2019-07-23 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes

Home

• He had been a member of the Commission while the applicant had been in violation for about nine months; • The applicant's previous application before the Commission at its April 9, 2019, meeting had drawn an unusually high number of public members who all had testified against the application and then existing illegal signs; • At that meeting the Commissioners had commented, using words such as "unethical," on the applicant's refusal to file the application and their continued violation of the code; • At that meeting the Commissioners had unanimously rejected the application and had indicated that the offending signs had to be removed; • Since then the signs had eventually been removed, but banner signs had then been erected without permission in violation of the code, whose design differed from what was shown in the current proposal; • The issue here was the knowing, intentional and continued violation of the Sign Code, rather than whether the current application was appropriate or not; and, • He would suggest that the Commission make its decision contingent upon enforcement and adjudication by civil or criminal standards to appropriately discipline the applicant for the nine months of intentional violation that had offended the Commission, the citizens of Kona, and him personally. Ms. Newlon presented the proposal. She pointed out that the sign permit application erroneously indicated one wall sign fronting Kuakini Highway, which was in fact Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. She described the design elements of the proposed signs. She noted that the signs were consistent with the Sign Code, and that the applicant was not requesting a sign variance. She mentioned that she would rely on DPW's evaluation of the sign elevation, which appeared to be higher than the code restriction. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Ikeuchi, Ms. Newlon confirmed that each letter on the signs would individually be illuminated from the inside, with no illumination on the back panel. Commissioner Hetherington in answering Chairman Roth's inquiry said that the other signs on the same building were not illuminated. Chairman Roth called upon the applicant. Al Muro representing the sign company, Universal Signs, introduced himself. In addressing Mr. Van Pernis' comments, Mr. Muro stated that his understanding was that there had never been an official written violation notice to Planet Fitness, and that the previous tenant, Borders Books and Music ("Borders"), had had an even larger sign. Ms. Newlon commented that the sign variance allowing Borders' larger sign had been approved specific to Borders and could not be used by anyone else. Mr. Muro emphasized, however, that the proposed sign was smaller than Borders'. Regarding the sign elevation that Ms. Newlon had mentioned in her presentation, Mr. Muro stated that it was shown on the plans as being 20 feet, but that it could come down at 15 feet, if necessary. He explained that they were trying to center the sign to the facade, and that it would come close to the existing Coldwell Banker sign above. He also confirmed that each letter was proposed to be self-illuminated. Asked by Chairman Roth, he reconfirmed that the back panel would not be lit, and that only the letters and the logo would be illuminated. 6