Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Yes. Chair, you can start the meeting, but our applicant is in route, so it's up to you if you want to start now. Maybe we can get through the minutes. Yes.

Let's adjourn the meeting. I mean, start the meeting. Anybody else? Yes. Jump the gun. The meeting shall commence at 6 p.m. on time. So we'll have a call to order and a roll call.

Vice Chair Woodson.

I'm here.

Commissioner Barron.

Here.

Chair St. John. Here. Commissioner Jacobson.

Here.

Commissioner Simmons.

Here.

Commissioner Runner. Here. Do you have quorum?

You forgot about me.

Commissioner Chang here.

You're shaking it up tonight.

Hey. I have a moment of silence and the patchful agents. Sure. Vice chair, was that sure that you had some department? OK. The flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Item three, special announcements. No, item four, special announcements and communications from the floor.

We have none chair St. John.

Do we have anybody online?

We have three people online.

Like guests or did I just include our people?

These are guests and then we have a special council Marlene to cover in for set.

Thank you.

Hey. There's no communication from the floor that would include online that's correct. And we'll move on to item 5 export a communications. Any commissioners or quite a judicial matters. In particular on the proposed master signage program, I have 1, I had the applicant reach out 2 hours ago.

I didn't want to talk, but I was on my way out, so I said no.

Good.

Good. Consent agenda, the first item is approval of the minutes from two weeks ago. Do we have any corrections or additions to the minutes? If not, do we have a motion?

Awesome to accept the minutes as written. I second.

Okay, vote. I'm sorry, I didn't catch the first and the second.

Go ahead. Commissioner Simmons moved and Jacobson second?

No, Vice Chair did. It doesn't matter.

Note that you.

the roll call so uh vice chair woodson yes commissioner baron commissioner rana yes chair saint john yes commissioner chang yes commissioner jacobson yes commissioner simmons yes motion passes thank you the next item is our the public hearings

which we have just one tonight. The sign program for Imgen Parkway in Second Avenue. This is specifically the gasoline station.

That's correct. And Brad is our planner who will be presenting for this item today.

good evening chair commissioners i'm brad evanson with regional government services um i've been before your body several times for projects related to the dunes and harvey in particular and this is the latest element for his development there at engine and second avenue which is the master sign program for the service station convenience store car wash and recently Appealed and approved by council, the drive-through restaurant with a tenant TBD. So with everyone's permission, I will go ahead and share my screen.

Brad, you're sounding a little muffled. I don't know if you could speak a little closer to the microphone.

Yeah, yeah, sure. See what I can do about this. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and share my screen and start my presentation. Let's hope this works. okay can everyone see the presentation yes okay great okay so like i said this is a master sign program for harvey's gas station development there at the northwest corner of uh i left that as del monte it's second avenue as we've all concluded second avenue and engine parkway uh the project site as uh we've uh come to be familiar with uh it's uh Just over 1.3 acres. It's zoned multiple use MU within the University Villages specific plan. General plan is multiple use. This project is subject to the Dunes Master Sign Program that was adopted February 2022 and most recently updated in June of 2024. Page 29 of the Dunes Master Sign Program does allow for proposed non-conforming signs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission, which is why we have the Master Sign Program before you tonight. This is the site plan that accompanied the set of plans that were included in your packet. This one is actually updated. As Guido may have mentioned, I don't know if he did, the applicant in response to reviewing the draft conditions of approval and reviewing the staff report and hearing the concerns that were expressed, made some late revisions to the plan, the site plan. No drastic changes except cleaning up a few things. But this is the functional site plan. All the red dots are the different signs that we will go through. And we will go ahead and review what those are. And when the applicant does get online, he'll be able to better go over the changes that he has made relative to what was included in your packet. And we'll go on from that point. The first sign, A1, this is the primary sign for the development, the Extra Mile convenience store sign. As you can see, it's located on the building facade over the entrance to the convenience store. And that is obviously by design. And this sign is just under 50 square feet, and this is the standard uh designed for the extra mile uh convenience store branding that is uh consistent with chevron uh many chevrons use that uh particular branding and that's what this one is the next signs a2 and a3 a2 is crispy crunchy chicken this is actually a standard internal convenience store brand that is strictly dealing with like fried chicken and chicken tenders and things like that uh there happens to be an independent gas station near my own house about less than a mile from that that actually has crispy crunchy chicken and over the weekend when my wife starts driving around she kept pointing out the different places that had crispy crunchy chicken so it really is a thing um as you can see uh this sign is um Let's see, where is this? It's just under 30 square feet and it's located on the far right side of the east elevation over roughly where in the convenience store where the prep area for the crispy crunchy chicken is. That is not part of the drive-thru. Those items are not sold through the drive-thru. They are inside the convenience store, just a quick serve item that you can buy hot at the convenience store. and there are similar operations in addition to the crispy crunchy chicken there are other similarly branded operations throughout all the different branded convenience store gas station operations sign a3 is the sign for the future restaurant drive-through restaurant tenant uh this obviously since a a tenant has not been identified uh we do not have any details of the sign but we do have a commitment to keep it to a maximum of 36 square feet three feet tall and 12 feet wide, so the sign will not overwhelm the facade of the building, and it will be positioned at the far left side, the south end of the east elevation over the entrance to the restaurant space. The next is signs B1 and B2. These are the car signs, which has been different from the packet or the set of plans in your packet. The applicant has renamed it to the Dunes Express Wash to better align with the branding of the Dunes. As you can see, it is a prominent sign that they are posing over the east and west elevations of the car wash tunnel. They have not specified a sign size and the plans do show it as not to scale. The original set that was posed, the way that it was placed on the building. It looked like it was a rather large sign. So we don't know what this one is going to be in the conditions of why I had proposed that condition be added to limiting this sign to 50 square feet in size. If the client gives us some chooses that can be adopted or something else can be proposed. These are all the standard Chevron corporate markings, they're proposing two word mark signs on the south or the east and the west elevations of the fascia. And then one of the logo marks on the south part of the fascia. These are all standard illuminated chevron signs that you can see in any chevron anywhere in the state. Sign E, this is the monument pricing sign. This one is located along Imgen Parkway, visible east to west. And it is 20 feet tall. It was originally proposed at 18 feet. And in talking with Shane Holmes, he went ahead and increased the size to ensure greater visibility. So you can see that it's the standard Chevron branding with their Tecron gas thing and the pricing for all of the different grades of fuel that they offer. And then they do have the extra mile convenience store branding on that sign as well. This sign is actually designed specifically to be consistent with a lot of the architectural treatments in and around the dunes with the weathered wood finish, the stone And so that's how this one was designed. Sign F, this is the prominent community center identification sign located at the very corner of 2nd Avenue and Imgen Parkway. Sign F, you can see the indicator there on the plan. This would be 22 feet tall. Again, this was originally proposed, I believe it was 18 feet, and it has been increased to 22 feet. And this would be, design-wise, it again fits with the overall dune design ethos. It is noted that the applicant originally had intended to name the development as the Browder Plaza after the street the development is located on. And because, say, Homes Master Developer had expressed concerns over that name, it has been renamed to be the Dunes Marketplace, consistent more with the overall Dunes ethos and aesthetic. So that has been done. The signs of the tenant panels are backlit. but otherwise it's not an illuminated sign, it's just backlighting behind the individual panels. Sign Z is a directional community center ID monument sign. This one is only nine feet tall and it's at the corner of Breakwater and 2nd. In our early submittal for the sign program, the applicant had proposed a sign for the future hotels on the other side of Breakwater that matched the design of this particular sign with the intent of creating kind of an entry gateway into that overall development as the hotels go forward. So whether that will come to fruition, we shall see, but that was the purpose behind this particular sign. Okay, this is actually signs H1 and H4. H1 is the, it's two sets of double-faced signs, exit only and do not enter. These will be positioned in the mini site plan on the left. You can see that that's at the exit point of the drive-through lane. So obviously facing out would be do not enter and facing into the drive-through lane would be the exit only. The other one is on the right-hand mini site plan. That is at the exit point of the car wash tunnel. And then sign H1. is the stop sign that's out at the corner or at the very end of the way from Imgen where it connects actually to Imgen Parkway. So that's what that one is.

Signs H2 and H3.

H2 is the infamous custom mill right U-turn that was established or was recommended from the Kimley Horn Traffic Study that was done with a drive-through. And that would be located up on Breakwater west of the driveway entrance into the site. The determination was made that it would be a half step above impossible for any car sort of like a Miata or a Mini to flip a U-turn coming eastbound on breakwater to enter the drive-through lane. So the determination was made to instead of encouraging people to make a three-point turn in the middle of the driveway to place the no U-turn sign there and then encourage people through on-site typing and signage within the parking lot to encourage the end of the site, circulate around the gas pumps, and then enter the drive-through lane more easily from the east of the east side of the parking lot. And then signage three, is the directional leading to the entrance of the car wash that's down at the uh at the far corner of the development uh at the entrance to the car wash lanes and you can see that in the mini site plan on the upper right of the screen concerns were raised by staff and others uh both from the master developer and from staff there was there and from There have been concerns expressed that there were too many signs for this development, particularly with the car wash. And there were also concerns noted that the original sign for the car wash that was included in your packet was not consistent with the dune's colors, materials, and finishes. The applicant has eliminated two of the four signs that were originally proposed for the car wash and agreed to redesign the signs to be more consistent with kind of the coastal California aesthetic with weathered browns, blue grays, and that sort of development aesthetic. The master developer expressed concerns that the proposed name for the development was not consistent with their naming conventions, and the applicant did rename the project. The master developer expressed concerns that signs FNG were not appropriate, as they did not consider it to be a traditional multi-tenant commercial retail center. Staff also expressed similar concerns about whether signs FNG were larger and more intensive than was necessary for the scale of the project development. From the Planning Commission, there were questions raised regarding visibility and readability of signs along Imgen Parkway. In looking at that question, I have no way of being able to run a simulation to see how visible signs might be to traffic with the variables of whether there's a bus or a truck or something like that. It's really difficult to make that assessment. Also questions, were there visible entrance signs to the development? Not exactly, but with the community signs, it does identify where the community is or where the shopping center is. Were there parking signs on site? Yes, there will be parking signs on site. Signs for the EV chargers, there'll be signs for the disabled parking. And we will have a striping plan as a condition of approval prior to opening of the business, finalizing the inspections, that the applicant has to submit and get approved and then install a comprehensive onsite signage and striping program with directional arrows, labels for which would be a driveway or a drive-through, direct all signs on the pavement to direct traffic to if they want to go eastbound on Imgen Parkway instead of westbound and directly on I-1, those sorts of things. There was a question about whether there could be a 3D simulation developed to show the signs from the point of view of both Imgen and Second, and that will be a question for the developer. there are also questions regarding the phasing of the installation of the signs which were critical to operations uh when would they be installed and then how would future amendments be addressed would they be staff level or would they be through the planning commission questions regarding signs f and g is the development a multi-tenant development given the building and on-site signage is sign f justified similarly the sign g justified given the grade difference from engine parkway to the site why does the sign e need to be so tall and could signs E and F be replaced with a low monument sign that have required info such as pricing and the minimal tenant identification such as shown in this image here that was taken from Chevron in Monterey at 2400 Fremont Boulevard. There were questions submitted regarding the justification for the crispy crunchy chicken, future drive-through details, whether there would be any details for the menu board, what future signs my staff review versus planning commission review um not having a tenant identified uh we do not know what a menu board would look like so uh what we have allowed for in the conditions it should be anyway is that the drive-through signage ultimately would be a staff level approval we have for the building signage we do have the limitations on size height and width so that is easily a staff level approval there's a place identified on the site plan for where a menu board would go so then it becomes a matter of ensuring that the proposed design of the menu board meets with lighting standards uh the speakers have uh noise suppression on there so that they don't violate the the city's sound ordinance or noise ordinance um and at this point the master sign program the intent would be that uh future amendments to Future sign changes likely would be staff level review. If there is a fundamental change proposed to the master sign program itself because the planning commission is the approval body for that, that would likely come back to the planning commission. And then there were questions regarding the future fast food branding taking over the building. And then questions about how window signs and temporary signs might be regulated. And there was a request for a comprehensive visual simulation of all signage. That would be a question, that last one would definitely be a question for the applicant. In terms of window signs and temporary signs, those ultimately are deferred back to the master sign program for the Dunes. And if the issue is not addressed there, then it would come back to the municipal code sign sections. And then again, page 29 of the Dunes Master Sign Program does allow for consideration of signs that do not fully comply with the Dunes Master Sign Program under the following circumstances. That the sign program, the draft sign program would encourage exceptional sign design and creativity. It would accommodate imaginative, unique, and or otherwise tasteful signage that is deemed to be within the spirit and intent of the sign criteria. And it would accommodate specific use or tenant requirements that cannot be reasonably met by other methods. And staff finds that at the time of adoption of the Dunes master sign program, the site was anticipated for retail use. After negotiation between the applicant and the master developer, a gas station was proposed and approved by the planning commission in December of 2023. Due to the unique nature of the car wash on a prominent corner in the city of Marina, signage with visibility from Imgen Parkway is warranted for this master sign program. And with that, staff is available if you have any questions.

