2016-06-21 KVDC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

had discovered that the ground sign was currently projecting into the County right-of-way. He said that he had spoken to the business owner and the sign maker in that regard, and that they were going to relocate the sign within the property boundary, likely on the south side of the driveway, which would actually provide better visibility to motorists. He noted that both the wall sign and the ground sign complied with the size limitations of the Sign Code. The applicant’s representative, Raini Castro, stated that their objective was to replace the two old signs. In response to Commissioner Van Pernis’ question about relocating the ground sign, Ms. Castro said that the location would be up to the business owner, and that the applicant \[the sign maker\] was just to remove the existing sign and install a new one accordingly. Mr. Dunlap reiterated that he had confirmed with another representative of the applicant today that they had no objection to relocating the sign. Commissioner Van Pernis asked if the Commission could approve the application subject to relocation. Mr. Dunlap said that according to Mr. Kelly Wilson of the Department of Public Works, Building Division, if the relocation was acceptable to the Commission, the Department of Public Works would be fine with the applicant or the business owner selecting the location as long as it was not in the County right-of-way. Chair Dahlberg commented that the Commission’s recommendation could be that the site plan included in the application package be revised to depict the correct location. Ms. Castro indicated her agreement. Commissioner Roth was in favor of the south side of the driveway, which he said was typical in the area and seemed much safer. It was moved by Commissioner Van Pernis and seconded by Commissioner Roth that the Commission recommend the Public Works Director’s approval of the sign permit application subject to a condition upon the relocation of the ground sign off of the County property. There were no discussions on the motion. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried with five ayes (Van Pernis, Roth, Akina, Kern and Sullenberger) and three absent and excused (Andreae, Au Hoy and Cartwright). 2.This application proposes to demolish two existing residences and replace them with a two-story, eight-unit condominium, with lofts above the second floor. The first floor is constructed of wood using conventional methods of construction while the second floor, roof trusses, lofts and exterior walkway are constructed of bamboo. Applicant: David E. Sands, Architect. Landowner: C K Hale LLC. TMK: 7-5-004: 024. Location: The project is located on the south side of Ololi Road adjacent to Kopiko Plaza at 75-5648 Ololi Road, Kailua-Kona. Mr. Dunlap familiarized the Commissioners with the property and the proposed project on a location map, site photographs and the applicant’s drawings. He also displayed color samples to further describe the proposed building. He reminded the Commissioners that what was structurally required for the bamboo material to meet the Building Code would be dealt with by the Department of Public Works, Building Division, and not by the Commission; the Commission’s focus should be on the design and colors. He also noted that since the parcel was zoned Resort, it was required that at least 20 percent of it be landscaped, and that compliance would be confirmed by the Planning Department later. He added that the applicant’s intent was to preserve the natural growth of vegetation that was present, including some kiawe trees. 2