2019-01-08 Kailua Village Design Commission Minutes

Home

a. Niumalu ID/Tenant Directory – located at the corner of Queen Ka‘ahumanu and Henry Street b. 2-Sided ID/Directory – located at the corner of proposed Road “A” and Henry nd Street – 2 ground sign c. Gas Station Price Sign, 2-Sided – located along Henry Street in front of the Gas rd Station - 3 ground sign d. 2-Sided ID/Directory – located at the corner of proposed Road “B” and Henry th Street – 4 ground sign.  Anchor Building #4 – Variance Proposed for Each a. Safeway Tower ID Sign b. Bank, Pharmacy, Safeway (Main Store sign) & Starbucks  Gas Station signage – 2 signs - Safeway C-Store ID & Safeway Gas Canopy ID – Variance Proposed for Each  Typical Tenant Wall ID Signs – up to 2 signs per business designed to be compliant to KVDC sign requirements Landowner: Kona Owner, LLC TMK: (3) 7-5-004:007 Location: No Street Address Assigned Yet, parcel located the corner of Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway and Henry Street. Ms. Bugado gave a PowerPoint presentation for the proposed master signage plan, in which variance requests were incorporated. She circulated the applicant’s color samples, and noted that the green color for the Starbucks logo was absent. She went over the Sign Code allowance for each type of signs proposed, and also provided some information on existing blanket variances for commercial centers in the neighborhood, such as Lanihau Center, Kopiko Plaza, Kona Coast Shopping Center, KBXtreme, and Century 21 All Islands Plaza. She further informed the Commission that all variances that had been applied by nearby gas stations had been either withdrawn by the applicants because of comments received during the review process or denied. Commissioner Van Pernis expressed his concern that the staff appeared to be advocating for the applicant by mentioning the existing variances in the area. Ms. Bugado responded that she had been requested to provide the information, and Chairman Roth and Commissioner Sullenberger also responded that they had separately requested her to include the information in her presentation so that the Commission could review the proposal in context. Upon inquiry by Commissioner Hetherington, Ms. Bugado said that the Commission could approve, deny or defer the proposed master plan, including the requested variances, either in full or in part. In response to Commissioner Van Pernis’ questions, she explained that the Commission’s role was to make a recommendation to the Department of Public Works (“DPW”) on any sign permit applications or master signage plans, and that by having an approved master signage plan in place, the tenants would not have to come in for review by the Commission as long as their signs were in compliance with the plan; however, each tenant would still have to apply for their own sign permit. Also in response to Commissioner Van Pernis’ question, she said that the terms “lot” and “parcel” appeared to be used interchangeably in the application document. She explained that the entire project was situated on one parcel of land, which allowed one ground sign for the project as a whole, and therefore, the applicant was requesting a variance for the three additional ground signs. 2