Thank you. Let's start. I think I want to start with vice chair. He had the largest number of questions and comments.

um let's cut to the chase i think the first thing i want to understand is that part of the reason that we're here and driving this really quickly from a staff perspective is i'm trying to understand um one of the reasons for getting this all done quickly and turned around quickly is that this is the construction schedule is is being in is being held up on long lead time material for ordering of the signs and the signs must be in to be able to meet a launch date and opening date for the store. So I'm trying to understand, number one, which of these signs monuments has the long lead time material date on it. So that's the very first question I have is kind of what makes these signs, which signs make the critical path? Because I don't think all of them are the critical path item. The second one is from scheduling. That's to the applicant for the staff side. today as we go through this discussion if we get to a point where we can't come to a decision or reach a point of agreement on certain parts of this can we split this off into two areas and approve a certain set of signs so that the applicant can go ahead and begin on those but then come back to some of the other ones at a future date if we can't reach an agreement on that and then the third question and i'll leave it at that for now is one of the things that's sitting on the revised drawings, and this is why I'm asking all this, is that we had a set of drawings and now we have a set of revised drawings and just like the last time we were here on this, we got a set of drawings and revised drawings for the window, is the concern that there are conditions added specifically. I understand the administrative approval for the drive-through menu board. I'm not necessarily averse to that. I do think that some of the other areas, such as the potential future price sign that is on 2nd Avenue, That is not something that I am willing to allow for administrative approval. I think that is a very visual sign and that overall this gas station to the applicant's benefit is likely to be the number one visual gas station in the entire city of Marina, period. I don't think there'll be another one that's built that has a more relevant, important place visually. And I want to make sure that we are, even with the reductions, we still have a challenge with an image side of it. And then I would like, I mean, generally all the interior signs, I generally agree with, I don't have a challenge with, but I do have some very specific issues with sign E and sign F still. I don't know if we want to address those right now, chair, just kind of lay those out and then I'll just turn it back over to staff at that point.

Let's, let's address the the first your topic zero. Specifically, can we split the approval for two categories of signs, one that are critical path signs? And the second was it that we can't reach consensus on? Can we defer those?

I would have to defer to the applicant about what are the mission critical signage and then we can have that discussion. So you have to ask direct that question to him. Yes.

Okay, thank you very much. Regarding which one is critical, which one is not, actually all the signs are critical. The reason the GC, general contractor, has to build now, because if the commission approves today, then we have to go through the building department. Building department will take time. So then the general contractor will start building those signs. It's very time consuming. It took a lot longer to go through the signage back and forth with the city, with the planning. I'm sorry to put pressure on you guys, like commissioners, to get it done very quickly, but we are already late. Because if you see the time, the building department will take probably maybe another couple of months to approve the signage. It has to go through the structural. all the monument sign. So when they do it, GC had to build it. OK, number one. Number two, the signage, like a chevron, extra mile. So those are signs are very price sign. They are very, very important. So usually, to fabricate the signage, it takes from six to eight weeks. They told me eight weeks, but I'm asking them, if we pay extra price, how long? Then they say, OK, probably maybe six weeks, but we cannot guarantee because they have to get the material, and it takes time to build them. So in reality, we are already late and we are planning to open late July or early August. That's the latest we are thinking because my contract with my GC to like open July 15th. So he is working very hard to get this thing done, because there is a penalty clause. But I understand that there was some hiccups, and it took a little bit longer. Because what happened, I'll give you a little bit of history. When I bought this lot to build a gas station, I started drawing right away. I hired an architect. But infrastructure was not there. So when my architect, he designed the grading and elevation, The roads were not there. Infrastructure was not there. So everything got messed up. I end up to pay another couple hundred thousand dollars to architect because he has to change the whole thing. It took a lot longer because when the infrastructure got done, then he start doing it back again. And when we started construction, there was a difference lot in the grading. So it took anyway, it cost me a lot more money. But anyway, we are now pretty much very close and everything is ready to go. So I asked like, you know, it needs to be approved today. Not in piece meals because it will take a lot longer time. You know what? It's not right now. I don't have that. I mean, everybody will miss. The city will lose revenue. I will lose revenue and I will end up to pay more interest to the lender because it will take a lot longer. I mean, everybody understand that how it works. You know, it's just not only one thing.

okay thank you harvey we will as commissioners we will do our best to complete our job tonight we will do our best so right okay so let's see vice chair you got through topic

Zero, so I think he addressed the adjust to critical path, which I understand and that's fine. I am. I am understanding of it as a civil engineer who have built many projects over 35 years. I'm. I'll just say I understand the schedule. I'm not sure that that's my responsibility as the planning commissioner to worry about when it gets. commissioned and put into operation i think that our job is to ensure that we protect the city's developmental perception right um but i understand what he's saying um i think that addresses the lead time issue and it addresses the the partial first time right so on and i guess technically that's the backlog scheduling because that fits into it and that combines with that um and then he said he is not willing to accept the deferral process so it's fine we'll just sit here until we get it all approved tonight Or not.

or your list of comments and questions you want to continue?

I'm going to defer to the, I don't want to monopolize the rest of the question, but I'll defer to, I'll defer to the other commissioners on how to get mine in to theirs. Cause I don't want to deprive them of being able to raise points and issues.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Barron, you had a, a, very short list of concerns.

Speaker mentioned some of them. Um, I don't think I got all the answers. I understand that there will be parking signs. Um, I don't know. I wasn't clear about entrance and exit signs. I saw there is no exit and no entrance signs. But I did not see entrance sign exit sign.

There is. Physically, there is a. Entrance and exit in the South West corner of the plot. to and from Imgen?

The question is, if somebody is not familiar with the property, how would they know how to enter the place? I guess they might...

I mean, drivers can see the gas station.

But it feels like a labyrinth to me.

Well, I mean, if you've driven past it lately, the entrance is bored now. And the elevation... of Imgen, we'll call it zero. And the elevation of the station is maybe plus five feet. Is that about right? So maybe eight or nine feet. So when you're driving on Imgen, you're going to see that driveway if you're properly watching. And you will see a big dirt wall before the driveway. There's only one way to get up that hill, and that's the paved area.

Okay. As I requested in my last question, I would really like to see, Weissel called it simulation, I called it 3D, to understand what we are looking at because the feeling is that there's going to be so much going on visually that it's almost a sense of a circus area with all the signs, its sizes and colors and fonts. So I would really appreciate if I could get a feel when I drive through, what do I see? in the speed that cars move there on Imjin, or as they enter Breakwater.

So, Commissioner Barron, Brad, can you pull up signs E and F, because those will be the two signs that people will primarily see on Imjin, and then show sign G, which is the one off of Breakwater, so Commissioner Barron can see um yeah so this is sign e this is as your and then i just to help out the commission i did print off the site map i did put that on all of your dice there's a map that shows the sign type e that's the one as you're heading west west down engine heading towards highway one and then if you want to show sign f brad Sure.

And sign E is a double-faced sign, so it's visible from both east and westbound engine. But yes, it is on the westbound engine side of the street. Here's sign F. This is located... Yeah, so Commissioner Barrett, that's at the corner of second and engine.

That's what you'll see right at the corner.

And it's not particularly a... a sign advertising the fuel station. Dune's marketplace would have nothing really to do with Chevron gas or the Chevron car wash. And then Brad, if you want to show...

Pardon me? I believe the applicant does have intent to put at least some of the businesses included in there, including the car wash. The applicant has shown the car wash listed on one of the tenant panels in a previous version of this so i would defer to the applicant as to what businesses they envision being on these tenant panels because it could very well be that they have just a generic chevron panel without the logo just to match the the aesthetic of the of the the font and the text on the panels but to have like the chevron the car wash The crispy crunchy chicken, the extra mile, they might very well put all of those on there. I do not know, but previous versions did show some of the car wash on there anyway.

We have the applicant here now, so he can address that right now.

So, Commissioner, the dunes market, actually, that's what I discussed with Shea Homes. I asked them what you guys like, and they said anything with the dunes will work. So we come to see, okay, quickly, dunes marketplace. So, I mean, that's not if commissions have some idea, I don't mind to change the name, but basically Dunes has to go with that. That's the share homes requirement. The rest of, like, it's not, I'm pretty open, you know, I'm not saying, okay, this is what is, you know, I'd like to do it. The second thing would be a Chevron. So, say, Chevron Gas, because they have their own logo. And where you see the future, below the Dunes Market, that's a Chevron. Second one will be Extra Mile. And after that will be a Crispy Crunchy Chicken. They have a small logo. You have already seen it. Below that will be a a car wash and after that there would be a the any uh like a qsr or sandwich place whatever comes that will be after that and i mean below all the way and last one the master developer he recommends that we should have to have a the hotel signage so people can see driving on image and that there is a hotel behind it. But in the meantime, it will be stay empty. But that's the plan is because the hotel won't, I mean, it will be visible, building will be visible, but the entrance, they will see, okay, this is all the, you can go from there, you know. So that's what was his suggestion. I did not add in the beginning, but now we added after his recommendations. Okay.

Thank you for the clarification.

I have a couple comments about that. So I guess I'm coming back to, I've just heard a whole bunch of things from small to large. At a high level, when I see future tenant, I see a tenant. A tenant is a hotel. A tenant is your gas station. A tenant is Five Below or Best Buy or a movie theater. It is not a service that is provided by the owner of one of those. So I don't expect to see a tenant to be a hotel name with the word pool. underneath it as an option or car wash or EV charging station. So when I see future tenant, I see a primary business, number one. So I'm going to clarify that right off the bat that this sign is, at least for me, I have a really difficult time if it's not the primary business. So if you have the name of the gas station, that's great. That's all that would go there. I would not support adding in any of the services that are provided with that gas station, which by the way, is a whopping 25 feet away because this sign is literally matched on the property. there um number one um number two i'm gonna come back to right now that therefore means you have one property that is listed on the sign board of up to six um i was already in already had some issues with the signage with this monument sign in the first place and i appreciate the signage and I look at it and then I literally look across the street right now to the monument sign for Shea for the original properties that are on the other side of the highway, literally across the street. And over the last 15 years that they have been there, that has turned into a faded mess. It doesn't look professional. It doesn't represent, honestly, it doesn't represent Shea. and what they're trying to build out of their development and out of the Promenade. And I don't believe it's what you or Shea is trying to get out of what is now the Dunes Marketplace. As long as Shea approves whatever the title is, I'm not, I'm not in concern of whatever it is. This is your, that's their sub, this, your and their sub property. So if you want to call it Dunes Marketplace or you want to call it whatever, that's fine. As long as the two of you are all in agreement on that, I think that's my concern there. But the biggest one is when I look at the signage here, I have a real challenge with building the signage right now when there is only a tenant, which is your gas station. And I would much prefer that this specific sign get tabled for a future time because it is not necessary to have this on day one when your gas station opens. It's important to have prices. It's important to say Chevron. It's important to say the brand, to have stop signs and ingress and egress and navigation signs. It's not important to have Dune's marketplace that has one sign that says Chevron gas station, which literally you can see several Chevron signs. on let's see if i'm sitting right in front of that sign at least on two places chevron and chevron on the side on the sides of the of the canopy or if i'm coming off of highway one off the canopy and this and the front and then i see it in the big 20 foot sign that you want to put 18 foot sign you want to put on the main entrance off of Imgen. So I just think sign F is one of those that defer this until there is a better idea of what is really going to be built in all of that property area and what it's going to look like. And I think a number of things will happen. Number one, Two days ago, it was a different name. So today it's Dunes Marketplace because you've all come to a tacit agreement that that's acceptable. Acceptable does not mean it's the best name that is the best for the hotel resort complex and gas station. And then that, again, represents only three. So it's still these three other businesses to be built there. We don't know what those other three are because they're not even identified yet. We still don't know what the two hotels are, the timeline for that, and we have your gas station. So why not wait on sign F until there is a greater and a deeper understanding of what is going to be built on the overall property as a whole. Your gas station is going to stand out regardless as soon as it's there because it has big signs that say Chevron all over the place. So that would be my one on sign F is number one. I think the tenant side of it has to be the main property owners and what we're putting in. And number two, it has, I just would defer the whole thing. Um, at least on my side. Um, so that's on sign up. So maybe, and maybe that's the best thing. Maybe we just go through each of the signs in the buildings and we just talk through it that way.

Okay. If I may, through the chair, this is legal counsel. Um, I believe we're still in the period of commissioner questions and then, um, we'd need to open public hearing, uh, or sort of to allow for public comment, um, before moving on to, to debate the item. So.

right okay so this is just uh commissioner's comments right now and questions and i think it's prudent to include the the applicant when we you know discuss these these questions so that we understand where he's coming from also and we can open public comment as soon as we get through the commissioners

I would fine with that.

Okay.

And so we won't go sign by sign, but we can do the major comments right now. And then we'll open public comment. So, yes. Okay. So we were, I was with Commissioner Barron. Okay. Yeah, okay. So next we'll go to...

Chair St. John, I was hoping to finish my answer to Commissioner Barron. She wanted to know how it would look. We didn't get a chance to look at sign G. Is it possible we can answer that before we proceed? Yes. So Brad, if you want to show sign G. There we go. So, Commissioner Barron, this is at the corner of 2nd and Breakwater.

