Laserfiche WebLink
that considering the fact that the application lacks necessary information, as DPWBD's <br /> comments point out, and the fact that there is no sign variance application while the proposal <br /> clearly requires a variance, he did not think that the Commission could recommend this request <br /> to go through; it is a matter of deferral or disapproval in his opinion. Ms. Luga requested that it <br /> be deferred. She said that they had been instructed to process this application prior to filing a <br /> variance application, which they did, but now that they have specific comments from DPWBD, <br /> they will process the variance application. Upon being asked by Ms. Luga, Ms. Bugado <br /> confirmed that sign variances are approved or denied by the Director of Public Works, not by the <br /> Commission. Chairman Roth commented that while the Commissioners understand that <br /> branding is important, they for example did not accept Safeway's sign to go over 36 inches <br /> where the brand was also very important and the building was big and far from the roadway; the <br /> applicant in this case should take that into consideration when they reassess their signage, and <br /> the variance application should be clearly articulated as to the reasons why the variance is <br /> necessary. <br /> Commissioner Werchick commented that considering the size of the building, he was fine with <br /> having a sign by the sixth floor, which in his opinion looks better. He suggested that the <br /> applicant consider a variance from the Sign Code limitation of 9-foot above grade in their <br /> application. Commissioner Greenwell, agreeing that the size of a sign needs to be proportional <br /> to the building size, said that he did not have an issue with the locations or the sizes of the signs, <br /> but that he was not fond of the design, which does not feel like Kona to him. He suggested that <br /> the applicant reconsider the font or otherwise make it more artistic. Commissioner Werchick <br /> commented that the applicant's disadvantage and challenge is with the building, which itself <br /> does not look like Kona and is very different from everything else in the village. Commissioner <br /> Greenwell, while agreeing on that perspective, suggested some artwork or a mural rather than <br /> just the Arial font. <br /> It was moved by Commissioner Werchick and seconded by Commissioner Crusat that the <br /> Commission defer the application until the applicant can prepare a sign variance application and <br /> provide more detailed information. There being no discussion on the motion, a roll call vote was <br /> taken, and the motion carried with five ayes (Werchick, Crusat, Greenwell, Kilkuskie, and Roth), <br /> and one absent and excused (Kern). <br /> ANNOUNCEMENTS <br /> Next meeting is tentatively scheduled for March 21, 2023. <br /> At 3:22 p.m. Chairman Roth asked if there were any administrative matters. Ms. Bugado <br /> informed the Commission that there are four individuals being nominated to the Commission by <br /> Mayor Roth: One in the Historic/Cultural Resources Expert category and three in the <br /> Business/Property Owners Representative category, two of which would succeed Commissioners <br /> Crusat and Werchick, if confirmed. She added that Commissioner Greenwell's reappointment <br /> for a full three-year term, who has served less than a year of resigned member's remainder, is <br /> also being submitted to the County Council for confirmation. <br /> Ms. Bugado also confirmed that the next scheduled meeting date is March 21, 2023. <br /> 5 <br /> Kailua Village Design Commission <br /> March 7,2023,Meeting Minutes <br />