting in the event of disruption of remote participation and the efforts that the City will make to attempt to restore the service.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. Approves the SB 707 meeting disruption policy attached as Exhibit A.

SECTION 2. Staff is authorized and directed to take all actions reasonably necessary to implement the policy to comply with Government Code section 54953.4.

SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. The SB 707 disruption policy shall apply to meetings subject to Government Code section 54953.4 beginning July 1, 2026, unless otherwise required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on June 16, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 16 th day of June 2026
by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 381 of 443 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

Policy: Disruption of Telephonic or Internet Service
During Public Meetings

1. PURPOSE
This policy
establishes procedures for respondi ng to a disruption in the telephonic or internet services that provide two-way remote public access to meetings of the City of Pleasanton, as required by the Brown Ac t (Gov. Code § 54953.4). The policy ensures transparency, public participation, and cont inuity of government during technology disruptions.

2. BACKGROUND
Senate Bill 707 (2025) am ended the Brown Act to require eligible legislative bodies to adopt, on or before July 1, 2026, a policy addressing how the agency will respond to disruptions in telephonic or internet servic e that prevent members of the public from attending or observing a meeting remotely. This policy is adopted to comply with that requirement and to ensure continuity of public participation during technical disruptions.

3. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this policy:
• “Disruption” means any failure, outage, or other interruption that prevents members of the public from attending or observing the meeting via these remote access services.
• “Remote access services” means the two-way telephonic service and/or two-way audiovisual platform used to provide real-time remote public attendance and observation of meetings.

4. APPLICABILITY
This policy applies to all open and public meetings of the City Council at which remote public participation is offered or required under the Brown Act.

CITY COUNCIL

EXHIBIT A

Page 382 of 443 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

5. PROCEDURES IN THE EVENT OF A SERVICE DISRUPTION

5.1. Response to Service Disruption
If the Presiding Officer or Clerk becomes aware of a disruption to the agency’s remote access services that prevents members of the public from attending or observing the meeting remotely:

1. The Presiding Officer may call for a recess of the open session or convene the legislative body in closed session, consistent with the Brown Act.

2. Staff shall begin efforts to diagnose and restore the disrupted service.

3. The meeting shall remain in recess for at least one hour or until service is restored, whichever is sooner. The recess period may be extended if restoration efforts are ongoing.

5.2. Efforts to Restore Service
The agency shall make good faith efforts to restore remote access services.

Depending on the nature of t he disruption, efforts may in clude one or more of the following:
• Troubleshooting platform or teleconferencing software • Resetting or replacing audiovisual equipment
• Attempting alternative connection methods
• Contacting necessary support staff or service providers • Switching to back-up equipment or platforms, if available

The Information Technology department shall document the re storation efforts undertaken.

6. RECONVENING TH E OPEN SESSION

6.1. Timing
The open session may be reconvened after at least one hour has elapsed from the time of disruption or as soon as service is restored, whichever occurs earlier.

6.2 If Service Is Restored
If the remote access service is restored before or at the time the meeting reconvenes, the meeting shall continue as normal.

6.3 If Service Is Not Restored
If service has not been restored after one hour, the City Council may reconvene and:

1. Adjourn the meeting; or

2. Continue the meeting in open session by adopting, by roll call vote, the following, or a substantially similar, finding:

“The City of Pleasanton has made good faith efforts to restore telephonic or internet service in accordance with its adopted policy, and the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access.”

Page 383 of 443 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

Upon adoption of the finding, the legi slative body may continue the open session even if remote access services have not been restored.

7. RECORDKEEPING

The Clerk shall enter a brief statement of the disruption into the meeting minutes, including the following:
• The nature and time of the disruption, and restoration efforts undertaken • The time the meeting was reconvened (if applicable)
• Any finding adopted pursuant to Section 6.3

8. REVIEW AND UPDATES

This policy may be amended by the City Council at a noticed public meeting in open session, or as may be amended by the Government Code.

Approval Date: ______________

Page 384 of 443 ends

SB 707: Disruption Policy
June 2, 2026
Background – Senate Bill 707 (2025)
•Requires eligible legislative bodies (City Council) to provide remote opportunities to participate at public meetings through the following means:
•A
two-way telephonic service; or
•A two-way audiovisual platform; or
•Another method allowed by law
•Requires the City Council to adopt a meeting disruption policy •Implementation beginning July 1, 2026
ATTACHMENT 2

Page 385 of 443 ends

Summary of Disruption Policy
•The policy provides a process in the event remote access is disrupted or fails during a City Council meeting:
•recess the open session;
•make good-faith efforts to restore the service for at least one hour unless service is restored sooner.

Summary of Disruption Policy (cont.)
•If service cannot be restored, the City Council may continue holding the meeting after making the findings that:
•Good-faith efforts were made to restore the service;
•The public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access

Page 386 of 443 ends

Recommendation
•Adopt a resolution approving the City of Pleasanton’s policy establishing a process for public meeting disruptions under Senate Bill 707
QUESTIONS?

Page 387 of 443 ends

Page 1 of 4 ends

Item #20

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

June 16, 2026
Community and Economic Development

TITLE: REVIEW AN APPLICATION FOR SIGN DESIGN REVIEW TO REBRAND AN EXISTING 76 GAS STATION AND CIRCLE K MARKET TO SHELL GASOLINE AND FASTFILL MARKET LOCATED AT 4191 FIRST STREET, FILED AS CASE NO. P25-0300

SUMMARY
A member of the City Council has requested a review of Case No. P25-0300, an application for Sign Design Review (SDR) to rebrand the existing 76 Gas Station and Circle K Market to Shell Gasoline and FastFill Market located at 4191 First Street. In the absence of an approved master sign program, the requested signage changes require SDR approval. The Zoning Administrator denied the application on February 25, 2026 (Attachment 2). The applicant appealed the decision to the Planning Commission on March 5, 2026 (Attachment 3). On May 13, 2026, the Planning Commission considered and upheld the appeal, overturning the Zoning Administrator’s denial, subject to findings and conditions of approval, including a reduction of the amount of corporate branding color on the canopy to not exceed 50 percent of the total canopy fascia height (Attachment 6). Per Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) Section

18.144.010 (‘City Council Review’), on May 15, 2026, a member of the City Council called up the action of the Planning Commission for review. Accordingly, the SDR application is before the City Council for de novo consideration.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator’s denial of Case No. P25-0300, subject to the findings in Attachment 1, Exhibit A.

Alternatively, the City Council may, based on its de novo review of the application, elect to approve the project, either consistent with the Planning Commission's determination, in alignment with the applicant's proposal, or with further modifications. If electing to approve the project, staff would recommend the City Council adopt a resolution with the same or similar findings and conditions of approval made by the Planning Commission, as outlined in Attachment 6.

BACKGROUND
Project Description and Location
On September 2, 2025, Guy Houston submitted a Sign Design Review (SDR) application on behalf of property owner Mike Ahmadi (GAWFCO Enterprises, LLC) to rebrand the gas station at 4191 First Street. The proposed project includes the installation of new monument, wall, canopy, and pump signage as part of a gas station rebranding for a Shell gasoline station located at 4191 First Street (former 76 Gas Station). The site contains a gas station and a convenience market. Access to the site is provided along the First Street and Ray Street frontages. Adjacent uses to the site include detached single-family homes and office buildings to the west along Ray Street, commercial tenant spaces to the north along First Street,

Page 388 of 443 ends

Page 2 of 4 ends

residential to the east along Vineyard Avenue, and a variety of commercial uses to the south along First Street.