This is the sign. I think we will table that one right now because that's very much in line with the sign F. This is another tenant sign. And I also have a very strong aversion to finalizing the tenant signs right now. Even whether a one acre plus service station is really appropriate. to advertise the little tenants like a car wash a lot of solar stations have a car wash but they're not justified as a tenant sign understood okay so let's put that one back on the understand understand and move on to to uh commissioner check It's a hard name. Yeah. It's not here very often.

Thank you, Chair. I think the, you know, there's a lot that have been presented here and thank you for Commissioner Woodson and, you know, raise a lot of questions. I'm looking at the whole things here. My question is to Brad. Brad, are you there?

Yes, I am.

Okay. All these signs that have been presented, I think we are talking about MSP, the master's science programs. So are all these signs compliant to master's science programs?

no um most of them do not and that is actually why this special master sign program specific to this site is before you as i noted previously page 29 of the dunes master sign program does specifically clarify that signs that do not conform with the standards in the master sign program itself the dunes master sign program those are subject to review by the planning commission. So what a common planning practice is and what we are doing here is when an applicant has a, like, particularly like a multi-tenant development of some sort, commercial office, whatever that happens to be, and their signs are going to deviate from whatever the governing standards happen to be, um the practices that they develop a master sign program for their particular site their particular development and they basically effectively specify what it is that they want or need and make as much effort as possible to comply with whatever the spirit of the governing standards happens to be, since it obviously isn't going to meet the letter of that regulation, and that's what we're talking about here. There might be a few signs off the top of my head that do comply with the DUNES Master Sign Program, but not many of them, because As was noted when the master sign program was originally approved, this was anticipated as a retail site, not a gas station. So some of the signs that are proposed under discussion tonight, such as the car wash signs, those were never approved. considered under the Master Sign Program because it wasn't a use that was anticipated. Same thing with the gas station, the gas pricing signage. That was not something that was anticipated in the Dunes Master Sign Program at that location because it wasn't an anticipated use. So yes, what we are doing here is a separate sign program specific to this site. And what we are doing based on the direction from the Dunes Master Sign Program is reviewing the proposed sign program to see if it employs the unique design, the creative design ethos, that it demonstrates consistency with the materials and the colors and that sort of thing. So that's what we are reviewing tonight.

I'm not done. I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

I'm very confused. Beginning, your first answer is no. And later on you say some. So there are altogether 16 signs here have been presented to us. Right?

Commissioner, can I just slightly amend what Brad said just to clarify? Is that okay? So just to slightly amend. So the master sign program says, and I don't have it verbatim, but if there's a deviation from what the original proposed signage was for the site then a master sign program comes to the planning commission so on the original master sign program that the commission adopted three or four years ago it showed a retail use at the site it's not a retail use it's a gas station site so that's the reason why so i just want to clarify it's not a non-conforming issue it's it's baked into the master sign plan for the dunes So that's why we're here today.

Okay, I remember last year in planning commission, we talked about the signs for the Ross department store, which is, you know, it's not, it's oversized. And then we allowed it to go through. And also I remember you were saying that, okay, we're going to come up with a new master sign programs so that, you know, in future everybody will comply with it. and then everything will go through to the planning department to to approve it and don't have to come to planning commissions.

This is a master-signed program specifically for this piece of land.

What he's saying is that we did agree at the discuss at the end of the discussions on that other facility that we would update the overall MSP for this site-specific plan. And we would address that. And I don't think, to his point, we haven't done that yet.

Correct. And so now we are coming here. I think the important thing is we are looking at this, when looking at, you know, Commissioner Woodson's comments, I think a lot of good points that he had brought up. Of course, I think there's a lot of unknown. I mean, there's one unknown 10, and I think right now we do not know. And also there's... I think what I suggest we focus on the size, the font, and the layout. And the tenant name is definitely going to change because I remember when I was in Vacaville, the nut tree totally changed and then they put out the monument too. And there's no name on it. Everything is vacant because we do not know who are the tenant. and we were telling them we want some top class tenant there, eventually they come up with some fast food store, and then they change the name. So I would suggest we look at the size and the proof in general, and then the name, they can come back to us and subject to approval because we want to know how the name design and the size and the font. And so because right now, I think they have 110 and it's unknown, right? And also, I don't know the monument signs. I think like Glenn Wilson said, maybe the Hilton sign will be there, which I do not know whether the Hilton sign will be there. But I don't think I want to put Hilton sign with Chevron sign together. It doesn't tie. But again, we are not here to run the business. they need signs. So our job is to see whether the signs is acceptable. And I think we should address the issue here on the signs and identify the elements required to further refine it, you know, if you need to refine it and allow the operational signage needed for the project to proceed with it. If I look at the comments the fellow Commissioner have made, I know the... I don't know whether I read the email from Commissioner Woodson's The Unknown Future 10, and I think that is something a lot of signage monument sign i think they would not know what who are the uh non-tenant yet and uh were the size necessary in your comments um and i i think we are not here to decide whether the business needs size or how many signs they need and um and the uh Monument sign, yes, it's a fair question to raise. And the crispy, crunchy signage, I think that usually is a business decision, you know. And as long as it complies with the sign regulations. And future drive-through sign, we do not know the tenant, but I think as long as MSP governs the future signage and, you know, it complies with MSP, that's fine. The visual simulations is helpful, but not necessarily required by the ordinance, correct?

I'm sorry, what was the question?

The visual simulations is not required by the ordinance, right?

Currently, no.

So I think the gateway characters, I think, appropriate design considerations i think as long as we we we consider that and uh let's see is your home i mean i think uh am i right uh javi mentioned the is that i think i understand the name i changed to dunes plaza instead of brick water plaza

so it was before it was like a breakwater plaza now it's a dunes market place uh the main uh the uh on the top so uh i'm going to answer a few more uh if you guys if your commissioner allow

me i'd like to answer a few things harvey they're still deliberating as a body so it's probably better if they all get their questions out and then you can address them at that time and then the the attorney uh mentioned to the chair that at some point we do have to go out for public comment so if you just want to wait a little bit harvey so

I agree with Commissioner Wilson's earlier saying that whether it's the Breakwater Plaza or Dune Plaza, as long as it's an agreement between you and Chevron, you know, that's your decision, you know, what name you want to use.

Right. We're not really open to argument about the name right now.

So I think The important thing is whether this proposed signage appear or comply with the MSP. I think that's what we need to decide this evening.

Right. Staff has elaborated on that, that it doesn't comply specifically with the MSP, but we, as the commissioners, can approve or comment on the dimensions and the materials because there isn't an msp until tonight okay for this block okay that's good okay thank you commissioner jacobson thank you chair um

as it relates to signs f and g um i don't know why we delay the construction of those order the materials or anything like that i think that uh if uh the applicant wants to put whatever he wants on those, it's okay with me. My hunch is that as time goes on, you'll want to replace that with the more prominent tenants. You may begin with, you may just want to put Chevron on there and leave everything else blank, but I'm okay with you constructing those and getting them in place. So as new tenants come in, you don't have to order that. The other thing I have a question is about sign E. which is pretty much the largest, brightest sign on the property. And I guess the questions for the applicant, that's now 20 feet high. And we talked about the sign like the Chevron on Fremont, but I think it's different. Is the reason that sign E is so high is so that it's visible from the highway one? Harvey?

The driving cars, they go so fast, they cannot see the sign, I mean, the letters. So all a little bit taller. And also, chevrons do not allow any other signage next to their price sign. So that's the reason we have a sign F. So sign F is all the offering. Sign E. Sign E is just like a price sign. I know, but it's huge. Because the font has to be bigger. And the aesthetic has to look good. That's the main key.

So how do you explain the other signs that are not that big that have been approved by Chevron and they're sitting on the property?

There's different demographics. If you see on the highway, like Highway 5, they are much bigger. They are like 40 feet high. Right.

I understand that. My question was, is it that high so that people driving north on Highway 1 can see that sign? Because we certainly don't need it that high for MGM or 2nd.

I mean, I don't think it will be visible, even that high sign. But if it's visible, then definitely that make a big difference. People have no idea that there's a gas available on Imgen.

I suspect that Caltrans will take care of that at some point when they put signs that say hotels, gas station, that kind of stuff just before an exit.

I don't think so because we did try. They don't allow any signage on Highway 1.

Ah, I didn't know that.

No signage on Highway 1 because that's a different. We try to have like a my hotel signage. So they say no, that there's no signs allowed.

Okay.

So in terms of... I don't think it'll be seen anyway though. Of signage E... There's no room to make that smaller. It has to stay that large in order for the fonts and the sizes of the... We can lower it.

It's okay. If a commissioner feels like that is too high, that's okay. That's fine. Whatever you feel more appropriate. But I'm more concerned about sign F, because that's the main, it tells what we are offering.

I don't care.

That's the key.

Okay.

But otherwise, they will never see what we have, a car wash, any extra miles, or any fast food, or crispy crunchy chicken, because that's not visible from imaging.

Yeah, in my mind, that's your business, what you put on that sign. Harvey, the other thing I want to say is that I thought the city staff did a great job on the conditions of approval, that a lot of this stuff is covered in those conditions of approval. And so with that, you know, I have a tendency not to pick and point and do all this little individual sign business. I think it's covered by that. And for me, the biggest issue is signee. Signee is huge and it's not consistent with anything else in that area. So I'd like to see that reduced in size. And I'll turn it back to you, Chair. I see.

Sine is the fuel price monument.

Yes.

Is that the 20-foot tall?

Yes, it's 20 feet tall.

Tell me, we're afraid. Is this grade near Imchen or the grade the top of sand?

No, it will be on top.

So it's really 28 or 29 foot tall then? Sign? No, from engine.

From engine, yes. But the building is 25 feet tall. So that's what we are trying to see. One thing should be visible from far away, people driving on Imgen. If it's too small, the people won't be able to because it's like a further away, you know, inside. And with the building, it will look much better if it's a little tall, but if commissioners don't agree, then I'm okay with that.

Okay. Thank you, Dan. All right. Commissioner Simons.

Thank you, Chair. Actually, to the applicant. I guess my question was, I believe I saw on the staff report that they were looking at taking the pricing sign, sign what we have marked currently as E, and put it in a location where sign F, which is your tenant sign. I think that was a recommendation to staff when this report came out.

Brad, do you want to clarify your recommendation for E? Sign E. Let's see.

Well, this morning when we were meeting with Harvey, they did go ahead and increase the height of the sign. But my original recommendation was to remove... Originally, my thought was to remove the extra mile branding from that sign and put the... then Breakwater Plaza, now Dunes Marketplace sign on that bottom panel to act as the central identification sign, and then move that pricing sign from its proposed location next to the Imgen driveway to the very corner of Ingen and Second where sign F is currently proposed to be located and basically replace sign F with that pricing sign. That way you would have the community identification sign and the gas pricing sign very prominently located. And then for potential tenant IDs, sign G would have been able to fulfill that need up at the intersection of Breakwater and Second.

And that's exactly to my point is essentially that the pricing sign goes to the corner of second and Imgen Parkway. So to the applicant, I'm asking, is that something, I mean, you're talking about visibility and I certainly understand that and why you need that. So with that location, moving it up to that corner, as opposed to being on the entranceway right off Imgen, is that something that is possible or is there a reason that you feel that it needs to be where it's currently shown at?

So the reason is to have a sign over there where the sign is. Because Chevron do not allow any other tenant. Like if we have a drive-thru, we have a car wash, they try to avoid it. They just know our price sign has to be completely, they don't even like extra mile sign with that. But they have a collaboration with extra mile, but not with anyone else.

Well, that's what I think I'm kind of saying is could you essentially – because right now it's showing that you're going to have the tenant sign where sign F is. If you moved sign E to F and then take F and make it possibly the same dimensions as G and move it to where E is. So you'd have G and E as your tenant signs. and then F would be your pricing sign, and that wouldn't, sounds like it would not conflict with Chevrons, and I understand, you know, not to have other signing, but All I'm essentially saying is just switch the signs.

Commissioner Simon, the thing is the sign G is nine feet high. So the plan is when we are going to build a hotel, I'm starting next year anyway, so we'd like to create a kind of statement entry that will be same signing will go the other corner so when you enter people feel like that it make more aesthetically or like uh look much better that both side there's a sign and you have entrance okay and yeah that was the reason that we that's like we like otherwise if it's not there i don't even mind But Imgen is the main corridor where everybody sees the signage. Not that one. Only people will see that sign when they go there.

Okay. The other, again, question is, I saw the staff now called, instead of the spa, it's called... with the car wash.

The dunes.

Yeah, dunes, express wash. You have it on both the east and west facings of the car wash itself. And I think staff had indicated that the west facings facing was was fine but the um excuse me i'm sorry yeah the west facing was not needed and the east facing was fine and and as i kind of look at this um i kind of wonder too you have the vacuum canopy there um Is it really necessary to have, because there's a lot of signs here, but I understand why, but I'm looking, do we really need that?

No, it's okay. Bishop Simon, no, it's okay. If the commission doesn't like it, I'm fine with that. Okay. The east side is very important. People will see it. But that sign is already people know car wash. But one thing I'd like to mention that the car wash is not like a standard car wash that go with the gas station. It's a more kind of quick way you see over in Wal-Mart. It's like a very high end. It will be much better. There won't be any noise. I'm spending extra money that even when you drive in the car wash, you can still use the phone. It won't be that you don't need to like turn off your phone. It will be that like a noise reduction system I'm using.

