2012-07-10 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes

Home

said that they had considered the possibility as well; however, she said that moving it further back would create an issue with the drive-through queue and possibly block the driveway. The Chair inquired why the applicant had not submitted the proposed changes for the Commission review earlier. Mr. Sean Asmus apologized for the procedural mistake that they had unknowingly made; he said that the owner had been unsure of the tenant’s desire when the windows were incorporated into the building design, that the windows had been designed so that the tenant’s signage could be hung behind the glass, if desired, and that it had turned out, when their signage program came together early this year, that it was the tenant’s desire to use the high walls without windows for their signage. The Chair emphasized that the Commission would not have approved the design without the window element or the architect’s cooperation. Commissioner Hetherington commented that the Kailua Village, being a very small town, did not need such big signs, and that visitors were here for a quaint village feeling, not for Walmart or Starbucks, so the small town character had to be kept. The Chair also commented that the twelve-inch high “DRIVE THRU” lettering seemed excessive since it was obvious that there is a drive-through. In response to the Chair’s remark on the sense of distrust of the project due to the changes already happened, Mr. Asmus represented that although there were no trees depicted on the plans in order to show other details, they were going to plant trees as well, and that their construction drawings had been prepared with the Planning Department’s approval, which actually rendered the same or a larger number of windows in total. Commissioner Andreae said that she personally liked the Starbucks logo, and that the logo alone seemed adequate and nothing else, including the “DRIVE THRU” sign, would be necessary. Commissioner Burns commented that since the building was not set back far from either street, she was having a hard time justifying signs that exceed the allowable size. Commissioner Au Hoy opined that the building as proposed looked like a block and was unattractive, and suggested that the applicant follow rules and conform to the community as other fast-food businesses in the area do. She also expressed her concern about negative impacts on the view planes, considering the site location. She asked the representatives to keep in mind that they are in the small village of Kailua-Kona where its historical character must be maintained. The Chair also said that the proposed signage scheme was not suitable for a historical village, and mentioned that he had found all different types and sizes of Starbucks signs around the world on his Google Image search. He advised the representatives to proactively follow the Master Plan for Kailua-Kona and work with the Commission. 2. Design Review of proposed modifications to an existing building eliminating certain windows from walls facing Kuakini Highway and Henry Street. Applicant and Landowner: Relo Kona, LLC. Property Tax Map Key No.: 7-5-004:031. Location: 75-5695 Kuakini Hwy., Kailua-Kona, at the southeast corner of Kuakini Hwy. and Henry Street. It was moved by Commissioner Burns and seconded by Commissioner Hetherington that the Commission forward a recommendation of denial to the Planning Director. The Chair suggested that the applicant submit a revised design with an element to break up the large wall surfaces. Mr. Asmus said that since the construction was near completion, the applicant would rather be given specific requirements or recommendations, for example, a preferable shape for the subject windows, rather than denial so that the project would not be halted. He clarified his comment by saying that they would put the windows back in, if that were to be the case. There was a short discussion on the window design, and the consensus among the Commissioners was that the circular design, as opposed to rectangular, was preferable, which would soften the look of the block-like structure. Mr. Asmus brought to the Commissioners’ attention other minor modifications, of which the Commissioners indicated their acceptance. Given the consensus, Commissioners Burns and Hetherington withdrew their motion and second, respectively. 3