See the Project Plans (Attachment 5) for additional details of the proposed project, including images of the prior 76 Gas Station design.

Staff Review and Zoning Administrator Action
Staff deemed the application incomplete on September 16, 2025, expressing general support for the site upgrade but requesting a reduction in franchise branding colors on the canopy fascia, consistent with the approximately 25 percent coverage featured on the existing 76 Gas Station canopy.

Following further dialogue, the applicant switched brands from Sunoco to Shell Gasoline and resubmitted in January 2026; while the revised package reduced franchise color coverage compared to the earlier Sunoco proposal, the Shell Gasoline canopy design still featured approximately 66 percent yellow and red franchise branding color. Although staff indicated the project could be approved with reductions in the amount of branded color elements on the canopy, the applicant declined to make such changes. The Zoning Administrator issued a denial on February 25, 2026, finding the proposed signage inconsistent with General Plan Community Character Element Policies 15 and 16, which call for attractive colors that minimize bright franchise branding and discourage franchise prototype signage. The applicant filed a timely appeal on March 5, 2026 (Attachment 3).

PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On May 13, 2026, the Planning Commission heard the appeal, and after considering the agenda report (Attachment 4), public comment, the applicant's testimony, and project plans (Attachment 5), the Planning Commission upheld the applicant’s appeal (3-1 vote), overturning the Zoning Administrator’s determination to deny the SDR application. The Planning Commission made findings for approval and adopted standard SDR conditions of approval, as well as two project-specific conditions of approval as follows: 1) the height of the Shell Gasoline corporate branding color band shall not exceed 50 percent of the total canopy fascia height; and 2) any canopy illumination (except underlighting) shall automatically turn off at 10 p.m. daily (Attachment 6).

DISCUSSION
As part of the SDR process, the Zoning Administrator subjectively evaluates the proposed signage against the following standards prior to making a determination:

1. Any applicable General Plan policies, specifically:
o Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3:
▪ Attractive sign design and higher quality sign materials ▪ Attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors o Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage".

2. Any applicable Design Guidelines (such as the Downtown Design Guidelines) and,

Page 389 of 443 ends

Page 3 of 4 ends

for signs on Main Street, standards in the Downtown Revitalization District Ordinance (PMC Chapter 18.74).

3. Any applicable provisions specified in PMC Section 18.96 (Signs).

The City's Sign Ordinance includes basic parameters as to the amount, size, placement, and lighting of signs (with such standards varying by Zoning District), but lacks strict, objective design parameters in many respects, particularly with regard to aesthetics (e.g., colors, materials, permissible lighting levels, amount of branding vs. non-branding components, etc.).

The Sign Ordinance does not include a quantified standard for the amount of "bright franchise colors" that could be considered to meet the General Plan's policy intent to "minimize" their use. Staff notes that there is a wide range of existing examples and degrees of use of gas station franchise colors throughout Pleasanton, even within the same brand, ranging from minimal to much more extensive.

As such, the SDR process involves some degree of subjectivity, wherein staff evaluates projects on a case-by-case basis through the review process, taking into account factors such as the location and visibility of the site, existing signage/sign conditions, and design/character of the buildings or structures on which the signage is being placed, nature of the use for which the signage is proposed, and character, type, and proximity of adjacent uses. The City must also consider the reasonable expectation or First Amendment right that a business may wish or be entitled to use its corporate colors, business identification, or branding as part of its signage program.

As outlined in the Denial Letter (Attachment 2) and the Planning Commission agenda report (Attachment 4), it was staff's conclusion that, as designed, the proposed canopy would create an overly franchise-brand-forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and does not reinforce the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The proposed canopy color band is disproportionately large ( approximately 66 percent of the canopy height), altering the perceived scale and the canopy's emphasis when viewed from the public right-of-way. Rather than providing a balanced architectural feature that transitions appropriately with the streetscape at a Downtown gateway, the canopy reads as a dominant graphic/franchise branding element, which is also discouraged by General Plan Community Character Element Policy 16.

Please refer to Attachments 2 through 6 for full project details, an overview of the SDR process, and governing General Plan policies and PMC standards related to SDR.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, which statutorily exempts projects that a public agency intends to deny. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
As outlined above, in the absence of a quantified standard in the Sign Ordinance, evaluation of the suitability of a specific sign design proposal involves some degree of subjectivity, based on site-specific conditions and considerations.

Page 390 of 443 ends

Page 4 of 4 ends

While staff continues to recommend denial of the application based on the findings outlined in Attachment 1, the City Council, based on its independent and de novo review of the application, could elect to follow the Planning Commission's determination (a reduction to no more than 50 percent of the canopy area being branded colors), and adopt a resolution with the same or similar findings and conditions of approval made by the Planning Commission (Attachment 6); approve the project as proposed by the applicant; or make further modifications. In either of these latter cases, similar findings for approval as were made by the Planning Commission would also be appropriate to adopt.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable to this project, since this a routine item of City business.

OUTREACH
Notice of this application was sent to property owners and tenants/occupants within a 1,000- foot radius of the subject site, as shown in Attachment 7, and it was published in the Valley Times newspaper on June 5, 2026. At the time this report was published, no public comments had been received.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Not applicable to this project, since this is a routine item of City business.

FISCAL IMPACT
The project applicant is responsible for paying the fees as set forth in the Conditions of Approval (Attachment 6). No fiscal impacts to the City or public services are anticipated.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Eric Luchini, Senior Planner Ellen Clark, Director of Community and Economic Development

Acting City Manager

Attachments:

1. City Council Resolution

2. Denial Letter

3. Applicant Appeal

4. Planning Commission Agenda Report

5. Project Plans

6. Planning Commission Resolution

7. Location and Noticing Map

8. Presentation

Page 391 of 443 ends

R
ESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASA NTON UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S DENIAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR SIGN DESIGN REVIEW TO REBRAND AN EXISTING 76 GAS STATION AND CIRCLE K MARKET TO SHELL GASOLINE AND FASTFILL MARKET LOCATED AT 4191 FIRST STREET, AS FILED UNDER CASE NO. P25-0300
W
HEREAS, on September 2, 2025, Guy Houston, as the applicant (“Applicant”), on behalf of the property owner Mike Ahmadi, GAWFCO Enterprises, LLC (“Property Owner”), submitted 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 (hereinafter “the Project”) located at 4191 First Street, Assessor Parcel No. 94-110-12-6 (hereinafter “the Property”); and
W
HEREAS, the Property has a General Plan land use designation of Retail/Highway/Service Commercial Business and Professional Offices; and W
HEREAS, the Property is zoned C-C (Central Commercial) District; and W
HEREAS, the Property is designated Downtown Commercial in the Downtown Specific Plan; and
W
HEREAS, on February 25, 2026, the Zoning Administrator denied the Project pursuant to inconsistencies with the required findings listed in Pleasanton Municipal Code ( PMC) Section

18.20.050.B.1 through 6, as outlined in Section 4 below; and W
HEREAS, on March 5, 2026, Applicant, on behalf of the Property Owner, filed a timely appeal of the Zoning Administrator's determination to deny the Project to the Planning Commission; and
W
HEREAS, pursuant to Section 65905 of the Government Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project on May 13, 2026, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. The Planning Commission considered the agenda report dated May 13, 2026, incorporated herein by reference, and all written and oral testimony; and
W
HEREAS, on May 13, 2026, the Planning Commission voted and adopted Resolution No. PC-2026-12, upholding the appeal and made revised findings pursuant to those listed in PMC Section 18.20.050.B.1 through 6; and
W
HEREAS, on May 15, 2026, pursuant to Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 18.144.010 (‘City Council Review’) , the City Council called up the action of the Planning Commission for review; and
W
HEREAS, pursuant to Section 65905 of the Government Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project on June 16, 2026, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. The City Council considered the agenda report dated June 16, 2026, incorporated herein by reference, and all written and oral testimony; and Attachment 1

Page 392 of 443 ends

WHEREAS, on June 16, 2026, the City Council denied the Project pursuant to inconsistencies with the required findings listed in PMC Section 18.20.050.B.1 through 6 and as outlined in Section 4 below; and

WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton was the lead agency for the Project, and the City Council was the decision-making body for denying the Project.

NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

Section 1. Prior to acting on the Project, and at a properly noticed public hearing, the City Council reviewed written and oral agenda reports, conducted a public hearing on the Project and took testimony, and received into the record all pertinent documents related to the Project (collectively, the “Record Evidence”). The City Council’s de novo determination is based on its own independent review of the Record Evidence, which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference.

Section 2. The Project is not consistent with the adopted and applicable General Plan Programs, Policies, and Goals related to community character and the discouragement of franchise and prototype architecture and signage. As such, the Project does not comply with the requirements of Government Code Section 65860.

Section 3. Findings for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) With respect to CEQA, the Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, which statutorily exempts projects that a public agency intends to deny. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required.

Section 4. Findings for Sign Design Review Denial
With respect to the denial of P25-0300, the City Council makes the following findings as required by Section 18.20.050.B.1 through 6 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code:

1. The project's approval is in the best interest of public health, safety, and general welfare.

The Project, as designed, is not in the best interest of the general welfare, which encompasses not only health, spaciousness, and balance, but also beauty . Berman v.

Parker (1954) 348 U.S. 26 . The proposed canopy composition is not a balanced architectural expression because the color band occupies 63.8% of the canopy height, making color the primary defining feature rather than the relationship of architectural components and materials. The dis proportionate band undermines architectural quality and the cohesive relationship of building components, colors, and materials.

The Project site serves as a prominent Downtown gateway/entry corridor, where the streetscape's visual character contributes to Pleasanton’s community identity and general welfare. The proposed canopy design, specifically the oversized, franchise-forward color band, creates an overly brand- forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and does not reinforce the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The proposal conflicts wi th the General Plan Community Character Element, including Policy 15 / Program 15.3 (attractive sign design and higher -quality sign materials and colors, minimizing bright

Page 393 of 443 ends

franchise colors) and Policy 16 (discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage). As a result, the project does not demonstrate that approval would serve the general welfare as contemplated by the City’s adopted community character policies.

Accordingly, the City Council cannot make this finding.

2. The site design, including building placement, parking and circulation, landscape, and outdoor space, enhances the pedestrian experience, embraces natural features, promotes connections, creates visual interest, and relates to the character of the surrounding development.

The proposed canopy treatment relies primarily on a dominant franchise color field rather than a context -sensitive architectural composition that reinforces the established Downtown entry character. Because the color band is disproportionately large and visually dominant from the public right -of-way, it draws attention away from building form, materials, and the broader streetscape composition and therefore does not enhance the pedestrian experience along this Downtown approach. Further, the emphasis on franchise color diminishes the ability for landscaping and streetscape elements to complement architectural features, strengthen vistas, and reinforce an established gateway character.

Accordingly, the City Council cannot make this finding.

3. Architectural considerations, including character, scale, massing, and quality of design, have been incorporated to ensure the project integrates with the existing site and has a cohesive relationship with the surrounding context.

The proposed canopy design creates an overly brand -forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and does not reinforce the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The proposed canopy color band occupies approximately 63.8% of the canopy height, altering the perceived scale and emphasis of the canopy when viewed from the public right -of- way. Rather than reading as a balanced architectural feature with subordinate branding, the canopy reads as a dominant graphic/branding element, which is not compatible with the intended Downtown gateway context and is inconsistent with the City’s direction to avoid franchise/prototype architecture and signage (General Plan Community Character Element Policy 16). The disproportionate band undermines architectural quality and results in an inappropriate relationship to the site, public views, and surrounding development patterns.

Accordingly, the City Council cannot make this finding.

4. Exterior lighting, signage, amenities, mechanical equipment, and other architectural features are integrated into the design of the site and building.

The canopy color band functions as a large- format branding device rather than an architectural element integrated into the overall design concept. Given its size and prominence, the band is inconsistent with integrated sign design and does not meet the record-supported threshold that would keep branding subordinate to architecture. The proposal conflicts with General Plan Community Character Element Policy 15 / Program

15.3 (minimize bright franchise colors; attractive sign design and materials) and Policy 16 (discourage franchise and prototype architecture/signage).

Page 394 of 443 ends

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 C haracter 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 395 of 443 ends

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on June 16, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Daniel Sodergren, City Attorney

Page 396 of 443 ends

COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT P. O. BOX 520 · 200 Old Bernal Avenue www.cityofpleasantonca.gov Pleasanton, CA 94566-0802 Planning Building & Safety Code Enforcement Permit Center Traffic Engineering (925) 931-5600 (925) 931- 5300 (925) 931-5620 (925) 931-5630 (925) 931-5677 February 25, 2026
VI
A Email:
[email protected]
Guy H
ouston
California Gold Advocacy Group
6300 Village Parkway
Suite 200
Dublin, CA 94568
S
ubject: P25-0300, Gas Station Monument, Wall, Canopy Signage 4191 First Street
Effective Date: March 7, 2026
D
ear Mr. Houston:

T
he City of Pleasanton has completed its Sign Design Review procedure for your proposal to install new monument, wall, and canopy signage as part of a gas station rebranding for Shell Gas Station located at 4191 First Street.

Y
our application has been denied, subject to the following review criteria outlined in Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 18.20.030:

1. P
reservation of the natural beauty of the city and the project site's relationship to it; T
he project site is located at a prominent entryway to Downtown, where the visual character of the streetscape contributes to the City’s community identity. The proposed canopy design creates an overly brand-forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and does not reinforce the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. General Plan Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3 requires redevelopment of existing commercial sites to include attractive sign design and higher-quality sign materials and attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors. Further, Community Character Element Policy 16 "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage".

2. A
ppropriate relationship of the proposed building to its site, including transition with streetscape, public views of the buildings, and scale of buildings within its site and Attachment 2

Page 397 of 443 ends

adjoining buildings;

The proposed canopy color band is disproportionately large (63.8% of canopy height), which changes the perceived scale and emphasis of the canopy when viewed from the public right-of-way. Rather than providing a balanced architectural feature that transitions appropriately with the streetscape at a Downtown gateway, the canopy reads as a dominant graphic/branding element, which is also discouraged by General Plan Community Character Element Policy 16. This results in an inappropriate relationship to the site and public views along the corridor.

3. Appropriate relationship of the proposed building and its site to adjoining areas, including compatibility of architectural styles, harmony in adjoining buildings, attractive landscape transitions, and consistency with neighborhood character;

At this Downtown entry location, the project should contribute to a cohesive, context- sensitive character. The dominant franchise color treatment is not compatible with a locally integrated architectural approach and does not promote harmony with surrounding development patterns that rely on architectural form and materials rather than large-format franchise color fields. Accordingly, the proposal is not consistent with the intended neighborhood/Downtown character.