Okay. That's everything I have. Thank you.

Okay.

Yeah.

Commissioner.

Okay. Thank you, Chair. All right. So after hearing the discussion this evening, I'd like to make some comments. The very purpose of having signage on the business, as we all understand, it is identification as to what is here visibility from a distance and directions and if there are any safety issues so that's the very purpose we have this subject in front of us today Our mandate basically is to see that the city regulations, any concerns staff has expressed, they are addressed. Public concerns, if they are there, we've not heard public. So we address that. And then the business, of course, we are a business friendly city and we want to encourage the current business and even having others. So we, from the discussion, the reluctance, I feel that we trying to kind of discourage and trying to argue on certain things. I heard the developer, he's saying, when I read the agenda packet earlier, There were issues which the staff has raised certain concerns. And I think after discussion, some of these like color sign compliance with the city, the main concern was whether it is with the master sign plan of the dunes. It is in conformity. When the nature of business has changed, the signage will change. And it's a new master business sign plan, which we are discussing. And if we say it is not in compliance, that may not be correct. Because four years ago, when we prepared this MSP, this business was not in this shape as we see it today. So from that perspective, it's a new plan altogether for this specific business. So it is not that it is not in conformity. It's a new subject that we are discussing. So we are, as such, in compliance. Business needs. Now today, whatever decision we take, we say accept it, we say reject it, or we find something in the middle. If there are issues of public concern or conformity with the city regulations, it's fine. But doing anything, whatever is proposed, then accepting and telling the business to either do major changes or come. after some time or maybe postpone the decision, it will have cost to the business. For what? Why are we laying this cost to the business if other concerns are being addressed and he's willing to change the plan? We said that, okay, height is small. He says, okay, make it less. He says, okay, a particular site is not required. He says, okay, let's not have it. So from that perspective, he as a representative of the people of this city need to be kind of. depict the nature of our city and people that as a business friendly people taking care of the concerns of the cities, the rules and regulations and the public and the business address also. I say that whatever changes that we have discussed, I think we should implement those changes. Let's go ahead with... this plan so that this business, this is the only gas station and one of the major facilities coming into this area, which is going to benefit the local communities and also outsiders.

You should go ahead with that.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Arana. Harvey, extra mile is, is it still over the convenience store entrance? sign called Extra Mile.

Extra Mile will be on the building. On the building. On the building.

Over the entrance doors to the convenience store.

From the 2nd Avenue where when you break Water Street. Brad, do you want to pull up A1?

Sign A1. A1. Yeah, there you go.

Yeah, there you go. Is A1 the entrance to your convenience store? I call it the convenience store.

This is on the building, yes. It's on the building, but it won't be visible from Imgen.

Right. Yeah. So is that considered a Chevron tenant? Crispy Crunchy is a tenant. it would be listed as a tenant?

It's inside, basically. You can say it's a tenant or it's not a tenant. When you go to 7-Eleven, they have just one counter, and it's a small thing. It's just an amenity, something offering. That extra mile, prefer that they have more customers come in to buy stuff. When someone is buying that, crispy crunchy chicken then they buy soda and soda belongs to extra mile so it's they have the collaboration they find the way okay how we can do and that's the reason we have a crispy crunchy chicken a1 is the extra mile entrance that's a2 is the drive-through

Entrance to 3 is to try to. Yes, that is correct. The. Crispy crunchy. It's snack entrance.

I'm a little confused because the original thing is when you see below the building, crispy crunchy chicken is inside the building, but your entrances you see extra mile there is a door on the where we see crispy crunchy chicken.

There's no entrance. They have no A1.

Yeah, there's nothing. There's no entrance. Okay.

Okay. Okay. So extra mile really has nothing to do with Chevron GoJuice.

No. They are completely, they have a collaboration with Chevron, but they are completely independent. And mostly, you see mostly Chevron and Extra Miles together. Like ARCO, AM, PM together, but they are both separate, different companies.

Can I kind of fill in on Crispy Crunchy a little bit? Yeah. So Chris, I think if I get it right, Crispy Crunchy Chicken is a non-brick-and-mortar louisiana restaurant flavored chicken cajun that sets up as a fran with as a franchisee franchisee relationship with owners who want to open a non-brick and mortar store where it becomes an add-on within the within it so it's not officially a restaurant but it serves as a restaurant light where he has his own ovens he has his own thing but he'll have he'll have chicken and biscuits and i think that's the primary things they have but it so it's literally a it's a standalone franchise it's not associated with extra mile it is not an official partner of extra mile like some of their other partner restaurants and other things that they that they will put into an extra mile store so he's gone out and he has basically he's going to have a non he's going to have a franchisee relationship with a non-brick-and-mortar restaurant providing food provider and that's going to be in the center of the store and that won't have the drive-in and then he'll have to the to the engine side of the property he's going to have a standalone some type of take out to go into your restaurant we don't know yet whatever it is we just know that there's going to be a door there's going to be a window there's going to be a drive-in and there's going to be a sign but we have no idea what the configuration of the inside is going to look like so they'll actually be two franchises within the actual store that are selling food okay and that's what makes it different and unique BECAUSE OTHER RESTAURANTS AND OTHER GAS STATIONS AND CONVENIENCE STORES DON'T HAVE TWO SEPARATE FRANCHISEES AS SUBTENANTS.

NEW SPEAKER Okay. I'M CLEAR. ALL RIGHT. LET ME OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT NOW.

NEW SPEAKER CHAIR, NO ONE HAS RAISED THEIR HAND. YOU CAN CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU WANT. NEW SPEAKER WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. all right now well our attorney asked us to do that so i have to comply so the chair if i may uh I'm hearing different opinions from the commission, if I may chair Harvey. So I'm hearing from the commission, they're still having a little bit of concern about a lot of the signage. So for F and G, the tenant signage, I guess the question is you had started the presentation by saying all the signage is mission critical, but if those were to not be included today, would you be able to open up the gas station and the convenience store? And at a later time, you could come back to get that? Or is the tenant for F&G? So I just wanted to help you and the commission with this conversation, because you have the tenant stuff there.

I understand that, yes, we have to have a price sign. And we also have to have tenants, what we have over there. Those are very critical. But when I'm developing a site, when we do it piecemeal, there will be a lot more work, and there will be a mess. To build something, if now the GC is on site, site is under construction, he can build monument sign. And when the tenant come, it's just we already know the font size, the sizes of the signs, everything. They just have to slide in. You know, make a sign or letter, individual letter, and put over there. That's about it. But that's everything. It's already built. and those one is not important right now but i like to build the signage if possible if commissions allow that because otherwise it will be much more work and a bit more mess to build and bring the gc back and then go to the i mean planning and go to the building department i mean it's a whole lot more work

I was the one I know, Guido, that kind of raised the question there. And I will tell you the answer I got from the applicant on why he feels E needs to be where it's at and F needs to be where it's at. I'm satisfied with that. I just wanted to understand why, you know, is it possible to switch? But I understand what he's saying. So I am fine with that as it stands here.

One thing I also like to clarify, the sign, I think Commissioner Simon, you raised question, another price sign behind the car wash on the east side. That sign, I don't like to do it. Basically, I'm with you because the thing is I'm building, that's a whole car that I own. I have to build and I like to make it really beautiful. And I want like all the lighting, everything looking nice, because this will affect my business. I do not want somebody driving at the signs blind, you know, go in your like, light go in your eyes. I'm all with you, you know, and that sign is not important. I don't want to do it. But what I heard from uh chevron they say might wait and measure department will make you on price sign on all the entrance So they say, might they will come, might they will not say anything, might they say, oh, no, no, no, you have an entrance here, you have no price sign. You have an entrance there, it's a main entrance on, like, what's the name, on Breakwater, but there's no price sign. But I think price sign, price is already there on the, what's the name, on the tank, on the dispensers. People see it, but I think they have their own requirements.

They decide if they're going to come in based on price sometimes.

Yeah, right. They see it. They do. They measure everything. Yeah, they got to see it. But otherwise, I don't like to do it.

One last clarification or comment. The future tenant for your sit-down-and-drive-through service is unknown?

Right now, Commissioner, yes, because I have not seen any interest like a... Right.

So right now, you've got a sign that's approximately three foot high, a rectangular sign, and 12 foot long over entrance A3.

On which one? A3 sign. And the sign right above the door, it says, right, empty, right? There's nothing, nothing there. That's correct? Yes. Sign, yeah. So that one is just like nothing over there right now. But all the font and size is already there.

Right. But had that been, had you not made the deal with crispy crunchy yet, and you make the deal on July 1st, and we've approved or you've turned you loose on June 26th, 25th, 26th, 25th. Yeah, 25th. Then Crispy Crunchy would be kind of stuck with a three-foot, but it wouldn't look like a fancy deal. logo sign anymore.

So, no, no, no. Karanji Crisp is completely on the right side. That is, that's just not, there's no seating inside the convenience store.

Right, right. I know that.

Yeah. I know that. On the, what's called A3 or A2.

That's a very distinct sign. That sign. The extra bile is a rectangular plain sign. with fancy letters, but Crispy Crunchy is a distinct shape.

It's very small.

It's just a logo. Six foot by five foot. If I could try and help, the three by 12 sign that's on A3 over the future tenant may not want a three by 12 foot sign because they may have a distinct logo like whatever that crispy crunch is.

Yeah, it might be. Like one thing I did talk to Panda Express. Panda Express, they said, no, we don't want to leave. We like to buy. I'm not selling because of Panda. So if you jump on Panda Express, I think Panda Express will fit in that thing.

Okay. Yeah.

So this is like I just gave you an example. Or maybe Jamba Juice or Baskin-Robbins. So those kind of things. They'll be okay. Yeah. I think that will fit in the sign, that one.

Chair, did I help or make that worse?

No. I think what we will finish tonight is if all goes well, the sign A3 will be undefined.

Yes, I repeat again. We know the sizes, but it's right as there's nothing over there. There will be empty space.

An empty space. You won't place an order for an empty sign to your sign contractor.

No, no. He is not building those.

He will build a lot of signs.

No, he will only build. That's not his job. His job is to monument sign only. Oh, just mount them. Monument. You know, they go high. Oh, the monument sign. Yeah. So those commissioners, chair of the... Those signs are built by the contractor, you know, who fabricates signage. So the franchisor, they tell them their specifications and the sign company, they build accordingly. And Brian, I believe he's online. He knows that. Brian.

Yeah. And just to help the conversation. So on A3, you're showing a three foot by 12. 12-foot space 12-foot space commission uh chair what's uh chair 36 square feet yeah so what what the commission would be approving tonight would be whoever goes in there has to fit within that three foot by 12 foot um box and if there's a deviation from that then either staff approves it or we kick it back up to the planning commission so yeah i mean i think if so

The reason is that you have a three by 12 because, you know, when you see that wood cladding, that one is, I think, five feet. So I believe it's a five feet. So they're trying to make it like a look more aesthetically look nice.

Right.

That's the main reason. So it does not look odd to that wood ironing in the middle.

So I would again suggest that we go sign by sign. and approve or disapproves. And we could start right with this one on A3. So A3 is sitting at three feet by 12 feet, which is 36 square feet. The actual visual orientation of the upper slats versus the building versus the lower slats above the door has an area of four feet center line because I'm going off a crispy crunch and I'm going off of the extra mile signs, which are approximately four feet in height. So my suggestion would be to approve a three with a footprint of 36 square feet that can go from three feet by 12 feet to four feet by nine feet. Sure. That would give him the flexibility if there is a specific vendor that comes in with something that's more vertical than horizontal that we get the square footage. But looking at the plan, he already has a four foot sign because the crispy crunchy that he wants to put in is four feet. So it actually it fits presentation wise and creates consistency across all three of the signs, A3, A1 and A2.

Then how about the font size? I mean, if you're going to change it to...

I think we leave that up to your point that you made before. We give the square footage. We assume that it's going to be proportional and that the lettering is going to match whatever is appropriate to support A1, A2 because A3 is going to be in line with that.

And it's probably going to be some corporate logo or name that's whatever it is. Yeah.

And that makes sense because I think all the sites that they presented to us already with the dimension, with the font size, if you agree to it tonight and approve it, If any deviation, then they have to come back to us. Right.

And I think we just, we approve the dimensions. We approve the square feet. That then turns it back over to an administrative issue that it goes to the business. And what we don't get back into is we don't get back into our phone company that was on reservation that we sat around and discussed for three hours on the correct color and text size. Right. Yeah. I mean, we give that up to the developer to figure out. Right.

I think we can group them too, can't we? For example, A1, A2, A3, the A signs, that'll eliminate us, you know, doing that three times.

Say that again?

Okay.

So in groups.

We can go very quickly.

