2019-04-09 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes

Home

Ms. Newlon gave a PowerPoint presentation, and described the two existing wall signs that the applicant was requesting a variance for. Ms. Newlon spoke of the variances approved in the past for the subject building, including the one for Borders who had been the tenant previous to Planet Fitness. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Sullenberger, Ms. Newlon clarified that the Borders variance application had been subject to the Commission review, that the Commission had recommended approval, and that the Planning Commission, who had been the authority then, had subsequently approved on August 8, 1997. Commissioner Smith asked whether or not the existing illuminated signs had an electrical permit for the hardwiring. Mr. Tanaka answered no, and Ms. Newlon added that an as-built building permit application, including electrical, was being processed but had not been issued. Commissioner Smith noted that the signs then should be neither installed nor illuminated. Mr. Tanaka expressed his concurrence. Asked by Chairman Roth, Mr. Villafana stated that he had nothing to add to his earlier presentation. Commissioner Ikeuchi commented that her first reaction had been “‘a‘ole, it is not pono.” She said that she wholeheartedly agreed with Ms. Au Hoy’s testimony, and that she did not think it would even be ethical for the Commission to approve this request because it did not go in line with looking out for the best interest of the culture in the community. She reiterated that in her opinion the danger of granting variances was that each one would become a step stone to the next one. She mentioned some of the existing variances in the neighborhood as an example, and said that if she had been on the Commission, she would not have supported those variances. She further said that she was generally not against businesses using their own colors and logos, but that the subject signs with bright illumination were almost blinding and even capable of causing traffic accidents contrary to the applicant’s claim that bigger signs were safer. She opined that it would be a mistake to approve this variance. Commissioner Ching recalled that when Planet Fitness had been asked about signage by former Commissioner Van Pernis at the time of renovation design review, its representative had told the Commission that a sign application would be done later, but that no such application had followed. Commissioner Sullenberger commented also that one of the issues to him was that despite the fact that Planet Fitness had been advised of the path they needed to take, it had chosen to not do so and instead gone ahead and put up those signs. He added that the Commission historically tried to work with applicants as long as they communicated, but in this case that collaboration step had not happened. He continued to say that the other issue was the sign itself, which in his opinion was in your face, and additionally, it was illuminated without electrical permit. He emphasized the wrong sequence of events, and said that that was not how things worked in the Kailua Village, and that those signs had to come down. Commissioner Kern also commented that there were so many things that were wrong with this applicant’s process. She said that she agreed with the other Commissioners, as well as the public members’ statements, that there had been no effort made by the applicant to work with the Commission, and that nobody could just do whatever they wanted in this community, including Planet Fitness. She further said that she could not possibly support this request, and that it was not unreasonable for the Commission to tell the applicant to take down those signs now as a gesture of good faith and then talk with the Commission. 9