2022-12-13 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes

Home

illuminated in any way. He expressed his opposition and said that in his opinion it was an intrusion into the skyline, and that the building could be made attractive at its existing height, which is already substantial and quite visible from the surroundings. Commissioner Crusat agreed and said that she was not one for approving variances, for which the applicant might want to expand even more and ask again once the Commission approved this. Chairman Roth noted that the 73-foot height was already a variance, and that the applicant was asking for an additional 16 feet. Commissioner Werchick commented that had he been on the Commission when the variance to allow 73 feet was requested, he would have been opposed. He also said that he would not make a motion to approve with a condition to modify the tower because the Commission would be dictating a very significant change in design, which should be up to the architect in his opinion. He said further that he was inclined to disapprove. Chairman Roth said that he would like to see what the elevation would look like with a spire that meets the existing variance limit, as everything below the height limit was acceptable to him. He added that the spire is the most prominent thing from the roadway as is. Commissioner Werchick reiterated his agreement with Chairman Roth on the question about the backlit window and how essential that was. He also commented that when the sight of the neighborhood is dominated by a building like this, it tends to be viewed as the symbol and characteristic of the community regardless of the residents' religious faith. Chairman Roth pointed out that there are other churches in town with steeples, but that none of them appears to exceed the height limit as much. Commissioner Greenwell commented that he would be curious to know the steeple heights of Moku`aikaua Church and St. Michael's Church in comparison. Chairman Roth said that if they exceeded the limit even more, there might be an argument, but that he was not seeing that argument for this proposed extra height. Commissioner Werchick said that the steeples on the other churches are also more integral to the building structures themselves. Commissioner Greenwell said that the steeple was essentially a decorative element for which an auto dealer or restaurant would not have gotten their first variance approved. He further said that he did not have an issue with anything else because the building expansion would not be visible from any public places, but that it would be unfair in his opinion to allow a second excessive variance when there is a clear height restriction. There being no further comments from the Commissioners, Chairman Roth spoke to the options that the Commissioners could consider. He said that their role was to make a recommendation to either approve or disapprove; the Commission could also defer its decision to allow the applicant to make a resubmittal. He said in clarification that if the Commission voted to recommend disapproval, that would give the applicant the opportunity to go ahead and move forward with the negative recommendation. It was moved by Commissioner Werchick and seconded by Commissioner Crusat that the Commission recommend disapproval of the application. There were no discussions on the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion carried with five ayes (Werchick, Crusat, Greenwell, Kilkuskie, and Roth), and one absent and excused (Kern). 6 Kailua Village Design Commission December 13,2022,Meeting Minutes