Well, I think we just can, I think we can go through it. Do we, do we as a group agree with A1? yes yes yes yes 50 square feet no problem yes so a2 a2 yeah crispy crunchy that's fine my comment on crispy crunchy is only that and it's i get it but i think this i'll just say it i i'm i'm going to approve it i'm not going to disagree with it because i think we're way down a path But we are really opening our gas stations up to having two sub vendors within. We're actually having two tenants. Two tenants within a third tenant property, and we haven't done that anyplace else in the city. And I think we've cast our we've already we've already thrown the die and we can't back off on it because we didn't know what we were approving at the time. And I'm going to say that back to you, Harvey, that my frustration on the the drive through the signs. going back to the original design is that there have been so many changes to the footprint and what's inside and they're so minor that okay they they go to the planning office you go work with the planning staff and they make a change and then they make another change and then they make another small change and then now all of a sudden we have two sub tenants within your convenience store that if this had come to us with the original design a year ago when we laid this out and you had said, hey, I'm going to probably going to have, I'm going to break with tradition and I'm going to put two subtenant food vendors into my facility, we would have had this discussion at the time. And so you've been slowly making changes that have backed us into a corner. And so I'm going to support A2 and Crispy Cluck But I'm doing it with the understanding that you have done this over and over again. And I'm very concerned that we don't continue that pattern anymore in the future developments that come in. So that's my comment. Go ahead.

So, Commissioner, I understand that the press station is not you. I think it's my fault because I was kind of concerned. Like I said in the beginning, I never like to do the gas station. But I forced to get this thing done. So now I start looking, okay, how I can make it? Because construction cost is so high. I don't want to put the number here, but if you see it, you see, man, how this guy will make this thing? Because even the new gas station, there are so many new regulations you have to follow.

And I completely understand that. And I think we can move on. I talked about this the last time. The fact is that we have a gas station that is a gas station and a car wash and six EV stations, which is funny at a gas station. And it's got two internal franchise food restaurants. one of which is a drive-thru. So it's not really a gas station anymore. In fact, the gas station arguably is going to be secondary to a lot of things on this, the way you've got stuff. So you're trying to maximize your space with products as a business owner. If each one of these is a product line and totally understand it, I'm just saying with anything else that comes before us, now that you know the concerns, please do not do this again. I'm fine with A1, A2, and then I think the recommendation I had on A3 was that it's 36 square feet. I'm shy today. I want to make sure that the color scheme is in line with the color scheme of A1 and A2.

as well as the the font and the font yeah so i think that was the other condition um that would that my fellow commissioner would like to add into that is just to make that as a note and i think i could understand that if if somebody came in there that had a unique sign uh as long as it stays within those dimensions but i think it needs to come back for approval. Because that happens. I get that.

We're going to let staff do that.

We trust. I think what we're doing is we're trusting if it's not outlandish that it would...

If they've got to come back with something that's...

So just to work clear, whatever the commission approves tonight, this will be the final standards for this site? If it goes off by one foot or five feet, that's kind of staff's determination. If it's a substantial change from today, we will have to bring that particular sign back to the Planning Commission. So just so that we're... Hopefully, Harvey, you understand that these are kind of etched in stone and that if you're going to try to make significant changes, we will have to bring this back to commission.

Yes, I understand that. Basically, the size, I'm not concerned. I only think the logo, every franchise will have a different logo. So that's the color that depends on which franchise comes. But size is fine. I'm okay with that.

And I'm fine with that. And I would say to that, Guido, and this is to the commissioners, that I guess my suggestion is that if there are more than five design changes, or five signs that have design changes to them after this, that we would request that as a condition that it would be considered for coming back to the commission. That way there's flexibility, but it's not just carte blanche.

Okay. Moving on then.

Did we approve A3?

Yeah, we approve all the A's. Okay, A's are done.

The B's are the car wash. Why don't we just pull up the slide deck and just kind of go through in order for them.

The car wash signs would be... Guido, can you pull it up?

My laptop died and I did email it to you.

Uh... You emailed it to me a little bit later in the day, so I was actually at dinner when you emailed it.

Oh, I'm sorry. So I don't have it. So you wrote it.

You want to. Yeah, we have ours is old. I did print off the. Yeah, sign B1 and B2 are on a page here.

Yep. Yes.

All right. So.

It's on that new one that he had set up. Yes. He had got with the set down.

Yes. So for the commission, so all the back and forth. So in speaking with the dunes reps, they were fine as long as it matched the overall look and feel of the overall signage on the property. Brian is Harvey's design guy. He did that in the revised plans in front of you. So the plans B1 and B2 do better reflect the overall signage on the property. Yeah.

I mean, I'm fine with both. I'm fine with having to sign on both sides. I mean, I think I don't necessarily care if it's on the second avenue and on the interior side.

I would not vote against it because it's there. I just don't think it's needed.

I agree that the interior one is not needed because it's pretty obvious that it's a car wash right there. But I'm not wedded to it.

I just think of the lighting. And quite honestly, I don't know what kind of a savings you might have by only one side.

It's also advertisement for the name.

But to see it, they're already going to be in there. I don't see the purpose of it, but I'm certainly not going to vote against it if it's there. I just don't see the purpose of B1, I think it is.

Harvey, am I right? The lighting of the signs will not be 24-7? It will be turned off?

Yes, the lighting will be.

Is Express Wash a franchise? No. Okay. It's not a franchise.

Okay. And I think I would add to that that I'm not only fine with B1 and B2, I'm fine with the presentation of B1 and B2 as text only in that type of format. And if he decides, again, because we've just made a change in the last two days, that if he and Shea Properties is in agreement on the property name and they're changing the monument one, I'm fine with them changing that also. I'm not necessarily locked into Dune's express wash. I'm more locked into the font and presentation than I am with the actual wording.

All right, moving on. C1 and C2.

Consensus? C1 and C2? Or chevrons?

No, this case is chevron standard design. Yes. I agree.

We're fine. D is also chevron logo? That's correct.

And I agree.

E is the monument fuel pricing sign and that chevron has particular... My proposal

to this would be to take the, because it's been done, and I sent Guido a text image of one, is to reduce this down, make it horizontal. The lettering, how tall is the lettering? How tall are the, we've got the dimensions. What I really want to know is how tall those are, the letters. Do we have any idea? um on sheet or sign e the chevron sign itself is four feet by no i don't want i don't care about the chevron i care about the i care about the gas i care about what customers care about the customers numbers yeah the customers are going to recognize what customers really want to know is the price yes and at and so if i'm if i'm looking at this distance and bear with me on this From my planning kind of days on highway design, it was equivalent to about one inch per 10 feet. And so if we take the intersection of Second Avenue and Second and Imgen, that's approximately 125 to 150 feet. So I would say that the numbers probably are, I would guess, are on the verge of somewhere around 12 to 12 inches to 12 to 15 inches.

Yeah, that's correct.

So if that's, if, and I say that because I'm in this drawing, if those numbers are correct and they're around, around the 12, 15 inches, that gives correct sight lines from 150 feet, which would get both sides of the road. Everybody could see it. The, the way that Chevron allows things to be done is if you take the drawing and this is, I don't know how to, do we have anything with this drawing online we know that we can pull up at all on the presentation uh yeah because we have yeah we did i'd like to pull this up because we have we do have people in the public and i'm going to describe something and i want them to be able to have at least up on screen sure i mean i did have brian our assistant plan here put the revised plans and all the comments up on the let me just go to the city website

Yeah, Mr. Woodson, the other thing to consider here is there's that vacuum canopy right next to it.

Yep, I know.

So it has to be positioned so that's not blocking. Give me one sec. Of course, Harvey knows that.

What I also know is that we don't – so what Chevron doesn't require – So right now, I'm going to give this to the audience so that they're on before Rita's trying to pull this up. Right now, it's a vertical sign that has the Chevron logo on top. It has the Chevron with Tecron little underneath. Then it has the prices in the middle. And then it has all the secondary kind of extra miles. There we go. Now I've got it on the screen. So things that I know about looking at enough research across this state, I looked at over 40 different chevrons and chevron extra miles within the radius between here to San Jose down to south, down to at least King City. And so if we don't have to have with Tecron, You could actually have just the extra month. Really, if we put all this in there, we really don't actually have to have cash and credit. You could just have crash only. And if I was looking at this, then what I would suggest is leave the gasoline prices as the main base above the monument. So there would be the monument, and then it would be the gas prices on the left, and then it's a horizontal. And then I would move the Chevron down to the right of the gas prices, and then put a rectangle that currently says like with Tecron, and then I would put extra mile there. So basically it's a three-part sign that has the gas prices on the left, then on the right it has the upper right is the normal chevron and then the lower right is the little small rectangle that says extra mile and that actually exists in a number of different chevrons in the region where they've done that type of of signage and i know i sent guido a picture i wish i had sent this one earlier today but i think if we did that what we're now doing is we're reducing the height down to around eight feet plus the base of the monument and so we're reducing it by about half i have a we're already eight feet up we're going to go around 28 to 30 feet up in the air And I'm not necessarily concerned about the perceptional difference on the height of the sign versus the site of the building, because everybody is sitting 10 feet down and looking up at an angle. And that's a two, that's a 3d perspective. That's going to change things. So to me, the idea of having a more rectangular base, horizontal sign that has the Chevron and the gas, the gas prices and the Chevron next to it. As long as, if we can get that, if we get that fit, I think that that is a, more indicative presentation for what we want in the city that it's it's more aesthetically present to the city without standing i said i don't need a big sign board that's 30 feet tall that says hey look at me i'm a gas station we know that it's a gas station everybody at this point in our area knows that that's a gas station unless it was advertising on highway one Right, but they're not going to see it. There's no way you can see it with Highway 1 because Highway 1 sits down below.

One of the things that I hear you saying is you're designing the sign for Chevron, and I don't think we can design the sign for Chevron. That's perfect.

That's what I'm asking for.

Okay. Yeah. I just, I thought.

No, I'm not trying to redesign. I'm literally trying to.

Yes. There is an approved Chevron sign that is horizontal instead of vertical.

Right. Yes. And it's a typical signboard. I mean, that's why I wish, I wish we could pull that up because it's, but the idea is literally, it's just, it's a standard signboard that has Chevron, it has the gas prices and then the Chevron sign right next to it. So it's still there. It still meets that presentation. and because the because you have the unleaded premium or plus and premium but then he's got diesel also that you've got going to have the extra space on the gas side that you're going to have to be able or you're going to be able to put the extra mile underneath the chevron so he'll still be able to create a nice rectangular package that looks presentable, that has Chevron, extra mile, and then it has all the gas prices. And people understand that and see it. And I don't think that from a width-wise, if we get into the canopy issue, that we don't have to have credit and cash and credit. And I understand it's a design issue, but people nowadays understand that. And I think, again, I'm just looking at this. This is the premier location for a gas station in the entire city. But at the same time, it is a monument site. And we've already gotten a lot of feedback from the local community about what we're trying to present here. And so we really want to present something that's long lasting. I like the design that he has for this and the monuments. I don't disagree with the monuments, Jeffrey, and we'll get to that in a minute. I just don't think we're at the point where we need to put them in because we don't have other businesses, but we can talk to that later. But this is my concept. That's what I would be more willing to entertain for the signage because I think it keeps all the elements, but it lowers the profile.

Yes.

So, Commissioner Wilson, are you suggesting shorter the sign, but broader than it?

Yeah.

Make it a wider, make it a horizontal sign instead of a vertical.

Yeah, so it will be wider. Now, my concern, because the location of the E sign, this is E sign, right? Yes. So, will that block the traffic view when cars coming in? You know, because it's broader.

you're driving and then i got big stuff you're turning if you're if you're turning into that kind of like this they have to turn yeah it's kind of like this but instead of having instead of having the extra mile as a as a third component here the extra mile would just be underneath the chevron because he's going to have to have an e85 so he's going to have three prices or four prices four rows for prices when he puts that fourth row of price in he can then take the rectangular extra mile and pull that directly underneath the chevron

What about the piece?

Well, that's, he has four. He has on his diagram. Well, all right.

Okay.

So there are five.

I'm sure they can figure it out. If we just change.

I think we want to lower it and create a horizontal profile instead of a vertical profile. That's what we need.

And let them do it.

Right.

I hear Commissioner Chang's concern with visibility. I don't know so much coming in. Coming out. Yeah.

But coming out, it's going to be up on the, it's coming out.

I'm just having a hard time.

Can you pull that? Can you go to the site plan? The overview of that, please. I mean, I get your point, but I think that if you're built, I'm not building out from, I think that the outer edge is still the outer edge. I think you're building into the property. You're not building out. I did a good point. Yeah. Well, you have space to build in. So that's why I say, could we pull up the site plan? I guess I'll pull it up right now.

It's a double-sided sign.

It is. Yeah.

Which is fine.

But I don't think that, so looking at the scale of the way the sign is, on assuming that the scale of the sign is correct to the scale of the site plan. And you're gonna, I mean, it's like this very small thing underneath E, there's lots of space above that. And then cars coming out, the sign's actually gonna be up, the sign's gonna extend up into where the letter E is. It's not gonna extend down closer to the property line. So I don't think it's going to have an effect on any cars because they're going to be further down to merge anyway. They're going to be below that dashed property line.

Only concern, commissioners, I have that I don't know how much space we have to build a rectangular sign instead of vertical. That's the only concern I have. Otherwise, I'm okay with it.

No, I understand. I understand.

able to see the price yes well if you if you look at the way the underneath the e you'll see it almost looks like a little cross and it's also represented on the drawing there you go our packet and that width that length of that bottom piece is 20 feet 20 feet it's 20 feet the

Yes.

Retaining wall type.

Yes, is 20 feet long.

