2016-05-03 KVDC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

mentioned that the second floor had not been utilized for many years, and so they wanted to bring it back to life. He added that the existing single wall was in a poor condition. Commissioner Au Hoy observed that existing signage banners made the building look unattractive, and that especially at this core location of the Kailua Village she wished the building to look classy. Mr. Kilgore stated that on behalf of the owner they would take down those banners. Mr. McCowatt responded that the building would look nicer with this renovation, and that the signage banners were not under their control, but they would talk to the owner about it. Mr. Dunlap commented that those banners were supposed to be temporary, and that it was not unusual for a design review application to not include a signage proposal. In response to Commissioner Roth’s request for assurance that the applicant would come back with their signage plan, Mr. Kilgore stated that they would comply with the Sign Code and present their proposal to the Commission, if they had a new plan. He also clarified that he had not been involved in the previous sign application process. Commissioner Roth opined that although the overall design seemed to fit in the Kailua Village, the proposed deck and roof design appeared proportionally off in that the two dormers looked too small for the size of the deck. He pointed out that even if it might not be visible to the pedestrians and motorists on Ali‘i Drive, it would be the entry view to the Kailua Village for passengers on cruise ships. Mr. Dunlap confirmed with the applicant that the dormers would function as access to the third floor. There was a discussion about possible design modifications. Mr. Kilgore offered suggestions that the two dormers be made lower, wider, or bigger with double doors, or else a third dormer be added. Mr. McCowatt mentioned that they had a budget constraint so that the project would remain exempt from Special Management Area Use Permit. The consensus between the Commission and the applicant was that further articulation of the third level would be a condition of the Commission’s favorable recommendation, but that the applicant would be given latitude in modifying the design. It was moved by Commissioner Roth and seconded by Commissioner Kern that the Commission recommend the Planning Director’s approval of the proposed project, with the following conditions: 1.The upper deck and roof area be further articulated, such as with a third dormer; and, 2.All temporary signs and banners be removed. There were no discussions on the motion. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried with five ayes (Roth, Kern, Akina, Au Hoy and Sullenberger) and three absent and excused (Andreae, Broderson and Cartwright). ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS None. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Dunlap announced that the next meeting was scheduled for May 17, 2016, with one design review application on the agenda. He distributed the meeting materials. 3