PC 081011 - Laserfiche WebLink

left, one cannot see the extra panel to be added to the right. He indicated that the goal was to get the signs above the landscaping so they can be seen and to discourage landscapers from cutting down the privet that surrounds the planter box. He added that if the concern is the brick breaks between the panels and the brick return around the top, these could be added so the signs are similar. Mr. Abbott noted the conditions of approval state that if staff determines the color scheme to be a substantial change from what was previously approved, the item must return to the Planning Commission. He stated that he did not think the colors were a substantial change, but if it is know what staff thinks the colors were muted from, such as if they were muted from want to be in a position go the canopy would have brushed aluminum columns and a blue fascia, much like the Chevron station at Hopyard Road and Owens Drive. He noted that the proposed building is the same color as that, except with the addition of the mocca band along the bottom. He stated that if the Commissioners focus on the Danville project and the photo simulation for the existing versus the proposed, the Commission would see that the project is a good match for the neighborhood, not stark in comparison to what is being proposed and being constructed across the street. He asked the Commission to support the project. Commissioner Pentin indicated that he has a problem with what the applicant has presented to the Commission tonight while submitting a photograph of another location on a given day and a given light that he wants the Commission to believe is what they are going to do. Mr. Abbott stated that they originally submitted an 8½-inch by 11-inch color board with each color sample, and staff asked for larger color samples. He noted that when staff saw that there was not as much contrast in the colors generated by the office printout versus the color samples, they asked for photos showing something the applicants had done using these colors. He added that they then submitted one photo in the shade and another in the light. He commented that had they done that a month and a half ago, they would not be before the Commission today. Commissioner Pentin referred to page 3 of Exhibit F of the staff report and asked Mr. Abbott if they are really charging $8.90 a gallon as depicted on the sign. Mr. Abbott said no and that they should just have used all zeros. With respect to the height of the sign, Commissioner Olson stated that he drove through the property and noted that the sign is totally visible from both Bernal and Valley Avenues. He indicated that he did not understand why the sign needs to be raised and suggested that the hedge be trimmed down a little bit. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 10, 2011 Page 5 of 15