So that's plenty of room to put a sign horizontally. It's not three feet. That's just the part that was holding up the placard. But the real width of that right there that we're looking at is 20 feet. So I think that's perfectly good. I also think it's further back. It's far enough from the property line that when you're exiting, if you look at the difference, there's no way that sign's going to be in your way when you get towards the exit. So I think it's fine.

Yeah.

Bobby, what do you think?

No, I'm fine with that. Like I said, I'm very open, you know, like whatever commission recommend, only as long as it's fit and it's visible. Because what I see is from Imgen and second, I think it would I'm not sure right now how many feet, but it's pretty far away from Imgen. There's a bus stand and it's after that.

It's 151 to the far side of the intersection. I just measured it. I see. I'm not sure. So I think here's what, and I get it, and I don't want him to have to come back at the same time. And so my preferred Harvey is that it be horizontal and that it has only the Chevron, the prices, and the extra mile fit into the horizontal component of it. At the same time, I am willing... go back to the vertical and say that yeah i would not like it to be 20 feet i'd like to go back to the original that we started with which was 18 feet but that if we if engineering wise up to the planning department and public works department if it does not fit then i'm not going to say no because that sign makes sense to be right there that he can have a horizontal sign then i would recommend that the sign again be the same components it would only be the the chevron the extra mile and the prices that any all the extras like the with tecron because chevron doesn't require that in their signs as a sub as a sub component that that would be removed because that would at least that would pull it down another 18 inches or so and so i just don't want to have a 20 foot sign on top of an eight foot rise And so anything that we can, if we got the horizontal, that's the preferred one, that's one that we would, that I would propose that we work on approving. But from an engineering perspective, when they does the design, if there is a true engineering reason, and I, we trust Guido to make that determination that that it cannot be horizontal for what for public works for safety reasons or anything else that then they can default to the vertical with the idea that the intention is to keep the verticals as short as possible and remove the components that the extra components yes and for vertical it was do you like the restricted economic or Well, I mean, I think I'd like to remove.

So if I could help out the commission. So tell me if I'm wrong, commission. But the first thing it would be if at all possible, make the sign like the two four zero zero Fremont Boulevard sign in Monterey and make it horizontal. If engineering and. structurally feasible. If not, as determined by the community development director, then it would be vertical, but no taller than 18 feet. Is that a fair summary?

The only exception would be that in the 2400 Fremont that you show a picture here, it's got three panels. the extra mile is a full-size panel like the Chevron, we would like to keep it the way he has it proposed, that it is a small rectangular one that goes underneath the Chevron. Because the 2400 one doesn't have all the extra gas types that he has. So that way he's going to have to have a little taller because of the gas types that he has, which then gives some space underneath the Chevron proportionally to be able to put the extra mile underneath the Chevron.

Understood. Just a quick one here. And I know you said it's not required with Tektron.

Tektron is required. I'm sorry to interfere you. I just got a text from the sign company. They said,

they required that's the new requirement they have to have it with tech so what i was going to suggest is if you have the sign like you're showing here on fremont and uh you have the chevron the prices of the the three three grades of gas and then where it says extra mile that's actually where you could go with the the diesel the e85 and the uh with um Oh, excuse me. I was going to say Chevron symbol with the width Tektron below it. Then the three prices of gas next to it. And then below that, you would have diesel, E85, and extra mile. So it's just so that you have three panels.

And maybe that's it. Maybe we just say we know what the requirements are. Right. We want a horizontal. Maybe we just simple. We want it to be horizontal. We would like you to work towards horizontal. That would get the height down under 10 feet. We're fine with that. But if it doesn't fit design-wise, then we won't want to do that. But we really want the focus to be on horizontal versus vertical.

Yes. And if they have to go vertical, I know you said you'd like to get it down at least to 18 by getting rid of the Tecron. Can't do that. I hear that. But can you get rid of the extra mile? Yes. I'm fine with that. Yeah. Understood.

Understood.

Yes.

And you could also adjust the height of the monument itself. Just a lot of things. You could adjust the height of the monument and subtract a foot out there or whatever.

Yeah, the wall.

Now on to F. Can we just say that?

I mean, with all this, are we giving them two options or let them decide?

No, no, Commissioner Chang. What the commission is giving direction to me and the staff on is to direct the applicant, if feasible, to make it a horizontal sign. If through the design process, it's not feasible to make it horizontal, to make it vertical, but to drop it to 18 feet and to have the extra mile signage removed. and i believe that's amenable to the applicant yes that's the direction from the planning commission all right you would decide right no i'm not deciding it's going to be the applicant's going to submit in the public works department and the building official will tell me if structurally what they're proposing is it

But you would discuss it. I know. We're trying to not bring it back between you and the applicant.

That seems to be amenable to the applicant.

That way he doesn't have to bring it back to us because he couldn't make it horizontal. So it has to come back to the planning commission. We're giving an alternative that worst case public works says you can't do this at all. It will not fit. Then we have an alternative. Do you have any comments, Javi?

No, I'm good with that. As long as this works proportionally and aesthetically look good, that's all my only concern.

Otherwise, it's good.

Sign D is approved?

Yes. Yeah, agreed.

Sign F? E is approved as? Yes. With, yes. Yes.

F. This is the... You know, I understand your position down there, but I also understand his position that if he doesn't construct this at the same time as he constructs the first wall monument, then he's going to have extra costs.

There's an additional mobilization cost and demobilization cost. It's not a real extra construction, but there's an extra move and demove cost. I understand that.

Yeah. So I'm wondering, Harvey, how we can get through this. whether you really need all these little tenant signs for what you already have in your gas station, or do you want to, I don't know.

I know there's objections to that. Commissioner Jacobson, the thing is like, the site is high, but you cannot see anything what we offer. So from Imogen and Second Avenue, that's our main intersection. That's what this sign is very, like, very important for me so people can see it. Then there is like a red light stop sign. They can see, OK, these are the operators they have, right? So then we can build it the same time. And it's time-consuming as well.

Yeah, I think the confusion sometimes is you kept putting the word tenant in here, and it may not be tenant at all. It's just what you're offering at the gas station right now.

No, it would be all what I just said. I mean, extra mile, car wash, or what's the name? Yeah, that's what I meant. Yeah, that's what I meant. That's what we are going to put there. People can see it. Or that's also like, I think... Concerning maybe we put drive-through, whatever, because all the space will be taken. But I do not also, same thing, do not want to put too much, because then you confuse people.

Well, I don't think you can. I guess mine is. I know what you're saying.

Isn't that just a business decision?

This is actually, I mean, next to the Mercedes sign. entrance to the city monument wise yeah this is probably the most prominent concrete concrete stone monument that we will have in the city because the signs across the street for best buy and the thing are very simplistic they're simplistic metal they're fading they really don't stand out well right right this is going to be much more prominent it's going to look better i completely i'm fine with this now i do think that the pedestal I'd like to see the pedestal pulled down a foot, just like I'd like to see the pedestal pulled down on you foot, but cause they match. And cause this is another third, this is another 20 foot. This is another 30 foot sign because it's going to be sitting eight feet, seven feet up in the air. So it's going to be, that's a three story building or a sign. And that's, and this is a three story sign for services. This is not a three story sign that says Hilton hotel, uh, Hampton Inn, the Dunes gas station, and it's not a location sign for businesses. This is actually the services that are being provided by the gas station. And we're asking to literally make a big sign on a corner that is literally in opposition to montage on the opposite corner. And it just says montage. We don't say montage with pool and outpatient clinic and urgent care. We have montage, right? Yeah. And what we're doing here is now we're saying, or, and we don't go across the street and we say, we don't have a signboard that says, we have a signboard that says Best Buy, Target, REI. It has the businesses. What we're asking, what he's asking for here is he's asking to provide, it's not future tenant. And I think that the clarification is you're absolutely right. It should have said, it should have said the services, gas station, car wash, chicken place, future service, future food prices, whatever. This is services. And I don't think in such a prominent corner location that we want to have a sign that's sitting up there that's going to look and say, here, these are the services we're providing at the gas station. And I understand the kind of, it's going back to support the business. I support, I am more supportive of this from a, these are all the businesses that are up in this whole area up on CDAC Hill. Then I am with, these are the services that are in this one little property of 1.3 acres. So if it was going to be future tenant and the property is going to be divided into five, five different tenant spots with two hotels and a gas station, that makes more sense to me than all the services that are being provided right here. If we want to take sign, this is F, if we want to take sign G and say, okay, these are all the services. I'm like, okay, that's interior to the property off of Breakwater. I kind of get that there. But I just don't, this is such a visible spot that we're putting a really visible sign that says car wash. And it's not even a vendor car wash. It's just an internal gas station car wash.

I was also not thinking about the actual size of this. It's huge. It's huge. This is a monster. It's a monster.

Yeah.

Yeah. I wasn't taking that into consideration either. So I don't.

I mean, this is a landmark. This isn't a monument. This is a landmark sign.

Yeah.

That we're asking to be put in here.

Yeah.

And I just don't think that a landmark sign should have the services of a gas that are being provided within a gas station.

Yeah. Should have the convention.

Well, that's what I'm wondering, Harvey, in the future. I mean, I know you want to put this up in the future. Are you actually thinking of replacing all those services things with your other facilities and commission?

Not really. So it's not I have no idea. But maybe, you know, later on what like Venus requires or something. But at this point, we are more concentrating on the gas station. OK, but the backside will be more a kind of a result. So, like you brought this thing might, you know, if suppose we see that, okay, why not we put those things here and remove everything else? We already have a signage, what we offer in the back. I mean, I'm just be very honest and straightforward. I don't want to hide anything, you know, whatever. But if it's business requires that, suppose the city comes or people say, there should be something we can see it, right? We can put like, what we have. like a resort, you know, like I said, Curio Collection or Marriott or Hilton or whatever it is.

Yes. You know, I understand that. I think you can do it in a much smaller, more tasteful, less obnoxious way as it relates to these big signs or If you couldn't do that, I'd say I'm with Commissioner Woodson, who says these two signs can wait.

No, I don't think we are saying we can wait. I think we are saying that the... I think we already agreed on signs E, and now we are talking about sign F, right? Yes. So we are not waiting on sign E. We are not talking about sign F. No, we are signing on F and G. And... I think this is a very prime location, I have to say, and really appreciate that this design is very important. And so I think at that corner, I think showing the business, what are the businesses going to be there? I think that's good. And just as long as, you know, just remember the, we don't want to, a kind of,

chivalry makes signs but this is good all right what if i mean if i come back to this and i'm thinking this is a commissioner you have a comment i wanted to add something um we need to look at the future a little bit i think most people um in the very near future are driving with an app that tells them where to go and where to find things. So they go, hey, Siri, give me the next car wash or give me the next place I can charge my car. They're not going to start reading on the sign, Siri going to tell them, make a right and now turn left. So we can make things a little bit cleaner because most drivers, in-town drivers, will know where they're going. They don't need to read all these things. And out-of-towners will get their apps in the car telling them where to turn and where to find these things. So just for the aesthetics, I think we can reduce the number of signs unless we want to publicize something's going on.

Can I make one request? Yes. If commissioners, like I see, there's too many signage, sign G on breakwater, you guys can remove it. I'm okay with that. But I think this sign is very important because more people will see it. That sign will only people see when they go in the gas station. So to make it that corner and the other side sign, I was just thinking about more aesthetically or look nicer entry, that both side kind of signage. But if commissioners don't feel comfortable, I think that one, I'm OK. There's no sign over there. But this sign, I definitely ask. But if the height is the issue, I'm OK with that, whatever. uh commissioners see that it makes sense if you get a sign that's like sign g where sign f is currently you're okay with that no no i like no no i like to have a sign f he's going to trade f for g uh yeah but like g if you can so we don't ask without that can i ask a staff question the property that's across the street on breakwater

that's not developed obviously and i can't honestly i don't remember what all the properties are above above and behind so i know behind behind the gas station we've got the hotel property what is on the other side of breakwater from the gas station is that is that part of another hotel uh let me pull up the map commissioner watson so i could and to give you some my thought process on this this is coming back to g a challenge with g is that G is not conducive to actually viewing if you're driving. The actual, in the U.S., we look left to right. And so when we're making a turn, we're going to be looking to the right around that turn in Breakwater. So when I'm driving up Breakwater, when I'm driving up Second Avenue, and I'm going to be looking at trying to figure out where am I going to navigate back in the CDAC property area, I actually don't need a sign where G is. I actually need a sign on the other side of where G is, on the other side of Breakwater, on the corner there. And I just don't remember whose property that is. But obviously, we can't make a decision on, hey, we're going to make sure there's a property sign, that navigation sign G on the other side of Breakwater. But I think that that's actually where the G sign, the navigation sign for the overall property makes more sense anyway.

yeah so up on the screen commissioner woodson is an old aerial doesn't really do justice to all the great work harvey's done but basically where the um red whatever you call it thing that's the gas station that's the gas station to the west of that uh harvey is under contract with the city to build two hotels up here right one here and basically one here If you go up second now, if you look, if you actually, you can actually drive up there now and then you make a left around breakwater around here. Are you asking around here?