4. Preservation of views enjoyed by residents, workers within the city, and passersby through the community;

Because the site is part of a gateway into Downtown, views from public streets are particularly important. The oversized color band draws attention away from building form, materials, and the broader streetscape composition, visually interrupting the quality of views experienced by passersby. The design therefore does not adequately preserve the visual experience along this Downtown approach.

5. Landscaping designed to enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas, provide shade, and conform to established streetscape;

The proposed canopy treatment relies primarily on a dominant color field rather than architectural design that can be complemented by landscaping and streetscape elements.

By emphasizing franchise color over integrated architectural composition, the canopy diminishes the ability for landscaping to serve its intended role—enhancing architectural features and strengthening the gateway streetscape. The proposal does not demonstrate a design approach where landscaping and architecture work together to reinforce an established Downtown entry character.

6. Relationship of exterior lighting to its surroundings and to the building and adjoining landscape;

Page 398 of 443 ends

The north and west sides of the canopy are non-illuminated. The west side of the property is adjacent to residential uses, as such the proposed illumination is appropriate for the site.

7. Architectural style, as a function of its quality of design and relationship to its surroundings; the relationship of building components to one another/the building's colors and materials; and the design attention given to mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings;

The proposed canopy composition is not a balanced architectural expression because the color band occupies 63.8% of the canopy height, making color the primary defining feature rather than the relationship of architectural components and materials. This conflicts with staff’s supported design direction (band ≤50%) that was intended to maintain a more proportionate, higher-quality appearance consistent with the existing/previous canopy design and the Downtown entry context. The disproportionate band undermines architectural quality and the cohesive relationship of building components, colors, and materials.

8. Integration of signs as part of the architectural concept; and

The canopy color band functions as a large-format branding device rather than an element integrated into the overall architectural concept. Given its size, the color band is not consistent with the intent of integrated sign design. Staff’s support was explicitly tied to limiting the band to 50% or less to ensure the canopy remained an architectural element with subordinate branding; the proposal does not meet that integration threshold. General Plan Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3 requires redevelopment of existing commercial sites to include attractive sign design and higher-quality sign materials and attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors.

Further, Community Character Element Policy 16 "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage". The signage as proposed does not meet the requirements and intent of the General Plan.

9. Architectural concept of miscellaneous structures, street furniture, public art in relationship to the site and landscape.

As a Downtown entryway location, the site’s overall public realm experience depends on cohesive design among building features and streetscape elements. The proposed canopy’s dominant franchise color band does not contribute to a coordinated architectural concept that complements the surrounding public realm character; instead it introduces a prototype-like visual emphasis that competes with, rather than reinforces, the broader streetscape composition.

Any interested party may file an appeal of this action within 10 days of the date of action.

Therefore, denial of the Sign Design Review will become effective on March 7, 2025, unless appealed prior to that time.

Page 399 of 443 ends

If you have questions, please feel free to contact me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Emily Carroll, AICP
Associate Planner

Page 400 of 443 ends

Attachment 3

Page 401 of 443 ends

Page 402 of 443 ends

Page 403 of 443 ends

Page 404 of 443 ends

Page 405 of 443 ends

Page 406 of 443 ends

Page 407 of 443 ends

Page 408 of 443 ends

Page 409 of 443 ends

Page 410 of 443 ends

Planning Commission
Agenda Report
May 13, 2026
Item XX
S
UBJECT: P25-0300
AP
PLICANT: Guy Houston
PR
OPERTY OWNER: Mike Ahmadi, GAWFCO Enterprises, LLC
PU
RPOSE: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s denial of an application for Sign Design Review to rebrand an existing 76 Gas Station and Circle K Market to a Shell Gasoline Station and FastFill Market L
OCATION: 4191 First Street
G
ENERAL PLAN: Retail/Highway/Service Commercial Business and Professional Offices
ZONING: C-C Commercial Central District
DO
WNTOWN
SPECIFIC PLAN: Downtown Commercial
EXH
IBITS: A. Draft Resolution
B. Denial Letter dated February 25, 2026
C. Appeal materials submitted by applicant on March 5, 2026, including narrative and project plans
D. Location and Notification Map
S

TAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s denial of Case No. P25-0300, based on the findings in Exhibit A.

EXEC

UTIVE SUMMARY
On September 2, 2025, the applicant requested review of a Sign Design Review (SDR) application to allow for the installation of new monument, wall, canopy, and pump signage as part of a gas station rebranding for a Shell gasoline station located at 4191 First Street (former 76 Gas Station). In the absence of an approved master sign program, the requested signage Attachment 4

Page 411 of 443 ends

P25-0300, 4191 First Street Planning Commission 2 of 6
changes require SDR approval. The Zoning Administrator denied the SDR application (P25- 0300) on February 25, 2026. The applicant filed an appeal on March 5, 2026, pursuant to Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) Section 18.144. The application is therefore before the Planning Commission for de novo consideration, whereby the Commission is tasked with evaluating the application afresh, as if the Zoning Administrator had never taken action. The Planning Commission may uphold the denial or approve the SDR with or without modifications.

SITE AND AREA DESCRIPTION
The subject site is an approximately 0.5-acre parcel located at the intersection of First Street and Ray Street/Vineyard Avenue. The site contains a gas station and a convenience market (shown in Figure 1). Access to the site is provided along the First Street and Ray Street frontages. Adjacent uses to the site include detached single-family homes and office buildings to the west along Ray Street, commercial tenant spaces to the north along First Street, residential to the east along Vineyard Avenue and a variety of commercial uses to the south along First Street (shown in Figure 1).

Figure 1: Aerial of the Site and Surrounding Area

BACKGROUND
Design Review Process
The PMC Section 18.20.010.B.7. (Design Review) specifies the City's Zoning Administrator shall review and make decisions regarding all signs.

Determinations on signs are typically made in one of two ways:

1. Conformance with an approved master sign program; or

2. Sign Design Review.

Master Sign Program

Page 412 of 443 ends

P25-0300, 4191 First Street Planning Commission 3 of 6
If a sign is proposed within a project area with an approved master sign program (e.g., a shopping center, office/business park, corporate headquarters/campus, etc.), the Zoning Administrator reviews the proposed signage against the criteria specified in the master sign program. If the proposed signage meets the criteria, the proposed signage is approved ministerially and any required construction permits may be applied for by the applicant. If the proposed signage is found not to conform to the approved master sign program, it is rejected by the Zoning Administrator, and the applicant is directed to correct the deficiencies prior.

Sign Design Review
If the sign is not in a project area subject to an approved master sign program, then as part of the SDR process, the Zoning Administrator evaluates the proposed signage against the following standards prior to making a determination:

1. Any applicable General Plan policies, specifically:

o Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3:
 Attractive sign design and higher quality sign materials  Attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors o Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage".

2. Any applicable Design Guidelines (such as the Downtown Design Guidelines) and, for signs on Main Street, standards in the Downtown Revitalization District Ordinance (PMC Chapter 18.74).

3. Any applicable provisions specified in PMC Section 18.96 (Signs).

The City's Sign Ordinance includes basic parameters as to the amount, size, placement and lighting of signs (with such standards varying by Zoning District), but lacks strict, objective design parameters in many respects, particularly with regard to aesthetics (e.g., colors, materials, permissible lighting levels, amount of branding vs. non-branding components, etc.).

Staff provides feedback to applicants through the review process, with comments taking into account factors such as the location and visibility of the site, existing signage/sign conditions, and design/character of the buildings or structures on which the signage is being placed, nature of the use for which the signage is proposed, and character, type, and proximity of adjacent uses. The City must also consider the reasonable expectation or First Amendment right that a business may wish or be entitled to use its corporate colors, business identification, or branding as part of its signage program.

ZONING ADMNISTRATOR ACTION
On September 2, 2025, Guy Houston, on behalf of the owners of the gas station at 4191 First Street, submitted a Sign Design Review application for signage modifications as part of a rebranding process from the former 76 Gas Station to a new Sunoco Gas Station. The scope of work also included replacing much of the dead landscaping and removing outdated structures like the propane tank holders, bollards, etc.

On September 16, 2025, the application was deemed incomplete. While staff indicated general support for the applicant’s intent to upgrade and improve the appearance of the project site,

Page 413 of 443 ends

P25-0300, 4191 First Street Planning Commission 4 of 6
comments requested that the percentage/intensity of blue the franchise branding colors be reduced in order to be consistent with the existing 76 Gas Station canopy design, which features approximately 25 percent orange franchise branding colors. See Figure 2 for the existing canopy design and Figure 3 for the design proposed with the September 2025 proposal.

Figure 2: Previous 76 Branded canopy

Figure 3: Canopy Design Proposed with September 2025 Application

Page 414 of 443 ends

P25-0300, 4191 First Street Planning Commission 5 of 6
Over the course of the following weeks, staff communicated with the applicant several times to review possible sign design options, lighting options, etc. The applicant decided to switch brands from Sunoco to Shell.

After switching brands to Shell Gasoline, the applicant resubmitted a sign package on January 15, 2026 (See Figure 3). This submittal included less franchise branding colors than the Sunoco design, which featured about 25 percent franchise branding color, but still featured a predominant amount of yellow and red franchise branding colors on the canopy (approximately 66 percent of the canopy fascia). As a compromise, staff reached out to the applicant to request that the franchise branding color bands be reduced such that franchise branding colors do not exceed 33 percent of the total canopy band fascia on each side of the canopy.

Figure 3: Shell Branding

The applicant was unwilling to further modify the canopy signage and requested that the Zoning Administrator take action on the application as proposed. As such, the Zoning Administrator issued a denial letter on February 25, 2026 (Exhibit B). Note that the Design Review findings were updated following the project submittal and Zoning Administrator denial.

As such, the Zoning Administrator denial letter includes findings for the former Design Review criteria outline, whereas the resolution (Exhibit A) utilizes the updated Design Review findings.

The applicant filed a timely appeal on March 5, 2026, pursuant to PMC Section 18.144.

ANALYSIS
As proposed, the signage fails to meet the intent of two General Plan policies:
• Community Character Element Policy 15, Program 15.3:
o Attractive sign design and higher quality sign materials o Attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors • Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage".

Moreover, the project site is located at a prominent entryway to Downtown, where the visual character of the streetscape contributes to the City’s community identity. The Downtown Specific Plan states that “signage is a factor in the overall aesthetic of downtown’s commercial district, and attractive signs can reinforce downtown’s pedestrian scale and traditional design.”

Page 415 of 443 ends

P25-0300, 4191 First Street Planning Commission 6 of 6
The proposed canopy design creates an overly franchise-brand-forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and does not reinforce the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The proposed canopy color band is disproportionately large (63.8 percent of the canopy height), altering the perceived scale and emphasis of the canopy when viewed from the public right-of-way. Rather than providing a balanced architectural feature that transitions appropriately with the streetscape at a Downtown gateway, the canopy reads as a dominant graphic/franchise branding element, which is also discouraged by General Plan Community Character Element Policy 16.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of this application was sent to surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000- foot radius of the subject parcel, and it was published in the Valley Times newspaper on May 1, 2026. At the time this report was published, staff had not received any public comments.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, which statutorily exempt projects that a public agency intends to deny. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
As proposed, the Zoning Administrator found that the proposed SDR is not in keeping with other similar gas station signage design concepts throughout the City and is not consistent with the General Plan's sign policies. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator’s denial of Case No. P25- 0300.

Staff Planner: Emily Carroll, Associate Planner, 925-931-5608 or [email protected]

Reviewed/ Approved By:

Derek Farmer Assistant Director of Community and Economic Development and Planning Manager Eric Luchini, Senior Planner
Katherine Wisinski, Assistant City Attorney

Page 416 of 443 ends

SITE OVERVIEW

SCOPE OF WORK
Manufacture and install:
• Building Sign: Manufacture and install 2 signs with brand vinyl graphics on building. • MID 1: Reface existing price sign.
• MID 2: Reface existing price sign.
• Canopy: Complete branding with 2 Shell Pectens.
• Dispensers: Install new dispensers and brand vinyl graphics. • Under Canopy: Install all the necessary elements to customize the space with Shell brand.

PROPERTY LINE

AERIAL VIEW

FIRST STREET

RAY STREET

PARKING

PARKING
CANOPY

BUILDING

VINEYARD AVE
FIRS
T STRE
ET
MID 1
3 MID 2
4 5
1 2
9 9
9 99
9 9
6 7
3 45
1 2
9 9
9 99
9 9
6 7
54’
SIGNS PROPOSED SQ. FT.

Building Sign 22 24’
MID 13 45.33’
MID 24 16.44’
1 Building Sign 1
157.81’
0’
5 Canopy Details
6 18.04’
Dispensers Imaging
8 8
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 1/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026
Attachment 5

Page 417 of 443 ends

BUILDING SIGN

EXISTING

PROPOSED
1 COLORS USED:
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-61
Slate Gray
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-33
Red
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-51
Silver Gray
Blue
PROPOSED SQ.FT
54 SQ. FT.
12’
4’-6”
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 2/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 418 of 443 ends

BUILDING SIGN 2

EXISTINGEXISTING

PROPOSED
PROPOSED SQ.FT
24 SQ. FT.

COLORS USED:
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-61
Slate Gray
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-33
Red
3M Scotchcal Translucent 3630-51
Silver Gray
Blue
3’
8’
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 3/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 419 of 443 ends

3PRIMARY MID SIGN
Rendering
...for graphic purposes only and not intended for actual construction dimensions. For windload requirements, actual dimensions and mounting detail, please refer to final engineering specifications and install drawings.

PROPOSED SQ.FT

45.33 SQ. FT.
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 4/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
"86
"8-'5

EXISTING SIGN
96" CABINET
8'-0"
6” LEDS
6” LEDS
6” LEDS
6” LEDS
Cash Credit/
DebitGasoline
Diesel
#2
Regular
Plus
V-Power
35 1/2"
[902 mm]
Cash Credit/
DebitGasoline
Diesel
#2
Regular
Plus
V-Power
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 420 of 443 ends

4SECONDARY MID SIGN

EXISTING

PROPOSED

DAY NIGHT
PROPOSED SQ.FT

16.44 SQ. FT.

MUST FOLLOW CA STATE LAWS:
- Diesel must be displayed as “Diesel #2” ambar yellow digits and slid - “Regular Gasoline”, “Plus Gasoline”, “V-Power Gasoline”, “Diesel #2”, “Cash” and “Credit/Debit”, must be 1/3 of the numeral height (but the final text/copy never needs to be more than 4” in height,
regardless of numeral height).
- Required to have full 9/10
- ALL grades must be written out
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 5/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
64"
24"
[610 mm]

CABINET ELEVATION
"73
Regular
Gasoline
Plus
Gasoline
V-Power
Gasoline
Diesel #2
Regular
Gasoline
Plus
Gasoline
V-Power
Gasoline
Diesel #2

SIDE VIEW
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 421 of 443 ends

EXISTING

PROPOSAL
CANOPY
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 6/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 422 of 443 ends

CANOPY
Scope of Work:

Remove existing fascia and dispose.