No, I'm actually talking. If I, if we take it, the intersection of breakwater and second, which is a plus interstate a left right interstate a full plus intersection yeah because if you make a right you turn into the other property if you make a left yeah it looks like the marina coast water district it is marina coast water district um so that's breakwater basically comes out where marina coast water district comes in so right at that so i believe that the the property If you extend Marina Coast Water District, if you extended that road across, which is where Breakwater is now, so that just keeps going to the west because that's where Breakwater comes straight across. On the northern side of Breakwater, that's going to be part of one of the hotels. So I think G... is better on the other side because that's going to give people when they're coming in to make the turn they're going to look at that sign they're going to say oh look gas station here this hotel here this hotel there so i think g i don't think g is necessarily in the right place right now anyway so i think we can come back to g because it's all your property it's all going to be your property anyway so that navigation one i think we can we could table g but coming back to f My challenge is, again, it's a landmark sign. It's going to be a sign. Montage is a landmark sign for that area. You look at that and people, where do you go? It's a montage sign. It's right there. The rest of the landscaping sucks, but the sign itself definitely stands out. And even more than the gas station sign, to his point, this sign right here that says Dunes Marketplace, it's going to stand out and it's going to be the primary thing that people see and think about when they're driving around there. And I just, I don't know. I mean, it's huge, but it just feels like to me, it's not a main thoroughfare sign. It feels like that's an important sign. It's a directional sign. It's a services sign. It's something that would be absolutely appropriate on a secondary road. But given the importance of that intersection to our city, it doesn't feel like it's the rights that the services component don't feel correct there. But I'm willing to go on with the group if the group really feels that. I mean, I don't agree with it, but I'm not going to hold the whole motion on the same because I think we're working towards a solution.

And I think, Harvey, I think the commission, because also the grade, it's so high above the Imgen, and then you're adding a 20-foot sign tall on top of that grade, I think that's part of the concern that's going to be such a prominent sign.

So what if we did the same thing? What if we came back and we said, okay, you've got three, you've got six. You have six services that you want to provide in your gas station that you want to highlight. And it could be EV charging, it could be gas, car wash, the two restaurants, and gas. Whatever the six are that you want to have. Or it could be five. It could be four in the top center one that says gasoline and then four underneath. What if we did the same thing? What if we turned this into a horizontal sign, lower the height down, back down to around 10 feet so that it's more proportional to the property. We expand it out so it's at an angle to the road so that everybody can see it there. And then it's more of that kind of block side. Now, I understand this because this is the forward thinking way that a lot of malls and commercial facilities are doing things is they're kind of dropping these signs into the side of a monument. versus kind of the way of having one on each side. But maybe if we – I'm more willing to accept this if we bring the height down again and not make it – I just keep thinking it's a services sign that's going to be 30 feet tall. That's a really big landmark to say this.

Commissioner, I'm good with that. Like the option we have on the E, if with the same option this side, and I'm good with that. I have no problem.

I think that's a good idea. That is a good idea. Your concern was the height that I was going to ask that. I mean, we're kind of fighting over that side, that side.

We don't have a lot of super beauty here.

Yeah. And I'm thinking this thing in height, not necessarily overall square footage, but in height just eclipsed that thing.

Yeah.

But if we go horizontal versus the vertical,

Now what I would, what I say Guido is after, if we, if we did that and we agree to that, which I think we're leaning towards, we could take this sign, this slide specifically, send it across the street back to, to, to Shay and say, you really should relook at redoing your two signs because I do, I do appreciate this. And I think for like the bigger mall across the street, as you're coming off the highway, something like this then ties back into what Harvey's building. And I think it increases the overall, uh, the overall integration of all the Shea properties together, because then you have, we have these types of signs over here. This is not part of our thing here. It's not part of the discussion. But I think that if we're trying to integrate across all of our, we're trying to integrate properties that he's presenting that we eventually know we're building into, and we're going to try to design all that design in. And as we talked about at the very beginning of this, we are trying to bring some of these rock and architectural elements out of the other development that is in Shea and the Promenade then one of the challenges has always been those signs on the highway that this or this taking this concept whatever we end up with the final design that he comes up with with the horizontal pass that back to shay and say you know you guys might want to think about this in development wise because this will really integrate and make your entire development on both sides of the street tie together I think that would be good. I like the looks of it. I just think it's just too big. And I'm willing to compromise on the services side if we can just make it smaller. I have a question.

Go ahead.

All right. Yeah, we have applicants want to have 24 signs, high sign, and have two of it. And now we ask him to flip over and turn to 10. So are we going to set a precedent here? And then so all the future 10 signs were to comply with this MSP. I don't want because we tell Harvey, OK, we want you to flip. And later on, somebody come here. I want another 24 sign.

This is site specific, is it not? Yeah. It's not part of the MSP. It's not site specific.

But again, that's why I think as a city as a whole, I think we should have an MSP for the whole city. So that's how the city is going to look like.

That's not your job tonight.

I know it's not. But again, because then I'm talking about, is it fair right now? We tell him to flip and then later somebody come in. I want that. We allow that.

So is it equally fair if we say we don't approve the 20 foot sign?

No, I think we have to... On top of a... I'm not objecting of flipping. I think we just have to be standardized and then the whole city, how we want the whole city to look like. You know, I just look at the MSP for this side and the MSP for the other side.

There's an easy answer to that. We don't have a standard. We have objective design standards. that go to the rest of the city that are not part of our site-specific plans. We have a request that we do a review of our objective design standards once a year, once every two years. And the signing, I believe, is part of that objective design standards. I can't remember completely.

Well, it's actually a simpler answer. Okay. You're bringing up a valid point, Commissioner Chang. We're not setting a precedent because the applicant is building something that wasn't envisioned in the original Dunes Master Sign Program. It's a deviation from that. And the Master Sign Program for the Dunes says if there's a deviation, from the original msp for the overall dunes then he has to file his own master sign program for this property so it doesn't set a precedent for the rest of the city or it doesn't uh chain us down to doing something for individual properties and then the second part of your question is um the city is developing gateway signage requirements throughout the whole city But those are probably not going to be done for about a year. So it wouldn't be fair to the applicant to make him wait a year to do the citywide.

I think what he's saying is that as we move forward is to create some more, going back to why it's so good called objective design standards, right, is that we We just need to add to the next review cycle of the overall city plans to review what we're thinking about on how we present signage across the city. And that next time we do a review of our citywide signage, that we just make sure that that's added so that we can relook and take some of the lessons that we've learned here and apply that to the overall city down the road. Okay.

That's understood.

That's good.

I hope I didn't, I hope I've corrected you. You're right. I think I like to see the kind of citywide kind of, you know, regulations, right? And every different location and different requirements.

Yeah. So I think coming back to F, we've got that we're in agreement, try to lower it down to around 10 feet and make it horizontal over vertical. And I'm not necessarily tied to the 10 foot level as much as I'm tied to spread versus height.

So I've been around maybe the 12 feet, the max.

Whatever. Well, I will, like I said, I just don't want it to be 30 feet. So, and the 30 feet is the 20 feet plus the step off from the elevation. So I'm, I just, we're going to, Basically, we're cutting it probably 25% is the main height for the wording. And then 75%, we're reducing that in half. So we're reducing by about a third overall. I'll let you guys deal with it.

10 to 12 feet? 10 to 12 feet. That's fine. And sign G is going to be removed. Is that correct?

That's up to the commissioner. Yeah, I would like to remove... Or maybe we can put a price sign over there, a small price sign. That's another idea that if like, you know, weight and measure department comes with that, then we have a space to build exactly where the sign G is.

So I would be more willing to just not have a sign there. But again, maybe I'm willing to if... If there was a physical requirement that Chevron came back and said, oh, yes, we have to have it by every entrance, that give public works and the design department the ability to add a small, just a very small sign for pricing for cash or credit only, whichever one. on right there in its place with the idea that we would rather not have something there unless Chevron comes back and says that it's a requirement.

Right. And then you're saying essentially eliminate G as it's shown here. But if the sign has to be there, then turn it into a pricing sign like F, but much smaller.

Just the pure pricing by itself.

Yeah.

The smallest footprint. And then what I would do is in order to say back to you, I agree. I understand the navigation side and what you're trying to build with the whole property as a whole is I would consider when you're doing a design for G, what was the original G for directional is considered putting it on the other side of breakwater when you're doing that design. yes and i think that that i to me that's telling oh for this hotel go straight up straight up second for the gas station go here and for this hotel go here so that makes it makes more sense on the other side anyway but that's just a design thing for the future for you yes that would be really nice a really nice looking sign that's what we are looking because like going to the hotels uh the gas station like i said if there's no requirements for saveron

or we attend magic department does not require that, that I'm okay without any sign.

The only concern I have, because that is a turning point, right? Going to the gas station. If you go to the, turn to the, what is the name of the street? The breakwater street. And then on the left is your gas station. And then a hotel will be straight ahead. And on the other side, you may need a sign. to show the hotel directions, correct?

Yes, but that will be on the right side.

What will probably happen, I'm speaking out of turn for you, is that there will probably be more of a horizontal monument sign that has Two hotels, two hotel names with probably a center logo or something in the middle just to make it look pretty. And it'll be basically Hotel 1 with an arrow, go up Breakwater. Hotel 2, there'll be an arrow that says keep going up Second Avenue or however to get to the entrances. Mm-hmm. But it'll probably be a much bigger horizontal sign that really probably advertises both hotels and gives directions on how to get to the entryway of both. I'm assuming it's going to be something like that.

I can tell that as you were envisioning exactly what we are looking.

yes that's what i'm saying the other side i think it's more for the hotel because it had to be a very nice sign because this is where the navigation comes in yeah that's why i say say we don't need it on the g side we don't need it on the gas station side because we're going to have this really nice sign on the other side it's not part of our discussion tonight But we know that that's going to be two hotel resorts on the other side. So it's already going to be taken care of there. So is it okay for you to be on the G side?

Yes. Okay. So in summary, F is try very hard to make it horizontal. Yep. and G convert it to a pricing side?

No. No. No. The commission's direction and the applicant is agreeing to removing G. Remove G. Unless it's required by Chevron.

And then it would be a pricing side. Yes. Yes. Okay. Moving on to H. Those are all directional signs. Directional signs. Yes.

No problem with that. I literally have no issue with any of the other signs on the list. No issues. We need that for directing the traffic. Those are just internal ones. And I think in the end, when they're sitting out there, they're probably going to look prettier than what they look like on this form. Because on the form, they're just kind of like bland.

Yeah. All right.

All right. So I have detailed notes. I'm going to go over them with the commission. If I missed anything, please tell me that is still on the call.

He'll be the one. Stop. I still have one thing. Okay. So I still want to go back to my other set of questions. And this is more, I just, I want to understand. the glass and the signs and temporary and it's i'm not saying no i just want to understand that the main glass windows for the the gas station yeah that you're going to use that it will be like every other convenience store gas station and if you have sale signs or lottery signs or everything else that in that respect it'll still be it you're planning on treating those And the only reason I'm asking is because you've come before us the last three times and it's like, I really want to make this high scale. I want to make this kind of high impact. I want to make it high class. And as soon as you start adding, hey, 59 cent drinks and two for 350 hot dogs, it It changes the look and the visual kind of impression. And I'm just curious. I don't want to say no, but I am curious. Are you planning on, in that respect, going that normal route, or are you planning to kind of try to keep things clean?

Commissioner Glenn, me personally, I do not like window sign. I just want to be very clean look. If I have that option, I will just, okay, I don't want to put anything. People go in, they see what is over there. Because those small signage, $299, this or that, that does not look good, you know. So instead, I mean, if it looks good, if it's in an arc or something, but it's a very prime location and I want to keep it very clean and not like too many things over there.

And I think that's what we've been discussing tonight. And my long list of questions, and so everybody knows. I know you saw it too in the public. I have lots of these questions every meeting. I usually just don't forward that to the group, and I usually don't ask all those questions. So just because I had 43, that's just because I had 43 individual thoughts. Does not mean that most of them ever get asked at a meeting. So this was not necessarily trying to pick on Harvey's gas station here. But I think what we've been trying to do is present something that is really kind of more upscale and is fitting for what he's trying to do, but what we're trying to do on a critical spot. And I don't think we can tell. I mean, and again, I think it's more just it was more for my edification is I don't think I don't think we can put us. I don't think we could put a restriction on you anyway. I don't think it's and I don't think it's necessary. And I don't think it's appropriate to do that. I actually we haven't done to anybody else.

Commissioner, I think actually the council is actually considering that right now. Um, uh, they've been talking about, uh, the maximum signage in a window. And the last number I heard was like 10% of the window.

Right.

Um, and, and that's what I was going to bring up is I think that's actually going to be covered. I don't believe they passed anything, uh, on it yet, but they are seriously looking at.

But I don't think so.

There was actually something in the downtown plan. There is.

It was 30%. Is it 30% or 35%?

Yeah, it's in the 30% range.

So that's what they're talking about changing. So what do we have? Guido, can you update us on what that is?