Install 36” pre-imaged Shell fascia.

Fascia to be ILLUMINATED on East/South View.

Fascia to be FLAT NON-ILLUMINATED on West/North
Install Qty: 2 Shell Pecten.
36”
102’
East View
Ray Street
Illuminated Fascia
36”
102’
West View
Non-Illuminated Fascia
36”
43’
North View
Non-Illuminated Fascia
1 3
C-Store
4 2
’201
43’
riF
s
rtS t
ee
t
Ray Street
F
hgieH aicsa
”63 :t

NGIS DI
M
36”
43’
South View
Illuminated Fascia
1 2
3 4
First Street
First Street
Ray Street
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 7/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 423 of 443 ends

16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 8/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas

CANOPY DETAILS PECTEN MOUNTING DETAILS
Existing met al ACM
canopy fascia
Existing elect rical
with disconnect sw itch
Raceway
LED transformer
mounted to canopy framing
Metal fasteners as r equired.

Metal self tapping screw s
(minimum 4 per letter)
Sign Face
L.E.D. lights
trim cap
Aluminum return
Pecten
Logo Sign

37.38”

34.76”
Existing Panels

CANOPY PANEL MOUNTING DETAILS

CANOPY MOUNTING DETAILS (SIDE ELEVATION)

6.30” (180mm) Corners - Standard Corners Shell Pecten Logo Canopy Branding PROPOSED SQ.FT

9.02 SQ. FT.

Level 1

4.72"

2.24"

23.6"

36.00"

37.38"

34.76" 38.24"
Illuminated Pecten panelLevel 1 Dimensional Fascia
w/Mini LED Red Bar
02/05/2026

Page 424 of 443 ends

DISPENSERS

PRICE PER DIESEL
GALLON EQUIVALENT $

ALL TAXES INCLUDED
1 PRICE PER GALL ON

ALL T AXES IN CLUDED

PRICE PER GALL ON

ALL T AXES IN CLUDED

PRICE PER GALL ON

ALL T AXES INCLUDED
1 Customer Service
Unit (CSU)
Dispenser Valance
Canopy
Column
HSSE/ADA decal
Bollards
Dispenser
Skirt
35”
60”
Gas Dispenser Scope of Work:

Existing Wayne Ovation (Qty: 2 3+1 DSL & 4 3+0) dispensers to be re-imaged to Shell. a. Shell Valances provided by ProSign to be ﬁtted on all dispensers (Qty: 6) b. Install new Metal Door Skins (Qty: 6 set)
c. Install LSI provided PID/Octane/Crind Overlay decals (Qty: 6 set) d. Install 2-1/2” Pump # Decal to dispenser crind/bezel. e. Health & Safety decals (2 per dispenser) installed on inside risers f. Install all required regulatory decals as needed (ethanol, low sulfur, ADA etc.) g. Install Qty: 6 Pump Topper Frames
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 9/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 425 of 443 ends

2 3
4 1
6 5
The brand colors used throughout this site are:
– Shell Yellow and Shell Red: 1:5 ratio.
– Shell White is the canvas on which Shell Yellow and Shell Red are able to appear – Shell Dark Gray and Shell Mid Gray, both recommended for Signage and Messaging applications – Shell Silver Champagne, used in Prime Signs and directional signage – Shell Silver, used on building doors on site and High Rise Sign pole P
Shell
Yellow
Shell
Red

Shell Dark Gray 80%
Pantone 425 C
CMYK 0–0–0–80
RGB 89–89–89
HTML #595959
Pantone 485 C
CMYK 0–100–100–0
RGB 221–29–33
HTML #DD1D21
Pantone 116 C
CMYK 0–16–100–0
RGB 251–206–7
HTML #FBCE07
Shell Mid Gray 60%
Pantone Cool Gray 10
CMYK 0–0–0–60
RGB 127–127–127
HTML #7F7F7F
Shell Light Gray 40%
Pantone Cool Gray 7
CMYK 0–0–0–40
RGB 166–166–166
HTML #A6A6A6
Shell White
CMYK 0–0–0–00
RGB 255–255–255
HTML #FFFFFF
Shell Silver Champagne
Pantone 8004C
CMYK 00-11-23-46
RGB 137-122-105
HTML #897A69
Shell Silver
Pantone XXX C

CMYK XXX
RGB XXX–XXX–XXX
HTML #XXXXXX
The brand colors used throughout this site are:
– Shell Yellow and Shell Red: 1:5 ratio.
– Shell White is the canvas on which Shell Yellow and Shell Red are able to appear – Shell Dark Gray and Shell Mid Gray, both recommended for Signage and Messaging applications – Shell Silver Champagne, used in Prime Signs and directional signage – Shell Silver, used on building doors on site and High Rise Sign pole P
Shell
Yellow
Shell
Red

CMYK XXX
RGB XXX–XXX–XXX
HTML #XXXXXX
COLORS
16 th St
16t
h St
J St
Approval of this proof conﬁrms that all
spelling, grammar, punctuation, numerials,
and colors are correct and ready to print.

CUSTOMER
NAME:

PHONE:

EMAIL:

PROJECT LOCATION

REVISIONS
INITIAL DESIGN:
1ST REVISION:
2ND REVISION:
3RD REVISION:

REVISIONS AFTER 3:

PAGE: 10/10

PROJECT OVERVIEW
DESIGNED BY:

This design is the property of AA Sign Image, Inc.
and may not be reproduced, copied, displayed,
or used for any purpose outside of this project
without written consent or purchase of full rights.

AA Sign Image, Inc. is not responsible for errors in
spelling, grammar, dimensions, or colors. Client
approval conﬁrms all details are correct and
authorizes production.
12/05/2025

CUSTOMER APPROVAL SIGNATURE
SHELL
4191 FIRST STREET,
PLEASANTON, CA 94566
Building Sign 22
MID 13
MID 24
1 Building Sign 1 Canopy Details5
6 Dispensers (6)
01/13/2026
Julio Vargas
02/05/2026

Page 426 of 443 ends

RE SOLUTION NO. PC-2026-12
A RE

SOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR SIGN DESIGN REVIEW TO REBRAND AN EXISTING 76 GAS STATION AND CIRCLE K MARKET TO SHELL GASOLINE
AND FASTFILL MARKET LOCATED AT 4191 FIRST STREET, AS MODIFIED TO LIMIT THE CORPORATE BRANDING COLORS TO FIFTY (50) PERCENT OR BELOW THE CANOPY HEIGHT, AS FILED UNDER CASE NO. P25-0300
W
HEREAS, on September 2, 2025, Guy Houston, as the applicant (“Applicant”), on behalf of the owners Mike Ahmadi, GAWFCO Enterprises, LLC (“Property Owner”) submitted 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 (hereinafter “the Project”) located at 4191 First Street, Assessor Parcel No. 94-110-12-6, (hereinafter “the Property”); and W
HEREAS, the Property has a General Plan land use designation of Retail/Highway/Service Commercial Business and Professional Offices; and W
HEREAS, the Property is zoned C-C (Central Commercial) District; and W
HEREAS, the Property is designated Downtown Commercial in the Downtown Specific Plan; and
W
HEREAS, on February 25, 2026, the Zoning Administrator denied the Project due to inconsistencies with the required findings listed in Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) Section

18.20.050.B.1 through 6; and
W
HEREAS, on March 5, 2026, Applicant, on behalf of the Property Owner, filed a timely appeal of the Zoning Administrator's determination to deny the Project to the Planning Commission; and
W
HEREAS, pursuant to Section 65905 of the Government Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project on May 13, 2026, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. The Planning Commission considered the agenda report dated May 13, 2026, incorporated herein by reference, and all written and oral testimony; and
W
HEREAS, on May 13, 2026, the Planning Commission voted and adopted Resolution No. PC-2026-12, upholding the appeal and made revised findings pursuant to those listed in PMC Section 18.20.050.B.1 through 6 and as outlined in Section 4 below; and W
HEREAS, the City of Pleasanton was the lead agency for the Project, and the Planning Commission was the decision-making body for the Project.

NO
W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton does resolve, declare, determine, and order the following:

Attachment 6

Page 427 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

Section 1: Prior to acting on the Project, and at a properly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed written and oral agenda reports, conducted a public hearing on the Project and took testimony, and received into the record all pertinent documents related to the Project (collectively, the “Record Evidence”). The Planning Commission’s de novo determination is based on the Record Evidence, which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference.

Section 2: The Project, as modified, is consistent with the adopted and applicable General Plan Programs, Policies, and Goals related to community character and the discouragement of franchise and prototype architecture and signage, as further documented in Section 4, Finding No. 6 below. As such, the Project complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 65860.

Section 3: Findings for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a): Existing Facilities. The project involves minor exterior alterations to an existing structure. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required.

Section 4: The Project, as modified, fulfills the following findings set forth in Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 18.20.050.B.1 through 6:

1. The project's approval is in the best interest of public health, safety, and general welfare.

The Project, as modified, is in the best interest of the general welfare, which encompasses not only health, spaciousness, and balance, but also beauty. Berman v.

Parker (1954) 348 U.S. 26. The proposed canopy composition is a balanced architectural expression because the color band occupies no more than 50 percent of the canopy height, enhancing the relationship of architectural components and materials.

The Project site serves as a prominent Downtown gateway/entry corridor, where the streetscape's visual character contributes to Pleasanton’s community identity and general welfare. The proposed canopy design, as modified, creates a balanced visual emphasis consistent with the intended Downtown entry character and reinforces the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The modified project is consistent with the General Plan Community Character Element, including Policy 15 / Program 15.3 (attractive sign design and higher-quality sign materials and colors, minimizing bright franchise colors) and Policy 16 (discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage). As a result, the modified project demonstrates that approval would serve the general welfare as contemplated by the City’s adopted community character policies.

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

Page 428 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

By reducing the color band to no more than 50 percent, the proposed canopy treatment provides a context-sensitive architectural composition that reinforces the established Downtown entry character. The modified color band balances the aesthetic appearance of the canopy fascia, it enhances the pedestrian experience along this Downtown approach. Further, the balance of colors on the canopy fascia enhances the ability for landscaping and streetscape elements to complement architectural features, strengthen vistas, and reinforce an established gateway character.

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

By reducing the color brand to no more than 50 percent of the canopy height, the modified project reduces the brand-forward visual emphasis that detracts from the intended Downtown entry character and thereby reinforces the site’s relationship to the City’s broader aesthetic context and natural/visual setting. The modified canopy color band occupies approximately 50 percent of the canopy height, which balances the perceived scale and emphasis of the canopy when viewed from the public right-of-way, compatible with the intended Downtown gateway context and consistent with the City’s direction to avoid franchise/prototype architecture and signage (General Plan Community Character Element Policy 16).

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

4. Exterior lighting, signage, amenities, mechanical equipment, and other architectural features are integrated into the design of the site and building.

By reducing the color brand to no more than 50 percent of the canopy height, the canopy color band functions as an architectural element integrated into the overall design concept. Given its reduced size and prominence, the band is consistent with integrated sign design, and it meets the record-supported threshold that would keep branding subordinate to architecture (i.e., staff’s supported design direction of a band at or below 50 percent of canopy height). As modified, the Project is consistent with General Plan Community Character Element Policy 15 / Program 15.3 (minimize bright franchise colors; attractive sign design and materials) and Policy 16 (discourage franchise and prototype architecture/signage).

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

Page 429 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

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.

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

6. The plan meets the requirements of the municipal code and any other applicable guidelines, policies, and standards.

By reducing the color brand to no more than 50 percent of the canopy height, the Project is consistent with the City’s applicable guidelines or policies included in the following:

a. The General Plan. The Project aligns 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 modified, the Project’s sign design is attractive, and uses the bright franchise colors at a level consistent with the General Plan. Additionally, the modified Project is consistent with Community Character Element Policy 16, which "discourages franchise and prototype architecture and signage," insomuch as it relies heavily on franchise signage.

b. The Downtown Specific Plan. As modified, the Project conforms 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 modified Project’s reduction in branding colors improves the Gateway by making the brand less forward and reduces the amount of bright franchise colors.

Therefore, the Planning Commission makes this finding.

Section 5: The Planning Commission hereby approves the appeal and overturns the Zoning Administrator’s determination to deny Case No. P25-0300, the 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, subject to the Conditions of Approval shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 6: This resolution shall become effective 10 days after its passage and adoption, unless appealed before that time.

Page 430 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 13, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes: Commissioners Pace, Wedge, and Jagoe
Noes: Commissioner Jain

Absent: Commissioner Morgan
Abstain: None

ATTEST:

_____________________________ ______________________________ Derek Farmer Brandon Pace
Secretary, Planning Commission Chair

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

______________________________
Katherine Wisinski
Assistant City Attorney

Page 431 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

P25-0300
Shell Gasoline and FastFill Market Sign Design Review
4191 First Street
May 13, 2026

The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this approval, that (s)he is required to satisfy and maintain compliance with the conditions of approval below. Where approval by the Director of Community and Economic Development, Planning Division, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, City Attorney, Chief Building and Safety Official, Fire Department or other City staff is required, review shall be for compliance with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted practices related to the approval. In addition to complying with the conditions below, the applicant is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws that pertain to this Project, whether specifically noted herein.

This approval is granted for Sign Design Review 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, on Assessor Parcel No. 94-110-12-6, located at 4191 First Street. Development shall be substantially as shown on the Project materials listed below:

a. Project Plans, Exhibit B, prepared by Sign Image, Inc., dated “Received” on February 5, 2026, and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community and Economic Development Department.

The Project materials listed above are collectively the “Approved Plans.”

THIS APPROVAL IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. APPROVAL AND REVISIONS: The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the “Approved Plans”, except as modified by the following conditions.

Minor changes to the plans may be allowed, subject to the approval of the Director of Community and Economic Development, provided they are found to be in substantial conformance with the approved exhibits. Planning Division approval is required before any changes are implemented in site design, grading, architectural design, building colors or materials, green building measures, landscape material, etc.

2. EXPIRATION – SIGN DESIGN REVIEW: This Sign Design Review (SDR) approval will lapse and shall become void one year following the date on which the SDR became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site which was the subject of the SDR application; or a certificate of occupancy is issued for the structure which was the subject of the SDR application; or the site is occupied if no

Page 432 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

building permit or certificate of occupancy is required; or the applicant or his/her successor has filed a request for extension with the Zoning Administrator pursuant to the provisions of the Pleasanton Municipal Code.