So the 10%, no more than 10% of your windows can be covered. We started enforcement on that. We got some pretty significant pushback from small business owners. So Council asked us to kind of look at that a little bit more, which we are. But to Commissioner Woodson's point, I feel like now we're trying to get into the operation of a store's business. If they want to put up the $2.99 hot dog for a soda sign, I mean, if that's part of their standard practice, I...

you know unless it's you know if we get further direction from the council then obviously we'll enforce that but and we don't have anything in the downtown i think what is what did we did we say 30 in the downtown vitalization i don't recall off the top of my head i don't i don't know why that's stuck in my head it may be because i remember we had the discussion yeah and and the reason that i think that's maybe the reason why i raised this harvey is that we One of the things that we're trying to do across our city is we're trying to create consistency so that we're promoting growth in our old part of the city where we live. We're all right now, right? Versus the new part of the city, which is where you're operating out of and trying to create a set of consistent standards so that we're not favoring one or the other. And one of the big things that we get a lot of pushback on from residents on this side of the tracks is you always get them do everything over there. And then you always give us more restrictions and more control over here. And we're not getting anything. We're not getting this growth. And that window signage thing, I mean, and I think maybe what I'm coming down to is if we do have I think we, I thought it, well, I agree with you. I thought it was 30 or 35% of the window space was the maximum that could be covered. If that's what we're trying to make for our downtown vitalization plan, which is this whole Del Monte reservation quarter, which is a huge project for us in the city. If we had something that said that there was a condition of you couldn't do more than 35% of your window space, knowing that you don't want to do it, but that we're kind of like meeting in between of saying, okay, No, but yes. Is that something you would consider?

I really appreciate your concern. Like I said, as long as I'm not required to put a window sign, I'm not going to do it. It's an extra mile kind of a thing.

Right. So if we put on that you can't – that way you have the ability if something comes up. Or, hey, if California Lottery gets to a point and they say, well, you have to have a window sign and you want to sell lottery tickets, well, you don't have a choice. If we say – You're going to have to have it. But if we put a condition on it that said no more than 35%, that gives you the flexibility that if something ever happens on yourself, you can make that change. Because I don't think we want to restrict your business. At the same time, we want to create standards that are kind of consistent across our entire city.

I'm okay with that.

Does that work?

That'll control extra mile too, because they won't be able to do it.

I understand that, but what I'm saying, because me personally, I'm not in that side. I'm also looking very clean look. So to me, if there's a restriction that says, okay, we will tell them, hey,

Oh, and I don't mind reducing it to something lower than that, too. I don't want to make an exception of you to Commissioner Chang's perspective. We don't want to make an exception for you and say, oh, well, he only gets 10% because there are benefits to that. There's benefit to you because you want to go to zero. But there's a flip side to that on the other side. is that then people can, well, he said 10%, and all of a sudden that pits you against the other businessmen in the community, and we don't want to do that either.

If the city council moves on their actions and reduces it, doesn't that become...

I think they'd have a hard time. I think it grandfathered in everybody.

For the commission, I believe our attorney is trying to speak right now.

Oh, please do.

Go ahead. You're muted. You're still muted.

Can you hear me now?

Yes. And we could see you for a minute, and then Guido said no, we can't see you. Go ahead. My comment here, I hear the...

desire to address the signage in the windows here as well my concern would be that that may be outside the scope of what a master sign program of this type would normally address and this is Guido where I may go to you to see if the I know what's before the commission tonight is decisions related to this development, which has deviations from the master sign program. But just to ask Guido if for the other businesses or sort of the master sign program that applies to the dunes as a whole, if that addresses window signage or if that's outside the scope of what that sign program.

So that's a good question. So the DUNE specific plan, the way it's written, it says if something's silent in the specific plan, then we default to the zoning code. Right now the council's deliberating increasing the window coverage from above 10%. So if the commission wants to impose that and the applicant's willing to accept it to say no more than 35% because the specific plan is silent on it it would seem to be an appropriate uh measure but i was just going to add to the discussion to say no more than 35 or whatever the council gives final direction on just so that we don't have a non-conforming situation with one property that would seem appropriate for me and i would be fine with that

Well, I think, Harvey, you as a businessman, you know that plot of land is the prime location in Marina.

Yes.

And you secure it. And it's a good thing. And you're going to build another hotel or two hotels over there. I call it a luxury hotel. And I believe you would... your gas station will live up to that standard as well. So you don't want to tarnish it and then people coming in, oh, I have to go through this terrible gas station to go to a luxury hotel. I think you as a businessman, you know how to maintain it. I trust you.

Commissioner, you can see the building, the look. It's like it's not a typical gas station. So I try to do my best, even though I don't think there will be any return, but I'm willing to do it because of my luxury resort in the back. I want to keep it a very clean and nice look.

Thank you.

Okay. Have we addressed all the commissioner's concerns so far?

Yeah, I mean, I think that the glass piece was my kind of last one, which was a little bit off. So Guido, you've got it.

Yeah, so I'm going to go ahead for the commission because Brad's going to be typing up the final reso for his benefit. So sign types A is 50 square feet. A2 is 36 square feet. A3 is 36 square feet. There was a request to, as best we can, to have those be of similar font, but understand that there are trademark issues with that. B1 and B2 are approved. C1, C2, and D, we understand that those are basically Chevron kind of protected signage. The lengthy discussion about sign E, make the sign horizontal, similar in nature to the one identified in the discussion at 2400 Fremont Boulevard in Monterey. make it horizontal as feasible, but During the plan check process, if engineering-wise or plan check-wise, it cannot be made horizontal, that it can be vertical. If it is vertical, no more than 18 feet. And to reduce the size of the extra mile. So that's sign type E. Sign type F, once again, to make it, if during the plan check process, we can make this horizontal if feasible. If it does become vertical, no more than 18 feet. And then sign type G, remove this from the master sign program. If it is required to make it a pricing and signage sign, the sign types H are required. And to make the window signage no more than 35%, or... whatever the city council decides for that particular Muni code amendment. Is that a summary of the conversation tonight?

I wanted to ask. If you said it has to stay vertical no more than 18 feet, I thought we were less than that.

Yeah, I thought we were too.

I thought we said, because it's right now it's 20 feet. I thought we said we wanted to take off. No, it didn't fit.

So we're talking, we're really by two feet.

Yeah.

Well, we don't want it... For which one are we talking about?

I'm sorry. G. For G. No, F. F. For F, I don't think we ever went to vertical. I think we always left it horizontal. Always horizontal. We didn't create a vertical portion because that corner is big enough because of the curve of the traffic flow into the car wash that there's enough space to make it horizontal.

Oh, okay. So... so i just want to be clear sign type f which is on the screen now to make it horizontal and no more than 10 to 12 feet tall yes okay okay that's it good catch which which sign

Well, we're just talking that to get the height down on E and F, that potentially you could look at reducing the pedestal height from where it is to be consistent. If that could be part of the design.

Give up signage space, give up pedestal space. Right.

But to reduce that height lower than the pedestal.

Yeah.

The sign takes precedence over the pedestal height. So if to get below the height, you have to reduce the pedestal by a foot, for example, to give the flexibility.

Okay. I understand.

So as long as the side that sign can fit. Absolutely. Yes.

If you have to go and you have to go vertical to get it a little bit lower. The pedestal, I'm making this up, if it's this tall, I'm down here.

I understand that, but I'm saying like the height wise, maybe 18 feet. So if it goes vertical, no more than 18 feet.

Correct. And that's, yeah, that's on what?

That's for E. Is that correct? Yes.

If I may, Chair, just for clarity of the motion, when you're speaking about the height of the sign, are you talking about the height from the ground up to the very top, including the base or the base separate from the height?

The total overall height from the grass to the top of the sign.

Total height from base to top of sign.

Okay, so for if, if we have to go vertical for sine type E, including the base, no taller than 18 feet, I just want to be clear that, right? Yes, that's correct.

Okay.

Okay, okay, let's see. I'm apply on sine F, maybe.

So F will be the F will be 10 to 12 feet.

If they're voting to make it 10 to 12 feet.

Because we're, F is the one we're going to spread out horizontal for the services.

Commissioner, I understand that, but if like, if there's no space, that's only that, in that case, that's what I'm asking. Otherwise, I'm good with that.

If it doesn't fit, then it's got to be vertical. But it probably can fit. It's got a high likelihood to fit.

Well, right now, it is horizontally 10.8 inches. Feet. 10.8 feet. So it'll definitely fit. Okay. I see.

Yeah.

Well, horizontally, it's 10.8 feet. It's 10 feet wide.

It's going to go to 20 feet. It's going to go to 20 feet if we wouldn't make a course on the side.

I thought we... Yeah. Well, it can go up to 20 feet. It doesn't have to be 20 feet.

Actually, it'll be close because of the separation on either side. It'll actually be... Each of the signs is 9 feet 4, so it's probably going to be 10, 8 plus 9, 4. So it's actually going to be right around 20 feet if you reverse the tenant sign to the other side and just have that same separation.

Well, I see what you're saying. Yeah. Well, if you have the space...

I think he, well, so, so what he's saying is if he doesn't have the space, we still do allow vertical. So I guess the answer is yes, because we don't want him to come back, but we want to right now it's at 20 feet. I would say, I mean, I would rather try to take it down to 16 feet instead of 18 feet because of the corner. But I think that that is, that's a, again, we're back to, we're back to that becomes a really tall monument right there. Guido, I mean, I...

It's probably easier for staff if he can't go horizontal just to make it the same height as the other one just for... 18 of 8.

But that really emphasized, Mike, with three exclamation points, that is not the desire of the commission.

Right.

Understood. Find a way to get that to fit in there correctly and professionally, aesthetically. Yeah.

You want the Tower of Battlemont.

Well, I would say the commission needs to be very thoughtful and Harvey, this will be the most prominent sign in South Marina. So we need to be very clear that the direction from the planning commission is to make this. Horizontal as much as feasible, unless you and your engineer can prove to me and our building official that it's structurally. is impossible to make it horizontal if you can't agree to that now harvey you need to tell the commission that literally just for the commission like if we get this stuff wrong this will be the stuff all the residents will complain to the future city manager and future city council for as long as I work here. So I just wanna be clear that this is like, the reason why we spent two and a half hours debating this is this is gonna be the most prominent signage probably in all of Marina. So I appreciate how thoughtful the commission has been and how Harvey's been willing to work with the commission. So I just, if there's anything that's been said tonight, Harvey, that you're uncomfortable with, you need to tell the planning commission now.

I just want to make it clear, I'm a part of community. I live here.

I'm not making any of this. But they don't know how to find you. They know how to find my house.

They can find me anytime.

You make your house kind of prominent. I do make my house prominent.

I can't hide, you know. So, I mean, how am I going to praise you guys, you know, anybody if I don't do something right?

And I really do appreciate, the 43 questions aside, I appreciate the willingness to work with us on this because I think we all realize that this is really important to both you, but to us. And I'll be honest, I'm surprised that there's some people in our community that are not, that were not here tonight who typically have raised concerns about different things over the years. Because this is such a visible area. And they've spoken a lot on next door. And they've spoken not just next door. Anyway, I'm just surprised that there's some people that did not come today to provide input to us. And that's fine. And they didn't. And I think that we think this was a good compromise across the board. Now we're at the motion.

Yeah, to the chair and to Harvey. So because this is going to be such a prominent area with signage that everyone in the city is going to see. I don't normally do this, but. I would recommend that I type up the motion and I send it to the chair and vice chair. And if I made any errors in the next 48 hours, please let me know and I'll send it to Harvey. And if there's anything you don't agree with or whatever, we can immediately schedule it for the next meeting. If there's any errors in the motion, because like I said, this is going to be the most prominent signage any of us are going to see.

i mean if i had to do an emergency session on it yeah i mean i'm and i'm throwing it out as the vice chair it's up to the chair to make that recommendation i'm willing to do i i understand the significance in the time in the turnaround time so can we can we formalize a motion oh no i'm saying you can go with the voice voice motion that i've made

you can vote on it tonight but if the chair and vice chair are open to me sending it to them to make sure i didn't make any errors and then if they say yep that looks good then i can sign it and we can get it to harvey quickly right we don't have to wait for the next meeting to do the review of the minutes and make any changes because that's okay that's wonderful you're going to send to auto commission right

Well, some Brown Act issues there. We can't do it. We're not going to vote. We're voting tonight.

All we're doing is validating the final words. All we're doing is validating that the wording is correct.

Yeah, if I send it to everybody now, I'm creating a Brown Act serial meeting.

I think it just comes to the chair and the vice chair. I think it's fine.

If the commission's open to that. No, I'm fine with that. All right. Okay. So there's a motion on the floor. There needs to be, I read the motion, but somebody needs to actually.

I proposed that the motion that the city planner just read to us covering the signs a through H plus the additional signage reporting to on the coverage on coverage be approved.

I second that motion.

Vice Chair Woodson?

Yes.

Commissioner Barron? Yes. Commissioner Rana? Yes. Chair St. John? Yes. Commissioner Chang? Yes. Commissioner Jacobson? Yes. Commissioner Woodson?

That would be vice chair.

Commissioner Simmons?

Yes.

Motion passes. Sorry, my brain's going here, sorry.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thank you, Harvey. Thank you. So it's a big help, you know, because I can.

All right, let's wind it up. Any informational items? No. No. Harvey, Harvey, Harvey. You want to close out some remarks? Pardon? I interrupted you. I'm sorry.

No, no, it's okay. No, no, I'm saying that, like, thank you very much. I really appreciate that. And I'll be back with the hotel soon. All right.

Okay.

Thank you, Harvey. I appreciate that.

I will admit that this meeting