3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CHECKLIST: The applicant shall submit a “Conditions of Approval Checklist” indicating all conditions in Exhibit A have been satisfied, incorporated into the building permit plans or improvement plans, and/or addressed.

Said checklist shall be incorporated as one of the first four plan sheets of all building permit and engineering permit plan submittals for review by the City prior to issuance of permits.

4. APPEAL PERIOD: The building permit submittal will only be accepted after completion of the appeal period provided in the Municipal Code, unless the applicant submits a signed statement acknowledging that the plan check fees may be forfeited in the event the approval is overturned on appeal, or the design is significantly changed as a result of the appeal. In no case will a building permit be issued prior to the expiration of the appeal period.

5. LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: To the extent permitted by law, the Project applicant shall hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), and indemnify the City, its City Council, its officers, commissions, employee and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and/or the applicant to attack, set aside, or void the approval of the Project, including the environmental review thereof, or any permit authorized hereby for the Project, including without limitation, reimbursing the City its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice.

6. BUILDING PERMIT: Any signage plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval prior to operation. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to commencement of any work. (Project Specific Condition)

7. FEES: The applicant shall pay any and all fees to which the property may be subject, prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, or prior to recordation of the final map, whichever is applicable. The type and amount of the fees shall be those in effect at the time the permit is issued.

8. SCHOOL IMPACT FEES – COMMERCIAL: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall pay the required commercial development school impact fee as prescribed by State law and as adopted by the Pleasanton Unified School District (PUSD).

Page 433 of 443 ends

P25-0300 PC-2026-12, May 13, 2026

PLANNING DIVISION – 925-931-5600

Sign Design Review

9. CANOPY SIGNAGE: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall revise the project plans such that the corporate branding color band on the canopy does not exceed 50 percent of the total canopy height. (Project Specific Condition)

10. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division final inspection shall be required. Prior to final inspection, if applicable, all existing building signs shall be removed and all wall surfaces, including, but not limited to any holes in the wall resulting from its removal shall be patched, repaired, and/or replaced to match the existing wall color and texture to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. (Project Specific Condition)

11. All canopy signage and lighting (except under canopy lighting) shall be remotely turned off daily by 10:00 p.m. Canopy signage and lighting shall not be turned on daily prior to 7:00 a.m. (Project Specific Condition)

12. ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE: There shall be no additional signage on the subject property without prior approval from the City. (Project Specific Condition)

<End>

Page 434 of 443 ends

THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
NAD_1983_2011_StatePlane_California_III_FIPS_0403_Ft_US Feet1,796.6
Notes
Notes
Legend
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.
898.300
1: 10,780
Map Print Title
Fire Station
School
Park
Parcels
aerial 2025 Vexcel 3 inch
Red: Band_1
Green: Band_2
Blue: Band_3
Attachment 7

Page 435 of 443 ends

Shell Gas Station
4191 First Street
City Council Review of Sign Design Review (P25-0300)
City Council
June 16, 2026
Purpose and Requested Action
•De novo review of an application for Sign Design Review to rebrand an existing 76 Gas Station and Circle K Market to a Shell Gasoline Station and
FastFill Market
•Adopt a resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator’s denial of Case
No. P25-0300
ATTACHMENT 8

Page 436 of 443 ends

Site Description
SSSSSSSSSSSS ee esc ppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp o Sign Design Review (SDR) Process
•SDR required for sites without an approved master sign program •Zoning Administrator reviews and bases decisions on:
• PMC Chapter 18.96 – Signs
• Dimensional and other standards where specified
• General Plan Community Character Element Policies:
• Policy 15, Program 15.3:
Attractive sign design and higher quality sign materials Attractive colors, minimizing bright franchise colors • Policy 16: "discourage franchise and prototype architecture and signage" • Applicable Design Guidelines (such as the Downtown Design Guidelines) • Components of review and findings require subjective evaluation

Page 437 of 443 ends

Sign Design Review (SDR) Continued
• No strict (quantitative) standards for amount of lighting, use of colors, logos, and branding • ZA considers factors such as:
Location and visibility of the site
Rebranding of an existing gas station vs. new construction Existing signage/sign conditions
Design/character of the buildings or structures on which the signage is being placed Type of use for which the signage is proposed
Character, type, and proximity of adjacent use
• City must also consider the reasonable expectation that a business may wish or be entitled to use its corporate colors, business identification or branding as part of its signage program Discussion
•September 2, 2025: Sign Design Review
application - Sunoco
o Modifications for the monument, wall,
canopy, and pump signage as part of
rebranding
•September 16, 2025: Application deemed
incomplete, with comments:
o Support intent to upgrade and improve the
appearance of the project site
o Reduce percentage/intensity of the blue
franchise branding colors to approximately
25 percent of the canopy fascia height

Page 438 of 443 ends

Discussion Continued
• Discussion between staff and applicant over possible canopy design options. • January 15, 2026, Resubmittal – Brand shift to Shell Gasoline:
• Less franchise branding colors than Sunoco design
• Continued to include predominant franchise brandi ng colors on the canopy (~66 % of fascia) • Staff proposed compromise – Reduce franchise branding colors to no more than 33 percent of the total canopy band fascia.
• Applicant declined to make further modifications
Zoning Administrator Action
• September 16, 2025
• Application deemed incomplete
• General support for the site upgrade
• Request for a reduction in franchise branding colors on the canopy fascia (max. 25 percent coverage consistent with the existing 76 Gas Station canopy fascia)
• January 2026
• The applicant switched brands from Sunoco to Shell Gasoline • Revised design package submitted with reduced franchise color coverage compared to the earlier Sunoco proposal (approx. 66 percent yellow and red franchise branding color on the canopy fascia) • Early February 2026
• Staff informed the applicant that the project could be approved with reductions in the amount of branded color elements on the canopy fascia
• The applicant declined to make such changes
• February 25, 2026
• The Zoning Administrator issued a denial
• Proposal inconsistent with General Plan Community Character Element Policies 15 and 16 • Attractive colors that minimize bright franchise branding and discourage franchise prototype signage

Page 439 of 443 ends

Appeal and Planning Commission Action
• March 5, 2026
• Applicant files an appeal to the Planning Commission
• May 13, 2026
• Planning Commission hearing
• Planning Commission upheld the applicant’s appeal (3-1 vote) • Planning Commission made findings for approval and adopted standard SDR conditions of approval, as well as two project-specific conditions of approval:
• The height of the Shell Gasoline corporate branding color band shall not exceed 50 percent of the total canopy fascia height
• Any canopy illumination (except underlighting) shall automatically turn off at 10 p.m. daily Signage Plans
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggnnnnnnaaaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeeeee PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPllllllaaaaaannnnnss

Page 440 of 443 ends

Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator’s denial of Case No. P25-0300
Alternatively, based on de novo review:

Council may elect to approve the project, consistent with either the Planning Commission determination, consistent with the applicant’s proposal, or with other modifications
Shell Gas Station
4191 First Street
City Council Review of Sign Design Review (P25-0300)
City Council
June 16, 2026

Page 441 of 443 ends

Appendix: Gas Station Examples
New Construction – PUD Zoning - Hopyard

Page 442 of 443 ends

New Construction – PUD-C Zoning
Highway Onramp
Existing – PUD and 5251 Hopyard

Page 443 of 443 ends

Pleasanton City CouncilJune 16, 2026

Pleasanton City Council
June 16, 2026